Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items

Confronting collective inactivity to safeguard our freedom

27 April 2021 | Story Prof Sethulego Matebesi | Photo Sonia Small

Prof Matabesi — Prof Sethulego Matebesi is a Senior Lecturer and Academic Head of the Department of Sociology at the University of the Free State.

This year’s Freedom Day marks an important milestone in the history of South Africa. It will be 27 years since the first non-racial elections were held in the country, a figure that equals the number of years Nelson Mandela spent in prison.

If equating Mandela with the freedom we enjoy today is not already disingenuous enough, we sunk even lower by assuming that we are close to achieving the civil liberties he embodied. You do not have to go further than read the daily media headlines to understand the extent of the onslaught on the pillars of democracy. That this onslaught comes from political leaders is one of the main reasons why most South Africans are disillusioned with politics, democracy and social issues.

Anarchy wreaking havoc in weak societies

Sociology taught me about the relevance of institutions to a social structure: they control human conduct by setting up predefined behaviour patterns. For example, throughout history anarchy has wreaked havoc in settings where organisations are weak, fragmented, and the citizenry is inactive. Similarly, while peace, unity, and the preservation and the restoration of human dignity are the hallmarks of Freedom Day celebrations, we have become a nation increasingly influenced by symbolic politics and the politics of offence.

It would be hard to find a better example of a significant threat to the pillars of democracy than the widespread onslaught on the judiciary. At the heart of the broader political, legal, and moral issues confronting SA today is how the right of all to equal respect and equal protection under the law has been compromised. Casting doubt about the independence of the judiciary conceals the motivations that most endanger the principles of freedom and equality.

My stance is not aimed at muting the expression of unpopular opinions – a basic tenet of democracy. However, we need to be mindful of events that have and will become powerfully symbolic in altering the nation’s social fabric.

Freedom under attack by populist politics

Any societal change requires some form of flexibility. No doubt, the first decade of democracy was accompanied by hope and the euphoria of the Rainbow Nation. This period demonstrated how different racial groups could live together in harmony, play together, and attend the same school without being required to forsake values they hold dear. This period was punctured by notions of active citizenship and the promotion of democratic cooperation that is based on the acceptance of universal human rights and the rule of law and values of diversity.

While millions of people elsewhere in the world have been forced to flee hunger, war, terrorism, and emboldened autocrats in their countries of birth, the euphoric wave of the Mandela years has, unwittingly and dramatically, worn off during the past decade in South Africa. This turn of events is linked to populist politics that seriously compromise democratic institutions in the country.

In my opinion, there are no heroes in situations like these.

In a country characterised by rampant corruption, violent crime, gender-based violence, human trafficking, racial intolerance, and teenage drug abuse, are politicians the only ones to be blamed for the threats to democracy?

Conquering immorality and safeguarding our freedom

Despite all the challenges we face as a country, we remain a remarkably resilient nation, as is widely acknowledged. This resilience is echoed by how we have navigated our way around a highly divisive and intolerant society to embrace and celebrate our rich and vibrant cultural heritage.

Nevertheless, we have become complacent. We have been vocal against any narrative aimed at restricting our legal, religious, human, civil, economic and political rights. Yet, partly due to our collective inaction, we have failed to use the means to provide a compelling counter-narrative of resistance to the manipulation of state institutions and broader immorality permeating society. This inaction affects the lives and livelihoods of millions of those who do not have the organisational capacity and means to advocate for the causes that affect them.

Let us use this year’s historic Freedom Day celebrations to demonstrate our firm resolve to protect the critical pillars of democracy from further exploitation. This kind of collective responsibility is what South Africa has always been about. Only when our government at all levels, the private sector, and concerned citizens across the country begin a critical partnership and commitment to maintain our democratic institutions and processes that our past losses as a nation become gains and defeats become triumphs.

* Prof Sethulego Matebesi works on all current affairs such as political and social issues. More specifically, he focuses on social movements and protests, community-mining company conflict, and local municipal governance.

News Archive

Twenty years of the constitution of South Africa – cause for celebration and reflection

2016-05-11

Description: Judge Azar Cachalia Tags: Judge Azar Cachalia

Judge Azar Cachalia

The University of the Free State’s Centre for Human Rights and the Faculty of Law held the celebration of the twentieth anniversary of the adoption of the South African Constitution on 11 May 2016 on the Bloemfontein Campus. Students and faculty members celebrated and reflected on not only the achievements of the constitution but also on perspectives regarding its relevance in modern society, and to what extent it has upheld the human rights of all citizens of South Africa.

The panel discussion started with a presentation on the pre-1996 perspective by Judge Azar Cachalia of the Supreme Court of Appeal. Judge Cachalia reflected on his role in the realisation and upholding of the constitution, from his days as a student activist, then as an attorney representing detainees during political turmoil, and currently as a judge: “My role as an attorney was to defend people arrested for public violence. My role as a judge today is to uphold the constitution.” He stressed the importance of the constitution today, and the responsibility institutions such as the police service have in upholding human rights. Judge Cachalia played a significant role in drafting the new Police Act around 1990, an Act which was to ensure that the offences perpetrated by the police during apartheid did not continue in the current democratic era. Further, he pointed out that societal turmoil has the potential to make society forget about the hard work that was put into structures upholding human rights. “Constitutions are drafted in moments of calm. It is a living document, and we hope it is not torn up when we go through social conflict, such as we are experiencing at present.”

Thobeka Dywili, a Law student at the UFS, presented her views from the new generation’s perspective. She relayed her experience as a student teaching human rights at schools in disadvantaged communities. She realised that, although the youth are quite aware of their basic human rights, after so many years of democracy, “women and children are still seen as previously disadvantaged when they should be equal”. She pointed out that, with the changing times, the constitution needs to be looked at with a new set of eyes, suggesting more robust youth engagement on topics that affect them, using technology to facilitate discussions. She said with the help of social media, it is possible for a simple discussion to become a revolution; #feesmustfall was a case in point.

Critical perspectives on the constitution were presented by Tsepo Madlingozi of University of Pretoria and University of London. In his view, the constitution has not affected policy to the extent that it should, with great disparities in our society and glaring issues, such as lack of housing for the majority of the poor. “Celebration of the constitution should be muted, as the constitution is based on a decolonisation approach, and does not directly address the needs of the poor. The Constitutional Court is not pro-poor.” He posed the question of whether twenty years on, the present government has crafted a new society successfully. “We have moved from apartheid to neo-apartheid, as black elites assimilate into the white world, and the two worlds that exist have not been able to stand together as a reflection of what the constitution stands for.”

Prof Caroline Nicholson, Dean of the Faculty of Law, encouraged more open discussions, saying such dialogues are exactly what was intended by the Centre for Human Rights. She emphasised the importance of exchanging ideas, of allowing people to speak freely, and of sharing perspectives on important issues such as the constitution and human rights.

Back

Economic and Management Sciences

Education

Health Sciences

The Humanities

Law

Natural and Agricultural Sciences

Theology and Religion

Open Distance Learning

Business School

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept