Abstract

The essay addresses the question of how to ascertain historical truth - while analyzing the work of the various legal committees for "reconciliation and truth" born in the second half of the Twentieth Century in various States - considering three methodological perspectives: first, the one between two paradigms of the justice of transition (and two models of judicial truth), second, the one between judicial truth and historiographical truth, and third, the one between historiography and memory. According to the author, the historian is particularly interested in any change of the procedures and of the judiciary rhetoric because this introduces a substantial alteration in the method of investigating both about the authenticity of evidences and the search for proofs.