DEMOCRACY IN SOUTH AFRICA AND REMEMBERING THE PAST

HOW HAS SOUTH AFRICA CHOSEN TO REMEMBER THE PAST?

VARIOUS FORMS OF JUSTICE:

RETRIBUTIVE PUNISHMENT. SEEN DURING THE

NUREMBERG TRIALS.

RESTORATIVE - FOCUS ON VICTIMS. REJECTS ONLY

PUNISHING BUT BRINGS VICTIMS AND PERPETRATORS
TOGETHER

ESTABLISHING THE TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION COMMISSION

The idea of the TRC first came from the ANC

The ANC faced accusations of human rights abuses in its training camps after being
unbanned
It set up an internal inquiry and found this to be true.
The Nation Executive Committee (NEC) of the ANC accepted the findings but
declared that they needed to look at these violations in context.
So rather than calling for general amnesty, it called for an independent truth
commission so everyone could be held accountable.
South Africa then established the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC).
In the TRC hearings, victims and perpetrators of apartheid violence and human rights
abuses faced one another.
Victims described their suffering and perpetrators had to take responsibility for their
actions
o Perpetrators had to fully disclose what they had done
o They had to take responsibility for their actions
o They had to ask the victims for forgiveness
The Commission was intended to bridge the divide between victim and perpetrator
and provide closure.
The TRC was a political compromise in the interests of national reconciliation.
The Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act of 1995 created the TRC and
1

had to monitor the process.

Page
 The Chairperson of the TRC was Archbishop Desmond Tutu.

THE TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION COMMISSION

The role of the TRC was to:
o Compile a complete picture of the human rights abuses that took place
between 1960 1993.
o To hear testimony from victims and perpetrators
o Where there was full disclosure and clear political motivation, perpetrators
could be granted amnesty from prosecution or civil action.
o To suggest how victims could be compensated through reparations.
The TRC had a limited time period of TWO YEARS to achieve its tasks. The
overarching objective was to encourage truth telling, and the TRC faced the problem
of subjective truth of memory and the objective truth of what happened during
APARTHEID.
The TRC hearings were held in public and everyone witnessed the pain and suffering
that apartheid had caused to fellow South Africans.

THE TRC had three committees:

Committee on Human Rights Violations to hear and investigate public testimonies by

victims and their families of gross human rights abuses. This was not a court of law.
Committee on Reparation and Rehabilitation investigated cases, gave support and
awarded reparations to victims.
Committee on Amnesty which would grant amnesty from prosecution under certain
conditions.
2
Page
 THE DEBATES CONCERNING THE TRC
It was beyond the TRCs ability to fully record all the institutional violence that
occurred in South Africa between 1960 and 1994. It only dealt with GROSS HUMAN
RIGHTS VIOLATIONS.
It had the right to subpoena people (ordering a person to attend a court) and many
did testify
Some key figures from the apartheid era refused to appear before the TRC. E.g. P.W.
Botha of the NP.
This limited the TRCs ability to record all the human rights violations that occurred
during the period under review, and to determine who were responsible.
Many of those who did appear did not disclose the full extent of their involvement
in gross human rights abuses.
However the TRC process showed that the South African security forces arrested
tortured, executed and assassinated activists and civilians with impunity, especially
during the 1980s.
The most revealing submission came from Eugene De Kock, the SAP colonel. He
confessed to killing and/or torturing hundreds of people, and named those above
him in the SAP hierarchy on whose orders he had acted.
Some ANC leaders made a submission of collective responsibility for the gross
human-rights violations that occurred during their leadership and received amnesty.
However, many felt that the TRC unfairly equated the gross human-rights violations
of the apartheid regime with the gross human rights violations of the liberation
movement.
The TRC committed itself to investigating both.
It took the view that a just war did not include acts of war against civilians, nor the
torture or killing of prisoners of war (by either side)
The TRC found conscription to be immoral and ruled that the states use of
conscripts in townships and outside of South Africa was a violation of human rights.
It stated that some churches had created a climate of human rights abuses by
encouraging conscription.

