In international law, non-repetition refers to assurances and concrete structural measures a responsible state must offer to prevent the recurrence of an internationally wrongful act. It is codified in Article 30(b) of the International Law Commission's 2001 Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts (ARSIWA), which requires a state in breach to "offer appropriate assurances and guarantees of non-repetition, if circumstances so require."
Non-repetition is conceptually distinct from the three classical forms of reparation — restitution, compensation, and satisfaction — set out in ARSIWA Articles 34–37. While reparation looks backward at harm already caused, guarantees of non-repetition look forward, addressing the risk of future breach. They can take the form of:
- legislative or constitutional reform
- training of security forces or judicial officers
- vetting, dismissal, or prosecution of responsible officials
- public acknowledgement and memorialisation
- institutional reform of agencies linked to the violation
The principle is also a pillar of the UN Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law (A/RES/60/147, 2005), which lists non-repetition as one of five forms of reparation alongside restitution, compensation, rehabilitation, and satisfaction.
The Inter-American Court of Human Rights has been particularly active in ordering guarantees of non-repetition, for example requiring Mexico to reform military jurisdiction following Radilla-Pacheco v. Mexico (2009). The ICJ addressed the concept in LaGrand (Germany v. United States) (2001), where the United States' general assurance regarding Vienna Convention on Consular Relations notifications was deemed sufficient.
Non-repetition also features prominently in transitional justice frameworks, including the mandate of the UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion of truth, justice, reparation and guarantees of non-recurrence, established by Human Rights Council resolution 18/7 (2011).
Example
In its 2009 judgment in Radilla-Pacheco v. Mexico, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights ordered Mexico to reform Article 57 of its Code of Military Justice as a guarantee of non-repetition.
Frequently asked questions
Under ARSIWA (2001), assurances of non-repetition are treated as a consequence of an internationally wrongful act distinct from reparation, but the 2005 UN Basic Principles and Guidelines (A/RES/60/147) list it as one of five forms of reparation for victims of gross human rights violations.
Keep learning