On October 1, 2022 I delivered the Memorial Lecture at Hartheim, the live stream is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pV4z8fIM1oU, the text of my lecture:

Welcome to you: who have come as experts in your own right, as self-advocates, to commemorate the murder of persons with disabilities. 

Welcome to all of you who have lost a relative or loved one to almost immeasurable acts. 

To all of you who have come here today to commemorate the victims of Nazi euthanasia and to reinforce the “never again” that must necessarily result from it: welcome.

In all the uncertainties, shocks that surround us at the moment, it is difficult to find a beginning. One is no longer sure whether the speed of events is “only” the distortions of growing inequalities and the climate catastrophe or also, to a certain extent, the momentum attributed to illiberal currents. 

It is a lot, often too much, and it seems increasingly difficult to find moments of reflection. In particular, common groundand the unity seem to have currently receive little space.

A few weeks ago, aspiring musicians from Ukraine demonstrated their skills at a concert in Salzburg. While they were playing enchantingly, a few thoughts inevitably ran through my head: “Do the musicians know how their closest relatives and friends are doing? When did they last see their family? Will they ever play in front of them again? When will there be concerts of this kind in Ukraine again …?” 

And then my eyes fell on the make of the grand piano: exactly the same that my grandmother once played in Garmisch. And with it – along with so many other things that resonated – also the question of how the light-heartedness of her childhood in the Bavarian mountains could evaporate as it did. 

In the omnipresence that memories can develop, it is one thing to know rationally how National Socialism arose and led people to authorise innumerable  atrocities, to set them in motion or to make them possible by omission; at the same time, the consequences of National Socialism remain elusive on a personal level. 

My grandmother, Annemarie Klein, sold her piano after she fled, having married Ernst Böhm at a very young age. She got on very well with her father-in-law, Adolf Böhm. Together with his son, he ran a cotton factory in Wilhelminenstraße in Vienna. It was a modern company that attached great importance to good working conditions. Adolf Böhm took an interest in – political – Zionism ‘on the side’, as it were. He wrote one of the standard works on Zionism that is still in use today: “The Zionist Movement.” In addition, there are numerous articles and speeches by him. 

His involvement as a member of the Jewish Community and his book on Zionism attracted the interest of Adolf Eichmann. Eichmann wanted a list of the “most prominent Jews” from Adolf Böhm and therefore made daily appearances at the factory from 14 March 1938. After several weeks, according to anecdotal evidence, the pressure was once again massively increased and the library sealed. This was too much for a book lover like Adolf Böhm; my great-grandfather had a nervous breakdown and was taken to several psychiatric intermediate stations as part of the T4 actionand murdered here in Hartheim in April 1941. 

In the meticulous, systematic murder of prominent people in particular, all traces were covered up and files destroyed. In addition, there was also deliberate misinformation, such as that according to which my great-grandfather died of “pneumonia” in Chelm, Poland. “Fake news“ of the time, which also made it into the Encyclopedia Judaica. 

One runs out of words in an effort to capture and express these atrocities and especially the mixture of ruthlessness and meticulousness.

This makes all the more important the answers that the then still young community of states found in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights after the end of National Socialism: 

“All human beings are born equal in rights and dignity …”

The reality of life for persons with disabilities globally – and also in Austria – fails daily to meet this claim to guarantee equal opportunities and the implementation of all human rights. Ensuring that persons with disabilities are respected, that their self-determination is strengthened and recognised, and that they can lead an equal life, is far too often still a shadowy sketch of the future instead of factual reality. 

The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, which was finally negotiated in 2006, guarantees all persons with disabilities all rights and the associated dignity in everyday life. To recognise that persons with disabilities are self-determining and have a right to live their self-determination. 

Incidentally, the assistance that persons with disabilities sometimes need in shaping their self-determination is not so fundamentally different from assistance that the so-called ‘chronically normal’^[1] people use on a daily basis. It is the level of detail of information and methods, but not the act of self-empowerment that goes on between an opinion-forming process in a random board office, the cabinet of a provincial governor or just in supported decision-making. But it is still perfectly acceptable to comprehensively devalue the decision-making of persons with disabilities without putting a stop to the abelism or paternalism encoded therein.

