Reconnaître ou punir ? De la justification des commissions de vérité

This article aims at examining the conceptual justifications of truth commissions by way of a crossed approach between philosophical frameworks and juridical instruments. As official, extra-judiciary and temporary instances, truth commissions are put in place in transitional contexts (war to peace, authoritarian to democratic regimes) in order to shed light on massive and systematic Human Rights violations perpetrated in a given time in the past. A “negative” justification for these commissions can be readily found in the criminal institution's limitations when faced with mass crimes. By moving beyond this type of justification, this contribution aims, however, at providing a “positive” justification for truth commissions. To do so, we will rely on the concept of reconstructive justice, insofar as it is underpinned by the notions of recognition and acknowledgement, by a narrative enterprise and a desire to break the cycle of retributive violence. As such, the purpose here is not to plead in favour of truth commissions, but to refine and inform our understanding of the theoretical debate that surrounds them