In 1973, General Augusto Pinochet led a coup d’état on Chile’s democratically elected government and installed a brutal and repressive military junta which lasted 17 years. During this time, thousands of citizens were tortured, jailed, imprisoned, exiled or killed by the military regime. Pinochet held a plebiscite in 1988, effectively functioning as a referendum on his rule, which he lost by a close margin.[1] In 1990, President Patricio Aylwin was elected, and quickly created the National Commission for Truth and Reconciliation. Due to the fragility of the Chile’s budding democracy and the prominent role the military and Pinochet continued to play in Chilean politics, Aylwin felt that the Commission needed to conduct its inquiry quickly to begin the country’s healing process.[2] Thus, the Commission was given nine months and a limited mandate of only investigating human rights violations which had resulted in death or disappearance. To reduce any form of bias, the Commission was made up of four pro- and contra- military regime commissioners and headed by Raul Rettig, a centre-left former senator.[3] With a staff of sixty, the Commission held hearings in government buildings all over Chile, where families of victims could be heard and have their experiences considered for the report being developed by the Commission.[4] In February 1991, the National Commission for Truth and Reconciliation Report was published, and a month later, President Aylwin presented its findings in a televised speech and formally apologized for the atrocities committed by the state.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________

1. Hayner, Priscilla B. Unspeakable Truths: Confronting State Terror and Atrocity. New York, Routledge, 2001.
2. Ensalaco, Mark. "Chapter 8: Recovering the Truth." Chile Under Pinochet: Recovering the Truth. University of Pennsylvania Press, 2000, pp. 182-121.
3. Ibid.
4. Vasallo, Mark. “Truth and Reconciliation Commissions: General Considerations and a Critical Comparison of the Commissions of Chile and El Salvador.” The University of Miami Inter-American Law Review, vol. 33, no. 1, 2002, pp. 153–182. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/40176564. Accessed 29 Nov. 2020.

The mandate of the National Commission for Truth and Reconciliation (the Rettig Commission) was to determine the truth about the human rights violations that occurred during General Pinochet’s military regime, in order to find justice for the victims and their families, and begin a national reconciliation process.[1] Specifically, the Commission was assigned to investigate instances of “disappearance after arrest, executions, and tortue leading to death” as committed by General Pinochet’s military regime, as well as political disappearances and attempted murders committed by private citizens.[2] The Commission was given nine months to investigate these violations, which involved examining documentation from NGOs, the Chilean Armed Forces, and the government, in addition to interviewing families of victims.[3] An issue that many had with the Rettig Commission was its limited mandate: the Commission only looked into cases of those who were murdered or had been made to disappear by the military regime. While the Rettig Commission reviewed over 3,400 cases, there were several thousand more cases of people who had been tortured, illegally detained or forcibly exiled by the regime, yet survived; these victims were not defined as such by the Commission, and left out of the commission’s report.[4] This caused considerable consternation among those who had wanted a broader investigation.[5] However, this limitation was rectified in 2004 with the creation of the National Commission on Political Imprisonment and Torture, which looked into cases of political imprisonment and torture that did not necessarily result in death.

In addition, another key issue of the Rettig Commission dealt with was recommending measures of reparation and reconciliation. This was addressed in Part Four of their 1,128 page report. The report recommended financial reparations to families of victims in the form of a monthly pension, as well as education subsidies and free health care. Again, there was significant displeasure that victims of the Pinochet Regime who had survived had been excluded for the reparations.[6] Other recommendations included the formation of the National Corporation for Reparation and Reconciliation, which was set up to both implement the commission’s recommendations and determine verdicts for cases the Commission had not had time to resolve.[7] The Commission also recommended various ways to ensure that the abuses that occurred during Pinochet’s regime were not forgotten. Perhaps most significantly, the Museum of Memory and Human Rights was a direct outcome of this recommendation. The museum holds exhibits that chart the events that occurred during the military dictatorship, and commemorates the victims, detailing their stories. 

