Source: (2014) Canadian Journal of Law and Society. 29:199-217.
How and why did Canada end up with a Truth and Reconciliation Commission
(TRC) rather than a judicially based public inquiry in response to Indian
Residential Schools? Using a constructivist-interpretivist approach with interview
research with twenty-three key actors, this article traces the path toward
the Indian Residential Schools Settlement Agreement. It examines in particular
the shift from calls for public inquiry to truth and reconciliation. In sourcing the
idea of a TRC, it gauges the balance between transnational influences and homegrown
elements and suggests that two different approaches to a truth commission
were merged during the settlement negotiations. One approach, associated with
the Assembly of First Nations, focuses on accountability and public record, and
the other, associated with survivor and Protestant organizations, is more grassroots
and community-focused. This article looks at hybridity and gaps in the
TRC’s design, suggesting that the two visions of a truth commission continue to
exist in tension.(author’s abstract)
Your donation helps Prison Fellowship International repair the harm caused by crime by emphasizing accountability, forgiveness, and making amends for prisoners and those affected by their actions. When victims, offenders, and community members meet to decide how to do that, the results are transformational.
Donate Now