2
Victims on the Truth Commission:
Overcoming Financial, Truth, and Reconciliation Deficiencies in South Africa
Abstract
The evaluation of truth commissions from the perspective of the victims often
produces conflicting results, depending on view that researchers hold about the
purported needs of the victims and the effects of such commissions. This paper
introduces the concept of “victims’ deficiencies” to replace the vague concept of
“needs” and hypothesizes that the Commissions have an economic effect. The
framework is applied to the assessment of the paradigmatic Truth and Reconciliation
Commission in South Africa. It utilizes data drawn from our interviews with 60
victims conducted in South Africa during 2003-04. The concept of victims’
deficiencies and the identification of economic effects help refine the assessment of
the impact of truth commissions on a fairly heterogeneous population of victims.
These provide guidance for further evaluative research in the area of transitional
justice.
Truth commissions have almost become standard response to the treatment of human rights violations.
The global acclaim of the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) bolstered the
impression that they are indispensable for overcoming past conflicts, reconciling divided nations, and
facilitating transition to democratic order in society. Academics, researchers, human rights groups and
international organizations have advocated the establishment of truth commissions in Timor-Leste,
Ghana, Peru, and even in the United States. At the same time, truth commissions, inspired by the
South African model, are criticized for perpetuating the culture of impunity and for their negative
impact on victims. There is conflict about the assumptions that underpin truth commissions and there
is controversy about the evaluation of their processes. The current literature on transitional justice has
been unable to reconcile the conflicting accounts and the ambiguities surrounding the truth and
reconciliation process in South Africa.
In order to investigate the substance of the ambiguities more fully, some scholars have employed
ethical standards such as “truth”, “forgiveness”, “justice” in developing a victim-centered approach to
transitional justice. This approach was supposed to provide a solid foundation for assessing the effect
of the truth and reconciliation process (Biggar 2003; Hamber 2003). In spite of this, the question of
what the victims of human rights violations actually need, remains one of the most contested areas of
transitional justice studies. On the one hand, victims’ needs are used as an argument for the
Convention