Some call it a good thing, perhaps even therapeutic for the participants. Others think it’s a waste of time and money.

As the African nation of Liberia tries to rebuild after years of strife and warfare, it is dispatching representatives of a Truth and Reconciliation Commission abroad to encourage expatriates to recount their stories of the conflict.

Some volunteers will be coming to Staten Island this month to gather testimony.

The purpose of the commission is to chronicle the country’s brutal past, and lay the grounds for repentance and forgiveness so Liberia may move forward.

Morris Sesay, whose mother and brother were killed in the conflict, is among the skeptics of the commission’s work. He doubts anyone involved in the violence will actually take responsibility.

“The wrongdoers will not be able to tell the truth and say they killed these people,” he said. But those who study truth commissions, which have been established in other countries after similar strife, believe that if run properly, they can actually get at the truth.

The commissions date to the 1970s, and have had varying degrees of success. The most well-known commission to date was one established in South Africa after the end of apartheid.

“When done well, they can be quite an important process for a country,” a co-founder of the International Center for Transitional Justice, Priscilla Hayner, said.

A retired professor of philosophy at The College of Wooster, Richard Bell, said the South African commission was a good model. Significant time and money were devoted to it. Its leadership had credibility. It also had the power to give amnesty to people in exchange for their testimony, he said.

In South Africa’s case, those amnesty offers led to testimony by a number of people who confessed to atrocities committed under apartheid.

Some experts said the Liberian commission might have similar success.