Dealing with the past in Northern Ireland: Resources

This is an ever-growing list of resources I have compiled on dealing with the past in Northern Ireland.  First published 29 June 2012. My last update, following the release of the most recent government policy consultation, was reposted and updated on 18 November 2025.

Key Policy Documents & Resources

Sequential list of key policy documents & resources

• 
  The Northern Ireland Troubles Bill 2024-26 was introduced in the House of Commons on 14 October 2025. The second reading for the bill took place on 18 November 2025. More [External]
• CAJ Briefing Document on UK-Ireland Joint Framework. Download [External]
• The Legacy of the Troubles: A Joint Framework, 19 September 2025. Download [External]
• On 21 January 2026, MPs voted 373 to 106 to remove the contentious conditional immunity clause from the Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023, following a court ruling that the immunity provisions violated human rights and the Windsor Framework.
• The Model Bill Team’s Response to the NIO Proposals, May 2022. Download [External]
• In May 2022, the UK government put forward the Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Bill. Download [External]
• The Model Bill Team’s Response to the NIO Proposals, September 2021. Download
• Addressing the Legacy of Northern Ireland’s Past, July 2021, Command Paper CP 498. Download
• Veterans of the Northern Ireland Troubles protected (newspaper article on British Government "proposals" as no official sources exist at this point) (6 May 2021). Read [External]
• Addressing the Legacy of Northern Ireland's past Northern Ireland Affairs Committee consultation (Interim Report) and Evidence (26 October 2020). Download [External]
• Addressing the Legacy of Northern Ireland's past Northern Ireland Affairs Committee consultation: The UK Government's New Proposals (open to 1 June 2020). Download [External]
  
• Ministerial Statement: Addressing Northern Ireland Legacy Issues: Written statement - HCWS168 (18 March 2020). Download [External]
  
• Analysis of the Stormont House Agreement (SHA) consultation responses (July 2019). Download [External]
  
• Consultation: Addressing the Legacy of Northern Ireland's Past (closed 10 September 2018). Download
• Draft Northern Ireland (Stormont House Agreement) Bill (10 March 2016). Download [External]
• Healing Through Remembering: Guide to the Stormont House Agreement (SHA) (2016). Download [External]
• Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion of truth, justice, reparation and guarantees of non-recurrence on his mission to Northern Ireland: Comments by the State (16 Nov 2016). Download
• Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion of truth, justice, reparation and guarantees of non-recurrence, on his mission to the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (March 2016). Download
• 'Model Bill Team' based at Queen's University Belfast and Committee on the Administration of Justice. Stormont House Agreement – Model Implementation Bill and Explanatory Notes (17 September 2015). Download [External]
• Stormont House Agreement (23 December 2014). Download
• Proposed Agreement (31 December 2013). An agreement among the parties of the Northern Ireland Executive on Parades, Select Commemorations, and Related Protests; Flags and Emblems; and Contending with the Past (also known as Haas O'Sullivan Proposals). Download [External]
• House of Commons Northern Ireland Affairs Committee (December 2009). The Report of the Consultative Group on the Past in Northern Ireland. Response. Download [External]
• Report of the Consultative Group of the Past (January 2009). Download [External]
  
• House of Commons. Northern Ireland Affairs Committee. (2008). Session 2007-08, evidence from Brandon Hamber, Cate Turner, Alan McBride and Sandra Peake. Download
• Healing Through Remembering (2006). Making Peace with the Past: Options for truth recovery regarding the conflict in and about Northern Ireland. Download
  
• House of Commons. Northern Ireland Affairs Committee (October 2005). Ways of Dealing with Northern Ireland's Past: Government Response to the Committee's Tenth Report of Session 2004-05. Download
• House of Commons Northern Ireland Affairs Committee  Ways of Dealing with Northern Ireland's Past: Interim Report - Victims and Survivors  Tenth Report of Session 2004–05. Download
  
• Healing Through Remembering Consultation on Dealing with the Past (2002). Download
  
• "We Will Remember Them": Report of the Victims Commissioner (April 1998). Download [External]
  

Articles by Brandon Hamber and Colleagues

• Hamber, B. (2021, 15 July). Amnesty a line in the sand? It’s not even close. Belfast Telegraph.
• Hamber, B. (2020, 12 December). Moment of Truth…Victims of Northern Ireland’s Troubled Past Can’t Wait Forever. Belfast Telegraph.
• O'Neill, S. & Hamber, B. (2020). Response on Mental Health to Dealing with the Past Consultation. Northern Ireland Affairs Committee Consultation on "Addressing the Legacy of Northern Ireland's past: The UK Government's New Proposals". INCORE, University of Ulster. Submitted online 31 May 2020.
• O'Neill, S. & Hamber, B. (2018). The need for a victim and survivor centred, trauma-informed approach: A Response to the Addressing the Legacy of Northern Ireland's Past Consultation. INCORE, University of Ulster. Submitted online 5 October 2018.
• Hamber, B. and Kelly, G. (2018). Response on Reconciliation to the Consultation Paper: Addressing the Legacy of Northern Ireland's Past. INCORE, University of Ulster. Submitted online 5 October 2018. 
• Hamber, B., & Kelly, G. (2018). Reconciliation: A Northern Ireland Case Study. In Kofi Annan Foundation and Interpeace (Eds), Challenging the Conventional: Can Post-Violence Reconciliation Succeed? (pp. 98-148). New York/Geneva: Kofi Annan Foundation & Interpeace.
• Brandon Hamber, 2008, Submission to the Consultative Group on the Past in Northern Ireland. (Submission, January). Belfast, Northern Ireland.
• Brandon Hamber, 2006, Getting to the Truth Through Talking, Daily Ireland, 14 March 2006.
• Brandon Hamber, 2004, Time to stop permissible lies about the past, Polity, 26 November.
• Brandon Hamber, 2004, Submission to the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee. Reconciliation: Ways of dealing with Northern Ireland's Past (Submission, December). London: Northern Ireland Affairs Committee.
• Brandon Hamber, 2003, A Truth Commission for Northern Ireland, Blog Post, 11 June 2003
• Hamber, B. (2002). Rights and Reasons: Challenges for Truth Recovery in South Africa and Northern Ireland. [Journal Article]. Fordham International Law Journal, 26(4), 1074-1094.
• Hamber, B. (Ed.). (1998). Past Imperfect: Dealing with the Past in Northern Ireland and Societies in Transition. Derry/Londonderry: University of Ulster, INCORE.

