‘Defeated amnesty laws: Standing between impunity and accountability, Uruguay opens up the wounds of the past.'

‘Defeated Amnesty Laws: standing between impunity and accountability, Uruguay opens up the wounds of the past.’

 

Estela Valverde

Macquarie University

In the aftermath of state terrorism amnesty laws have been used to try to quarantine the past by entrenching impunity in law thereby preventing victims seeking justice and recognition and pushing reconciliation off the agenda. While transitional justice strategies challenged impunity by demanding accountability amnesty has remained part of the equation for political stability, the just in case precaution. 

The Uruguayan case is especially interesting because amnesty laws were reaffirmed by two referenda in 1989 and 2009. The paper will analyse the impact of repression under the light of the recent dismissal of the amnesty laws by the Uruguayan executive. Have the ontological status of past and present changed after the abolition of these laws? Do we need to call for a new historical ethics where the continuing presence of the past should be taken seriously, instead of being treated as merely metaphorical? These and other ethical questions around the topic of human rights, remembering, forgetting and the weight of history will be analysed.