Redress for past harms? Official apologies in Northern Ireland

Patricia Lundy, Bill Rolston

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This article critically examines the nature, role and function of official apologies with respect to conflict-related deaths in Northern Ireland. It draws on empirical research of investigations carried out by the Historical Enquiries Team (HET) in state involvement cases and in particular a sample of unpublished reports that prompted official apologies. These reports also contain individual ‘perpetrator’ apologies or expressions of regret. Apologies are promoted as an important transitional justice tool, and the topic has generated considerable literature. However, while that literature has touched upon the possible adverse effects of apologies, there has been less focus on examining the empirical evidence of situations where apologies have turned out to have negative effects. This article addresses aspects of this research gap through the lens of three key transitional justice themes: redress, reparation and victims’ agency. Pivotal questions are raised about the value of apology to the victim on the one hand and the state on the other. The conceding or withholding of official apologies is examined: who qualifies and why, and whether certain victims are deemed ‘undeserving’ of an apology. The article concludes by suggesting that a pattern of official apologies without accountability and acceptance of responsibility is emerging in Northern Ireland; that official apologies can function as a way to shield state institutions, deflect further scrutiny, deny culpability, avoid effective redress and placate and silence victims. In this context historical injustice may be intensified rather than rectified, causing more harm than good, at best glossing over past wrongs and at worst facilitating impunity and re-traumatising victims.
LanguageEnglish
Pages104-122
Number of pages19
JournalThe International Journal of Human Rights
Volume20
Issue number1
Early online date13 Jun 2015
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2 Jan 2016

Fingerprint

justice
reparation
responsibility
empirical research
acceptance
death
evidence
Values
literature

Keywords

  • Redress
  • Official apologies
  • Historical Enquiries Team
  • Northern Ireland

Cite this

@article{d9f9830c9f8640a5a634570394676469,
title = "Redress for past harms? Official apologies in Northern Ireland",
abstract = "This article critically examines the nature, role and function of official apologies with respect to conflict-related deaths in Northern Ireland. It draws on empirical research of investigations carried out by the Historical Enquiries Team (HET) in state involvement cases and in particular a sample of unpublished reports that prompted official apologies. These reports also contain individual ‘perpetrator’ apologies or expressions of regret. Apologies are promoted as an important transitional justice tool, and the topic has generated considerable literature. However, while that literature has touched upon the possible adverse effects of apologies, there has been less focus on examining the empirical evidence of situations where apologies have turned out to have negative effects. This article addresses aspects of this research gap through the lens of three key transitional justice themes: redress, reparation and victims’ agency. Pivotal questions are raised about the value of apology to the victim on the one hand and the state on the other. The conceding or withholding of official apologies is examined: who qualifies and why, and whether certain victims are deemed ‘undeserving’ of an apology. The article concludes by suggesting that a pattern of official apologies without accountability and acceptance of responsibility is emerging in Northern Ireland; that official apologies can function as a way to shield state institutions, deflect further scrutiny, deny culpability, avoid effective redress and placate and silence victims. In this context historical injustice may be intensified rather than rectified, causing more harm than good, at best glossing over past wrongs and at worst facilitating impunity and re-traumatising victims.",
keywords = "Redress, Official apologies, Historical Enquiries Team, Northern Ireland",
author = "Patricia Lundy and Bill Rolston",
year = "2016",
month = "1",
day = "2",
doi = "10.1080/13642987.2015.1050235",
language = "English",
volume = "20",
pages = "104--122",
journal = "International Journal of Human Rights",
issn = "1364-2987",
number = "1",

}

Redress for past harms? Official apologies in Northern Ireland. / Lundy, Patricia; Rolston, Bill.

In: The International Journal of Human Rights, Vol. 20, No. 1, 02.01.2016, p. 104-122.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Redress for past harms? Official apologies in Northern Ireland

AU - Lundy, Patricia

AU - Rolston, Bill

PY - 2016/1/2

Y1 - 2016/1/2

N2 - This article critically examines the nature, role and function of official apologies with respect to conflict-related deaths in Northern Ireland. It draws on empirical research of investigations carried out by the Historical Enquiries Team (HET) in state involvement cases and in particular a sample of unpublished reports that prompted official apologies. These reports also contain individual ‘perpetrator’ apologies or expressions of regret. Apologies are promoted as an important transitional justice tool, and the topic has generated considerable literature. However, while that literature has touched upon the possible adverse effects of apologies, there has been less focus on examining the empirical evidence of situations where apologies have turned out to have negative effects. This article addresses aspects of this research gap through the lens of three key transitional justice themes: redress, reparation and victims’ agency. Pivotal questions are raised about the value of apology to the victim on the one hand and the state on the other. The conceding or withholding of official apologies is examined: who qualifies and why, and whether certain victims are deemed ‘undeserving’ of an apology. The article concludes by suggesting that a pattern of official apologies without accountability and acceptance of responsibility is emerging in Northern Ireland; that official apologies can function as a way to shield state institutions, deflect further scrutiny, deny culpability, avoid effective redress and placate and silence victims. In this context historical injustice may be intensified rather than rectified, causing more harm than good, at best glossing over past wrongs and at worst facilitating impunity and re-traumatising victims.

AB - This article critically examines the nature, role and function of official apologies with respect to conflict-related deaths in Northern Ireland. It draws on empirical research of investigations carried out by the Historical Enquiries Team (HET) in state involvement cases and in particular a sample of unpublished reports that prompted official apologies. These reports also contain individual ‘perpetrator’ apologies or expressions of regret. Apologies are promoted as an important transitional justice tool, and the topic has generated considerable literature. However, while that literature has touched upon the possible adverse effects of apologies, there has been less focus on examining the empirical evidence of situations where apologies have turned out to have negative effects. This article addresses aspects of this research gap through the lens of three key transitional justice themes: redress, reparation and victims’ agency. Pivotal questions are raised about the value of apology to the victim on the one hand and the state on the other. The conceding or withholding of official apologies is examined: who qualifies and why, and whether certain victims are deemed ‘undeserving’ of an apology. The article concludes by suggesting that a pattern of official apologies without accountability and acceptance of responsibility is emerging in Northern Ireland; that official apologies can function as a way to shield state institutions, deflect further scrutiny, deny culpability, avoid effective redress and placate and silence victims. In this context historical injustice may be intensified rather than rectified, causing more harm than good, at best glossing over past wrongs and at worst facilitating impunity and re-traumatising victims.

KW - Redress

KW - Official apologies

KW - Historical Enquiries Team

KW - Northern Ireland

U2 - 10.1080/13642987.2015.1050235

DO - 10.1080/13642987.2015.1050235

M3 - Article

VL - 20

SP - 104

EP - 122

JO - International Journal of Human Rights

T2 - International Journal of Human Rights

JF - International Journal of Human Rights

SN - 1364-2987

IS - 1

ER -