By Mir Mohammad Ali Talpur
Wednesday, 07 Oct, 2009
TIME and again, well-meaning people have demanded the creation of a Truth and Reconciliation Commission to resolve the problems of alienation and insurgency in Balochistan, believing that this commission would be just as workable here as it was in South Africa in the ’90s.
However, they disregard some critical factors which had impelled and facilitated the TRC’s efforts to heal the wounds of apartheid. Remember that this commission became possible only when the scenario changed completely after the white minority under F.W. de Klerk accepted the principle of majority rule in 1991 and negotiated the end of apartheid with the ANC.
Following transfer of power, the TRC was set up in 1995 and a person of Bishop Desmond Tutu’s eminence undertook the responsibility of conducting the exercise. Black South Africans, in spite of the rancour and hatred fomented by decades of discrimination, indignity and exploitation, accepted the commission because it had the support of Nelson Mandela. The white minority, meanwhile, went along with the idea since it had run out of options.
The principle behind setting up the TRC was that justice could be achieved not through retribution but the restoration of community. Healing communities, it was argued, required truth-telling, forgiveness, acceptance and trust. The TRC was a court-like body and victims of violence or injustice during the apartheid era could come forward and give evidence. Perpetrators too could testify and request amnesty. The TRC covered the period from 1960 to 1994, and in all 19 public hearings were held. The sessions were covered by the media to allow recognition to the victims and give them a sense of closure to their ordeals.
The commission consisted of three committees. The Amnesty Committee offered criminal and civil amnesty to individuals in exchange for full confessions. All political crimes committed after the banning of the ANC were eligible for amnesty but those who did not confess were liable to prosecution as per the testimony of others. The second committee, the Human Rights Violations Committee, investigated cases of amnesty-era political violence and violations of human rights. Then there was the Reparation and Rehabilitation Committee which strove to help victims find medical or psychological treatment. It also aided victims in securing pensions and providing their children with education. It recommended symbolic recognition for victims of extraordinary suffering.
The commission was empowered to grant amnesty to those who committed abuses during the apartheid era, as long as the crimes were politically motivated, proportionate and there was full disclosure by the amnesty-seeker. The TRC heard reports of human rights violations and considered amnesty applications from the apartheid state and the liberation forces to avoid the tag of ‘victor’s justice’. Out of 7,112 petitioners, 5,392 people were refused amnesty. The commission presented its report on Oct 28, 1998 and condemned both sides for committing atrocities.
It should also be remembered that neither the procedure nor its findings enjoyed universal approval. Many on both sides opposed the TRC and some even resisted it. F.W. de Klerk apologised for the suffering caused by apartheid but his predecessor P.W. Botha called it a circus and defied the
commission’s subpoena. Relatives of slain activist Steve Biko termed it a “vehicle for political expediency” which “robbed” them of their right to justice and appealed in South Africa’s highest court against the amnesty granted to his killers.
A 1998 report by South Africa’s Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation revealed that most citizens felt the TRC failed to achieve reconciliation between the two communities. They believed that justice was a prerequisite for reconciliation rather than an alternative to it, and that the TRC had been weighted in favour of the perpetrators of abuse.
South Africa’s TRC had the backing of both communities and the blessings of Nelson Mandela. Yet opinion is split on whether it delivered. Here, where the perpetrators of violence are nowhere near accepting the Baloch as equals and unwilling to relinquish their master status and ideology, it will prove to be an exercise in futility. The establishment in Pakistan has hardly acknowledged the atrocities and excesses which led to the creation of Bangladesh. The principle of accepting mistakes is practically unheard of here. The only reconciliation in vogue here is the NRO type which absolves tyrants, corrupt politicians and bureaucrats of their misdeeds so they can enjoy their pelf and power with impunity.
Acts of depredation, on flimsy pretexts, against the Baloch have been devastating and expecting them to acquiesce to more of the same without resisting is wishful thinking. It is essential that the state, instead of making empty promises of reform and amnesty, shed its self-righteousness and make amends by punishing those responsible for atrocities in Balochistan.
The intransigent attitudes etched in the psyche of the establishment do not leave much room for optimism. Extra-judicial killings and disappearances are rife in Balochistan but there has never been any impartial inquiry leave alone justice for the victims. When even the police are beyond accountability, expecting the military and bureaucratic establishments to publicly acknowledge their transgressions and accept punishment from the TRC is tantamount to living in a fantasy world.
There are too many Steve Biko’s in the annals of Balochistan. Nawab Nauroz Khan and companions, Nawab Akbar Bugti, Nawabzada Balaach Marri and many others who died will neither be forgotten nor their goals forsaken by the Baloch. Moreover, the killings continue unabated. Baloch National Movement chairman Ghulam Mohammad Baloch, Lala Munir Baloch of the BNM and Sher Mohammad Baloch of the Baloch Republican Party were abducted on April 3 this year and their mutilated bodies were later found near Turbat. On Aug 23, Rasool Bakhsh Mengal was abducted and murdered. Such gory incidents are too numerous to list here.
Balochistan has suffered unending political, economic, cultural and physical violence since Partition at the hands of a security-obsessed state, with no recourse to justice. What is needed is a basic change in the relationship between the two adversaries, as occurred in South Africa. Until then, to ask for a Truth and Reconciliation Commission here is like expecting a chick to hatch from a white, egg-shaped stone.
mmatalpur@gmail.com |
