Archiwum Filozofii Prawa
i Filozofii Społecznej Journal of the Polish Section of IVR ISSN 2082-3304 Logo Polskiej Sekcji IVR Polska Sekcja IVR ↗

Research article

Procedury weryfikacyjne w perspektywie sprawiedliwości tranzycyjnej jako prawnoochronna odpowiedź na politykę (nie-)pamięci

Autorzy artykułu
  1. Emilia Kowalewska

Truth Revelation Procedures as a Rights-based Alternative to the Politics of (Non-)Memory

Archiwum Filozofii Prawa i Filozofii Społecznej, nr 3(21)/2019, s. 51-66

DOI 10.36280/afpifs.2019.3.51 ↗
Numer
nr 3(21)/2019
Strony
51-66
Opublikowano
Język tekstu
polski

polski

Abstrakt

Artykuł podejmuje refleksję nad relacją między prawem, obowiązkami państwa i pamięcią zbiorową. Skoro pytanie o instytucjonalizację pamięci staje się kluczowe w kontekście zmian ustrojowych, artykuł podejmuje refleksję w perspektywie teorii sprawiedliwości tranzycyjnej ( transitional justice ). Perspektywa ta pozwala na spojrzenie interdyscyplinarne, ze szczególnym uwzględnieniem norm i mechanizmów ukierunkowanych na utrwaleniu autorytatywnej wiedzy o przeszłości. Zasada prawa do prawdy pozwala dostrzec społeczne oczekiwanie rozliczenia przeszłości. Artykuł przedstawia trzy formy procesów weryfikacyjnych ( truth revelation procedures ) w odniesieniu do praw podstawowych i teorii sprawiedliwości tranzycyjnej. Relacja między prawem a pamięcią – często redukowana do relacji instrumentalnej – powinna być przedstawiona z perspektywy praw jednostki i praw zbiorowych, zgodnie z wartościami demokracji liberalnej. Artykuł pragnie przyczynić się do rozwoju pamięcioznawstwa w naukach społecznych, poprzez ujawnienie funkcji norm i mechanizmów prawnych często pomijanych w dyskursie o polityce pamięci.

Słowa kluczowe

  • pamięć zbiorowa
  • sprawiedliwość tranzycyjna
  • prawo do prawdy
  • polityka pamięci
  • pokomunistyczna Polska

angielski

Abstract

This article offers a socio-legal reflection on the relation between law, state obligation, and attempts to institutionalize collective memory. As the question of memory institutionalization becomes most pertinent in the context of regime change that imposes on an incumbent government certain expectations for addressing the past, the article considers this research problem from the perspective of transitional justice theory. The transitional justice paradigm allows for an interdisciplinary consideration of the topic. Special attention is paid to legal norms and mechanisms directed towards establishing authoritative knowledge about the past. The emerging principle of the right to truth is presented as an integrating and rights-based perspective from which to approach societal demands for acknowledging injustices of the past. Measured against the fundamental rights that lie at the heart of transitional justice theory, three types of truth revelation procedures are presented. The article shows that the relationship between law and memory – which is often reduced to one of political instrumentalization – should, in accordance with the values of a liberal democracy, be reframed from the perspective of individual and collective rights. The article seeks to contribute to the field of memory studies in the social sciences by exposing functions of legal norms and mechanisms that are often overlooked when discussed from the perspective of the politics of memory.

Keywords

  • collective memory
  • truth revelation procedures
  • transitional justice
  • right to truth
  • politics of memory
  • post-communist Poland
Pełny tekst PDF Jak cytować

Bibliografia

74 pozycji bibliograficznych

Literatura

  1. Albon, M. (1992). Truth & Justice: the Delicate Balance. Documentation of Prior Regimes and Individual Rights. Rapporteur’s report. Budapest: Central European University.

  2. Andrieu, K. (2016). Confronting the Dictatorial Past in Tunisia: Human Rights and the Politics of Victimhood in Transitional Justice Discourses since 2011. Human Rights Quarterly 2, 261–293.

  3. Baranowska, G. (2018). The Right to the Truth for the Families of Victims of the Kat yń Massacr e. Verfassungsblog, https://tinyurl.com/y74zhqny [last access: 10.05.2020].

  4. Beattie, A. (2008). Playing Politics with History: The Bundestag Inquiries into East Germany. Brooklyn: Berghahn Books.

