Narrative truths: On the construction of the past in truth commissions

2013 ◽  
pp. 156-174
Keyword(s):  
Author(s):  
Andrew Valls

In regime transitions, a number of mechanisms are utilized to memorialize the past and to reject the ideas associated with human rights abused of the prior regime. This is often done through truth commissions, apologies, memorials, museums, changes in place names, national holidays, and other symbolic measures. In the United States, some efforts along these lines have been undertaken, but on the whole they have been very limited and inadequate. In addition, many symbols and memorials associated with the past, such as Confederate monuments and the Confederate Battle Flag, continue to be displayed. Hence while some progress has been made on these issues, much more needs to be done.


Comma ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 2020 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 139-150
Author(s):  
Romain Ledauphin ◽  
Claudia Josi ◽  
Rahel Siegrist

Records and archives containing information relating to grave violations of human rights and international humanitarian law represent a fundamental source for, and can become trustworthy documentary evidence within, Dealing with the Past (DWP) processes including truth commissions, criminal tribunals, reparation programs, vetting processes and outreach projects. Those intergovernmental organizations (IGOs) and international non-governmental organizations (INGOs) working in the fields of human rights and peace and security are themselves important observers and actors in DWP processes and hence their records and archives are highly relevant to DWP initiatives. Such organizations should therefore be transparent and be able to facilitate DWP processes by granting access to their records. Given the International Council on Archives’ definition of “access” as relating to “… the availability of records for consultation as a result both of legal authorization and the existence of finding aids”, and the experience of swisspeace in advising DWP initiatives on collecting evidence and improving records management capacity, swisspeace together with the Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs developed a roadmap which centres on the development of an “archives accessibility maturity model”. This tool will not only improve hands-on access in practice, but will ultimately improve knowledge about the multi-layered complexity of archives’ accessibility, strengthening the capacity of IGOs, INGOs and DWP initiatives to design and implement their access regulations, and thereby improving DWP initiatives’ ability to make successful access requests.


2014 ◽  
Vol 74 (5) ◽  
pp. 349-363
Author(s):  
Stefan Engert

Abstract How did the united Germany address the human rights violations of the communist dictatorship in Eastern Germany? This question is particularly intriguing as the process of accounting for the past was interrupted and postponed by the reunification with West-Germany. In spite of having made use of tribunals, lustrations, truth-commissions and reparations, two important reconciliation tools - political apologies and amnesties - have not been used during that time. As a consequence, the reconciliation of the former perpetrators and victims has remained incomplete.


2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 82-107
Author(s):  
G. Nelaeva ◽  
N. Sidorova

The concept of transitional justice has been associated with the periods of political change when a country emerges from a war or turmoil and attempts to address the wrongdoings of the past. Among various instruments of transitional justice, truth commissions stand out as an example of a non-judicial form of addressing the crimes of the past. While their setup and operation can be criticized on different grounds, including excessive politization of hearings and the virtual impossibility of meaningfully assessing their impact, it has been widely acknowledged in the literature that the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in South Africa can be regarded as a success story due to its relatively strong mandate and widespread coverage and resonance it had in South African society. We would like to compare this commission from the 1990s with a more recent example, the Brazilian National Truth Commission, so as to be able to address the question of incorporation of gendered aspects in transitional justice (including examination of sexual violence cases, representation of women in truth-telling bodies, etc.), since gender often remains an overlooked and silenced aspect in such initiatives. Gendered narratives of transitional justice often do not fit into the wider narratives of post-war reconciliation. A more general question addressed in this research is whether the lack of formal procedure in truth commissions facilitates or hinders examination of sexual crimes in transitional settings.


2003 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 128-130
Author(s):  
John Boye Ejobowah

How should societies that have transitioned from authoritarian to democraticrule deal with the atrocities and gross human rights violations of theirimmediate past? Should those implicated in the crimes of past regimes beprosecuted? This sophisticated volume attempts to address such questions.About one-third of the book is comprised of well-reasoned theoreticalchapters that answer the above questions by creating a space in liberal justicefor forgiveness. The remainder consists of empirical contributions thatdescribe the ways in which international institutions and five countries(Chile, Guatemala, South Africa, Rwanda, and Northern Ireland) haveresponded to such crimes. Unlike the theoretical section, most contributionshere argue that while memory and forgiveness (the truth commissions) areimportant, they are not enough to meet the victims’ psychological needsand do not guarantee non-repetition. The introduction rightly acknowledgesthat some of the chapters argue in different directions.Doing justice in the aftermath of civil conflict is a thorny problem. In liberalism,criminal justice always has been straightforward: the courts, themouthpiece of objective law, have to mediate and impose punishment if theperpetrator is proven guilty. Punishment must consist of penalties that annulthe advantages seized by the criminal, compensate the victim in the case of ...


