Sujeito à vontade política? Sociedade civil e mobilização de vítimas em torno de comissões da verdade
No. 97 (2019-01-01)Autor(es)
-
Carles Fernandez TorneUniversitat Autònoma de Barcelona (Spain)
Resumo
Objetivo/contexto: este artigo explora as comissões da verdade como processos que permitem a mobilização social das vítimas e da sociedade civil. Examina a relação entre o regime do governo e as vítimas e a sociedade civil no período anterior ao estabelecimento de uma comissão da verdade e na implementação das recomendações da comissão. O artigo considera que a mobilização permite, depois da pressão que as vítimas e a sociedade civil exercem sobre o regime dominante, relações verticais de prestação de contas. Para respaldar esse argumento, são examinadas as comissões estabelecidas, em 1990, no Nepal e, em 1994, no Sri Lanka. Metodologia: o artigo propõe critérios avaliativos que mostram que um regime governamental presta contas diante da pressão da sociedade civil, no período anterior ao estabelecimento de uma comissão da verdade, e como resultado das recomendações do relatório final. Em seguida, avalia se os dados coletados atendem aos critérios de avaliação propostos. Os dados foram coletados por meio de uma revisão da literatura, incluindo fontes primárias e secundárias, e por meio de entrevistas semiestruturadas realizadas no Nepal e no Sri Lanka entre 2013 e 2015. Conclusões: a evidência coletada sugere que uma relação próxima entre vítimas, sociedade civil e partidos políticos pró-democráticos no período anterior ao estabelecimento de uma comissão da verdade, limita a pressão que essa sociedade civil pode exercer, em termos de implementação de recomendações, quando os partidos políticos pró-democráticos estão no novo governo. Originalidade : a análise das comissões da verdade como processos é relevante para entender melhor as razões subjacentes à falta de implementação de suas recomendações.
Referências
Ackerman, John.2003. “Co-Governance for Accountability: Beyond ‘Exit’ and ‘Voice’.” World Development 32 (3): 447-463. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2003.06.015
Adams, Vincanne.1998. Doctors for Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Alwis, Malathi de.2008. “Motherhood as a Space of Protest: Women’s Political Participation in Contemporary Sri Lanka.” In Women in Peace Politics, edited by PaulaBanerjee. 152-174. New Delhi: Sage Publications.
Bakiner, Onur.2016. Truth Commissions. Memory, Power and Legitimacy. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Bastians, Darisha.2014. “Civil society: The Greatest Bugbear, the Greatest Hope?.” 31 July 2014, Colombo Telegraph. https://www.colombotelegraph.com/index.php/civil-society-the-greatest-bugbear-the-greatest-hope/
Council of ministers. 1991. “The Decision and Opinion of the Interim Government in relation to the Mallik Commission Report.” In The Mallik Commission Report: Action–Why and against whom? Kathmandu, Nepal: International Institute for Human Rights, Environment and Development (INHURED International).
De Mel, Neloufer.2001. Women & The Nation’s Narrative. Gender and Nationalism in Twentieth Century Sri Lanka. Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield.
Fernandez-Torne, Carlos.2015. “Truth Commissions and the Accountability Relations They Generate: A New Framework to Evaluate their Impact.” Asian Journal of Peacebuilding 3 (2): 233-251.
Fernandez-Torne, Carlos.2017. “How Truth Commissions Promote Accountability: An Assessment of the 1994 Zonal Commissions of Inquiry in Sri Lanka.” Asian Journal of Peacebuilding 5 (2): 169-193.
Commission of Inquiry, 2047. 1990. “Final Report of the Mallik Commission.” Kathmandu, Nepal.
Commission of Inquiry.1998. “Final Report of the Commission of Inquiry into the Involuntary Removal or Disappearance of Persons in the Western, Southern and Sabaragamuwa Provinces”. Colombo.
Fox, Jonathan.2007a. “Civil Society and Accountability Politics.” In Accountability Politics: Power and Voice in Rural Mexico. Oxford Scholarship. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199208852.001.0001
Fox, Jonathan.2007b. “The Uncertain Relationship Between Transparency and Accountability.” Development in Practice 17 (4-5): 663-671.
Goetz, Anne Marie and RobJenkins. 2002. “Voice, Accountability and Human Development: The Emergence of a New Agenda.” Human Development Report Office occasional paper. United Nations Development Programme. URL: http://hdrnet.org/481/1/Goetz-Jenkins_2002.pdf
Gready, Paul, and SimonRobins. 2014. “From Transitional to Transformative Justice: A New Agenda for Practice.” The International Journal of Transitional Justice 8: 339-361.
INHURED International. 1995. The Mallik Commission Report: Action-Why and against whom? Translated by Unofficial translation. Kathmandu: International Institute for Human Rights, Environment and Development (INHURED International).
Subodh RajPyakurel. 2013. Role of HRDs in Democratic Movements in Nepal. Kathmandu: INSEC.
Interim Reports of the Southern COI. 1997. “Interim Reports of the Commission of Inquiry into the Involuntary Removal or Disappearance of Persons in the Western, Southern and Sabaragamuwa Provinces”. Colombo: Department of Government Sri Lanka.
Lambourne, Wendy.2009. “Transitional Justice and Peacebuilding after Mass Violence.” The International Journal of Transitional Justice 3: 28-48.
Law & Society Trust. 2010. A Legacy to Remember: Sri Lanka’s Commissions of Inquiry.Colombo: Kishali Pinto-Jayawardena.
O’Donnell, Guillermo.1999. “Horizontal Accountability in New Democracies.” In The Self-restraining State: Power and Accountability in New Democracies, edited by AndreasSchedler, LarryDiamond and Marc F.Plattner, 29-51. Boulder: Lynne Rienner.
Parajulee, Ramjee P.2000. The Democratic Transition in Nepal. Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Samuel, Kumudini.2006. A Hidden History: Women’s Activism for Peace in Sri Lanka 1982-2002. Colombo: Social Scientists’ Association.
Secretary-General, United Nations. 2004. “The Rule of Law and Transitional Justice in Conflict and Post-conflict Societies”. United Nations Secretary General.
Smulovitz, Catalina and Enrique Peruzzotti. 2000. “Societal Accountability in Latin America.” Journal of Democracy 11 (4): 147-158.
“Special Rapporteur on the Promotion of Truth, Justice, Reparations and Guarantees of Non-recurrence”. 2013. Report to the Human Rights Council.
“It is a closed chapter.” 1992. The Commoner. 25 August 1992.
“Mallik Panel Report Presented.” 1991. The Independent, 10 July 1991.
“Mallik Commission Report, Doubts over Inaction.” 1992. The Independent, 2 September 1992.
Thomson-Senanayake, Jane.2014. A Sociological Exploration of Disappearances in Sri Lanka. Hong Kong: Asian Human Rights Commission.
Wijewardene, Shermal, and Vijay K.Nagaraj. 2014. Human Rights Practice in Sri Lanka: Towards a Thick Description. Colombo: International Centre for Ethnic Studies.
Licença
Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.