Observers noted that the amnesty was perceived as having rewarded the war perpetrators. For the DRC, the amnesty law of 2009 had the effect of issuing a blanket reprieve for all international and serious crimes against humanity. To this day Eastern Congo remains a hotbed of international war crimes and serious human rights violations because among other reasons the perpetrators still operate freely. In South Africa, the well - known amnesty law was successful in many ways as a lot of information and truths were availed which reportedly led to healing for some survivors. However, Mohamed in his presentation lamented that some of the perpetrators who had been given amnesty had committed serious international crimes and worse still for some who had been denied amnesty by the TRC, they managed to get Presidential pardons and were let go from prison. Mohamed went on to discuss the ideal situation in which amnesties should be implemented and listed the following points as critical: Ÿ Amnesty laws should be limited e.g. to specific geographical locations, specific human rights violations with a caveat that excludes international crimes such as genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes Ÿ Amnesty laws should be conditional e.g. requiring that perpetrators issue public apologies before they can be granted amnesty or that they need to reveal all the truth they know about certain human rights violations. Mohamed grappled with the question of whether Zimbabwe's political context was in favour of amnesties. In his presentation he noted that the population including all stakeholders need to be consulted as the past amnesties were biased and more partisan oriented granted to protect partisan interests. Dilemma of Hard Truths ad Reconciliation: Truth Seeking and Preservation Strategies Truth Seeking strategies: Lessons from Kenya Tecla Namachanja, Former Commissioner, Kenya TJRC The former Truth and Justice Commissioner from Kenya gave a narration of the Kenya atrocities from the 2007 elections and earlier efforts by then President Mwai Kibaki to establish truth, justice and reconciliation to deal with past injustices from Daniel Arap Moi’s era. She narrated the journey that led to the establishment of the Kenya Truth Justice Reconciliation Commission. She noted that the Commission faced serious criticisms largely around its legitimacy, the suitability of a Chairperson who had been a serving member of the past regime who was called a “functionary of Moi dictatorship”. The criticisms became worse and a section of the Commissioners stated criticising the Chair, Mr. Kiplagat from inside. Part of the criticism was published in a newspaper article written by the Vice Chair and another Commissioners and it went thus: We write to end our public silence … A truth commission, like a court, requires that its members be free of any actual conflict of interest, and a perception of partiality that is reasonably based. In other words, given the evidence against Kiplagat, it is reasonable to believe that or Chairman may not be independent, neutral, or fair with respect to some or all of the matters within our mandate”. 26 2018 TRANSITIONAL JUSTICE POLICY SYMPOSIUM REPORT