The Truth And Reconciliation Commission in South Africa - A Learner's Diary

1.  INTRODUCTION  2

2.  BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE TRC  2

3.  WHAT DO I THINK ABOUT THE TRC AS A METHOD TO DEAL WITH THE PAST?  4

4.  ANTJIE KROG’S BACKGROUND FEELINGS  6

5.  ANALYSIS OF CHAPTER 28 IN GILLIAN SLOVO’S RED DUST  8

6.  COMPARISON  10

7.  THE MAIN CHARACTERS’ ATTITUDE TOWARDS THE TRC  11

8.  THE TWO CARTOONS  13

9.  FAZIT  15

10.  BIBLIOGRAPHY  16

1

Introduction

1.

In this learner’s diary I will try to give an insight into the learning progress I went through during the course The Truth and Reconciliation Commission in South Africa. The order of the chapters reflects the order of the session we had at university. I will not hide my own opinion in order to stick to to the idea of a diary. I will use in class material and sheets that we worked out in groups. In addition to that, I will support my own ideas by quotations of the novels we read and information I found.

Brief Summary of the TRC

2.

The South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) was set up by the Government of National Unity to help deal with what happened under apartheid. The conflict during this period resulted in violence and human rights abuses from all sides. No section of society escaped these abuses. 1

So the TRC was a unit of involved people of both sides. On the one hand the oppressed and on the other hand the oppressors. But the subjective of the TRC was not to find out who was guilty but to offer forgiveness on each side. Amnesty based in ubuntu. Ubuntu is an ancient African word, meaning ‘humanity to others’. Ubuntu also means "I am what I am because of who we all are" ² . Without internalising the ubuntu spirit there won’t be any freedom at all.

The TRC travelled to the places where atrocities had happened with all its members. It gave victims the chance to tell their stories. For the first time in their lives it gave a voice to black women. Before that, it was the leadership who decided what was right; a white, male dominated leadership who was always right in what they did. The TRC was not a court and it could not give sentences but everyone had the chance to justify or to apology themselves. The spirit of ubuntu gives force to accept the apology, not to bear a grudge.

The Leader of the TRC was the Archbishop Tutu. If the opressor convinced Tutu that he regrets and that he acted in political belief, he got amnesty from Tutu. Political belief was the keyword. The statement in front of the commission had to content that one believed in the government. You can not say that you tortured somebody because you were keen on it and then apology. The only reason to achieve amnesty is when one acted in political belief. Amnesty means having the

¹ The official TRC Website http://www.doj.gov.za/trc/ on 20.05.06

² http://www.ubuntu.com/ on 20.05.05

2

right not to feel guilty anymore. One will be forgiven and can continue life with a free heart. It was almost the same amnesty than in court because Tutu acted like a lawyer. When he decided for amnesty the opressor would not get an official trial.

The difficulty for the TRC was to decide who should be inside?

Which Afrikaners will be on the Commission? Those who paid a price in the past for their stance against Apartheid or those who can now draw in the supporter of the National Party and right-wingers? And how can a former right-wing Afrikaner take moral decisions about people whose sentiments he shared? 3

So the members had not to be prejudiced on either side. They have to be able to feel sympathy for both sides. With this feeling of understanding for both parites, the TRC did a successful job. Furthermore,

the TRC was largely successful in its efforts ‘to expose as much truth as possible about those human rights violations that tend to be cloaked in denials and would otherwise, in all likelihood, have remained obscured from the public eye. 4

The TRC members had to have a great knowledge of human nature in order to recognize the truth and not to be cheated. If one had committed a crime he could also lie to get amnesty.

The set objectives were:

~ completing a picure of violations ~ restoring the victims’ dignity ~ giving victims a voice and a chance for healing ~ considering to grant amnesty

On a more general level the aim was to establish a South African identity. People were lost in their proper identities because before there was a black and a white identity where everyone found themselves. The hearings, the forgiveness and the reconciliations facilitated a united identity.

³ Antje Krog: 1999 p. 30

⁴ Shane Graham: 2003 p.11

3

What do I think about the TRC as a method to deal with the past?

3.

It was hard work. All repressed memories came back, everyone was confronted with their own past. The victims, the opressors, the atrocities were all alive again.

The traumatic past cannot be assimilated into memory and consciousness as other

events normally are, because the trauma survivor continues to be haunted by the

past and is compelled to relive it literally, through nightmares, hallucinations, and

obsessive-compulsive behaviors. 5

Nothing could have been harder than to ‘repeat’ these situations. They repeat themselves enough in nightmares but to tell them in front of a commission is much harder; several people who question the details, that is very tough. But it was needful work because without working up your past, you cannot start your future.

In Germany, where we had similar atrocities, we dealt with them in another way. It could be called a great repression and a black point in history. But it is not that easy to compare these situations because in Germany, Hitler forced a final solution. His final solution meant to annihilate all Jews. In the movie in my country Samuel L. Jackson wrote in an article about the ‘South African Holocaust’, here he means the people’s mentality; how they behaved during apartheid. He questions if it was possible not to notice injustice, not to see uprisings, not to know the ambitions their black neighbours followed. Later they deny that those scenes happened and that their white neighbours were the perpetrators. Weird world? In Germany there are people who think that Auschwitz is a lie.

Krog used the same comparison saying paying money as reconciliation - like in Germany - is not enough. Victims should have a voice to tell their stories. In Germany, 6 million Jews died among the Hitler era; they do not have a voice anymore. Reconciliation was paid for members of their families. Krog’s comparison is limping. In Germany there were the Nuremberg Trials, there the perpetrators got sentences but no one raised his voice to apology. They justified themselves saying they had just done their jobs out of political belief. Jews did not raise their voices either because they were dead or took refuge.

Germany has not worked up its past, yet. It has been hushed up; a taboo what is hardly ever discussed. We tend to feel sorry even the younger generation

⁵ Shane Graham: 2003 p. 13

4