This is also why we are taking massive steps backwards in education: segregation of persons with disabilities is commonplace, the well-meaning references to the importance of inclusion are nothing more than phrases. This is first and foremost a human rights violation vis-à-vis persons with disabilities who have a right to equal participation in a school of their preference and choice. But it is also a symptom of a school system that increasingly fails to do justice to anyone, learners and teachers alike. 

The catastrophe that is looming here has been vividly described by the Court of Audit, among others: the regulations in this area are so outdated and impracticable that school trials and pilot projects have been permanently established at more than half of Austria’s federal schools in order to avoid arcane rules. The steadily growing number of functionally illiterate – completely devoid of any ethnic attributions – people across all social strata should have prompted everyone to act for decades.

No less alarming and scandalous is the fact that in 2022 persons with disabilities are again be increasingly dependent on donations. A life of self-determination is still possible for very few persons with disabilities, the mechanisms of exclusion are too strong, the need to “alleviate suffering” with handouts instead of actually making equality possible with rights and de facto empowerment, as the obligations for the federal and state governments in the Convention stipulate, is too deep-seated. The pandemic and inflation are dramatically affecting people in precarious working conditions, but also those who are living on social benefits that are too low to start with.

A third and final example: structural accessibility, where the “neglect of civility” for equal participation, to a truly representative democracy measured against legal and human rights commitments, is currently progressing rapidly. Far too often, structural accessibility is not implemented, or far too often people believe that they know what is required and then wonder about the stairs that have not been considered or the door frames that are far too narrow. The fact is, rooms in which everyone has enough space have been guaranteed in various regulations. And: as soon as rooms are structurally accessible, everyone feels much more comfortable and welcome. 

What do the examples of education, the failure to guarantee social security and structural accessibility have in common? The exclusion of persons with disabilities continues to happen primarily at the structural level. 

Structural means: it is difficult to attribute exclusion and human rights violations to individual persons. It is the way decisions are made, the processes by which permits are granted, the specifications that serve as the basis for planning that prevent all people from experiencing safety, equality and well-being. 

In this structure of non-responsibilities, those who were already partially excluded are more vehemently marginalised. Because prejudice, stigma and other aspects of exclusion are constantly reinforced in this mix. And we all know, which socio-political tendencies and political ideas gain particular momentum as a result. 

This is precisely why a commemoration in Hartheim is necessary and also particularly painful: the exclusion of personswith disabilities is an indicator of the basic constitution of a democracy’s claim to equality. 

More stigma and prejudice tends to flow into the exclusion of persons with disabilities than into the exclusion of other groups of people, also because the demarcation between “normal” and “not normal” is drawn particularly harsh. And all the more urgent and insistent a “never again!” here in Hartheim, today and every day. 

Implementing the anti-fascist basic consensus means in particular respecting and implementing all human rights for all. “All human beings are born equal in rights and dignity” also means a self-critical approach to structural violence, be it in education, in the prevention of inhuman and degrading treatment or in dealing with those who are actively threatened for their opinions, as has happened in a number of cases in recent years and most recently ended fatally for Dr. Lisa-Maria Kellermayr. 

We must do more to make human rights a reality, especially where responsibilities seem to get lost and no one seems to be legally accountable. For it is precisely in this supposed space between legal and moral responsibility that the momentum is created for a growing number of human rights violations – also by omission – and thus the impetus for anti-democratic currents. 

This makes the commemoration here at Hartheim Castle all the more important. And the daily efforts of the team of the learning and memorial site to convey facts, to point out developments, to classify mechanisms that discriminate and exclude and other aspects that made the emergence and National Socialism itself possible. 

The focus of the educational work is on young people, who are made aware of the almost incomprehensible, who are sensitised to mechanisms of exclusion as well as to the consequences of unquestioned norms: legal as well as biological. Another focus of the activities of the learning and memorial site is the inclusion of persons with disabilities. Dealing with the inhumane treatment of impairment requires a high degree of sensitivity and empathy. Other mediation methods are also needed to actually ensure an accessible space. An example of this is the new permanent exhibition, which was designed with a lot of thought and heart and is now rightly acclaimed and brings many visitors to this difficult place.  

Ongoing research around the National Socialist euthanasia programme, here and at other sites, complements the work of the learning and memorial site. I would like to thank the board and the team for their enormous commitment, their constant efforts to convey the unimaginable in a factual, inclusive and accessible way and the daily renewal of “never again!” as well as the affirmation of human rights here at Hartheim Castle.

In keeping with a growing tradition of commemoration, I now invite you to a minute of silence and remembrance, and may I conclude by asking you: use your human right to freedom of expression, speak about the importance of ensuringall human rights for all.

^[1] Patricia Deegan, Conspiracy of Hope.

The Komagata Maru incident: 376 passengers of mostly Sikh descent arrived in Vancouver and were refused entry into Canada due to the discriminatory laws of the time 102 years ago. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has announced he will apologise in the House of Commons on May 18: “As a nation, we should never forget the prejudice suffered by the Sikh community at the hands of the Canadian government of the day. We should not – and we will not.”

“An apology made in the House of Commons will not erase the pain and suffering of those who lived through that shameful experience. But an apology is not only the appropriate action to take, it’s the right action to take, and the House is the appropriate place for it to happen.”

A helpful illustration on the health impact of violence against women by the World Health Organization: women exposed to violence are amongst others twice as likely to suffer from mental health problems and also twice as likely to abuse substances such as alcohol, among others. Note that more than a third of incidents of violence – 38% – are reportedly committed by intimate partners.

The BBC reports that Chilean judges have issued an apology for their lack of action in response to motions seeking to save victims of the Pinochet Regime. The statement by the National Association of Magistrates of the Judiciary states: “the time has come to ask for the forgiveness of the victims … and of Chilean society.”

As has been highlighted in the past, soccer is no human-rights-haven; on the contrary a lot needs to be done to make sure that human rights are applied in stadiums and around, particularly non-discrimination. It is thus a welcome BBC-read that FIFA  is taking steps to have more sanctions in place to reduce discriminatory behavior on and particularly around the soccer fields.

A soccer team with a “say no to racism” banner © FIFA

A powerful documentary in the Washington Post on gun violence. Includes a portrait of Mary Jane Ledgerwood, Priest in charge, Grace Episcopal Church, The Plains:

Washington Post Mary Ledgerwood

In her message in celebration of Women’s Day, Michelle Bachelet, UN Women Executive Director states:

My message today is simple and straightforward. This year on International Women’s Day, we say enough is enough. Discrimination and violence against women and girls has no place in the 21^st century. It is time for Governments to keep their promises and protect human rights in line with the international conventions and agreements that they signed onto. A promise is a promise.

Watch and share:

The plurality of media outlets is under scrutiny these days. The UN Committee on the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in its discussion in 1983 of the implications of Article 19 CCPR (Freedom of Opinion) has stated:

“little attention has so far been given to the fact that, because of the development of modern mass media, effective measures are necessary to prevent such control of the media interfering with the right of everyone to freedom of expression,”

One of the Committee’s experts said:

“By this sentence, the Committee managed to come to unite these kinds of worries by careful wording, but what it means is that any kind of concentration, any kind of control of the media, is harmful to the enjoyment of this freedom. Sometimes the Committee acts in a very “superstitious” way. It does not mention things that should be mentioned.”

Now the Committee is working on a new statement, which shall also be more specific on the issue of diversity of ownership:

“States parties should take appropriate action, consistent with the Covenant, to prevent undue media dominance or concentration by privately controlled media groups in monopolistic situations that may be harmful to a diversity of sources and views.”

The recent capture of Ratko Mladic in Serbia is, as Geoffrey Robertson writes in The Age, also part of the Nuremberg legacy: that no one can escape their responsibility for a crime, particularly those against humanity. Robertson, whose book “Crimes Against Humanity” is a must-read on international criminal justice goes on to observe:

Focus on this war crime will discomfort those who might have prevented it – especially the UN, which refused to authorise the air strikes that would have stopped Mladic’s advance, and the Dutch government, which insisted on vetoing them to protect its cowardly battalion that was meant to be protecting the town but which immediately surrendered to Mladic and handed over to him the thousands of Muslims who had sought refuge in the UN compound. The moral nadir of UN/NATO ”peacekeeping” where there is no peace to keep is the photograph of Mladic blowing his cigar smoke in the face of the spineless Dutch colonel while in the background those his battalion should have protected were taken off to the killing fields.

The visit of Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II. is an opportune occasion to return to the “saying sorry” series. Full coverage by the BBC.

