Gorrin Castellano, Guillermo2023-06-262023-06-262023https://hdl.handle.net/11299/254832Professional paper for the fulfillment of the Master of Human Rights degree.This paper examines the practice of anti-landmine action by contrasting technocratic, top to bottom approaches and community, victim-informed approaches and how they relate to the concepts of non-repetition and remedies in Human Rights. The goal is to search for prescriptive conclusions that harmonize both practices in support of future landmines action. The paper establishes important stipulative definitions in two parts 1) a descriptive discussion based on the literature around the pitfalls of the current international law regime regulating landmines, how victims are defined, and the issue of non-repetition and remedies in the context of landmines, and 2) a discussion around community, victim centered approaches and technocracy as they relate to non-repetition and remedies. To understand these stipulations in practice, two paradigmatic case studies were chosen: Colombia and Mozambique. A descriptive comparative analysis places the two previous discussions in the context of these case studies and aims to signal at how the successful incorporation of both the technocratic and the community, victim -based approach have yielded substantial positive outcomes in redressing victims by not focusing solely on the framework of prohibition, removal, and disposal.enAnti-Personal LandminesAPLsremediesMozambiqueColombianon-repetitionOttawa ConventionvictimstechnocracyThesis or Dissertation