Deconstruction (amongst other things) attempted to “liberate the Other”. The problem is that there is an indefinite number of Others. Many Others are also at mutual odds.
Whatever the case is, surely only a shared language - the language that deconstruction rejected or deconstructed - can liberate the Other. As Thomas McCarthy puts it:
Isn’t it the case that ‘legality’, ‘legitimacy’, ‘fairness’, ‘justice’ - and nearly all the other concepts and words referred to by McCarthy - are essentially examples of “transcendental signifieds” in Derrida’s book (or "texts")? Thus Derrida's only interest in words/concepts (or at least his interest in political and philosophical positions) was to violently deconstruct them. If he hadn't done that, then the whole enterprise would have self-destructed (if not deconstructed) itself.