THE TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION

COMMISSION (TRC):
After winning the 1994 election the ANC had a huge task of building a
truly non-racial and democratic South Africa without forgetting its
past. Mandela believed that South Africans had to find a way to forgive
the perpetrators of the system of Apartheid without forgetting
this crime against humanity. The ANC’s solution to ‘forgiving without
forgetting’ was the establishment of the Truth and Reconciliation
Commission in 1996.

*In 1995 the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) was set up
by PARLIAMENT. (INITIATED BY MANDELA AND TUTU)
*ARCHBISHOP DESMOND TUTU was appointed Chairperson of the TRC and
ALEX BORAINE the Vice chairperson.
* It was expected that the Commission would last for about TWO years
and was it would deal with gross human rights violations that occurred
between 1 March 1960 and 10 May 1994.

Archbishop Desmond Tutu Dr Alex Boraine

A. REASONS FOR THE TRC

 Overall aim was to investigate politically motivated violations

of human rights during the apartheid era.

1
  The past had to be confronted and the knowledge of truth used to
bring about reconciliation.

 Aims of the TRC were:

o To investigate the causes and extent of human rights

violations under apartheid and hear testimonies of both
victims and perpetrators

o To recommend compensation for victims

o To grant amnesty to perpetrators from prosecution

under certain conditions. In return for this amnesty, the
individuals or political parties had to give a full and public
testimony of their actions and prove political
motivation.

B. VARIOUS FORMS OF JUSTICE

There were different ways of dealing with crimes against humanity. One
way focusses on justice and punishment and is called ‘retributive
justice’ (revenge). The Nuremberg Trials, which were held in Germany
after World War II, were based on retributive justice. After the defeat
of Germany, the Allies set up a court in Nuremberg to put on trial

2
people accused of war crimes. These included Nazi political and military
leaders, as well as people who carried out atrocities. Some were
sentenced to death and others were given prison sentences.

RETRIBUTIVE JUSTICE:
Retributive means revenge. This is punishment given/ handed out to the
people that committed gross human rights violations. A good example of
this is the Nuremberg trials in Germany after WWII.

The TRC did not function like this. It was based on the principle of
‘restorative justice’ (healing), where the emphasis was on forgiveness
and reconciliation.

RESTORATIVE JUSTICE:
Restorative means healing. Considered to be a gesture of reconciliation if
perpetrators of gross human rights violations were prepared to speak the
truth and were expected to also show some remorse for their actions.

 It was based on compromise, reconciliation and healing.

 Witnesses were subpoenaed (demand to appear in court). Two
key political leaders, P W Botha and Mangosuthu Buthelezi refused
to appear before the TRC.
 It was not possible to try perpetrators
 TRC was not a court of law → could not prosecute or hand out
judgement.

3
 C. WORK AND STRUCTURE OF TRC

*The TRC began its work in 1996.

*For the next two years it held hearings around the country.
*The hearings were broadcast on radio and television.
*Over 22 000 victims told their stories or made statements to the TRC.

*The Commission was made up of people chosen by President

Mandela. They came from diverse backgrounds, but were all people
who had a history of promoting human rights and social justice.

Three separate committees were involved in the TRC:

 Committee on Human Rights Violation – this Committee heard

stories of victims (→ 21 300 victims and 38 000 stories)

 Committee on Reparations and rehabilitation – this Committee

gave support and awarded reparations (money) for suffering/loss.

 Committee on Amnesty – this Committee granted freedom from

prosecution - under certain conditions → not done for personal gain
or not done out of malice and the perpetrators had to show genuine
remorse in order to get amnesty.

The Amnesty Committee

 Consisted of people with a sound background
 Both the perpetrator and victims had an opportunity to be presents
by a lawyer – cross-examination of witnesses was allowed.
 Only 1167 of the applicants received amnesty out of 7116
applicants.
 Many political parties opposed the amnesty committee and its work.
They claimed that those who wanted amnesty were merely carrying
out orders. Hence the process was flawed and unfair.


4
The Reparation and Rehabilitation Committee
 Members of this committee investigated the evidence by victims
and, based on this, provided appropriate support.
 In most cases the rehabilitation of victims included financial support
for the suffering and loss experienced.
 The committee finally recommended that to restore the dignity of
victims a once-off payment of R30 000 would be given to each
victims.
The Human Rights Violations Committee
 Investigated the human rights abuses that took place in South
Africa between 1961 and 1994 – politically motivated crimes.
 It was estimated that about21 000 statements were collected and
recorded.
 People were invited to tell their stories at the TRC hearings. These
hearings took place across South Africa from 1996 to 1998.

 TRC hearings revealed high levels of violence. Some

wanted revenge; others compensation; others the truth.
The TRC though focused on “restorative justice”
(compensating) rather than “retributive justice”
(punishment).