POSITIVE ASPECTS OF THE TRC

The revelations encouraged a deeper understanding of how South Africa became so
dysfunctional
An awareness of victims suffering made many offenders take more responsibility for
3

their actions
Page

The process discouraged violence

 It also helped stabilise the economy so that it could be developed for the benefit of
all South Africans.
In some cases, reconciliation and forgiveness occurred and helped people overcome
grief or guilt
Some families were able to achieve a sense of closure.
The published report meant that no-one could deny the abuses that were recorded.

THOUGHT BUBBLE: WAS THE AMNESTY GRANTED BY

THE COMMITTEE ON AMNESTY APPROPRIATE?

Some of the victims families did not want

amnesty to be granted, and wanted retributive
justice.
Some thought that amnesty should only be
granted to those who showed remorse.
Others felt the criteria to grant amnesty was
sufficient.
On the whole, people were unsatisfied with the
process.

THOUGHT BUBBLE: WERE THE REPARATIONS RECOMMENDED

BY THE COMMITTEE ON REPARATION AND REHABILITATION
SUFFICIENT AND SUFFICIENTLY IMPLEMENTED?

The TRC did not provide full redress for the victims.
It made recommendations to government concerning
reparations but victims only received 30% of the
recommended reparations.
The fact that reparations were recommended and, to an
extent, implemented, showed respect for victims.
4
Page
 THOUGHT BUBBLE: WAS THE TRC AN INSTRUMENT OF RECONCILIATION?

Some reconciliation did occur.

Some victims/families of victims have not forgiven those who hurt them.
Others criticised the TRC for creating a climate where the victims and their
families felt pressured to forgive the perpetrators
High ranking officials were not forced to appear before the TRC and were not
punished when they did appear. This gave people the impression of double
standards and that only the foot soldiers were being held accountable.
Many people did not serve any time in jail, or only served a fraction of their
sentence.

RESPONSES OF POLITICAL PARTIES

THE RESPONSE OF THE NP

The NP felt the TRC was biased against the NP, and claimed it was a witch
hunt.
De Klerk claimed that the report emphasised revenge and reconciliation
However, De Klerk apologised for the suffering caused by apartheid

THE RESPONSE OF THE IFP

The IFP felt that the TRC was biased against the IFP
The IFP wanted the ANC to apologise for the violence in Natal in the lead-
up to the 1994 elections

THE RESPONSE OF THE ANC

The ANC was unhappy that the TRC did not distinguish between the
actions of the apartheid government and the liberation organisations
The ANC wanted the TRC to censure the NP government for Third Force
5

activities
Page
 There was resentment that the gross human rights violations committed
by the SADF were not dealt with.

THE RESPONSE OF THE PAC

The PAC did not accept that members of liberation organisations should
be treated as guilty at all, and called the TRC a circus.

THE REPONSE OF THE SACP

The SACP accepted the decisions of the TRC

LEGACY OF THE TRC
In its 1998 report, the TRC described the mood as mostly "sombre and
dignified; at others, there was an undercurrent of anger. Yet always there
was an awareness of a spirit of compassion and acceptance".
One of the major failings of the TRC was that it focused on politically
motivated crimes and human-rights abuses.
The politicisation of forgiveness and reconciliation also leaves "ordinary"
folk out in the cold, as though a death or violation had to be somehow
political to matter.
In a report, the Khulumani Support Group said the TRC had also failed
women, as "rape and gender-based violence did not fall within the criteria
of a political act".
The TRC made some recommendations which, if implemented, would have
made more of a difference than the commission itself. The TRC report
published in 1998 declared that "reconciliation without cost and pain is
cheap, shallow and must be spurned".
The commission also recommended that "a scheme be put into place to
enable those who benefited from apartheid policies to contribute towards
the alleviation of poverty", mentioning a wealth tax as one option.

FURTHER READING:
6
Page
 http://www.saha.org.za/news/2010/April/the_legacy_of_the_truth_and_r
econciliation_commission.htm
https://www.timeslive.co.za/sunday-times/opinion-and-analysis/2016-04-
10-20-years-after-the-trc-hearings-south-africas-pain-persists/
http://www.justice.gov.za/trc/special/
http://justice.gov.za/Trc/hrvtrans/index.htm
http://www.justice.gov.za/trc/amntrans/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yTnY5SQYAro
http://actionkommandant.co.za/
7
Page