Truth-seeking As bodies mandated by governments, truth commissions constitute a form of "official
truth-seeking". One of the difficult issues that has arisen over the role of truth commissions in transitional societies, has centered on what should be the relationship between truth commissions and criminal prosecutions. While it is generally assumed that truth and reconciliation commissions could investigate on a larger number of crimes, they are less effective in pursuing criminal punishment. This leads to the idea that truth and reconciliation commissions are effective to heal large societal conflicts, but they should also be matched with criminal trials for the top criminal offenders. In general, truth commissions issue final reports which seek to provide an authoritative narrative of past events, which sometimes challenges previously dominant versions of the past. Truth commissions emphasizing "historical clarification" include the
Historical Clarification Commission in Guatemala with its focus on setting straight the former military government's version of the past, and the
Truth and Justice Commission in Mauritius which focused on the legacy of slavery and indentured servitude over a long colonial period. The
Commission for Reception, Truth and Reconciliation in East Timor also aimed to tell a new "national narrative" to replace the version of history that had been prevalent under foreign rule.
Reconciliation Within the scope of
transitional justice, truth commissions tend to lean towards
restorative rather than
retributive justice models. This means they often favour efforts to reconcile divided societies in the wake of conflict, or to reconcile societies with their own troubled pasts, over attempts to hold those accused of human rights violations accountable. Less commonly, truth commissions advocate forms of
reparative justice, efforts to repair past damage and help victims of conflict or human rights violations to heal. This can take the form of
reparations to victims, whether financial or otherwise; official apologies; commemorations or
monuments to past human rights violations, or other forms. Reparations have been central, for instance, in
Morocco's Equity and Reconciliation Commission.
Reconciliation forms a crucial aspect of most commissions. In some cases, peace agreements or the terms of transfers of power prevent court prosecutions and allow
impunity for former rulers accused of human rights violations or even
crimes against humanity, and truth commissions appear as the major alternative. In other cases, governments see the opportunity to unite divided societies and offer truth and reconciliation commissions as the way to reach that goal. Truth commissions formed part of peace settlements in
El Salvador,
Congo,
Kenya, and others. Commissions often hold public hearings in which victims/survivors can share their stories and sometimes confront their former abusers. These processes sometimes include the hope of forgiveness for past crimes and the hope that society can thereby be healed and made whole again. The public reconciliation process is sometimes praised for offering a path to reconciliation, and sometimes criticised by main stake holders (victim associations, relatives of the disappeared, ex-perpetrators) for promoting impunity and further traumatising victims. The criticism is mainly due to the fact that in many cases the aspect of "reconciliation" is rather perceived as a political slogan, a "feel good" label attached to the process, often a truth commission, while the actions taken as part of the commission's work do little to convey the semantics of the concept of reconciliation, sometimes even counteracting its very notion. This was e.g. quite tangible in the South African case, where the heard facts about the committed wrongdoings during the commission hearings did not lead to what the victims perceived to be administering justice to achieve reconciliation: "We've heard the truth. There is even talk about reconciliation. But where's the justice?" As such, the lack of consequences for the truth-telling as part of similar commissions to which the label of "reconciliation" is attached is rather considered by many as a revictimization, this time by the hands of the new authorities which are supposed to rectify the past wrongs. On some occasions, truth commissions have been criticized for narrow mandates or lack of implementation after their reports. Examples include Chad's
Commission of Inquiry into Crimes and Misappropriations committed by former president Hissene Habre and the
Philippines Truth Commission which has been criticized as selective justice. A short-lived
Commission of Truth and Reconciliation in Yugoslavia never reported as the country that created it ceased to exist. In others, such as
Rwanda, it has been impossible to carry out commission recommendations due to a return to conflict. == History ==