Bolstering's Argument Analysis

172 Words1 Pages
Another distinct group of scholars has vast perceptions regarding the quality of truth that was revealed during the TRC proceedings. They argue that the TRC did not impose on victim statements the balance of proof required in criminal cases, that of confirmation and substantiation of proof, and rather utilised the balance of probabilities utilised in civil litigation. Bolstering their arguments, they add this circumvented lawful necessities vital to due process, essential standard of reasonableness, and the protection of the innocent. It is important to note that such perpetrator protective arguments enkindle curiosity on dual grounds. Firstly, the TRC was not a court, therefore the benchmark for due process should irrevocably differ. Secondly,