When dictatorships breakdown and democracies breakthrough there might or might not be some immediate reckoning with the dictatorial past. Today, it is commonly accepted that transition modes largely explain differences in ‘transitional justice’ pathways (Huntington, 1991). In sum, negotiations between elite and opposition prevent accountability measures; defeat of the dictatorial elite enhances the likelihood of punishment and retribution. But do transition modes produce path dependent effects? And do transitional justice choices represent a ‘closing of the books’ on the past (Elster, 2004)?
Through an in-depth study of two cases of belated ‘dealing with the past’ – Spain and Poland (since 2004/05) – this paper suggests that transition modes have been somewhat underestimated in these analyses of late ‘dealing with the past’. This paper further suggests that the return and/or intensification of political debates on the politics of the past are also a product of a particular path dependent factor, i.e. the legitimation strategies of new and old political players, as well as their historical background (Welsh, 1996; Grzymala-Busse, 2002; Nalepa, 2010). This suggests that attempts at changing a democracy’s narrative of the past is not only a matter of forgotten truth and justice, or trust in institutions, but it also reveals elites’ interest in reinforcing their legitimacy through the delegitimation of the ‘other’.
