CONCEPTUALIZING A TRUTH, JUSTICE AND RECONCILIATION
PROCESS IN KENYA
By Nyamori Victor∗
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
This chapter begins by exploring the meaning of the term ‘transitional justice’. It digs
deeper to understand the different legal definition of the concept of transitional justice
and analyze the effort by different scholars to demystify the meaning. It diagnoses the
different mechanisms that have been adopted around the world to achieve the objects of
transitional justice. Further, this chapter introduces the meaning and nature of truth
commissions as model of transitional justice and looks at the reasons behind the
recommendations of the formation of truth commission in Kenya. Finally this chapter
briefly discus some of the developments that have been made in regard to the formation
of the said commissions
1.0 TRANSITIONAL JUSTICE
Transitional justice refers to the to the view of justice associated with periods of political
change as evidenced by primarily legal response that deals with the wrong doing of
repressive predecessor regimes. In the wave of post war and political fragmentation, the
phenomenon of transitional justice has accelerated and appears to have become a
The Author a former student of Moi University School of Law where he perused his Degree in Law. This research is a draft copy of his final year thesis presented to: Moi Univesity, School of law in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of bachelor of law. The immense help of my supervisor MR.Oduor, Lecturer in School of Law was very fundamental for the development of this work. I am also grateful for being able to be alive after the post elections violence and this work is dedicated to the youths who in the fight for democracy lost there lives.
1
permanent feature of our political universe.1Transitional justice is further noted to be the
conception of justice associated with period of political change.
The former UN Secretary General, Kofi Annan gave a very well crafted definition of
transitional justice in a report on the rule of law and transitional justice:
The notion of ‘transitional justice’…comprises the full range of processes and
mechanisms associated with a society’s attempts to come to terms with a legacy of large-
scale past abuses, in order to ensure accountability, serve justice and achieve
reconciliation. These may include both judicial and non-judicial mechanisms, with
differing levels of international involvement (and none at all) and individual
prosecutions, reparations, truth-seeking, institutional reform, vetting and dismissals, or a
combination thereof.2
Martin Logan further notes that transitional justice is a way to address the past human
rights violations and how people can move forward towards sustainable peace and
reconciliation.3 Transitional justice is a response to systematic or widespread violations of
human rights. It seeks recognition for the victims and to promote possibilities for peace,
reconciliation and democracy. It is the system of justice when a country moves from
autocratic rule to democracy or from armed conflict to peace.
Transitional justice processes have inspired a growing field of study. Legal scholars
tackle theoretical and ethical issues surrounding transitional justice norms, participants
and researchers have analyzed a number of transitional justice institutions, and a small 1 See Ruti Teitel “Theoretical and international framework: Transitional justice in New Era” 2 See The Secretary-General, The rule of law and transitional justice in conflict and post-conflict societies, Report of the Secretary-General, para. 8, U.N. Doc. S/2004/616 (Aug. 23, 2004).3See Marty Logan, “What is transitional justice” a paper presented in OHCHR Nepal 2007 available at http//:www.nepal.ohchr.org/en/resources/Documents/English/pressreleases/APR2007/2007_04_12_HCR_Investigate%20Commission_E.pdf as at 13 October 2008
2
number of scholars have published comparative studies.4It is worthy to note that each
society has its unique economic, social, and political features of transitional periods
which legitimately demand a response to past human rights crimes hence they adopt
different methods of achieving their objectives. With this feature, one cannot say to have
a consensus over the method of transitional justice that can be adopted allover the world.
Approach to transitional justice emerged in the late 1980s and early 1990s, mainly in
response to political changes in Latin America and Eastern Europe and to demands in
these regions for justice. At the same time, human rights activists and others wanted to
address the systematic abuses by former regimes but without endangering the political
transformations that were underway. Since these changes were popularly called
“transitions to democracy,” people began calling this new multidisciplinary field
“transitional justice.”
1.2 MODELS OF TRANSITIONAL JUSTICE
There are some models of which transition justice use to achieve its specific objectives.
This is because some of the existing judicial and none judicial structures that are
available within a state are not able to fully address the issues. On that note, countries
have developed some specific models which are used to further the objective of transition
justice.
4 Lyn Graybill and Kimberly Lanegran. "Introduction to Special Issue on TRCs: Truth, Justice, and Reconciliation in Africa: Issues and Cases" African Studies Quarterly 8, no.1: (2004) [online] URL: <http://web.africa.ufl.edu/asq/v8/v8i1a1.htm> as at 7 November 2008
3
1.2.1 PROSECUTION
Prosecution is one model that countries use to prosecute perpetrator of such crimes. They
have the primary responsibility to carryout out trials for genocide, crimes against
humanity, war and other serious violation of human rights.5Apart from the international
tribunals and courts, domestic courts need to be exhausted extensively before setting the
matter to international courts. Domestic courts and prosecutions are judicial
investigations of those responsible for human rights violations. Prosecutors frequently
emphasize investigations of the “big fish” suspects considered most responsible for
massive or systematic crimes.
1.2.2 REPARATION
Persons who have undergone the dehumanizing experience of violation of some of the
basic human’s right have recourse for remedies and reparation. International Instruments
provide for reparation of victims of gross human right violations6.Reparation need not to 5 Some of the internationally acclaimed models of prosecution include the International Criminal Court
that was established in the Hegue (Netherlands) in 1998 to try persons for genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity committed after July 2002
6 .See the UN Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to Remedy and Reparation adopted and proclaimed by UN General Assembly resolution 60/147 of 16 December 2005, UN Doc. A/RES/60/147.
The right to an effective remedy for victims of human rights violations is enshrined in article 2 (3) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). It is also recognized in article 8 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, article 6 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, article 14 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, article 39 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, article 3 of the 1907 Hague Convention concerning the Laws and Customs of War on Land, article 91 of the Protocol I Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Additional Protocol I), article 75 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court and article 7 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights.
4
be in term of monetary value only, they can also include symbolic acts such as apologies,
recognition of the plight of the victims. Thus countries adopt integrated approach into
application of both the individual measure, managerial and symbolic measure.
Institutions that ware part of the past regimes which ware used to support the
authoritarian regimes and or were a contributed to the conflicts need to be changed too.
1.2.3 INSTITUTIONAL REFORM
The Institutional Reform as model for transitional justice cannot be gainsaid, as such, the
institutional reform program is aimed at changing the institutions to ones that respect
human rights, maintain peace and preserve the rule of law. It’s a pity that most truth
commissions around the world centre their focus on individuals but forget about the
institutional reforms. Institutions have in the past been used as tool for human’s right
violations. Some states have not been able to archive its basic objective of transition
because the institution remains the same.7
1.2.4 TRUTH COMMISSIONS
7 As Dr Alex Dr. Alex Boraine, President International Center for Transitional Justice , notes in paper “Transitional Justice as an Emerging Field” presented at the “Repairing the Past: Reparations and Transitions to Democracy” symposium Ottawa, Canada * March 11, 2004
“On a recent visit to Serbia, it was quite clear that one of the major problems that are preventing that country from moving out from its very dark and ominous past into a brighter democracy was that the institutions remained almost exactly the same. Neither the structures nor the personnel had changed. As I moved from one group of leaders to another, it was clear that unless and until institutions are radically restructured, there will be little opportunity for growth, for development and for peace in Serbia. In deeply divided societies where mistrust and fear are characteristic of that society, there must be bridge-building and a commitment, not only to criminal justice, but also to economic justice. For that to be a reality, institutions, as well as individuals, have to change.”
5
One last but not the least models adopted by countries all over the word are the truth
seeking models. This model adopt the style and format of working as truth commissions
of which by definition refers to an officially sanctioned, temporary, non-judicial body
created to establish truth about large scale violation, including the responsibility of
individuals and institutions and the root cause of violation.
Henry Steiner in his article about the “Introduction to Truth Commission” he ably defines
in verbatim that:
..Truth commissions has become familiar conception and institution for a state emerging
from a period of gross human rights abuses and debating how to deal with its recent
past. The terms serve as generic designation of a type of governmental organ that is
intended to construct a record of this tragic history…..these commissions offer among
many ways of responding to years of barbarism run rampant, of horrific human rights
violations that occurred while countries ware caught up in racial, ethnic, class and
ideological conflict over justice and power…8
Guideline from Amnesty International titled “Truth, justice and reparation: Establishing
an effective truth commission”9 notes that Truth commission is an official, temporary,
non-judicial fact-finding bodies that investigate a pattern of abuses of human rights or
humanitarian law, usually committed over a number of years. The object of their inquiry
(a pattern of human rights violations, rather than a specific event) distinguishes truth
commissions from other commissions of inquiry. Their temporary character distinguishes
8 See Henry J Steiner and Philip Alston, The International Human Rights in Context, Law Politics Morals,(2nd ed,2000) at page 12179“Truth, justice and reparation: Establishing an effective truth commission “This article is available at http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/POL30/009/2007 as at 20 October 2008.
6
truth commissions from many national human rights commissions and other national
institutions for the promotion and protection of human rights, which are permanent
monitoring and enforcement bodies. Truth commissions are established by national
authorities, generally during a political transition. They take a victim-centered approach
and conclude their work with a final report containing findings of fact and
recommendations. Its is also noted that A truth commission or truth and reconciliation
commission is a commission tasked with discovering and revealing past wrongdoing by a
government, in the hope of resolving conflict left over from the past10.
In principle, truth and reconciliation processes could be held that addressed conflicts and
abuses across borders, or in a regional context. In practice, official truth commissions,
mandated by governments, are designed to address crimes in a national context. This does
not mean that truth commissions and their reports cannot address regional dynamics.11
The contemporary surge of truth commissions in noted to have started in Argentina after
the country’s defeat in the Falkland Islands war and leaving of political power by the
military. In this regard, the functions of truth commissions have since the last few years
changed. In the past truth commissions ware understood to be investigative mechanism
with the aim of publishing an authoritative and factual report on humans rights violations
committed in the country.12The objects of inquiry of truth commissions distinguish it
10 This definition is found from the following link, http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth_and_Reconciliation_Commission as at 10 October 2008.