Websites

• Healing Through Remembering
• Transitional Justice Institute
• CAIN
• CAIN (Section on Victims and Commemoration)
• Bloody Sunday Inquiry
• Commission for Victims and Survivors
  
• Committee for the Administration of Justice
• Consultative Group on the Past
• Historical Inquiries Team
• Pat Finucane Centre

Publications

List of key academic papers on Northern Ireland, dealing with the past and transitional justice, review the annotated list (56 references).

Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) BillNorthern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) BillNorthern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) BillDownloadDownloadDownload More

Northern Ireland (failed?) Agreement of 31 December 2013

Over the second half of 2013, US diplomat Richard Haass (Chair) and Meghan O'Sullivan (Vice Chair) were ask to independently chair an all party panel to address outstanding contentious issues in the Northern Ireland peace process. They were asked to achieve consensus recommendations whenever possible on the specific issues of parades and protests; flags, symbols and emblems, and related matters; and the past (full mandate).

The Panel’s work took nearly six months, including 33 days of meetings and negotiations, and involved some 100 meetings with 500 people and 600 submissions from interested groups and the public.  A document, said to be the 7th draft, was produced on 31 December 2013, however, was not ratified by all parties. There have however been several calls to move forward on the parts of the document where there is consensus. 

Agreement Document of 31 December 2013

• Final and full text  (download)
• Summary Fact Sheet (download)

Haass and O'Sullivan 

• Statement by Haass and O'Sullivan (8 January 2014, download)
• Haass and O'Sullivan Op-Ed in Belfast Telegraph (27 December 2013, link)

Selection of Office Party Responses (Press Releases)

• SDLP: UUP a ‘Pontius Pilate moment – 7 Jan 2014
• Sinn Fein: Unionist leaders need to do just that - 7 Jan 2014
• UUP: Executive statement on Haass - 6 Jan 2013
• Sinn Fein: Unionist Leaders Must Decide - 3 Jan 2014
• UUP: Executive to meet - 2 Jan 2014
• Sinn Fein: Adams welcomes publication - 31 Dec 2013
• Alliance: This isn’t the comprehensive agreement - 31 Dec 2013
• DUP: "We must not lose the momentum" - 31 Dec 2013

Dealing with the Past in Northern Ireland

Today I attended a Transitional Justice Institute workshop looking at dealing with the past in Northern Ireland. Main question asked: where to now. In short, the key point emerging was that the dealing with the past question has not gone away, and there is a need to have some organised way of addressing it. However, a lack of leadership and commitment locally and by the two governments stymies things moving forward. While this goes on victims continue to be frustrated by the plethora of mechanisms out there, none of which are meeting their needs in entirety, in fact making many feel they have to repeat themselves in multiple forums. There is also a growing resentment by some victims of their cases being called "historical" or "legacy issue" implying the concerns about truth and justice are not contemporary. Denis Bradley spoke at the event, and although does not see much progress, said he felt that the Consultative Group on the Past report has not been entirely binned and may return, as it is the only viable option on the table.

Also see my collection of resources and website on dealing with the past in Northern Ireland.

Launch of the Consultative Group on the Past Report

Today the Consultative Group on the Past launched its report, here is the speech at the launch. The launch itself was marked by controversy. I was present and it was all very calm until various victims groups started an argument about the recommendation for a "recognition payment" to all the victims of the conflict. The scenes were actually fairly distressing and the launch was delayed for some time (see BBC footage). The whole affair has left the future of the report in doubt. Although the recommendation payment is only one of 30, no doubt controversy will reign.

Download the full report here.

Healing Through Remembering, which I Chair, released a press statement before the launch. It is below.

HTR Response to Report of the Consultative Group on the Past launch

27/01/2009 

The report builds on the work of Healing Through Remembering and supports the view, long held by Healing Through Remembering, that there is need for society to address the issues relating to the conflict in and about Northern Ireland in order to build a more peaceful future.

Kate Turner, Director of Healing Through Remembering says “What we need is measured and reasonable debate on these issues. The experience of HTR is that honest inclusive debate in an appropriate environment can bring agreement on reconciliation, truth and justice by those who hold opposing views and opinions.”

Brandon Hamber, chair of Healing Through Remembering says “The report offers an opportunity to genuinely engage with the difficult issue of the past. Few places have consulted so widely in their deliberations on such issues. We should not squander opportunities for dialogue on these thorny issues on the back of political posturing. Let’s debate the recommendations and try and find a measured way of taking this issue forward.”

Healing Through Remembering continues to enable deeper discussions, forums and events on how best to deal with the conflict in and about Northern Ireland to build a better future.

Truth recovery: In principle where do you stand?

Just News: CAJ Newsletter, 3 January 2008

The question of how Northern Ireland deals with its past has become commonplace. This mainstreaming marks a major shift. A few years ago the question itself was off limits. That said, exactly how the society should deal with its past remains unclear. Some still favour “drawing a line” under it.

Last year the Consultative Panel on the Past was set up by the British government to provide a way forward on the dealing with the past. Questions remain whether it is the best vehicle to answer these questions, nonetheless work has begun with most adopting a "wait and see" attitude.

Recently the Panel burst into public view with controversies about whether amnesty should be granted and if the conflicts of the past should be labelled a ‘war’ or not. Although this is a strange place for the discussion to start, it belies wider questions. In terms of amnesty, what compromises will be needed to deal with the past? And for the "war" question, how should the extent of the conflict be acknowledged and whose actions were legitimate?

