This analysis reveals the divergent outcomes of truth commissions in Ethiopia and Sierra Leone, indicating that local attitudes toward justice play a crucial role.
Truth commissions serve as a pivotal transitional justice mechanism in post-conflict societies, aiming to foster healing and social trust by uncovering historical truths. This article examines the divergent outcomes of truth commissions in Sierra Leone and Ethiopia, two African nations with similar post-conflict contexts but markedly different results. While Sierra Leone’s truth commission is celebrated as a success, Ethiopia’s effort was abandoned. Through qualitative research, including interviews and comparative analysis using the Most Different Systems Design, this study identifies the primary reason for Ethiopia’s failure: the population’s rejection of amnesty for perpetrators in favour of retributive justice. The findings highlight the influence of local attitudes toward justice, the role of international support, and the legacy of ethnic power dynamics. Ultimately, the article underscores that the effectiveness of truth commissions depends not only on structural mandates but also on aligning justice mechanisms with the collective will of the affected society.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
C. Neville Rolfe (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: