ABSTRACT
The twentieth century has witnessed grave human rights violations conducted by a considerable number of governments around the world. Surprisingly, human rights have been more frequently infringed upon by repressive governments during peacetime than during international or civil war. In the literature of contemporary legal philosophy, there seems to be a loose consensus on how to deal with ex post facto laws. Authors substantially agree that a retroactive law is permissible or even advisable when the normative deficit it creates is outweighed by its objective necessity. The development of international law on human rights appears to have resolved the retroactive justice problem in trials for torturing and killing citizens. There are some attempts to resolve the retroactive justice problem from perspectives outside of international law. The pertinacious unfairness of retrospective laws places those who were involved directly or indirectly in prosecution of perpetrators in a moral predicament.
