Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-n9wrp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-18T14:14:18.287Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Importance of Conversation in Transitional Justice: A Study of Land Restitution in South Africa

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 December 2018

Bernadette Atuahene
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

One of the most replicated findings of the procedural justice literature is that people who receive unfavorable outcomes are more likely to believe that the process was nonetheless legitimate if they thought that it was fair. Using interviews of 150 people compensated through the South African land restitution program, this article examines whether these findings apply in the transitional justice context where it is often unclear who the winners and losers are. The question explored is: When all outcomes are unfavorable or incomplete, how do people make fairness assessments? The central observation was that the ability of respondents and land restitution commission officials to sustain a conversation with each other had the greatest effect on whether respondents believed that the land restitution process was fair. The study also contributes to the existing literature by exploring the institutional arrangements and resources necessary to facilitate communication and to overcome any communication breakdowns encountered.

Type
Articles
Information
Law & Social Inquiry , Volume 39 , Issue 4 , Fall 2014 , pp. 902 - 937
Copyright
Copyright © American Bar Foundation, 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References

Atuahene, Bernadette 2007. From Reparation to Restoration: Moving Beyond Restoring Property Rights to Restoring Political and Economic Visibility. Southern Methodist University Law Review 60:1419–1470.Google Scholar
Atuahene, Bernadette 2009. Things Fall Apart: The Illegitimacy of Property Rights in the Context of Past Theft. Arizona Law Review 51:829–866.Google Scholar
Atuahene, Bernadette 2010a. Property and Transitional Justice. UCLA Law Review Discourse 58:65–93.Google Scholar
Atuahene, Bernadette 2010b. Property Rights and the Demands of Transformation. Michigan Journal of International Law 31:765–819.Google Scholar
Atuahene, Bernadette 2011. Paying for the Past: Addressing Past Property Violations in South Africa. Law & Society Review 45 (4): 955–990.Google Scholar
Atuahene, Bernadette 2014. We Want What's Ours: Learning from South Africa's Land Restitution Process. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Brockner, J., and Wiesenfeld, B. M. 1996. An Integrative Framework for Explaining Reactions to Decisions: The Interactive Effects of Outcomes and Procedures. Psychological Bulletin 120:189–208.Google Scholar
Commission on Restitution of Land Rights. 2008. Commission on Restitution of Land Rights Annual Report, 1 April 2007–31 March 2008. Pretoria: Commission on Restitution of Land Rights.Google Scholar
Dawood, Zohra 1994. Race and Space: Dispossession Through the Group Areas Act. Cape Town: Surplus Respondents Project.Google Scholar
Donaldson, Ronnie, and Lochner, Marais, eds. 2002. Transforming Rural and Urban Spaces in South Africa During the 1990s: Reform, Restitution, Restructuring. Pretoria, South Africa: Africa Institute of South Africa.Google Scholar
Espeland, Wendy, and Stevens, Mitchell 1998. Commensuration as a Social Process. Annual Review of Sociology 24:313–343.Google Scholar
Fay, Derick, and James, Deborah 2008. The Rights and Wrongs of Land Restitution: “Restoring What Was Ours.” Abingdon: Routledge‐Cavendish.Google Scholar
Folger, R. 1977. Distributive and Procedural Justice: Combined Impact of “Voice” and Improvement on Experienced Inequity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 35 (2): 108–119.Google Scholar
Gibson, James 2010. Overcoming Historical Injustices: Land Reconciliation in South Africa. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hall, Ruth 2004a. Land Restitution in South Africa: Rights, Development, and the Restrained State. Canadian Journal of African Studies 38:654–671.Google Scholar
Hall, Ruth 2004b. A Political Economy of Land Reform in South Africa. Review of African Political Economy 31:213–227.Google Scholar
James, Deborah 2009. Gaining Ground?: Rights and Property in South African Land Reform. Abingdon: Routledge‐Cavendish.Google Scholar
Kanfer, R., Sawyer, J., Early, P. C., and Lind, E. A. 1987. Fairness and Participation in Evaluation Procedures: Effects on Task Attitudes and Performance. Social Justice Research 1 (2): 235–249.Google Scholar
Lahiff, Edward (2008) Land Reform in South Africa: A Status Report Programme for Land and Agrarian Studies. Research Report No. 38. Bellville, South Africa: Programme on Land Agrarian Studies.Google Scholar
Lahiff, Edward, Maluleke, Themba, Manenzhe, Tshililo, and Wegerif, Marc 2008. Land Redistribution and Poverty Reduction in South Africa: The Livelihood Impacts of Smallholder Agriculture Under Land Reform. Bellville, South Africa: Programme on Land and Agrarian Studies.Google Scholar
LaTour, Stephen 1978. Determinants of Participant and Observer Satisfaction with Adversary and Inquisitorial Modes of Adjudication. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 36 (12): 1531–1545.Google Scholar
Lichbach, Mark 1990. Will Rational People Rebel Against Inequality?: Samson's Choice. American Journal of Political Science 34:1049–1076.Google Scholar
Lind, E. Allan, Kanfer, R., and Earley, P. C. 1990. Voice, Control, and Procedural Justice: Instrumental and Noninstrumental Concerns in Fairness Judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 59:952–959.Google Scholar
Lind, E. Allan, Lissak, Robin I., and Conlon, Donald E. 1983. Decision Control and Process Control Effects on Procedural Fairness Judgments. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 13 (4): 338–350.Google Scholar
Lind, E. Allan, and Tyler, Thomas R. 1988. The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice. New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
Lind, E. Allan, Walker, Laurens, Kurtz, Susan, Musante, Linda, and Thibaut, John W. 1980. Procedure and Outcome Effects on Reactions to Adjudicated Resolution of Conflicts of Interest. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 39 (4): 643–653.Google Scholar
MacCoun, Robert J. 2005. Voice, Control, and Belonging: The Double‐Edged Sword of Procedural Fairness. Annual Review of Law and Social Science 1:171–201 Google Scholar
Manenzhe, Tshilio, and Lahiff, Edward 2007. Restitution and Post‐Settlement Support: Three Case Studies from Limpopo. Bellville, South Africa: Programme on Land and Agrarian Studies. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Royal African Society.Google Scholar
Midlarsky, Manus 1988. Rulers and the Ruled: Patterned Inequality and the Onset of Mass Political Violence. American Political Science Review 82:491–509.Google Scholar
Miller, D. L. Carey 2000. Land Title in South Africa. Kenwyn, South Africa: Juta & Company.Google Scholar
Mostert, Hanri 2000. Land Restitution, Social Justice and Development in South Africa. South African Law Journal 119:400–428.Google Scholar
Muller, Edward, Seligson, Mitchell, and Fu, Hung‐der 1989. Land Inequality and Political Violence. American Political Science Review 83:577–596.Google Scholar
Parker, Gail 2004. The Challenge of Sustainable Land‐Based Local Economic Development in Poor Communities of South Africa: The Case of Groblershoop, Northern Cape. Bellville, South Africa: Programme on Land and Agrarian Studies.Google Scholar
Platzky, L., and Walker, Cherryl 1985. The Surplus People: Forced Removals in South Africa. Johannesburg: Ravan Press.Google Scholar
Rwelamira, Medard, and Werle, Gerhard, eds. 1996. Confronting Past Injustices: Approaches to Amnesty, Punishment, Reparation and Restitution in South Africa and Germany. Durban, South Africa: Butterworths.Google Scholar
Teitel, Ruti 2003. Transitional Justice Genealogy. Harvard Human Rights Journal 6:69–94.Google Scholar
Thibaut, John, and Walker, Laurens 1975. Procedural Justice: A Psychological Analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Thompson, Leonard 1995. A History of South Africa. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Tilley, Susan 2007. International Comparative Study of Strategies for Settlement Support Provision to Land Reform Beneficiaries. Bellville, South Africa: Programme on Land and Agrarian Studies.Google Scholar
Tyler, Tom R. 1984. The Role of Perceived Injustice in Defendants' Evaluations of Their Courtroom Experience. Law & Society Review 18:51–74.Google Scholar
Tyler, Tom R. 1987. Conditions Leading to Value Expressive Effects in Judgments of Procedural Justice: A Test of Four Models. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 52 (2): 333–344.Google Scholar
Tyler, Tom R. 1989. The Psychology of Procedural Justice: A Test of the Group Value Model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 57 (5): 830–838.Google Scholar
Tyler, Tom R. 1990. Why Respondents Obey the Law: Procedural Justice, Legitimacy, and Compliance. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Tyler, Tom R. 1994. Governing Amid Diversity: The Effect of Fair Decision‐Making Procedures on the Legitimacy of Government. Law & Society Review 28:809–832.Google Scholar
Tyler, Tom R., Rasinski, Kenneth A., and Spodick, Nancy 1985. The Influence of Voice on Satisfaction with Leaders: Exploring the Meaning of Process Control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 48 (1): 72–81.Google Scholar
Walker, Cherryl 2008. Landmarked: Land Claims and Restitution in South Africa. Athens, OH: Ohio University Press.Google Scholar

