international law. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) under Article 6(4) states: „„Anyone sentenced to death shall have the right to seek pardon or commutation of the sentence. Amnesty, pardon or commutation of the sentence of death may be granted in all cases.‟‟ Similarly, Protocol II to the Geneva Conventions Article 6(5) 5 states: ―At the end of hostilities, the authorities in power shall endeavour to grant the broadest possible amnesty to persons who have participated in the armed conflict, or those deprived of their liberty for reasons related to the armed conflict, whether they are interned or detained.” Do they play a big role in pre transition states and bringing justice? It has been argued that pre-transition states should balance the quest for peace with the attainment of justice. An example is Sierra Leone cited above, where the amnesty was later rescinded and Charles Taylor was indicted at the Special Court for Sierra Leone in the Hague. Critics argue this was an error as it would set a bad precedent that amnesties do not work as a transitional justice tool: For example, one of the most intractable situations in contemporary Africa is posed by Mugabe‘s Zimbabwe. A Taylor-like solution, whereby the country‘s ageing despot might be convinced to leave power in return for a promise he would escape prosecution, is an attractive option and deserves consideration. But Mugabe is an observant man, and he has already noted publicly how the pledge to Taylor was ultimately rescinded. What was a useful option in 2003, when it was taken up by Taylor has become a trap that Mugabe will probably avoid at all costs (Schabas 2012:197) What can be deduced from the above discussion and the database is that amnesties form the foundation of pre-transitional justice. As they allow the hardliners against change to step aside and pave way for other accountability mechanisms such as truth commissions, institutional reforms, reparations and even prosecutions for international crimes. 4.6.2 Truth Commissions Truth Commissions were used in only 9% of countries, and less frequently in Africa than in other parts of the world. In order to fully appreciate the timing of truth enquiries and their significance in pre transitional states, it is important to define the terms from the onset. The most common definition of truth commission was put forward by Hayner (2010), who described a truth commission as having the following characteristics: (1) Truth Commission focus on the past; (2) they investigate a pattern of abuses over a period of time, rather than a specific event; (3) a Truth Commission is a temporary body, typically in operation for six months to two years, and completing its work with the submission of a report; (4) these Commissions are officially sanctioned, authorized, or empowered by the state. (Hayner. p14). Whereas truth commissions are officially sanctioned by States, Unofficial Truth Projects (UTPs) are not, and they are defined as: 25