진실·화해위원회 이후: 아르헨티나와 페루의 배·보상과 추모 정책

Abstract

This article tries to examine what followed after the official activities of

the Argentine CONADEP(Comisión Nacional sobre la Desaparición de

Personas) and the Peruvian TRC. The Argentine example along with its official

report titled Nunca Más was regarded as a model case that the subsequent

similar commissions would have to consult. After a long pause of forgetting and

indifference, the Argentine civilian governments succeeded in resuming the

processes of transitional justice, caring for the victims rights to truth and justice,

providing them with reparations, and even putting the military perpetrators on

trial. In contrast, the Peruvian case, in spite of the comprehensive

recommendations of the TRC, exemplified a complex and unfavorable situation

in which the longstanding tripartite strife hindered the successive governments

from propelling effective policies of reparations and reconciliation.

In both countries, reparations entailed acts of restoring what had been lost and

giving something, whether symbolic or material, to victims equivalent to a loss

to compensate harm. Neither truth nor justice, including economic reparations,

was able to repair the loss of victims, but such measures provided recognition

for victims and contributed to better individual and collective processes of

dealing with the tragic past.

The policy of reconciliation included not only reparations but also a continuing

dynamic confrontation with the past, in other words, an exercise of

memorialization through institutional and state-sponsored commemoration. In

Argentina and Peru, these programs of reconciliation at the level of the state

worked in the form of building monuments for victims and opening security archives, though it is too early to judge whether such development of levels of

reconciliation could be identified as solid democratization and culture of peace

and human rights.