TRC Final Report

Volume 1

Chapter 5

Subsection 1

Volume ONE • Chapter FIVE

Concepts and Principles

■ INTRODUCTION

National Unity and Reconciliation

This Constitution provides a historic bridge between the past of a deeply divided society characterised by strife, conflict, untold suffering and injustice, and a future founded on the recognition of human rights, democracy and peaceful co-existence and development opportunities for all South Africans, irrespective of colour, race, class, belief or sex. The pursuit of national unity, the well-being of all South African citizens and peace require reconciliation between the people of South Africa and the reconstruction of society.

The adoption of this Constitution lays the secure foundation for the people of South Africa to transcend the divisions and strife of the past which generated gross violations of human rights, the transgression of humanitarian principles in violent conflicts and the legacy of hatred, fear, guilt and revenge. These can now be addressed on the basis that there is a need for understanding but not vengeance, a need for reparation but not for retaliation, a need for ubuntu but not victimisation.

In order to advance such reconciliation and reconstruction, amnesty shall be granted in respect of acts, omissions and offences associated with political objectives and committed in the course of the conflicts of the past... ¹

1. The previous chapter emphasised the importance of viewing the Commission as part of the broader national process of ‘building a bridge’ between a deeply divided past of “untold suffering and injustice” and a future “founded on the recognition of human rights, democracy, peaceful co-existence, and development opportunities for all”. This chapter seeks to clarify the concepts and principles underlying the Commission’s work. Judge Richard Goldstone highlighted the importance of these concepts and principles thus:

On the one hand, there is the vital legal underpinning of the [Truth and Reconciliation Commission] without which such a commission could not succeed and would not exist. On the other hand, there are philosophical, religious and moral aspects without which the commission will be an empty legal vessel which would do a great deal of harm and achieve nothing ²

2 The Commission was founded in the belief that, in order to build the “historic bridge” of which the interim Constitution speaks, one must establish as “complete a picture as possible” of the injustices committed in the past. This must be coupled with a public, official acknowledgement of the “untold suffering” which resulted from those injustices. It is to these goals that the Commission must contribute.

3 The task assigned to the Commission proved to be riddled with tensions. For many, truth and reconciliation seemed separated by a gulf rather than a bridge. Moreover, in the process of implementing its obligation to consider amnesty for perpetrators (as required by the interim Constitution), the concept of justice also came under constant scrutiny. “We’ve heard the truth. There is even talk about reconciliation. But where’s the justice?” was a common refrain.

4 Before explaining how the Commission dealt with the overlapping and apparently contradictory goals of truth, reconciliation and justice, it is necessary to highlight two more general sources of tension.

The public nature of the Commission

5 A distinctive feature of the Commission was its openness to public participation and scrutiny. This enabled it to reach out on a daily basis to large numbers of people inside and outside South Africa, and to confront them with vivid images on their television screens or on the front pages of their newspapers. People saw, for example, a former security police officer demonstrating his torture techniques. They saw weeping men and women asking for the truth about their missing loved ones. The media also helped generate public debate on central aspects of South Africa’s past and to raise the level of historical awareness. The issues that emerged as a consequence helped the nation to focus on values central to a healthy democracy: transparency, public debate, public participation and criticism.

6 The sword wielded by the media is, however, double-edged. The fact that much of the Commission’s work was transmitted by the media meant that public perceptions were formed by what people saw on television, heard on the radio or read in the newspapers. Thus, while the ‘soundbites’, headlines and photographs of what happened in the public domain contributed significantly to the work of the Commission, they also had the effect of making aspects of its work more vulnerable to criticism. For example, the Commission was accused of accepting untested allegations, primarily because the activities that led to its findings (investigation, research, enquiries in closed hearings and the actual decision-making process by commissioners) were less visible. Similarly, the first steps towards reconciliation, such as private encounters between victims and perpetrators or pre- and post-hearing community visits by commissioners, usually took place out of sight of the media. Although, clearly, the envisaged reconciliation could not be accomplished in the lifespan of the Commission, a number of serious initiatives were taken to promote it.