AFH 4450 C11 Agenda-1- jonathan

.docx

School

Miami Dade College, Miami *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

4450

Subject

Sociology

Date

Apr 27, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

3

Uploaded by meemoomaww on coursehero.com

AFH 4450 Class 10 Agenda 2024 Name: Jonathan Davis Follow this side as we go through each section in class. Use the questions to prompt responses for the right side. Use this side to write your notes and practice active engagement during class. You will be submitting a copy of this completed class agenda for participation. 3:00-3:05 Overview Our learning outcomes for this class: o Understand the objectives and operations of the Truth and Reconciliation Committee. o Analyze the TRC's impact on post-apartheid South Africa, including its successes and criticisms. o Relate the TRC's work to broader themes of justice, reconciliation, and healing in post-conflict societies. Notes: 3:05-3:15 Introduction to the Truth and Reconciliation Committee Dr. Maxwell will provide a quick refresher on the TRC and its role in the new democratic South Africa. Notes: The Truth and Reconciliation Commission played a pivotal role in post-apartheid South Africa by uncovering the truth about human rights abuses and crimes that were committed during the apartheid era. Through public hearings and testimonies, it provided a platform for victims and perpetrators to share their stories, which involved the pardoning of black civilians who committed crimes as a result of political injustice, and the accountability of corrupt white officials. The TRC's efforts aimed to promote national reconciliation and foster a sense of equality by acknowledging the past and fostering a sense of accountability for the atrocities committed. 3:15-3:50 Breakout Group Activity: Analyzing TRC Cases and Testimonies Task: Each group will take 10 minutes to analyze their assigned TRC case. Each group should answer the following questions: During Group Analysis: Document Your Analysis: As you examine the assigned testimony or case, note down key points that stand out to you regarding the
1. Ethics and Morality: Based on the details of the testimony or case, discuss the ethical and moral considerations at play. Were the actions of the individuals involved justified under the circumstances of the time? How do these actions stand up to ethical scrutiny today? 2. Decision on Amnesty: If you were a member of the TRC, would you grant amnesty to the individual(s) involved in the case or testimony you analyzed? Why or why not? Consider the criteria used by the TRC for granting amnesty, such as the political motive, proportionality of the act, and full disclosure by the applicant. Group 1: The Case of Sibandiso John Nkuna Link: https://sabctrc.saha.org.za/documents/decisions/59012.htm Group 2: The Case of Christina Buthulezi Link: https://sabctrc.saha.org.za/documents/hrvtrans/soweto/55904.htm Group 3: The Case of Deon Martin Link: https://fiudit-my.sharepoint.com/:w:/g/personal/lmaxwell_fiu_edu/EcRgN- Wk3mBPjEu3gwf8-W4BBiRID1frkGPCfx_yiacINg?e=YkUMho Group 4: The Case of Fannie Abram Mkhwanazi Link: https://sabctrc.saha.org.za/documents/decisions/59020.htm Group 5: The Case of Sean Mark Callaghan Link: https://sabctrc.saha.org.za/documents/decisions/59316.htm motivations behind the actions taken, the ethical dilemmas presented, and how the case aligns with the TRC's goals of truth, reconciliation, and justice. Reflect on Group Dynamics: Explain your contributions to the group's analysis and the role you played in shaping the group's conclusions. How did your perspective influence the group's discussion, and what insights did you gain from your peers? Notes about the Case / Testimony: Write out which group you were in and the key elements of the case or testimony that stood out to you. I was in Group 4, and analyzed the Case of Fannie Abram Mkhwanazi. He along with another co-conspirator, murdered one individual, and was also charged with the attempted murder. Arguments were made for Fannie to become rehabilitated and seek counseling under the conditions of his pardon after serving two years in prison, as he is still very young. While other arguments said that his premeditated crimes, which included murder, were much too severe for an amnesty grant. Fannie was also charged with unauthorized possession of weapons and ammunition. What is your group’s collective answer to the two questions for this activity? We examined the circumstances- Fannie received orders and thought about it consciously for enough time to commit the murder. It was not an act of passion, as it was premeditated (received orders and brought the illegal weapons with him to the location in preparation of the murder.) We decided he should not receive amnesty- “You do the crime, You do the time”. Even though he was oppressed and politically motivated, two wrongs do not make a right and the crime of murder was just too severe for an amnesty grant. Reflect on the concept of reconciliation as presented through the TRC's work. How does the case you studied illustrate the complexities of achieving reconciliation in a deeply divided society? In a society deeply scarred by decades of apartheid, achieving reconciliation requires navigating the delicate balance between acknowledging the past, holding individuals accountable for their actions, and fostering forgiveness. Mkhwanazi's case illustrates the TRC's recognition of the complexity of such
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help