Why have some democracies made considerable progress in elucidating and prosecuting human rights violations committed by preceding dictatorships, while others still have amnesty laws that prevent —or at least hinder— the approval of such policies? We aim to demonstrate that, during democratization periods, the more legal the previous dictatorial repression, and the more direct judicial involvement in it, the more resistance there will be to apply policies of transitional justice. We will compare the Spanish case with those of Chile and Argentina. The establishment of democracy following a right-wing dictatorship responsible for the systematic violation of human rights forced all three countries to consider how best to confront this violent past. Once democracy has been consolidated, additional explanatory factors will account for the presence or absence of judicial accountability.