It is our right and our obligation, in SA, to take everything in the media with a pinch of salt.

South African Flag

I have not written this article. I have taken bits and pieces from the article called Truth in Translation – The “Truth” Behind the Play. From all my research material to understand what the TRC was or is about, this is the easiest to read and understand. I have not altered the article in any other way besides deleting unnecessary and long-winded parts of it. It is now an easy to understand piece of work. I trust that the unknown authors will not take offence.

I do feel that one of the problems we still face as a society, after 20 years of democracy, is the lack of understanding from a large majority of our population who did not follow the TRC process. Our born-frees know very little and most only have a biased view-point of the past, unfortunately depending on the race and culture our parents were. It is our ignorance and our gullibility that gives the media such power over a society that we believe that what they tell us is TRUTH.

In a democratic society, it is not only our right, but our obligation to take everything in the media with a pinch of salt. If we do not do this, we will be like sheep thinking they are going to be taken out to graze, when in fact they are walking towards the slaughter house. Ignorance that is fuelled by the authorities and the media, creates the ideal situation for growing sheeple born-frees, as well as keeping the older generation of sheeple in line. (A sheeple is a cross between a sheep and a person)

I write to educate, to inspire, to entertain and most specifically, to show people that, like a pancake, truth has two sides. And I write because I love it. I love the challenge of writing non-fiction.

What was the TRC?

The Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) was a national commission assembled after the end of Apartheid in South Africa to “promote national unity and reconciliation” and to identify the “causes, nature and extent” of apartheid-erav violence.

It provided a space in which those who had been victims of gross human rights violations under apartheid could come forward and make their stories heard for the first time. They could apply to the commission for investigations to be done and for reparations to be given. Perpetrators of violence could request amnesty from prosecution and by giving testimony and by being found to have provided true and full accounts, could have amnesty granted.

The TRC was a crucial turning point in the history of South Africa. It was a product of the negotiation process which aimed to bring an end to over 300 years of colonialism and apartheid and which led to the establishment of an interim constitution, which provided for democracy, human rights and the rule of law. Since there had been no “outright winner” in the conflicts leading to the end of apartheid, compromises needed to be made on both sides. One of the agreed-upon compromises in this settlement was that amnesty would be provided for those who had violated human rights. Thus restorative justice rather than retributive justice was chosen as a way to bring about reconciliation in the future.

The TRC was set up by means of the Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act of 1995. The mandate of the commission was to bear witness to, record and in some cases grant amnesty to the perpetrators of crimes relating to human rights violations, reparation and rehabilitation.

Dullah Omar, the Minister of Justice in 1994, said: “If the wounds of the past are to be healed, if a multiplicity of legal actions are to be avoided, if future human rights violations are to be avoided and indeed if we are to successfully initiate the building of a human rights culture, then disclosure of the truth and its acknowledgement are essential…. The fundamental issue for all South Africans is therefore to come to terms with our past on the only moral basis possible, namely that the truth be told, and that the truth be acknowledged

How did the TRC work?

The work of the TRC was accomplished through three committees:

The Human Rights Violations Committee investigated human rights abuses that occurred between 1960 (the Sharpeville massacres) and 1994 (the first democratic elections). This committee heard the victims tell their stories: As journalist, Max du Preez described,

“mothers, fathers, daughters, sons, husbands sitting in front of cameras and microphones to tell of their suffering at the hands of policemen or soldiers – or sometimes guerrillas in the armies of the ANC or PAC. Most of it was intensely emotional: even grown, hardened and proud black men who had never cried before in their lives broke down in tears…Many of those who had testified at these hearings told us that the act of sitting down at the witness table before the commissioners and members of their community – and the television cameras and radio microphones – made them feel that their society, their nation, was at last recognizing their pain and honouring them for their suffering. That brought them a form of closure.”

Only a proportion of the victims could in fact appear in public hearings. Their participation was to an extent, symbolic. While 2000 people told their stories in the public hearings, more than 21 000 applications were processed by the commission.

The Amnesty Committee considered applications from individuals who applied for amnesty for gross human rights violations. This committee had a quasi-legal framework and was presided over by a judge. Proceedings were characterized by gruelling questioning of applicants by lawyers, reports by investigators and statements from victims. The Amnesty process meant that the silence was broken on what had occurred in the past and denial of these violations was no longer possible.