Interviews

Confidential Interview, Boden. 2008. Western Cape, South Africa.Google Scholar
Confidential Interview, Dlamini. 2008. Gauteng, South Africa.Google Scholar
Confidential Interview, Doe. 2008. Western Cape, South Africa.Google Scholar
Confidential Interview, Flanders. 2008. Western Cape, South Africa.Google Scholar
Confidential Interview, Gains. 2008. Gauteng, South Africa.Google Scholar
Confidential Interview, Ganesh. 2008. Gauteng, South Africa.Google Scholar
Confidential Interview, Howard. 2008. Gauteng, South Africa.Google Scholar
Confidential Interview, Kagiso. 2008. Western Cape, South Africa.Google Scholar
Confidential Interview, Karl. 2008. Western Cape, South Africa.Google Scholar
Confidential Interview, Lesedi. 2008. Gauteng, South Africa.Google Scholar
Confidential Interview, Madlingozi. 2008. Gauteng, South Africa.Google Scholar
Confidential Interview, Mdontswa. 2008. Gauteng, South Africa.Google Scholar
Confidential Interview, Ngcobo. 2008. Gauteng, South Africa.Google Scholar
Confidential Interview, Rabodila. 2008. Western Cape, South Africa.Google Scholar
Confidential Interview, Richardson. 2008. Gauteng, South Africa.Google Scholar
Confidential Interview, Starks. 2008. Western Cape, South Africa.Google Scholar
Interview, Thozi Gwanya. 2008. Pretoria, South Africa.Google Scholar
Interview, Elias Khama. 2008. Pretoria, South Africa.Google Scholar
Phone Interview, Lusapho Ngqonogqo, Project Officer, Land Restitution Commission. 2012. Chicago, IL.Google Scholar

Statutes Cited

Natives Land Act No. 27 (1913), South Africa.Google Scholar
Native Trust and Land Act No. 18 (1936), South Africa.Google Scholar
Restitution of Land Rights Act 22 of 1994, as amended by Act 48 of 2003.Google Scholar
South African Constitution (1996).Google Scholar