Jennifer J. Llewellyn - Speaking My Truth

Jennifer J. Llewellyn - Speaking My Truth Jennifer J. Llewellyn - Speaking My Truth

speakingmytruth.ca
from speakingmytruth.ca More from this publisher
12.07.2015 Views

epair the harms of residential schools. This does not address the harms tocommunities and future generations. Further, individual compensation canonly go so far to address the non-material harms caused by residential schoolabuse and its legacy. The commission is charged with understanding theseharms in their fullness and recommending a response. Such a response willinclude, among other possibilities, reparations for communities and othersaffected by the legacy of residential schools, commemorative actions, andeducation plans and programs.It will also pose a significant hurdle in the bid for reconciliation if thecommission approaches its work with a view to bringing final closure to theissue. If the commission seeks to write the final chapter on residential schoolswith the intention to bury the issue once and for all, the cause of reconciliationcould be seriously hampered. The truth the commission finds will aid in thework of reconciliation only if it is made known, understood, and respondedto. Thus, it is important that the commission recommend ways forward thatrespond to the harms related to and resulting from residential schools. It isequally important for these recommendations to be acted upon by those withthe power to do so. The truth commission report cannot be taken as an end inand of itself. If the truth is told and goes without response, this might result infurther harm to the relationships involved. A restorative lens helps make clearthe necessity for the commission to make plans for reconciling relationshipsin the future. The commission cannot hope to achieve reconciliation withinthe span of its five-year mandate; thus, its work must be about preparing andequipping people for the journey that must be walked into the future.ConclusionThe Indian Residential Schools Truth and Reconciliation Commission will playa key role in providing a holistic and comprehensive response to the experienceof residential schools and its legacy. In order to realize its full potential, thecommission must figure out how to travel the road from truth to reconciliation.Restorative justice provides an essential guide for this journey. Through its lens,the starting point and the ultimate destination of the journey can be identifiedand the mode and means of travel can become clear. The commission will facesignificant challenges along the road, but its efforts will pave the road towardreconciliation for Canada and serve as a compass for others around the worldthat will try to travel this same road in the future.200 | Jennifer J. Llewellyn

Notes1 Indian Residential Schools Resolution Canada (IRSRC) (2006). Indian ResidentialSchools Settlement Agreement: Schedule “N:” Mandate for the Truth andReconciliation Commission. Retrieved 18 September 2007 from: http://www.residentialschoolsettlement.ca/SCHEDULE_N.pdf2 IRSRC (2006:1).3 IRSRC (2006:9).4 IRSRC (2006:1).5 Zapiro (1997). The Hole Truth: Cartoons from the Sowetan, Mail & Guardian, and CapeArgus. Cape Town, SA: David Philip Publishers.6 Truth and Reconciliation Commission of South Africa (1998). Volume 1: Truth andReconociliation Commission of South Africa Report. Cape Town, SA: Juta & Co. Press.7 Llewellyn, Jennifer and Robert Howse (1998). Restorative Justice – A ConceptualFramework. A paper presented to the Law Commission of Canada [unpublished];Llewellyn, Jennifer (2002). Dealing with the Legacy of Native Residential School Abuse:Litigation, ADR, and Restorative Justice. University of Toronto Law Journal 52(3):253–300.8 Llewellyn (2002).9 Llewellyn and Howse (1998); Llewellyn (2002).10 Llewellyn and Howse (1998).11 Llewellyn (2002); Llewellyn, Jennifer (2007). Truth commissions and restorative justice. In G.Johnstone and D.W. Van Ness (eds.), Handbook of Restorative Justice. Devon, UK: WillanPublishing: 351–371.12 Llewellyn and Howse (1998); Llewellyn (2002); Llewellyn (2007).13 Truth and Reconciliation Commission of South Africa (1998).14 Truth and Reconciliation Commission of South Africa (1998:114).15 Truth and Reconciliation Commission of South Africa (1998:114).16 Llewellyn (2007).17 For a full discussion of these principles see: Llewellyn and Howse (1998); Llewellyn,Jennifer and Robert Howse (1999). Institutions for Restorative Justice: The South AfricanTruth and Reconciliation Commission. University of Toronto Law Journal 49(3):355–388;Llewellyn (2002); Llewellyn, Jennifer (2004). Doing Justice in South Africa: RestorativeJustice and Reparations. In C. Villa-Vicencio and E. Doxtader (eds.), Repairing theUnforgiveable: Reparations and Reconstruction in South Africa. Cape Town, SA: DavidPhilip Publishers/New Africa Books: 166–183; Llewellyn, Jennifer (2006). RestorativeJustice in Transitions and Beyond: The Justice Potential of Truth-Telling Mechanismsfor Post-Peace Accord Societies. In T.A. Borer (ed.), Telling The Truths: Truth Telling andPeace Building in Post-Conflict Societies. University of Notre Dame, IN: Notre Dame Press:83–114; Llewellyn (2007).From Truth to Reconciliation | 201

epair the harms of residential schools. This does not address the harms tocommunities and future generations. Further, individual compensation canonly go so far to address the non-material harms caused by residential schoolabuse and its legacy. The commission is charged with understanding theseharms in their fullness and recommending a response. Such a response willinclude, among other possibilities, reparations for communities and othersaffected by the legacy of residential schools, commemorative actions, andeducation plans and programs.It will also pose a significant hurdle in the bid for reconciliation if thecommission approaches its work with a view to bringing final closure to theissue. If the commission seeks to write the final chapter on residential schoolswith the intention to bury the issue once and for all, the cause of reconciliationcould be seriously hampered. The truth the commission finds will aid in thework of reconciliation only if it is made known, understood, and respondedto. Thus, it is important that the commission recommend ways forward thatrespond to the harms related to and resulting from residential schools. It isequally important for these recommendations to be acted upon by those withthe power to do so. The truth commission report cannot be taken as an end inand of itself. If the truth is told and goes without response, this might result infurther harm to the relationships involved. A restorative lens helps make clearthe necessity for the commission to make plans for reconciling relationshipsin the future. The commission cannot hope to achieve reconciliation withinthe span of its five-year mandate; thus, its work must be about preparing andequipping people for the journey that must be walked into the future.ConclusionThe Indian Residential Schools <strong>Truth</strong> and Reconciliation Commission will playa key role in providing a holistic and comprehensive response to the experienceof residential schools and its legacy. In order to realize its full potential, thecommission must figure out how to travel the road from truth to reconciliation.Restorative justice provides an essential guide for this journey. Through its lens,the starting point and the ultimate destination of the journey can be identifiedand the mode and means of travel can become clear. The commission will facesignificant challenges along the road, but its efforts will pave the road towardreconciliation for Canada and serve as a compass for others around the worldthat will try to travel this same road in the future.200 | <strong>Jennifer</strong> J. <strong>Llewellyn</strong>

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!