Truth And Reconciliation Commission (TRC)

Topic Summary

The Truth and Reconciliation Commission was set up AFTER the end of Apartheid. There was a
lot of discussion about what to do with people (on both sides) who had committed human rights
abuses. The TRC was SA’s unique way of dealing with the crimes of the past in a way that
allowed South Africans to deal with their past and move past it into the future.

Work through past papers to work through different case studies.

TERM DEFINITION
Amnesty Being officially forgiven

Atrocities Shocking and cruel acts against an enemy during conflicts

Compensation Amount paid for loss or damage to the victims during the TRC

Human Rights Abuse of individual rights

Violation
Perpetrators People who commit crimes or abuse

Third force An unknown political faction that was accused of stirring conflict in
South Africa especially between the ANC and the Inkatha Freedom
Party.
Witch- hunt An intensive systematic campaign directed against those who have
done something wrong
Restorative justice Based on reconciliation where perpetrators who were prepared to
tell the truth and show remorse for their actions to the TRC
commission get amnesty
Retributive justice Based on revenge where perpetrators are punished for committing
gross human rights violations.
Reconciliation Making peace between perpetrators of Human Rights Violations
and victims of these political crimes
Armed Struggle The strategy used by both the ANC and the PAC’s military wings
(MK and POQO) to launch covert military operations against the
apartheid regime in order to obtain democracy.

The Setting Up of the TRC

What is a “Commission”?
• After the end of Apartheid, there was a lot of discussion about what
to do about people who had committed crimes during Apartheid A group of people appointed
(not just on the NP side: some members of the ANC and other by a government or another
liberation organizations also committed human rights abuses!) official body with authority to
• Two options: retributive justice (punish them!) or restorative justice do something
(forgive them!)
• Many people were worried that if they went with retributive justice,
no-one would ever get over what had happened in the past and there might be more violence in
1
 the future. South Africa was a deeply divided nation and this might have gotten worse if they
had gone with this option
• Most leaders preferred the idea of restorative justice because they wanted a peaceful transition
and wanted both sides to work together going forward
• National Unity and Reconciliation Act
(1995) – creation of TRC
• Nelson Mandela appointed Desmond
Tutu as Chairman of the TRC and Alex
Boraine as the vice-chairman.

Aims:

• Find out the truth about gross (really

bad!) human rights violations which
occurred in between 1 March 1960 –
10 May 1994
• Help people find closure
• Provide a record of the things that had
happened so that nobody would ever
forget
• Give perpetrators (those who
committed crimes) and victims a Alex Boraine and Desmond Tutu – both were priests and anti-
chance to tell their stories Apartheid activists. They were chosen because they were
widely respected and people thought they would be unbiased.
• Develop a culture of human rights, so
past suffering would never happen again
• Find a way to deal with the past that would not lead to further violence or civil war
• Help bring about reconciliation
• Provide reparations (compensation) to victims and their families (R30,000 payment for loss)
• Provide counselling to those who needed it
• Give amnesty to people who had committed crimes (ONLY to those who had committed
POLITICAL crimes) and who had provided FULL DISCLOSURE)

Explanation of normal vs. political crimes: Explanation of “full disclosure”:

If you were an Apartheid cop who shot his Telling the FULL truth. If the TRC believed
wife for having an affair, he could not get you had told everything you had done and
amnesty because there was nothing knew about a political crime, they would
political in the crime! If that same cop give you amnesty. If they didn’t believe
murdered an ANC activist because he saw you, or if evidence came out later that you
him as a threat to the country or because hadn’t told everything, you would not get
his commander told him to, he would get amnesty!
amnesty!

