Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Interest in cross-national comparison of transitional justice mechanisms has grown recently, as has the study of truth commissions specifically. However, like in many emerging areas of research, progress has been hampered by a lack of consensus as to what constitutes the universe of cases. In addition, no comprehensive database exists which carefully examines and measure the various important and intriguing aspects of truth commissions. To address these problems, this paper introduces the most comprehensive truth commission database we know to be in existence. First, we describe the process of collecting information on truth commission cases and outline our logic in determining what cases to include in the database. Then, we briefly discuss the attributes of truth commission cases included in the database and explain our reasoning regarding their inclusion. In this part, we will also examine a couple of lesser known truth commission cases – e.g. South Korea, Tajikistan, and Fiji. Finally, we discuss the various important aspects of a truth commission that would be relevant to future research – i.e. duration of a commission, temporal and geographic mandate, privileges and limitation, personnel composition and budget of a commission, final reports, and policy recommendations – and introduce a complete database.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Six years ago the United States government charged a ten member independent, bipartisan commission to study the 9/11 attacks. In August 2004, the 9/11 Commission released its report to much media buzz and fanfare. However, when all ten commissioners reconvened in late 2005 to issue a “report card” on progress made on the recommendations of the commission, they issued five F’s, twelve D’s, nine C’s, and one A-minus. This paper therefore looks at independent commissions in the United States and the role they play as “flak-catchers” – stopgaps for uncertain or unfavorable judgments cast onto the political system. Because they work as effective mechanisms of evasion, giving the appearance of government action while at the same time dodging responsibility, government bodies have frequently and readily turned to independent commissions. This paper looks at the ways in which the 9/11 Commission acted as a flak-catcher. It uses historical and comparative case-study analysis to portray how the 9/11 Commission operated, organizationally and symbolically, in a manner similar to other American independent commissions, and thus argues that we should expect similar outcomes whenever an independent commission is appointed.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: With an emphasis on the political aspect of competition policy, the study examines the relational status of the competition authority in the policy network, particularly referring to the case of the Fair Trade Commission of Japan (JFTC). The concept of legitimacy is employed as a key factor in the analysis. JFTC is neither court-based nor ministry-based, formally enjoying strong quasi-judicial power and much independence from other ministries. On the other hand, JFTC has far less legalized legitimacy than its otherwise similar counterpart in Korea, and thus needs more to earn substantial legitimacy to secure its status in the policy network. The reform case in the mid-1970s demonstrated the benefit of the non-ministry framework, but it also shows how difficult it is for JFTC to earn substantial legitimacy. The reform case in the mid-1990s reveals further weaknesses of the current form of governance, which seem to have made it less effective for JFTC to be legitimatized as a powerful entity.

Supporting Publications:
Supporting Document

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: There is global consensus that the fall of the Berlin Wall and the dissolution of the Soviet Union marked the end of the cold war. However, the mood with which the end of the cold war was received varied around the world. One response was the attitude of triumphalism commonly identified with Francis Fukuyama's version of the 'end of history'. Triumphalists experience the end of the cold war as the victory of the 'good' over the 'evil' empire. This mood is similar to what the allied forces experienced in the Nuremberg and Tokyo trials after the end of World War II. Both historical moments show how at the end of a war triumphalists exalt their virtues and condemn the principles and actions of the enemy. From a critical point of view, the end of the cold war is a moment for self-criticism, introspection, an opportunity to face our fears and change our mentalities and views about the other. A critical attitude calls for structural reform through introspection and dialogue with the 'other'. This critical attitude inspired the creation of truth commissions in Argentina (1983), Chile (1990), El Salvador (1992), South Africa (1995), Guatemala (1997), and Peru (2001). In opposition to the arrogant attitudes of triumphalists, truth commissions are institutional initiatives directed at investigating past human rights violations with a focus on restoring dignity to victims. What follows discusses the potential and limitations of truth commissions in questioning the arrogance of US power. Do truth commissions have the potential to challenge U.S. hegemony? Or, on the contrary, are truth commissions another instrument of U.S. human rights imperialism? Is a truth commission for the U.S. possible? Sorting out these questions demands a discussion of the relationship between truth, human rights, and U.S. hegemony. The analysis approaches this task in