Debunking the Myth of Independence of the NPRC Commissioners in Zimbabwe

Abstract

Scholars have long been interested in understanding the functions and efficacy of Truth and ReconciliationCommissions (TRCs) in promoting post-conflict justice and reconciliation, particularly in countries emergingfrom violent conflict. However, less well understood is how issues of autonomy and independence ofcommissioners condition the efficacy of TRCs. In joining this debate, I contend that how and why certainpeople are selected to be commissioners of TRCs has an impact on the legitimacy and success or lackthereof of such bodies. The article unpicks how and why the social status of the commissioners, their levelof professionalism, independence and their political leanings (neutrality) impact on the integrity, efficacyand legitimacy of TRCs. Drawing on the Zimbabwean case study, I show how loyalty, past and currentallegiance, selection criteria (methods) or appointment and conduct of commissioners shape the efficacy ofthe National Peace and Reconciliation Commission (NPRC). Such an investigation is relevant in contributingto a deeper understanding of the inner workings and legitimacy of TRCs in Africa and beyond as they seekto promote justice and reconciliation in post-conflict contexts