10. 特别报告员在本报告中讨论了作出充分赔偿所面临的法律障碍，同时也强调了涉及各国当今完全有责任作出赔偿这一法律义务。此外，特别报告员强调指出，争取和实现对奴隶制和殖民主义的赔偿需要切实地对依然阻碍赔偿的国际法理论进行“去殖民化”。面对奴隶制和殖民主义的严重历史不公正及其余孽，会员国利用法律理论以阻碍补救是令人痛心的。特别报告员强调指出，国际法理论为殖民统治辩护和促成殖民统治的历史比保障所有人平等权利的历史要长。长期维持新殖民主义互动关系(包括未能根除奴隶制和殖民主义余孽)的法律本身必须被认识并谴责为新殖民主义法律。应该将推动力放在制定不分种族地确保所有人实现公正和平等的法律理论之上。殖民主义和奴隶制曾经是合法的，但现在都已废除了。这就提出了一个问题，即自由正义的捍卫者为什么并没有倾注全力关注实现法律改革，使全面赔偿与国际法两者相符合。
10. In the present report, the Special Rapporteur discusses legal hurdles to providing full reparations, while also highlighting legal obligations related to the provision of reparations for which States are fully liable today. In addition, the Special Rapporteur emphasizes that the pursuit and achievement of reparations for slavery and colonialism require a genuine “decolonization” of the doctrines of international law that remain barriers to reparations. In the face of the grave historic injustices of slavery and colonialism, as well as their continuing lega cies, the use of legal doctrine by Member States to impede redress is distressing. The Special Rapporteur stresses that international legal doctrine has a longer history of justifying and enabling colonial domination than it does of guaranteeing equal rights to all humanbeings. Law that perpetuates neocolonial dynamics – including the failure to eradicate the legacies of slavery and colonialism – must itself be recognized and condemned as neocolonial law. The impetus should be on developing legal doctrines that can ensure justice and equality for all, irrespective of race. Colonialism and slavery were legal once, but both were abolished. This then raises the question as to why defenders of liberal justice are not preoccupied with achieving the legal reform that would make comprehensive reparations compatible with international law.