No description available.

Thesis (MA (General Linguistics))--University of Stellenbosch, 2009. / This study investigates the ways in which former South African Police (SAP) perpetrators of human rights violations justify their criminal actions in testifying before the Amnesty Committee (AC) of the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC). In particular, attention goes to the testimonies of former Commissioner of Police Johan van der Merwe, and former member of the Security Branch section of the SAP, Jeffrey Benzien. A key assumption in the study is that the justification of human rights violations is a discursive practice that is largely language dependent (Reisigl & Wodak 200: xi). The research draws on the theoretical aims and methods of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA). It refers largely to Benke and Wodak’s (2003) discourse–historical study on the justificatory discourse of ex-Wehrmacht officers of the Austrian army. This study therefore takes a discourse-historical approach to discourse and the data, an approach which takes into consideration the surrounding political and historical context of the selected texts, which are, in this case, the testimonies of perpetrators at the AC hearings. Besides an analysis of the justificatory discourses produced by two former police officers, the study reflects on how the discursive strategies of the apartheid perpetrators compare with one another and with the ex- Wehrmacht officers. CDA and the discourse-historical approach provide interdisciplinary angles on linguistic analysis of a text. For this reason, a review is given of literature which relates the study to political, historical and philosophical insights. The analysis particularly makes use of Foster et al.’s (2005) socio-political study of apartheid perpetrator narratives. The study reveals that perpetrators used a fixed set of justificatory discursive strategies to talk about human rights violations, and their role in such violations. These linguistic strategies are used for a number of different reasons, including reducing personal responsibility, avoiding talking about past atrocities, saving face where personal malicious and degenerate behaviour is made public and diverting feelings of personal guilt. On a discourse theoretical level the study eventually convinces that there are generic strategies typically used in justificatory discourse, whether it be in response to Wehrmacht atrocities of the Second World War or to security force excesses in repressing aspirations of disenfranchised citizens during the last thirty years of the Nationalist government in South Africa. Some stories don’t want to be told. They walk away, carrying their suitcases held together with grey string. Look at their disappearing curved spines. Hunch-backs. Harmed ones. Hold alls. Some stories refuse to be danced or mimed, drop their scuffed canes and clattering tap-shoes, erase their traces in nursery rhymes or ancient games like blind man’s bluff. Excerpt from “Parts of Speech” by Ingrid de Kok

This work narrates a qualitative sociological exploration with auto-ethnographic underpinnings. It deals with the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission (SATRC) as a contextual case among others. The thesis seeks to answer the question of whether countries following a TRC route did better than those that did not use TRCs, when it comes to establishing civil control over the military. The author's exposure and involvement in the process as participant, participant observer, observer participant and observer inform the study. With the SATRC as one cornerstone other cases reflected upon include Argentina and Chile (Latin America), Spain and Portugal (Southern Europe), Namibia, Nigeria and Rwanda (Africa). / Sociology / D.Litt. et. Phil. (Sociology)