11 See Chandra Lekha Sriram “Conflict Mediation And The ICC: Challenges And Options For Pursuing Peace With Justice At The Regional Level” available at http//www.peace-justice-conference.info/download/WS1-Sriram%20report.pdf as at 12 October 2008
12 See Dealing with the Past: Rights and Reason: Challenges for truth recovery in South Africa and Northern Ireland. Fordham International Law Journal(Volume 26;1074)
7
from some commissions. Even if they are involved in the protection of human rights, this
characteristic is more fundamentally different from other national humans’ rights
commissions and other institutions that protect and promote national humans rights. This
is because their objects on inquiry deal with the establish pattern of humans rights
violations unlike other institution that deal specifically with one event. They take a
victim-centered approach and conclude their work with a final report containing findings
of fact and recommendations13.
Some of the distinctive features that truth commissions should have include the issue of
time frame. It is noted that truth commissions should have a time frame of operations lest
it take a whole century to come up with its report. This time frame would include time it
starts its operation by collecting and collating evidence from people and witness up to the
time it will submit its final report. The advantage from this in that truth commission can
start operations as soon as the panel or the commissioners are sworn in.14
Truth commissions’ mandates must fall within some realities. Thus s commissions
cannot be tasked with the duty of inquiry of some of the past humans right violations that
happened some irretraceable years back. Thus this will not be possible because some
sources of collating evidence will have demised by then.
13 See: The rule of law and transitional justice in conflict and post-conflict societies, report of the UN Secretary-General, UN Doc. S/2004/616, 23 August 2004, para. 50.
14 It should be noted that some truth commissions over the past had taken time for conclusion of some of their report. In Uganda fro example, the Commission of Inquiry into Violations of Human Rights was created in mid-1986 to examine the abuses committed under the Obote and Amin governments from 1962-86, unfortunnaly the commissions chaired by Supreme Court judge dragged its work for nearly a decade.
8
1.3 REASONS FOR TRUTH COMMISSIONS
Since its creation by the British in 1895, the Kenyan state has witnessed a great deal of
commissions of massive human rights violations.15The successive government that took
over from the colonialist engaged in the most abominable human rights violations and
economic crimes known to humanity. The two general elections in 1992 and 1997, the
first of their kind in decades did not bring relief from state-directed human rights
violations and the wanton and shameless theft of public coffers and property, evils that
became the trademark of the Kenya government.16
Election that culminated in the removal KANU regime from the long rule showed some
glimmer of hope to Kenyans. Some of the promises that the then incumbent Government
made to the people was the formation of Truth, Justice and Reconciliation Commission to
act as vehicle for transitional justice that would try to join back the social fiber that had
been broken for more than two decade of bad leadership and rule. The task force
appointed over the same made recommendations for the establishment of the
Commission and a bill is in parliament pending discussion and subsequent enactment into
law upon thorough securitization
The Post election violence that rocked this country was as result of some of the issues
that were raised by the task force for Truth Justice and Reconciliation Commission.
Emotive issues that had been ignored over the past ware some of the factors that
contributed to the violence after the flawed electoral process. The violence that marred
15See “Report of the Task Force on the Establishment of a Truth, Justice and Reconciliation Commission” Presented to Hon. Kiraitu Murungi The Minister for Justice and Constitutional Affairs on 26 August 200316 Ibid
9
every part of the country was based on some of the historical issues that had remained
unresolved by the past regimes despite constant urge from the citizens and the civil
society. In view of the foregoing ,the Panel of Eminent persons in trying to resolve the
conflict of the disputing sides mooted an agendas that would tackle the past historical
injustice and human mistreatments and irregular and emotive land issue ,this is was noted
to be the Agenda Four that formed part of the discussion of the National Dialogue and
Reconciliation.17
The Kenya National and Reconciliation Committee then agreed to the formation of Truth
Justice and Reconciliation Commission. This was to be done by passing of an Act of
Parliament which should be adopted by the legislatures. They agreed that the commission
mandate would tackle event that took place between 12th December in 1963 to 28th
February 2008.18Further they noted that it would be reasonable to look at antecedents of
this date to understand the nature, root cause, of context that led o the violence, violation
and the crimes.
The agreement further reiterated the guiding principles with reference to international
standards that shall cover the operation the truth commission. They noted that
17 The Kenya National Dialogue and Reconciliation commission mediated by Kofi Anan made a press statement on 14 February 2008 with recommendations on how to resolve the political crisis. They noted in Part III of the statement that in then current crisis, the need for political settlement was need to promote national healing and reconciliation. That political settlement was necessary to manage wide spectrum of reform mechanism which included but not limited to the following:
• Comprehensive constitutional reforms.• Comprehensive electoral reform• Truth justice and reconciliation commission• Etc.
18 See the post Koffi Annan agreement for the formations of Truth, Justice and Reconciliation Commission signed on 4th March 2008 available at:http://rescuekenya.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/commission-truth-and-reconciliation-4-march-2008.pdf
10
Independence of the commission would suffice for its good work. They noted that the
commission would decide its own budget. It will decide on its own working methodology
and how to investigate and report. Finally they would be free from any political
influence.19
The Commission when established shall seek to find the truth in cases before it. Influence
from other quarters should be avoided in making recommendations and drawing of final
report. Thus the report should represent the people’s views as was collected and collated.
The Commission shall be given powers of investigation, including the right to call
persons to speak with the Commission, and powers to make recommendations that shall
be considered and implemented by the government or others. These recommendations
may include measures to advance community or national reconciliation; institutional or
other reforms, or whether any persons should be held to account for past acts.20
Government and other State offices shall provide information to the Commission on
request, and provide access to archives or other sources of information. It is urged that
other Kenyan and international individuals and organizations also provide full
cooperation and information to the Commission on request. The Parties encourage strong
financial support to the Commission. It is expected that the Government of Kenya will
provide a significant portion of the Commission’s budget. Other funding may be obtained
by the Commission from donors, foundations, or other independent sources.21
19 Ibid20 See Supra note 1821 Ibid.
11
CHAPTER TWO
2.0 Truth, Justice and Reconciliation Commission: The Kenyan Case
The concept of using truth commissions around the world is a new institution in the
universe of law and justice; and is a vehicle for transitional justice. Each country where it
has been established –starting in Argentina and later in Uganda, South Africa, El
12
Salvador, Chile, Argentina, Peru, Ghana, Sierra Leone, among others – has had to
improvise and craft an institution that was determined by the particular country’s
traumatic history and the balance of the political forces. That is why there is no model
truth commission anywhere that Kenya can simply mimic.22 Kenyans should learn from
the experiences of all these countries, and decide the type of a truth commission they
desire to establish mindful of the complexities of Kenya’s particular history.
There ware a lot of suggestion to the establishment of Truth Commission in Kenya. The
three suggestions that were put forward to the Task Force for the establishment of Truth
Commission were: That Truth Commission should be entrenched into the new
constitution. This was rejected due a number of factors. First; the Task Force noted that
the idea of entrenchment of the institution into the new constitution was strange. This has
never been witnessed in any part of the world. Further it was argued that a new
constitution was long lived document and yet the truth commission was to work on
specific period of time. Thus Truth Commission is a temporary institution that should not
concern the constitution.
The second idea put forward by proponents of Truth Commission just after the coming
into power by the NARK government was the establishment of Truth Commission by
presidential assent. This was said to be advantageous due to a number factors and
variables that affected the choice to be made. These ware: the speed with which a truth
commission ought to be set up, the powers that would be vested in it, the support that it
22 See “Report of the Task Force on the Establishment of a Truth, Justice and Reconciliation Commission” Presented to Hon. Kiraitu Murungi The Minister for Justice and Constitutional Affairs on 26 August 2003
13
would garner from various constituencies, and the ability or political will to set up the
commission.23
After taking into account the aforementioned factors and variables the Task Force
recommended the use of Presidential Order for establishment of the Commission. They
noted that through the order the commission will be established with speed.24Many
Kenyans suggested the formation of Truth Commission by way of an Act of parliament.
They felt that legislating a truth commission would give it adequate powers and insulate
it from the whims of the executive, a fate that has all too often met past presidential
commissions under KANU governments. But they also wanted a Truth Commission
established immediately. The Task Force then had to reconcile these two positions. The
Task Force rejected the legislative route because it was of the view that the Kenyan
parliament has too many competing, vested, and self-protective interests that would
delay, scuttle, or give the country a Truth Commission that would be devoid of any
meaningful powers. Many members of parliament and some political parties are either
ambivalent or hostile to a Truth Commission.25
2.1 Truth Justice and Reconciliation Commission Act Of 2008
Parliament unanimously passed the Truth, Justice and Reconciliation Commission Bill
(herein after referred as TRC ACT) on the 23rd October 2008. The Act goes on to
elaborate the procedure for the establishment the TRC. It notes that the Act shall establish
23 Supra note 22. 24 The Judicial Commission of Inquiry into the Goldenberg Affair is the best example of the advisability of the presidential route.
25 Supra note 22.
14
a Commission to be known as the Truth, Justice and Reconciliation Commission.26 The
commission shall be a body corporate, have perpetual succession and have a common
seal.27In its operation the headquartered of the commission shall be in Nairobi’s and this
is not limited because the commission will be executing duties by traveling around the
country to gather and collating evidence from various vintage points within the country.
