Reconciliation in rainbow land

The release on parole of a high-profile apartheid-era police officer convicted on 89 charges and sentenced to 212 years in 1996 is yet another reminder of South Africa’s struggle to balance justice with reconciliation. The overriding imperative of securing peace and stability between the once brutally oppressed majority black communities and their erstwhile Afrikaner white minority rulers underlay the constitution of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) in 1994. Its vision entailed the avoidance of the potentially tortuous course of divisive prosecutions and the award of amnesty for all those who would come clean during public confessions before the TRC. Notably, the grant of amnesty was to be examined equally for those complicit in politically motivated crimes perpetrated against the white supremacist regime, as well as those in defence of apartheid rule. Although about 1,000 security personnel and others admitted to brutalities they had committed against activists of the African National Congress, just one Cabinet Minister pleaded guilty. A former apartheid-rule President, whom a court had implicated for unlawful acts, refused to testify. Another former President never sought amnesty, pleading ignorance about atrocities committed by the regime.

“Prime Evil”, as Eugene de Kock was described, is now to be released after 20 years in jail. But the 66-year-old convict is not the first of his ilk to be set free. The grant of amnesty in 1996 to a top police official within less than five years of the start of a life term was seen by critics as an attempt by the TRC to encourage others to atone for their crimes. Another decision to pardon a notorious killer was surrounded by questions about the veracity of the confessions. Such has been the chequered history of bringing closure to past wounds. A perception that he was made a scapegoat for actions authorised by political higher-ups, as well as his expression of genuine remorse to the relatives of victims, have influenced the grant of parole to de Kock. The question of the nature of activities that should qualify for pardon was controversial in the aftermath of the release of Nelson Mandela and the restoration of democracy in the 1990s. The ANC had insisted that guerrillas charged with crimes in the armed struggle against white minority rule were also eligible. On the eve of the TRC hearings in 1996, there was even a legal challenge from the kin of some of the victims arguing that they could not be denied the right to settle disputes in a court of law. To balance justice with reconciliation is akin to making a choice between reason and emotion. There is much to learn from South Africa on this.