Mark Iyi, JohnEwi, Gilbert Bua2023-11-132024-04-022023-11-132024-04-022023https://hdl.handle.net/10566/10318Magister Legum - LLMThe right to an effective remedy for victims of mass atrocities and the massive human rights abuses perpetrated in intra-state conflicts remains weak in international law. This is more so when such conflicts involve a ruling government and a section of its population. A host of substantive and procedural legal issues prevent victims from being able to seek redress in national and international courts. This problem is particularly acute where victims seek redress for the abuses perpetrated by the regime’s military and other paramilitary forces in connivance with law enforcement personnel, loyal to the regime in power. The nature of these conflicts, full of the regime’s absolute power over the judiciary, the paramilitary and military forces, the gendarmerie and the police force, makes it difficult to hold the regime accountable for such human rights abuses. This doctrinal research seeks to critically examine and assess other transitional justice measures and then ascertain the effectiveness of the non-judicial mechanisms of memory and truth in a bid to achieve sustainable peace and reconciliation in the conflict-torn state of Cameroon. The research seeks to examine the parameters of an effective remedy under international law and then proceeds to assess the concept of memory and truth as a transitional justice mechanism offering human rights-compliant remedies geared towards achieving sustainable peace when deployed in the Cameroonian conflict.enMemory and truthTransitional justiceNon-judicial measures,Intra-state conflictCameroonThesisUniversity of the Western Cape