Elizabeth Silkes

Executive Director

International Coaliton of Sites of Conscience

Since 2014, GIJTR has been innovating transitional justice practice with these exact goals in mind, developing inclusive and effective new tools alongside communities emerging from conflict rather than imposing the traditional, top-down tools of transitional justice whose focus and priority were high-profile criminal prosecutions of a very small number of perpetrators—trials that often further marginalized survivors. Turning from this approach that not only marginalized survivors but also left them poorly equipped to rebuild their communities and sustain peace, GIJTR has developed a dynamic, locally led methodology that strengthens survivors' ability to heal from trauma as well as contribute in meaningful and lasting ways to peace-building regardless of whether their efforts are supported by political will or have the international media's eye.

In this groundbreaking The State of Truth in the World Report, GIJTR and its local partners draw on and share their learnings in order to focus the field's attention on an oft-overlooked aspect of conflict and conflict prevention that has major implications for anyone seeking lasting peace: civil society's access to truth.

In the context of human rights violations, the right to truth means having free and full access to facts about past events, including what took place, who was involved and why the violations occurred. While the right to truth is clearly established in international law,[iv] this liberty is among the first targets of repressive regimes and authoritarian figures on their paths to power, manifesting in the manipulation of historical and contemporary truths to perpetuate systemic injustice, as we see in Russia’s justification of its invasion of a sovereign Ukraine[v] and in the proliferation of state-level bans on teaching "difficult" histories about race in the United States.[vi]

This report defines “truth” as the facts of a situation—but also foregrounds the reality that defining “truth” is a complicated matter. On an individual level, personal truths in the form of memories are subjective processes anchored in experiences and shaped by material and symbolic markers. More broadly, when it comes to representing the past, communities can be affected by a number of factors, from the legal and political to the cultural and moral. Flexible paradigms, such as the four truths established by the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC)[1] may feel restrictive or the opposite—too vague –—to be helpful in certain contexts. But as a starting point for inclusive, community-driven truth-telling, accountability and peace-building efforts, these frameworks are immensely helpful.

The findings in this report, written largely by local community members, suggest that embracing the concept of multiple truths is core to social and political transformation following conflict. As seen throughout, the most successful transitional justice processes are those that bring together a diverse range of stakeholders in an unwavering commitment to public dialogue and community consultation. Of course, recognizing a diversity of truths does not inherently lead to social cohesion, but if violence can be prevented and the seeds of compassion and understanding planted in its place, peace is possible. Amid multiple truths, a path to peace then emerges.

This is the first report of its kind, written largely by local actors with a diversity of lived experiences and expertise. As such, definitions of “truth” and “justice” vary from one context to the next and even within a single context. In countries in active conflict or only recently emerging from it, truth as accessed through memory initiatives takes center stage, while truth in terms of justice and education may be barely mentioned or considered, rather, as longer-term goals. Further, some governments manipulate one sphere in order to suppress another, promoting memorialization projects at the expense of justice and accountability measures, for example. Readers who look to the report for a linear model will not receive as much as those considering it as a prism, where new formulations, solutions and possibilities abound.

The individual country reports do share common findings, including an overarching theme that when truth is inaccessible, silence and fear dominate to create the perfect incubator for recurring cycles of violence and oppression. The State of Truth in the World Report moves us to consider what happens when access to truth is denied. What happens when survivors of conflict have no spaces in which to testify to their experiences? . When evidence of crimes are destroyed with impunity? . When dictators, autocratic regimes and leaders of established democracies claim control over the narrative of what happened and to whom? .

In sum, what we see in this report is that the ability to expose, address and prevent injustice is essential if communities are to move beyond trauma and effectively advocate for accountability and justice—and access to truth is core to those efforts.

I hope this groundbreaking report will inspire you to join the movement to embrace and promote truth as paramount to just, peaceful futures.

In Solidarity,

Elizabeth Silkes