ICTJ in the News

April 28, 2003

ICTJ Op-Ed: Truth Commissions Earn Respect

News & Record (Greensboro, NC)

By Lisa Magarrell

International experience may provide some additional insights to questions raised by Tom Steadman in his article, "Commission faces criticism, questions" (News & Record, April 20).

First, can a truth commission process spearheaded by victims be credible? Almost all truth commissions have their origins in victim-driven efforts. This advocacy role does not mean that the victims become the commission that will carry out an inquiry, sift through documents, listen to witnesses and submit a final report. Rather, victims provide the impetus for such an undertaking, and later, their own testimony about events.

A broad, participatory selection and nominating process for commissioners, and a mandate that establishes the commission as an independent body, are strong guarantees that the resulting commission will enjoy the trust and respect of the community at large.

Second, how much can a community truth commission with no subpoena powers realistically accomplish? In fact, many truth commissions have relied solely on voluntary testimony, with impressive results. (In Peru, a commission with no subpoena power has taken more than 17,000 statements from victims, witnesses and even perpetrators. In Brazil and Guatemala, church-led truth-seeking processes were key to revealing a history of injustice and violence which the government was unwilling to disclose of its own accord.)

Finally, what can a truth commission add to prior court cases and investigations? Court cases only address the evidence on hand at the time, speak to narrow issues defined by legal charges, and must adhere to rules of evidence that can sometimes hinder a broader and more comprehensive understanding of events and the context in which they occurred. Countries such as Sierra Leone and East Timor are engaged in prosecuting some cases but are also pursuing a deeper understanding of what happened through truth commissions. When investigations, prosecutions and court proceedings have been tainted by politics, a truth commission can be an even greater aid to a full examination of the past.

While none of the truth commissions cited provides a one-size-fits-all model for Greensboro, they have shown us that fair concerns about a truth commission can be addressed by the commission's mandate and how it is selected. Such concerns should not, however, be reasons to prematurely discredit the commission before it takes shape.

I certainly hope that the citizens of Greensboro give themselves a chance to participate in this worthy undertaking.

The writer is senior associate, International Center for Transitional Justice in New York.