2
The Structure of the TRC - 3 committees:
1. Human Rights Violations committee:
investigated crimes and held
hearings. Found out the truth.
2. Reparation and Rehabilitation
committee: provide compensation
and support to victims and their
families
3. Amnesty Committee: Grant amnesty
to those who had committed crimes
(only POLITICAL crimes, after full
SOURCE A
disclosure)

Successes:
• Many crimes WERE investigated. Truth
was discovered in many cases SOURCE B
• Public examples of forgiveness and
reconciliation.
• A lot of people found out what had
really happened to their friends or
family
• There was no out of control violence
afterwards (ie civil war). South Africa
WAS able to collectively move forward
• Many perpetrators did confess and
received amnesty
• Many people got closure
• Victims received counseling and
compensation
• Served as an example to other nations
in similar circumstances (eg. Rwanda
and Liberia)

Failures:
• Not all crimes were investigated
• Not all perpetrators came forward to
confess
• Most participants were junior to middle
importance. No important leaders testified before the TRC
• Some victims and their families didn’t
support the TRC – wanted retributive SOURCE C
justice
• Could not deal with widespread
systemic Apartheid abuse – eg
Group Areas Act (not a “crime” as
such by TRC’s definition…)
• Didn’t have a huge budget.
Compensation was insufficient for
most people
• Some parties and leaders didn’t
support the TRC

3
 • Evidence hidden or destroyed. Some perpetrators didn’t tell everything they knew
• Sometimes, the truth was found but people were not able to find reconciliation and move
forward.

The TRC: Cartoon Analysis

It is VERY important that you understand how to analyse cartons and answer questions based on
them. Political cartoons might be funny but that isn’t the point: they have a serious message and
you need to be able to understand and explain that message. Remember: cartoons are
METAPHORS. They are not literal!
You need to ask yourself several questions when you look at a cartoon:
• Who is in the cartoon and how are they portrayed? If someone is larger or in the centre of
the cartoon, it usually means that they are more important or powerful. What they are
wearing or carrying can tell us a lot. For example, if they are carrying a gun, we are meant
to understand that the person is violent.
• What is happening/what are the people doing? What is being done usually gives us the
point of the cartoon.
• Is there any text in the cartoon? What is being said is usually in a speech bubble etc but
there might also be a heading or caption or some kind of label. These give you clues as to
the point of the cartoon

Look at the cartons below… We will be looking at the above points for each of them!

Beast/Monster. Apartheid Torch. Tutu is looking for the

crimes = monstrous! Terrible truth in the “darkness” of the
Cartoon 1: things ahppened apartheid era crimes

4
 Tutu doesn’t
know what
he/the TRC
will find –
probably bad
(inside a
monster)

Alex Borraine

The press
(TV camera).
TRC open
and
transparent
Tutu

What is the overall meaning of cartoon 1?

“Victim”. Tutu is helping him to find the truth

about past crimes. Possibly comforting him

Apartheid era crimes were terrible (the monster). TRC was designed to find the truth (Tutu with the
torch looking into the belly of the beast). TRC was designed to help victims to find the Truth and help
them generally (Tutu holding the Victims hand). TRC was open and transparent (the camera man)

Cartoon 2:

Eugene de
Kock A looooooooong list of his crimes.
He commited a LOT of nasty
crimes during apartheid

What is the overall meaning of the

cartoon?

5
The TRC: people are applying for
amnesty for their crimes
 Tutu

Case Study: Eugene De Kock

In exams, you will often be given case studies of victims
who were murdered, tortured etc and whose cases were
heard by the TRC. You will also get details about the
people who applied for amnesty for these crimes, like
Eugene De Kock in the cartoon

The main things you need to look for in case studies are the following:
1. Details of the crimes committed: was the truth discovered? Yes, generally. De Kock
apparently told the whole truth
2. Did the person who committed the crimes commit them for political reasons? Partially.
Some were not.
3. Did the person make a full disclosure? Apparently.
4. Did they receive amnesty? Yes, for some of his crimes. Went to jail for the other crimes.
5. If they did, why did they get it? If they didn’t, why didn’t they? Was politically motivated for
the crimes he got amnesty for. The other crimes went beyond the call of duty (political
motivation/orders), so no amnesty for them.
6. Did reconciliation happen? Was the perpetrator forgiven by any of his victims? Did in the
cases mentioned in the sources.
7. Did closure happen? Did victims/their families find out the truth? Yes. Many of his victims
got closure and found out the details of De Kock’s crimes
8. How did people feel about amnesty or the lack of amnesty? In this case, very positively.
Many people felt he deserved amnesty/freedom
9. Did the TRC succeed or fail in the case study. Succeeded. Crimes were confessed,

amnesty was granted, the truth was found, reconciliation and forgiveness occurred!