Open AccessREMORSE AND REPENTANCE STRIPPED OF ITS VALIDITY. AMNESTY GRANTED BY THE TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION COMMISSION OF SOUTH AFRICA
Author(s) -
Eugene Baron
Publication year - 2015
Publication title -
studia historiae ecclesiasticae
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 2412-4265
pISSN - 1017-0499
DOI - 10.25159/2412-4265/110
Subject(s) - amnesty , remorse , repentance , forgiveness , wrongdoing , political science , commission , law , theology , psychology , politics , social psychology , philosophy
During the South African amnesty process perpetrators would get amnesty if they could prove that there was a political motive for committing their actions, their deeds were proportionate, that they happened during and between the years 1960 and 1994, and if they gave full disclosure. The purpose of this article is to demonstrate the following: the fact that remorse and repentance were not required in order for perpetrators to get amnesty, left the reconciliation process in a vacuum. The inclusion of remorse and repentance as a requirement for amnesty, would have established a true (not a cheap) forgiveness and a ‘thick’ reconciliation process between perpetrators and victims. Remorse and repentance would have requested an admission and regret of wrongdoing, followed by an act of repentance underwritten by acts of contrition.