The Injustices of Reparations

IF 2.3 2区 社会学 Q1 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Antony Anghie
{"title":"The Injustices of Reparations","authors":"Antony Anghie","doi":"10.1017/ajil.2025.10078","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The campaign for reparations for colonial violence, slavery, and exploitation is now becoming a global phenomenon, as claims are being pursued in different jurisdictions and international forums.<span>1</span> Each of these claims has its own specific legal character because of various factors including the forum in which it is brought, the applicable law, and the identity of the plaintiffs. Nevertheless, many reparations claims are based on appeals to international law, to developments in international human rights law and international criminal law, and specific prohibitions on slavery and genocide. It would appear intuitive that international law would provide remedies to the blatant injustices that are the subject of these claims. Slavery and exploitation have been denounced in the Durban Declaration<span>2</span> and genocide and crimes against humanity including apartheid and other such practices are listed in the statute of the International Criminal Court.<span>3</span> International law, however, has been largely a creation of the European powers; and historically, the law has facilitated rather than remedied colonial violence.<span>4</span> It is unsurprising then that many claims for reparations encounter some basic legal obstacles.<span>5</span> This is hardly coincidental. A legal system that is based on conquest will not readily permit an inquiry into its imperial origins, far less remedies for the injustices it permitted, indeed, mandated.</p>","PeriodicalId":47841,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of International Law","volume":"12 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of International Law","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ajil.2025.10078","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The campaign for reparations for colonial violence, slavery, and exploitation is now becoming a global phenomenon, as claims are being pursued in different jurisdictions and international forums.1 Each of these claims has its own specific legal character because of various factors including the forum in which it is brought, the applicable law, and the identity of the plaintiffs. Nevertheless, many reparations claims are based on appeals to international law, to developments in international human rights law and international criminal law, and specific prohibitions on slavery and genocide. It would appear intuitive that international law would provide remedies to the blatant injustices that are the subject of these claims. Slavery and exploitation have been denounced in the Durban Declaration2 and genocide and crimes against humanity including apartheid and other such practices are listed in the statute of the International Criminal Court.3 International law, however, has been largely a creation of the European powers; and historically, the law has facilitated rather than remedied colonial violence.4 It is unsurprising then that many claims for reparations encounter some basic legal obstacles.5 This is hardly coincidental. A legal system that is based on conquest will not readily permit an inquiry into its imperial origins, far less remedies for the injustices it permitted, indeed, mandated.

赔款的不公正
对殖民暴力、奴役和剥削进行赔偿的运动现在正在成为一种全球现象,因为索赔正在不同的司法管辖区和国际论坛中进行由于各种因素,包括提起诉讼的地点、适用的法律和原告的身份,每一项索赔都有其特定的法律特征。然而,许多赔偿要求是基于对国际法、国际人权法和国际刑法的发展以及对奴隶制和种族灭绝的具体禁止的呼吁。显而易见的是,国际法将为这些主张所涉及的公然不公正提供补救办法。《德班宣言》谴责了奴隶制和剥削,《国际刑事法院规约》列出了种族灭绝和反人类罪行,包括种族隔离和其他这类行为。然而,国际法主要是欧洲大国创造的;从历史上看,法律促进了而不是纠正了殖民暴力因此,许多赔偿要求遇到一些基本的法律障碍就不足为奇了这绝非巧合。一个建立在征服基础上的法律体系不会轻易允许对其帝国起源进行调查,更不会允许对它所允许的(实际上是强制的)不公正进行补救。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
16.30%
发文量
84
期刊介绍: AJIL is a leading peer-reviewed journal, published quarterly since 1907. It features articles, essays, editorial comments, current developments, and book reviews by pre-eminent scholars and practitioners from around the world addressing developments in public and private international law and foreign relations law. The Journal also contains analyses of decisions by national and international courts and tribunals as well as a section on contemporary U.S. practice in international law. AJIL and AJIL Unbound are indispensable for all professionals working in international law, economics, trade, and foreign affairs.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信