2.15. Pasts that do not pass: irreconcilable narratives in the context of transitional justice and the resurgence of authoritarian institutional tendencies in Latin America [ES]
How can we understand that, after more than fifty years of dictatorships and internal armed conflicts in Latin America, and having implemented policies of democratization and transitional justice, there has been a setback in human rights in the region? Where were the obstacles and what were the challenges in implementing transitional justice policies? What social, political, and institutional processes in recent decades have led to the weakening of democracy as a political institution? This interdisciplinary panel proposes to reflect on these questions by bringing together distinct national contexts across the region, analyzing how conservative shifts, memory struggles, and authoritarian institutional trends have reconfigured the field of human rights and limited the scope of transitional justice processes. Far from being a temporary phenomenon, the resurgence and institutionalisation of denialist narratives and authoritarian practices within democratic frameworks —through judicial control, budget cuts, state-sanctioned stigmatization and criminalization of human rights defenders and dissidents in general, the repression of social protest and militarization of public security, or the manipulation of already recognized historical memories—reveals a persistent tension between past and present. Based on case studies in Argentina (Figari Layus; Quaretti), Colombia (Cardozo Ruidiaz), and Peru (Wilson Vasquez), this panel explores how memory works and transitional justice mechanisms face a regional context characterized by the return of denialist discourses, institutional erosion, and the consolidation of new forms of democratic authoritarianism. By bringing together structural analyses of far-right turns, the institutional and policy tensions of contesting denialism, decolonial critiques of local-global memory interactions, and the ethnographic tracing of intergenerational stigma, the presentations contribute to a broader debate on the current limits, resistances, and challenges of human rights in Latin America.
"Pasados que no pasan: narrativas irreconciliables en el marco de la justicia transicional y el resurgir de tendencias institucionales autoritarias en América Latina" ¿Cómo comprender que transcurridos poco más de cincuenta años de dictaduras y conflictos armados internos en Latinoamérica y habiendo implementado políticas de democratización y justicia transicional, se presencie un retroceso en materia de derechos humanos en la región? ¿Dónde estuvieron los escollos y cuáles fueron los retos en la implementación de políticas de justicia transicional? ¿Qué procesos sociales, políticos e institucionales de las últimas décadas condujeron al debilitamiento de la democracia como institución política? Este panel interdisciplinario propone reflexionar sobre estas preguntas al reunir distintos contextos nacionales en la región, analizando cómo los giros conservadores, las luchas por la memoria y las tendencias institucionales autoritarias han reconfigurado el campo de los derechos humanos y limitado el alcance de los procesos de justicia transicional. Lejos de ser un fenómeno coyuntural, el resurgimiento e institucionalización de narrativas negacionistas y prácticas autoritarias dentro de los marcos democráticos (a través del control judicial, los recortes presupuestarios, la estigmatización y criminalización estatal de defensores de derechos humanos y disidentes en general, la represión de la protesta social y la militarización de la seguridad pública, o la manipulación de memorias históricas ya reconocidas) revela una tensión constante entre el pasado y el presente. A partir de estudios de caso en Argentina (Figari Layus; Quaretti), Colombia (Cardozo Ruidiaz), and Peru (Wilson Vasquez), este panel explora cómo los trabajos de memoria y los mecanismos de justicia transicional se enfrentan hoy a un contexto regional caracterizado por el retorno de discursos negacionistas, la erosión institucional y la consolidación de nuevas formas de autoritarismo democrático. Al reunir análisis sobre los giros hacia la extrema derecha, las tensiones institucionales y políticas de hacer frente al negacionismo, las críticas decoloniales sobre las interacciones entre lo local y lo global en la memoria, y el rastreo etnográfico del estigma intergeneracional, las ponencias contribuyen a un debate más amplio sobre los límites, resistencias y desafíos actuales de los derechos humanos en América Latina.
Rosario Figari Layus, University of Bonn.
"The rise of the far right and its effects on transitional justice in Argentina"
Over the last few decades, Argentina has been characterized by the tireless struggle of human rights organizations, which have made significant progress in terms of memory, truth, and justice, both for the victims of state terrorism and for society as a whole. Transitional justice policies have contributed to the recognition and reparation of victims of state crimes, establishing normative and institutional standards for non-repetition in the country.
However, the rise of far-right forces, which came to power with Javier Milei at the end of 2023, has resulted in the institutionalization of denialist discourses and the adoption of pejorative positions toward policies of memory, truth, and justice. Restrictive measures have also been implemented that affect the actions of human rights organizations and activists. This includes the use of defamatory advertising campaigns directed against the human rights movement, as well as the withholding of funding for policies and institutions linked to the promotion and protection of human rights, which has a direct impact on the progress of judicial proceedings and other reparation measures.
In this context, this exhibition illustrates how the current government's denialist and authoritarian stance against transitional justice has materialized in specific official measures aimed at undermining four key dimensions of its functioning and objectives: obstructing judicial investigations into crimes against humanity; limiting access to information; reducing the public impact of memory and transitional justice policies; and weakening the activism and participation of human rights and victims' organizations.
Rosario Figari Layus, Universidad de Bonn.
"El ascenso de la extrema derecha y sus efectos sobre la justicia transicional en Argentina."
A lo largo de las últimas décadas, Argentina se ha caracterizado por la incansable lucha de los organismos de derechos humanos, que han logrado avances importantes en materia de memoria, verdad y justicia, tanto para las víctimas del terrorismo de Estado como para la sociedad en su conjunto. Las políticas de justicia transicional han contribuido al reconocimiento y reparación de las víctimas de crímenes de Estado, estableciendo estándares normativos e institucionales para la no repetición en el país. Sin embargo, el auge de fuerzas de extrema derecha, que llegaron al poder con la figura de Javier Milei a finales de 2023, se ha traducido en la institucionalización de discursos negacionistas y en la adopción de posiciones peyorativas hacia las políticas de memoria, verdad y justicia. Asimismo, se han implementado medidas restrictivas que afectan el accionar de organizaciones y activistas de derechos humanos. Esto incluye el uso de campañas de publicidad difamatoria dirigidas contra el movimiento de derechos humanos, así como la retención de financiamiento para políticas e instituciones vinculadas a la promoción y protección de los derechos humanos, lo cual repercute directamente en el avance de los procesos judiciales y otras medidas de reparación. En este contexto, la presente exposición ilustra cómo el posicionamiento de carácter negacionista y autoritario del gobierno actual en contra de la justicia transicional se ha materializado en medidas oficiales específicas dirigidas a debilitar cuatro dimensiones clave de su funcionamiento y objetivos: obstaculizar las investigaciones judiciales de crímenes de lesa humanidad; limitar el acceso a la información; reducir el impacto público de las políticas de memoria y justicia transicional; y debilitar el activismo y la participación de las organizaciones de derechos humanos
Manuel Cardozo Ruidiaz, PhD candidate Katholische Universitat Eichtatt Ingolstat. " By examining the transitional justice measures that the Colombian state has implemented since 2005 this paper will seek to understand the relationship between the global and local imaginaries of memory in contexts of political transition. This paper argues that local and global imaginaries of memory are not, as the existing literature argues, mutually exclusive or opposite. Instead it argues that the two are symbiotic imaginaries and that there is not only a global construction of the local, but also a local construction of the global. The central question: what is the relationship between the global and local imaginaries of memory in memory works in Colombia, is this relationship between the local and global mutually exclusive or mutually conducive? The methodology employed is qualitative and deductive. This work focuses on the analysis of three local memory initiatives through empirical research and phenomenological analysis of their socio-spatial interactions with the local and the global. Therefore, as a way of conclusion, the way in which communities at the local level construct their social imaginaries about their memory of a violent past, cannot be controlled, nor, is it a product of the global imaginary represented in transitional jurisprudence. The Colombian case brings into play the decolonial position on the local and global imaginaries in memory studies which opposes these two spatial units that produce the imaginary through social interaction with the manifestation of a dynamic interconstitutive relationship in a transitional context. The local adapts universal human rights norms to localized struggles, but at the same time, transforms and dynamizes global institutions, giving them meaning."
