Reparations refer to various measures that aim to redress past wrongs and provide compensation, rehabilitation and satisfaction for victims. These measures can involve the provision of material reparations, such as cash payments, or goods or services (e.g. education and physical and mental health assistance). Reparations also include symbolic measures such as disclosure of truth, public apologies, memorials and monuments (see memorialisation section below), and commemoration of victims (de Greiff, 2006). Where the number of victims in need of reparation is exceptionally high, for example in the case of reparations for displacement, symbolic reparations may be particularly appropriate (Duthie & Seils, 2016).
Reparations can be judicial or non-judicial and can be allocated individually or collectively—such as the building of a school or hospital (see socioeconomic rights and development section). For some victims, reparations are the most tangible manifestation of state efforts to remedy the harms they have suffered, having a direct impact on their welfare (de Greiff, 2006).
Official public apologies have gained prominence in recent years as an important form of symbolic reparation. This is a formal, solemn and usually public acknowledgment of past human rights violations. It involves recognition of what survivors have suffered and acceptance of some or all responsibility by the party apologising (state, group or individual). In some cases, an apology may form part of the recommendations of truth commission reports; in other instances, victims’ groups may drive it. The process of developing consensus for the need for an apology could help societies face the past and work toward non-repetition (Carranza et al., 2015).
The emphasis on apologies should not eliminate the need for other reparative measures, such as restitution and health services that could address physical needs of victims. In Canada, for example, the apology for Indian Residential Schools was preceded by the settlement of a class-action lawsuit and implementation of reparation payments and services, in addition to a state-sponsored report acknowledging the human rights violations (Carranza et al., 2015).
Tools and guidance
- OHCHR. (2008). Rule-of-law tools for post-conflict states: Reparations programmes. New York and Geneva: Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights.
- De Greiff, P. (2006). The handbook of reparations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Carranza, R. Correa, C., & Naughton, E. (2015). More than words: Apologies as a form of reparation. New York: ICTJ.
- De Greiff, P. (2006). The handbook of reparations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Duthie, R., & Seils, P. (2016). The case for action on transitional justice and displacement strategies during and after conflict. New York: ICTJ.