Why America Does Not Need a TRC

What started as an extraordinary institution for extraordinary times seems fast on its way to becoming a pre-packaged catch-all for sinister deeds. Instant justice, just add water.

Ethan Zuckerman posted an interesting account of a recent talk by South African human rights activist-extraordinaire Paul Van Zyl on "Why America needs a TRC." But in the case of torture and the War on Terror, a Truth and Reconciliation Commission would simply cement the notions of our past (and future?) leaders that they are, indeed, above the law.

The South African TRC was an extraordinary institution -- years of hearings and research uncovered and put on public display the insidiously dirty deeds of the Apartheid government, providing at least some measure of justice to its victims and in many cases, even years after the Commission ended, locating the bodies of missing loved ones. The TRC was uniquely South African, painstakingly developed by activists and scholars  like Van Zyl and particularly suited for the negotiated terms of the country's transition to democracy.

Truth commissions more generally are often appropriate for post-conflict societies, where functioning judiciaries are notably absent and the scale of the violence is too great for even a healthy system to handle. As justice mechanisms, they often represent a compromise -- far less than many victims may want, but far more than they would get otherwise. Simply put, they are better than nothing, and the use of grandiose theoretical selling points -- about healing, reinventing, reconciling -- lead to overblown and unfulfilled expectations.

(Full disclosure: As a grad student in South Africa, I wrote a dissertation on how the TRC sorta-maybe-coulda had a broader societal impact in South Africa. My examiner commented that I "excel in abstract theorizing," and I don't think he meant it as a compliment.)

The United States, however, has a sizeable, functioning, independent judicial system capable of handling this case load. We have a Congress capable of holding hearings and commissioning reports, and a robust (if Balloon Boy-obsessed) media to help them along. The cases themselves may be extraordinary, as the crimes are among the most serious breach of our Constitution and national ethos ever seen, but that is precisely why the perpetrators need to familiarize themselves with the inside of an American courtroom: To show that no one can so thoroughly disregard the rule of law without consequence.

In my own view, the architects of crimes against humanity should be held criminally accountable for their actions, though this frequently proves to be a frustrating task. In the case of the U.S., our only excuse is a dangerous complacency sure to breed future contempt, and future crimes.

[Photo from Wikimedia Commons: Abu Ghraib detainee, February 2006.]