Reconciliation Between Victims And Perpetrators

1640 Words7 Pages
Throughout the course of human history, violence has been a reoccurring theme in the conquest for power in countries across the planet. Understanding the ideology behind some of this violence have puzzled historians and psychologists for centuries; furthermore, the presence of reconciliation between the victims and perpetrators after some of these horrific acts of terror is even more astonishing. This form of reconciliation was a significant factor during South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) formed in 1996. After close analysis, I have been able to identify the difference between the similar terms of reconciliation and forgiveness, understand the evaluation process of reconciliation between victims and perpetrators…show more content…
Negotiated forgiveness consists of the perpetrator and the victim to confront one another and discuss the motives and understand the perpetrator’s intentions. With the dialogue between the two opposing parties, reconciliation can finally emerge. Kraft states the need for negotiated forgiveness, “In the context of truth commissions, unilateral forgiveness is forgiveness, and negotiated forgiveness is reconciliation. During truth commissions, forgiveness appears as an internal disengagement from the perpetrator, independent of the actions of the perpetrator. In contrast, reconciliation is a dialectical process of acceptance, involving direct interactions between perpetrators and victims,” (Kraft 115). This is why reconciliation is extremely important, to resolve reconciliation is essential in promoting peace. With a strong understanding of the contrast between forgiveness and reconciliation, one can intensely evaluate the process of reconciliation during the events of the TRC. In the amnesty process in the TRC, as previously stated to reach reconciliation, the perpetrators were to confront the committee and the victims and discuss, in detail, their crimes. In a strange way, these testimonies, “humanized,” the perpetrators, “For those who watched the amnesty proceedings and for those who participated, the testimony humanized and particularized the perpetrator. As perpetrators gave testimony, they divulged their crimes, but they also revealed themselves as flawed and
Get Access