  5. Borneman, J. (1997). Settling Accounts: Violence, Justice, and Accountability in Postsocialist Europe. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

  6. Bucholc, M. (2019). Commemorative Lawmaking: Memory Frames of the Democratic Backsliding in Poland After 2015. Hague Journal on the Rule of Law 11, 85–110.

  7. Buckley-Zistel, S., Koloma Beck, T., Braun, C., Miet, F. (2014). Transitional Justice Theories: An introduction. In S. Buckley -Zistel, T. Koloma Beck, C. Braun, F. Mie t (E ds.), Transitional Justice Theories. Abingdon: Routledge.

  8. Calhoun, N. (2004). Dilemmas of Justice in Eastern Europe’s Democratic Transitions. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

  9. Cassel, D. (2007). The Inter-American Court of Human Rights. In K. Salazar, T. A ntkowiak (Eds.), Victims Unsilenced: The Inter-American Human Rights System and Transitional Justice in Latin America. Washington: Due Process of Law Foundation.

  10. Ciorciari, J.D., Franzblau, J. (2014). Hidden Files: Archival Sharing, Accountability, and the Right to the Truth. Columbia Human Rights Law 46, 153.

  11. Crocker, D.A. (1999). Reckoning with Past Wrongs: A Normative Framework. Ethics & International Affairs 13(1), 43–64.

  12. Czarnota, A. (2005). Between Nemesis and Justitia. In A. Czarnota, M. Krygier, W. Sadu rski (Eds.), Rethinking the Rule of Law after Communism. Budapest: Central European University.

  13. Czarnota, A. (2014). Prawo, historia a pamięć zbiorowa. Przyczynek do związków między historią a socjologią prawa. Miscellanea Historico-Iuridica 1, 203–216.

  14. Czarnota, A. (2006). Barbarians ante Portas or the Post-Communist Rule of Law. In W. Sadurski, A. Czarnota, M. Krygier (Eds.), Spreading Democracy and the Rule of Law. Dordrecht: Springer.

  15. Czarnota, A. (2015). Decommunisation and Democracy: Transitional Justice in Post -communist Central-Eastern Europe. In S. Eliaeson, L. Harutyunyan, L. Titarenko (Eds.), After the Soviet Empire: Legacies and Pathways. Leiden-Boston: Brill Academic Publishers.

  16. David, R. (2003). Lustration Laws in Action: The Motives and Evaluation of Lustration Policy in the Czech Republic and Poland (1989 – 2001). Law & Social Inquiry 2, 387–439.

  17. David, R. (2011). Lustration and Transitional Justice: Personnel Systems in the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

  18. Dudek, A. (2011). Instytut: Osobista historia IPN. Warszawa: Czerwone i Czarne.

  19. Dudek. A. (2014). The Consequences of the System Transformation of 1989 in Poland. Remembrance & Solidarity 3, 11–39.

  20. Dudek, A., Paczkowski, A. (2005). Poland. I n K. Persa k, L. Kaminski (E ds.) A Handbook of the Communist Security Apparatus in East Central Europe, 1944-1989. Warszawa: Institute of National Remembrance.

  21. Due Process of Law Foundation (2010). Digest of Latin American on International Crimes, Washington: Due Process of Law Foundation.

  22. Elster, J. (2004). Closing the Books: Transitional Justice in Historical Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  23. Engelmann, R. (2009). The 'Stasi Records', the Public and Collective Memories: The Inspection of Personal Records. In S. Karstedt (E d.), Legal Institutions and Collective Memories. Portland (Oregon): Hart Publishing.

  24. Ferrari, V. (2005). Law and Society Studies and Legal Education. Journal of Legal Education 4, 495– 499.

  25. Frankowski, S. (1991). The Independence of the Judiciary in Poland: Reflections on Andrzej

  26. Rzeplinski's Sądownictwo w Polsce Ludowej (the Judiciary in Peoples' Poland) (1989). Arizona Journal of International and Comparative Law 8, 33–52.

