Institute for Historical Justice and Reconciliation

With many pinning the hopes of underrepresented and marginalized people around the world on a single man, President-Elect Barack Hussein Obama has taken on arguably the most important job in the world.

Although the financial meltdown and continued concerns over national security top his agenda, Obama will make an impact in the realm of international justice, human rights and reconciliation.

As the world waits to see what this son of a white mother and black father will do, we can take heart in knowing that his role in historical justice and reconciliation will on the whole be positive. As the recent issue of The Economist pointed out “Because he is young, handsome and intelligent, and also because as the child of a Kansan and a Kenyan he reconciles in his own person one of the world’s most hateful divisions, Mr. Obama carries with him the hopes of the planet” (Jan. 17, 2009 pg. 11).

He will have a long list of things ahead of him, and while historical justice and reconciliation will not factor in as a campaign promise, they will benefit from the approach and style the international community can hope for from Obama.

In terms of foreign policy, Obama has already given us much to look forward to. His personality, education, demeanor and intellect have proven to be harbingers for a shift in America’s standing in the world.

His most telling move is to close Guantánamo, which he has promised to do. The New York Times reported today: “Saying that “our ideals give us the strength and moral high ground” to combat terrorism, President Obama signed executive orders Thursday ending the Central Intelligence Agency’s secret overseas prisons, banning coercive interrogation methods and closing the Guantánamo Bay detention camp within a year.”
Amnesty International USA had asked that in his first 100 days he: “announce a plan and date to close Guantanamo, issue an executive order to ban torture and other ill-treatment, as defined under international law, ensure that an independent commission to investigate abuses committed by the U.S. government in its "war on terror" is set up.” This is the first step to resurrect our moral standing in the world. We must rectify the wrongs from this disturbing chapter in American history.
On the larger international scale is the smoldering aftermath of the Israeli-Palestinian war. The recent flare up appears to be coming to an end, and it would be the ideal time to further talks about a peaceful solution. Past American presidents have stepped in to try to reconcile the two sides. Though his stance on Israel is not fundamentally different than his predecessors, we can hope he brings fresh perspective to this decades-old conflict. While much of historical justice and reconciliation lies outside of the realm of politicians, it is often their political wills that move and guide societies on these paths.

And, its’ the reconciliation in our American minds – that a man born of a union that was considered illegal not too far back in history has now risen to the ranks of the highest and most important office in the land, if not the world.

How far his character and intellect stretch to the corners of the globe remains to be seen. But most likely his voice will resound a little louder with nations mired in ethnic conflict with a vision of what reconciliation on some level can look like, especially on a social level. After all, he is living proof that vicious histories can be overcome.

Country Profile: http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/africa/country_profiles/1069166.stm

President Yoweri Museveni: http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/africa/4124584.stm

Timeline: http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/world/africa/country_profiles/1069181.stm

As tensions mount during efforts toward anxiously-awaited peace negotiations between guerilla-led Lord�s Resistance Army (LRA) and the Ugandan government, fresh clashes broke out in the past week among President Museveni�s Ugandan People�s Defense Force (UPDF); the LRA, led by the infamous Joseph Kony and based in Northern Uganda and South Sudan; and South Sudanese forces of the Sudanese People�s Liberation Movement/Army (SPLM/A), as efforts towards peace negotiations between the Lord�s Resistance Army and the Ugandan government are being brokered.

While Museveni ruminated as to the appropriateness of meeting with indicted LRA leaders, eight LRA guerillas were killed last week by UPDF troops while attempting a raid on Internally Displaced Persons (IDP) camps in Northern Uganda, reported army spokesman, Major Felix Kulayigye. He indicated that military operations were scheduled to continue as usual. An unidentified state governor also reported that four LRA fighters had been killed by Sudanese forces in South Sudan. Such reports from the field cannot help in the current pursuit of peace in northern Uganda.

