Race and Reconciliation in a Post-TRC South Africa

Journal of Refugee Studies, 2001

1999

Law. From 1996-1998 I was a consultant in international law to South Africa's Truth and Reconciliation Commission. These introductory comments, and the contents of the submission itself, do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the Commission. I am grateful to all who contributed to the drafting of the submission, in particular Margaret DeGuzman and the Allard K. Lowenstein International Human Rights Law Clinic at Yale Law School, and Scott Christensen of Hughs, Hubbard & Reed and the Lawyers Committee for Human Rights. 1. See, e.g., Convention on the Non-Applicability of Statutory Limits to War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity, 660 U.N.T.S. 195, reprinted in 8 I.L.M. 68 (1969) [hereinafter Statutory Limitations Convention], discussed infra at note 65. 2. "Persecution based on race" is a part of every definition of crimes against humanity that has been considered since the first definition articulated in the Nuremberg Charter. See infra notes 31-49 and accompanying text. 3. See infra note 101 and accompanying text. [Vol. 20:267 10. See infra note 116; 2 Truth and Reconciliation Commission of South Africa Report, 510-23 (1998) (reporting on the TRC's special investigation into biological and chemical warfare). To provide genocide, one must show that certain acts were committed with "the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial, or religious group, as such." See infra note 106.

African Studies Review, 2002

Reviewed by Jaap Durand Referring to the Zimbabwean crisis caused by the occupation of farms by war veterans of the struggle for freedom from colonial domination in the old Rhodesia, a political commentator in an Afrikaans newspaper observes that it would not have happened if Zimbabwe, instead of giving amnesty to violators of human rights in the old Rhodesia, had set up a truth commission similar to the one in South Africa. This is a remarkable acknowledgement in a newspaper that consistently had shown itself as a severe critic of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC). This indicates that the debate on the TRC is not yet over and that, as the time goes on, new perspectives on the work of the TRC will open up. In this respect, the collection of essays on the TRC in Looking Back, Reaching Forward can play an important role, because here we have the remarkable story and a debate triggered by it from the inside-in the words of the editors: an "internal critique".

The impact of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) of South Africa is a contested terrain. On the one hand, it pioneered an entirely new level of national " truth telling " by empowering the victim's voice through public hearings and reparations, and by insisting on accountability for all amnesty applicants by treating them in a uniform manner (regardless of claims of moral high ground). Additionally, it applied a conditional amnesty, robust public hearings, sectorial submissions, and provided intensive national media coverage coupled with investigative services to verify confessions and exhumations to locate missing remains. On the other, there were also multiple deficits attached to the TRC process. Many evaluators assessed the TRC to be ineffectual in reaching the community " grassroots " level masses due to its " top-down " centralized approach, its perceived perpetrator bias, and its unacceptable level of victim compensation. Other critiques pointed to a lack of follow through, limited timeframe and mandate, and its coercive forms of forgiveness and reconciliation. This entry is concerned with the wider societal impact of the TRC 20 years after its inception. Three broad themes will be utilized to frame this entry and to identify future research forays: the contribution of the TRC to public participation processes; the contribution to the construction of a new narrative discourse at a societal level; and the contribution to collective social justice in South Africa today.

2001

2010

Since the 1980's, many dictatorships around the world have been replaced by new democracies. These old dictatorships were notorious for their human rights abuses. 1 Many people were killed and tortured; and many others were disappeared. 2 When the new governments came into power, they had to confront these injustices that were perpetrated under the predecessor regime. This was necessary to create a culture of human rights; promote a respect for the law and access to justice. Many confronted these injustices in different ways, some granted amnesty, some prosecuted and others instituted truth commissions 3. This research paper focuses on truth commissions. The research focuses particularly on the study of the South African Truth Commission. The mandate of the South African Truth Commission is analysed; and the investigation into whether the commission served the purpose for which it had been established is discussed. 4

Melbourne Journal of Politics, 2015

The twenty-year anniversary of the establishment of democratic governance in South Africa presents a fitting time to reflect upon the work of the country's Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC). This article focusses on the TRC as a key institution in the transition from apartheid to democracy, and commences by outlining the context and remit of the TRC and considering some of its more recent critiques. I conclude that many of these perspectives present an unfair judgement of the Commission based on either a misreading or misunderstanding of its mandate, and to a certain extent, a disregard for the contextual constraints within which it operated. Whilst acknowledging its limitations, I argue that the TRC played an important role in facilitating political transition and maintaining a fragile peace, and that it contributed to creating a more inclusive official historical narrative, as well as a human rights culture. I identify that the Commission's therapeutic ethos and its emphasis on the human capacity for empathy and compassion were particularly significant in cultivating a shared purpose and sense of national community. I conclude by considering the TRC in the context of key contemporary challenges facing South Africa, underscoring the need for ongoing attention to structural injustice.

This paper analysis the effectiveness of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in the fall of apartheid South Africa. At the end of the racial segregation fostered by the apartheid regime in South Africa, The Truth and Reconciliation Commission was formed in Cape Town to give South Africans the opportunity to come to terms with what happened in the past and advance reconciliation among its national citizens. Reconciliation is defined as the restoration of friendly relations, but unfortunately throughout the history of South Africa, there is no time in which it was not a deeply divided society (Barrow, 1998). Therefore, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission was fighting an uphill battle from the start.

The Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) was formed in South Africa in 1990 in order to deal with the effects of the apartheid regime. Its main objective of the TRC was to foster peace and reconciliation in South Africa. To date, scholars, researchers, and other individuals are divided over the benefits of the TRC. Supporters of the TRC insist that that it

2002

The legislation that gave birth to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission provides for the possibility of amnesty to the perpetrators of certain crimes and delicts. It also provides for the possibility of reparations to the victims of apartheid who suffered as a result of their human rights being grossly violated. The problem with the legislation is that it is only competent to deal with matters falling within its ambit, but there are numerous issues that still need to be addressed which clearly fall outside of it. One might be tempted to say that such issues falling beyond the scope of the TRC mandate should then be dealt with according to the ordinary principles governing the legal relationship between those who suffer a loss and those that cause their loss. But the difficulty is that the unjust benefits and wrongful burdens imposed and facilitated by apartheid are effectively passed on from generation to generation. The descendants of apartheid's victims continue to suffer a grave disadvantage. And in addition to this it is not only the actual perpetrators of the abuses that have benefited from apartheid but also later generations of white South Africans and corporations who continue to enjoy unequal advantage to springboard themselves ahead of black competitors who are still, for the most part, shackled by the disadvantage of apartheid. Whilst the state has made significant * The following work was developed out of the two authors' contribution to a submission to the TRC Committee on Reparation and Rehabilitation titled "The Case Against Apartheid's Beneficiaries" by Ben Cashden, Kevin Hopkins, Chris Roederer and others. We would like to acknowledge the help of Roman David,