Unspeakable Truths, Essay Example

Introduction

For countries emerging out of conflict or countries that are transitioning into a democracy, the most significant issue these countries face is how to encourage different conflicting groups to coexist peacefully after years of conflict. The most advocated means of ensuring that these groups co exist peacefully is the use of truth commissions. Truth commissions are bodies that are established to investigate past violations of human rights in a particular country. These violations include violations by the government, the military, and other armed opposition forces. Truth commissions have four main characteristics and these include the focus on the past, investigation of a pattern of violations over a specific period of time, are temporary commissions and are officially authorized, empowered and sanctioned by the state. The focus of most post conflict states is to bring former enemies together in order to have a peaceful society. Trials may not put conflicts to an end or in some cases the judicial system is unable to handle issues related to past violations. This together with the pressure for accountability from the international community makes it necessary to establish truth commissions. Truth commissions have increasingly become more common and received worldwide recognition as an alternative for criminal prosecution. Moreover, the use of truth commissions has been shown to be effective in healing conflicts in various countries. As such, this paper provides support for the argument that truth commissions are effective means of healing conflicts within countries(Hayner 89).

Measuring Effective Applications of Reconciliation

In analyzing the effectiveness of truth commissions, it is important to examine the goals of these bodies. Truth commissions, as the name suggests, are used mainly to establish and officially acknowledge the truth on past violations. This is achieved through the process of conducting an official inquiry into past conflicts and establishing a record of these abuses. The truth finding process of the commission is necessary in order to form a practical record of the country’s history. It becomes necessary to clarify past events and shun denial and silence that result from painful periods in the past. In Argentina, truth commission officials visited camps and collected statements of other victims from all over the world in its embassies. Truth is the central goal of these commissions and this can be used in a number of ways which include creation of records that can be used for criminal or judicial proceedings, adopting recommendations made by the commission to aid institutional reform, and also provide a basis to enable financial compensation of victims through reparation. It is worth noting that, in contrast to courts, truth commissions do not have the power to punish nor do they have a the same standard of proof as courts. This implies that individual justice may be served in few instances, but the process of finding the truth will benefit a greater proportion of the population. In post conflict states the courts may not be functioning properly and may be unable to administer justice but reports from truth commissions may be used in trials and to issue warrants(Phelps 67).

Apart from finding the truth, these commissions are also effective tools for transitional justice. Transitional justice as defined by the United Nations is a set of mechanisms and processes that are linked to a societies attempt to embrace past violations in order to facilitate accountability, serve justice and foster reconciliation. Transitional justice includes judicial and non judicial processes that focus on the right to truth, institutional reform, consultations and reparations. Because violations of human rights do not only affect the victims but society at large, efforts should be made to ensure that such violations do not recur. Transitional justice as facilitated by truth commissions ensure that institutions that were involved or incapable of preventing past human rights violations are reformed. If past human rights violations are not addressed, they are likely to lead to mistrust among different groups, in state institutions and may also hinder the attainment of security and peace. This in turn may result in a cyclical recurrence of human rights violations. Truth commissions in this regard provide opportunities to attain justice for past violations by means of political transition. Most truth commissions are formed in the midst of conflicts or in the process of building peace. One country where truth commissions have become an effective tool for transitional justice is Sri Lanka. Investigations were conducted on the misdeeds by the government and the military during the conflict against the Tamil tigers. These investigations conducted by truth commissions facilitated the transition of the society after the conflict(Rotberg, and Dennis 96).

A truth commission is also effective in healing wounds of past violations and preventing future conflicts. Healing in this case is attained through community building and reinforcing of political transitions. Reconciliation is a result of healing and involves increased dialogue between former warring factions, lack of bitterness and a unified understanding of past events. Reconciliation after a past violation of human rights results in a smoother transition to a peaceful society while at the same time improving respect for the rule of law within that society. Unlike trials which focus on perpetrators, truth commissions focus on the victims and are also non argumentative which creates a comfortable environment for the victims. This environment offers an opportunity for the victims to tell their stories and receive an official acknowledgement for their suffering. Truth commissions also create a common public platform where society can restructure the political community. Additionally, truth commissions facilitate moral reconsideration by dealing with difficult issues raised in the past violations. An example of a country where truth commissions facilitated such process is South Africa. Truth commissions were effective in addressing violations that resulted during the apartheid regime and facilitated the transition of the South African community post-apartheid(Drange 125).

Critique of the Functions of the Commissions

The Truth and Reconciliation Commissions were founded and used as one of the most important and effective ways to help reconcile and heal countries that are at war with each other. At first, people were terrified of the idea of speaking about previous crimes they have committed; in fear of government retaliation against them. But as time went on, the individuals and countries that have tried to adhere by the truth and reconciliation commission came out of it, if not necessarily as friends, they came out in peace. Therefore, the TRC became one of the most effective and influential ways to stop and reconcile wars and conflicts between countries or individuals. In this essay I will be critiquing my opponent Mohammed’s essay that stands against the truth and reconciliation commissions, and believes that this commission are of no use in healing and reconciling warring countries.