This is not to say that nothing has been happening on the dealing with the past front. There have been many inquiries; cases before the European Court of Human Rights; and there is the Historical Enquiries Team. At the civil society level, the Healing Through Remembering initiative has made a significant contribution. The project, which has members from all different political perspectives, has presented options for truth recovery, hosted a Day of Reflection, considered methods such as storytelling and provided ideas for a living memorial museum.

Photo by Clay Banks / Unsplash

So Northern Ireland is, at least to a degree, engaged in a process of dealing with the past. The bigger question is whether more is needed and how structured this should be. But this question in itself creates apprehension. Some fear any method of dealing with the past will be a republican Trojan Horse to put the British state in the dock. Others fear no one will “come clean” especially paramilitaries and the two governments. There are also those that fear truth is damaging and will destroy the peace process. The question of whether justice will be done for past violations also remains critical, especially for some victims. Many worry that any method for dealing with the past that is not judicial will extinguish hopes of justice.

Working with Healing Through Remembering over the years, and through my own research, I have heard all these arguments (and others) on countless occasions. What is interesting about them from the international perspective is that they are also the arguments used by other countries when arguing for a structured approach to dealing with the past, especially a truth commission.

I have heard people from Liberia to Peru argue for a truth commission because they fear that if nothing is done one version of the past will dominate history. If all accounts of the past are put on the table, all will come out tarnished, even those who think everything they did was correct. Similarly, if no one wants to “come clean” then an independent body with powers such as search, subpoena and seizure should be put in place to investigate the past. Those who do not cooperate, including the state, should be labelled as such. Some victims also voice the need for alternative mechanisms to courts because courts often fail to deliver justice, especially en masse. And finally, contrary to the view that the truth is damaging, many argue that if the truth about the past does not come out, it will pollute the future.

So where does this leave the larger questions about the past in Northern Ireland? 

For me it highlights how people are better at articulating why the past should be avoided rather that why it should be confronted. What is at the heart of this resistance?

All that can be surmised is that no one is clear whether their view of history and their actions will be vindicated. To this end, one critical question needs to be answered: is truth about past violations a right? Do we think knowing about the past from all sides, including paramilitaries, the two governments, as well as institutions that shaped the past from churches to the media, is important in principle? If so, then surely the next step is not to list all the reasons this will never be possible, but rather to ask how society can ensure truth can be delivered in a way that has political and social backing, independence and integrity.

Reference: Hamber, B. (2008). Truth recovery: In principle where do you stand? Just News: CAJ Newsletter, January, 3.

Making Peace with the Past: Options for truth recovery in and about Northern Ireland

Brandon Hamber & Kieran McEvoy set out the key options

Despite recent developments in the peace process and the restoration of the Assembly there is little doubt that the question of how Northern Ireland will deal with its past will remain a burning issue for some years to come. Core to this debate will be the issue of truth recovery and specifically the controversial question whether past atrocities should be brushed under the carpet of history or tackled head on.

The organisation Healing Through Remembering has attempted to deal with this debate proactively and recently launched a discussion document outlining options for truth recovery. The report was drawn up by the organisation's Truth Recovery and Acknowledgement sub group. This unique and diverse group includes former Loyalist and Republican combatants, a former British Army officer, members of the PSNI, victims of the conflict, people from church and civil society backgrounds and a range of others. 

Although the recovery sub group members have robust and diverse views, all shared a common sense of frustration at the superficiality of much of the debate on dealing with the past over the last few years. The sub group therefore sought to provide sufficient information to offer this debate, and specifically the discussions on the issue of truth recovery, some structure and depth, allowing people to make up their own minds about what the best course of action might be.

The report details five options for truth recovery regarding the conflict in and about Northern Ireland. The options are neither exhaustive nor indeed mutually exclusive. The options are presented with the aim of concretising discussions that have often moved little beyond the abstract. They can be summarised as follows:

Option 1: Drawing a Line Under the Past

The "drawing a line under the past" or the "do nothing else" option would mean the ongoing patchwork of processes would continue with no additional formal steps towards a process of truth recovery. This is an articulation of the position of those who argue either that no further process of truth recovery is necessary, that truth recovery would 'open old wounds' for victims and others, or that truth recovery could destabilise the fragile political process or indeed that it might serve to criminalise those who were involved in acts of political violence.

Drawing a line under the past... would mean the ongoing patchwork of processes would continue with no additional formal steps towards a process of truth recovery

Option 2: Internal Organisational Investigations

In this option, organisations previously involved in acts of violence would take primary responsibility for assisting in providing victims and families with the truth. The organisations would become involved voluntarily, to meet victims' requests for information, and would build on their experience in conducting internal investigations. This option could provide ex-combatants and the security forces with the opportunity to make a commitment to social and individual healing and reconciliation.

Option 3: Community-based "Bottom-up" Truth Recovery

This option would involve local people in collecting and documenting local truth. It would take advantage of this skills base, and would itself be a mechanism for communal healing and reconciliation. This model could consider structural issues, and combine with storytelling and local history as well as "top-down" truth recovery. It could provide an alternative to dominant "macro" narratives by giving voice co victims and marginalised communities, record previously untold stories, and underline the validity of different experiences between and within communities.

Option 4: Truth-recovery Commission

Such a commission would focus on events of the past over a specified period of time. It would explore the causes, context and consequences of violence as well as examine specific events and patterns. Set up by legislation by the Irish and British governments, with independence from both, it would have the power to compel witnesses, grant amnesty, recommend prosecution, order reparations, and present a report with recommendations. It would be a practical and symbolic expression of the willingness of society to deal with its violent past as part of the transition to becoming a more inclusive society.

A truth recovery commission ... would be a practical and symbolic expression of the willingness of society to deal with its violent past as part of the transition to becoming a more inclusive society.