__________________________________________________________________________________________________

1. Republic of Chile, Supreme Decree [Patricio Aylwin]. Supreme Decree No. 355: Creation of the Commission on Truth and Reconciliation. 1990.
2. Ibid.
3. Vasallo, Mark. “Truth and Reconciliation Commissions: General Considerations and a Critical Comparison of the Commissions of Chile and El Salvador.” The University of Miami Inter-American Law Review, vol. 33, no. 1, 2002, pp. 153–182. Accessed 29 Nov. 2020.
4. Hayner, Priscilla B. Unspeakable Truths: Confronting State Terror and Atrocity. New York, Routledge, 2001.
5. Ibid.
6. Ibid.

President Aylwin: Chile’s first democratically elected president after the end of the dictatorial Pinochet regime. As part of Chile’s transition to democracy, Aylwin created the “National Commission for Truth and Reconciliation” (Comisión Nacional para la Verdad y Reconciliación) in 1990. In March of 1991, he also presented the report publicly by way of a televised speech.

National Commission for Truth and Reconciliation (Rettig Commission): The commission created by President Aylwin to investigate human rights violations which resulted in the death or disappearance of Chileans during General Pinochet’s military dictatorship and provide recommendations for reconciliation. It was chaired by former Senator Raul Rettig, hence the commission’s colloquial name: the Rettig Commission.

Vicariate of Solidarity: A non-governmental organisation (NGO) of the Archbishop of Santiago. The Vicariate was a human rights organisation which tracked reports of disappearances during Pinochet’s regime, among other functions. When the Rettig Commission was active, the Vicariate provided all its files to the Commission, which provided a starting base for victims and families for the Commission to speak to.[1]

The Chilean Armed Forces: A major perpetrator of violence during the Pinochet regime. The Rettig Commission requested information from the armed forces regarding specific cases of death or disappearance. Military forces largely ignored these requests or responded that any evidence had been legally destroyed prior to Aylwin’s presidency.[2]

__________________________________________________________________________________________________

1. Hayner, Priscilla B. Unspeakable Truths: Confronting State Terror and Atrocity. New York, Routledge, 2001.
2. Ibid.

Spain and the United Kingdom: The Rettig Commission was voluntarily established by President Aylwin and his government through an “executive decree.”[1] Thus, unlike some other states, there was very little direct involvement of the international community in Chile’s truth and reconciliation process. However, the actions of Spain and the United Kingdom had a significant indirect impact on the power of the Rettig Commission. As will be expanded on later in this database, the Rettig Commission was limited because it could not prosecute government and military officials found to be responsible for the deaths and disappearances of Chilean citizens.[2] However, in 1998, 7 years after the commission’s report was released, Pinochet travelled to London, England where he was arrested by British officials.[3] Spain had issued an arrest warrant based on the crimes Pinochet had committed against Spanish and Chilean citizens.[4] Thus, British authorities had acted in accordance with their extradition agreement with Spain. Pinochet was detained for a year and a half before eventually being released back to Chile.[5] The significance of this incident, however, was that there was a renewed desire among the Chilean population to prosecute Pinochet for his crimes and to overturn the amnesty law which had given him immunity.[6] As a result of domestic pressure and greater international scrutiny, the Supreme Court began to change the way it interpreted the amnesty law and eventually Pinochet along with other military officials were indicted for their crimes.[7]

__________________________________________________________________________________________________

1. Ensalaco, Mark. "Truth Commissions for Chile and El Salvador: A Report and Assessment." Human Rights Quarterly, vol. 16, no. 4, 1994, pp. 656-675.
2. Brown, Cynthia. “Human Rights and the ‘Politics of Agreements’ - Chile during President Aylwin's First Year.” Human Rights Watch, 1991, pp. 1-109.
3. Evans, Rebecca. “Pinochet in London: Pinochet in Chile: International and Domestic Politics in Human Rights Policy.” Human Rights Quarterly, vol. 28, no. 1, 2006, pp. 207–244. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/20072729. 
4. Ibid
5. Ibid
6. Ibid
7. Ibid

The Rettig Commission faced a number of obstacles that limited its scope. One barrier to the truth and reconciliation process was that the commission only investigated deaths and disappearances caused by Pinochet’s regime.[1] Many in Chile criticized this decision arguing that the TRC should have investigated other human rights abuses, such as torture that were committed during Pinochet’s rule.[2] Thus, while the Rettig Commission's aim was to heal the nation and address the harm caused by the previous regime, the painful experiences of many victims were excluded from this process. 