To have power for its operations, the Act gives the corporate entity power of being
capable of suing and being sued28, taking, purchasing or otherwise acquiring, holding,
charging or disposing of movable or immovable property29, borrowing money30and doing
or performing all other things or acts for the furtherance of the provisions of the Act,
which may be lawfully done or performed by the body corporate.31
2.1.1 Membership of the Commission
The commission shall consist of nine commissioners32 who will be responsible for the
function and operation of the commissions. The commissioners shall be composed of
three, at least one of opposite gender, of who shall be non citizens and selected by the
Panel of Eminent African Personalities.33The selected commissioners herein should be
persons who have knowledge of and at least good experience in matters relating to human
26 Sec 3(1)27 Sec. 3(2)28 Sec 3(2)(a)29 Sec 3(2)(b)30 Sec 3(2)(c)31 Sec 3(2)(d)32 Sec 10(1)33 Sec 10(1)(b)
15
rights laws.34Their names shall then be forwarded to the National assembly for
nomination and thereafter forwarded to the president for appointment.35
The remaining six Kenyan commissioners shall be selected through a process put down
in the First Schedule of the Act. The selection Panel36 shall invite the application of
persons who are interested to be commissioners of the commission. Groups and
organization are also allowed to tender or submit proposal of persons they wish to be
selected as commissioners.37
Four of the six shall have knowledge of and experience in forensic audit, investigations,
psycho-sociology, anthropology and social relations, conflict management, religion or
gender issues.38 The selection panel shall make submission to the national assembly of
suitable qualified persons to be nominated to the posts. This shall be done in a ranking
manner and putting suitable comments to each individual. The national assembly shall
upon getting the names of nominated six finalists, forwarded the same to the minister
34 Sec 10(5)(a)35 Sec 10(2)36 The selection Panels shall consist of nine persons appointed as
I. follows: two people jointly nominated by religious organizations namely; the Evangelical Alliance of Kenya, Hindu Council of Kenya ,National Council of Churches of Kenya, Seventh Day Adventists, the Supreme Council of Kenya Muslims and the Catholics;
II. One person nominated by the Law Society of Kenya;III. One person nominated by Federation of Kenya Women LawyersIV. One person jointly nominated by Central Organization of Trade Unions and Kenya National Unio
of TeachersV. One person nominated by the Association of Profession Societies of East Africa (APSEA)
VI. One person nominated by the Kenya National Commission on Human RightsVII. One person jointly nominated by the Kenya Private Sector Alliance and the Federation of Kenya
Employers;VIII. One person nominated by the Kenya Medical Association
37 The invitation of the commissioners hall be done 38 Sec 10(5)(b)
16
concerned after approval. The Minister will then forward the names of the finalist to the
President who shall by notice in the Kenya Gazette make the appointments.39
Notwithstanding the above, the commissioners should be persons of sound mind ,good
character, integrity40 and has not in any way been involved ,implicated, linked or
associated with the perpetrators or supporters of the acts and humans right violation or
any other matter which is being investigated by the commission.41Section 10(6) notes that
the commissioners appointed by the operation of the Act should be impartial in the
performance of the function of the Commission and shall enjoy the confidence of the
Kenyan people.
The composition of the commissioners is very important to achieving the objectives of
the commissions. The effectiveness and outcome of a truth commission largely turns on
who is appointed to serve in key positions. Commissioners control the resources, the
major decisions not specified by mandate, the priorities, the work plan, and the final
report. Because the commission possesses significant power, its membership should have
relevant subject-matter expertise and should represent the diversity of victims, society,
and other major stakeholders.42In the Kenyan case, different parties to the National
Accord must be represented fully if not equally to give a balance to the decision made in
the execution of its functions.
39 See Sec 6 of the First Schedule of the Act.40 Sec 10(6)(a)41 Sec 10(6)(b)42 Renee Dopplick “Truth and Reconciliation in Post-Conflict Nepal: the Suitability of the Peruvian Truth
and Reconciliation Commission Model” Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1222964 as at 22nd Jan 2009.
17
The non-inclusive method adopted by the NTGL43 Chairman to select the nine
commissioners of the proposed TRC in Liberia was a major setback to the good
performance of the commission. Mr.Brant who was the Chairman of the NTGL in
January 2004, without prior consultation with other stakeholders, announced the names
of TRC members.44
In Chad, for example, it became apparent that the truth commission was used to discredit
the old regime and legitimize the new one.45 In the case of El Salvador, for example, the
violence was seen as so polarizing that no Salvadoran could fairly assess what had
happened. The UN secretary-general, with the agreement of the parties to the peace
accords, selected a former Colombian president, a former Venezuelan foreign minister,
and a former president of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights to conduct the Truth
Commission.46
Another area that the United Nations had come of great assistance to the nations in the
appointment of commissioners was after the violence of Timor-Leste. An Independent
43 The NTGL draws its leadership from representatives of the various armed factions as well as members of civil society.
44 See Dr Abdul Rahman Lamin “Truth, Justice and Reconciliation: Analysis of the Prospects and Challenges of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in Liberia” available www.iss.co.za/pubs/Books/TortuousRoad/Chap10.pdf as at 22nd Jan 2009,where he notes that:
This move understandably drew immediate fire from critics. They contended that the chairman’s actions could potentially undermine “ownership” of the process, something that was of crucial importance to the overall success of the commission and the process of democratic consolidation in Liberia. While these criticisms are well placed, it appears from careful reading of the situation that Bryant was merely taking advantage of a legal void that existed at the time. Although Article XIII (1) of the CPA called for the establishment of a TRC, it did not spell out the process that should be followed prior to the appointment of commissioners
45 Brahm, Eric. "Truth Commissions" Beyond Intractability Eds. Guy Burgess and Heidi Burgess. Conflict Research Consortium, University of Colorado, Boulder Posted: June 2004 http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/truth_commissions/ as at 22nd Jan 2009
46 Supra note 45.
18
Special Commission of Inquiry 47for Timor-Leste was established after the request of the
prime minister to the UN. The appointment of international commissioner to the
commission was to give the process of the TRC to have relevance in international forum
an also be independents in its finding and in compilation of the reports .The influence of
national player could not affect the function the commissioners as no connection would
be found with national interests.
In Kenya, the parities to the dialogue committee that resulted to the speedy enactment of
the TRC Act should have a say in the selection of the commissioners. Although they
should have a say to the selection of the commissioners, they should not be allowed to
make appointments of their cronies and sympathizers. This is to deter the selected
commissioners from advancing partisan interest over the core objectives and values of the
commission. With the derailment of the objectives of the commission, the people on the
ground will not be able to have trust to the commission hence it will lose its core
function: Reconciliation.
2.2.1 Functions and Objectives of the Commission
The core objective of TRC is to promote peace, justice, national unity, healing, and
reconciliation among the people of Kenya.48Section 6 of the Act also enumerates some of
47 See the Report of the United Nations Independent Special Commission of Inquiry for Timor-Leste available at www.ohchr.org/Documents/Countries/COI TimorLeste .pdf as at 22nd Jan 2009. The report notes that:
On 8 June 2006, the Senior Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Cooperation of Timor-Leste wrote to the Secretary-General of the United Nations inviting the United Nations to “establish an independent special inquiry commission” to “review the incidents on 28 and 29 April and on 23, 24 and 25 May, and other related events or issues which contributed to the crisis”
48 Sec 5
19
the functions of the commission. To be able to achieve the objectives herein and function
as noted herein, the Act mandates the commission to be able to operate as a quasi judicial
body where they can investigative, inquire and making recommendations to particular
issues.
2.2.2 Investigation Role
The TRC is mandated to carry out investigation and hold hearings to establish an
accurate, complete and historical record of violations and abuses of human rights and
economic rights inflicted on persons by the State, public institutions and holders of public
office serving and retired, between 12th December 1963 and 28th February 2008,
including antecedents, circumstances, factors and context of such violations as well as the
perspectives of the victims and the motives and perspectives of the persons responsible
for commission of the violations.49
Part C of the objectives of the TRC include the investigation of gross human rights
violations and violations of international human rights law as well as abuses that
occurred, including massacres, sexual violations, murder and extra-judicial killings and
determining those responsible for the Commission of the violations and abuse.
2.2.3 Gross violation and abuses on Humans Right
The kind of history this state had undergone over the past cannot be forgotten. Different
kinds of human right violation have been part and parcel of this state for a very long 49 Sec 5(a)
20
period of time. Kenya's parliament in the KANU regime just after Moi got into power
and on his orders reinstated the detention laws which had been suspended in 1978.50
Colonial era laws, like the Chief's Authority Act, the Public Order Act, the Preservation
of Public Security Act, the Public Order Act, and the Penal Codes, gave the president the
right to suspend individual rights guaranteed by the constitution.51 To that effect, Kenyans
wanted to know the real truth of some of the violations visited upon them over the KANU
era.
Section 6(a)52 gives power to the TRC to be able to investigate Gross human right
violations53 which has been in this country for every long time. Torture which had been
prohibited not only in our national laws but also in international instrument had been a
method that the government used to silent its critic. Tortures that had been occasioned to
some people who ware against the government also fall within the TRC mandate.
Between 1989 to 1999, Kenya saw one of the worst human rights violations in its history.
Moi accused advocates of multiparty politics of subversion, and thereby got a fresh
50 See, Kimondo, G. K. "The Bill of Rights", in The Citizen and the Constitution. K. Kibwana, G. K. Kimondo and J. T. Gathii, Editors. 1996, Nairobi: Claripress,
51 Ibid52 Sec 6(a) provides that the TRC can investigate violations and abuses of human rights relating to
killings,abductions, disappearances, detentions, torture, ill-treatment and expropriation of property suffered by anyperson within the specified period53 Sec 2 interpret gross human rights violations” means
a) violations of fundamental human rights, including but not limited to acts of torture, killing, abduction and severe ill-treatment of any person;
b) imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty;c) rape or any other form of sexual violence;d) enforced disappearance of persons;e) persecution against any identifiable group or collectivity on political,racial, national, ethnic,
cultural, religious or gender or other grounds universally recognized as impermissible under international law;
f) any attempt, conspiracy, incitement, instigation, command, or procurement to commit an act referred to in paragraph (a) and (c), which was committed during the period 12th December 1963 and 28th February 2008 and the commission of which was advised, planned, directed, commanded or ordered, by any person acting with a political motive;
21
excuse for detaining a new generation of his critics. A number of the champions of
multiparty politics--John Khaminwa, Raila Odinga, Mohammed Ibrahim, Gitobu
Imanyara, Kenneth Matiba and Charles Rubia--among others, were detained under
inhuman conditions and without trial. Human rights lawyers, Gibson Kamau Kuria and
Kiraitu Murungi, fled to the United States to avoid being jailed.54
Murder and extra-judicial killings occasioned by government machinery was very much
evident during the post election violence. The OHCHR made a report55 that implicated
the Kenya Police to have had used firearms and live ammunition to respond to
demonstrations and related violence in Kibera, Eldoret and Kisumu and that the Police
failed to abide by the principle of proportionality and of necessity. Information gathered
by the Fact Finding Mission suggested that, in a number of cases, the police failed to use
the full range of “crowd control tools” such as teargas, batons and rubber bullets before
resorting to firing live ammunition and that in many instances it failed to issue clear
warning to the demonstrators and the crowd prior to shooting with live ammunition56.
In view of the foregoing and in so doing the kind of investigation into the violations of
human right, the TRC will be investigating the context in which, causes and
circumstances under which the violations and abuses occurred. It will identify the
individuals, public institutions, bodies, organizations, public office holders, the State,
state actors, or persons purporting to have acted on behalf of any public body responsible
54 See Korwa G. Adar and Isaac M. Munyae 2001. "Human Rights Abuse in Kenya under Daniel Arap Moi 1978-2001. African Studies Quarterly 5(1): available at http://web.africa.ufl.edu/asq/v5/v5i1a1.htm as at 22nd Jan 2009.
55 See Report from OHCHR Fact-finding Mission to Kenya, 6-28 February 2008 available at http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Press/OHCHRKenyareport.pdf as at 7th Feb 2009.
56 Supra note 54.
22
for or involved in the violations and abuses.57The TRC will also be able to investigate if
such kind of violations were deliberate or were planned by the state which is vested with
the responsibility of guarding and protecting the same.58
2.2.4 Recommend Prosecution
Finally, the TRC have the duty to recommend for prosecution of the persons who are
responsible or were involved in the human rights and economic rights violation and
abuses.59The criminal justice system in Kenya should take charge to find way of bringing
the perpetrators of such kind of human’s right violators to justice. This should not only be
seen to be done but also should be done.
In South Africa, it was noted the provision for amnesty procedure that was put in their
Act was away in which the court system escaped the possibility of influx in the
prosecution of cases that might have resulted out of the truth justice process. Akin to the
Kenya system, the criminal justice system was blamed to be dysfunctional .Research
showed that in South Africa only four percent of those who commit crimes such as
murder, armed robbery, rape and serious assaults spend more than two years in jail. This
demonstrates a collapse in the capacity of the police to investigate and arrest, attorneys
general to prosecute, judges to convict and correctional facilities to imprison,60
57 See Sec 6(b)58 Sec 6(d)59 Sec 6(f)60 See Paul van Zyl: “Dilemmas of Transitional Justice: The Case of South Africa’s Truth and
Reconciliation Commission” available at http://www.swisspeace.ch/typo3/fileadmin/user_upload/pdf/KOFF/17_dilemmas.pdf as at 4th Jan 2009
23
Kenyan criminal justice is not fully competent because some political crimes committed
by highly skilled operatives trained in the art of concealing their crimes and destroying
evidence are difficult to prosecute. The Kenyan police have an extremely small number
of properly trained detectives. In certain towns more than a third of prosecutorial posts
are empty and cannot be filled. Even in those towns that are fully staffed, attorneys
general complain that they do not have the prosecutorial resources to complete more than
a small percentage of the cases ready for trial. It has been see that most perpetrators of
heinous crimes walk free because the state cannot prove case against them.
In agreeing with the foregoing, particular provision was inserted in The TRC Act which
provided procedure and methods to be used in the processing Amnesty application.61
2.2.4 Victim Identification
The TRC have the mandate to investigate into the whereabouts of victims and by
restoring the human and civil dignity of such victims.62 They will grant them an
opportunity to relate their own accounts of the violations of which they are the victims,
and make recommendation for reparations measures in respect of them.63In any society
meeting the challenge of transitional justice, victims or their families should be provided
with a platform to tell their stories and have their testimony publicly acknowledged.64 The 61 See Part III (Sec 34-41) of the Act that deal with Amnesty Mechanisms and Procedures. This will be
disused in if full details letter. 62 Sec 6(t)63 See Topic dealing with Reparation where it has been discussed in full length and in details.64 See David A. Crocker ,”Truth commissions, transitional justice, and civil society” an article available at
http://www.puaf.umd.edu/facstaff/faculty/CrockerVita105.pdf
24
TRC will identify and specify the victims of the violations and abuses and make
appropriate recommendations for redress.65
2.2.5 Economic Crimes
The TRC Act in section 6(g) gives the TRC mandate to investigate economic crimes
committed within the specified period. The Act also mandate the TRC to be able to
investigating economic crimes, such as grand corruption and the exploitation of natural or
public resources and how they have been dealt with.66
2.2.6 Sexual Crimes against women
The mandate of the TRC also cover crimes committed against the women of Kenya. Such
kind of crimes of sexual nature against female victims67 has been noted to include rape.
The kind of violence that was visited upon women after the disputed election will also be
covered under this mandate.68
Most truth Commission around the world had been noted to be gender neutral. This did
not act as a bar to investigate some of the gender based crimes. Though their mandates
were formally gender neutral, commissions in Guatemala, South Africa and Peru
interpreted mandates to address sexual violence.69
65 Sec 6(c) and Supra note 60.66 Sec 6(n)67 Sec 6(h)68See an article by Koffi Annan: OP-ED: available at: http://www.dialoguekenya.org/docs/ArticlebyH.E.KofiAnnan_17.04.pdf as at 28 Jan 2009 where he
explains what had happened in Kenya after disputed election. He notes in verbatim that: What gripped the country was the stuff of nightmares: rapes, mutilations and communal violence. Children lost their parents. Families lost their homes. Communities lost trust in each other.
69 Christine Bell and Catherine O’Rourke “Does Feminism Need a Theory of Transitional Justice? An Introductory Essay: The International Journal of Transitional Justice, Vol. 1, 2007, 23–44, available at:
25
In Haiti, Sierra Leone and East Timor/Timor Leste, gender or sexual violence was
explicitly incorporated into commission mandates thus giving them an explicit authority
to look at some of the violence afflicted upon women. The South African Truth
commission developed a new concept in its hearing where it could hear cases that
involved the crimes afflicted to women. This was called the Gender hearing. The
establishment of a gender unit in the Peruvian Truth and Reconciliation Commission and,
most recently, the integral role played by the United Nations Development Fund for
Women (UNIFEM) in providing technical advice, training and other support to staff and
those who testified before the Sierra Leone Truth and Reconciliation Commission is an
indication that most commissions have developed such concept.70
Sexual violence cases are generally under reported. This is often complicated by the fact
that members of government may have been the perpetrators. Women victims face a
difficult choice. Disclosure of sexual assault is risky and can result in estrangement from
their family, mistreatment of their children and social exclusion. On the other hand, if
crimes are not reported, women may be ineligible for reparations or other forms of legal
redress. Access to commissions is another challenge for women. Often those in rural
areas have no way to get to cities where commissions are typically held.71
http://www.peacejusticeconference.info/download/Bell%20and%20O%27Rourke%20Does%20Feminism%20Need%20a%20Theory%20of%20Transitional%20Justice.pdf
70 Supra note 66.71 See Sanam Naraghi Anderlini, Camille Pampell Conaway and Lisa Kays: available at
http://www.huntalternatives.org/download/49_transitional_justice.pdf as at 4th Feb 2009.
26
2.2.7 Educate the Public72
To be able to achieve the objective of the commissions, The TRC is mandated to teach
the public and engage the public so that they can be able to contribute positively to
achieve of the objectives of the act.
2.2.8 Land Inquiry73
The colonial legacy and mismanagement of land distribution especially in the Rift Valley
has generated conflict over what is often perceived as the most important form of wealth
and source of political power.74 Land has been a major sauce of conflict in this part of the
world.75With the kind of attitude formed over the ownership of land, the violence that
72 Sec 6(i) notes that educate and engage the public and give sufficient publicity to its work so as to encourage the public to contribute positively to the achievement of the objectives of the Commission;
73 Sec 6(o) notes inquiring into the irregular and illegal acquisition of public land and making recommendations on how the land can be repossessed or how the cases on such land can be determined
74 See Report From OHCHR Fact-Finding Mission To Kenya, 6-28 February 2008.75 Ibid notes:
In the early 1900s, The British colonialists evicted the Rift Valley’s communities (Nandi, Maasai, Samburu and Turkana) to create the “White Highlands”. Agricultural labourers from the neighboring provinces, particularly Kikuyus from the Central Province, were recruited to work on the colonial farms. In the aftermath of Kenya’s independence from the British Empire, some of these agricultural labourers took advantage of the land-buying schemes offered by President Jomo Kenyatta and bought the land they had worked on for the British colonialists. These small lands were in Nakuru, Uasin Gishu, Nandi, Trans Nzoia and Narok districts. This situation was largely maintained until 1992-1993, when, during President Moi’s tenure, politically-instigated violence forced many Kikuyu farmers out of their farms. At this point, some ministers and national politicians from the Kalenjin and Maasai communities rallied on the reestablishment of a majimbo4 system of Government – a federal system based on ethnicity5. Some proponents of majimboism simultaneously called for the expulsion of all other ethnic groups from land they claimed to be historically theirs, and the return of the “Kikuyu outsiders” to their “homeland” or
27
rocked this country after the 2007 disputed election were some of the major result of the
unresolved land problem that continue to haunt Kenya year after year. In the same gist,
the official holders of public offices sold land to alleged investors without following the
right procedure. The officially allocated forest in this country was seen to be coming
down after politically correct fellows bought some of the forest land. Amazingly the
former regime awarded public land to some of the leaders that ware able to dance to the
tune of the president.
