A/HRC/24/50 93. In terms of their suitability for indigenous peoples, there are also challenges related to how truth commissions have been conducted, including their tendency to focus mostly on recent violations and a discourse of national unity and reconciliation. In the case of national reconciliation, which is often a goal of truth commissions, some observers have questioned whether current understandings of reconciliation are appropriate in the context of indigenous peoples, as there is the danger of strengthening the dominant national identity at the expense of others.100 94. Concerns also exist regarding the dominant views represented by truth-seeking processes. Indigenous peoples have their own world views, which include understandings of justice and truth that may differ from that of the dominant society. In addition, truth processes have generally not been adequately inclusive of indigenous peoples, who must be included from the earliest stages, throughout the work of the commission and in the implementation of their outcomes. 95. Challenges exist even in instances where truth processes are indigenous led. For example, criticisms of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada include that the scope of its mandate is very limited, excluding, for example, the examination of issues associated with day students at residential schools and broader harms suffered by Aboriginal peoples in Canada.101 Some have argued that the Commission regarding schools should extend to include collective and cultural harms suffered by communities, including historical grievances. D. Ways that truth commissions can effectively address the rights and concerns of indigenous peoples 96. There are a number of advantages to truth commissions, including that they might be more consistent with indigenous peoples’ conceptions of justice and cultures; they can inspire political commitment to the resolution of grievances; 102 and they can enhance understandings of and public support for indigenous peoples’ claims to politically sensitive rights such as self-determination. Generally, truth commissions are still young institutions, and therefore offer great scope for their enrichment with and adaptation to indigenous practices. 97. However, to best address the rights and concerns of indigenous peoples, transitional justice processes and mechanisms must take account of indigenous peoples’ context and the root causes of the injustices experienced. 98. As a starting point, the participation of indigenous peoples is essential at all stages. A positive example of indigenous engagement comes from the Truth, Justice and Reconciliation Commission of Kenya. Although not specifically focused on indigenous peoples, the Commission provided an explicit forum for the expression of indigenous issues regarding historical injustices, marginalization and ethnic tension. While the Commission has faced challenges in other respects, in relation to the participation of indigenous peoples, successes included the engagement of indigenous peoples’ organizations from the early stages. The Commission: hired indigenous people as part of its staff; conducted public hearings allowing testimony in different languages, including Maasai; and conducted 100 101 102 International Centre for Transitional Justice (ICTJ), Strengthening Indigenous Rights through Truth Commissions: A Practitioner’s Resource (2012), p. 3. Paige Arthur, “Indigenous self-determination and political rights: practical recommendations for truth Commissions”, in ICTJ, Strengthening Indigenous Rights, p. 39. Deborah J. Yashar, “Indigenous rights and truth commissions: reflections for discussion”, in ICTJ, Strengthening Indigenous Rights, p. 11. 21