Truth, Reconciliation and National Unity Commission   ‘Very few people have come forward to petition for amnesty’   |02 June 2022

Speaking on behalf of the Truth, Reconciliation and National Unity Commission (TRNUC) before the hearing session yesterday, chairperson Gabrielle Louise McIntyre underscored that very few people involved in human rights violations have petitioned for amnesty before the commission which is reflective of the reality that very few persons responsible for human rights violations have been truthful before it.

She noted that of the 60 or so completed determinations to date, the commission has served well over 100 perpetrator notifications. While many of those have been served on the next of kin of a person that is passed and a significant number have also been served on living persons. 

She added that in each of those notifications the commission has advised of the right to petition for amnesty but the vast majority of persons still alive, appear to have chosen not to do so.

Mrs McIntyre stated that rather than contribute to the process of reconciliation, that is at the heart of the work of the commission, those persons still alive have chosen to continue to deny their responsibility despite the evidence to the country or to remain silent as is their right, and as the commission has been told by some, confident that they will not be pursued by the government authorities thereafter.

She said that this approach on the part of the majority of the perpetrators does not bring closure to the victims or assist the broader community in understanding what happen and why which is necessary information towards the broader process of reconciliation and the goal of non repetition.

She said in that respect, it must be recognised that those few people that have decided to petition for amnesty, take responsibility for their actions and to seek forgiveness, are seeking to contribute to the process of reconciliation in the country. She said that these people have shown courage and for that they deserve our respect and our best efforts at understanding.

“Notably, what must always be borne in mind is the context in which human rights violations occurred and the Commission’s examination of that context, through its hearings and investigations, reveals that it was the system that was introduced by the coup d’etat of 1977 that created the conditions for the perpetration of human rights violations and many Seychellois supported that system.

“In that sense, the responsibility for human rights violations that occurred is not only the responsibility of the direct perpetrators – it is the responsibility of all of those that allowed that system to continue knowing that it encouraged and sanctioned human rights violations against those who opposed it,” Mrs  McIntyre said.    

She stated that by conducting these amnesty hearings with transparency, the Commission is trusting that the people of Seychelles are ready to support its reconciliation efforts because without that support there will be no reconciliation in Seychelles.

She added that in this regard, the Commission hopes that the broader community embraces the opportunity that is being given and that all Seychellois will make efforts towards the goal of forgiveness and reconciliation.

The amnesty hearings being held since Tuesday, is pursuant to Section 12 of the TRNUC Act. In accordance with Section 12(3) and (4) of the TRNUC Act the Commission has brought the petitioners for amnesty together with the victims.  Those provisions provide that the Commission shall, as far as reasonably practicable, require the petitioner to provide the apologies to the victim or victims in person and that the Commission shall hear the victims, petitioner and any other person it deems appropriate in considering a petition for amnesty.

Petitioners have to set out the details of the incident for which they are petitioning for amnesty, bearing in mind that to be eligible for amnesty a petitioner must provide a full and frank disclosure of the incident and offer a sincere apology to the victims or victims that have suffered as a result of their acts or omissions. Once the petitioners have set out the details of the incident the victims will have the opportunity to ask questions to the petitioners.

Compiled by Patrick Joubert