20260729T140020260729T1530America/Argentina/Buenos_Aires2.15. Pasts that do not pass: irreconcilable narratives in the context of transitional justice and the resurgence of authoritarian institutional tendencies in Latin America [ES]A110MSA Buenos Aires 2026buenosairesconference@memorystudiesassociation.org
Weaponizing the Past: State Violence, Memory, and the 'Terrorist' Label in Peru
Individual paperPopulism, Backlash, Negationism00:00 Midnight - 00:00 Midnight (America/Argentina/Buenos_Aires) 2026/07/29 03:00:00 UTC - 2026/07/29 03:00:00 UTC
This presentation explores how the weaponization of the 'terrorist' discourse in post-war Peru (known as 'terruqueo'), which legitimizes state violence and undermines democratic processes, can be understood as a product of both 'slow memory' (attritional harm) and 'memoria larga' (colonial legacies). Methodologically, the paper draws on a decade-long collaborative ethnographic study with the sons and daughters of the Túpac Amaru Revolutionary Movement (MRTA). It analyzes their evolving testimonial narratives to trace the intergenerational inheritance of stigma and resistance strategies that can, in turn, reproduce the terrorist discourse. This approach is combined with a theoretical dialogue between 'Slow Memory' (as a politics of pace) and 'Memoria Larga' (as a decolonial politics of time), embracing both, the slow, reflective process of engaging with the past and the long, interconnected histories of violence and resistance in order to analyze the difficulties of working through political violence in Peru outside of this discourse. The findings underscore the failures of Peru’s democratic transition to question the construction of the ‘terrorist subject’ and its supporting legal and media frameworks. By critically examining the ongoing violent effects of ‘terruqueo’ (branding people or groups as terrorists), the paper claims that: (1) It inflicts a ‘slow’ attritional violence on those stigmatized, foreclosing paths to justice and full enjoyment of their rights. (2) It is a product of ‘long’ memory, re-living deep-seated colonial-racial logics to dehumanize those identified as threats. (3) This discourse is continually redeployed to justify ‘fast’ repressive violence against contemporary dissent, rendering protesters ‘disposable’ and legitimizing state-sanctioned violence. The paper concludes this is a memory-based repression that reduces dialogic spaces, promotes distrust, and becomes lethal to particular bodies. It serves as a warning for societies mobilizing the terrorist discourse, as it perpetuates the State’s right to kill.
Presenters Goya Wilson Vasquez Senior Research Associate, University Of Bristol
Policies and discourses against “state terrorism denial” (Argentina, 2016–2023)
Individual paperPopulism, Backlash, Negationism00:00 Midnight - 00:00 Midnight (America/Argentina/Buenos_Aires) 2026/07/29 03:00:00 UTC - 2026/07/29 03:00:00 UTC
In Argentina, since the last dictatorship, there have been voices denying the existence of gross human rights violations. After the recovery of democracy, it became almost impossible to deny the crimes, as they were judicially proven. However, some actors linked to the military claimed that the condemned crimes were part of a “dirty” war. These were minority voices within Argentine society, but since 2016 they reached the governmental level, as public servants from “Cambiemos,” the political alliance opposed to Kirchnerism, expressed them. Several scholars described these speeches as “state terrorism denial” or “denialism.” From 2020 to 2023, when a new Kirchnerist alliance took office, diverse initiatives sought to limit the spread of such denial: draft bills were presented, educational materials published, and the executive branch delivered speeches to stop the denial of human rights violations. Previous studies have focused on denialist discourses and, in some cases, offered historical arguments against them. Some scholars argue that the “state terrorism denial” label serves to censor criticism of Kirchnerist memory and justice policies. None, however, have analysed the policies—designed or implemented—to counter denialism. This communication explores those policies. It asks: To what extent did the “state terrorism denial” reveal a new phenomenon? What was the rationale behind the policies against denialism? What conceptions of justice for the recent past were conveyed in those accusations? To answer these questions, I analysed public files published between 2016 and 2023: draft bills, news articles, publications from the Human Rights Secretariat, debates on Law 14.910, public conferences, and executive speeches demanding the penalization of denialism. Although exploratory, the study finds that “state terrorism denial” accusation is a polysemic phrase encompassing proposals in tension—punishment and education—and claiming judicial truth in a context where trials for crimes against humanity are still being carried out while increasingly questioned.
Goya Wilson Vasquez