This study is an attempt to critique the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission from a theological ethical perspective. The central critique and argument of this study will be that, it is impossible to reconcile the dispossessor and the dispossessed or the oppressor and oppressed in the way the South African TRC did. As such, it will be befitting to start off this study which explores some of the noticeable lessons and challenges emerging from the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission (hereafter, the TRC) by elucidating that this study is an attempt to contribute to the on-going discussions on reconciliation. It is also vital to mention up front that this study attempts to contribute to the discussion on reconciliation which seeks to remove injustice at the root. It contributes to a discussion of the weeds of alienation and fragmentation, and it stands in contrast to the frequent use of reconciliation merely to reach some political accommodation and not to address the critical questions of justice, equality and dignity (Boesak & DeYoung 2012). It is also befitting to point out that two central themes – political pietism and Christian quietism – form the backdrop to this study (Boesak & DeYoung 2012). The study contends that reconciliation in South Africa was used merely to reach some political accommodation and did not address the three critical questions of justice, equality and dignity. These arrangements perpetually favour the rich and powerful but deprive the powerless of justice and dignity. Hitherto, this reconciliation is presented as if it does respond to the need for genuine reconciliation and employs a language that sounds like the truth, but it is in fact deceitful – and this we call political pietism. It is also vital to mention that “reconciliation” is a Christian concept, and as such, Christians’ measure matters of reconciliation with the yardstick of the gospel and therefore should know better. However, as it will be shown in this study, when Christians in South Africa discovered that the TRC was not really promoting reconciliation, they became complicit in a deceitful reconciliation. This may have been for reasons of self-protection, fear or a desire for acceptance by the powers that govern the world. Whichever way one looks at it, they tried to seek to accommodate the situation, to justify it and to refuse to run the risk of challenge and prophetic truth telling. As a result, they denied the demands of the gospel and refused solidarity with the powerless and oppressed. This is called Christian quietism (Boesak & DeYoung 2012:1). This study in its attempt to critique the South Africa TRC from a theological ethical perspective will point out that, the TRC which was obviously the product of the negotiated settlement needs to be understood against the background of the global struggle of particularly Third-World countries which were resisting authoritarian regimes put in place by the West for the benefit of the West. As such, this study will point out how the West, in their attempt to keep a grip on the Third-World countries – particularly on their resources – had to recommend and promote their notion of democracy. Democracy became the only option for Third-World countries as a result of the fall of the Soviet Union. It must, however, be mentioned that the problem is not democracy but the manifestation thereof under capitalism. This is because the notion of democracy was recommended to Third-World countries when capitalism was becoming global. As such, this presented some contradictions because democracy emphasizes joint interests, equality and common loyalties whilst capitalism is based on self-seeking inequality and conflicting individual and group interest (Terriblanche 2002). This means that a transition to democracy (especially constitutional democracy) means that the former oppressor or dispossessor will hold on to economic power. As such, the sudden interest of both the NP and the corporate sector in South Africa to a transition to democracy needs to be understood against this background. This study will argue and demonstrate how the ANC was outsmarted during the negotiations in that, at the formal negotiations, the ANC won political power whilst the NP/corporate sector in South Africa won economic power. This is mentioned to here to point out that both the elite compromise reached at the formal and informal negotiations and the influence of the Latin-American truth commissions led to the inability or unwillingness of the TRC to uncover the truth about systemic exploitation. As such, this study will argue and demonstrate that, on the one hand, reconciliation was not added to the truth commission for the purpose of confronting the country with the demands of the gospel and, on the other hand, the TRC was set up (from its inception) for failure. / Philosophy, Practical and Systematic Theology / D.Th. (Theological Ethics)

This study evaluated the effectiveness of the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission (SATRC), using the theoretical and conceptual framework of the five pillars of transitional justice. Chitsike (2012) identified the five Pillars of Transitional Justice that the study uses. For that reason, Truth-Seeking and Truth-Telling, Trials and Tribunals, Reparations, Institutional Reform and Memorialisation are the Five Pillars of Transitional Justice that this study elected to use as the conceptual and theoretical framework. The Five Pillars of Transitional Justice that were delineated by Boraine (2005) are referred to for analytical purposes in the study. Methodologically, the study assumes a qualitative posture. Literature study through content analysis that uses description and exploration is deployed to make interpretation of the used literature. This study notes that each one of the pillars of transitional justice has its recommendations and limitations, and the pillars are much more enriched and enriching when applied in complementarity to each other rather than in isolation. The SATRC process also had its achievements and limitations, and its popularity was based on political impressions rather than concrete transitional justice achievements on the ground, in the view of the present study. Furthermore, it appears to the present study that more time is needed for much more reliable evaluations of the effectiveness of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) to be made, some of its successes and limitations will take many years and or even decades to manifest because at the end of the day, TRCs are historical process and not events. / Political Sciences / M.A. (Politics)