Option 5: A Commission of Historical Clarification

The primary focus of this option is historical (that is upon the causes and consequences of conflict) with less emphasis on either victims or those involved in past acts of violence. The emphasis would be on devising an independent, authoritative, historical narrative about what occurred during the conflict and why, and to encourage a broader sense of collective (rather than individual) responsibility for what happened. An agreed narrative would limit misperceptions and disagreements about what actually happened, and thus help to prevent future cycles of violence based on grudges and manipulation.

Conclusion

The Making Peace with the Past report document from Healing Through Remembering is not designed to offer a definitive view on how or whether Northern Ireland should have some form of a truth-recovery process. Rather, this report is intended  to provide sufficient detail and context to help focus the debate concerning truth recovery in and about Northern Ireland on realistic options for the future.

Reference

Hamber, B. and McEvoy, K. (2007). Making Peace with the Past: Options for Truth Recovery in and about Northern Ireland. Fortnight , Jun- Jul, 453, pp. 9-10

Brandon Hamber is a consultant to Healing Through Remembering. 

Kieran McEvoy is author of the report and a member of the Healing Through Remembering sub group on Truth Recovery and Acknowledgement.

The authors would like to thank Martin Beddeleem for his editorial suggestions.

Views expressed are personal to the authors. Copies are at the HTR Office 028 9023 8844, or download at www.healingthroughremembering.org

Getting to the Truth Through Talking

Conflict-transformation expert Dr Brandon Hamber asks what messages programmes like Facing the Truth convey and what else might need to be done to deal with the past

The recent BBC series Facing the Truth, which brought victims of political violence face to face with perpetrators, has got people talking.The dialogues, facilitated by Archbishop Desmond Tutu, are a stark reminder of the suffering caused by the conflict in and about Northern Ireland. It is sobering to think that the cases featured are a fragment of the thousands of stories that need to be told.

The programmes were a bold move and may have helped individual victims. They provide some hope for the future, along with the work of organisations that have fostered similar dialogues over the years, albeit behind closed doors. But we also have to ask what other messages such programmes convey and what else might need to be done to reckon with the past.

Although the programmes are not a truth commission but a dialogue, the central idea leans heavily on the South African experience. It draws on the idea of publicly airing grievances as a way of addressing the past, as championed by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. There are profound differences, however. The South African commission’s primary focus was on outlining the causes, nature and extent of the conflict through victim and perpetrator testimony. This testimony took place in separate victim and amnesty or perpetrator hearings. Although most amnesty hearings took place publicly, only approximately 2,000 of the 21,000 victims who gave statements to the commission gave testimony in public.

When perpetrators applied for amnesty in exchange for speaking the truth, victims or their lawyers could question perpetrators as to the veracity of their statements but this was not billed as a meeting or as necessarily reconciliatory. The South African commission was not primarily about victims meeting perpetrators and nowhere in its legal mandate does it say it was.

The BBC programmes, presented by veteran Irish reporter Fergal Keane, have now created this myth. Victim-offender meetings did happen on occasion as a result but largely outside the remit of the commission. In addition, such meetings and the commission itself were part of a more extensive political process. This leaves one wondering: Is Northern Ireland trying to walk before it can crawl or are high-profile encounters needed to move the process forward?

Photo by Chris Zhang on Unsplash

Given the stalled peace process, the programmes might get people to re-engage with resolving the conflict. The courage shown by participants can demonstrate what is possible despite the dense fog of political dilly-dallying. However, focusing on the victims can also inadvertently suggest that it is the responsibility of victims, rather than wider society, to reconcile as the first step to change, thus burdening victims with another liability. Some victims could feel pressured to forgive, or perpetrators compelled into expressing remorse they don’t really feel, especially on television.

The programmes’ focus is the stories of those directly affected by or acting in the conflict. There is no context provided or debate about the causes. There was no questioning of the statements given by offenders, thus allowing them to define the truth. Truth commissions traditionally question and try to reach forensic truth. Emotive television of this type also invariably draws one to the plight of the victims. This is important but conflict resolution is not only about sympathising with victims, important as that is. It demands that everyone across society recognises their own capacity for wrongdoing at the same time.

In the project Healing Through Remembering, a five-year-old initiative that brings together over 80 people from different political perspectives each month to wrestle with questions about the past, the issue of considering one’s own role in the past is discussed under the rubric of “reflection”. Reflecting on the past, not merely remembering it, necessitates that we consider not only victims’ suffering but also how we all supported or fuelled the conflict through direct action, our attitudes or our failure to act.

Resolving conflict requires reflection and public debate on levels of complicity and guilt, not only recognition of the hurt caused or confessions from direct actors. This process should be supported by public acknowledgment of hurts inflicted. This leaves no one untouched, and all institutions need to examine their role in the past — among others, paramilitaries, the governments, churches, the judiciary, political parties, the education system and the media.

The view of Healing Through Remembering is that there are no quick fixes and no one is neutral in protracted political conflict. A range of interrelated options for dealing with the past are required, such as a living memorial museum, a day of reflection, a network of commemoration projects, and collective storytelling. For truth recovery, an informed debate is necessary, evidenced by the misperceptions created by the recent programmes. To this end, Healing Through Remembering will shortly be launching five detailed options for truth recovery for public discussion. There is no doubt that the BBC programmes have stimulated debate on dealing with the past. Questions, however, remain as to whether the focus on victims and offenders, as in the first major media intervention on this issue, has not confounded the reconciliation discussion. It certainly has confused many as to what really happened in South Africa. A more complicated, nuanced and reflexive debate about the past is needed, with a healthy and functional political context and, of course, the media have a role in this. But in the long run, this will demand something more subtle than eerie music and darkly lit forums where victims and perpetrators meet in the glare of the camera, no matter how moving or personally transformative such meetings might be. 

