The promises and limitations of law in guaranteeing freedom in Africa: The right to a RevolutionPosted: 30 June, 2021 Filed under: Eduardo Kapapelo | Tags: African Charter, Christof Heyns, crimes against humanity, democratic order, dictatorial governments, fair elections, genocide, human rights, human rights violations, international crimes, Lome Declaration against unconstitutional changes of government, peace and security, political violence, post-indepedence, recourse, revolution, State violence, struggle approach, violence Leave a comment
Author: Eduardo Kapapelo
Centre for Human Rights, University of Pretoria
One of the main objectives of international and regional law is to maintain peace and security. It has been reasoned that where there is peace and security, humanity stands a better chance to protect individual rights and freedoms. On account of the importance of peace and security at national, regional and international level, States agreed to criminalize those who engage in violent conduct or seek to change governments through the use of violent force. Yet, is it a coincidence that in many dictatorial governments with atrocious human rights records, opposition leaders are often charged of attempting to unconstitutionally change the government of the day? This contribution seeks to discuss the right to a just-revolution and how existing laws promise freedoms but is limited in delivery when it comes to dictatorial governments. In this contribution, a just-revolution is defined as a revolution to overthrow a government of the day whose rule is characterised by gross human rights violations or international crimes such as crimes against humanity and genocide. Do citizens have a right to a just-revolution?