2.2.9 Economic Marginalization76
The previous regimes had been accused to have economically marginalized certain parts
of this country. This was evidenced by the way certain areas in the state developed more
rapidly than others and yet independences was received on the same time. Politically,
areas that ware not pro government or fell within the opposition ware blocked from
accessing investors. The Luo Nyanza which since independence had leaders who ware
critics of the incumbents governments in many ways and ideas ware always sidelined in
terms of development. The allocation of resources to this area was minimal hence the end
result was the increase in poverty and under developments.
The Northern part of this country has always reflected the negative part of Kenya. The
government allocation of resources to this area has always been minimal hence the level
“ancestral home”, in the Central Province.
76 Sec 6(p) inquiring and establishing the reality or otherwise of perceived economic marginalization of communities and make recommendations on how to address the marginalization;
28
of development has not been able to redeem this area from the economic problems. From
poverty, inequity, equitable access to opportunity and regional imbalances. Kenyans in
such areas were faced with insurmountable poverty; people developed a sense of
hopelessness which in turn can lead to acts of violence.77
2.3 Operations Of The TJRC
The Act gives powers to the commissioners to manage how it will function within the
defined mandate. The Independence of the commission in the performance of the
functions is provided for in Section 21 of the Act. It allows the commission to make
decision without due regard to any authority or direction from any person or authority.
Section 27 allows the commission to make special arrangements and adopt specific
mechanism and procedure for addressing the experience of women, children, person with
disabilities and other vulnerable groups.
In the same gist, the Act allows the commission to form such committees that it may
consider necessary for the better performance of the function of the Act. This is allowing
the commission to be able to make work easy. In South African model of TRC three other
committees were set up to carry out the mandate of the TRC. The first was the Human
77 See Kofi Annan Article. Supra note 64.
29
Rights Violations Committee (HRV) whose purpose was to investigate human rights
abuses between 1960 and 1994. It was to use statements made to the TRC to find victims
and then to refer the victims of gross human rights violations to the second committee,
the Reparation and Rehabilitation (R&R) Committee, whose job was to provide support
for victims in an effort to restore the victim’s dignity. This committee was also assigned
the task of formulating policy proposals and recommendations on how to promote the
rehabilitation and healing of the survivors, their families, and the community at large.
The goal was to develop effective ways to prevent such abuses in the future. Finally, the
Amnesty Committee’s (AC) had the duty to ensure that applications for amnesty would
be carried out in accordance with the act which established the process. If granted an
amnesty, the applicant would not be subject to future prosecution. Each amnesty
application had to be granted final approval by the president, who was `Nelson Mandela.
Once granted amnesty, the recipient would no longer be eligible for future prosecution in
either criminal or civil court. Those who did not come forward continued to be eligible
for future criminal prosecution. Supporters of this approach have called it restorative
rather than retributive justice.78
The TRC will be able to administer and manage the funds allocated to it. Section 44 of
the Act notes that the funds to the commission shall consist of monies appropriated to it
by parliament, such other monies or asset that might accrue to the commission in the
course of the exercise of it powers and also from donations. What is evident from the
above is that the parliament of Kenya shall have the full control of allocation of funds to 78 Campbell, Patricia J. 2000. "The Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC): Human Rights and State Transitions--The South African Model," African Studies Quarterly. 4(3): 2 http://web.africa.ufl.edu/asq/v4/v4i3a2.htm
30
the commission. With this, the impartiality of the commission will be in question. The
depending on donor funding for the operation of the TRC is something that had failed
some commissions in the past. The Sierra Leone TRC suffered a great setback when the
funding from the donor community delayed. Some donors also wanted to cut down the
funding after failure of the Sierra Leone to do as they wished.79The SLTRC’s work
suffered as a result. The commission could only spend one week in each province for
public hearings, far too little time. This resulted to less participation of the people hence
the process lost its relevance. Everywhere the commission went people thought one week
was too short and People were eager to testify but only two or three dozen individuals
gave testimony in each of the provinces. Locals were frustrated by the limited time
available to them, as were commissioners. Reconciliation efforts were largely left to the
localities because the SLTRC had neither the time nor the money to do them. Funding
questions dogged the writing and publishing of the report; the TRC had to seek external
funding for the children’s and picture versions, which were underwritten by UNICEF and
79See Beth K. Dougherty. (2004). "Searching for Answers: Sierra Leone's Truth and Reconciliation Commission." African Studies Quarterly 8, no.1: available at http://web.africa.ufl.edu/asq/v8/v8i1a3.htm as at 14 Feb 2009.
…..As noted above, the SLTRC’s management difficulties undercut its credibility with donors, exacerbating its financial worries. From the beginning, the SLTRC operated under a cloud of inadequate funding. OHCHR estimated the SLTRC would need close to $10 million for 12 months of operation, with additional funds required for the start-up phase. Although this is not out of line with the budgets of other TRCs, early donor response was very weak. The SLTRC inauguration ceremony was delayed for a month to July 2002 because a mere $1.1 million had been pledged. Over the summer of 2002 the budget was slashed to $6.5 million, which necessitated cuts in staffing and program activity even as the sensitization campaign was getting under way. The SLTRC’s troubled performance did much to harm donor willingness to contribute. By May 2003, the funding situation was so grave OHCHR was again forced to trim the budget, down to $4.5 million. Several weeks later only $2.3 million had been received of the $3.7 million pledged.[28] Once the hearings phase was well underway, and donors were satisfied that the commission was on track, funding increased significantly to cover costs for the rest of 2003.Current estimates place the final cost at $5 million, an increase necessitated by the extension of the report writing phase into summer 2004.Many TRCs have run short of funding or felt constrained by an inadequate budget. In the case of the SLTRC, several factors can account for the scarce funding: poor fundraising efforts by OHCHR and the commission itself; donor fatigue; competition for funds with the SCSL, established in January 2002; and the SLTRC’s unimpressive start. Generally truth commissions are funded by their national governments, but the Government of Sierra Leone was not in a position to offer much support; it donated $97,000 and a building for the Secretariat.
31
the International Center for Transitional Justice.80Thus the kind of commitment that the
donor community had showed to Kenya after the post election violence will only
continue when the state and the government show that it is willing and committed to
follow the objective of the TRC to the latter.
Conclusively, although the Act had been faulted when it was in the preliminary stage
before the enactment, the kind of issue raised over the same ware taken into consideration
hence at the moment, the Act expresses the popular views.
CHAPTER THREE
3.0 Post Conflict Kenya: Options for Truth Justice and Reconciliation
3.1 Truth
The commission in Kenya is mandated to establish an accurate, complete and historical
record of violations and abuses of human rights.81Through truth telling, the Commission
attempts to document and analyze both the actual violations and the structures that
allowed or facilitated the abuse.82 But this has been marred with difficulty. The question
remains as to what is meant by the word “truth”. In One instance scientific historians
agreed that a truthful reconstruction of the past should be based on a critical study,
interpretation, and narration of facts.83
3.1.1 International Protection for Right to Truth
80 Ibid.81 Sec.5 of TJRC Act of 2008 enumerates some of the core objectives and mandate of the TJRC82 Transitional Justice as an Emerging Field83 Jacobus A. du Pisani and Kwang-Su Kim. (2004). "Establishing the truth about the apartheid past:
Historians and the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission" African Studies Quarterly 8, no.1: http://web.africa.ufl.edu/asq/v8/v8i1a5.htm as at 15 March 2009.
32
The right to ytruth id not just a waord that has been coind locally to help in the in
fulfilling the aobjectives of the commsionn.The right to truth requires states to provide
information on: the causes of the events that have led to a person having become victim
of a human rights violation; the reasons, circumstances and conditions of the violations;
the progress and results of the investigation; the identity of perpetrators (both
subordinates and their superiors); and, in the event of death or enforced disappearance,
the fate and whereabouts of the victims. Both in its individual and collective dimensions,
the right to truth is an inalienable right, which stands alone. It should be considered as a
non-derogable right and should not be subject to limitations.84
There has bee no internationally claimed definition of the word truth. Scholars in tear
quest to find a binding definition of the word truth had to go through rigorous process of
combining facts from different areas and school of thought. Some scholars rejected the
notion that historical truth is a commodity that can be discovered simply by revealing the
facts about the past, and advocated the idea that historical truth is constructed on the basis
of individual experience.85 Although historians wish to maintain standards of proof and
evidence, most realize that historical truth, as it is filtered through their minds, remains
partial and subjective to a greater or lesser extent. By that the Kenyans is the quest for
the truth about past are left to depend on some of the people who had historical
experience of the past.
84 Study on the right to the truth, Report of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner forHuman Rights, UN Doc. E/CN.4/2006/91, 8 February 2006, para. 38 and Conclusions.85 Ibid
33
The South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) was mandated to
establish “the truth” about the causes, nature and extent of gross violations of human
rights in the country between 1960 and 1994.86One of the major tasks of the TRC of
South Africa in terms of the Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act (Act no.
34 of 1995) was “to establish the truth in relation to past events” and to provide as
“complete a picture as possible” about these events.87The Act specified that the
investigation should cover the nature, causes, and extent of human rights violations. This
included the antecedents, circumstances, factors and context of such violations, and the
motives for and circumstances in which they had occurred, as well as the fate or
whereabouts of the victims. The investigation was to cover the perspectives of both the
victims and the perpetrators. It was stipulated that the investigation should be done in the
form of conducting investigations, holding hearings, and compiling a comprehensive
report.88 While commenting on legality of the TRC, Constitutional Court judge I.
Mahomed offered his own, lengthy, interpretation of the envisioned model.89
86 Ibid87 Ibid.This truth-finding mandate was restricted to a specific period of 1 March 1960 to 10 May 1994 and
a specific type of past event which included gross violations of human rights.88 Ibid89 He noted in the South African Constitutional Law Reports 1996, p. 1017 …
Much of what had transpired during the past conflict was shrouded in secrecy. The truth had been concealed and was not easily accessible. The Act sought to address this massive problem by encouraging a public unburdening of grief on the part of the survivors and families of victims so that they could be helped to discover what in truth had happened, and to receive the collective recognition of a new nation that they had been wronged. The truth which was so desperately desired would be more likely to be forthcoming if the perpetrators of past violations were encouraged to disclose the whole truth with the incentive that they would not receive punishment if they did. . . . In the process, families of victims and the survivors would be better enabled to discover the truth; perpetrators would also have the opportunity of relieving themselves of a burden of guilt or anxiety with which they might have been living for many years. In the process the country would begin the process of healing the wounds of the past, transforming anger and grief into an understanding and thereby creating the climate essential for reconciliation and reconstruction.
34
Some of the advantages of TJRC in seeking to know the truth about the past relate to
building and reconciling Kenya. Through the process, the truth and the true nature of
Kenyan governance system would become public knowledge, thus the creation of a
national memory. No longer would anyone in Kenya pretend that the abuses perpetrated
under previous regimes did not happen or were not as bad as many of its victims had
been alleging. The process will ensure that those who refused to believe the full extent of
Kenyan historical stories will have a nationally acknowledged report over the same.
Nevertheless, we should not assume that knowledge of the truth alone will satisfy the
relatives of victims. Take the South African case of Joyce Mthimkulu whose son,
Siphiwo, had been killed by the police. At a hearing of the Truth and Reconciliation
Commission’s Committee on Human Rights Violations, she said this: “If they can just
show us the bones of my child, I’ll be grateful. Where did they leave the bones of my
child? Where did they take him? Who handed him over to them? What did they do to
him?” However, when in applying for amnesty her son’s killers answered her questions
and told her the truth, she found that she wanted more: she wanted justice.90 Narration of
some of the perpetrators of the post election violence would be seen to be bringing the
truth to the fore, but this will not be equally possible due to the fact that the victims and
those who ware affected would wish to have justice be done even if any amnesty
agreements had been made. Thus it does not follow that it will quieten their resentment
or pacify their cries for justice.
3.2 Justice
90 This terribly poignant moment was recorded in “Getting Away with Murder?” an excellent BBC TV documentary about the T.R.C., which was presented by Michael Ignatieff and originally broadcast on November 1, 1997, as part of the “Correspondent” series.
35
In the aftermath of conflict or authoritarian rule, people who have been victimized often
demand justice. This has been witnessed in Kenya where citizens demanded to be given
justice over some atrocities that had been occasioned to them. Justice in TJ is foremost
and predominantly justice for victims. However, victims have not only interests, as part
of a broad notion of justice; they have also rights, namely a right to justice.91 Kofi Annan
in the Report Secretary General on Transitional justice refers to justice as:
“an ideal of accountability and fairness in the protection and vindication of rights and the
prevention and punishment of wrongs. Justice implies regard for the rights of the accused, for the
interests of victims and for the well-being of society at large. It is a concept rooted in all national
cultures and traditions and, while its administration usually implies formal judicial mechanisms,
traditional dispute resolution mechanisms are equally relevant92
Justice is also some form of judicial protection either by access to the legal system of the
violator state which - according to human rights case law - has an obligation to
investigate, prosecute and sanction the responsible or by way of an alternative (public)
forum where the victims can confront and challenge the perpetrators93.Thus, justice in TJ
reaches well beyond retributive, criminal justice, in fact, that criminal justice cannot be
fully enforced.94To put it bluntly, the price for peace is often justice or a “trade off
between peace and justice.95The act also mandates the commission to make investigations
or make recommendations concerning any other mater with the view of promoting and
achieving justice within the context of the Act.96
91 These rights have been elaborated in great detail by the Human Rights case law, They are also explicitly recognized in the ICC Statute. Art. 68 (3), 75
92 See Report Secretary General on Transitional justice, para. 7 93 The Legal Framework of Transitional Justice94 The legal framework of Transitional Justice as he quotes Ruti G. Teitel, Transitional Justice (OUP,
Oxford 2000) 55; 95 Ibid96 See Sec 5(2) of the Act
36
The notion that there cannot be peace without justice emerges forcefully in many
communities. But justice can be based on retribution which is based on punishment and
corrective action for wrongdoings or on restoration which involves the emphasizing the
construction of relationships between the individuals and communities.97Mark Drumbl
has devised a typology of post-genocide societies that describes the relationship between
victim and oppressor groups and prescribes an appropriate model of justice. He
delineates three types of societies:
I. Homogenous Society: oppressor group has “eliminated” the victim group i.e. Nazi
Holocaust, Kosovo, Aboriginal communities in Canada and Australia.
II. Dualist Society: both groups coexist within same nation-state with no possibility
of a territorial division (i.e. Rwanda)98.
III. Pluralist: Oppressor group coexists with victim group and third group; or, several
oppressor or victim groups i.e. Iraq, Bosnia, South Africa
Compared to the Kenyan case, one of the above typologies does fit exactly into the
Kenyan system. This is because the society in Kenya the communities’ coexisted within
97 See Sanam Naraghi Anderlini, Camille Pampell Conaway and Lisa Kays: available at http://www.huntalternatives.org/download/49_transitional_justice.pdf as at 4th Feb 2009
98 Alana Tiemessen. "After Arusha: Gacaca Justice in Post-Genocide Rwanda" African Studies Quarterly 8, no.1: (2004) available at: http://web.africa.ufl.edu/asq/v8/v8i1a4.htm as at 5 March 2009
As for Rwandan Drumbl’s description of a dualist post-genocide society lists a specific set of characteristics. First and foremost, his type of society requires that both groups, victims and oppressors, coexist within the nation-state and territorial division is not possible. Secondary characteristics include: control of political and economic power (and the groups’ numerical significance), level of participation in the violence, and geographic distribution of the two groups. Rwanda complies with the characteristics of a dualist post-genocide society on all counts. In Rwanda, Tutsis and Hutus both coexist within an overpopulated nation-state where territorial division between the two groups would be impossible. Additionally, both groups live in the same communities and participate in civil society, sharing culture with social status. In terms of power sharing, the Tutsis wielded the most political power despite being numerically weaker at only ten to fifteen per cent of the population. With regard to the level of participation, documented testimonies indicate that a large number of civilians participated and a large number of victims and survivors remain.
37
the state very well. The different tribes that ware in arms against one another are within
the territory. The oppressors and violators of humans’ rights are in Kenya. These are
characteristic of a dualistic society.
3.2.1 Elements of Retributive Justice
Retributive Justice is concerned with both the rewarding of good and the punishment of evil.99
Retributive justice is based on the principle that people who have committed human
rights violations, or ordered others to do so, should be punished in courts of law or, at a
minimum, must publicly confess and ask forgiveness. The perpetrators of violence and
any other violence of human rights during the post election violence should be punished
in court and publicly confess and seek for forgiveness not only from the victims but the
nation at large. From that it can be deduced that justice has been seen to be dispensed
with. Retributive justice by definition is dispensed through a criminal justice process
instituted at national, regional or international level. Such a process can be in the form of
an international criminal court or tribunal set up in the aftermath of conflict to prosecute
perpetrators of human rights abuses.100
99 Rouge Roderick O'brien “Justice, Law, And The Proposed Tribunal For The Khmer”100 Dr Abdul Rahman Lamin “Truth, Justice and Reconciliation Analysis of the Prospects and Challenges
of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in Liberia”…he further notes that:Recent examples of a retributive model of justice include the International Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), and Rwanda (ICTR), and the Special Court for Sierra Leone(a “hybrid” international tribunal). An important development in the evolution of international criminal law generally, and more specifically in reinforcing retributive justice, is the adoption in 1998 of the Rome Treaty to establish the International Criminal Court (ICC). The ICC, which came into force in July 2002 following the ratification of the Rome Treaty by 60 state parties, is a significant development that not only reaffirms the rapid evolution of individual human rights, but also underscores the erosion of state sovereignty, and the whole concept of“sovereign impunity”
38
In dispensing justice to such victim of atrocities as enumerated in the Act, the victims
should not see this as revenge as this has not been the basic obligation of justice. The
Kenya legal system plays a very crucial role over dispensing of such justice. The failure
of the legal system to dispense justice over history has been the reason for the formation
of TRC. If there is no effective legal system to undertake the institutional revenge of a
people, then the way is open for private revenge. Ultimately, this is socially destructive,
and can lead to a never-ending cycle of revenge without closure.101 Those who uphold
this approach contend that punishment is necessary to:
a) make perpetrators accountable for their past actions;
b) deter future crime; counter a culture of impunity;
c) and create an environment in which perpetrators and victims can realistically be
expected to live next to one another.
Other positive elements of retributive justice, according to its supporters, believe that it
help in avoiding vigilante justice in which victims seek punishment, or justice, from their
perpetrators, potentially creating cycles of revenge. It also help ensuring that the
perpetrators do not rise to power again because in Kenya, the perpetrators have been
having an easy time by rising to power because there has not been any credible institution
to interdict them. The process will also make people have individualistic guilt to ensure
that entire communities or groups are not held responsible for crimes; and it will
instilling trust in the new legal, justice and political systems, ensuring that people believe
101See Jacobus A. du Pisani and Kwang-Su Kim. (2004). "Establishing the truth about the apartheid past: Historians and the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission" as noted in supra note 83
39
in those systems and do not become cynical towards them if perpetrators go unpunished
for crimes.