five ways. First, it examines critically the function of truth commissions in relation to truth and hegemony. An important limitation of truth commissions overlooked by supporters and critics is the nationalist framework within which they operate. The history truth commissions investigate is the national history of human rights violations committed by Argentines against Argentines, Chileans against Chileans, and so forth. The reconciliation sought by truth commissions is national reconciliation. National reconciliation is closing the historical gap that has divided the nation into the warring factions of a civil (domestic, internal) war. However, truth commissions' nationalist framework reinforces post-cold war triumphalism. By framing human rights violations within the boundaries of the nation, truth commissions end up silencing the responsibility of the United States or other great powers. Second, the chapter analyzes the functions of insincere apologies from such hegemonic states as the US as variation of the triumphalist approach. And third, the paper argues why investigating the direct participation of the United States could help national reconciliation by helping the parties involved to realize that the perceptions of themselves and the other, as well their mutual behavior, was to certain degree conditioned by a third party. Theoretically, understanding that violence is related to global strategic interests, as well as poverty and that poverty is also related to global inequalities could help reconciliation between Peruvians. All the above are reasons why investigating U.S. involvement in human rights violations could help the national reconciliation between Peruvians sought by Peru's TRC. The reconciliation policy advanced by Peru's TRC and other similar experiences is predicated on the assumption that such policy will establish the basis of a peaceful society. The theory is that the distancing or alienation between Peruvians is the root of violence; thus, reconciliation is the solution. Is such theory applicable to international relations, that is, to relations between Peruvians and Americans? Addressing this set of questions is the fourth line of inquiry developed in this chapter. By overlooking the direct involvement of the U.S., truth commissions overlook the reconciliation and democracy building in a global context. A strong case could be made that the violence that causes human rights violations around the world could be significantly reduced if the United States engages in multiple processes of international reconciliation. The chapter concludes by taking on the argument for not investigating the direct involvement of the United States: this case is based on the realities of power. The fact that only two truth commission reports mentioned the direct participation of the United States is in itself revealing. One could even speculate whether a truth commission would have been possible if it explicitly announced that one of its purposes was to investigate the direct involvement of U.S. government, corporations, and individuals in human rights violations. Similar to what is said about human rights violations themselves, the problem is not that the truth about direct U.S. involvement is unknown. U.S. direct involvement has been well documented and analyzed in a several studies. The problem is not truth itself, but the extent of public awareness and the political function that such truth could have in changing power relations. In other words, truth commissions are limited by existing power relations, but, at the same time, have the potential of challenging power relations.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: The East Timorese are emerging from a turbulent history comprising 450 years of Portuguese rule followed by civil war, invasion and 25 years of Indonesian occupation characterised by human rights abuses, massacres and violence such as that which followed the independence referendum in 1999. The population is divided politically between those who supported autonomy within Indonesia and those who supported independence. In the aftermath of the militia violence of 1999, there is a division between those who led the militia, those who followed, their families, and those who were targets of the militia violence. Reconciliation is needed between these different sectors of the East Timorese population, as well as between East and West Timorese, East Timorese and Indonesians more generally, and between East Timorese and those members of the international community such as Australia which supported the Indonesian annexation of East Timor and failed to prevent the subsequent violence and human right abuses. This paper will focus specifically on assessing the contribution of the Commission for Reception, Truth and Reconciliation towards achieving reconciliation and justice for the East Timorese. The Commission, which is due to release its final report in October 2004, had three main purposes: to investigate human rights violations during the period between 25 April 1974 until 25 October 1999 (truth seeking); to assist in the reception and reintegration of those who committed lesser crimes (community reconciliation); and to report its findings and make policy recommendations to the East Timorese government for further action on reconciliation and the promotion of human rights. Based on interviews conducted with East Timorese in July 2004, this paper will comment on the effectiveness of the Commission and how its operations and impact have been affected by the lack of amnesty and concurrent operation of criminal accountability mechanisms in both Indonesia and East Timor.