Comparing truth regimes and discursive practices in state-led inquiries into cases of compulsory social measures in Switzerland and Australia

This paper explores approaches of two truth seeking commissions, the Australian Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse and the Swiss Independent Expert Commission (IEC) on Administrative Detention. It examines how the differing personnel compositions, mandates, and framing of issues in these two commissions shape their discursive practices in the form of recommendations and the broader national responses to institutional abuse. Based on their distinctive mandates, the Australian Royal Commission, as an official national truth commission, driven by practitioners with direct experience in law, mental health, and advocacy, adopts a forward-looking approach that emphasizes preventive measures and the protection of children in the present and future. In contrast, the Swiss IEC, as an academic research-led truth commission, composed mainly of academic scholars, focuses on historical analysis aimed at acknowledging and understanding past injustices. This results in divergent recommendations, with the Australian commission prioritizing systemic reforms for current child safety and the Swiss commission concentrating on historical redress, memory work and research-driven approach to preventing future abuses. The findings underscore the significance of context in shaping the outcomes of truth-seeking regimes in different national settings.