There is little doubt that the colonial period ushered in a series of steep and horrific human rights abuses.

Crimes against humanity, including genocide, mass extermination, forced disappearances, torture, displacement, slavery, racial discrimination, and cruel or degrading treatment were commonplace amongst all societies touched by the period.

Portugal has been estimated to be responsible for more than half of the approximately 12 million people trafficked in the transatlantic slave trade, making it the largest trafficker in enslaved people. Separately, colonialism was also marked with plundered wealth, resource expropriation and the privatising of African land and domestic animals. It further decimated African wildlife and biodiversity; destroyed some of Africa's cultural monuments, and resulted in a large proportion of African cultural heritage being found in private and public collections in Europe and North America. 

To summarise, Africa suffered immensely during the colonial years - best described in detail by Vanfraechem, Pemberton, and Ndahinda.

Portugal: An Unwillingness to Account for Past Wrongs

Returning to Portugal, it seems that a new Tordesillas Treaty has been signed between the left and right, in which the former pledged to destroy any heritage from the time of the discoveries, while the others guarantee to carry on the Lusitanian pride of what was once the Kingdom of Portugal in never-sailed seas.

If you look into the Portuguese History programme of the Ministry of Education for the 10th grade, one of its essential lessons is "the violent subjugation of various peoples and the trafficking of human beings as a reality of Portuguese expansion". 

In light of this, it would be inaccurate to say that Portuguese youth isn't being taught about the abuses of that era, sometimes disguised as "discoveries". A decade on from the 10th grade, I can picture the vivid illustrations of slaves working in the sugar cane fields from my history manuals. 

However, during those years of compulsory education, I did not once have the opportunity to reflect on the long-term consequences of that historical period. We inherited land, gold and art, but with it came a certain arrogance; an inability to look beyond Eurocentrism; the Western narrative as the only narrative; and "history" as recorded by its victors. 

Is it really so ambitious to explain the impact of colonialism to 15-year-olds? 

Apparently so - as this attitude can be seen in other areas, not only in the field of Education.

In response to this nonchalant telling of a troubled history, there has been a pendulum swing in the opposite direction: rising voices who have been addressing the evils of that period and the Portuguese blindness in conceptualising it. For example, Mariana Mortágua, a deputy of the Portuguese Assembly, recently condemned Portugal's historical role in the slave trade. "It is necessary to recognize that Portugal played an important and decisive role in the formation of the structures of racism today, historically and internationally," stressed the leader of the Bloco de Esquerda Party. 

Yet, such observations usually do come from a destructive point of view, almost wanting to erase what is considered the positive inheritances of that period.

For my part, I suggest dealing with it in a positive and reconstructive way, by keeping both the Belem Tower and the Pattern of the Discoveries intact, but at the same time, letting us try to approach the era of colonialism for what it was. 

The Movement for Reparations

Since the 1990s, there has been a small social movement for reparations for the slave trade in Africa and among members of the African diaspora, amidst a nascent belief that the Western world owes compensation to Africa for the crime.

A reason why the issue of reparations is now so topical is the fact that the matter of reparations for slavery and colonialism was a major, and highly contested, agenda item at the World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, in 2001. The issue is also more relevant now because a number of countries have been finding ways of dealing with such issues from the distant past. In 2009, Italy agreed to pay Libya US$10 billion for atrocities committed during the colonial period; South Africans have similarly filed cases in the USA, against a variety of corporations for their alleged complicit role in the apartheid system.

Nevertheless, there are many different types of reparations. Reparations can encompass a variety of concepts and each of these concepts has a unique meaning although they are often used as general terms to encompass all the different types of remedies available to a victim.

One dimension of reparation is restitution - that is, the restoration (insofar as possible) of the status quo before the crime had been committed. Such is evidently not possible regarding the colonial era, since we cannot go back in time and unhurt who we have wounded. 

But reparations may also include rehabilitation, such as medical, psychological, legal and social services, although this cannot obviously apply to a collective group subjected to the slave trade centuries ago. But while it is certainly too late to prosecute Vasco da Gama or Pedro Álvares Cabral, along with their armadas, there are still some measures which can be taken.