It also contributed to uncovering the causes, motives and perspectives of past atrocities.

The Reparation and Rehabilitation Committee was charged with restoring victims' dignity and formulating proposals to assist with rehabilitation. The TRC made recommendations on what reparations could be made to individuals and to communities, including financial aid, pensions, housing, education, land restitution, monuments and symbolic reparations. It also oversaw the exhumations of bodies and the reburials. There was also an investigation unit and a number of other sub-committees. The commission worked independently of Government.

What made the South African TRC different?

There had been other similar processes before the South African TRC, notably in Argentina and Chile. However, this process was different in both its transparency and the level to which the nation participated in the process.

Public hearings of the Human Rights Violations Committee and the Amnesty Committee were held at venues across South Africa, from major towns and cities to small rural villages. These hearings were televised and a special hour-long weekly programme captured the main events.

Called "Truth Commission Special Report" it was presented by progressive Afrikaner journalist, Max du Preez, former editor of the Vrye Weekblad. Radio and television news broadcasts provided coverage in all official languages of South Africa. Newspapers carried stories on a daily basis. No-one had the excuse any longer of being able to say “I did not know”.

Max du Preez, Journalist

The commission was empowered to grant amnesty to those who committed abuses during the apartheid era, as long as the crimes were politically motivated, proportionate, and there was full disclosure by the person seeking amnesty. There was, however, no blanket or general amnesty, as there had been in other countries which had held TRCs. The law required individual application in writing with full disclosure of the facts. This meant that a great deal more of the truth was uncovered than might otherwise have been the case.

No side was exempt from appearing before the commission. The commission heard reports of human rights violations and considered amnesty applications from all sides, from the apartheid state to the liberation forces, including the African National Congress and the African Peoples’ Liberation Association.

While this was controversial, since many people did not agree that the liberation movement should be treated equally with the apartheid government, it meant that a more complete and balanced picture of the South African past was presented. More than 21000 victim statements were processed, relating to some 38 000 incidents and the killing of some 14 000 people. In the Amnesty process, after 1888 days of hearings, 1167 amnesties were granted out of a total 7116 applications. On October 28, 1998 the Commission presented its Final Report, which condemned both sides for committing atrocities (my italics) and in 2003, a final two volumes of the Report were tabled in parliament.

Why was a TRC necessary?

South Africa’s history has been one characterised by oppression, abuse, division and

the denial of human rights to those indigenous to the country. First the Dutch, and then the British, colonised South Africa, before the declaration of the Union of South Africa in 1910, independent from Britain. The “Union” however, was constructed from the start as a country that ignored the rights and interests of the black majority of its inhabitants. And from its very beginnings the politically conscious educated class of Africans, began to mobilise itself into political organisations to voice their dissent, along with Mahatma Gandhi and other iconic political leaders. Two years after the declaration of the Union, the organisation which would become the African National Congress was launched. Even before apartheid, the trend towards racial divisiveness could be clearly seen.

Apartheid (or “separateness”) was a government policy enforced in South Africa when the National Party took power in 1948. It was characterised by legislation, which divided and demeaned people, taking away their basic human rights. The effect of apartheid legislation was invariably favourable to the Whites and detrimental to the other race groups. The impact of these laws was felt in every aspect of life in South Africa.

The Population Registration Act ensured that every South African was classified into a race group, either Black, White, Asian or Coloured (mixed race). This classification then brought with it certain privileges or restrictions. The Separate Amenities Act meant that segregation between the races was carried out in every aspect of life, including transport, education, health care, access to buildings etc. In every respect, the separate amenities set aside for “Non-Europeans” were less well resourced, convenient or plentiful than those for “Europeans” or Whites.

Education of black people was controlled by the Bantu Education Act, which advocated

a curriculum which would equip Blacks only for low-level jobs, such as manual labour.

Black and White people were prohibited from marrying or having sexual relations under the Mixed Marriages and Immorality Amendment Acts, and people were forced to live in separate residential areas, under the Group Areas Act. This Act resulted in forced removals of people who happened to be living in what were considered to be white areas. The Bantu Homelands Citizens Act made all black people citizens not of South Africa, but of one of several homelands, designated to these according to their ethnic grouping. The Pass laws then regulated the movements of black people, who had to carry an identification document (or pass) with them at all times. No black person could seek work in an urban area (outside of their Homeland) without having a permit to do so.