2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 192
Author(s):  
Professor Bishnu Pathak

<em>The objective of this paper is to explore the initiatives and practices of different countries in truth seeking. Many countries during the post-conflict, colonial, slavery, anarchical and cultural genocide periods establish the Truth Commissions to respond to the past human wrongdoings: crimes and crimes against humanity. Enforced Disappearances (ED), killings, rapes and inhumane tortures are wrongdoings. Truth Commission applies the method of recovering silences from the victims for structured testimonies. The paper is prepared based on the victim-centric approach. The purpose reveals the piecemeal fact-findings to heal the past, reconcile the present and protect the future. The study covers more than 50 Commissions in a chronological order: beginning from Uganda in 1974 and concluding to Nepal in February 2015. Two Commissions in Uruguay were formed to find-out enforced disappearances. Colombian and Rwandan Commissions have established permanent bodies. The Liberian TRC threatened the government to submit its findings to the ICC if the government failed to establish an international tribunal. The Commissions of Bolivia, Ecuador, Haiti, former Yugoslavia and Zimbabwe were disbanded, and consequently, their reports could not be produced. No public hearings were conducted in Argentina and former Yugoslavia. It is noted that only 8 public hearings in Ghana, 8 national hearings in East-Timor and 15 in Brazil were conducted. Moroccan Commission held public hearings after signing the bond paper for not to disclose the names of the perpetrators whereas Guatemala did not include the perpetrators’ names in the report. The Shining Path’s activists are serving sentences based on civil-anti-terrorist court, but Alberto Fujimori is convicted for 25 years. Chadian Commission worked even against illicit narcotics trafficking. The UN established its Commissions in Sierra Leon, El Salvador and East-Timor, but failed to restore normalcy in Kosovo. Haiti prosecuted 50 perpetrators whereas Guatemala prosecuted its former military dictator. The Philippines’ Commission had limited investigation jurisdiction over army, but treated the insurgents differently. In El Salvador, the State security forces were responsible for 85 percent and the non-state actors for 15 percent similar to CIEDP, Nepal. The TRCs of Argentina, East-Timor, Guatemala, Morocco, Peru and South Africa partially succeeded. Large numbers of victims have failed to register the complaints fearing of possible actions. All perpetrators were controversially granted amnesty despite the TRC recommendation in South Africa. The victims and people still blamed Mandela that he sold out black people’s struggle. Ironically, the perpetrators have received justice, but the victims are further victimized. As perpetrator-centric Government prioritizes cronyism, most of the Commissioners defend their respective institution and individuals. Besides, perpetrators influence Governments on the formation of Truth Commission for ‘forgetting the victims to forgive the perpetrators’. A commission is a Court-liked judicial and non-judicial processes body, but without binding authority except Sierra Leone. Transitional Justice body exists with a five-pillar policy: truth, justice, healing, prosecution and reparation. It has a long neglected history owing to anarchical roles of the perpetrators and weak-poor nature of the victims. Almost all TRCs worked in low budget, lack of officials, inadequate laws and regulations, insufficient infrastructures and constraints of moral supports including Liberia, Paraguay, Philippines, South Africa, Uganda and Nepal. The perpetrators controlled Governments ordered to destroy documents, evidences and testimonies in their chain of command that could have proven guilty to them.</em>


Author(s):  
Anja Mihr ◽  
Chandra Sriram Lekha

States are expected to provide both security and justice for their citizens; one needs the other in order to work well. Yet when both are damaged or destroyed by war, state actors and outsiders alike tend to treat them as competing post-conflict priorities. Over the past twenty years, numerous processes have emerged to promote one or both, including “transitional justice”—from courts and truth commissions to community reconciliation—and programs to restore rule of law, reform the “security sector” (SSR) and disarm, demobilize, and reintegrate fighters into society (DDR). The many actors involved have just as many, sometimes competing, operational priorities, knowing that change is urgent, but necessarily long-term. This chapter examines the interaction of transitional justice, rule of law, SSR, and DDR, identifying key concepts, actors, processes, and challenges in pursuing change in each of these areas simultaneously.


2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 444-470
Author(s):  
Jeremy Sarkin ◽  
Ram Kumar Bhandari

Abstract Over five decades and with dozens of examples of truth commissions to look back on, an undeniable aspect of their legacy is that the world has become far more focused on dealing with the past and uncovering the truth about past atrocities. While there is typically a focus in the literature on the more widely publicized and famous truth commissions, scores of other processes have taken place, especially since the 1990s. Post-conflict or divided societies have designed institutions in ways that achieve specific objectives but at the same time conform to international standards, creating a reputation of being both democratic and accountable. Using the prism of Nepal, this article examines why the process to establish transitional justice mechanisms, and specifically truth commissions, needs to be legitimate and credible for them to be effective and be impactful. It specifically examines issues relating to appointments to such institutions and why such appointments need to be done independently and not overtly politically. It scrutinizes why appointment mechanisms and processes are so important to enhancing the legitimacy and independence of such bodies. The case of Nepal is used as an example to extrapolate conclusions about the problems that affected its processes, and the various crises that have emerged in those processes. The article argues that commissioners ought to be chosen on the basis of their impartiality, moral integrity, and known commitment to human rights and disclosure of the truth. This is essential to ensure that the process is seen to be independent and credible.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document