Museveni, who originally declined to negotiate with the five individuals named in October 14, 2005 indictments for war crimes and crimes against humanity by the International Criminal Court, is now entertaining the possibility of sending a delegation to negotiate a peace settlement with outlawed LRA insurgents who have been terrorizing Northern Uganda and South Sudan for nearly two decades. In an interview with Uganda�s independent newspaper, The Daily Monitor, on Tuesday, June 27, 2006, Museveni stated that, after receiving a request from South Sudan President Salva Kiir, he intends to send a team to Juba, capital city of South Sudan, to engage in preliminary talks and then proceed with peace negotiations with indicted 46-year old leader and self-styled messiah of the LRA, Joseph Kony, and his second-in-command, Vincent Otti. Three other indicted leaders, Okot Odhiambo, Raska Lukwiya, and Dominic Ongwen are also expected to participate in the talks. Kony has named Dr. Lensio Onek, a Sudanese national, to lead the LRA negotiating team. Museveni had previously refrained from deploying a high-level delegation to Juba, seeking first to establish the sincerity of the LRA before engaging in negotiations. Uganda�s minister for internal affairs, Dr. Ruhakana Rugunda, past peace negotiator with LRA on behalf of the government, previously declared that �an appropriate authority will, at an opportune moment, issue a statement.� with regard to Uganda�s lead negotiator.

In a surprising first ever interview with journalist Sam Farmer of the London Times and aired on BBC television last night, Kony emphatically denied all accusations against him, responding, �I am not guilty� to each crime alleged. At a meeting with Farmer in the jungles of the Democratic Republic of Congo, Kony declared that he is no killer; �I am a human being like you�Why do you meet me if I am a killer�? Kony dismissed the allegations made about him as propaganda and accused Museveni of oppressing the Acholi people � �Our wealth, our property, was destroyed by Museveni.� To Kony, Museveni is the icon of all that is malfunctioning in Uganda and must be removed.

Following Kony�s meetings along with his four commanders and South Sudanese officials in May and June of this year, his first such encounter with mediators in almost a decade, the South Sudan regional government is reportedly anxious to broker an end to the 19-year hostilities between the LRA and Museveni�s government, some of which has taken place in its backyard. The violent conflict between the LRA and the UPDF has given rise to squalid IDP camps and destabilization of the area of South Sudan where the LRA is billeted. Add to this volatile mix the disagreement between the ICC and the prospective peace-builders.

As mediating forces seek to bring leaders of the Ugandan government, the LRA, and South Sudanese representatives to the negotiating table, many have voiced concern over the timing of the ICC�s arrest warrants against Kony et al., which were issued last October. The concern is that the Court has inconveniently inserted itself into the equation, thereby encumbering the progress of preliminary efforts toward peace negotiations. President Museveni has been pressured by supporters of the ICC not to negotiate with indicted LRA leaders but he had reportedly given until July 31, 2006 for Kony and his cohorts to surrender and receive amnesty from charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity. In view of Kony�s mission since 1986 to destabilize and destroy the Museveni regime by inciting the LRA to acts of murder, rape, child abduction, torture, plunder and numerous other atrocities against Northern Ugandan civilians in Acholi lands and South Sudanese villages, it is extremely difficult to imagine the effects of granting of amnesty in these proceedings. The ICC has a huge stake in maintaining its credibility and validating its relevance by bringing the LRA to justice for its crimes, though some members of the international community may press the ICC to drop its charges if it means getting Kony et al. to the negotiating table in order to stop the violence.

For its part, the ICC chief prosecutor, Luis Moreno-Ocampo, dismissed prospects of a peace initiative as a Kony ploy to �buy time and regroup.� Conversely, many were shocked at the recent footage of a digital recording of vice president of the regional government of neighboring South Sudan, second-in-command of SPLM, and Museveni ally - Dr. Riek Machar Teny Dhurgon - buying Kony off in the bush on May 2, 2006 with $20,000 to use for food and supplies - not ammunition. Just who is buying whom? The encounter, however, is seen by some to reflect a high degree of trust between Machar and Kony, and therefore a good basis on which to proceed with plans for peace negotiations. In defense of this action, the regional Sudanese government asserts LRA claims that its attacks on Sudanese civilians are prompted by efforts to feed its troops, which prompted the payment.

While the cash payout has drawn severe criticism from interested parties in the international human rights community, such as Human Rights Watch, it has received support from the U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs, Jendayi Frazer, and former Ugandan government minister, Betty Bigombe, whose own peace initiative between LRA and Ugandan government troops collapsed in 2004; some say due to ICC intervention. Both Frazer and Bigombe believe that bringing Kony to peaceful negotiations is paramount to any other considerations, including the ICC warrants for arrests for crimes dating from July 2002. South Sudanese government representatives are anticipating a speedy resolution to the situation and do not intend to supply the LRA indefinitely with food and other provisions.

