Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

Truth commission methods questioned

Robert Block
Sunday 21 April 1996 18:02 EDT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

The South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission moves to Cape Town today for what is expected to be a second week of dramatic hearings aimed at bringing apartheid-era crimes to light.

But as the impact of last week's first harrowing testimonies and the screams of anguished witnesses begin to fade, questions are being asked whether the commission will really uncover the truth about the past and whether its hearings will really lead to reconciliation.

The body's chairman, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, has said he was extraordinarily pleased at last week's hearings in the Eastern Cape town of East London because they showed the panel's bias towards the victims of apartheid.

"The major purpose [of the commission] is the rehabilitation of the human and civil dignities of these people who have been treated like dirt and that is largely by allowing them to tell their story," the archbishop said.

There is little doubt the testimonies of the first 30 witnesses to appear before what some pundits have called an "historical group therapy session" opened a door on the suffering, pain and brutality of South Africa's past. The testimonies were both gripping and moving.

The impact of the proceedings and the archbishop's tearful collapse at the end of the second day were tremendous. Officials say the commission's offices were deluged with requests from people wanting to tell their stories.

But some watchdog groups have dismissed the tears as theatricals. Paul Peirera, of the South African Institute of Race Relations, called the hearings - in which some victims named their alleged torturers and the supposed killers of their loved ones - a "farce". He said evidence of crimes should go to the courts, adding: "If this thing's about searching for truth, then it should use ways that have evolved over centuries for getting to the truth. You're not going to get respect for the rule of law back until you start applying the law."

Alex Boraine, the commission's deputy chairman, acknowledged that its team of 60 investigators faced a tough task in cracking many apartheid crimes and urged perpetrators of abuses to tell their stories. The commission has powers to grant indemnity to wrongdoers as an inducement for them to come forward. Many former security officers have said they plan to take up the offer.

But two former security officials have brought legal action to try to block the testimony of one woman who intends to accuse them of complicity in the poisoning of her activist son.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in