Four years ago, the Australian government seized control of 73 indigenous communities in the Northern Territory. The Age reports that in Ampilatwatja, 350 km north-east of Alice Springs, Richard Downs, the leader of the Alyawarr people asked that no pictures be taken of his people as it embarrasses them to be pictured living in dirt.

Along dirt streets littered with rubbish and abandoned vehicles, he points out a $500,000 building, the home and office of a government business manager, one of 60 appointed across the territory to supervise delivery of government services under the emergency intervention. ”That’s all we got over four years … a government business manager living here who everyone in the community tries to avoid and doesn’t listen to,” Downs says. Downs says 500 of his people living in Ampilatwatja have been treated as outcasts from white man’s decision-making. ”No one has asked us what will work for us,” he says.

Federal funding for homelands has been capped at $20 million a year for three years and runs out next year. No government funding is available for new houses on homelands, leaving people living in substandard, overcrowded accommodation with poor infrastructure.

ISDE Bangladesh highlights the results of excluding minorities from census data. During the 2001 census, “a large number of minorities from Hindu and Christian were excluded from counting. In an Upazila, Mohammadpur of Magura the 2001 census shown that the Hindu Population was 21,808 where the number of Hindu voters was 35,503,” in the 2008 voter list. Also, people of Christian faith were grossly underrepresented in census data. ISDE calls for inclusion, also of Dalit people in the upcoming 2011 census.

On the occasion of women’s day, an indepth look by the NYTimes at the challenges women in Egypt face as the movement for a change of government makes its way.

The BBC provides a moving account of children that were forcefully taken from their parents during the military rule in Argentina and are now reuniting with their parents: the intimate side of reconciliation, an important and challenging part in the aftermath of human rights violations.

The important report of the International Trust Fund for Demining and Mine Victim Assistance, ITF, which highlights the impact of landmines, particularly on children uses some very powerful imagery to convey the message:

The BBC features an unsung hero on the theory behind the current uprisings of societies in the Middle East: Dr. Gene Sharp is credited with sketching what it takes for people to rise and demand equality, justice, accountability and other features of democracy.

For what they are worth – and they are worth a lot less than one is made to believe  – diamonds can have a bloody history. As a reminder some recent reports by Human Rights Watch on the conflict related origins of some of the gems as well as the child and slave labour that often is part of the chain of production of the precious commodity.

As always, The Atlantic piece by Edward Jay Epstein on “Have you ever tried to sell a Diamond?,” here as a reminder on the actual value of diamonds and the power of marketing.

The Observer profiles the success of the Innocence Project , which so far has exonerated 260 people!

As ASIL notes in its International Law in Brief (ILIB), the 2006 International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance entered into force late last month, December 22, 2010.  Another core human rights treaty joins the expanding collection!

In a piece on high-impact advertisement the BBC highlights the overrated value that diamonds have based on  – the admittedly brilliant (sic!) – marketing strategies. The human rights, gender and value implications of that industry are a long time favourite of mine.

Based on a 5.000 page, 10 volume report of 12 years, the British Prime Minister, David Cameron apologized for the “unjustified and unjustifiable” killings of 14 civil rights activists on Bloody Sunday, reports the Guardian.

As part of its Demand Dignity Campaign, amnesty international, in its Report From Promises to Delivery demands that the fight against poverty – the spear head of the Millennium Development Campaign – be based on human rights.

In early December the United States of America reached an agreement with a string of American Indian tribes who had been battling the government’s faulty practices towards them by way of a class action since 1996. The statement by President Obama did not focus on offering an apology but did venture to state that it was “an important step towards a sincere reconciliation.”

The Celebration of the Fall of the Wall on 9 November 2009:

Gordon Brown, Prime Minister of Britain

This wall was torn down not by the demands of political leaders, not by dictat from on high, not by the force of military might but by the greatest force of all – the unbreakable spirit of the men and women of Berlin. You dared to dream in the darkness. You know that while force has temporary power to dominate, it can never ultimately decide. You proved that there is nothing that cannot be achieved by people inspired by the power of common purpose, and let me thank you, the people of Berlin, for sending a message to every continent that no abuse, no crime, no injury need endure forever.

(…) injustice is not the final word on the human condition (…) in a troubled world, with an Africa in poverty, Darfur in agony, Zimbabwe in tears, Burma in chains, individuals, even when in pain, need not suffer forever without hope (…)we can advance prosperity not just for some but for all.

