Long, winding road to reconciliation<\/p>\n
One hurdle to the truth and reconciliation commission to be
\nformed, would be the political interest to search either a
\nwhitewash or a witch-hunt, writes political analyst Kusnanto
\nAnggoro, a senior researcher with the Centre for Strategic and
\nInternational Studies and a lecturer at the postgraduate program
\nof the University of Indonesia, Jakarta.<\/p>\n
JAKARTA (JP): A banner was hanging at the venue of a recent
\ntwo-day seminar which read \"Solutions to human rights abuses:
\nBetween truth and justice\".<\/p>\n
In the new millennium, in this age of reckoning, such words
\nencapsulate one of the principal paths Indonesians have to tread
\nin order to deal with their dark past, hopefully for a better
\nfuture.<\/p>\n
Truth and justice are two of four concepts that peace educator
\nJohn Paul Lederach has identified as being important to
\nreconciliation -- the other two are mercy and peace.<\/p>\n
Indeed, truth and justice are the two most powerful motives
\nbehind reconciliation. It could well be more so for Indonesia,
\nwhose very foundation of statehood and nationhood has gone into
\ndisarray.<\/p>\n
Many people are now trapped in conflicts with one another
\nthat, directly or otherwise, could be the consequence of
\nconflicts among the elite.<\/p>\n
Others have been living with the sheer drama of the past
\nduring the legally sanctioned military regime of Soeharto's New
\nOrder, during which time almost every aspect of life was governed
\nwith an iron fist. It is imperative in seeking the truth to give
\nas complete a record of human rights violations as is humanly
\npossible.<\/p>\n
Uncovering the truth is a struggle for justice -- a luxury of
\nthe past and promise of the future.<\/p>\n
For decades, perpetrators have benefited from corruption,
\nenjoyed power and privilege, while victims have suffered the
\ntrauma of arbitrary arrests, detention without trial, and many
\nother rights abuses.<\/p>\n
Truth has to give voice to the experiences of victims and
\nsurvivors, witnesses and perpetrators.<\/p>\n
Justice must deal with the question of pardon or punishment --
\nsomething which is extremely difficult in a transitional regime.<\/p>\n
More often than not, an important distinction has been made
\nbetween information (the facts of the case) and acknowledgement
\n(the bearing of responsibility).<\/p>\n
Nonetheless, the relationship between truth and justice is one
\nof the keenest paradoxes of the process of reconciliation.<\/p>\n
There cannot be genuine reconciliation without forgiveness and
\nmercy, which, unfortunately, cannot be granted without knowledge.<\/p>\n
It is problematic. Knowledge is impossible without inquiry,
\nwhich of course requires justice for the victims and survivors as
\nwell as the perpetrators.<\/p>\n
Victims and survivors cannot forget what has happened to them
\nand cannot get on with building the future until their calls for
\njustice have been answered. The guilty would like to see mercy
\nshown to them in the form of general amnesty.<\/p>\n
The creation of a truth and reconciliation commission is now
\nbeing highly discussed, picking up steam behind the already
\nestablished commission of inquiries. It is widely assumed that
\njustice is a precondition for reconciliation.<\/p>\n
Yet, such a commission could well be an institution capable of
\ncreating a split in the national psyche; perpetrators and
\nvictims, euphoria and grief, victory and defeat.<\/p>\n
The success of a truth commission depends on Lederach's
\nconcepts of truth, justice, mercy and peace. People's assessments
\nof the success of the commission depends very much on their
\nemphasis on one or more of the four concepts to the exclusion of
\nthe others. For the family of victims, for example, the
\ncommission's work would be measured against the yardstick of
\njustice and thus found wanting.<\/p>\n
The government of Abdurrahman Wahid has the legitimacy to
\nestablish the commission, as did the post-Pinochet Chile
\nPresident Patricio Aylwin, the post-military dictatorship of
\nArgentina's Raul Alfonsin, and post-Apartheid South Africa's
\nNelson Mandela.<\/p>\n
Abdurrahman may be in a better position than the volte-face
\nregime of Sierra Leone and Guatemala. He has the standing of a
\ndemocrat and humanist comparable to South Korea's Kim Dae Jung.<\/p>\n
At the end of the day, however, a legal foundation is needed.
\nIn South Africa's case, this comes from an interim constitution
\n(1993) and, thereafter, the Promotion of the National Unity Act
\n(1995). This would provide the commission with required
\nlegitimacy, and, thus, authority to do it job.<\/p>\n
The commission would encounter serious challenges. It cannot
\npossibly try every violation of the past. It will be
\noverburdened. Financial and human resources are not easily
\navailable.<\/p>\n
More importantly, politics would perhaps force it to adopt the
\nprinciple of transitional justice, striking the balance between a
\nwhitewash on the one hand, and a witch-hunt on the other.<\/p>\n
Not even the widely modeled South African truth and
\nreconciliation commission has been able to escape from this
\nconstraint. Only if appropriately structured can the commission
\nachieve its objectives of encouraging and fostering
\nreconciliation, while accommodating the needs for mercy and
\npeace.<\/p>\n
The way ahead may be arduous. The idea of creating the
\ncommission deserves full support. In fact, as was the case in
\nGuatemala, civil society could take the lead. Of course, its role
\nmust be debated, discussed and disseminated.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/long-winding-road-to-reconciliation-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}