Anti-Apartheid activity was curtailed through the Suppression of Communism Act, which banned any political organisation calling for radical change in the status quo, and the Terrorism Act, which allowed for measures such as detention without trial.

Through these laws, a police state was created in South Africa, which allowed for the abuse of human rights on every level. Resistance against these measures began with strikes, acts of public disobedience and protest marches. But when these were met with violence (for example, in the Sharpeville massacre of 1960, where 69 people were killed for protesting against the pass laws), so armed resistance became the only alternative.

In turn, the Apartheid government hit back at the liberation movements (the African National Congress, the Pan-African Congress, the South African Communist Party) by declaring states of emergency and banning these organizations. Many thousands of

their members were harassed, imprisoned, detained without trial, tortured or killed.

The capture of Nelson Mandela, Walter Sisulu and others of the ANC leadership in

Rivonia in 1963, resulting in sentences of life imprisonment, meant that many others

left the country to go into exile. Some trained as soldiers within the armed wing of

the ANC (Umkhonto we’Sizwe) in camps in neighbouring African countries, or in the

Soviet block countries. Others worked to sustain the struggle abroad and gain support for the notion of a free and democratic South Africa. Exiled ANC leaders were targeted for assassination and The Bureau of State Security (Boss) took over military intelligence and reported directly to the prime minister.

Within the country there was extensive censorship and repression, with conscription becoming compulsory for all while males in 1967. South Africa became more and more isolated as sport, cultural and trade boycotts built up. Events such as the Soweto Protests where students protested about being taught in Afrikaans, and many were killed in the process, spread a spirit of revolt like wildfire across the country.

The 1980s were characterized by massive repression and state-orchestrated violence to contain the threat of so-called “radical” elements and in response, an intensification of the armed struggle. Political divisions between the ANC and the Inkhatha Freedom Party led to protracted violence in Kwazulu Natal, which divided black communities. Suspicion of police informers within the ranks led to communities turning on one another, often using the petrol-filled tyre or “necklace” as a weapon.

South African secret agents infiltrated ANC ranks and this in turn led to ANC training camps being used as places where suspected spies were tortured and executed. In the late 1980s the Mass Democratic Movement was launched to campaign vigorously against apartheid. South Africa was on the brink of civil war.

In 1989 PW Botha resigned as State President (after a stroke) and was replaced by FW De Klerk. Nelson Mandela, who had begun secret talks with the government from prison, saw an opportunity to begin negotiating a way forward. The political climate changed as prisoners were released, parts of the Separate Amenities Act were changed and some of the repression of the past was lifted. In 1990 FW De Klerk made an extraordinary speech in which political parties were unbanned, Mandela’s release from prison was announced and emergency restrictions were lifted. A new order had been heralded. White minority rule was almost over.

In the years leading up to the first democratic elections of 1994, as the new constitution was debated in the Convention for a Democratic South Africa (Codesa), it became apparent that a negotiated settlement between the parties would require compromises on all sides. Violence was still very much a reality of the political landscape; parties such as the PAC had not yet suspended the armed struggle, and attacks on civilians continued. Violence between the ANC and Inkhatha also flared up continuously, fuelled by what many referred to as “the third force”, the participation of the security forces in arming and supporting Inkhatha units. Nelson Mandela was elected as President of South Africa in 1994 and made reconciliation the hallmark of his leadership. In the following year the new Constitution of South Africa was adopted, and its provisions made possible the establishment of the

TRC.

The Truth and Reconciliation Commission allowed for all South Africans to come to terms with their history of division and oppression in a way that would allow for public admission of the

conditions that led to the excessive and systematic abuse of human rights from 1960 onwards. The TRC was designed to examine both the human rights abuses committed in the name of preserving apartheid and of fighting against it. As Archbishop Tutu said, it was an attempt to heal the wounds of the past by exposing the cause and the nature of the injuries.

Who was involved in running the TRC?

