過去20年來，「轉型正義」成為各國政治與國際社會刻不容緩的政治議程。目前人權活動者與理論研究大致探取兩種視角或途徑：一、是道德哲學與法學的普世人權規範；其次、是轉型學研究對轉型 模式與政治菁英權力平衡的考量。道德哲學與法學視角要求加害者負 起政治與法律的責任、對受害者的赔償與重新肯認，以及強調人權與 責任對於重建民主與法治社會的重要性。轉型學則主要強調轉型過程 的類型與時機，以及新舊菁英的權力對比，如何決定各國處理模式的 差異。轉型學研究認為政治菁英間的權力平衡，以及第三波民主化協 商式轉型的特色，務實地探用大赦、特赦與遺忘作為社會和解的代價。
本文認為，上述兩種視角分別有其缺陷，也都同時忽略公民社 會、象徵情戚、集體選擇的角色’以及時間變化的向度；並且進一步提出記憶政治的視角去整合兩者，從公共論述與政治記憶的框架效果，以及論述一記憶與政策制度的互動來探討罪責意識的形式。近年 來，西班牙在轉型正義政策上的轉變，尤能見到政治記憶的框架理論 有助於我們理解轉型正義的持續與變動，也更能讓我們理解正義實踐的可能性。

For the past two decades, transitional justice has been a worldwide political agenda. The issue of how to deal with the past human rights violations is an important task to reconstitute democratic normality and reconciliatory relationships. Current researchers and human rights activists generally take two kinds of perspectives or approaches: one is the moral philosophy of universal human rights and law; and the other is transitology on types of regime change and balance of power elites. Perspective of moral philosophy and law requests to take the political and legal responsibility of perpetrators, compensation for the victims and to emphasis on human rights and the reconstruction of democracy and the rule of law. About guilt and responsibility, they prefer to prosecute perpetrators of human rights violations. Transitology suggests the balance of political power matters most for transitional justice decision. They concern about the reality of political bargaining between old and new political elites. Most political scientists consider the character of the third wave democracy, and take practical use of amnesty and pardon. In other words, forget is the cost of social reconciliation.
This article considers that they both neglect the role of the civil society, symbolic meanings, emotions, collective choices, and the effects of the passage of time. I theorize the framework of politics of memory and bring up the framing effect of public discourse and political memory. The interaction of discourse-memory and institutional decision contributes to realize the consciousness of guilt and accountability. Finally, Spain’s case proves that politics of memory is a promising and useful perspective to observe transitional justice policy selection and change.