People & Histories
Hearings from April 1996; report October 1998

The Truth and Reconciliation Commission

Under Archbishop Desmond Tutu, victims tell their stories in public and perpetrators can win amnesty by confessing in full, an experiment watched around the world.

  • Truth and Reconciliation Commission of South Africa Report — Truth and Reconciliation Commission of South Africa (1998)
  • Truth Commission: South Africa — United States Institute of Peace
  • No Future Without Forgiveness — Desmond Tutu, Doubleday (1999)
  • Country of My Skull — Antjie Krog, Random House (1998)
  • Amnesty or Impunity? A Preliminary Critique of the Report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of South Africa — Mahmood Mamdani, Diacritics (2002)

Well established memorypeacetraumademocracy

Created by Parliament in 1995 and chaired by Archbishop Desmond Tutu, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission investigated gross human rights violations committed between 1960 and 1994. It took statements from about 21,000 victims, some 2,000 of whom testified at public hearings broadcast on radio and television. Mothers asked what had happened to their sons; police officers described torture and murder; Tutu sometimes wept with the witnesses.

Perpetrators could apply for amnesty if they fully disclosed their crimes and showed they were politically motivated. Of 7,112 applications, amnesty was granted in 849 cases and refused in most of the rest.

The final report, presented in October 1998, found the apartheid state the main perpetrator of gross violations, while also finding that the ANC, Inkatha and others committed abuses. It recommended reparations for victims; the government eventually paid a one-off amount far smaller than proposed, in 2003. Very few of those refused amnesty were ever prosecuted, a lasting grievance.

For the people who lived through it, the TRC was above all an experience. Night after night, radio and television carried testimony in all of the country’s languages, and white South Africans who had said “we didn’t know” could no longer say so. The poet and journalist Antjie Krog, who reported on the hearings for radio, captured the shock in Country of My Skull. Some families found the remains of loved ones; some met the men who had killed them, and a few forgave. Others walked away more bitter than before.

  • Country of My Skull — Antjie Krog, Random House (1998)
  • No Future Without Forgiveness — Desmond Tutu, Doubleday (1999)

How it's seen
Supporters

Truth in exchange for amnesty was the price of a peaceful transition. Grounded in ubuntu and restorative justice, the hearings let victims be heard, revealed what happened to the disappeared, and made reconciliation possible.

  • No Future Without Forgiveness — Desmond Tutu, Doubleday (1999)
  • Country of My Skull — Antjie Krog, Random House (1998)

Victims' families and critics

Families such as Steve Biko's opposed the amnesty process in court; many feel justice was traded away. Mahmood Mamdani argued that by focusing on individual acts of torture and killing, the TRC ignored the everyday injustice of apartheid suffered by millions and let its beneficiaries off the hook.

Former regime and liberation movements

Both the National Party and the ANC objected to parts of the findings: de Klerk went to court to remove passages implicating him, and the ANC unsuccessfully sought to block publication of findings on its own abuses.

Why it matters today

South Africa

The TRC gave the country a shared record of apartheid's crimes that no one can easily deny, and it became a model for truth commissions worldwide. But many victims feel let down: few perpetrators who were refused amnesty or never applied were ever prosecuted, and reparations were small and late. Whether South Africa chose forgiveness wisely, or let the guilty off, is still argued.