The TRC was chaired by Archbishop Desmond Tutu. As a church leader, a Nobel peace prize winner and a spokesperson for all those who had been oppressed and all those who had wanted equality and freedom, Tutu was the ideal person to head the commission. President Nelson Mandela selected the seventeen commissioners from a shortlist of 25 names that in turn had been chosen by a multiparty panel.

Dr Alex Boraine was the Deputy Chairman. Other commissioners included Mary Burton, Advocate Chris de Jager, Bongani Finca, Pumla Gobodo-Madikizela, Sis Khampepe, Richard Lyster, Wynand Malan, Reverend Khoza Mgojo, Hlengiwe Mkhize, Dumisa Ntsebeza, Wendy

Orr, Advocate Denzil Potgieter, Mapule Ramashala, Dr Faizel Randera, Yasmin

Sooka and Glenda Wildschut.

This group of distinguished individuals had made their presence felt in the legal, social services, medical and human rights sectors. They included freedom fighters, former detainees, exiles, church leaders and politicians. They were chosen as respected community representatives, coming from a range of cultural, political and social backgrounds.

The Successes and Criticisms of the TRC

Many questions around the TRC remain hotly debated issues in South Africa and across the world:

• Did the TRC achieve forgiveness and reconciliation?

• Did the TRC uncover all the truth?

• Was the TRC biased or limited in its findings?

• Did amnesty breed an ethic of impunity amongst perpetrators?

• Were victims victimized again by the fact that after the TRC they were unable to seek justice from the courts for the wrongs done to them?

Many victims feel that the TRC failed to achieve reconciliation between the black and white communities. However, the purpose of the TRC was never to achieve reconciliation, but to promote it. And reconciliation did happen in many instances. Many feel that justice is a prerequisite for reconciliation rather than an alternative to it. Some victims felt that the TRC favoured the perpetrators, since perpetrators were able to get amnesty, while the reparations process was slow, flawed and insufficient. Some people refused to participate in the process, including PW Botha, the ex-State President (who referred to the TRC as a “circus”) and Gatsha Buthelezi, the leader of the Inkhata Freedom Party. When FW de Klerk appeared before the commission and reiterated his apology for the suffering caused by apartheid, many felt that his response was insufficient and that he was not prepared to take personal responsibility for wrongs committed.

Some people opposed the amnesty process, feeling that it would rob them of justice. One example is the family of anti-apartheid activist Steve Biko, who was killed by the security police. Many of the criticisms of the TRC can be laid at the door of the new government,

which in many cases, failed to act on the recommendations of the commission, as laid out in its Final Report. Those who did not receive amnesty or who had not applied for amnesty in the first place, were not prosecuted at the time; reparations were insufficient and poorly handled.

So how successful was the TRC?

You decide… In the play, the interpreters come up with an arbitrary figure of 9.5%

success. Not very impressive, you might say. But on the other hand, Marcel argues,

“that is 9.5% more reconciliation, more forgiveness, more truth than South Africa had

ever had before.”

As Reverend Peter Storey said about the TRC, “The TRC did not fail. It did everything

it could. It is now up to South Africans, white and black to find a way forward.”

These sentiments are echoed by Nobuhle, at the end of Truth in Translation, when

she says:

“This time of healing has been a pretty picture that we have drawn across the land - and every day the dry wind comes from the north to wipe it out. But we've made this image of what we can be - that’s what we have to celebrate - and we have to draw those lines again

while our hands remember. Then maybe we will step back one day and stare with wonder at what we have done, what we have become...”

“Forgiveness is a practise, a verb! Something you can choose to DO. Every morning that we wake up we can choose to forgive and we can work on it. It doesn’t happen overnight and it’s not a once off event. You have

To practice forgiveness to get better at it. This is something that have learnt being part of this play!”

–

Nick Boraine (Peter in Truth inTranslation)

“Stupidity is the most dangerous activity on this planet. To act stupidly in the face of humanity. To deny, to act without thinking, to sow fear and short sighted morals, to exercise your “God-given” right to tell people that they are right or wrong… is stupid.”

– Jeroen Kranenburg (Rudi / Schalk in Truth in Translation)

FW De Klerk has claimed that “I have not only a clear conscience. I am not guilty of any crime whatsoever.”