The tides of history may ebb and flow, but across the ages, history is moving towards our best hopes, not our worst fears, towards light and not darkness, towards the fulfilment of our humanity, not its denial, so as we stand here, as free people, gathered today in the shadow of history, let us pledge that we will work together to write the next chapter of the human story. Let us write a chapter of liberty, and of prosperity, and of peace.

Barack Obama, President of the United States of America

There could be no clearer rebuke of tyranny. There could be no stronger affirmation of freedom. This anniversary is a reminder that human destiny will be what we make of it.

Even as we celebrate these values, even as we mark this day, we know that the work of freedom is never finished.

Today, there are still those who live within wall of tyranny. Human beings were denied the very human rights that we celebrate today. And that is why this day is for them as it is for us. It is for those who believe even in the face of cynicism and doubt and oppression that walls can truly come down.

Angela Merkel, Chancellor of Germany

For us Germans November 9 is also a day of remembrance. 71 years ago today the Reichsprogromnacht opened the darkest chapter of our history: the systematic persecution and murder of European Jews and many other human beings. We do not forget this on a day like today.

Both facts show us: freedom does not develop by itself. One has to fight for freedom and liberty. Freedom has to be defended regularly. Then freedom remains what it is: the most valuable good of our political and societal order. Without freedom no democracy, without freedom no diversity, no tolerance and therewith also no common Europe.

The Guardian reports on an independent study by Johns Hopkins University that interviewed victims and helpers in the aftermath of cyclon Nargis in May last year in Myanmar/Burma. The military junta appears to have blocked relief efforts, seizing food stuffs for sale on markets, arresting some of the people trying to offer help and using forced labour in some reconstruction efforts.

The director of the centre for public health and human rights at Johns Hopkins University, Chris Beyrer assumes that the regime’s response is a violation of humanitarian relief norms and that the systemacy of abuse could amount to crimes against humanity by “intentionally causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health”.

The Guardian published the statement by Binyam Mohamed, the recently released British Guantanamo Detainee: 

I hope you will understand that after everything I have been through I am neither physically nor mentally capable of facing the media on the moment of my arrival back to Britain. Please forgive me if I make a simple statement through my lawyer. I hope to be able to do better in days to come, when I am on the road to recovery.

–Binyam Mohamed

Eighty percent of the world’s governments fail to provide adequate information for the public to hold them accountable as reported by the International Budget Partnership (IBP). Almost half of 85 countries whose budget accessibility was reviewed by the IBP are able to hide unpopular, wasteful, and corrupt spending.

Australia seems to continue along its path of reconciliation, naming Mick Dodson, one of the “stolen generation” as Australian of the Year and announcing that action is to be taken on ensuring that indigenous people have access to birth certificates – addressing a long lingering “identiy crisis,” which creates a major barrier in accessing mainstream services, among others.

As Fred Kaplan reports in Slate, one of the first memoranda by President Barack Obama is a “restoration of the purpose” of the Freedom of Information Act. The Memorandum states, inter alia, “A democracy requires accountability, and accountability requires transparency,” and: “The Freedom of Information Act should be administered with a clear presumption: In the face of doubt, openness prevails. The Government should not keep information confidential merely because public officials might be embarrassed by disclosure, because errors and failures might be revealed, or because of speculative or abstract fears.”

We honor and we apologize, states the editorial of the Meridian Star today. Opening with a quote by Martin Luther King – “The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy” – the editorial board says sorry: 

“There was a time when this newspaper – and many others across the south — acted with gross neglect by largely ignoring the unfairness of segregated schools, buses, restaurants, washrooms, theaters and other public places. We did it through omission, by not recording for our readers many of the most important civil rights activities that happened in our midst, including protests and sit-ins. That was wrong. We should have loudly protested segregation and the efforts to block voter registration of black East Mississippians. Current management understands while we can’t go back and undo some past wrongs, we can offer our sincere apology — and promise never again to neglect our responsibility to inform you, our readers, about the human rights and dignity every individual is entitled to in America — no matter their religion, their ethnic background or the color of their skin.”

One of the issues one may easily forget is the dismissal of several judges in the Bush administration, which ultimately led to the resignation of the  Attorney-General, Gonzalez. As the LATimes reports, the political apointee in charge of supervising the career lawyers in the Justice Department’s civil and voting rights divisions, referred to his staff as “commies,” “crazy libs,” and reportedly confided in a friend that “he hoped to get rid of the “Democrats” and “liberals” because they were “disloyal” and replace them with “real Americans” and “right-thinking Americans.” 

