Being held accountable: why attributing responsibility matters

Debates over reconciliation, atonement, forgiveness, and forgetting involve political personal elements, with substantial investments commitments. I contrast two perspectives: one stresses unconditional forgiveness independent of atonement; the other reflects on importance moral responsibility for formation person. Being held accountable, Ricoeur, matters development self. For Derrida, is a defining aspect being human, becoming debased when seen as legal form justice. use philosophical arguments ethnographic writings from Papua New Guinea, Cyprus, Holocaust to examine reconciliation irreconciliation strategies either reaffirming or reimagining common world. Face à ses responsabilités: pourquoi il est important de dire qui responsable Résumé Les débats sur la réconciliation, le repentir, pardon et l'oubli mettent en jeu des éléments politiques personnels impliquant investissements engagements considérables. L'autrice met ici regard deux points vue : l'un insiste un inconditionnel, indépendant du repentir ; l'autre l'importance responsabilité morale pour personne. Pour être tenu développement soi. trait définit l’être humain avili quand considéré comme une forme légale À partir d'arguments philosophiques écrits ethnographiques Papouasie-Nouvelle-Guinée, Chypre l'Holocauste, présent article réconciliation l'irréconciliation stratégies réaffirmer ou réimaginer monde commun. My experience living in Northern Ireland its history sectarianism (known Troubles) first alerted me intricacies real pressing issue viable peace process. Several terms were used alongside exchanges that tore through community: apology, repentance, remorse, forgetting. Were these prerequisites reconciliation? Other thrown up process analysis: fault, trauma, resentment, responsibility, accountability, imputability. define my some minimize analytical elision, arrange them groups allow nuanced range meanings emerge. Fault, resentment follow each sequentially. Fault offence (evil deed, wrongdoing, atrocity), act causes trauma (a life-changing effect group person) which leads resentment. Resentment feeling having been violated, experienced one's humanity identity denied demeaned. Apology, remorse are linked by family resemblance. Apology blandest instrument (saying sorry denotes regret more level). Repentance (the second stronger) indicate change heart at emotional level. Atonement presages promises an penance. Responsibility, imputability closely connected concepts. Responsibility accept/own part fault. We see ethnography Yael Navaro-Yashin (2009) how ignoring state abjectness, ruination, melancholia. Accountability acknowledgement fault requires ‘making good’ way. Imputability general acceptance broadest sense – capacity virtue actions can be someone's account (Ricoeur 2004). Forgiveness quite different things; does not naturally other. Forgetting, just like remembering, identity-building memory (Lambek 1996). It pathological repression following conscious decision non-reconciliation order re-form world into better (Arendt 2002, cited Berkowitz 2011: 3-4). Arendt also adopts seemingly contradictory position, arguing comes claim absolute superiority (‘only God forgive’) so humanly possible, but same time it what enables human action. What serves similar function politics called (Berkowitz 12). offer pointers rather than definition discussed extensively throughout essay. Is act? Can stretched encompass extreme acts? And would granting unconditionally tantamount accepting evil house good (insofar suggests creation space goodness goodwill, unexpiated wrongdoing accepted cultural world)? begin discussion contrasting perspectives engage fulfilling functions. Jacques Derrida contingent repentance such expectations debase forgiveness. Paul contrast, kind his view, To aims reparation he adds necessity restore victim's damaged humanity, redemption will strengthen self perpetrator. pure human. Attaching conditions degrades justice, subject logic exchange political-economic transaction based negotiation calculation. Thus Derrida's call concerned enacting forgiving, while Ricoeur's expectation admission guilt shows concern redeeming guilty The attempt reconcile, beginning debate philosopher; their concern, rather, pre-existing requirements humanity. How helpful contexts among Kewa Guinea highlight impact manifestations responses people's humanity? if we cannot forgive others, choose Thomas Brudholm (2008) argues ressentiment felt survivor Jean Améry? ourselves suffer degradation, Navaro-Yashin's Turkish Cypriots? And, conversely, persons let go reconcile those whose acts have diminished self-worth (Josephides 2005)? usefulness perspectives, consider case studies demonstrate perils neglecting self, suggest accountability building In section, explore positions along Hannah Arendt. juxtapose context elaborate own work ‘resentment self’, further