Between principle and pragmatism in transitional justice

The paper examines the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) as a model for transitional justice and peace building. It argues that while the TRC succeeded in creating a public space for debate and uncovering hidden atrocities, it struggled with conceptual ambiguities regarding 'truth', 'justice', and 'reconciliation'. The author contends that the TRC's focus on individual perpetrators and restorative justice often overlooked the structural inequalities of the apartheid system. Ultimately, the document suggests that truth commissions are insufficient on their own for sustainable peace and must be complemented by long-term societal transformation and economic reconstruction.

• The South African TRC operated on a model of restorative justice rather than retributive justice, aiming to repair harm and restore community balance through reparations, memorialisation, and counselling instead of primarily seeking to punish offenders.
• The TRC utilised four distinct categories of truth: factual or forensic truth, personal or narrative truth, social or dialogue truth, and healing or restorative truth.
• The TRC's definition of 'victim' was limited to those who suffered gross violations of human rights involving bodily integrity, which excluded those affected by systemic apartheid policies such as forced removals, pass laws, and racialised poverty.
• The commission failed to adequately hold the architects of apartheid accountable, as its quasi-judicial amnesty process focused on individual acts of violation rather than the structural and ideological systems that incentivised those crimes.
• There was a significant conceptual tension between the individual model of reconciliation (focused on personal apology and forgiveness) and the national model (focused on peaceful coexistence and a democratic political culture).
• The claim that 'truth leads to reconciliation' is viewed as an unsubstantiated causal assumption; in some instances, the disclosure of ghastly truths increased anger and the desire for revenge among survivors.
• Ten years after its inception, the TRC's impact is hindered by the government's failure to implement its recommendations on reparations and societal reform.
• Despite its flaws, the TRC is regarded as a global benchmark for truth commissions, having produced significant new knowledge about hidden atrocities and established a framework for public discourse on the past.
• The author warns against other countries treating the South African TRC as a universal paradigm, arguing that transitional justice must be country-specific and integrated into a broader strategy of economic and structural reconstruction.

APA

Emmanuel, K. (2007). Between principle and pragmatism in transitional justice. Institute for Security Studies. https://issafrica.s3.amazonaws.com/site/uploads/Paper156.pdf

Chicago

Emmanuel, Kisiangani. Between principle and pragmatism in transitional justice. Institute for Security Studies, 2007. https://issafrica.s3.amazonaws.com/site/uploads/Paper156.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Emmanuel |first1=Kisiangani |title=Between principle and pragmatism in transitional justice |publisher=Institute for Security Studies |date=November 2007 |url=https://issafrica.s3.amazonaws.com/site/uploads/Paper156.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{emmanuel2007between, author = {Emmanuel, Kisiangani}, title = {{Between principle and pragmatism in transitional justice}}, institution = {Institute for Security Studies}, year = {2007}, month = nov, url = {https://issafrica.s3.amazonaws.com/site/uploads/Paper156.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }