Narrating the Past, Navigating the Future

: The Contribution of Truth Commissions to Creating a Shared History: The Case of Sierra Leone, Kenya and the Gambia

Abstract

Truth commissions are often regarded as important mechanisms in transitional justice, particularly for promoting national reconciliation. However, the general assumption that they create a shared history that settles past conflicts and prevents future violence has not been sufficiently rigorously studied. This gap is addressed here by analysing the contribution of truth commissions to creating a shared history in Sierra Leone, Kenya, and The Gambia. A qualitative research methodology was employed, combining an extensive literature review and a total of 44 semi-structured interviews with professionals and 38 focus group discussions with young people, men, and women in local communities. These included both direct victims of the human rights violations and the broader population affected by the conflicts or dictatorships addressed by the truth commissions. In total, 391 individuals participated in the research.
Findings demonstrate that truth commissions have significant potential to serve as a tool for creating a shared narrative that is accepted by a broad segment of professional audiences and the general public. However, this potential remains mainly hypothetical and underutilised due to insufficient validation and dissemination. Interaction with local communities was lacking in all three cases. To create a shared narrative, this interaction is crucial with respect to the number of people reached, the inclusion of groups and segments of society, and the quality of the interaction. This should not be a one-off action but rather a continuous process that requires long-term investment. The study found that acceptance among domestic audiences is enhanced when the social, political, economic, and cultural context is integral to the narrative, including crimes committed during the colonial era and the structural injustices they created. Professional audiences generally accepted the historical record produced. However, they did critique the depth and scope of the analyses. They may struggle to recall or prioritize the findings and recommendations, particularly when other reform initiatives within their professional sectors take precedence.
It was further noteworthy that in all three case studies, the (potential) involvement of international and hybrid courts introduced dynamics that tended to dominate the transitional justice process, including the functioning and framing of the truth commissions. Consistent with this, the study found that a lack of effective coordination with other transitional justice mechanisms may undermine acceptance among professional audiences and, in turn, hinder the implementation of recommendations.

Date of Award	2 May 2026
Original language	English
Awarding Institution	University of Portsmouth
Supervisor	Francis Pakes (Supervisor), Melita Lazell (Supervisor) & Ben Garner (Supervisor)