Burying the Past: Making Peace and Doing Justice After Civil Conflict (Expanded and Updated). Edited by Nigel Biggar. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 2003. Pp. 330. $26.95, paper.

The 1990s brought in a wave of new democracies in the world, producing a host of countries that are now entering into a phase of “transitional justice,” where they must come to terms with past atrocities from governmental repression and civil conflict. Burying the Past explores the tensions inherent in facing the past through a collection of essays written by scholars, theologians, and practitioners. As the title suggests, the central theme presented in the book is the tension between seeking justice for past wrongs and seeking peace for future stability. Through the thirteen contributing authors, the book explores the possibility (and arguably the necessity) of establishing peace through seeking restorative justice.

The book is organized into three sections. The first section addresses the “concepts” of justice and peace through a largely Christian perspective and challenges the perception that the two are at odds with one another. This section is a dialogue among Nigel Biggar, Donald W. Shriver, Jean Bethke Elshtain, and Tuomas Forsberg, about forgetting, forgiving, seeking justice, and seeking peace after civil conflict. In particular, the concept of restorative justice is advanced in place of retributive justice. Restorative justice is centered on the restoration of the victim, whereas retributive justice is centered on the punishment of the perpetrator. As Forsberg writes, “the forgiveness that is integral to restorative justice seems to be a future-oriented and victim-centered way of dealing with the past, whereas the punishment integral to retributive justice seems backward looking and state centered.”

Throughout the book, the authors emphasize the importance of a victim-centered restorative justice that does not blindly forget past injuries. That is, the “forgiveness” of the past asserted by Forsberg is not the same as “forgetting” the past. Rather, the remembering of past wrongs is essential to reestablishing the dignity and humanity of the victims and allowing for true forgiveness and reconciliation. The book suggests that this concept of forgiveness, as an opposing force to vengeance and perpetual hatred, while deeply entrenched in Christian morality and values, is a powerful concept and tool in dealing with “transitional justice” in the secular, political sphere.

In the second section of the book, “Dimensions,” contributing authors discuss the developments in human rights institutions. Martha Minow opens this section by exploring recent institutional innovations that have contributed to increasing human rights accountability across the world. These institutions include ad hoc international tribunals, truth commissions, and the permanent International Criminal Court. While each has its strengths and weaknesses, Minow believes that together they have launched a new awareness and condemnation of human rights abuses across the world. Minow predicts that the twentieth century may well “be known as one that created international human rights tribunals, truth and reconciliation commissions, and public and private institutions to advance human rights.”

Following Minow’s broad overview, Hugo Van Der Merwe and Marie Smyth discuss the particulars of the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) and the Northern Ireland peace process, respectively. Merwe argues that the South African TRC should be more sensitive to local processes, and that the TRC’s largely top-down approach should be supplemented with closer attention to the interests of individual victims. Smyth presents the problem of multiple victimhood in Northern Ireland, where multiple parties consider themselves the victims. She emphasizes the importance of empirical data in determining who is to blame and warns against categorization of victims or perpetrators along religious or political lines. Finally, Brandon Hamber offers a psychological perspective on dealing with past atrocities. Hamber affirms the importance of victim-centered justice, of remembering and forgiving, and of reintegrating the victim into society after civil conflict.

The third section of the book explores the transitional justice of individual countries, including case studies on Chile, Guatemala, South Africa, Rwanda and Northern Ireland. Alexandra Barahona de Brito discusses Chile’s premature “reconciliation” in accepting a democratic system wrought with authoritarian enclaves and military control. She acknowledges that the Chileans have made progress in confronting past atrocities, but holds that they still have a long way to go. Rachel Sieder promotes the importance of memory politics in Guatemala’s healing and democratization, and echoes the assertions made in support of restorative justice. Charles Villa-Vicencio further explores the components of restorative justice in the TRC, discussing the importance of amnesty, victim testimony, and reparation and rehabilitation. Stef Vandeginste addresses the aftermath of the Rawandan genocide and the ways Rwanda has fallen short of reconciliation and true democracy. Finally, Terence McCaughey discusses the shortcomings of the Good Friday Agreement between Northern Ireland and Britain, seeing it as an agreement to disagree rather than a step towards forgiveness and reconciliation. McCaughey urges that facing the past and extending forgiveness are necessary to true reconciliation and lasting peace.

Nigel Biggar concludes the book with a chapter that draws on the themes brought up by the different authors, as well as an epilogue that addresses the impact of the September 11 tragedy. Across the board, the authors seem to condemn the policy of forgetting as a default approach to dealing with past atrocities. Rather, emphasis is placed on remembering and forgiving. This is the central theme that gives the book a unique twist: in placing the importance of forgiveness (a largely religious concept) into the political realm, Burying the Past offers a creative approach to dealing with past conflict that defies dominant realist theories guiding domestic and international relations. The concepts and illustrations presented in the book put morality and justice back into what has become a zero-sum, survivor-takes-all approach to global politics and conflict. It is through this unique lens of forgiveness and reconciliation that the book offers a refreshing look into political conflict and transitional justice. As Biggar writes, “There is evidence, then, that the truth about the past will out, and that sooner or later, justice will press its claims. Humans, it seems, are not satisfied with peace in the present. They are constituted by moral as well as political needs.”

—Jill Kou

Copyright © 2004 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College
Harvard Human Rights Journal / Vol. 17, Spring 2004