Contents
Introduction: The Emergence of an Individual Right to Reparation for Victims of Armed Conflict
1.The Right to Reparation for Victims of Armed Conflict: The Intertwined Development of Substantive and Procedural Aspects
2.Operationalising the Right of Victims of War to Reparation
3.International Human Rights Adjudication, Subsidiarity, and Reparation for Victims of Armed Conflict
III.The Inter-American Court of Human Rights and Its Jurisprudence on Reparation
A.Gross Human Rights Violations, Victims, and Domestic Reparation Programmes in Guatemala, Peru, and Colombia
B.The Jurisprudence of the Court on Domestic Reparation Programmes: From Rectification to Deference
C.The Judgments in Yarce and Vereda La Esperanza v. Colombia: Is the Court Revisiting Its Approach to Subsidiarity?
D.The Reasoning of the Court behind Deference in Relation to Domestic Reparation Programmes: Problems and Consequences
E.The Court’s Shift towards Subsidiarity: What Explains This Approach?
IV.The European Court of Human Rights and Its Jurisprudence on Reparation
A.The Court’s Standard Approach to Subsidiarity and Reparation
B.Changes in the Court’s Treatment of Subsidiarity and Reparation
C.The Court’s Jurisprudence on War-Related Large-Scale Human Rights Violations and Domestic Reparation Programmes
D.What Explains the Approach of the Court to Subsidiarity when Dealing with Reparation?
E.The Reasoning of the Court on Remedial Measures: Problems and Consequences
V.What Should Regional Human Rights Courts Do When Faced with Challenges to Domestic Reparation Programmes?
Conclusion: Reparation for Victims of Armed Conflict – At the Interface of International and National Law