examined Améry. Following abjectness move juxtaposition self’ Brudholm's legitimate sentiment expressed refusal forgive. argument throughout, most specifically developed section accountable necessary mature, enlightened Subsequent sections show self-formation ethical project valued beyond moving mutual evaluation respect person means treat someone who take responsibility. major forgetting, philosopher Ricoeur (2004) refers amnesty ‘commanded forgetting’. level forgiving’? A commanded amnesia, writes, deprive private collective something precious: ‘the salutary crisis permits lucid reappropriation past traumatic charge’. Instead, institution respond only need urgent social therapy, nature truth utility’ (2004: 456). Here recalls (2001) distinction between pragmatic forgiveness: former truly announcing our freedom sovereignty state, latter mere procedural justice controlled contributing smooth running. directed unforgivable. He distinguishes types purity, Kant's law (1972 [1785]) Levinas's (1969) infinite pragmatic, legal, reasons, desired. type complex apologies offered governments public corporate bodies. If apology effective cases, restitution must hand hand. These apologies, may deduce lead ‘impure’ develops posing fourfold question: whom about what, arbitrate process? As ‘what’, there no merit forgiving forgivable, because perpetrator intended harm she has already done sort crime unforgivable crime, against makes us (‘that man man’ [Derrida 2001: 34]); this power itself. Not forgive, then, ultimate Concerning do diffuses blame asking us, proxy otherwise, crime. (2002) point her ‘levelling down’ ‘everyone … could wrong wrongdoer' (cited 8). Anthropologist James Laidlaw, shall below, shared uses examples practice many cultures. ‘to human’ ‘we all share guilt’ leave room action resolve post-conflict predicaments. question is: ‘who forgiven?’ penance, expiation, transformation perpetrator, then longer nothing worthy name, concludes, unconditional, given still forgiven Nonetheless, although acknowledge this, implies sections, deep loss Ireland, sides nursing grievances, was amnesties, taking chances future, working towards integrated lifestyles. (loyalist/unionist republican) had come long way, leaders Democratic Unionist Party Sinn Féin sitting shoulder ministers. But crucial stage negotiations, attempts resolution, whether government community level, tended stress even forging ahead conciliating, establishing schools. Conciliation, reconciliation's sibling, future atoning past. resembled Arendt's re-imagine new 14). Now again, 2021-2, protocol United Kingdom's exit European Union contributed suspension Stormont ushered uncertainties future. Throughout events, unremitting calls inquiries atrocities continue apace, unsated appetite apportioning blame. emotionally charged scenes May 2021 coroner's report events Ballymurphy 1971 attested rightful continues hold strong sway. Operation Demetrius, British army rounded ‘hundreds suspects without trial hope snuffing out IRA's campaign’ (Carroll 2021). operation, left ten people dead chaotic circumstances, found poor intelligence resulting killings innocent unarmed civilians. publication exoneration powerful fillip violated There cases closer purity. days 2008, ‘mini’ Truth Reconciliation session Belfast, Archbishop Desmond Tutu presiding. Though local feelings efficacy mixed, participants reported therapeutic effects, burgeoning understanding motives maimed killed relatives. event clearly attracted participation desired might representative broader population. Another initiative provoked open outcry. January 2009, eighteen months after set up, ‘Consultation Group Past’ launched report. One recommendation monetary compensation £12,000 families died Troubles, irrespective victims IRA members, security forces, According BBC Ulster News (from 28 18.30), greeted anger Irish community. should ‘moral equivalence’, they argued, deaths civilians members side, paramilitaries, ‘Perpetrators murder’ treated ‘victims murder’. spokesman victims’ insisted wanted recognition suffering, money, implied extending suffering paramilitaries quality recognition. minister Assembly saying Commission (i.e. Consultation Group) itself compromised findings making recommendation. Commission's chairmen cleric) pains explain figure immaterial person's life. learned listening bereaved present judicial institutions answering concerns: truth, Kamari Clarke (2019; volume) International Criminal Court research Nigel Eltringham (2019) Rwandan tribunal attest failures institutions. system, said chairman, combine strands bring chaos balance. forces needs. deal legacy past, develop system blended needs reconciliation. apparent limited actions, laudable reasons peace-making, achieve psychological repair appease long-standing outrage perceived ills suffered.22 comparison, Wilson (2000) South Africa. discuss feel wronged integrity response Early fieldwork