The Rettig Commission did not publicly reveal the names of officials who were found to have committed human rights abuses.[3] While the Rettig Commission clearly acknowledged the heinous crimes that were committed by the regime, many felt that the failure to publicly name the perpetrators, obstructed essential elements of the TRC process, which are justice, accountability and responsibility.[4]

Another obstacle to the truth and reconciliation process was the military’s resistance to cooperating with the commission’s investigation. When the Aylwin government took power, the military was still led by Pinochet and was composed of individuals who had committed human rights abuses.[5] As a result, the military strongly rejected the premise of the Rettig Commission and often refused to cooperate.[6] The Aylwin government had no control over the military and could not compel officials to testify.[7] Ideally, the truth and reconciliation process includes a restorative justice element in which the perpetrator acknowledges the harm caused by their actions. However, in the case of Chile, the military did not formally acknowledge or apologize for its wrongdoing during the truth and reconciliation process.[8] 

Another challenge to an effective TRC was the Amnesty Law of 1978, which was established by the military under Pinochet’s rule.[9] It effectively prevented any prosecutorial action against Pinochet or other military and state officials that had committed crimes.[10] When the Rettig Commission was established this law was challenged in the Supreme Court. However, many justices in the Supreme Court remained loyal to Pinochet and as a result, the amnesty law was upheld.[11] Thus, the Rettig Commission had no power to indict individuals who were responsible for the gross atrocities uncovered in the truth and reconciliation process.[12]

__________________________________________________________________________________________________

1. Vasallo, Mark. “Truth and Reconciliation Commissions: General Considerations and a Critical Comparison of the Commissions of Chile and El Salvador.” The University of Miami Inter-American Law Review, vol. 33, no. 1, 2002, pp. 153–182. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/40176564. Accessed 29 Nov. 2020.
2. Ensalaco, Mark. "Truth Commissions for Chile and El Salvador: A Report and Assessment." Human Rights Quarterly, vol. 16, no. 4, 1994, pp. 656-675.
3. Ibid.
4. Ibid.
5. Evans, Rebecca. “Pinochet in London: Pinochet in Chile: International and Domestic Politics in Human Rights Policy.” Human Rights Quarterly, vol. 28, no. 1, 2006, pp. 207–244. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/20072729. 
6. Ibid.
7. Hourcade, Sol et al. “Comisiones de la Verdad de Chile: Verdad y Reparaciones como Política de Estado.” CHR Michelsen Institute, 2018.
8. Evans, Rebecca. “Pinochet in London: Pinochet in Chile: International and Domestic Politics in Human Rights Policy.” Human Rights Quarterly, vol. 28, no. 1, 2006, pp. 207–244. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/20072729. Accessed 30 Nov. 2020.
9. Brown, Cynthia. “Human Rights and the ‘Politics of Agreements’ - Chile during President Aylwin's First Year.” Human Rights Watch, 1991.
10. Ibid.
11. Evans, Rebecca. “Pinochet in London: Pinochet in Chile: International and Domestic Politics in Human Rights Policy.” Human Rights Quarterly, vol. 28, no. 1, 2006, pp. 207–244. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/20072729. Accessed 30 Nov. 2020.
12. Ibid.

Overall, Chile’s National Commission for Truth and Reconciliation was successful in building peace, functioning as a form of restorative justice and fully acknowledging the harm the state perpetrated. However, the TRC’s peacebuilding effects were hindered by the nation’s political situation, which created a limited definition of ‘victim’ and prevented the perpetrators from facing the families of their victims. The Chilean TRC was centred around obtaining the stories of victims of the Pinochet military dictatorship and creating a ‘collective memory’ to document the human rights abuses suffered by citizens, as well as providing recommendations for reparations and to prevent further human rights abuses from occurring ever again. In its mandate, the TRC was designed to investigate human rights abuses resulting in death or disappearance. The Commission held over a thousand hearings, listening to the voices of family members of the victims and providing a way for their horrific experiences under the military dictatorship to be validated, allowing them to move forward in their healing process.[1] Once the Commission wrote up its final report in 1991, President Aylwin issued a formal apology on behalf of the state for all the harm it had committed under General Pinochet. This apology was another essential peacebuilding effort, as the state formally acknowledged its wrongdoing, starting the process of making amends to its citizens who had lived in fear and terror for seventeen years. 

