Restorative Justice and the South African Truth and Reconciliation Process1 Christian B.N. Gade Department of Culture and Society Aarhus University Jens Chr. Skous Vej 7 8000 Aarhus C Denmark
[email protected] Abstract It has frequently been argued that the post-apartheid Truth and Rec- onciliation Commission (TRC) was committed to restorative justice (RJ), and that RJ has deep historical roots in African indigenous cul- tures by virtue of its congruence both with ubuntu and with African indigenous justice systems (AIJS). In this article, I look into the ques- tion of what RJ is. I also present the finding that the term ‘restorative justice’ appears only in transcripts of three public TRC hearings, and the hypothesis that the TRC first really began to take notice of the term ‘restorative justice’ after April 1997, when the South African Law Commission published an Issue Paper dealing with RJ. Further- more, I show that neither the connection between RJ and ubuntu nor the connection between RJ and AIJS is as straightforward and unproblematic as often assumed. Introduction In my research on ubuntu and the South African transition from apartheid to multi-ra- cial democracy (see Gade 2011 & Gade 2012), I have frequently come across refer- ences to restorative justice (RJ). This is what has inspired me to look deeper into the issue of RJ and the South African truth and reconciliation process in this article. I will begin by exemplifying the idea that whereas the post-apartheid Truth and Rec- onciliation Commission (TRC) did not offer retributive justice, it did promote another kind of justice, namely RJ.