When dealing with a terrible post-conflict environment there are often few good choices as to how to deal with those who have committed human rights atrocities. In negotiation processes people are unlikely to put down arms without some hope for amnesty. Think of the negotiations that led to the end of Apartheid in South Africa. The military and police and security forces were not going to give up the fight without guarantees. The National Party represented those forces and knew that many of its own political leaders would face the dock as well if they allowed negotiations to go forward without implementing some protections. Rather than a blanket amnesty, however, South Africa came up with the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) process whereby those who committed gross violations of human rights could gain amnesty in exchange for telling the truth about their past misdeeds. The TRC process was imperfect and in many cases deeply unsatisfying. But it probably was the best option on the table, the least-worst option in a situation where there were simply no truly good options.
So while many surely cringed when they read that the parliament in the Democratic Republic of the Congo had passed a law granting amnesty to the militias in the country’s anarchic eastern regions, it might be wise to think of the TRC example. These militias have been directly responsible for the chaos and bloodshed. Many of them have their origins in the 1994 Rwandan genocide. The law grants amnesty for acts committed since 2003 and does not exempt war criminals from prosecution. Nonetheless, even with these caveats there are going to be a lot of people upset over what all but assures that few will be held to account for the suffering of many. But this may well be, like the TRC process, the least worst option. Granted, perhaps the DRC could use its own TRC-type process, but doing so requires a tremendous allocation of resources, an infrastructure that will allow the process to go forward, and both sticks and carrots that the DRC might not realistically be able to marshal. If the goal is to get beyond conflict, it seems to me that there needs to be a grand gesture to encourage a change of the intellectual and psychological terrain. Perhaps amnesty qualifies as such a gesture even if few of us can be truly happy with the outcome.