Arguing about accountability
Dr Dayan Jayatilleka
One must re-scrutinise the emphatic assertion that post-war
accountability, democracy, good governance and post-conflict
reconciliation are integral parts of a single package or located on a
continuum. It is argued that greater democratisation and fuller
accountability regarding the war are indispensable complementarities.
Waves of
democratisation
Southern Europe
Latin America
East Asia
Eastern Europe
Arab World |
|
Dr Dayan
Jayatilleka |
The argument is put forward that without accountability there will be
no reconciliation, and the question is therefore raised as to what the
international standards and best practices of accountability are.
Opinion divides between those who advocate or support an 'independent
international inquiry' and an independent domestic inquiry.
What if the wrong question is being asked, to wit, what are the best
practices with regards to post-war accountability?
Worldwide trend
The discussion today takes place against dual frameworks, those of
democracy and post conflict reconciliation. What does the overwhelming
evidence show, in both these realms?
In the first place, let us examine the evidence with regard to
democratisation. Even if one were to adhere to the notion of a worldwide
trend towards democracy, I would remind the reader that there is no
single worldwide or universal trend, there are universal trends
(plural), some of which tend to cancel the other out, or combine in a
fashion that modifies the outcome. Thus the 'End of History' meets 'the
Clash of Civilisations', with unforeseeable results.
Democratic transitions
Authentic adherence to pluralism has not only a domestic but also a
global dimension; recognising that there is a plurality of global
trends, such as democratisation as well as multi-polarity propelled by
newly emerging powers and the Asian resurgence.
This being said, I think the late Prof Huntington was onto something
when he wrote of the Third Wave.
He was referring to the great waves of democratisation, the first
being in Southern Europe in the 1970s, when the long lasting
dictatorships in Spain, Portugal and the 'younger' ones in Greece and
Turkey collapsed.
The second wave swept Latin America. The Third wave (or was it the
fourth?) took down the Soviet bloc. I would say the fourth (or was it
the third?) wave was in East Asia: the Philippines, South Korea and
Indonesia.
My slight confusion is because the Philippines restored democracy in
1986 and Indonesia in 1998, with the events of 1989 in Eastern Europe
and Russia '91 falling in-between. The Arab world is experiencing the
fifth wave. Now it must be emphasised that in the overwhelming number of
these democratic transitions (with the GDR case being a short-lived
exception), openings or re-openings, there were no accountability
hearings with regard to the conduct of the militaries of those
countries. More: an amnesty, or the pledge not to rake up accountability
issues, was part of a compact which underpinned democratisation and
guaranteed stability and forestalled further polarisation.
Democracy or accountability
So accountability probes were not part of the great waves of
democratization and were perceived to be counterproductive to the grand
bargain that underpinned the project. More starkly, democracy and
accountability did not go together.
It was, more often than not, a question of democracy or
accountability. The picture is no different with regard to post conflict
reconciliation.
From the Spanish civil war to the Philippines and Indonesia, the post
conflict reconciliation process did not involve accountability probes.
These were regarded as dangerously lacerating and polarising. Here
again, accountability was not understood as a precondition for
reconciliation but as a potential threat, and it was often a choice of
reconciliation or accountability.
In some cases, accountability issues have been allowed to surface
only after decades have passed. Chile is about to probe the death of
President Salvador Allende not only almost 40 years after the event but
a few decades after the restoration of democracy. Bangladesh is opening
an inquiry into atrocities committed by militia during its war of
independence in 1971, 40 years ago.
Future generations
Most societies settle accounts with their violent pasts by
classically cathartic means such as artistic expression and public
debate. Thus, some accounts are better balanced by History and left to
what the French called la longue duree, the long term - and to future
generations.
Reconciliation is more readily achieved and more rooted through a
negotiated compact between all democratic stakeholders. Such a process
has already been initiated in Sri Lanka.
No external claim of accountability is more important than the
accountability of a government to its own citizens; its own people. That
is the corollary and concomitant of popular sovereignty.
(An expanded version of remarks made at the discussion that followed
a paper presented by invitation by the author, at the Workshop on Global
Leadership, Yale University, USA)
|