Social restitution: tools and actions to rehumanise and transform injustice

Authors

  • Sharlene Swartz Human Sciences Research Council

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.38140/aa.v56i1.7956

Keywords:

social restitution, action dialogues, actors in transformation, Hilberg triangle

Abstract

Restitution has predominantly been described as a legal rather than a social action in international law, as well as in South Africa’s history of truth, reconciliation and redress policies after the end of apartheid. Introducing the concept of ‘social restitution’ this paper argues for a reimagined and wider understanding of restitution to address the need for social justice in the spaces between the law court and individual acts of charity, and between policies for redress and personal antipathy against these. Social restitution can be defined as intentional voluntary actions and attitudes developed through dialogue based on a sense of moral obligation aimed at addressing the damage done to individuals and communities by unjust actions and legacies of the past. Drawing on international debates about and understandings of the meaning of restitution, social restitution is shown to be both continuous with legal restitution and distinguished from it through its voluntary nature, its potential to be forward-looking rather than punitive, generative rather than accusatory, and offering everyday opportunities to bridge the gap between ‘knowing’ about injustice and ‘acting’ to repair it. Following this discussion, the latter part of the paper outlines the need for new categories of actors in contexts of injustice beyond those of victim, perpetrator and bystander (the Hilberg triangle of actors), introducing the ideas of beneficiaries and resisters; argues for the potential social restitution has as a mechanism for rehumanising all actors; and offers recommendations for how engaged action-oriented dialogues might contribute to achieving this aim, while noting the limits and dangers of dialogue. It draws on an empirical study on the meaning and actions of restitution conducted with black and white adult South Africans in making some of its arguments.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Atuahene B. 2014. We want what’s ours: learning from South Africa’s land restitution program. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Barkan E. 2000. The guilt of nations: restitution and negotiating historical injustices. London: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Biko S. 1978. I write what I like. London: Bowerdean Press.

Blasi A. 1983. Moral cognition and moral action: a theoretical perspective. Developmental Review 3(2): 178-210.

Birks P. 1985. An introduction to the law of restitution. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Booth WJ. 1999. Communities of memory: on identity, memory, and debt. American Political Science Review 93(2): 249-263.

Boesak A. 2017. Pharaohs on both sides of the blood-red waters: prophetic critique on empire: resistance, justice, and the power of the hopeful sizwe – a transatlantic conversation. Eugene, OR: Cascade Books.

Bowsher J. 2020. The South African TRC as neoliberal reconciliation: victim subjectivities and the synchronization of affects. Social and Legal Studies 29(1): 41-64.

Braithwaite J. 1999. Restorative justice: assessing optimistic and pessimistic accounts. Crime and Justice 25: 1-127.

Brooks T. 2008. A two-tiered reparations theory: a reply to Wenar. Journal of Social Philosophy 39(4): 666-669.

Buckley-Zistel S. 2009. ‘Transitional justice in divided societies – potentials and limits.’ Paper presented at 5th European Consortium for Political Research General Conference, Postdam, Germany.

Butt D. 2006. Nations, overlapping generations, and historic injustice. American Philosophical Quarterly 43(4): 357-367.

Butt D. 2009. Rectifying international injustice: principles of compensation and restitution between nations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Butt D. 2012. Repairing historical wrongs and the end of empire. Social and Legal Studies 21(2): 227-242.

Calder T. 2010. Shared responsibility, global structural injustice, and restitution. Social Theory and Practice 36(2): 263-290.

Doyle S and Wright D. 2001. Restitutionary damages – the unnecessary remedy? Melbourne University Law Review 25(1). Available at:

http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/MelbULawRw/2001/1.html. [accessed on 25 April 2023].

Eglash A. 1958. Creative restitution – a broader meaning for an old term. The Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology, and Police Science 48(6): 619-622.

Encarnación OG. 2007. Pinochet’s revenge: Spain revisits its civil war. World Policy Journal 24(4): 39-50.

Essed P. 1991. Understanding everyday racism: an interdisciplinary theory. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Fay D and James D. 2009. The rights and wrongs of land restitution: ‘Restoring what was ours’. Abingdon: Routledge.

Ferguson J. 2015. Give a man a fish: reflections on the new politics of distribution. Durham: Duke University Press.

Fields BA. 2003. Restitution and restorative justice in juvenile justice and school discipline. Youth Studies Australia 22(4): 44-51.

