Chapter 5 addresses the manner in which the International Court of Justice interprets and applies cessation and assurances and guarantees of non-repetition as remedies of international law. These remedies are treated in a single chapter because they are, to a certain degree, complementary. The definition and function of these remedies and their interaction with each other, and with other remedies of international law, such as specific performance or satisfaction, are issues that clarify their meaning. The manner in which cessation interacts with specific performance, and the relevance of the principle of pacta sunt servanda, clarifies the manner in which this remedy is applied before the International Court of Justice. Further, the distinction between assurances and guarantees of non-repetition and their related formality, as provided by states through their pleadings before the Court and by the judicial body, through its judgments, contribute to the clarification of their substance.

This chapter uses the case study of Colombia to argue that there is an emerging right to justice born out of the aspirations of international criminal law. This right comprises several elements, each finding its own unique realisation in the context of Colombia’s transition to peace. More specifically, the chapter discusses the right to see perpetrators of mass atrocities held accountable, the right to peace and reconciliation, the right not to face repetition of collective violence, victims’ right to justice, the right to truth, and, finally, the right to local administration of justice. The International Criminal Court (ICC) plays a role in enforcing these various elements of the overarching right to justice but with clear limitations dictated by the nature of international criminal law as a discipline relying on State cooperation and its own moral appeal. Such process is best understood if one sees the ICC as the enforcer at the domestic level of the generic right to justice.