Retributive models of transitional justice suffer from several shortcomings. Prosecutions
in this process focus primarily on the perpetrator and do not give victims the attention or
healing they need. Trials can lead to re-victimization, as those giving testimony are cross-
examined in a potentially hostile and humiliating proceeding. Criminal courts, due to the
necessity for clear-cut “yes” or “no” answers, may limit information sharing, making it
difficult to obtain the whole truth. Additionally, perpetrators have no incentive to confess,
tell the whole truth or make the record public. Another serious shortcoming is that there
would be no examination of systemic and institutional structures e.g. secret police,
paramilitary units) that allowed or contributed to the crimes.
Retributive justice also includes restitution—recovery of losses or compensation to
rectify harm. It generally takes the form of a financial payment made to the victim either
by the offender or by the state. Both retribution and restitution have symbolic value, as
they are concerned with making the victim return to the level they ware before the act in
question happened.
3.2.2 Restorative Justice:
40
Restorative justice is typically dispensed through a legally constituted
process that lacks prosecutorial powers, such as a “truth commission”
or a “national inquiry.102Restorative Justice is concerned with restoring the parties,
as far as possible, to their original position. In a sense, it is more about "rights" and less
about "wrongs."103 Restorative justice is also a process through which all those affected
by an offence—victims, perpetrators and by-standing communities—collectively deal
with the consequences. It is a systematic means of addressing wrongdoings that
emphasizes the healing of wounds and rebuilding of relationships. Restorative justice
does not focus on punishment for crimes, but on repairing the damage done and offering
restitution.
The goals of restorative justice include:
a) resolving the original conflict;
b) integrating all affected parties
c) healing the pain of victims through apologies and restitution; and
d) Preventing future wrongdoing through community building measures.
Truth telling and the meeting of victims and perpetrators are important in the process, as
are expressing remorse and making restitution to the victim and his or her family. In
conflict-affected societies in which children have perpetrated violence, a restorative
justice approach can be a means of getting children to admit to their actions and to
acknowledge their wrongdoing, while providing a means of rehabilitation and return to
“normal” life without permanent stigmatizations.102 Dr Abdul Rahman Lamin “Truth, Justice and Reconciliation Analysis of the Prospects and Challenges
of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in Liberia”103 Ibid
41
3.3 Reconciliation
The preamble of the TJRC states clearly that the main reason for the Act was to give
Kenyans a lasting peace and harmonious co existence. This, Act stated could not be got
without being in a forum which is free ad reconciliatory. Sec 6(s) gives the commission a
mandate to inquire into the causes of ethnic tension and make recommendations on the
promotion orf healing, reconciliation and coexistence among ethnic communities in
Kenya. The basis issue clear from the above is that the differences that ware present
between different ethnic groups were very crucial issue to address for the purpose of
getting reconciliation. It also said that local and international consensus exists in regard to
countries like Bosnia and Rwanda that there can be no reconciliation without retribution,
at least so far as the most serious offenders are concerned.104
In definition, the term Reconciliation varies in meaning and significance. It can simply
mean co-existence or it can mean dialogue, remorse, apology, forgiveness and healing. It
can be got from the National Level or from personal individualistic level. For each
person, reconciliation can begin at a different point in the post conflict transition like in
Kenya: It can start from the negotiating table: this was witnessed mostly when the
country was in a problem, the negotiations between the two opposing parties after the
2007 election was the first step toward reconciliation. Thus this will culminate to
reconstruction of the community, neighborly relationships, families, etc. which were
broken due to pain, distrust and fear. The second instance is when there is prosecution of
104 David Little “A Different Kind of Justice: Dealing with Human Rights Violations in Transitional Societies”
42
perpetrators where the victims see that justice has been got and move forward with the
belier that justice has been done. Construction of a non racist and non-exclusive ideology,
such as a new social consensus out of respect for human rights that is expressed in terms
of political changes. Promotion of intercultural understanding among cultures whose co-
existence has deteriorated; it promotes mutual understanding, respect and development. a
moral conversion: a personal change, acceptance of others and acknowledgment of one’s
own mistakes, crimes, etc.restitution of the victim’s integrity and a path to the
psychosocial rebuilding of experiences of suffering and resistance.a way of coming to
terms with the past by the victims and those responsible for the atrocities
An important point about reconciliation is that it is not an attempt to restore things to how
they were before the conflict, but rather about constructing relationships in a way that
allows everyone to move forward together. It is therefore not so much about an end
result, such as punishment, but rather about a sequence of processes that build and
improve relationships.
In defending the approach of the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission
(SATRC) toward wrongs committed in the name of apartheid, Bishop Desmond Tutu
invokes the African notion of “ubuntu”.105
UBUNTU says I am human only because you are human. If I undermine your humanity I
dehumanize myself. You must do what you can to maintain this great harmony, which is
105The concept of ubuntu was also used to legitimize the TRC’s call for reconciliation. Difficult to translate precisely, ubuntu encompasses the notion of “humaneness” or “humanness.” A common Xhosa expression states, “Umuntu ngumuntu ngabanye bantu,” which translates as “People are people through other people.” Thus, ubuntu emphasizes community over individuals.
43
perpetually undermined by resentment, anger, desire for vengeance. That’s why African
jurisprudence is restorative rather than retributive.106
For Tutu, reconciliation as ubtuntu explicitly excludes retribution.
David little in his article A Different Kind of Justice: Dealing with Human Rights
Violations in Transitional Societies goes on to distinguish between the Christian
forgiveness and other forgiveness as a way of reconciliation .He notes that Walter Wink, a
Christian theologian and New Testament107 scholar who brings his perspective to bear on
the questions of “transitional justice,” describes the meaning of reconciliation in the
following way:
“Reconciliation . . . requires that I and the other person, from whom I have been separated by
enmity, mutually forgive each other and walk into a common future together. Forgiveness is thus a
component of reconciliation, but only a first step. We may forgive our enemies in our hearts, but
reconciliation requires that we pick up the phone or meet face to face and try to work things
out.”108
106Cited by David Little. “A Different Kind of Justice: Dealing with Human Rights Violations in Transitional Societies”
107 David Littlke in “A Different Kind of Justice: Dealing with Human Rights Violations in Transitional Societies” goes on to state that:
Central to the act of forgiveness in this parable is the annulment of both the debt the first servant owed the master, and the punishment (being sold or imprisoned) that is taken to apply to those who default on their loans. Indeed, one meaning of apkvni—the Greek word “to forgive’’—is to “cancel,” “remit,” or “pardon,” while a related meaning is to “give up” or “let go, ” suggesting a radical alteration of the relationship between the forgiver and the forgivee. It is of course interesting that retribution reenters the picture after the first servant fails to replicate the forgiveness he had earlier received from his master. Nevertheless, the obvious moral of the story is that retribution, if it occurs at all, is divine or supernaturalin character, and not temporal, a position generally maintained in Jesus teachings. In the verses immediately preceding the Parable of the Unforgiving Servant, Jesus enjoins his followers to forgive offenders “seventy times seven.” It must be remembered, of course, that however much Jesus’ emphasis on forgiveness and supernatural judgment may exclude the idea of earthly retribution, the idea is not excluded from other parts of the New Testament. The First Letter of Peter explicitly states that mundane governors have been “sent by [God] to punish those who do wrong and to praise those who do right” (2:13-14), and a similar thought appears in Paul’s Letter to the Remans (13:1-5). Just how the concepts of forgiveness and temporal retribution, which exist side by side in the New Testament, are to be harmonized is an abiding perplexity for Christians.
108 Walter Wink, “When the Powers Fall: Reconciliation in the Healing of Nations” Minneapolis:Fortress Press, 1998), p. 14.
44
National reconciliation refers to a political form of consensus and interaction among
Parties and leaders. This will involve the political leaders in Kenya and those who are
endowed national personalities to come to work together to show the locals that they can
be unified in some way or the other. The differences of the national leaders are often
some of the major instigators of violence against different communities and different
party supporters. In South Africa, the need for reconciliation was captured in the National
Constitution of 1993 which stated in verbatim:
“This Constitution provides a historic bridge between the past of a deeply divided society,
characterized by strife, conflict, untold suffering and injustice, and a future founded on the
recognition of human rights, democracy and peaceful coexistence and development opportunities
for all South Africans irrespective of color, race, class, belief or sex.109
The preamble to the Constitution clearly reflects a commitment to redress past injustices
and to create a just society through the recognition of the contribution of each South
African group: “We, the people of South Africa, recognize the injustices of the past;
Honor those who suffered for justice and freedom in our land; Respect those who have
worked to build and develop our country; and Believe that South Africa belongs to all
who live in it, united in our destiny.”110In a different context from the above a lot of
scholars have argued that “Nations do not have collective psyches which can be healed,
nor do whole nations suffer post-traumatic stress disorder and to assert otherwise is to
109Ambrose Moyo “Reconciliation and Forgiveness in an Unjust Society dialog” A Journal of Theology • Volume 41, Number 4 • Winter 2002
110 Ibid
45
psychologies an abstract entity which exists primarily in the minds of nation-building
politicians.111
Societal reconciliation refers to the longer-term, more difficult process of community and
individual reconciliation. In the Kenyan case, this will involve the coming together of the
tribes that had been against one another. It will go into communities accepting the other
adverse communities. Reconciliation also requires sensitivity to the particular culture of
those involved.112 For reconciliation to occur, it is indicated that the following are
necessary:
a) some form of justice
b) community-level confidence-building measures; and
c) strategies and mechanisms for dealing with actors who could potentially derail the
peace process.