There is an ironic twist to the role of the South Sudanese government as mediator in this issue, as since 2002, the Sudanese have consented to UPDF operations counter to the LRA emanating out of South Sudan. The UPDF previously launched some attacks against the LRA assisted by the former rebel regional army of South Sudan (SPLA), which prior to January 2005, waged a rebellious war against the National Congress government of Sudan. A peace agreement was signed between the opposing factions that January, creating the newly unified South Sudan governing body. Perhaps the South Sudanese model presents some insights that may be used in addressing the current situation in Northern Uganda. Mediation and reconciliation will be the top agenda items in this quest for peace after the LRA�s 19-year stranglehold on Northern Uganda. Lack of attention from the international community left Museveni much to his own limited devices in attempts to quell the insurgency. The entire nation of Uganda is exhausted by the LRA�s reign of terror in the North and the hope for peace is palpable among those who suffered most.

Surfacing as a new wrinkle in this episode is the claim of a Netherlands Christian organization to have been approached by church leaders in northern Uganda and South Sudan ��to explore alternatives for a political solution to the civil war between the LRA and government of Uganda�,� as stated in an e-mail from Jan Heerkens, communication manager of Pax Christi. The Daily Monitor reported that it has seen a document revealing that Pax Christi, based in Utrecht, Netherlands, has been in contact with LRA leader Joseph Kony since 2005.

After information concerning the meetings between Kony and South Sudan vice president Riek Machar surfaced, the ICC and the UN issued strong statements castigating that peace effort. Citing that it is a supporter of the ICC, Pax Christi declared that its intention is not to create obstacles for The Hague in pursuing its mandate; it believes justice must be meted out on behalf of the many victims of violent conflict and human rights violations in northern Uganda. At one videotaped meeting, ostensibly one of those between Kony and Machar, a representative from Pax Christi identified as Simon Simonse is seen to be present, lending some credibility to the organization's assertion that it has been invited to be a mediator.

The National Chairman of the Ugandan People�s Congress, Prof. Patrick Rubaihayo, also leveled criticism against the government�s peace approach on Wednesday, June 28 in a press briefing at Uganda House. Although Museveni has now stated his intention to send a delegation to Juba for peace talks, Prof. Rubaihayo declared that the government would not favor peace because it would spell doom for the �personal dividends and political clout� enjoyed by the National Resistance Movement at the enormous expense and suffering of the people in the north.

Questions that come to mind are why has Kony decided to come to the peace table at this time in order to defend himself? Will he deliver himself and receive amnesty? If further military engagements follow, what will it mean for the future of the already fragile path to peace talks between the Ugandan government and the LRA? Which body will mediate the peace effort? Who really supports the peace effort in this increasingly complex state of affairs? I might note here that there is a growing movement toward forming an independent Nile State comprised of South Sudan, which has also had its share of LRA atrocities, and northern Uganda. It is supported by three Acholi districts in Uganda: Gulu, Pader and Kitgum. More on this at a later date.

Previous efforts to arrest LRA members proved fruitless and add some dimension of value to pursuing a peace-driven solution. As of yesterday, Chief Prosecutor Ocampo guaranteed safe passage to The Hague for Kony and his indicted commanders to answer the charges lodged against them along with the opportunity to present their case before a judicial body with the highest standards of due process in the world. The chief prosecutor is empowered to make this guarantee by Article 54 in Part 5 of the Rome Statute: �Enter into such arrangements or agreements, not inconsistent with this Statute, as may be necessary to facilitate the cooperation of a State, intergovernmental organization or person.� Once Kony is in The Hague, what defense will he use for his actions? Human Rights Watch East Africa coordinator, Jemera Rone, as well as others, are amazed at Kony�s declarations of innocence.

The Ugandan government is clearly conflicted in its dilemma, as it has vested interests in both South Sudan�s mediation efforts to end the 19-year violent insurgency as well as a moral imperative to support the ICC. The world waits to see how this convoluted backdrop of terror, mediation, and reconciliation will unfold.

Once peace is attained, examination may be made into the root causes of conflict in Ugandan communities and assessments made of available capacities for peaceful management of those conflicts. Proven methods of conflict resolution used in 1986 between the people of northwestern Uganda (West Nilers) and the Acholi people constituting the �bending of spears� should receive strong consideration. The challenge now is to rid Uganda of the scourge of the Lord�s Resistance Army.

Read more about Northern Uganda at: Doctors Without Borders -- 8th Annual Top Ten Most Underreported Humanitarian Stories of 2005

http://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/education/refugeecamp/index.cfm?msource=ADN060601E01

An article in the New York Times of June 28, 2006, entitled �Many Algerians Are Not Reconciled by Amnesty Law,� describes the frustrating pace of reconciliation in Algeria after years of civil war. The conciliatory program offers amnesty to convicted Islamic fighters who tell the truth about their violent actions. This amnesty is the extent of the reconciliation between the warring factions in Algeria; there were no truth commissions or war crimes trials. The institutional reconciliation program was not created for the victims, but for the perpetrators of violence as an incentive for them to confess to their violent crimes.

On the surface, the lack of consideration for the Algerian victims may seem like a gross oversight on the part of the proponents of reconciliation. In part, this is true, and the Human Rights Watch was one organization to predict the failure of the Algerian amnesty. One problem with this view, however, is that after mass atrocities the victimization itself is massive and messy. Often, the perpetrators of genocide feel victimized, and genuinely guilty for what they�ve done. They are repentant for their actions under circumstances for which they had little to no control, and they genuinely want to work to rebuild their war-torn nation. When the violence has ceased, it is important to hear and acknowledge the perpetrators� stories as a way for the perpetrators to repent for their actions, as well as to record the truth of the atrocities committed.

Most if not all countries that have had to deal with questions of reconciliation after genocide place an enormous amount of value on the testimony of the perpetrators as a way of capturing the truth of what happened within their country. Truth and justice is more objective when recorded collaboratively by both parties affected by the atrocity. And when it has been recorded, both sides can move forward again in unison. This act of honesty is so valuable, in fact, that often the victims are willing to pardon their perpetrators as a result of the perpetrators� genuine repentance, and the collaborative acknowledgement of the country�s unjust history.

However, it is up to the victims to forgive the people who enacted the violence upon them, and this can only be granted after hearing the perpetrator�s entire testimony. The victims can choose never to forgive their oppressors (and this is where the law steps in to decide a fair trial). If one thing is true, however, extraordinary forgiveness is the only forgiveness that can follow an extraordinary act of de-humanization.

Furthermore, as has been the case with the TRC in South Africa, amnesty in other war-torn countries has been granted on a case-by-case basis, based on the level of crime committed. A particularly heinous crime is not necessarily given amnesty by the victims, or by the law. The real problem that seems to be developing in Algeria, therefore, is related precisely to the tenuous forgiveness that has been bestowed on the perpetrators of violence by their victims�the fundamental trouble of which is the blanket amnesty that is given in exchange for admissions of guilt. Forgiveness in this system is granted before hearing the crime, not after. In this way, the victims lose their individual stake in the process of forgiveness, and truth itself becomes a minor detail; truth is collateral and forgiveness is merely part of a mechanical exchange ratio.

Part of the reason why truth commissions have become so effective as a tool in reconciling victims and perpetrators of mass atrocity is precisely because of the knowledge that underneath it all forgiving such an awful truth is one of the hardest and most noble acts a human being can bestow upon another human being�and it is a trust that must be earned. It is necessarily an individual act, because the pain�while it affects a collective body in the case of genocide�physically affects each individual body, indivdually. In truth commissions, the truth is the primary purpose (not the secondary, as in the barter-exchange amnesty offered in Algeria) and the volume stands as a pillar of memory to every single victim of violence. When the perpetrators are forgiven in this context, they are forgiven individually, as an act of goodwill between the violator and the violated, and they are forgiven after the victims have heard the whole story. In order for a country to heal, each case, while collected together in a historical body of evidence, must be able to be broken down and remembered individually.

One problem we run up against, which is part of the impetus to a blanket amnesty in Algeria, is the desire for a nation to put the past behind it as quickly as possible�to get over the shame, and to move on. However, because of the gravity of the wounds inflicted, the healing must take time. The process of forgiveness of massive atrocity is necessarily a slow one. The victims� pain is to deep to brush aside quickly. Another problem is the sheer number of atrocities committed (there were nearly 100,000 people were killed in military death squads in Algeria alone). But as we see in the dissatisfaction on both sides of the Algerian conflict, it doesn�t seem to matter how many people were affected, a long-standing justice can only be done when it considers each person, one person at a time. Otherwise, both the truth of the violence, and the forgiveness of the victims risk devolving into empty words in an exchange ratio, rather than actual deeds in a process of healing.