Originally published by Brandon Hamber in the Daily Ireland, 14 March 2006

Dr Brandon Hamber is a conflict-transformation expert from South Africa living in Belfast and a consultant to the cross-community project Healing Through Remembering. His views do not necessarily reflect those of all the members of the project. Contact mail@brandonhamber.com. Visit the www.brandonhamber.com for more information

Time to stop permissible lies about the past

Last week I took part in a television talk show filmed in the Crumlin Road Jail. The Victorian jail, built in 1846, is dank, cold and crumbling to the ground. It is one of the bleakest places in Belfast.

In the last few decades it served as a holding centre for prisoners who were to be tried in the courthouse across the street. All political prisoners in Northern Ireland would have passed through there at some point. But on the night of the television broadcast the prison provided a dramatic and historic backdrop to a discussion on how Northern Ireland should deal with its troubled past.

The lead in to the programme focused on South Africa. Much was said of our attempts to deal with the past as images of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission flashed on the screen. I was asked to follow this by reflecting on whether the South African model was appropriate for Northern Ireland.

In a world of sound bites for television I could add little. My obvious starting point was to say that every context is different and a unique solution for Northern Ireland is needed. No matter what approach is taken, society will have to deal with the delicate question of the truth about past atrocities.

Some moves are afoot in this regard. The British Secretary of State visited South Africa recently to draw lessons. He has also announced a consultation process. Various grassroots projects are also exploring the issue. The Northern Ireland Affairs Committee at Westminster is also looking into it. It is fascinating to consider how South Africa is used in these discussions. The country has become symbolic of attempts to deal with the past. Irrespective of the successes and failures of the South African TRC, the country has become a metaphor for attempts to come clean about past violations.

By drawing on the South African experience you immediately signal the importance you are putting on acknowledging past political violations. The South African context has become a “surrogate” for discussion. That is to say people discuss the South African case, all the while making points about their own situation, which they are struggling to address directly.

But are such “surrogate” discussions helpful? Do they help address local issues or divert attention from them?

It is questionable at times whether some of those looking at the South African case are interested in detailed lesson-drawing or merely registering some sort of nominal interest for other purposes.

For example, the South African case has been used as a justification for similar truth commissions when little genuine commitment to dealing with the past is present. Nigeria had a truth commission and publicised widely that they were going the South African route. The government received some international kudos and legitimacy for this, but in the end the government buried the final report and this has meant little political change.

At the same time, the South African experience has been used positively. The Peruvians studied the South African case closely and used it to learn solid lessons for their truth commission. They drew “negative” lessons' taking careful note of the lack of follow-up to reparations in South Africa. They chose to use models from Chile and Argentina on reparations as they were more successful and they put steps in place not to repeat South Africa's mistakes.

Dealing with a legacy of political violence requires more than making the right noises concerning lesson-drawing. It is long-term commitment and an ongoing endeavour.

This year in Chile, those initially protected from justice, by a 1978 amnesty decree, are being prosecuted. The courts no longer apply the amnesty to forced disappearance cases. A new political will to enforce justice is now seemingly evident thirty years after the military coup that overthrew the Allende government in 1973.

In Chile, the previous amnesty laws have effectively been rubbished. Although the 1990 Chilean truth commission might have helped some victims tell their story and uncover some truth, many still want justice decades later. Society is finally obliging.

A truth commission does not draw a line in the sand. It can merely help shape future debate, hopefully more constructively.

Michael Ignatieff feels truth commissions do not find the complete truth but narrow the opportunity for permissible lies about the past. He is of the opinion that truth commissions can provide a frame for public discourse and memory. They create a new public space for an ongoing debate.

Addressing a legacy of political violence is a lengthy task. It is not just about a few minutes of good television. The South African approach of televised victim testimonies has, to some extent, contributed to an almost surreal take on how to deal with past violence. But mass violence is not theatre.

In Northern Ireland, it is time to move away from the stylised view of the past the Crumlin Road Jail television talk show embodied. We need to enquire into the shadowy and bitter reality such a setting actually represents.

The genuine lessons from other contexts must be explored in all their complexity. For South Africans this means we need to tell our story of the transition, warts and all. We all know the election of 1994 was no miracle. It was created through tough negotiation, consensus building and compromise. For Northern Ireland, it is time to get down to the business of genuinely addressing the past. The hard work is just about to begin.

This article by Brandon Hamber was published on Polity and in the Engineering News on 26 November 2004 as part of the column "Look South". Copyright Brandon Hamber.

Northern Ireland talks must address the past

MEDIA RELEASE - TALKS MUST ADDRESS THE PAST

Embargoed until 00.01 September 16th 2004

How we deal with the past must form part of the talks at Leeds Castle if we are serious about achieving long-term settlement.

This call comes from Healing Through Remembering (HTR), a diverse group of individuals who have spent three years developing a series of recommendations for how to come to terms with a conflictual past.

Speaking as the talks are set to begin, HTR’s Chairman Professor Roy McClelland said: “Achieving a political settlement is important and we welcome the start of today’s talks, but for any settlement to succeed we need to remember the past in a way that enables us to heal the wounds in our society. Without this, any long-term political settlement could be easily undermined.”

“There will be no ultimate peace until we have a clearer understanding of our shared past. Dealing with the past is a long-term process and there is certainly no quick solution that can be debated and agreed over four days of talks. This is a long, difficult and complex journey and there is a need for everyone sitting around the table to acknowledge the past in order to go forward”, added Professor McClelland.

By posing the question ‘How should we remember the events connected with the conflict in and about Northern Ireland’ the Healing Through Remembering project received a wide range of submissions from the general public, organisations and individuals. It has used these to develop a series of recommendations on how to move the process forward, which include

* Acknowledgement
* A Storytelling Process
* A Day of Reflection
* Permanent Living Memorial Museum
* A Network of Commemoration and Remembering Projects

A number of working groups are currently developing these recommendations into practical proposals.

“As a first step, we would call on those people representing our society within the talks at Leeds Castle to engage in a spirit of tolerance and respect and to be mindful that a failure to acknowledge the past will undermine any shared future. Everyone has a part to play in dealing with the memories of the past and there needs to be a willingness to take risks if we are to avoid further damage and move into a new future built on a shared acknowledgement of the past”, said Professor McClelland.

