Why do governments block efforts to hold perpetrators of human rights violations accountable, including against actors linked to proscribed groups? This article explores the Malian government’s decisions to support or suspend accountability efforts against prominent individuals during the peace negotiations between 2012 and 2017, including those with links to jihadist groups. By tracing the micro-processes determining how and why certain individuals faced justice for crimes and not others, the article shows how Malian authorities used implicit amnesty measures as a tool of strategic legitimation for certain rebel leaders. This helped constitute certain actors as part of the legitimate opposition and gloss over both their alleged responsibility for human rights abuses and their involvement in jihadist groups excluded from the talks. This article presents a framework that demonstrates how elite bargaining around accountability follows four political rationales and shows how a government’s selective approach to justice can enable actors to use peace processes as a means of impunity and political rehabilitation. This reveals the political significance of implicit amnesty measures, which achieve similar aims as formal amnesties yet without crossing the red line of providing formal amnesty for international crimes and serious human rights violations.

中文翻译：

---

恐怖分子与叛乱分子：隐性特赦在马里和平进程中的战略运用

为什么政府要阻止追究侵犯人权者的责任，包括追究与被禁团体有联系的行为者的责任？本文探讨了马里政府在 2012 年至 2017 年和平谈判期间支持或暂停对知名人士（包括与圣战组织有联系的人士）追究责任的决定。通过追踪确定某些个人如何以及为何因犯罪而不是其他人而受到审判的微观过程，本文展示了马里当局如何利用隐性特赦措施作为某些反叛领导人战略合法化的工具。这有助于将某些行为者塑造为合法反对派的一部分，并掩盖他们所谓的侵犯人权责任以及他们参与被排除在谈判之外的圣战组织的行为。本文提出了一个框架，展示了围绕问责制的精英讨价还价如何遵循四个政治理由，并展示了政府选择性的司法方法如何使行为者能够利用和平进程作为有罪不罚和政治复兴的手段。这揭示了隐性特赦措施的政治意义，这些措施实现了与正式特赦类似的目标，但没有跨越对国际犯罪和严重侵犯人权行为提供正式特赦的红线。