Towards a New Model of the Transitional Justice Mechanism of Truth Commissions: An Assessment of the Role of the National Peace and Reconciliation Commission of Zimbabwe

This study provides a comprehensive assessment of the effectiveness of Zimbabwe’s primary transitional justice mechanism, the National Peace and Reconciliation Commission (NPRC). Grounded in an integrated theoretical framework of Jus Post Bellum, Transformative Justice, Normative Analysis, and Social Learning Theories, the research is situated within critiques of performative reconciliation in post-colonial Africa. It addresses the central problem: why, despite a constitutional mandate, has NPRC failed to deliver national healing? The study investigates the discord between the commission’s formal objectives and its operational reality, questioning whether its design inherently prioritizes political stability over transformative justice. Employing a qualitative-dominant, concurrent embedded design, (QUAL [quan]), the research integrates in-depth interviews (n=15) with stakeholders in Zimbabwe’s national peace architecture, a supplementary quantitative survey (n=322) in Mashonaland East and Matabeleland North provinces, and a CDA of NPRC’s constitutive legal texts using Fairclough’s three-dimensional model. Interview and cultural data were analyzed thematically in NVivo 15, while survey data were analyzed statistically in SPSS for triangulation. The assessment confirms a strong public mandate for TJ (78.72% support) alongside a profound implementation gap: 63.11% of respondents reported exposure to unaddressed violence, while 45% were unaware of the NPRC’s work. The CDA revealed that key deficiencies are discursively embedded within a design that prioritizes state-managed stability over genuine accountability. This discursive gap is mirrored and amplified in vibrant cultural counter-narratives (film, music, theatre) and in the unmet justice expectations of key social groups (diaspora, youth, women), which collectively contest the state’s therapeutic lexicon and demand participatory, transformative justice. The study’s primary contribution is the proposal of a transformative alternative: the National Commission for Post Conflict Justice (NCPJ). Grounded in an original Narrative Co-creation Framework, which synthesizes narrative theory, co-creation theory, and participatory action research, the NCPJ model is designed to bridge this discursive gap by shifting from state-centric testimony to community-owned justice. Supported by a Communicating with Communities media strategy, it provides a concrete, victim-centred blueprint for Zimbabwe and a transferable model for similar post-conflict societies, offering a pathway to disrupt cycles of violence through inclusive mechanisms. Future research should test this framework in comparative contexts.