noticias.info/ How can countries trying to move to democracy after authoritarian rule or civil war deal with the legacy of past human rights abuses? This was the question facing the Human Rights Subcommittee on Monday when it held a hearing to discuss the concept of transitional justice. MEPs heard from a range of witnesses with direct experience of the approaches tried in different countries.
Alex Boraine, former deputy chair of the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission and founder of the International Centre of Transitional Justice (ICTJ), said transitional justice “is a way to search not just for justice but for a just society.” There were five pillars to the approach as he saw it: accountability, with a reassertion of the rule of law and an equal administration of justice; truth recovery, revealing the facts but also the personal narratives of those affected and tearing away the propaganda of the past; reconciliation, which entailed a real commitment and sacrifice if it was to be more than just an excuse for passivity; institutional reform, so that systems were transformed rather than just seeing a change in the figures at the top; reparations, to make a tangible effort for the victims.
noticias.info/ How can countries trying to move to democracy after authoritarian rule or civil war deal with the legacy of past human rights abuses? This was the question facing the Human Rights Subcommittee on Monday when it held a hearing to discuss the concept of transitional justice. MEPs heard from a range of witnesses with direct experience of the approaches tried in different countries.
Alex Boraine, former deputy chair of the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission and founder of the International Centre of Transitional Justice (ICTJ), said transitional justice “is a way to search not just for justice but for a just society.” There were five pillars to the approach as he saw it: accountability, with a reassertion of the rule of law and an equal administration of justice; truth recovery, revealing the facts but also the personal narratives of those affected and tearing away the propaganda of the past; reconciliation, which entailed a real commitment and sacrifice if it was to be more than just an excuse for passivity; institutional reform, so that systems were transformed rather than just seeing a change in the figures at the top; reparations, to make a tangible effort for the victims.
Rwanda: hard choices
Esther Mujawayo-Kiener, a survivor of the Rwandan genocide who is now a therapist in a refugee centre in Germany, spoke about the hard, sometimes bitter, compromises there was little choice but to accept in her country’s efforts to move on. “It is very important, for a victim, for the crime to be named and recognised for what it is. It gives me hope that my daughter will not have to flee with her child on her back as I did.” Given the vast number of cases, the use of traditional justice alongside the international court was inevitable, though she felt it was hardly appropriate for such terrible crimes. And while men imprisoned awaiting trial by the UN court were provided with anti-retroviral drugs for their HIV, the women infected by them during the mass rape that took place alongside the killing were dying without such treatment.
Bosnia: documenting the crimes
Mirsad Tokaca, President of the Research and Documentation Centre of Sarajevo, spoke of the his efforts to trace details of the victims, perpetrators and witnesses of the crimes of the war in Bosnia. A major piece of social research had identified some 97,000 victims, putting an end to “the numbers game” with politicians bandying about different figures. He warned that reform of Bosnia’s institutions had made little progress: “There is still apartheid in education, for the system people still exist not as individuals but as members of ethnic groups.” He said perpetrators of war crimes were still working within state structures at all levels more than a decade after the end of the war.
Middle East and North Africa: signs of movement
Hanny Megally, Director of the ICTJ’s Middle East and North Africa Programme identified some hopeful signs in the region as changes, even if often succession, at the top of various longstanding regimes opened the door to reform. Morocco and Bahrain were among the countries seeing some progress, albeit not unmitigated.
Michael Matthiessen, Personal Representative on Human Rights for Javier Solana, the EU’s High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy, outlined the Council’s steps to integrate the concept of transitional justice into the EU’s activities in conflict prevention, crisis management and post-conflict stabilisation.
Raül Romeva i Rueda (Greens/EFA, ES) asked what aspects of the South African approach might be most useful for other counties. Mr Boraine stressed the wide consultation in setting up the Commission, that its hearings were in public and that it could challenge institutions as well as individuals to explain their role under the previous regime. Raimon Obiols i Germà (PES, ES) stressed the importance of a genuinely free process in terms of reconciliation, in contrast to the abusive use of power by the Franco regime after the Spanish civil war. Simon Coveney (EPP-ED, IE) said the reaction to Darfur was a disgrace for the EU, UN and other outsiders, with nothing happening despite the lessons of Rwanda and elsewhere.
