移行期正義研究において、先住民及び植民地主義をめぐる議論は従来タブーとされてきた。移行期正義の「移行」を社会の移行ととらえた場合、先住民の存在は移行期正義の「移行」の枠組みそのものを問うことになる。本発表は、グローバルなレベルで規範化が進むジャスティスをいかに用いるかという、多様なアクターによる説明責任を意識した選択・操作に注目し、アンデスの先住民と移行期正義の関係を論じる。

抄録全体を表示

This article reconsiders the nature of the National Security Doctrine (DSN) which was enunciated by the “new type” of military regimes of South America in the 1970s. The central purpose of the article is to shed light on the relationship among 1) the national security interests of the military; 2) the interests of the military in development and/or social reform; and 3) the politicization of the military, paying special attention to the cases of Chile, Argentina, Peru and Brazil.
In the first section, the DSN is defined and its characteristics examined. The author distinguishes three types of the military's interest in development and/or reform: a) development and/or reform for their own sake; b) development and/or reform to strengthen the external defense; c) development and/or reform to prevent the threat to internal security.
The second section analyzes the evolution of the DSN in this century. The author maintains that the DSN is an amalgam of various components and that its evolution is best understood when the changes in each component are considered. Based on this methodological proposal, the author traces the development of the DSN. Regarding the connection between external security and socioeconomic development and/or reform, the military became aware of it before World War II. With respect to the relationship between internal security and socioeconomic development and reform, it was not until the late 1950s that this link was fully understood and incorporated in the DSN as part of its professional tenets, although anticommunism existed in the military since the first decades of this century and some military precursors stressed this connection. From the late 1950s on most military officers accepted socioeconomic development and/or reform as a means necessary to prevent a revolution. However, they did not consider a revolution to be a legitimate demonstration of the suffering people but to be a movement of the masses instigated by “International Communism.”
In light of the foregoing discussion, the third section reviews Alfred Stepan's thesis of “New Professionalism” and some historians' critiques of that thesis. These historians argue that the Brazilian military's interest in socioeconomic development and the maintenance of public order was already present well before World War II. The author stresses that, in general, these two areas of interest were not seen by the military officers to have a causal relationship; and that the role played by the armed forces in internal security was usually not regarded as proper to their profession. Moreover, the military's proclivity to intervene in politics before World War II was not a result of their concern for internal security. At the end of the article, the author criticizes some aspects of Alfred Stepan's original thesis.

抄録全体を表示

This article identifies the characteristics of transitional justice (TJ) in Latin America compared to other world regions and explores the causes of such characteristics. The author highlights seven discernible aspects in TJ as practiced in Latin America. First, Latin America pioneered the current wave of TJ in the mid-1980s. Consequently, the Latin American experience inspired and contributed to the development of the TJ “field” at the global level. Truth commissions and “the right to the truth” may be counted among such contributions. Further, numerous perpetrators were successfully prosecuted in Latin America, perhaps on par with the Western Balkans. Second, the “post-authoritarian type” predominates in Latin America’s TJ, as opposed to the “post-conflict type.” Only four countries, i.e., El Salvador, Guatemala, Peru, and Colombia, had “post-conflict TJ.” Third, the punishments of the perpetrators were almost exclusively assumed by the national courts rather than international or hybrid courts. Nevertheless, prosecutions in the national courts of foreign countries had some significance. Fourth, regional human rights institutions, i.e., the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, were instrumental in advancing victims’ rights. Fifth, domestic factors were far more important than international factors in Latin America’s TJ. The limited international involvement may be explained by the pioneering character of Latin America’s TJ (as the international community only began to involve itself in TJ in the 1990s). More importantly, it may be attributable to the predominance of the “post-authoritarian type” (because the international community often serves as a mediator in internal armed conflict, but not in democratization settings). Sixth, the driving force of TJ in Latin America has been victims and their supporters, especially domestic human rights NGOs, which were far more instrumental than international and foreign NGOs in advancing TJ in their countries. Seventh, in Latin America, the principal demands of victims were the punishment of the perpetrators and the truth, although this conclusion should be qualified by several important caveats provided in the article. The truth can be divided between the “micro truth” (what happened to the particular victims) and the “macro truth” (the overall pattern of human rights violations and war crimes in the country). The victims were eager to discover the micro truth and, although most knew the macro truth, they demanded that it be recognized by the state and society. The article advocates for considering the Latin American experience to obtain a less skewed and more diversified representation of TJ around the world.

抄録全体を表示

The concept of international regime has been used widely to analyze global political change, especially in the international political economy. The present article applies that concept to international human rights, an issue area that has been discussed widely in recent years. The patterns of human rights achievement are diverse. The promotion of human rights through the United Nations has led to formulation of the ideals of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the legal norms of two International Covenants on Human Rights. Regional frameworks to protect human rights in Europe, the Americas, and elsewhere demonstrate particular facets of current practice. The machinery within the United Nations system and under the two Covenants represents a more universal means for protecting rights.
Trends in post-World War II practice of human rights in global politics are summarized according to five periods: (1) emergence, pre-1945; (2) first transition, 1945-1948; (3) consolidation, 1949-1973; (4) second transition, 1974-1978; and (5) continuation, after 1978. In the application. of regime analysis to trends in human rights, particular attention is devoted to the causes and characteristics of periods of transition in the practices of the international community and to an evaluationn of the significance of these changes.
The author also discusses three criteria specific to a human rights regime: justice, universality, and respect. Developments in the human rights regime since 1945 give evidence of major progress in this field at the global level.

抄録全体を表示