Legal Narratives and Societal Interpretations – Different Stories of the Past in Post-Communist Romania

Romania’s exit from communism, which left more than 1.100 persons dead and over 3.300 wounded, coincided with the trial and execution of its leader Nicolae Ceaușescu and his wife Elena. While the transition to democracy was the bloodiest in the region, Romania did not experience a replacement of its elite nor a resolute break with the past. Although a great number of proceedings has addressed the violence during the December events of 1989, accountability efforts for crimes committed during communism were relatively constrained until recently, when two former prison directors were convicted in 2016. The case of Alexandru Vişinescu, who was sentenced to 20 years of jail at the age of 90, was widely disseminated across the (inter) national media. Focusing on the prominent trial of Vişinescu, the paper examines the epistemic function of criminal proceedings. It analyzes the court’s narrative disseminated through the verdict, and compares this with personal perceptions and interpretations of the dictatorial regime and trial. In particular, the paper draws on semi-structured interviews with plaintiffs, victims (groups), and today’s students. Bringing legal and societal interpretations of past violent events together, the paper contributes to the debate on the role of trials in enabling a discussion about the violent past and in providing an (authoritative) explanation for past human rights violations. The case of Romania highlights that criminal proceedings do not readily shape the vision of a dictatorial past, and that the impact of criminal proceedings is limited by various boundaries (e.g. spatial or temporal).