ADDRESS BY
His Excellency Mr Xanana Gusmao
To the Stockholm International Forum
Conference on Truth, Justice and Reconciliation
23 April, 2002
RECONCILIATION -The Challenge for All
It is a great honour to be here, representing the people of East Timor,
at
this international forum on Truth, Justice and Reconciliation.
Before I speak of the universality of pain, suffering and forgiveness,
I
would like to remind all of the participants present here that the violence
in East Timor commenced on 11 August 1975 with two East Timorese
nationalist movements taking up arms against one another on ideological
grounds. And so began the bloody conflict which led to the Indonesian
invasion of 7 December 1975.
In 1984, a process of reconciliation involving the two movements was
initiated, making way for the establishment in 1986 of the Nationalist
Convergence which was a response to the reconciliatory efforts being
promoted inside East Timor itself.
After the first three years of resistance, the over 90% of the population
which had fled into the mountains found themselves under the control of
the
invading Indonesian forces. As of this moment, many were mobilized by
the
Indonesian military to fight the guerrilla forces. A large number of these
brothers who paraded the heads of slain Timorese from the mountains as
war
trophies were accepted back into their communities in a spirit of
reconciliation. Others joined the guerrilla struggle and died as heroes.
In the same way, many of those who were considered to be collaborators
for
having betrayed the clandestine organization were forgiven and turned
to
working for the resistance.
Mention must also be made of the political will of the East Timorese
to
engage in dialogue and reconciliation which was manifest through their
participation in dialogue in 1994 in London and in Austria in the two
years
that followed. Even prior to the popular consultation, two meetings took
place in Dare, just outside Dili, and another in Jakarta, with a view
to
bringing East Timorese face to face in search of reconciliation.
All of the above is evidence of the East Timorese people's profound
understanding of the need for reconciliation and of their efforts to
conduct themselves, whenever possible, in this spirit.
Today we continue to engage actively in this process, with special
attention being paid to the consequences of the violence of September
1999.
As I stated at the beginning, we are here to reflect upon the universality
of pain, suffering and forgiveness. These feelings know no boundaries
-
they are the human condition. Sometimes the pain is so overwhelming that
talk of forgiveness seems like another insult - people who talk to
perpetrators of injustice are accused of insulting the victims. Opening
dialogue with the recent enemy is a difficult process. In this sense I
come
today from the field of sorrows where the sea of sadness washed our shores
for so many years that we even lost names of those for whom we seek
justice. I have heard the same words from our brothers and sisters in
other
places in the world. We know from our knowledge of history that
civilisation evolved from brutality, that peace followed great wars.
· What then does a tolerant society in the 21st Century do to
speed
up the healing process? Truth and Reconciliation are important elements
but
the parties must become engaged-dialogue is the primary objective with
conditions for an effective exchange of views a basic requirement. Getting
the opposite sides to the table sounds like a simple negotiation but in
reality is very complex. People have different perceptions.
In post apartheid South Africa truthfulness was made a legal requirement
for participation in the reconciliation/healing process. Those who were
not prepared to truthfully acknowledge their crimes did not participate
in
the reconciliation process. Alternate judicial processes and sanctions
were developed in South Africa to deal with persons who would not recognise
their criminality. Such a structure may have been suited to South Africa
where there was a developed judicial and criminal law system. In East
Timor these structures are still being created.
Let me explain the situation in East Timor in more detail. In 2000 we
strove to revive dialogue and many meetings were held with the support
of
Uppsala University, starting with Jakarta and including gatherings in
Singapore, Tokyo, Denpasar and Baucau, East Timor. These meetings were
largely aimed at promoting dialogue with the pro-autonomy leadership.
It must be acknowledged that the people did not agree with these meetings
and we were accused of distorting the spirit of reconciliation. We
reflected deeply on this message from the people and resolved to identify
another mechanism.
The need has appeared for us to formulate a National Reconciliation Policy.
In meetings with the First Transitional Administration and the judiciary
(including judges, prosecutors and serious crimes investigators) I outlined
the need for all of us to be guided by a single code of conduct, without
which our efforts at reconciliation were bound to fail.
All of the government bodies agreed that reconciliation should offer
a
means whereby the perpetrators of human rights violations can sit together
with the victims and community leaders. From here commenced a second phase
of the reconciliation process. With the announcement of the unqualified
support of the Indonesian authorities, we proceeded to organize meetings
at
various localities along the border in both the north and south of the
country, including in the enclave of Oecusse-Ambeno.
Throughout this process I have witnessed tense encounters which ended
with
tears being shed and embraces of forgiveness exchanged between former
foes.
Such meetings allowed us to dispel many of the concerns regarding personal
revenge which persisted.
