The Paradox of National Reconciliation in Sudanese
By Charles Anteros
Jan 8, 2007 — The current call by the President of Sudan, Omar Hassan el Beshir for a National Reconciliation is one biggest step forward to mend fences of broken hearts, trust and confidence in the institution and the people who govern it. But we can hardly call that a National Reconciliation because we have seen that during the time of Nimeiri and his opponent Sadiq al Mahdi who arranged what they called a National Reconciliation. In 1979, the two leaders signed an eight-point agreement that readmitted the opposition to national life in return for the dissolution of the National Front. The agreement also restored civil liberties, freed political prisoners, reaffirmed Sudan’s nonaligned foreign policy, and promised to reform local government. As a result of the reconciliation, the government released about 1,000 detainees and granted an amnesty to Sadiq al Mahdi. The SSU also admitted former supporters of the National Front to its ranks. Sadiq renounced multiparty politics and urged his followers to work within the regime’s one-party system. That in itself should not make El Beshir think because the NCP has reached numerous peace deals with opponents, it is basically necessary to reconcile in a national fashion all woes.
For nations moving from authoritarian to civilian rule, debate about whether to forget past human-rights abuses and focus on the future has always been controversial. Freed from prison in 1990 after 27 years, Nelson Mandela presided over South Africa’s attempt to put the atrocities of the apartheid era behind it through the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) chaired by Archbishop Desmond Tutu. In, Sierra Leone, the truth commission asked how combatants in the country’s brutal civil war could slice open the wombs of pregnant women and amputate villagers’ limbs in the name of a senseless civil war. Ghana, too, has opted for a National Reconciliation Commission to examine the abuses that took place under the leadership of President Jerry Rawlings. In Sudan, a number of questions should be tabled to answer a lot of questions because the Sudanese people have the right to know truth about their past in order to build the future that will heal their wounds.
National reconciliation takes more than power-sharing between the NCP and its opponents or the use of the words “forgive and forget”. Sudan is yet to emerge from many wars that affected her deeply and is still facing marked brutal dictatorship. To the present human rights violations continue under the NCP’s watch that includes recent tear gassing of Old Saints Cathedral in Khartoum, bombing of civilian sites in Darfur etc. We Sudanese people are deeply divided and many disappeared under the President seeking a national reconciliation. Yet many families are still trying to find out what happened to their loved ones. Therefore, to move on from the past it is important to turn the page of the history by reading history itself. Reading the page of the past allows for understanding the past mistakes in order to avoid them in the future.
For a country like the Sudan, amnesia is the worst option because it is the best way for people to repeat the same mistakes when it is possible to avoid or avert it all together.
Reconciliation must be a process which needs to know who did what and there must be transparency, accountability and truth as essential ingredients in any nation which seeks integrity, the consolidation of democracy and a culture of human rights.
ACCOUNTABILITY
The call for National Reconciliation is to be done for the sake of justice, for stability and the restoration of dignity to victims and must be acted upon through accountability. El Beshir’s reign of undemocratic rule and deadly wars with people of South Sudan, the Blue Nile, Nuba Mountains and Darfur have left thousands of victims and many perpetrators. All past abuses including current of Beshir’s victims and perpetrators must be disclosed in order to heal the wounds of the victims and to send a deterrent message to the perpetrators.
Accountability for past abuses can be made judicially or extra-judicially. It is not possible to prosecute everybody in case of the mass abuses but there is a need to hold those responsible for the past abuses accountable through other mechanisms such as removal from office, retirement or an obligation to apologize publicly for the wrong done. In this regard, to set up an independent commission to deal with it.
Furthermore, accountability will draw the line between the past characterized by injustice and impunity and the New Sudan that has just been born. There must be the willingness to draw a line between a wrong past and the new era. And this line should start by holding accountable all those implicated in the past abuse.
REPARATION
In the restorative justice perspective, reparation is defined as including any form of compensation, ex-gratia payment, restitution, rehabilitation or recognition. Reparations should aim to redress injustices suffered by one or several individuals or communities. In the context of the vast past abuses, reparations can be granted by the court through a judicial process but also by the national authority. To me it is currently a myth because the judicial system is corrupt and is listed among the four most corrupt institutions set up by the NCP. Therefore, the only way for the thousands of victims of past abuses to expect any reparation is through and from the government of National Unity. This reparation will not change the pain suffered in the past, but will help victims to face the future.
In addition, reparations should aim to restore the dignity of the victims and to heal their wounds. Indeed, any reparation to the victims of past abuses will be an acknowledgement of their pain and a condemnation of the abuse they suffered.
The government should grant individuals reparations such as money, rebuilding of houses, free health care, free education to the children of victims, free treatment for the victims of rape or those affected by HIV/AIDS in the wake of the rape. They should also grant symbolic reparations such as building a memorial statue for those victims, or dedicating a memorial day to those victims.
Reparations will not only help victims to turn the page of the past but will also pave the way for the reconciliation process between victims and perpetrators, in particular and between the Sudanese people in general.
TELLING THE TRUTH
Truth bites! However, telling the truth about terrible events is a prerequisite both for the restoration of social order and for the healing of individual victims. When truth is finally recognized, survivors can begin their recovery. Furthermore, the research for truth and a commitment to truth must be undertaken by the entire nation: ordinary people, government, agencies, poets, writers, historians, academics, and whoever cares about the future.
Indeed, many injustices and conflicts that occurred in the past to the present left thousands of victims and divided the Sudanese people as a whole. The past is filled with plenty of mass violations of human rights – atrocities such as mass killing, rape, burning of houses, disappearance, torture or ethnic cleansing and the maintenance of the Para-military groups in South Sudan and Darfur. The road to reconciliation between victims and their perpetrators, or between communities, passes through a truth telling. It is not simple to forget the past by just saying let us reconcile. Indeed, the disclosure of the past will help many families know what happened to their loved ones and finally to end their long mourning.
In addition, truth telling is an opportunity for those who committed any abuse to cleanse themselves of the ghosts of the past by acknowledging their wrong doings, asking for forgiveness and for the victims to forgive them. Thus, Sudanese as a whole can say ‘never again’ for what happened and then turn the page of the past. To do so the establishment of a forum for national reconciliation becomes urgent.
* The author is based in Vancouver, Canada. He can be reached at [email protected]