“Some will argue that drawing attention to the past will simply slow up the prospect of a political settlement”, added Professor McClelland, “however, we believe that coming to terms with the past is vital for moving forward and for any lasting peace”.

-ENDS-

For further information please contact:
Nicky Petrie, Pagoda PR: 07960 586654/ 028 9092 3468
or
Kate Turner, Healing Through Remembering: 028 9023 8844/07786 263083
E: info@healingthroughremembering.org
W: www.healingthroughremembering.org

Notes to editors:

1. The key task of the Healing Through Remembering Project, formally launched in October 2001, was “to identify and document possible mechanisms and realisable options for healing through remembering for those affected by the conflict in and about Northern Ireland”.

2. Since the publication of Healing Through Remembering’s report the organisation has been engaged in discussions with groups and individuals about the report and the detailed recommendations. Encouraged by the feedback from these meetings Healing Through Remembering is now taking the recommendations further.

3. Copies of the Report are available on line at www.healingthroughremembering.org or by contacting the office, tel 02890238844; fax 02890239944, e-mail: info@healingthroughremembering.org

No single solution for dealing with the past in Northern Ireland

Healing Through Remembering Northern Ireland

MEDIA RELEASE - Sunday 4 July 2004

The first step in any truth recovery process must be acknowledgement. Everyone who has engaged in the conflict – including Governments – should acknowledge responsibility for their actions. Only when all organisations and institutions acknowledge responsibility can Northern Ireland move towards a sustainable peace. This call is made by Professor Roy McClelland, Chairman of Healing Through Remembering, a diverse group of individuals who for three years have been investigating ways of dealing with the past.

Speaking on BBC Radio Ulster’s Sunday Sequence this morning Professor McClelland said: “We are heartened by the growing debate in this area but feel that a lot of work needs to be done and we are adamant that Acknowledgment — particularly by the governments — should be the starting point for any process of Truth recovery”. “Given the current Government initiatives to find a solution for dealing with the past it is important that the opinions of those affected by the conflict are taken into consideration”, continued Professor McClelland.

And as the current debate becomes focussed on story-telling and truth commissions, Healing Though Remembering points to the need for a number of parallel but separate methods for dealing with the past – as outlined in their report of 2002.Healing Through Remembering today said that there is no single treatment for the healing process in Northern Ireland – processes of remembering, reflecting, informing and educating must be sustained for another generation at least. Practical recommendations from Healing Through Remembering include:

* Acknowledgement
* A storytelling process
* Establishing a day of reflection
* Permanent Living Memorial Museum
* A network of commemoration and remembering projects

Professor McClelland explained the current work of the organisation: “Healing Through Remembering is now expanding its membership in order to arrange a number of events in the autumn which will address the recommendations in more detail. These will include conferences and seminars drawing on local and international experiences. The aim of these events will be to draw together the people working on each issue in order to define the most appropriate methods of implementation – including timescale, scope, and who should – or should not – be managing each process.”

Healing Through Remembering feel that these events are the best way to progress the issue of dealing with the past – through considered and informed discussion open to all. Speaking from his experience in South Africa, Brandon Hamber, consultant to the project explained: “Each country needs to create a solution that is appropriate in that place and at that time. What I find so exciting about Healing Through Remembering is that it gives the opportunity to find the resolution to all of the people involved and affected by the conflict, rather than one being imposed from above. In particular the unique aspects in this report are the holistic nature of the package of recommendations and the request for acknowledgement as a first step in the truth recovery process. In my view this approach would be breaking new international ground.”

For more information on the Healing Through Remembering project and to download the full report click here, or phone: +44 (0)28 9073 9601.

Consultation on Northern Ireland Truth Process

That said, in Northern Ireland it now looks like a consultation process is going to start as to how to deal with the past, and the Minister is off to South Africa. A see BBC article on the subject begins: "A visit by the Northern Ireland secretary to South Africa will coincide with the beginning of a consultation process on how best to deal with the province's violent past. Paul Murphy is to meet senior figures in Capetown and Pretoria to hear their views on the country's Truth and Reconciliation process. Victims Minister Angela Smith is also expected to be fully involved in the process which begins at the end of May. The steps to be taken over the next few weeks will be the first in a very long process. Mr Murphy is expected to tell parliament how the government intends to handle the consultation process shortly before he travels to South Africa. That statement is expected in the final week of this month".

So its all going to get interesting now...although I suspect it will drag on for some time.

A truth commission for Northern Ireland continued...

Back to the serious stuff. Today, once again calls were made for a truth commission in Northern Ireland. Desmond Rea from Policing Board noted,"Therefore a commission is the proper way to take into account that hurt, but also to seek to find a way forward that is a more productive way forward than the road that we appear to be embarking".More.... I have been doing several interviews on the matter, and remain convinced that the starting point is acknowledgment from across the board, then a discussion about models as proposed by the Healing Through Remembering Project following their consultation.

Truth in Northern Ireland

BBC Northern Ireland security editor Brian Rowan looks at the question of how best to close the past and give victims their place in the new Northern Ireland. Click here. I have written a short response, mainly to the frantic TV coverage of the issue this week in Northern Ireland, click here.

A truth commission for Northern Ireland?

This week the BBC has been focusing on dealing with the past in Northern Ireland. The most startling thing about this debate has been how issues have been narrowed before genuine discussion has started. Concepts like truth and justice have been bandied about as if they were mutually exclusive and as if they meant the same to everyone.

The South African model has been used as a benchmark for discussion, with little recognition of what it was about. The other twenty or so truth commissions, in societies as diverse as Ghana, Peru, Argentina, Chile and Sierra Leone, have meanwhile been ignored.

Suddenly, out of nowhere, it seems we all should have an opinion on whether there should be a truth commission for Northern Ireland. Ground work already done on these issues has been neglected, and more measured approaches circumvented.

