ABSTRACT
Political scientists concerned with memory are usually interested in the ways in which memories and historical narratives are constructed to forge loyalties and collective identification. At the same time we look at how political processes themselves are being shaped by memory, both in its individual and collective forms. The field of ‘memory politics’ as an area of political science research is still new and remains highly under-conceptualised. Students of memory politics are required to have a sound understanding of both history and political science concepts. Moreover, depending on their specific area of study they often cross further disciplinary boundaries by using ideas and concepts from social theory, education or legal inquiries. The primary research task for political scientists engaging with memory, however, is to look at institutional mechanisms, legislation, state policies and elite discourses in order to identify processes of public-political meaning and decision-making. A rather common approach in these inquiries (though not the only one) is to identify and study specific political actors, their emergence and interactions as well as their relative power to influence public policy and discourses. The current chapter follows this approach by identifying historical truth commissions as interesting semi-state actors that emerge in particular situations of memory-related conflict and operate under specific constraints determined both by power structures and social processes. As this is meant as a contribution to a volume on ‘memory studies’, my goal here is not so much focused on determining causalities in relation to commissions’ emergence or effects. Instead my aim is to propose a memory-based conceptualisation of these interesting actors seeing them as mediators between history, memory and power.