In each of these meetings, we emphasized the importance of justice being
done. Whilst we recognize that many international organizations take
exception to our approach, our position continues to be that we must allow
the perpetrators of crimes to meet with victims before they decide to
return to East Timor and to face trial there.
The prosecutors of serious crimes will have little work to follow up
on if
the indicted refuse to return to East Timor. We advocate a reconciliation
process whereby justice is meted out to perpetrators but which eschews
revenge, resentment and hatred.
There has been some criticism of my meetings with militia leaders. Some
have suggested that persons are being invited to return home on the basis
of a known prosecution agreement. This is a very complex issue. To start
a reconciliation process requires a balancing of interests. On one hand
the interests of justice and on the other hand the interests of a suffering
community who follow a leader who is unwilling to return for fear of
punishment. In this sense the situation in West Timor among the East
Timorese people is very complex. I anticipate that early in the
independence of my country the East Timor Government will clarify its
position with respect to persons accused of very serious crimes. As I
said
earlier a good knowledge of the laws of East Timor and attitudes to those
suspected of serious crimes is necessary to facilitate the reconciliation
process.
A good deal is spoken outside East Timor on the subject of trauma. In
East
Timor's case I believe trauma is experienced at a personal level, but
it is
not a generalized phenomenon. Personally I believe that we must view trauma
from another angle, that is, as it may be experienced by the family members
and particularly the children of those facing prison sentences of 10,
15 or
even 20 years.
Reconciliation would be rendered meaningless. I am of the view that
reconciliation succeeds only when East Timorese society stops being haunted
by the ghosts of conflicts of the past. We have already proudly shown
to
the world that, in spite of 24 years of violence and suffering which
culminated in September 1999, the East Timorese people desire to live
in
harmony and to attain true peace of mind. The two elections which took
place within the space of 7 months were carried out peacefully and with
an
exceptionally high level of popular participation.
We agree with the need for justice. As part of the healing process, what
is
also required of us is courage in our political conduct because this is,
after all, a political process and not merely a judicial one.
In my programs (and I was elected President on the basis of my programs)
I
defended strongly the need for amnesty for those already indicted and
serving prison terms. I intend to urge the Parliament to issue a decree
granting the President special powers in this regard.
I have already mentioned that the process requires a balancing of
interests. I wish to include here the national interest of guaranteeing
stability along the border and of strengthening our cooperation with
Indonesia, in particular with the Province of Nusa Tenggara Timur inside
which our enclave of Oecusse is situated.
Last year at the UN Security Council I appealed for the down-sizing of
the
peace keeping forces to be delayed until after last year's general
elections. We are keenly aware that the attention of the international
community has turned to Afghanistan and the Middle East, with implications
for donor contributions to the peace keeping effort in East Timor.
Even before the war in Afghanistan, we were aware that the costs associated
with peace-keeping operations in East Timor were much higher than the
roughly 100 million dollars budgeted for the reconstruction of the country.
Following this conference, I am obliged to travel to New York to request
that peace keepers remain in East Timor for another two years with only
a
gradual down-sizing.
To relieve the burden on the international community, we must see our
reconciliation efforts as a means of consolidating national stability
and
of contributing to world peace.
The reconciliation process in East Timor has certain features and is
governed by certain rules which must be kept in mind.
One of the priorities of my term as President will be to continue to
unite
the Timorese people in the fight against poverty. In this sense,
reconciliation is an essential element in the process of national
reconstruction.
In November last year I visited Kupang. Earlier this month I traveled
to
Atambua and Kefa in West Timor where I addressed more than five thousand
refugees. On my return to Timor, I will visit Sulawesi with the same intention.
The small size of our population and the strong sense of community and
social solidarity which are a feature of many economically under-developed
nations have facilitated reconciliation amongst East Timorese. In addition,
our people's strong ancestral links to the land have been an important
factor in bringing refugees home in spite of fears of possible retribution.
A Reception, Truth and Reconciliation Commission has been established
to
provide support to communities in the resolution of small-scale conflicts.
The Commission of Reception, Truth and Reconciliation has to show virtues
of tolerance, compassion and forbearance as well as the pursuit of
truth. It may be a contradiction for a state sponsored commission to issue
threats of prosecution against persons unless they return or unless they
tell the truth; it may be counter productive for reconciliation to be
seen
as an outcome of strengths and power.
Only a wise policy of Reconciliation can promote harmony within Timorese
society and guarantee broad participation as the basic condition for social
justice and the improvement of the living standards of the population.
Only
then will Independence have real meaning for a people who fought, suffered
and finally won their right to live in freedom and independence.
We continue to count on the support of the democratic governments and
institutions which have assisted us thus far, many of which are represented
here at this Conference. We share the success we have attained so far
with
all of you, and we hope and trust that the experience of the small nation
of East Timor can contribute in a modest way to informing and enlightening
your deliberations here at this conference. Thank you.