Another important step towards building peace was the reconciliation and reparation process, a significant undertaking that the Chilean government continues to do today. Families of the victims (as defined by the TRC’s mandate) were compensated financially with a monthly pension for the loss of their family member, in addition to education subsidies, free public health care and a waiver for military service exemption.[2] Carla Friedman, whose brother was killed during the Pinochet regime by the Chilean army, stated that the monthly pension paid out to her signified “recognition from the state of its own guilt [in her brother’s death].”[3] There were also many symbolic and commemorative steps taken in the reconciliation process. One of the TRC’s recommendations was the creation of a museum of remembrance to recognize the human rights violations committed during the Pinochet regime and honour the victims of these violations.[4] In 2010, the state-funded Museum of Memory and Human Rights opened for this very purpose, and also houses the Centre of Documentation, containing an archive of media collected during the regime. Symbolic gestures undertaken include the abolishment of the public holiday celebrating Pinochet’s coup d’état and the transformation of the former torture and detention centre, Park for Peace Villa Grimaldi, into a park promoting peace and reflection. 

Despite the many successes of Chile’s Truth and Reconciliation process, the TRC did not name any of the individual perpetrators of the human rights abuses, only generally attributing the violence to the military regime. This was a serious point of contention, both within the Commission when deciding whether or not to approve this measure, and within public discourse.[5] However, popular in Chile, despite the end of his dictatorship, Pinochet and the military remained fairly firmly entrenched in Chilean politics, and leaving out names of specific perpetrators was done to placate the military, ensuring they would not try to wreak havoc on a fragile, budding democracy. Another point of contention was the scope of the mandate. President Aylwin had reconciliation foremost on his mind and asked for the TRC Report to be made available quickly, setting aside nine-months to investigate and write the report. In order to ensure the Commission met this deadline, Aylwin set a limited definition of ‘victim’: those who had disappeared or been murdered by the military dictatorship. The limited nature of this definition also applied to reparations proposals as well. Thus, citizens who were tortured, imprisoned and exiled but survived Pinochet’s regime were not recognized nor compensated for the human rights abuses they suffered. Unfortunately, there was very little by way of recourse for these victims for a decade or so. However, in 2004, President Lagos ordered a second TRC, the National Commission on Political Imprisonment and Torture Report, which formally acknowledged those who had been imprisoned and tortured as victims of the Pinochet Regime and allowed them access to reparations.[6] 

In sum, Chile’s National Commission for Truth and Reconciliation was a successful step undertaken by the government to build peace and renew positive relations between the state and its citizens. This was done by acknowledging and apologizing for past wrongdoings and creating reparations and symbolic reconciliation gestures. However, certain aspects of the truth and reconciliation process hindered peacebuilding, namely the unwillingness to name the individual perpetrators of violence and the limited nature of the investigation. 

__________________________________________________________________________________________________

1. Hayner, Priscilla B. Unspeakable Truths: Confronting State Terror and Atrocity. New York, Routledge, 2001.
2. Report of the Chilean National Commission on Truth and Reconciliation. Translated by the Center for Civil and Human Rights, Chilean National Commission on Truth and Reconciliation, 1991, https://www.usip.org/sites/default/files/resources/collections/truth_commissions/Chile90-Report/Chile90-Report.pdf. Accessed 26 Nov. 2020.
3. Hayner, Priscilla B. Unspeakable Truths: Confronting State Terror and Atrocity. New York, Routledge, 2001.
4. “About the Museum.” Museo de la Memoria y los Derechos Humanos, https://ww3.museodelamemoria.cl/english-version/. Accessed 25 Nov. 2020.
5. Ensalaco, Mark. "Chapter 8: Recovering the Truth." Chile Under Pinochet: Recovering the Truth. University of Pennsylvania Press, 2000, pp. 121-182.
6. Collins, Cath. "Truth-Justice-Reparations Interaction Effects in Transitional Justice Practice: The Case of the ‘Valech Commission’ in Chile." Journal of Latin American Studies, vol. 49, no. 1, 2017, pp. 55-82.