This work narrates a qualitative sociological exploration with auto-ethnographic underpinnings. It deals with the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission (SATRC) as a contextual case among others. The thesis seeks to answer the question of whether countries following a TRC route did better than those that did not use TRCs, when it comes to establishing civil control over the military. The author's exposure and involvement in the process as participant, participant observer, observer participant and observer inform the study. With the SATRC as one cornerstone other cases reflected upon include Argentina and Chile (Latin America), Spain and Portugal (Southern Europe), Namibia, Nigeria and Rwanda (Africa). / Sociology / D.Litt. et. Phil. (Sociology)

This study is an attempt to critique the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission from a theological ethical perspective. The central critique and argument of this study will be that, it is impossible to reconcile the dispossessor and the dispossessed or the oppressor and oppressed in the way the South African TRC did. As such, it will be befitting to start off this study which explores some of the noticeable lessons and challenges emerging from the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission (hereafter, the TRC) by elucidating that this study is an attempt to contribute to the on-going discussions on reconciliation. It is also vital to mention up front that this study attempts to contribute to the discussion on reconciliation which seeks to remove injustice at the root. It contributes to a discussion of the weeds of alienation and fragmentation, and it stands in contrast to the frequent use of reconciliation merely to reach some political accommodation and not to address the critical questions of justice, equality and dignity (Boesak & DeYoung 2012). It is also befitting to point out that two central themes – political pietism and Christian quietism – form the backdrop to this study (Boesak & DeYoung 2012). The study contends that reconciliation in South Africa was used merely to reach some political accommodation and did not address the three critical questions of justice, equality and dignity. These arrangements perpetually favour the rich and powerful but deprive the powerless of justice and dignity. Hitherto, this reconciliation is presented as if it does respond to the need for genuine reconciliation and employs a language that sounds like the truth, but it is in fact deceitful – and this we call political pietism. It is also vital to mention that “reconciliation” is a Christian concept, and as such, Christians’ measure matters of reconciliation with the yardstick of the gospel and therefore should know better. However, as it will be shown in this study, when Christians in South Africa discovered that the TRC was not really promoting reconciliation, they became complicit in a deceitful reconciliation. This may have been for reasons of self-protection, fear or a desire for acceptance by the powers that govern the world. Whichever way one looks at it, they tried to seek to accommodate the situation, to justify it and to refuse to run the risk of challenge and prophetic truth telling. As a result, they denied the demands of the gospel and refused solidarity with the powerless and oppressed. This is called Christian quietism (Boesak & DeYoung 2012:1). This study in its attempt to critique the South Africa TRC from a theological ethical perspective will point out that, the TRC which was obviously the product of the negotiated settlement needs to be understood against the background of the global struggle of particularly Third-World countries which were resisting authoritarian regimes put in place by the West for the benefit of the West. As such, this study will point out how the West, in their attempt to keep a grip on the Third-World countries – particularly on their resources – had to recommend and promote their notion of democracy. Democracy became the only option for Third-World countries as a result of the fall of the Soviet Union. It must, however, be mentioned that the problem is not democracy but the manifestation thereof under capitalism. This is because the notion of democracy was recommended to Third-World countries when capitalism was becoming global. As such, this presented some contradictions because democracy emphasizes joint interests, equality and common loyalties whilst capitalism is based on self-seeking inequality and conflicting individual and group interest (Terriblanche 2002). This means that a transition to democracy (especially constitutional democracy) means that the former oppressor or dispossessor will hold on to economic power. As such, the sudden interest of both the NP and the corporate sector in South Africa to a transition to democracy needs to be understood against this background. This study will argue and demonstrate how the ANC was outsmarted during the negotiations in that, at the formal negotiations, the ANC won political power whilst the NP/corporate sector in South Africa won economic power. This is mentioned to here to point out that both the elite compromise reached at the formal and informal negotiations and the influence of the Latin-American truth commissions led to the inability or unwillingness of the TRC to uncover the truth about systemic exploitation. As such, this study will argue and demonstrate that, on the one hand, reconciliation was not added to the truth commission for the purpose of confronting the country with the demands of the gospel and, on the other hand, the TRC was set up (from its inception) for failure. / Philosophy, Practical and Systematic Theology / D. Th. (Theological Ethics)