AFTER VIOLENCE: 3R, RECONSTRUCTION, RECONCILIATION ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

elation. As the quotes indicate it is not easy. V may feel that P, including those high up, have been lees than frank, that truth is not forthcoming, and sell forgiveness at a higher price in terms of truth currency. S may feel that truth is not forthcoming and hold back on amnesty. On the other hand, P (this is an hypothesis) may also feel that "the more truth the more amnesty", and exaggerate, adding crimes not committed, in the hope of getting off quickly. But by and large the model is clear: S, P and V meet in the same room, for a TRC hearing, with the possibility of arriving at closure together. If they so want. And, the same problem: if the theory works. First, even if, or indeed if, all truth is forthcoming it may be so horrendous, revealing evil intention behind the often irreversible harm that victim forgiveness is not forthcoming. Second, where is the steering of the hardened perpetrator? True, to have one's name revealed and associated with heinous crimes may lead to heavy social punishment, like ostracism. But the hardened perpetrator may not be deterred by that; social respect may not be what he is pursuing. To utter some truths and apologies may be a small price for amnesty, getting off scot free. What is there to prevent him from repeating the crime? Third, where is the justice? An economy is based on a market for the exchange of goods (including services), and a deal can be closed when the (positive) values are (about) equal. Is justice also based on a market for the exchange of bads/harms (including disservices), where closure can only be obtained when the (negative) values are about equal? As indicated in Chapter 3, is 46
there an underlying, universal, quest for balance, for tit for tat, quid pro quo, harm for harm, as there is for positive goods, that has to be met to obtain closure, also for violence? The English language uses the word "closure" in both cases. Closure can come through V doing equal harm to P as revenge and then stopping ("quits", like the Arab sulcha), or through S administering equal harm, "justice" to P. Contrary to the US saying "two wrongs do not make one right", two acts of equal suffering may cancel each other, whereas imbalance may invite violence compensation. Forgiveness in exchange for apology makes sense. But so does punishment in exchange for crime. One does not exclude the other; opening for an eclectic Model III. After all, the court process is about the same, adding priests and psychologists to jurists. But there are also some dissimilarities, leading to both-and rather than either-or: [1] Victim-Perpetrator. The Justice model is unrealistic, based on the idea that the direct trauma will be healed, even to the point of closure, by the satisfaction derived from indirect administration of punishment by the state. There may be some minor truth to this. But the major truth lies with the direct relation in the T&R model, exchanging apology for forgiveness, adding to that concrete, direct restitution. If direct relations are impossible, the trauma being too deep, go-betweens might be needed, with special training (religious/psychological). A typical example would be sexualized violence, such as rape. [2] Perpetrator-State: In both models the perpetrator has to tell the truth, and is confronted with evidence uncovered by the investigators. But how can the State both punish and give 47
Page 1 and 2: AFTER VIOLENCE: 3R, RECONSTRUCTION,
Page 3 and 4: The institutional breakdown, the ab
Page 5 and 6: potential. Violence is not like eat
Page 7 and 8: democracy is an answer. If the cont
Page 9 and 10: [1] The impression is given that vi
Page 11 and 12: violence till the cease-fire confus
Page 13 and 14: the underlying structural and cultu
Page 15 and 16: level of participation, a rich, blo
Page 17 and 18: up to net and gross national produc
Page 19 and 20: naive, self-exculpatory German der
Page 21 and 22: There is a special aspect of the da
Page 23 and 24: e proud of. Translated into nationa
Page 25 and 26: Cold War is by now a classical case
Page 27 and 28: and property. Creativity in life-en
Page 29 and 30: discourses good deeds may lead to s
Page 31 and 32: case, substituted the verbal duel o
Page 33 and 34: Scenario 4: Z hurts both X and Y fo
Page 35 and 36: wounds to the spirit never, as psyc
Page 37 and 38: chronologically. To the four cases
Page 39 and 40: soldiers were the limbs and "we" (t
Page 41 and 42: Let us try to summarize. Who/what w
Page 43 and 44: accident. The only recourse might b
Page 45 and 46: The white lynchers, victimized or n
Page 47: massive, even collective, political
Page 51 and 52: structural specificities./55/ Thus,
Page 53 and 54: enemies into court, they did not mi
Page 55 and 56: Christian; South Africa is mixed. C
Page 57 and 58: ereaved and those who know the bere
Page 59 and 60: opportunities. There is the good th
Page 61 and 62: Restructuration: the peace structur
Page 63 and 64: exchanges of apologies and forgiven
Page 65 and 66: and traumas of the past, in a strug
Page 67 and 68: know only one good German; a dead G
Page 69 and 70: positions in a deficient structure.
Page 71 and 72: This approach only works when the v
Page 73 and 74: forgive you"? Definitely not. Some
Page 75 and 76: context, landing it in the Self-God
Page 77 and 78: victim relation is translated into
Page 79 and 80: has a system analysis epistemology
Page 81 and 82: [7] The historical/truth commission
Page 83 and 84: empirical facts: counter-factual hi
Page 85 and 86: the video and say: "This is the tur
Page 87 and 88: model would be a village, a town, a
Page 89 and 90: facilitating reliving on the spot.
Page 91 and 92: outcome, never that violence again!
Page 93 and 94: acts in the light of extenuating ci
Page 95 and 96: y committing crimes of war, against
Page 97 and 98: CONFLICT = ATTITUDES/ASSUMPTIONS +
Page 99 and 100:
Table 9.1. The praxis triad: DIAGNO
Page 101 and 102:
The democracy, parliamentarian appr
Page 103 and 104:
task of the peace worker is to appr
Page 105 and 106:
ecoming a permanent state of societ
Page 107 and 108:
destroy them; a contradiction, to p
Page 109 and 110:
The best way of building nonviolenc
Page 111 and 112:
during the second half of this cent
Page 113 and 114:
socialism-communism (the last trans
Page 115 and 116:
and death) specificity beyond the n
Page 117 and 118:
war. The working class British (US,
Page 119 and 120:
was also the outcome of insufficien
Page 121 and 122:
the possibility that this was the p
Page 123 and 124:
things, words and exercises? My wou
Page 125 and 126:
76. 77. I am particularly indebted
Page 127:
to your feelings, if you have reaso
show all

AFTER VIOLENCE: 3R, RECONSTRUCTION, RECONCILIATION ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?