A nine-man delegation, headed by the Chairman of the Liberian Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC), Cllr. Jerome Verdier, arrived yesterday in South Africa. Their goal is to learn from the South African experience, broaden their knowledge of issues relating to transitional justice, as well as observe the impact of the reconciliation process in that country.

Last week, Cllr. Verdier visited the United States, where he met with officials of the Department of State and Justice Department, the World Bank, the Open Society Initiative for West Africa (OSIWA), the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), and the US Institute for Peace and National Security. He made a trip to Pennsylvania, where he met with officials and members of the Liberian Community as a part of the Commission's continuing outreach initiative aimed at engaging every Liberian, including those living in the Diaspora. According to some reports, Liberians who attended the meeting expressed delight in the TRC and underscored the need for all Liberians, including those living in the Ivory Coast, Ghana, Guinea and Nigeria, to support and fully participate in the TRC process. They also submitted a proposal to the government of Liberia, asking for the creation of reconciliation sites in different parts of the United States. During the same week, six of nine Commissioners of the TRC were touring the 15 political sub-divisions of the country to acquaint themselves with stakeholders of the TRC process in the leeward counties.

It seems that the TRC team has been working hard on gathering support not only from foreign governments and international governmental and non-governmental agencies, but also from Liberians at home and abroad, before the hearings start in June.

One of the reasons appears to be the increased effort of the group Forum for the Establishment of a War Crimes Court in Liberia. On May 12th, 10,000 Liberians marched in support of the Forum�s initiative. They presented their petition to the National Legislature, the United States Embassy, African Union, ECOWAS and the United Nations representatives in Liberia.

The group complains that the Truth and Reconciliation Commission lacks the power to effectively punish war crimes because of their limited mandate. The Commission, established by the National Transitional Legislative Assembly in June of 2005 in accordance with the Accra Comprehensive Peace Agreement in 2003, does not have the authority to try any suspects. Its primary responsibility is to document abuses that have taken place during the governments of Samuel Doe and Charles Taylor, and make recommendations for restitution.

TRC�s mandate is to �investigate gross human rights violations and war crimes, including massacres, sexual violations, murder, extra-judicial killings and economic crimes (such as the exploitation of natural or public resources to perpetuate the armed conflict).� The Commission is also to provide an opportunity for victims and perpetrators of human rights violations to discuss their experiences, �in order to create a record of the past and facilitate genuine healing and reconciliation.�

Liberia's president, Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf, has expressed her disapproval about the formation of a War Crimes Court in Liberia, because she believes that all Liberia needs is a truth and reconciliation process. The Chairman of the erstwhile Sierra Leonean Truth and Reconciliation Commission, Bishop Joseph C. Humper, agreed with Ms. Johnson-Sirleaf, saying that having the Special Court in Sierra Leone to operate at the same time as the Sierra Leonean TRC greatly undermined the effectiveness of that country's reconciliation process.

The discussion has begun and will continue. Whether Liberia decides on the creation of a War Crimes Court in addition to a TRC is an issue of careful consideration and reflections.

French President Jaques Chirac has announced that France will hold a national day of remembrance for the victims of slavery. Should other European countries follow suit in recognising their colonial pasts and what sort of remembrance activities would be suitable for this day? These questions are especially pertinent in the light of the recent overturning of a law requiring teachers to stress positive aspects of France's colonial past.

"France will hold a national day of remembrance for the victims of slavery every 10 May, President Jacques Chirac has announced.
The date for the annual holiday was chosen as it marks the day in 2001 when France passed a law recognising slavery as a crime against humanity.

He said children should be taught about slavery at primary and secondary school as part of the national curriculum.

He said UN figures suggest more than 20 million people were in slavery today.

"Slavery fed racism," he said. "When people tried to justify the unjustifiable, that was when the first racist theories were elaborated.

"Racism is a crime of the heart and the spirit... which is why the memory of slavery remains a living wound for some of our fellow citizens."

Mr Chirac said he would propose a "European and international initiative" to tackle any company still using slave labour.

"We must ensure that when western companies invest in poor or emerging countries they respect basic labour rules such as have been lain out in international law," he said.

Earlier this month, Mr Chirac said a controversial law on the teaching of France's colonial past would be overturned.

The law requires teachers to stress positive aspects of French colonialism, especially in north Africa."

Source: BBC News Online