the African Charter by the African Commission344 and with States’ obligation to punish such crimes under International Law.345 right to an effective remedy for victims of torture and ED. In cases such as Khirani, Mihoubi and Guezout, members of the HRCt repeatedly criticised this approach in their separate opinions, considering that, since ordinance No. 06.01 breached Article 2(2) of the ICCPR, the HRCt should have specifically recommended that Algeria repeal or review it.349 This view was then adopted by the HRCt in more recent cases. Since El-Boathi in 2017, the HRCt has consistently requested Algeria to review or repeal the provisions of Ordinance No. 06-01 that are incompatible with the ICCPR, to ensure that the rights enshrined in the Covenant can be enjoyed fully in Algeria.350 The Commission has noted that, “African states in transition from conflict to peace should at all times and under any circumstances desist from taking policy, legal or executive/administrative measures that in fact or in effect grant blanket amnesties, as that would be a flagrant violation of international law.”346 Although not specifically in the context of ED, the ACHPR has asserted its role in awarding reparation to victims of human rights violations, including by overcoming the existence of amnesty laws at the domestic level: In Zimbabwe, following a struggle for independence, the authorities passed two amnesty ordinances – Amnesty Ordinance No. 3 of 1979 and Amnesty Ordinance No. 12 of 1980 – granting amnesty to all those who participated in the liberation struggle of then Rhodesia. The amnesty covered any human rights violations committed, such as killing, rape, assault or torture.351 “An amnesty law adopted with the aim of nullifying suits or other actions seeking redress that may be filed by the victims or their beneficiaries… cannot shield that country from fulfilling its international obligation under the Charter. ”347 Many African countries have deployed transitional justice mechanisms to move societies from dictatorship and address past violations. However, in many instances States have chosen peace over justice, leaving victims of human rights violations unable to obtain justice for their violations. In Libya, under Law No. 6 of 2015, all Libyans who committed offences from 15 February 2011 until 7 September 2015 are eligible for a general amnesty which even applies to “those most responsible” for the crimes. However, this is not a blanket amnesty, in that certain crimes are excluded from its reach. These excluded crimes include ED and torture, terrorism, sexual crimes, drug smuggling and corruption crimes. Nonetheless, the crimes excluded from the amnesty law do not correspond to all of Libya’s obligations under international law, and the 2015 law provides a For example, in Algeria, Ordinance No. 06-01 granted blanket amnesty from prosecution to security and state-armed groups.348 The HRCt held that this Ordinance should not impede the enjoyment of the 344 ACHPR, General Comment No. 4 on the Right to Redress for Victims of Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Punishment or Treatment, para. 28; ACHPR, Thomas Kwoyelo v. Uganda, Communication 431/12, 17 October 2018, paras. 288-289. See also UNGA, Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, Article 18; UN ESC, Updated Set of Principles for the Protection and Promotion of Human Rights through Action to Combat Impunity, E/CN.4?2005/102/Add.1, 8 February 2005, Principle 24; UN Security Council, Resolution No. 1120 (1997), 14 July 1997; UN Security Council, Resolution 1315 (2000) Sierra Leone (14 August 2000); ICRC, Additional Protocol to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 relating to the Protection of Victims of Non-International Armed Conflicts, Article 6(5). 345 ICJ, Guidelines on Enforced Disappearances, p. 213; Louise Joinet in his report on amnesty law, when discussing the possibility whether crimes against humanity should be subjected to amnesties, specifically noted the prohibition of such practice. The report stated that “in the case of torture, involuntary or forced disappearances or extrajudicial executions, - the infringement of the human condition is such that the right of oblivion may become a right to impunity”. Louis Joinet, Study on Amnesty Laws and their Role in the Safeguard and Promotion of Human Rights. Preliminary Report, Special Rapporteur of the Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities, E/CN.4/Sub.2/1985/16 Rev.1, 1985, Geneva; ACHPR, Thomas Kwoyelo v. Uganda, Communication 431/12 [2018] ACHPR 129, 17 October 2018, pp. 288 – 289, 293. 346 ACHPR, Thomas Kwoyelo v. Uganda, Communication 431/12 [2018] ACHPR 129, 17 October 2018, para. 293. See, also, ECtHR, Margus v. Croatia, Application No. 4455/10, 27 May 2014, para. 139, where the ECtHR observed that the applicant had been improperly granted an amnesty for acts that amounted to grave breaches of fundamental human rights protected under Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention. The Court observed that granting amnesty in respect of international crimes is “increasingly considered to be prohibited by international law”. 347 ACHPR, Malawi Africa Association v Mauritania, Communications 54/91-61/91-96/93-98/93-164/97_196/97-210/98, para. 83. 348 Republic of Algeria, Law No. 06-01 on the Prevention of and Fight against corruption, 27 February 2006, Article 45. 349 Khirani (on behalf of Ouaghlissi and ors) v Algeria, supra note 184; Mihoubi (on behalf of Mihoubi) v Algeria, supra note 137: Guezout and ors (on behalf of Kamel Rakik and ors) v Algeria, supra note 136. 350 El Boathi v Algeria, Communication No. 2259/2013, CCPR/C/119/D/2259/2013, 16 May 2017, para. 9; Khelifati v Algeria, Merits, Communication No. 2267/2013, CCPR/C/120/D/2267/2013, 21 September 2017, para. 8; Boudjema v Algeria, Merits, Communication No. 2283/2012, CCPR/ C/121/D/2283/2013, 1 December 2017, para. 10; Millis v Algeria, CCPR/C/122/D/239/2014, 28 June 2018, para. 9. 351 Zimbabwe Human Rights NGO Forum, Anti Impunity Report 2019, June 2019. 50