  27. Gonzalez-Enriquez, C. (2001). De-communization and Political Justice in Central and Eastern Europe. In A. Barah (Ed.), The Politics of Memory: Transitional Justice in Democratizing Societies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  28. Heinze, E. (2017). Epilogue: Beyond Memory Laws: Towards a General Theory of Law and Historical Discourse. In U. Belavusau, A. Gliszczyńska-Grabias (Eds.), Law and Memory: Towards Legal Governance of History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  29. Heribert, A. (2009). Divided Memories: How Emerging Democracies Deals with the Crimes of Previous Regimes. In S. Karstedt (Ed.), Legal Institutions and Collective Memories. Oxford-Portland: Hart Publishing.

  30. Hirszowicz, M., Neyman, E. (2007). The Social Framing of Non -Memory. International Journal of Sociology 1, 74–88.

  31. Horne, C.M., Levi, M. (2004). Does Lustration Promote Trustworthy Governance? An Exploration of the Experience of Central and Eastern Europe, Paper prepared for Trust and Honesty Project, Budapest Collegium. Reproduced. In J. Kornai, S. Rose-Ackerman (Eds.), Building a Trustworthy State in Post-Socialist Transition. New York: Palgrave/Macmillan Press.

  32. Horne, C. (2015). ‘Silent Lustration’: Public Disclosures as Informal Lustration Mechanisms in Bulgaria and Romania. Problems of Post-Communism 3, 131–144.

  33. Horne, C. (2017). Building Trust and Democracy: Transitional Justice in Post -Communist Countries. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  34. Huntingdon, S. (1991). The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.

  35. Huyse, L. (2005). Justice after Transition: On the Choices Successor Elites Make in Dealing with the Past. Law and Social Inquiry 20, 51–78.

  36. International Commission of Jurists (2015). International Law and the Fight Against Impunity: A Practitioners Guide. Geneva: International Commission of Jurists.

  37. International Commission of Jurists (2016). Enforced Disappearance and Extrajudicial Execution: The Rights of Family Members. Geneva: International Commission of Jurists.

  38. Jacqmin, A. (2017). When Human Claims Become Rights. The Case of the Right to Truth over “Desaparecidos”. Oñati Socio-legal Series 7, 1247–1272.

  39. Jahn, R. (2014). The Better We Understan d Dictatorship, the Better We Can Shape Democracy – on Dealing with the Heritage of the Ministr y for State Security in Germany. Remembrance and Solidarity Studies in 20th Century European History 3, 103–110.

  40. Karstedt, S. (Ed). (2009). Legal Institutions and Collective Memories. Portland (Oregon): Hart Publishing.

  41. Kaminski, M., Nalepa, M. (2004). Judging Transitional Justice: An Evaluation of Truth Revelation Procedures. Irvine: University of California.

  42. Kochanowski, J. (2002). Penal law in confrontation with the nightmares of the past and challenges of the present day. Managerial Law 5, 13–28.

  43. Kowalewski, J. (2012). The WWII 'Katyń' crime before the ECHR: is the Convention a transitional justice tool? Human Right in Ireland, www.humanrights.ie [last access: 10.05.2020].

  44. Krotoszyński, M. (2016). The Transitional Justice Models and the Justifications of Means of Dealing with the Past. Oñati Socio-legal Series 6/3, 584–606.

  45. Krotoszyński, M. (2017). Modele sprawiedliwości tranzycyjnej. Poznań: Wydawnictwo Naukowe UAM.

  46. Krotoszyński, M. (2017). Transitional Justice Models and Analytic Philosophy. Towards Theory. Polish Political Science Yearbook 2, 9–21.

  47. Krygier, M. (1986). Law as Tradition. Law and Philosophy 2, 237–262.

  48. Łoś, M. (1995). Lustration and Truth Claims: Unfinished Revolutions in Central Europe. Law and Social Inquiry 20/1, 155–156.

  49. Magnussen, A. M., Banasiak, A. (2013). Juridification: Disrupting the Relationship between Law and Politics? European Law Journal 19/3, 325–339.

  50. Mendez, J.E. (2007). Lessons Learned. In K. Salaz ar, T. A ntkowiak (Eds.), Victims Unsilenced: The Inter-American Human Rights System and Transitional Justice in Latin America. Washington: Due Process of Law Foundation.

  51. Mendez, J.E. (2009). An Emerging ‘Right to Truth’: Latin-American Contributions. In S. Karstedt (Ed.), Legal Institutions and Collective Memories. Portland (Oregon): Hart Publishing.

  52. Misztal, M. (2005). Memory & the Construction of Temporality, Meaning and Attachment. Polish Sociological Review 149, 31–48.