Aylwin, Patricio. “Interview with President Patricio Aylwin.” Patricio Aylwin Foundation, 2012, http://fundacionaylwin.cl/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Entrevista-con-Patricio-Aylwin.pdf

“Ideas and Speeches: Speech Signature Decree Creation of the National Truth and Reconciliation Commission - April 24, 1990.” Patricio Aylwin Foundation, Accessed 29 Nov. 2020. http://fundacionaylwin.cl/ideas-y-discursos/

“Ideas and Speeches: Citizenship Speech on Making Truth and Reconciliation Report Known - March 4, 1991.” Patricio Aylwin Foundation, Accessed 29 Nov. 2020. http://fundacionaylwin.cl/mision-y-objetivos/. 

Report of the Chilean National Commission on Truth and Reconciliation. Translated by the Center for Civil and Human Rights, Chilean National Commission on Truth and Reconciliation, 1991, Accessed 26 Nov. 2020.  https://www.usip.org/sites/default/files/resources/collections/truth_commissions/Chile90-Report/Chile90-Report.pdf. 

Republic of Chile. Acta Consejo Gabinete 14-03-91, pp. 1-17. Universidad Alberto Hurtado, 1991. Archivos Históricos. https://archivospublicos.uahurtado.cl/uploads/r/archivo-institucional-universidad-alberto hurtado/2/8/b/28b00e69caffbcecc9839eea8ced375d16afd254c156556826e8d315441c406e/1-2-7.pdf

Republic of Chile, General Secretariat of the Presidency. ANALISIS SEMANAL: político, laboral, gremial-regional y económico, pp. 1-9. 1990. Patricio Aylwin Foundation. http://fundacionaylwin.cl/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Informe-de-Analisis-SGP.pdf

Republic of Chile. Ley No 19.123: Crea Corporación Nacional de Reparación y Reconciliación, Establece Pensión de Reparación y Otorga Otros Beneficios en Favor de Personas que Señala, pp. 1-24. Ministerio de Justicia y Derechos Humanos, 1992. Programa de Derechos Humanos. https://pdh.minjusticia.gob.cl/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Ley_19123.pdf

Republic of Chile, Supreme Decree [Patricio Aylwin]. Supreme Decree No. 355: Creation of the Commission on Truth and Reconciliation. 1990, Accessed 27 Nov. 2020. https://www.usip.org/sites/default/files/file/resources/collections/commissions/Chile90-Charter.pdf. 

USIP. “Truth Commission: Chile 90.” Report of the Chilean National Commission on Truth and Reconciliation. United States Institute of Peace, October 2, 2014. https://www.usip.org/publications/1990/05/truth-commission-chile-90.

USIP. “Commission of Inquiry: Chile 03.” National Commission on Political Imprisonment and Torture. United States Institute of Peace, October 18, 2018. https://www.usip.org/publications/2003/09/commission-inquiry-chile-03.

Brown, Cynthia. “Human Rights and the ‘Politics of Agreements’ - Chile during President Aylwin's First Year.” Human Rights Watch, 1991.

This Human Rights Watch report is quite a valuable resource because it addresses the broader political, social and historical context in which the Rettig Commission was established. The report not only provides a brief overview of the Rettig Commission, but it also details some of the key achievements made by the Aylwin government during its first year of office, such as facilitating greater democratic governance. The document reveals some of the responses to these reforms and the challenges faced by the government such as terrorism.

Ensalaco, Mark. "Chapter 8: Recovering the Truth." Chile Under Pinochet: Recovering the Truth. University of Pennsylvania Press, 2000, pp. 182-121.

This chapter of Ensalaco’s book provides comprehensive details about the socio-political context behind the creation of the Rettig Commission, as well as interviews with members of the Rettig Commission. These interviews are noteworthy, as the commission was made up of four pro- and four contra- military regime members, all of whom had divergent points of view on many salient issues regarding the truth and reconciliation report they created. While the eight members unanimously presented the findings of their report, the chapter details the discourse among them in deciding whether or not to release the names of human rights abuse perpetrators. This is significant, as including perpetrator names would likely have caused considerable outrage within the military, who still had a powerful role in Chilean society at the time of Rettig Report’s publication.

