TRC Final Report

Volume 1

Chapter 10

Subsection 12

■ OUTREACH AND NETWORKING ACTIVITIES

7 It became evident from the outset that, in order to fulfil its brief, the Commission would have to engage a wide range of groups and community structures to provide information and enlist support. This was done in a number of ways.

8 Public meetings, radio, television and the print media were used to inform the public about the Commission generally, and the work of the Reparation and Rehabilitation Committee in particular.

9 International visitors were hosted and shared their thoughts on the work of the Committee. Special groups interested in reparation corresponded with the Committee, thereby enriching its work. International literature was used extensively. Some members of the Committee were also invited to participate in conferences in other countries, thus increasing the international exchange of ideas.

10 Early in 1996, contact was established with academics nationally in order to get their input on policy development, while the regional offices made contact with local medical and tertiary institutions. In some instances, these institutions provided direct support, such as medical care and counselling services.

11 The Reparation and Rehabilitation Committee received significant assistance from the various church structures in its work, especially the South African Council of Churches which has a well developed infrastructure in both urban and rural communities and played an historical role in supporting victims. Its support for the activities of the Reparation and Rehabilitation Committee was invaluable. Interaction with other faith communities also played a part in the development of reconciliation programmes and reparation recommendations.

12 The Reparation and Rehabilitation Committee recognised the need to enlist the assistance of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and community-based organisations (CBOs), particularly in order to provide support to deponents (people making statements) after their old ‘wounds’ had been re-opened. To avoid or minimise the re-traumatisation of deponents and to strengthen capacity, regional co-ordinators and briefers attempted to involve interested organisations in the provision of services to deponents. These organisations also provided support before, during and after hearings. To ensure that the services provided were adequate, staff provided training to these volunteers.

13 The fragmented nature of service provision posed a challenge for the Reparation and Rehabilitation Committee, and attention was given to establishing constructive relationships and alliances. Thus, the Reparation and Rehabilitation Committee established an audit of existing resources, including existing service organisations and their capacity. This information is included elsewhere in the final report, along with recommendations to the President on essential services that are needed and where they should be located.

14 All regions established NGO and CBO networks, although the success of these varied from region to region, depending on the availability of community resources. In rural areas, churches, family structures and traditional support systems were used in the absence or scarcity of formal NGOs and CBOs.

15 Many of the deponents had needs which could be met through government agencies such as clinics, hospitals and schools. However, access was often denied or payment levied where those seeking help did not pass the means test. As a result, the Commission approached Members of the Executive Councils³ in the provinces to negotiate concessions for Commission-related requests to support victims of gross human rights violations. A useful result of this exercise was the opportunity to assess the capacity of these state institutions to assist victims. This served to highlight, for example, the glaring disparity of services between rural and urban areas. The issue of such services forms part of the recommendations made to the President.

16 As reparations are to be granted by government to established victims of gross human rights violations, the Reparation and Rehabilitation Committee maintained a formal relationship with government through an inter-ministerial committee at Cabinet level⁴. The aim was to facilitate the discussion and adoption of the Reparation and Rehabilitation Committee’s policy recommendations and to ensure the speedy delivery of reparation and rehabilitation to victims.