87 4 Transitional justice and political settlement: GAM ad e KKR Ace Lia Kent and Rizki Amalia Affiat In a 2016 interview, Irwandi Yusuf, former governor of Aceh and senior figure in the Gerakan Aceh Merdeka (GAM, Free Aceh Movement), expressed his scepticism about the recently established Komisi Kebenaran dan Rekonsiliasi (KKR Aceh, Truth and Reconciliation Commission in Aceh). Arguing that it was the responsibility of the national rather than the provincial government to establish a truth commission to address the violence committed during the decades-long conflict in Aceh (1976–2005), he predicted that the provincially mandated KKR Aceh would ‘stumble’. It would be ‘one-sided’ because it would focus principally on GAM violence and GAM perpetrators, causing issues associated with the conflict to resurface. The commission would also ‘revictimise victims’, as it would be unable to compel perpetrators to appear at public hearings to confess and apologise. The Acehnese government, he said, ‘should avoid it at all costs’. 1 Irwandi’s ambivalence towards the KKR Aceh, which was shared by several other former senior GAM leaders we interviewed, is intriguing at first glance. Human rights discourse was a powerful mobilising element of GAM’s domestic and international campaigning during the conflict, and provisions relating to both a human rights court and a truth and 1 Interview with Irwandi Yusuf, February 2016, Banda Aceh.