Has the democratically elected administration of any country ever prosectuted

[cali]

the one it replaced for torture and/or war crimes? I can think of many that haven't done so, but I'm unaware of any that did. South Africa had the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. It wasn't until yesterday that a court cleared the way for prosecutions from that era.

http://www.360news.co.za/africa/05-May-2009/105539-south-africa-court-clears-way-prosecution-cases-from-apartheid-era.html

So although I'm all for prosecuting bushco, historically, not just in this country, but in other countries post-Nuremberg, it doesn't look good. Spain never prosecuted for torture and mass murder by the Franco regime- which didn't end with the civil war, France issued 2 amnesties for torture that was perpetrated in Algeria. Serbia has cooperated with international prosecutions but I don't believe they've prosecuted their own.

If anyone is aware of countries that prosecuted the immediate past administrations for engaging in torture, please post that information.

[NoPasaran]

1. Argentina

Argentina prosecuted members of the military junta which waged the "Dirty War" against its domestic enemies. Says Wikipedia:

The junta relinquished power in 1983. After democratic elections, president elect Raúl Alfonsín created the National Commission on the Disappearance of Persons (CONADEP) in December 1983, led by writer Ernesto Sábato, to collect evidence about the Dirty War crimes. The gruesome details, including documentation of the disappearance of nearly 9,000 people, shocked the world. Jorge Rafael Videla, head of the junta, was among the generals convicted of human rights crimes, including forced disappearances, torture, murders and kidnappings. President Alfonsín ordered that the nine members of the military junta be judicially charged, during the 1983 Trial of the Juntas, together with guerrilla leaders Mario Firmenich, Fernando Vaca Narvaja, Rodolfo Galimberti, Roberto Perdía, and Enrique Gorriarán Merlo. Some claimed that Alfonsín's government was positing the "theory of the two demons", morally equating violent political subversion with state terrorism.

In 1985, Videla was sentenced to life imprisonment at the military prison of Magdalena. However, on 29 December 1990, President Carlos Menem pardoned Videla and other convicted generals. In 1998, Videla received a prison sentence for his role in the kidnapping of eleven children during the regime and for the forgery of the children's identity documents (the "stolen babies", kidnapped from the parents arrested, and raised by military families). Videla is currently serving this sentence under house arrest.

Some viewed the pardons as a pragmatic decision of national reconciliation that sought to please the military and thus prevent further uprisings. Others condemned it as unconstitutional, noting that the constitutionally acknowledged right of the president to pardon does not extend to those who have not yet been convicted — which was the situation in the case of some military officials. Others yet consider that this presidential privilege is inappropriate for modern times, a relic of monarchic rule that should be abolished.

Ironically, dictator Videla was de facto incapable of leaving his house, since every time he went out in public he risked insults or assault. At one time, the street was painted with enormous arrows pointing to his house, and the words: 30,000 disappeared, assassin on the loose.

[90-percent]

2. Got me

I'm clueless about giving you an accurate answer, but, instead, would like to offer this link that is profoundly pertinent to the entire Torture Debate.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=385&topic_id=307187&mesg_id=307187

The prof. brings up profound points I have not yet seen elsewhere.

Enjoy!

-90% jimmy

[Gregorian]

3. Fujimori of Peru?

I'm a little unclear how that all turned out, considering there were multiple issues.

It's interesting you posted this, as I was doing some reading on this. The one thing I come away from the Nuremberg trials with is that there were "winners" and "losers" in a legitimate war. I suppose Iraq could be considered a loser in the conflict. But it just doesn't lend itself to a concise situation like that with France, Germany, USA, Soviet Union, Britain.

And being that the Hague accepts crimes committed after July 1 2002, Shock and Awe would qualify.

I wouldn't expect anything from within the country. It isn't going to happen, if it already hasn't. As far as I am concerned immediate impeachment proceedings would have begun after attacking a nation that was not an imminent threat. And we all know how that turned out.

[fasttense]

4. Chile

Remember Pinochet? He liked to torture and kill union leaders and liberals in his own country. He was never voted into office.

In 1990, following a plebiscite he lost much to his dismay, he reluctantly stepped down as president, but remained commander-in-chief of the army.

In that position, he frequently acted to quash the threat of prosecutions against members of the security forces suspected of human rights abuses during the 17-year military regime, as well as to block any radical political initiatives.

In 1998, Gen Pinochet finally relinquished his post as commander-in-chief.

The very next day, he took up a parliamentary seat as a senator-for-life, another position he had created for himself.

"He seemed untouchable until his arrest and subsequent detention in London in October that same year, after an extradition request from Spain.

After more than a year in custody, the general was allowed to return to Chile in March 2000, after UK Home Secretary Jack Straw said he was not well enough to stand trial.

But the political climate in Chile had changed in his absence. That same month, Chile's first socialist president since Allende, Ricardo Lagos, took office.

But there was a new desire to come to terms with Chile's past, culminating in a decision by a Chilean court in 2001 which ruled that Gen Pinochet should stand trial for covering up human rights abuses."

Pinochet kept moving from one powerful political position in Chile to another, still controlling the military and political power. But as soon as he returned to Chile, they began prosecuting the murderer.

I think the bush and dick still have a long powerful reach into our federal government. But soon they will be powerless.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3758403.stm