Debate on this issue is vital, and the more the better. But some key points have been lost in the media circus.

First, dealing with decades of conflict is long-term, complex and time-consuming. It cannot be summed up in a few interviews or emails. It will not entail a single approach or model. International lessons suggest it takes decades. We should not look for any quick fixes.

We should not rush into opinions on different methods before we have agreed that remembering, acknowledgement, truth and justice are important issues for victims and society at large. We must interrogate what we mean by these terms and debate our different perspectives.

The past can only be dealt with if all concerned enter the debate in an inclusive way, aimed at entrenching peace. We should not underestimate the importance of getting this right, ensuring that the discussion is aimed at reconciliation and not point-scoring.

If we do not first agree the underlying principles, all discussion will be contorted and subject to political wrangling. This will ultimately result in mechanisms that will continue the conflict by different means, rather than finding ways constructively to resolve it.

The most extensive consultation on this issue to date has been carried out by the Healing Through Remembering Project. This sought to document possible mechanisms and realisable options for how remembering should occur, so that healing could take place for all those affected. This took two years of discussion.

Importantly, this consultation was run by a board reflecting a range of very diverse backgrounds. The project received over 100 written submissions and recorded thousands of hits on its website.

Many submissions endorsed the value of remembering and spoke of the importance of finding ways to move society forward. But others expressed concerns about the potential pitfalls. The idea of remembering also evoked an emotional response, indicative of much hurt and unresolved pain. The project’s recommendations include a focus on truth recovery, but extend well beyond it.

This is the second point: dealing with the past needs to be seen as wider than a truth-recovery process. Any such mechanism should run alongside other initiatives, such as storytelling, a living museum about the conflict, an annual day of reflection and a network of commemoration projects. Many community projects are also part of the picture.

In the same vein, although victims are central in dealing with the past, thorough engagement demands a focus on the entire society. This is vital when considering the issue of responsibility for the hurts suffered.

It was pointed out in several of the submissions that the need to revisit the past was not confined to those who saw themselves as primarily involved in the conflict: politicians, victims and those who carried out violent acts. For any collective remembering to be helpful it needs to engage the entire society and particularly those who saw themselves as ‘uninvolved'. The whole society has a responsibility to deal with the past.

Thirdly, the Healing Through Remembering Project does recommend that a formal truth-recovery process should be given careful consideration, though only as one part of dealing with the past. But it stipulates that an important first step is a process of acknowledgement, by all, of acts of commission and/or omission.

Political parties, the British and Irish states, republican and loyalist paramilitaries and other institutions would all need fully to acknowledge the extent of their particular culpability. In fact, we should all consider what we have done and have not done to prevent loss of life. Sincere acknowledgment is the key foundation for exploring truth recovery in an even-tempered, self-effacing and responsible manner.

Published by Brandon Hamber, 11 June 2003

Brandon Hamber works as an independent consultant to the Healing Through Remembering Project and is a research associate of Democratic Dialogue in Belfast.

Recognition and Reckoning- The way ahead on victims issues

Book Launch
Recognition and Reckoning- The way ahead on victims issues
Democratic Dialogue, Report 15

How to address the needs of the victims of the conflict in and about Northern Ireland remains a question as salient today as when the ‘peace process’ began in the early 1990s. In April 2002, the Office of the First and Deputy First Minister launched a victim strategy, Reshape Rebuild Achieve. This aims to ‘deliver practical help and services’ to victims. Democratic Dialogue convened a round table in December 2002 to evaluate the progress of the strategy. A range of victim groups, statutory and voluntary agencies and experts in the field participated. Recognition and Reckoning consists of contributions from influential policy-makers, practioners and academics made at the round table. It is essential reading for anyone trying to fully understand the complexities of Northern Ireland’s past and dealing with the perplexing long-term issues at its core.At the press launch of Recognition and Reckoning contributors to the report will share their perspectives. Inputs from: Prof Roy McClelland, Chair Healing Through Remembering Project, and Alan McBride and Patricia MacBride, Victim Representatives on the Civic Forum.

Download Report

Date: 3 June 2003 Time: 12 noon Venue:Europa Hotel, Belfast
R.S.V.P Ellen Finlay Tel: 02890220050 Fax: 02890220051 Email: ellen@democracticdialogue.org

Healing Through Remembering? The search for truth and justice

The idea of a truth commission has been suggested before as a way for Northern Ireland to deal with its past and its present. But there are other approaches to dealing with the legacy of conflict and a new project just launched aims to explore these with interested parties across Northern Ireland. BRANDON HAMBER explains.

Although the conflict in and about Northern Ireland has its own peculiar manifestations and is unique in many ways, the challenge facing the society about how it deals with its past is not wholly distinct. Most countries in conflict have had to, at least at some point in time, face up to and deal with the hurts that have taken place. Different contexts obviously allow for this to be dealt with in different ways, including attempts to simply forget the past and move on.

However, whether we like it or not, questions about truth, justice, compensation and more recently of reconciliation are inevitable in any society moving toward peace. Northern Ireland is probably no exception. The problem, though, for societies coming out of conflict, especially where a negotiation has taken place, is that the solution to dealing with these issues is not clear-cut and no perfect model exists.

For this reason, the Healing Through Remembering Project was launched in early October this year with the intention of exploring various models for dealing with the past in Northern Ireland. The Project seeks to identify and document possible mechanisms and realisable options for how remembering should occur so that healing can take place for all people affected by the conflict in and about Northern Ireland. Building on previous local and international initiatives, the Project will undertake a range of consultations with organisations, communities, politicians and individuals on ways of dealing with the past and in so doing attempt to highlight some of the models and options that may work for Northern Ireland.