Guinea,33 began 1979 continued until 1986, travelling widely within region teaching University Guinea. last visit PNG 1993, though kept contact throughout. became acutely aware everyday lives allocated any affront 2005). People always trying fathom other's thoughts elicitation, questioning akin Socratic method, intention bringing fore hidden grudges cause illness death. Using negotiated affairs before explicit 2008). ‘covered up’ thoughts, unspeakable (Keane 2015: 126-7), wished ascertain received revealing them. Their elicitations invitations agree world, strategy drawing forth willingness compromise. encountered commonly, negotiation, agreement, required hurt caused causing it, back words reversing responsible slighted, cheated, deceived, exploited, singled blame, prevented participating equally distributions, generally exercising controlling influence cumulative slights withheld opinions ignored. This arrow drew immediate response, often violent considerable physical injury. emotion that, unexpressed, kill it. Everybody constantly lookout possible neglect, lack appreciation, offences Local concepts due (whether male female) provided incentive fears, keeping check expressions contempt disdain Insights fieldsite suggested less defines structure culture mode constructing everywhere; manifestation Kant (2015 [1788]) described origin law, shrinks disparaging hero soul. acknowledged. gives rise feeling, action, (psychological) flourish close differs perceptions pertaining self-worth. situations unappreciated disadvantaged, risk losing damage position society. interprets omission commission injurious oneself. judgemental slight offence, pain. example support position. Unconditional occurs people, insist personhood stand compensated injury, reinstate injured place They willingly accept disrespectfully. Although live nation-state, basis organization tribal free awareness power. relatively weak presence communities argue construction fundamental state. make font untouched discussion: added return mentioned earlier, sees transaction. insists aim focusing victim violation His thus sense, suffered. particular grace ability test heroic consists overcoming vulnerability. stop there. mad, concedes, remain madness impossible. freely (for atonement), escapes everything Unconditionality becomes dissociated sovereignty. That is, power, enforced, mediated, enabled unconditionality independence announces chairman Past (in Ireland) taken grievances went powers read terms: pastoral performing duty, turn perspective magnum opus Memory, history, where seeks, memory, preserve boundary amnesia. mourning, guided spirit ‘If legitimately invoked [after mourning forgiveness], duty silence evil, pacified anger’ 2004: ‘difficult forgetting’, outlines problems encounters. begins problem representation plane 457). issues: paralyses lifts paralysis ‘existential incapacity’. First, existential (we presented action), robbing act. (For ‘fault’ terrorism, atrocity, genocide, etc.) am upon sister, brother, father, mother, life's partner, child, ‘effects fault’; together effects ‘a mark forgetting’ next step. disproportion pole (or offence) metaphor difference altitude, vertical disparity: ‘below, avowal fault; above, hymn forgiveness’ speech acts. names failure. accusation audible transgressors themselves accountable. hearings, policeman England would-be killer. reflected thing attacker's place. finding discuss. another instance, daughter father killed, happened, understand undertaken circumstances. Would constitute self-alienation, face impossibility unpardonable evil’ 458)? did daughter/victim repress herself/himself somehow much harm? ‘neglect self’. mind (empathetic) (‘if your shoes …’), prerequisite gained offending party. diametrically opposed perspective. realization unequal carried ‘heart selfhood’ imputability, paradox laid bare’ 459). journey criminal ‘political inherent status citizenship’. ‘gestures incapable transformed institutions’, designating ineluctable consideration every being, guilty’ 458). situates margins institutions, done. agreement writes tied Forgetting brief enter debate; nor 460) cites Karl Jaspers’ culpability, ‘boundary situation’. By Jaspers meant non-fortuitous situation ‘already there’ (such death, struggle). Culpability somebody blunder possibility blunders, ‘gives thought’ 460). account. integral dimension capable being: imputing imputed established book German (1947), identified four questions: category fault? Before court brought? effects? justification, exoneration, sanction? responds three questions. ‘Can admit fault?’ Yes, sense. answer. matter respecting person, argues, expect him 479). amount withholding her/him On forgiving. expects reveals wrongdoer. side thesis Heidegger's solicitude, ‘leaps dominates’ under pretence away ‘care’ Other, instead ‘leap[ing] liberat[ing]’ handing burden (Heidegger 1962 [1927]: 158-9). asks ‘Must pronounces himself