Acceso usuarios
Daniel Torres Checa
Since 2018, the concepts of truth, justice, and reconciliation have become increasingly important in the Mexican State’s judicial agenda. In Andrés Manuel López Obrador’s presidential term, two Truth Commissions were established to investigate cases of mass atrocities that have deeply affected the country’s social fabric. The first Truth Commission was established to look into the “Ayotzinapa Case” —a brutal episode of violence resulting in the disappearance of forty-three students. The second Truth Commission sought historical clarification of the atrocities committed in Mexico between 1965 and 1990, a time of political violence commonly known as the “Dirty War”.
Despite sharing the same institutional name (commission) and being based on the same ideal (truth), closer examination reveals a conceptual split in their mechanisms and goals. This article shows that the Truth Commission for the Dirty War (“MEH”) revolves around a reconciliatory view, while the Truth Commission for the Ayotzinapa Case (“COVAJ”) prioritizes a sense of retributive justice. The article demonstrates why the selection of one political objective (e.g., reconciliation) resulted in the exclusion of another (e.g., justice) and how truth works inside each political process.
Despite sharing the same institutional name (commission) and being based on the same ideal (truth), a closer examination reveals a conceptual split in how their mechanisms and goals are constructed. This essay shows that the Truth Commission for the Dirty War ("MEH") revolves around a reconciliatory view, while the Truth Commission for the Ayotzinapa Case ("COVAJ") prioritizes a sense of retributive justice. The article demonstrates why the selection of one political objective (e.g., reconciliation) resulted in the exclusion of another (e.g., justice), and shows how truth functions inside each political process.