Prosecution, with the most well known case being that of the Nuremberg Trials, is in some senses the most straightforward option to consider — but such an option is based on a scenario of clear winners and losers. Justice in the formal sense of the word can only be followed through the courts where the weight of complex compromises between the victors and vanquished, as often typified in a negotiated solution to a conflict, does not exist. Moves toward setting up the International Criminal Court are intended to reinvigorate this clear-cut form of justice for those charged with war crimes and genocide. This attempt is aimed to stabilise some form of international justice for crimes that are abhorrent the world over and should stand outside of national borders and norms. However, domestic situations, and especially negotiated peace deals, often pose a range of interesting dilemmas when considering the prosecution option.

Photo by Markus Winkler / Unsplash

In South Africa, it is argued that amnesty — for better of for worse — was an integral part of the peace settlement. This made justice through the courts — as the only means for dealing with political crimes committed in the past — almost impossible. It was possible, though, to demand truth from all those who committed political violence, irrespective of their political affiliation, in exchange for amnesty.

This was, in part, made possible by the power-balance at the time of the changes in 1994. The ANC had enough power to put a condition on amnesty, whilst the apartheid-regime had sufficient power to ensure that some form of amnesty would be granted. The result was a truth commission process in South Africa that attempted to paint as complete a picture as possible of the causes, nature and extent of the conflict through the testimony of so-called victims and perpetrators alike. It was hoped that exposing the truth about the past would contribute to it never happening again and opening the window for reconciliation. This less than perfect model has, at least in part, worked for South Africa, although many victims still feel dissatisfied with the price of the compromises made.

In Rwanda, the situation (and the conflict) is profoundly different. Initially it was hoped that justice could be carried out through the courts against those accused of atrocities committed in the 1994 genocide. However, it has proved logistically impossible to try all 120,000 suspects who are crammed into jails. So recently it was agreed that the 10,000 or so people accused of master-minding the genocide will remain in the legal system, but the remainder will be invited to confess to traditional hearings in exchange for reduced sentences. It remains to be seen if this model of partial reconciliation will work or not.

These models, and the many more that are out there including Commissions of Inquiry — and not to forget some of the Eastern European models where those affiliated to parties responsible for abuses under communist governments were simply expelled from all forms of public office — all reflect local complexity and sensitivity. They also drive home the point that often in societies in transition, justice and truth can become little more than ideals in the shadow of a fraught past and compromised future.

In Northern Ireland, there has been some discussion of the role of truth, justice, reconciliation and compensation in the society. Few, however, to date have been willing to call for an all-encompassing truth commission in which all parties to the conflict would have to come forward and acknowledge their role in violence. At the same time, endeavours aimed at uncovering the truth are ongoing, with the most notable of these being the Bloody Sunday Inquiry. There is also a range of local story-telling, documentation and commemorative initiatives underway.

There seems to be growing controversy about whether more inquiries are needed in Northern Ireland and, if so, what they should look like and what cases should be selected. Similarly, most commemorative projects seem to focus on one community and an all-encompassing cross-community reconciliation initiative is yet to be mooted.

Of course, there are also those who say the past should simply be forgotten because any more delving into it will destabilise an already fragile peace process. At the same time, there are those who say the full truth needs to come out if a new future is to be built. In their view, there needs be an acknowledgement of wrong-doing from a range of role-players including paramilitaries, the State and even those who turned a blind eye allowing atrocities to continue, whilst doing very little to stop them.

The above opinions are undoubtedly controversial, but — whether we like it or not — questions about how the past should be addressed (or not) will continue to surface. To this end, it may be useful to start to try and debate the various options in a more open and public manner and the Healing Through Remembering Project intends to do just that.

The mission of the Project is simple: it is to go out there and ask people for their opinions on the issue of dealing with the past conflict. More specifically, the Project seeks to elicit opinion on whether remembering the events of the past can contribute to healing or not. The Project asks for practical suggestions on the type of initiatives that people think may be useful. Such initiatives could include, amongst others, the need for more localised story-telling initiatives, more (or less) need for public commissions of inquiry, or a process like a truth commission that could try and develop an official history of the causes and extent of the conflict.

There are no uncomplicated answers or even an easily identifiable option at this point, but the Project feels it is useful to ask the difficult questions if Northern Ireland is ever to hope to normalise. The ultimate purpose of the consultation process is to produce a document outlining a range of options for dealing with the past, remembering and truth recovery.

In terms of eliciting opinion, the consultation process will use four main mechanisms to ensure the depth and range of opinion is adequately tapped.

First, all interested groups and individuals, from any community, are invited to make a submission to the Project. To this end, all are asked to reflect on the question: How should people remember the events connected with the conflict in and about Northern Ireland and in so doing, individually and collectively contribute to healing the wounds of society?

Second, all umbrella bodies and organisations are encouraged to make a submission. The Project offers a limited opportunity for facilitating group meetings to clarify the aims of the project and assist with the submission writing process.

Third, a number of public events and discussions will be held at a variety of locations. These events will look at particular issues in more depth and will be aimed at imparting information to empower the public in making their submissions. Finally, to complement the above, key role players and experts — including, amongst others, community leaders, church leaders, politicians, academics, voluntary organisation leaders, journalists and publicly appointed figures of relevance — will be interviewed.

To conclude, it is clear that opinion out there ranges from those who think the past should simply be left alone, to those who still see prosecutions and an unwavering quest for the truth as the only way forward; notwithstanding those who favour some form of structured reconciliation process. The debate needs be opened up into a public space and all voices heard. This will help the Project to produce a practical menu of options of different approaches that — if implemented — may be useful in promoting healing in Northern Ireland through the process of remembering. It is also the only way to ensure that if, and only if, Northern Ireland chooses to embark on an official remembering process that is appropriate for the context and developed locally, and in so doing prevents some unsuitable model being forced in from the outside.

Published by Brandon Hamber in Scope: Social Affairs Magazine, November 2001.

Brandon Hamber works as an independent consultant to the Healing Through Remembering Project and is a research associate of Democratic Dialogue in Belfast.

Reference

Hamber, B. (2001). Healing through remembering? The search for truth and justice. Scope - Social Affairs Magazine, November. NICVA: Belfast, Northern Ireland.