Reconciliation is often seen to be crucial if peace processes are to succeed, as it
establishes relations among parties after a conflict and decreases the risk of further
violence. In recent years, in the majority of post conflict states, efforts have been made to
implement both justice and reconciliation mechanisms. In general, justice mechanisms
111 See Lyn Graybill and Kimberly Lanegran. "Introduction to Special Issue on TRCs: Truth, Justice, and Reconciliation in Africa: Issues and Cases" African Studies Quarterly 8, no.1: (2004: http://web.africa.ufl.edu/asq/v8/v8i1a1.htm as at 15 March 2009
112 The primary source of meaning for many Cambodians is their religion. The majority is Buddhist, and the process of reconciliation needs to be based on a Buddhist understanding of what reconciliation means. But Buddhism, as with other religions, suffered great losses during the period of Khmer Rouge rule, and both monks and people may lack the religious sophistication to approach the task well20. One of the questions, for example, is the Buddhist belief in Karma, which sees suffering in this life as the consequence of wrongdoing in a previous life. If taken in an over-simplified way, this may lead to blaming the victim of atrocities for their suffering, and taking the focus away from the perpetrator.
46
have focused on the leaders or key instigators of conflict or repression, while
reconciliation mechanisms have been aimed at the lower ranks.
In the Kenyan situation, the scene contradicts its self. How can the reconciliation be
achieved and yet the scene remains the same. The kind of injustice witnessed some years
back still haunt us and to a worse extend the current regimes still operate in unjust way.
In Kenya today it would be totally unchristian to plead for reconciliation
and peace before the present injustices have been removed. Any such
plea plays into the hands of the oppressor by trying to persuade those of
us who are oppressed to accept our oppression and to become reconciled
to the intolerable crimes that are committed against us. That is not
Christian reconciliation, it is sin. It is asking us to become accomplices in
our own oppression, to become servants of the devil. No reconciliation is
possible in without justice.113
It is not the movement towards reconciliation presupposes an equally
important movement towards the creation of a just society. In other words
there can be no reconciliation without a visible effort to bridge the gap
between the impoverished majority and the rich. A new social order has to
be created. This is the lesson learned from the Zimbabwean experience
which failed to address these issues from the beginning114
113 See Recons il n Foegiv114 See Ibid
47
3.3.1 The Role of the Church
From the Christian stand point Reconciliation entails a lot of issues. The
factors that relate to reconciliation have been biblically oriented. Different
values will have to be splayed for one to be able to achieve reconciliation.
Thus in the Kenyan case, the church that had taken sides just before the
election should come over to unify the people of Kenya inspirit with the
national reconciliation. The Church’s involvement in justice and
reconciliation issues must be seen from its self understanding as a
community of sinners who have been justified through faith in Jesus Christ
or any other Supreme Being that they do hold much .The Church therefore
can only be an instrument of God’s justice and is called upon to work for
social justice, and in that way manifest God’s justice in all spheres of
human existence. In South Africa the African philosophy of ubuntu helps
Africans to understand faith not as something that is “restricted or limited
to an individualistic relationship to God, but necessarily includes the
neighbor, and thus concern and responsibility for the social and indeed
political dimensions of life. The poor people are created in the image of
God. Jesus stands in their midst demanding their recognition and justice
for them. Thus this notion helps the majority poor reconcile very well with
the rich. The gab between the poor and the rich is minimized and the
concept and ideology of reconciliation is achieved. In fact, Christianity
48
played such a large role in the South African TRC that some observers
have criticized the TRC leadership for adopting a religious-redemptive
understanding of their mandate.115
The mandate of the TRC as noted above include providing a platform for
both the perpetrators of human rights violations and the victims to tell
their story. Sec 5(g) of the Act notes that the commission will give victims
perpetrators and general public with a platform for non-retributive truth
gelling that chart a new moral vision and seeks to create a value based
society. In South Africa, the perpetrators who confessed their contribution
to the atrocities of the apartheid period in question were granted amnesty.
They were pardoned. The victims were able to look into the face of those
who made them suffer so that their oppressors could see and feel the pain
they caused and hopefully come to repentance.
It is argued that in the Bible, the issue of forgives is very essential for the
healing of the wounds of the victims. Matthew 18:15-17 notes that:
“If another member of the church sins against you, go and point out the fault
when the two of you are alone. If the member listens to you, you have
regained that one. But if you are not listened to, take one or two others with
you, so that every word may be confirmed by evidence of two or three
witnesses. If the member refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if
115Megan Shore and Scott Kline The Ambiguous Role of Religion in the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission, PEACE & CHANGE, Vol. 31, No. 3, July 2006 available at
49
the offender refuses even to listen to the church, let such one be to you as a
Gentile and a tax collector”116
As has been pointed out by Ambrose Moyo, 117forgiveness has to include
not only true knowledge of the situation, but also repentance leading to
change. Only a turning away from sin, from patterns of the past, can
enable forgiveness to avoid the charge of ‘cheap grace’.
In fact forgiveness without repentance leads but to the continuation of sin.
Convinced that there could be no future without forgiveness, Tutu saw the TRC as an
opportunity for perpetrators to repent their sins and survivors to redeem them (as well as
purify their own instinct for revenge) through the gift of grace. As a consequence, the
entire proceedings of the Commission became framed within the Christian ethical
economy of sin, guilt, confession, and redemption. Rather than a politico-economic
system of domination, the apartheid era was seen as a moral stain upon the nation (an
original sin) that needed to be cleansed through the redemptive power of forgiveness. In
this way, the TRC turned into a kind of national purification ritual with the
Commissioners assuming the role of secular divinities providing absolution for sins.118
116The story of Zacchaeus the Tax Collector is a classic Lesson on restitution or making reparation (Luke.19:1-9). Zacchaeus’ encounter with Jesus led to a conversion which enabled him to declare: “Look, Lord! Here and now I give half of my possessions to the poor, and if I have cheated anybody of anything, I will pay back four times the amount” (19:8). Zacchaeus voluntarily gave up some of his riches as his contribution towards creating a just society. Reconciliation with God meant for him reconciliation with those he had dehumanized by impoverishing them through the exploitation of their meager resources. Zacchaeus was prepared to make reparation. Only after he had taken that gigantic step did Jesus acknowledge that “Today salvation has come to this house” (19:9). Salvation only comes through reconciliation with God and with fellow human beings. Zacchaeus made a public confession of his sin, and took the necessary steps to improve the quality of the lives of those that he had exploited.
117 Amros Moyo118 See Paul Muldoon “Reconciliation and Political Legitimacy: The Old Australia and the New South
Africa” Australian Journal of Politics and History: Volume 49, Number 2, 2003, pp. 182-196 available at…
50
Lyn Graybill and Kimberly Lanegran119 in quoting the works of Tristan Borer, they say
that some of the problems in identifying the multiple meanings of reconciliation used by
people inside and outside of South Africa’s TRC are interconnected and creates a web
that is not easy to discern. She demonstrates that the TRC’s founding documents, as well
as its final report, failed to define clearly the kind of reconciliation the commission was
charged with building. She finds two models of reconciliation permeating the
commission’s statute and report. “Interpersonal or individual reconciliation,” in which
victims and perpetrators of gross human rights violations have their relationships restored
with the victims being healed, is one goal which the commission sought to achieve. Yet,
the commission also strove to hasten “national unity and reconciliation” in order to create
a nation “democratically at peace with itself.” Borer argues that the lack of clarity
hampered the commission’s work and has affected the way it has been judged. She finds
that while the TRC was empowered to contribute primarily to “national unity and
reconciliation,” the greater popular expectation was for the TRC to foster “interpersonal
or individual reconciliation.” The unfortunate result of this dichotomy is that “the TRC is
most likely to be judged in a way that makes it least likely to appear successful.
Forgiveness
Forgiveness is a constitutive element of reconciliation. “If no real effort at achieving
forgiveness is made, reconciliation is doomed to be partial and vulnerable”120
119Lyn Graybill and Kimberly Lanegran 120 J ens Meierhenrich Varieties of Reconciliation Law & Social Inquiry Volume 33, Issue 1, 195–231, Winter 2008
51
3.3.2 Pillars for Reconciliation
The process of reconciliation requires change of these societal beliefs. Scholars have
developed some of the major issues that need to be addressed in order to come up with a
reconciled society. Such include.
a) Beliefs about societal goals .The reconciliation process require changes in each
group’s beliefs about its own goals in order to remove the cognitive foundations
of the conflict. This condition requires, in essence, abolition—or at least indefinite
postponement—of the societal dreams and visions, expressed in specific goals,
which caused the intergroup conflict.121
b) Beliefs about the adversary group. The kind of stereo type in which members of
the society look at one another should be changed. This historical notion that
some communities n d tribes are he best destined for a political office should be
avoided and changed to deter any conflict in any forth coming election122.
c) Beliefs about intergroup relations. Reconciliation requires the formation of new
beliefs about the relations between the two groups that were engaged in the
intractable conflict. These beliefs should concern the nature of the relations in the
present, future, and past. With regard to the present, there is a need to develop
beliefs about the importance of normalizing relations with the former adversary.
There is a need to legitimize the construction of the new relations and provide a
121 Daniel Bar-Tal From Intractable Conflict Through Conflict Resolution to Reconciliation: Psychological Analysis: Political Psychology, Vol. 21, No. 2, 2000 School of Education Tel Aviv University available at
122An such the particular tribes and communities in Kenya should legitimize and personalize other groups and tribes that they ware in conflict with. Legitimization allows members of the ingroup to view the adversary group as belonging to the category of acceptable groups, behaving within the boundaries of international norms. In essence, it grants humanity to adversary group members after years of denying it to them. Personalization, in turn, enables members of the ingroup to see members of the adversary group as human beings and to perceive them as individuals, as humane as members of the perceiving group Are.
52
rationale for this change. With regard to the future, there is a need to establish
beliefs about cooperative and friendly relations, emphasize their importance, and
describe the utility of their amicable nature.123
123 Ibid
53
Top Related