Hans J and Stjernstrom O. 2008. Emotional links to forest ownership: restitution of land and use of a productive resource in Põlva County, Estonia. Fennia – International Journal of Geography 186(2): 95-111.

Hilberg R. 1992. Perpetrators victims bystanders: the Jewish catastrophe, 1933-1945. New York: Aaron Asher Books.

Hill RA. 2002. Compensatory justice: over time and between groups. Journal of Political Philosophy 10(4): 392-415.

International Law Commission. 2001. Articles on responsibility of states for internationally wrongful acts. Available at:

https://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/draft_articles/9_6_2001.pdf (Date of access: 25 April 2023.

Judt T. 2005. Postwar: a history of Europe since 1945. New York: The Penguin Press.

Kashyap R. 2009. Narrative and truth: a feminist critique of the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission. Contemporary Justice Review 12(4), 449-467.

Lephakga T. 2015. Dealing lightly with the wounds of my people: a theological ethical critique of the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission. Unpublished PhD thesis. University of South Africa.

Mamdani M. 2002. Amnesty or impunity? A preliminary critique of the Report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of South Africa (TRC). Diacritics 32(3/4), 33-59.

MacIntyre A. 1981. After virtue: a study in moral theory. London: Duckworth Books.

Mbeki M. 2009. Architects of poverty: why African capitalism needs changing. Johannesburg: Picador Africa.

Menkiti IA. 1984. Person and community in African traditional thought. In: RA Wright (ed). African philosophy: an introduction. Lanham: University Press of America.

Merkel W. 2009. Towards a renewed concept of social justice. In: O Cramme and Patrick Diamond (eds). Social justice in the global age. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Ngcukaitobi T. 2021. Land matters: South Africa’s failed land reforms and the road ahead. Johannesburg: Penguin Random House.

Ntsebeza DB and Kazee S. 2023. Opinion for National Prosecuting Authority concerning the TRC component and TRC prosecutions. Office of the State Attorney, Pretoria.

Nyamnjoh A-N, Swartz S, Roberts B, Gordon S and Struwig J. 2020. Worlds apart: social attitudes to restitution in South Africa. Strategic Review for Southern Africa 42(1): 13-40.

Puttergill C, Bomela N, Grobbelaar J and Moerane K. 2011. The limits of land restitution: livelihoods in three rural communities in South Africa. Development Southern Africa 28(5): 597-611.

Republic of South Africa Parliament (RSA Parliament). 1995. Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act (No. 34 of 1995). Pretoria: Government Printer.

Rabkin F. 2015. ‘Political interference’ blocked TRC prosecutions. Business Day. May 22. Available at: https://www.businesslive.co.za/bd/national/2015-05-22-political-interference-blocked-trc-prosecutions/ [accessed on 23 February 2022].

Sanders M. 2007. Ambiguities of witnessing: law and literature in the time of a truth commission. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Schneider PR, Griffith WR and Schneider AL. 1982. Juvenile restitution as a sole sanction or condition of probation: an empirical analysis. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 19(1): 47-65.

Smith C. 2010. What is a person? Rethinking humanity, social life, and the moral good from the person up. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Swartz S. 2006. A long walk to citizenship: morality, justice and faith in the aftermath of apartheid. Journal of moral education 35(4): 551-570.

Swartz S. 2009. The moral ecology of South Africa’s township youth. New York: Palgrave.

Swartz S. 2016. Another country: everyday social restitution. Cape Town: Best Read.

Truth and Reconciliation Commission. 1999. Truth and reconciliation commission of South Africa report (Vol. 1). London: Macmillan.

Teitel RG. 2003. Transitional justice genealogy. Harvard Human Rights Journal 16: 69-94.

Wale K. 2013. Confronting exclusion: time for radical reconciliation. SA Reconciliation Barometer Survey: 2013 Report. Cape Town: Institute for Justice and Reconciliation.

Walker C. 2005. The limits to land reform: rethinking ‘the land question’. Journal of Southern African Studies 31(4): 805-824.

Wenar L. 2006. Reparations for the future. Journal of Social Philosophy 37(3): 396-405.

Williams RC. 2005. Post-conflict property restitution and refugee return in Bosnia and Herzegovina: implications for international standard-setting and practice. New York University Journal of Law and Politics 37(3): 441-554.

Young IM. 2006. Responsibility and global justice: a social connection model. Social Philosophy and Policy 23(1): 102-130.

##submission.downloads##

Published

2024-07-30

Issue

Section

Articles