 The TRC did not only investigate the actions of those who worked
for the apartheid government. It also dealt with the actions of
the liberation movements, as well as those of politicians and
their supporters in the pre-election violence.
 The public testimony, both from those who had fought for and
against apartheid, revealed just how much violence had been
carried out in the previous decades.
 These ranged from well-publicised events, such as the murder of
the Cradock Four and the Bisho massacre, to thousands of
cases of ordinary South Africans who were caught up in the
violence. Some people who told their stories wanted revenge;
others wanted compensation. Some like Phila Ndwandwe’s
family, simply wanted to find out the truth about what

5
 happened to their family members who had simply
disappeared.

D. DEBATES CONCERNING THE TRC

To what extent was the TRC an instrument of reconciliation?

 The TRC played a significant role in healing South Africa from its
divided past and served to build a united nation.
 Families had a platform for reconciliation after years of oppressive
rule. In most cases families experienced great trauma and
indignation but was eventually prepared to forgive the
perpetrators.
 Liberation organisations like the ANC had to account for their
own crimes and atrocities that were committed inside and
outside South Africa.
 The TRC helped to solve many murderers and disappearances
of political activists that families were troubled about.
 Archbishop Desmond Tutu noted that the TRC was able to bring
about a sense of South Africa’s past so that citizens could begin a
process of reconciliation.

What were amnesty provisions for perpetrators?

 The TRC set out THREE pre-conditions that were to be met before
amnesty was to be granted: Applications
o were required to make a truthful and full disclosure if
their actions.
o had to prove that there was a political motive
o would not be granted amnesty if they committed murder
because of a political difference of opinion.

6
E. FINDINGS OF TRC IN OCTOBER 1998:

 NP government of P.W. Botha responsible for murder, torture,

arson, abduction and sabotage.
 Criticized De Klerk’s government for activities of “third force”
in an attempt to disrupt pre-1994 negotiations.
 Criticized the ANC civilian casualties in MK operations; torture
and execution in camps in exile; use of violence against opponents.
 The attacks by APLA guerrillas which had resulted in civilian
casualties and the necklace executions that supporters of the UDF
had carried out in the 1980’s.

F. LIMITATIONS

 TRC allowed leading figures of apartheid government to

escape the net of the TRC. (eg. P.W. Botha never testified)
 Perpetrators remained dissatisfied with amnesty system.
 Many deeds by both apartheid and liberation movement were
unaccounted for → not full disclosure.
 ANC government delayed to formally respond to commission’s
recommendations → only in 2003 final reparation payments to
victims.

G. CRITICISM AND ACHIEVEMENTS OF THE TRC

Differences of opinion about TRC

7
  Some believed that there should be war crimes tribunals like the
Nuremberg trials.
 Others believed that a truth commission could result in a witch
hunt which would reopen old wounds. – TRC wanted truth in order
to overcome the past through confession and forgiveness.
 Perpetrators of gross human rights violations escaped
punishment by giving them amnesty.
 Some believed that they should have been tried in a court of law
for their crimes – the families of Black Conscious leader, Steve
Biko, and others applied unsuccessfully to the Constitutional
Court for the whole TRC process to be stopped.
 Whole issue of amnesty controversial. Many found it difficult to
accept that men who were guilty of appalling crimes be allowed to
walk free – simply because they made public confessions.
 Once an applicant was granted amnesty by the TRC, she/he could
not be prosecuted in a criminal court.
 Some wanted justice, not simply truth – not all victims were
willing to forgive.

Problems with proceedings

 Some refused to give evidence – P W Botha, whose government

allowed use of death squads to kill its opponents.
 Some claimed to be carrying out orders.
 Not all who applied for amnesty displayed remorse.

Criticisms of findings

 ANC unhappy that TRC did not distinguish between actions of

apartheid government and liberation movements
 F.W De Klerk tried to prevent publication of a paragraph in report
making him responsible for ‘third force’ activities – ANC argued that
resistance to apartheid and defence of it was not equal → also
wanted to prevent publication of report.
 De Klerk said it emphasized revenge, not reconciliation.

8
  Buthhelezi believed it had favoured the ANC’s version of events
over that of Inkatha.

1.
Praise for TRC
 Mandela believed that it laid foundation for reconciliation
 Tutu believed that truth essential for reconciliation – He said: “
Reconciliation based on falsehood, on not facing up to
reality, is not true reconciliation and will not last.”

Links between the TRC and nation-building

 Some believed that TRC was essential for nation-building – it
would reconcile South Africans to build a new nation.
 Many examples of this: televised sessions showed perpetrators
asking forgiveness and victims granting forgiveness in scenes
which promoted the advantages of reconciliation.
 Others questioned whether it was possible to build a single South
African nation in this way.
 They questioned whether the TRC had brought reconciliation or
simply created further divisions.

Nonetheless, when compared to the virtual civil war that had existed in
the 1980’s, South Africa in the decade after 1994 certainly justified Nelson
Mandela’s description of it as a ‘small miracle”.

9
1.

1.

10
1.

1.

11
1.

12
13
14
15