Reconciliation is the ultimate goal in any society that has been traumatized and riven by violent abuses. What it can and should mean is not always easy to identify and depends on the political, cultural, and historical context of the society.

We at ICTJ believe that the process of reconciliation should first and foremost put a burden on those who have committed violations to acknowledge the harm done in a meaningful way. It cannot be premised on putting the burden on victims to forgive in the absence of that acknowledgment. Reconciliation has to be understood as a process – one where inevitably there will be powerful forces fighting against it.

Because the reconciliation process is wholly dependent on context, our contributions vary widely from country to country. In Timor Leste, throughout our comprehensive assistance to the Commission for Reception, Truth and Reconciliation, we helped devise a number of highly innovative approaches to foster reconciliation between local communities and the returning militia members. This included the Community Reconciliation Procedures, which allowed low-level perpetrators to face a local community hearing. The procedures enabled victims to address their grievances directly to the perpetrator and the perpetrator to seek forgiveness and reintegration into the villages. More than 1,000 such proceedings took place. In Morocco, we worked closely with the Equity and Reconciliation Commission, as well as civil society groups and the media, to help investigate human rights abuses, develop protocols for public hearings, design reparations programs and craft outreach strategies.

Over the years we have also studied different reconciliation processes to draw lessons that may be of use in the future. One such example is our report on what makes public apologies for human rights abuses meaningful to the victims. The report More Than Words: Apologies as a Form of Reparation reviews dozens of public apologies made in connection with human rights violations and war crimes, with a particular focus on apologies to victims in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. It also examines apologies made to indigenous people by governments of developed countries, including Canada and Australia. This research clearly establishes that the most effective apologies clearly acknowledge responsibility for the violations, recognize the continuing pain of survivors and victims’ families, and are linked with efforts to compensate and assist victims materially and through other justice measures.