T he right to redress for serious human rights violations is a well-established norm of international law.354 The ICPPED provides for the right of victims of ED “to obtain reparation and prompt, fair and adequate compensation.”355 The ACHPR considers reparations to be a form of restorative justice focusing on the needs of victims and the restoration of social equilibrium.356 Reparations have to be “effective” in practice as well as in law.357 States should not enact laws that hinder access to redress, such as amnesties and/or immunities, or short statutes of limitations to prosecute crimes.360 Civil claims for compensation should not be made dependent on penal sanctions imposed on the perpetrators;361 similarly the right to reparations should not be made conditional on the death of the victim.362 Reparations should also not be limited to ED which takes place during a specific time frame.363 Statutes of limitations should not be effective against civil or administrative actions brought by victims seeking reparations.364 Effective reparations in law and lifting legal barriers Effective reparations in practice The law should allow victims to access reparations, through judicial processes or special administrative bodies.358 Reparations should include judicial remedy; an administrative procedure will not suffice to provide redress.359 Accessible. Access to reparations for victims of ED “must not be unjustifiably hindered by acts or omissions by the authorities of the respondent State.”365 Information about available remedies should be 354 UDHR, Article 8; ICCPR, Articles 2(3), 9(5), 14(6); CAT, Article 14; ECHR, Article 13; ACHR, Article 25; African Charter, Articles 7, 21; Arab Charter on Human Rights, Article 16. See also: ACHPR, Zimbabwe Human Rights NGO Forum v. Zimbabwe, Communication 245/02, para. 213; IACtHR, Gelman v Uruguay, supra note 211, para. 247; Castillo Páez v. Perú, Reparations and Costs, 27 November 1998, para. 50: obligation to provide reparations is a customary norm of international law. 355 ICPPED, Article 24(4). This right “covers material and moral damages and, where appropriate, other forms of reparation such as: (a) restitution; (b) rehabilitation; (c) satisfaction, including restoration of dignity and reputation; (d) guarantees of non-repetition”; Article 24(5); see also ACHPR, General Comment No. 4 on the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights: The Right to Redress for Victims of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Punishment or Treatment (Article 5), 2017, para. 10. 356 ACHPR, Study on transitional justice and Human and Peoples’ Rights in Africa: The Right to Redress for Victims of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Punishment or Treatment (Article 5), 2017, para. 52. 357 See for instance: ACHPR, General Comment No. 4 on the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights: The Right to Redress for Victims of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Punishment or Treatment (Article 5), 2017, para. 1. 358 WGEID, General Comment on Article 19 of the Declaration on the Protection of all Persons from Enforced Disappearances, UN Doc E/CN.4/1998/43, para. 72. 359 HRCt, Bautista de Arellana v. Colombia, Communication No. 563/1993, 27 October 1995, para. 8.2; CAT, General Comment 3, 13 December 2012, para. 20; ECtHR, Ramirez Sanchez v. France, 399, 4 July 2006, paras. 165-166; see also: OHCHR, Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law, UN Doc. A/RES/60/147, Annex, 21 March 2006, para. 12; cf. ACHPR, General Comment No. 4 on the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, supra note 164, 2017, para. 26. 360 HRCt, General Comment No.31 [80], UN Doc. CCPR/C/21Rev.1/Add.13, 26 May 2004, para. 18; CAT, General Comment 3, 13 December 2012, paras. 18, 37-43; IACtHR, Caracazo v. Venezuela, 29 August 2002, Reparations, para. 119; see also: ICCPR, Article 2(3) and OHCHR, Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law, UN Doc. A/RES/60/147, Annex, 21 March 2006, paras. 6-7. In relation to Algeria, the HRCt drew attention to the terms of Ordinance No. 06-01, preventing families from bringing legal claims of ED. It underlined that the Ordinance should not impede the enjoyment of the right to an effective remedy for the victims of torture and ED (HRCt, , Khirani (on behalf of Ouaghlissi and ors) v Algeria, Merits, UN Doc. CCPR/C/104/D/1905/2009, 26 March 2012; Mihoubi (on behalf of Mihoubi) v Algeria, Communication No. 1874/2009, UN Doc. CCPR/C/109/D/1874/2009, 7 January 2014; Guezout and ors (on behalf of Kamel Rakik and ors) v Algeria, Merits, Communication No. 1753/2008, UN Doc. CCPR/C/105/D/1753/2008, 19 July 2012; El Boathi v Algeria, Communication No. 2259/2013, UN Doc. CCPR/C/119/D/2259/2013, 16 May 2017, para. 9; Khelifati v Algeria, Merits, Communication No. 2267/2013, UN Doc. CCPR/C/120/D/2267/2013, 21 September 2017, para. 8; Boudjema v. Algeria, Merits, Communication No. 2283/2012, UN Doc. CCPR/C/121/D/2283/2013, 1 December 2017, para. 10; Millis v Algeria, UN Doc. CCPR/C/122/D/239/2014, 28 June 2018, para. 9.) 361 WGEID, General Comment on Article 19, note supra 358, para. 73; OEA, Principal Guidelines for a Comprehensive Reparations Policy, OEA/Ser/L/V/ II.131 Doc. 1, 19 February 2008, para. 2. 362 WGEID, General Comment on Article 19, supra note 358, para. 74; however, a finding of the death of the victim as a result of the ED should give rise to additional compensation for the dependents; States should “provide for appropriate legal procedures leading to the presumption of death of a similar legal status of the victims which entitles the dependants to exercise their right to compensation” 363 See for instance ICPPED, Concluding observations on the report submitted by Argentina, UN Doc. CED/C/ARG/CO/1, 12 December 2013, para. 35. 364 UN ESC, Updated Set of Principles for the Protection and Promotion of Human Rights through Action to Combat Impunity, UN Doc. E/CN.4/2005/102/ Add.1, 2005, Principles 23 and 32; according to the WGEID, “the passing of time should not be an obstacle for the progress of civil demands through the application of statutes of limitations.” (Report of the WGEID, UN Doc. A/HRC/22/45, 28 January 2013, para. 58). 365 ECtHR, Aksoy v. Turkey, 18 December 1996, para. 95. 53