A-SAfricaTRC

inue in society, where they may threa

ught to justice in public trials. This is the only way to ensure that d

Terrible crimes deserve appropriate punishments. Ignoring the past may not be a good idea, but war criminals (especially the leaders of violent groups) should be brought to justice in public trials. This is the only way to ensure that dangerous men are not allowed to con

Even the best Truth and Reconciliation process can only arrive at a partial version of the truth. This may take so many years that political development is halted while society relives the trauma through commission proceedings. Such commissions also impose a particular form of morality upon everyone, drawing upon specifically Christian traditions of confession, absolution and forgiveness that may be alien both to many victims and to the wider society. Even in an almost completely Christian South Africa many victims' families rejected the process for this reason; it is even less well suited to other societies and cultures.

erra Leone, Cambodia, again, but also Rwanda).

Compromise is essential to achieving peace and stability after years of conflict. This often has to be negotiated, as in South Africa, and has to survive for long enough for trust to grow

Truth and Reconciliation commissions are a mask, behind which political bargains can be made that allow the guilty to go free. Power is traded in return for amnesty. People may be required to confess to their crimes (although in South Africa middle-ranking bureaucrats were the main scapegoats while their political masters mostly escaped close scrutiny), but they will not be punished for them. South Africa is a unique example where violence was often committed by agents of the state for purely political reasons, and where the end of repression was negotiated rather than brought about through victory for one side. Elsewhere political and criminal or economic violence are hard to separate (e.g. Sierra Leone, Cambodia), and violence was ended by victory for one party, often with external help (e.g. S

Participants

With regard to gender, 62 (46.3%) participants were male and 72 (53.7%) were female. Participants' ages ranged from 25 years to 86 years, with a mean age of 53 years (s.d.=14.3).

The average number of violations (to both themselves and to family members) to which participants were exposed was 8.4 (s.d.=5.4), ranging across the sample from a low of one violation to a high of 24. With regard to the types of violations experienced, 90% of the total sample had experienced a violation to themselves, 82% reported violations to a family member and 72% had experienced both. The number of violations to the participant him/herself ranged across the sample from 1 to 17, with an average of 6.1 (s.d.=4.6). The average number of violations to a family member ranged from none to 24, with a mean of 2.4 (s.d.=2.4).

Of the total sample (n=134), 21 (15.7%) gave public testimony, 70 (52.2%) gave a statement to a statement-taker and 43 (32.1%) gave neither a statement nor public testimony. The Public and Statement groups in this sample represent 5% of all statements (public and closed) given to the TRC in the Western Cape.