To begin with, my opponent has adopted a generalization approach by referring to a mere allegation that people tend to hate on each other because of political power and ideologies. Whereas, there was nobrief example provided to support the allegations made (Priscilla 65). Additionally, while loss of lives and property is factual, Mohammed has failed to authenticate his assertion by providing evidence. This amounts to sheer guesswork and unfounded assumptions. Also, due to lack of factual evidence I find it hard to be convinced by the point stated by my opponent regarding the inefficiency of the truth and reconciliation commissions. A case of contradiction is also evident from my opponent. Notably, he observes that reconciliation commissions are established to solve conflicts between the warring communities (Ishay 56). In a rather weird twist of events, he stated that the truth commissions tend to achieve nothing, without any case in point being referred. Wrongfully, He demands that while establishing a truth commission, citizens of a given nation must be involved. In a case of war, there is hardly any time to consult and consider views of all citizens and individuals. Although Mohammed appears to campaign for use of public views in establishing the commissions he also observes that, the public lacks confidence in them. This leaves the reader wondering whether indeed my opponent is keen on involving the public in putting up truth commissions. Furthermore, much factual evidence has been provided over time to prove the efficiency of the truth and reconciliation commission, which my opponent would have easily found with a little more research. As a reader, lack of proof only serves as an incentive to not take the essay seriously or give what has been stated much thought. Therefore, the idea behind the essay gets lost in midst of guesswork and assumption.

Whenever a truth commission is established, it has to be given time to uncover the truth and arrive at a lasting solution. People tend to not be very fond of the idea of standing before a committee or people they have wronged in order to speak of how they wronged them exactly. Also, as I stated earlier, people don’t find comfort in the fact that they are speaking against governments and/or powerful individuals, who may lead to fear of having the government turn against them after speaking the truth and confessing their wrongdoings to the public. Therefore, I it would require more than one hearing to get the truth out and find appropriate solutions that benefit everybody in a way that both warring countries could come out in peace. Even so, my opponent seems to oppose this and instead opts for use of information collected decades ago. The political preference associated with truth commissions owing to their way of conducting investigations is just a declaration that lacks evidence to convince the readers (Robert and Dennis 11); which again, does nothing to help his argument and only works to weaken the point he’s trying to get across in his essay.

Implications of Learning

The consideration over the need to serve as the connecting and balancing factor between conflicting nations remain to be the primary role of the Truth and Reconciliation Commissions existing around the globe. Believably, it could be realized that through this referential research, these commissions are able to provide the necessary support that countries need to have strong internal and external connections that are likely affecting the way humans coexist between each other, this matter particularly insists on how nations respond to quantifications of modernization and how such aspects of development are applied accordingly in relation to how each nation embraces growth.

The different approaches to reconciliation as imposed by these commissions are expected to provide a strong foundation for national administrators to take notice of. Relatively, it is the emergence of such development of idealisms taken from past and extensive national experiences that assumption of improving national relations that particular conflicts have been resolved accordingly. Practical options of developing considerations towards resolving national and international conflicts continue to be the base source of competence on how the commissions are expected to improve the way they develop their functional role in the society.

Conclusion

A truth commission is mostly formed whenever there are issues causing violence or tension within the community or even wars that last more than several years. It is difficult to establish a truth commission to solve general issues facing a given community; because there just isn’t time to sit and listen to every individual speak, therefore, the truth and reconciliation commissions are often used when major problems or conflict occur whether it’s within the same country or between two or more warring countries. Dismissing a truth commission on the grounds of not having powers to execute judicial powers is average (Freeman 45). Truthfully, truth commissions are helpful, and their findings can be used by judicial systems to uphold justice to victims of rape, extra judicial killings, and political violence among others. Victims who are not always able to speak and have some that can make a difference listen. Also, other than the TRC being a way of resolving issues, it has also proven to reconcile, therefore countries and government tend to walk out in peace, with all issues resolved and all justice made. It is imperative to note that truth commissions are effective means of healing conflicts within countries. These commissions facilitate the establishment of the truth regarding human rights violations, act as tools for transitional justice and aid the community in healing and reconciliation.

Reasoning towards the most convenient manners by which the commissions exist provides a strong foundation on why and how people would be able to respond to options of developing peaceful agreements between conflicting nations and conflicting citizens within the country. This way, the real meaning of the role that the commissions play imposes a distinct impact on how the conflicts are responded to and how matters of social and global developments are given way in line with the desire of containing situations in the country.

Works cited

Drange, Ragnhild. “Human rights, reconciliation and democratic consolidation: a case study of the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission.” (2002).

Hayner, Priscilla B. Unspeakable truths: transitional justice and the challenge of truth commissions. Routledge, 2010.

Phelps, Teresa Godwin. Shattered voices: Language, violence, and the work of truth commissions. University of Pennsylvania Press, 2004.

Rotberg, Robert I., and Dennis Thompson, eds. Truth v. Justice: The Morality of Truth Commissions: The Morality of Truth Commissions. Princeton University Press, 2010.