  53. Młynarska-Sobaczewska, A. (2010). Autorytet państwa. Legitymizacyjne znaczenie prawa w państwie transformacji ustrojowej. Toruń: Towarzystwo Naukowe Organizacji i Kierownictwa Dom Organizatora.

  54. Nalepa, M. (2010). Skeletons in the Closet. New York: Cambridge University Press.

  55. Naqvi, Y. (2006). The Right to the Truth in International Law: Fact or Fiction? International Review of the Red Cross 88, 245–273.

  56. Offe, C., Poppe, U. (2005). Transitional Justice After the Breakdown of the German Democratic Republic.

  57. In A. Czarnota, M. K rygier, W. Sadurski (Eds.), Rethinking the Rule of Law after Communism. Budapest: Central European University.

  58. Opalińska, A. (2012). Lustracja w Polsce i w Niemczech. Wrocław: Oficyna Wydawnicza ATUT.

  59. Osiatyński, W. (1996). The Roundtable Talks in Poland. In J. Elster (Ed.), The Roundtable Talks and the Breakdown of Communism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

  60. Paczkowski, A. (2018). Fenomen lustracji. In A. Paczkowski, Ł. Jasiński, P. Machcewicz, B. R óżycki (Eds.), Rozliczanie totalitarnej przeszłości: karanie i upamiętnianie zbrodni. Warszawa: Instytut

  61. Studiów Politycznych PAN.

  62. Persak, K. (2012). Rekonstruowanie prawdy. Tygodnik Powszechny, https://www.tygodnikpowszechny.pl/ [last access: 20.04.2020].

  63. Philpott, P. (2012). Just and Unjust Peace. An Ethic of Political Reconciliation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  64. Ratner, S.R. (1999). New Democracies, Old Atrocities: An Inquiry in International Law. Georgetown Law Journal 87, 710.

  65. Sadurski, W. (2005). Rights Before Courts: A Study of Constitutional Courts in Postcommunist States of Central and Eastern Europe. Dordrecht: Springer.

  66. Sarat, A., Kearns, T.R (Eds.). (1999). History, memory, and the law. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

  67. Stan, L. (2009). Introduction: Post-communist transition, justice, and transitional justice. In: L. Stan (Ed.), Transitional Justice in Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union: Reckoning with the Communist Past. Abingdon: Routledge.

  68. Sweeney, J.A. (2018). The Elusive Right to Truth in Transitional Human Rights Jurisprudence. International and Comparative Law Quarterly 67/2, 353–387.

  69. Szczerbiak, A. (2018). Politicising the communist past: the politics of truth revelation in post-communist Poland. London: Routledge.

  70. Tismaneanu, V. (2009). Truth, memory, and reconciliation: judging the past in post-communist societies.

  71. In L. Stan (Ed.) Transitional Justice in Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union: Reckoning with the Communist Past. Abingdon: Routledge.

  72. Verdery, K. (2012). Postsocialist Cleansing in Eastern Europe: Purity and Danger in Transitional Justice. In N. Bandelj, D.J. Solinger (Eds.), Socialism Vanquished, Socialism Challenged: Eastern Europe and China, 1989-2009. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  73. Walker, M.U. (2010). Truth Telling As Reparations. Metaphilosophy 41, 525–545.

  74. Zirk-Sadowski, M. (2006). Transformation and Integration of Legal Cultures and Discourses—Poland. In W. Sadurski, A. Czarnota, M. Krygier (Eds.), Spreading Democracy and the Rule of Law. Dordrecht: Springer.

Informacje o publikacji

Autor i afiliacja

Emilia Kowalewska

Polish Academy of Sciences

Dane wydania

Numer nr 3(21)/2019

Strony
51-66
Opublikowano
DostępOpen LicencjaCC BY 4.0 ↗

Jak cytować

Opis bibliograficzny i zweryfikowane formaty eksportowe.

Format AFPiFS

E. Kowalewska, Procedury weryfikacyjne w perspektywie sprawiedliwości tranzycyjnej jako prawnoochronna odpowiedź na politykę (nie-)pamięci, „Archiwum Filozofii Prawa i Filozofii Społecznej” nr 3(21)/2019, s. 51–66, DOI: 10.36280/afpifs.2019.3.51

Eksportuj dane cytowania