Relieving to read an unrelated story in Slate about the history of Supreme Court Presidents – who preside over the inauguration – and Presidents of the United States. The piece highlights the fact that the Chief Justice who swore in Lincoln, Roger Brooke Taney, stated in Dred Scott v. Sanford that blacks were “beings of an inferior order, and altogether unfit to associate with the white race, either in social or political relations, and so far inferior that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect.” Lincoln obviously opposed the decision. Obama and Roberts start out on opposite ground: Obama voted against Chief Justice Roberts.

A country that will be high up on the political agenda over the next year(s), Afghanistan, has an independent human rights commission, which just published a series of caustic reports.

As Jonathan Freedland reflects on the death of “Deep Throat”, Mark Felt, who was the major piece in a puzzle that has become known as “Watergate”, “it was thanks to Felt that America finally reasserted, with Nixon’s forced resignation, that no one – not even the president – is above the law.”

The methods of whistleblowers have evolved since the early 70ies and internet fora such as wikileaks – compare blog post 8 July 2008 – are facing criticism, mainly for the speed they can provide.

In an Editorial the NYTimes responds to the Report by the US Senate’s Armed Services Committee and calls for an independent panel to look at the egregious violations of both national and international law to restore the rule of law to adequate levels: “It said these top officials, charged with defending the Constitution and America’s standing in the world, methodically introduced interrogation practices based on illegal tortures devised by Chinese agents during the Korean War.” The officials “issued legally and morally bankrupt documents to justify their actions, starting with a presidential order saying that the Geneva Conventions did not apply to prisoners of the “war on terror” — the first time any democratic nation had unilaterally reinterpreted the conventions.”

An account of Human Rights Watch’ personnel, Jose Miguel Vivanco and Daniel Wilkinson of the events in Caracas on September 18 can be found here.

A friend of mine recently made the observation that there is no German word for the English term “whistleblower.” Curious that. 

Under the leadership of Julian Assange, a web activist, who grew up in Australia and now resides in Africa, Wikileaks provides a safe haven for those who have information, which is crucial for the public but fear being exposed. The Age reports that documents filed on Wikileaks were used in questioning the record of  former Kenyan leader Daniel Arap Moi, adding crucial momentum to the election campaign of the opposition.

Canadian CBC News reports about concerns over the draft anti-terrorism bill that was introduced in India’s parliament following the attacks in Bombay. Doubling the amount of days of holding terror suspects without filing charges to 180, the bill is also criticised for providing police with a disproportionate leverage in conducting searches. According to the report the home minister sees an adequate balance between human rights protection and the instruments necessary to respond to the “terror.”

The Australian government plans to make a public apology to the “stolen generation.” After years of debate, there is to be official recognition for the wrongs done to indigenous peoples.

Undealt injustices committed by a public body – no matter at what scale – have a negative impact on the human rights culture and therewith on the social fabric of a country. Many countries struggle to come to terms with such wrongs.

Obviously, there is no “right” way of getting the wrong “right.” Actually, I don’t think that there is a “right” after wrong but rather accommodation of the “wrong” through recognition. What I find interesting in the Australian debate is that – a bit like the Austrian, which, however, is not comparable – under political considerations, only part of the recognition takes place. How so? If one were to try and do this as completely as possible, as holistically as feasible, it should go like this: come up with a common history between the two sides (there is usually two distinct sides although there are obviously many shades of grey at play). That common history needs to be based on mutually agreeable facts. Truth, in essence, cannot be agreed upon; so it is publicly discussed and settled facts. That is a long, painful but very meaningful process.

Based on facts, one should try and come up with a meaningful apology. Then one may want to commence the parallel process of sustainably including the common-history into public discourse as well as addressing the marginalization of those who suffered the injustices as well as their descendants.

The need for a holistic approach to this is underestimated in most post-injustice situations, no matter what the scale. Ultimately the recognition of past wrongs is another variant of acknowledging that for everyone to enjoy and show mutual respect, their dignity has to be ensured. If there is a shadow of injustice, there is no dignity. If there is no dignity there is a violation of the sum of human rights.