Guarantees of non-repetition are another aspect of reparations and this guarantee is implicit in the international prohibition of the slave trade since 1926. But perhaps the most controversial frame of reparations is the principle of compensation, which refers to the obligation to compensate victims for economically accessible damages of past crimes. Western publics are unlikely to agree to pay huge amounts for reparations for very distant wrongs, especially as they will be aware that large sums of money transferred to reparations - especially to countries with weak institutions - may face the same administrative challenges as foreign aid has encountered over the last 50 years. Nor are Western publics likely to agree that they are responsible for the consequences of the slave trade, even if their governments are the institutional heirs of entities which directed the trade centuries ago.

However, two undisputed paths could be particularly significant. On the one hand, the principle of satisfaction contains several different elements, such as the verification of the facts of a crime and “full and public disclosure of the truth” about the crime; a public apology;  “commemoration of and tributes to the victims”; and an accurate account of the  violations of international human rights and humanitarian law in educational material. 

On the other hand, states can also take hold of some symbolic reparations. These include memorials to the victims of the slave trade; museums about the practice, and special exhibits displayed. In addition, an educational reform is necessary so that both people in the former slave-trading and enslaving nations, as well as those in Africa, learn more about the trade. 

However, this might require revisions of textbooks and joint commissions to determine their content.

Case in Point: The German Example

In what concerns the question of reparations, Germany is a success story - a state that, on the one hand, has a chilling past, but which has endeavoured to take account for it. Germany has prosecuted Nazi crimes in international courts; awarded compensation to victims; corrected laws that resulted from injustices; created an anti-fascist zeal in society and especially in schools; and creating a series of memorials, monuments, museums and documentation centres to honour the victims and at the same time offer information to the public about the crimes committed by Nazi Germany. 

Since World War II, Germany has spent more than $100 billion dollars on reparations for violations committed by Nazi Germany to Israel and individual victims. What if this country had never gone through such a process?

As a nation, we thought that granting freedom to the peoples we controlled at the time would be a sufficient condition to end this Portuguese sin, which has made it impossible for us to deal with the crimes we have committed for centuries. 

For this reason, Portugal needs a transition process.

Conclusion

In the year in which Portugal celebrates 50 years of democracy, its President declined to remark on the colonial era. 

Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa does not hide the Portuguese responsibility for the crimes committed during slavery and colonialism, but, at the same time, fails to give a formal apology. Concerning the restitution of art work and the prosecution of the guilty, he promises to work on it. However, and as predicted, the Social Democrat leader’s attitude changes in regards to restitutions, which he considers unnecessary, although also stating this nation needs to pay for their actions.

The prevailing reality of immense global inequality is indisputable. Many advocate for directing development aid to regions marked by colonial history and enduring poverty. This assistance is often fueled by a collective acknowledgment of the profound human rights transgressions of the past, albeit not always openly expressed. There's a growing recognition that those who profited from colonialism bear a responsibility towards those who continue to suffer its consequences. Yet, bridging the divide between different corners of the world requires intensified efforts. Much of the discontent and resentment from the Global South towards the Global North can be traced back to historical injustices. 

Addressing these grievances and nurturing reconciliation can pave the way for mutual benefits across all regions.

References

• http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctv16t6hqk
• https://www.routledge.com/Justice-for-Victims-Perspectives-on-rights-transition-and-reconciliation/Vanfraechem-Pemberton-Ndahinda/p/book/9781138666108?srsltid=AfmBOoqgf1DXe2qQ5avsSTKmdebw4GxHt6clK3xqJYuC8LwVOtpL1_8n
• https://www.dn.pt/2432928272/mariana-mortagua-condena-papel-historico-de-portugal-no-trafico-de-escravos/
• https://open.uct.ac.za/server/api/core/bitstreams/2c6f38e9-f63d-429d-9163-764b01218e14/content 
• https://www.jstor.org/stable/27756245