Evans, Rebecca. “Pinochet in London: Pinochet in Chile: International and Domestic Politics in Human Rights Policy.” Human Rights Quarterly, vol. 28, no. 1, 2006, pp. 207–244. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/20072729

This article details the struggle to reform Chile’s human rights policy after the release of the Rettig Commission’s report. It addresses some of the barriers preventing the prosecution of the perpetrators who committed human rights abuses, such as the Amnesty Law of 1978. The article also focuses on the progress made in holding Pinochet and other military officials accountable for their crimes. It specifically exposes the impact of Spain and the United Kingdom on Chile’s reinterpretation of its Amnesty Law.

Hourcade, Sol et al. “Comisiones de la Verdad de Chile: Verdad y Reparaciones como Política de Estado.” CHR Michelsen Institute, 2018.

This report provides a comprehensive overview of the Rettig Commission and the subsequent National Commission on Political Imprisonment and Torture. While many reports and articles on this topic were published shortly after the commission’s final report was released, this source was released in 2018. Thus, it is a useful resource to understand the long-term impact that the Rettig Commission has had on Chile. In addition, a significant portion of the report is dedicated to discussing the implementation of the Rettig Commission’s recommendations. 

Report of the Chilean National Commission on Truth and Reconciliation. Translated by the Center for Civil and Human Rights, Chilean National Commission on Truth and Reconciliation, 1991. https://www.usip.org/sites/default/files/resources/collections/truth_commissions/Chile90-Report/Chile90-Report.pdf

This report, over 1000 pages in length, was created and approved unanimously by the Rettig Commission in February 1991. It includes four major sections: an introduction, background surrounding Chilean politics and legal frameworks during the military dictatorship, a detailing of the human rights abuses committed during the regime, and recommendations for reparations and prevention of future human rights abuses. This text is foundational to the study of Chile’s truth and reconciliation process, and its proposals and recommendations for reconciliation are a useful barometer to determine whether or not the state is adequately fulfilling its duty to repair the fractured relationship between the government and the Chilean people.

Republic of Chile, General Secretariat of the Presidency. ANALISIS SEMANAL: político, laboral, gremial-regional y económico, pp. 1-9. 1990. Patricio Aylwin Foundation. http://fundacionaylwin.cl/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Informe-de-Analisis-SGP.pdf

This source is an internal government document released by the General Secretariat of the Presidency shortly after the establishment of the Rettig Commission. This document was issued to provide high-ranking government officials with the possible political, economic, regional and laboral ramifications of the Rettig Commission. It goes into particular depth about the potential political risks associated with the responses of the Supreme Court, the Military, Pinochet’s supporters and political parties on the right and left to the commission. The document also proposes various recommendations for the government to address and mitigate these negative reactions. Thus, this source is quite unique because it reveals a rare glimpse into the government’s inner workings and considerations regarding the commission which may have not been widely known in the public sphere.

Republic of Chile, Supreme Decree [Patricio Aylwin]. Supreme Decree No. 355: Creation of the Commission on Truth and Reconciliation. 1990, Accessed 27 Nov. 2020. https://www.usip.org/sites/default/files/file/resources/collections/commissions/Chile90-Charter.pdf. 

This supreme decree was created by President Aylwin shortly after his election in 1990. It calls for the creation of a National Commission on Truth and Reconciliation, outlining the reasoning behind the Commission, the members of the Commission as well as the scope and tasks of the Commission’s investigation. The decree clearly states the importance of forming a comprehensive narrative of the human rights abuses that occurred during the military dictatorship in order to “meet the basic demands of justice” and begin the reconciliation process. This decree set the general mandate and principles upon which the Commission operated and dictated the domains in which the Commission had its own jurisdiction (namely, its by-laws and the ability to protect the identity of those whom they received information from).

Vasallo, Mark. “Truth and Reconciliation Commissions: General Considerations and a Critical Comparison of the Commissions of Chile and El Salvador.” The University of Miami Inter-American Law Review, vol. 33, no. 1, 2002, pp. 153–182, https://www.jstor.org/stable/40176564. Accessed 28 Nov. 2020.

This paper provides a comprehensive look at Truth and Reconciliation Commissions (TRCs), comparing the commissions of El Salvador and Chile. It effectively outlines the concept of a Truth and Reconciliation Commission, why they are implemented and their dis-/advantages. With specific regard to Chile, the paper describes the context in which the TRC took place, how the TRC was conducted and the state and public reaction to the report. Vasallo concludes that Chile’s TRC was able to successfully begin the nation’s reconciliation process with the atrocities committed during the military dictatorship. Significantly, in the debate on the role of these commissions in promoting accountability, the author finds that it is not important to name perpetrators in a TRC report.

Works Cited

“About the Museum.” Museo de la Memoria y los Derechos Humanos, https://ww3.museodelamemoria.cl/english-version/. Accessed 25 Nov. 2020.

Brown, Cynthia. “Human Rights and the ‘Politics of Agreements’ - Chile during President Aylwin's First Year.” Human Rights Watch, 1991.

Collins, Cath. "Truth-Justice-Reparations Interaction Effects in Transitional Justice Practice: The Case of the ‘Valech Commission’ in Chile." Journal of Latin American Studies, vol. 49, no. 1, 2017, pp. 55-82.

Connett, David, John Hooper, and Peter Beaumont. “Pinochet Arrested in London.” The Guardian. Guardian News and Media, October 18, 1998. https://www.theguardian.com/world/1998/oct/18/pinochet.chile.

Ensalaco, Mark. "Chapter 8: Recovering the Truth." Chile Under Pinochet: Recovering the Truth. University of Pennsylvania Press, 2000, pp. 182-121.

Ensalaco, Mark. "Truth Commissions for Chile and El Salvador: A Report and Assessment." Human Rights Quarterly, vol. 16, no. 4, 1994, pp. 656-675, https://www.jstor.org/stable/762563. Accessed 27 Nov. 2020.

Evans, Rebecca. “Pinochet in London: Pinochet in Chile: International and Domestic Politics in Human Rights Policy.” Human Rights Quarterly, vol. 28, no. 1, 2006, pp. 207–244. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/20072729. 

Hayner, Priscilla B. Unspeakable Truths: Confronting State Terror and Atrocity. New York, Routledge, 2001. 

Hourcade, Sol et al. “Comisiones de la Verdad de Chile: Verdad y Reparaciones como Política de Estado.” CHR Michelsen Institute, 2018.

Lerer, Marisa. “Chilean Memorials to the Disappeared.” Wiley Online Library. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, July 19, 2016. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/9781118475331.ch2. 

Report of the Chilean National Commission on Truth and Reconciliation. Translated by the Center for Civil and Human Rights, Chilean National Commission on Truth and Reconciliation, 1991, https://www.usip.org/sites/default/files/resources/collections/truth_commissions/Chile90-Report/Chile90-Report.pdf. Accessed 26 Nov. 2020. 

Republic of Chile, General Secretariat of the Presidency. ANALISIS SEMANAL: político, laboral, gremial—regional y económico, pp. 1-9. 1990. Patricio Aylwin Foundation. 

Republic of Chile, Supreme Decree [Patricio Aylwin]. Supreme Decree No. 355: Creation of the Commission on Truth and Reconciliation. 1990, https://www.usip.org/sites/default/files/file/resources/collections/commissions/Chile90-Charter.pdf. Accessed 27 Nov. 2020.

Rohter, Larry. “A Torture Report Compels Chile to Reassess Its Past.” The New York Times. The New York Times, November 28, 2004. https://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/28/world/americas/a-torture-report-compels-chile-to-reassess-its-past.html.

USIP. “Commission of Inquiry: Chile 03.” National Commission on Political Imprisonment and Torture. United States Institute of Peace, October 18, 2018. https://www.usip.org/publications/2003/09/commission-inquiry-chile-03.

USIP. “Truth Commission: Chile 90.” Report of the Chilean National Commission on Truth and Reconciliation. United States Institute of Peace, October 2, 2014. https://www.usip.org/publications/1990/05/truth-commission-chile-90. 

Vasallo, Mark. “Truth and Reconciliation Commissions: General Considerations and a Critical Comparison of the Commissions of Chile and El Salvador.” The University of Miami Inter-American Law Review, vol. 33, no. 1, 2002, pp. 153–182, https://www.jstor.org/stable/40176564. Accessed 28 Nov. 2020.