Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
21 September 2023 | Story Motsaathebe Serekoane | Photo supplied
Motsaathebe Serekoane
Motsaathebe Serekoane is a Lecturer and BSocSc Programme Director, Department of Anthropology, UFS.

Opinion Article by Motsaathebe Serekoane, Lecturer and BSocSc Programme Director, Department of Anthropology, University of the Free State.


It is our heritage space; it is my private property: the challenge of access to heritage sites on privately owned land. 

The Free State's sacred valleys represent not only our heritage space but also private property. This dual nature presents a challenge in terms of gaining access to heritage sites situated on privately owned land.

Following the enactment of the country's constitution in 1996, segregation boundaries were abolished, granting public access to spaces that were once restricted. Evidence indicates an increase in accessibility to spaces that were traditionally exclusive. However, despite the ideals of inclusion and participation enshrined in the Constitution, property ownership practices and the right to restrict access continue to render sacred natural sites inaccessible to pilgrims. 

Sacred natural sites hold spiritual significance for people, transcending intrinsic or instrumental value. They are culturally and historically significant for people seeking to reconnect with their ancestors, undergo spiritual cleansing, receive training in spiritual healing and ask for guidance and forgiveness. For the Basotho people, the natural environment is an aspect of material reality through which the sacred is manifested. As such, they have returned to reclaim sacred spaces through spiritual journeys to sites like Mantsopa at Modderpoort, Mautse and Nkokomohi Valley near Rosendal, Motouleng near Clarens, and Witsie’s Cave in Qwaqwa.

Ownership rights and reserved rights vs access rights

The conflict between farm owners and pilgrims began when the former claimed exclusive ownership rights and reserved rights to access, while the latter only sought access rights without contesting ownership. According to Section 27 Subsection 8 of the National Heritage Resources Act, 25 1999 (NHRA), a site of significance can be nominated for declaration by the provincial or national heritage body. All the relevant sites were nominated at various times over the past decade and received provisional protection, but they were never formally declared. As a result, these sites have only enjoyed informal and provisional formal protection. In the case of informal heritage sites like Mautse and Motouleng, the private property owners have the legal right to deny entry to their properties and, consequently, the sacred sites.

Land regulation, particularly the Enlightenment-era separation of culture from nature, and the introduction of private ownership and commodification of nature in what were once  ‘traditional’ landscapes, in the African context, have placed many of the sacred sites under a terminal threat over the years. The complexities surrounding the sites persist, as seen in the closure of Mautse in 2016 due to a change in farm ownership. In 2020, Motouleng was also closed, with police forcefully evicting pilgrims on-site at the start of the hard lockdown of the COVID-19 pandemic outbreak. Furthermore, the structures within Motouleng Cave were destroyed by fire.

In recent years, the recognition of consequences for the affected communities and society at large due to the continued loss of sacred places, along with the role and function of pilgrimage to these sites, and related spiritual practices, has been growing. Urgent action from stakeholders at all levels, from international agencies to the local communities, is increasingly advocated to protect this heritage. The closure or denial of access to sacred sites is spreading rapidly. On 4 August 2023, the following access request was made: 

“We were asking for access to pray by the cave called Lehaha la Makhakha in Bothaville tomorrow. We spoke to the owner, but he refused to give us access. His reason for refusing is that other people are using candles which may cause fire and damage to the property, but we didn’t use candles even on 1 July 2023 we prayed, and no damages were incurred. The neighbourhood watch can attest to that. We have been using the prayer cave since 2016. We ask permission to pray.”

We need to dialogue

The conflict between the right to ownership and the right to access is a complex challenge, not only from the legal point of view but also considering South Africa’s complicated history and the cultural differences and contestations that exist. To address the past inequalities, the NHRA provides for the expropriation, subject to compensation, of private property ‘for conservation or any other purpose under this Act if that purpose is public or is in the public interest’, as outlined in Section 46(1). This aligns with Sections 25(2) and (3) of the Constitution (1996), which specify various conditions and circumstances to be considered regarding compensation amounts. Subsection (4) defines public interest to include “the nation’s commitment to land reform, and to reforms to bring about equitable access to all South Africa’s natural resources”. There is no doubt that the sacred sites serve a public interest, aligning effectively with the theory of commons. This has two implications: firstly, sacred natural sites are a kind of commons that cannot be privatized as they cannot have one exclusive owner. Secondly, sacred natural sites need to possess some kind of public property status to be accessible to all potential visitors who may have relational values regarding that site. 

What does this mean for promises of the Constitution and the National Heritage Resources Act? While we are enjoying a braai, let us also remember we need to dialogue on matters that continue to undermine the realisation of the idealism of heritage as cultural capital. This can help South Africa define its cultural identity, build the nation, affirm our diverse cultures, facilitate healing and material and symbolic restitution, and in doing so, shape our national character. 

News Archive

Reverend Frank Chikane honours ‘Oom Bey’ at second Beyers Naudé Memorial Lecture for 2012
2012-09-11

Rev. Frank Chikane and Dr Choice Makhetha, Vice-Rector: External Relations at the UFS.
Photo: Stephen Collett
10 September 2012

The 9th Beyers Naude Memorial Lecture, a partnership initiative between the University of the Free State (UFS) and Kagiso Trust, was held on the South Campus of the university last week. The theme of the lecture focused on Collaborative partnership for social cohesion: Building of a nation with ethics.

Guest speaker, Reverend Frank Chikane, is a member of the UDF, ANC, Director-General in the Office of the President and a board member of Kagiso Trust.

In his speech, Rev. Chikane focused on the first 45 years in the life of Beyers Naudé, sketching a picture of a man who lived for what he believes in. When this former minister of the South African Dutch Reformed Church and member of the Broederbond, decided to question the morality of the Apartheid government after the Sharpeville Massacre in 1960, he made some changes in his beliefs and started to play a big role in the struggle against apartheid.

“If one know about ‘Oom Bey’s’ earlier life, you will see how radical his contribution was in turning South Africa from a country on the brink of destruction to a country of peace. ‘Oom Bey’ must be seen as a role model, someone we can aspire to be in South Africa today,” Rev. Chikane said.

“From his legacy one sees elements of someone building a nation with ethics.

“He took sides with the poor against an unjust system. Power breaks cohesion. It makes people not to think,” Rev. Chikane said.

If Afrikaners and black people stood together after the South African War (Anglo-Boer War), we would have talked a different language today. However, they did not. Afrikaners stood together, excluding black people and cohesion between all races was destructed. ‘Oom Bey’ tried to build relationships between people from all races in South Africa in an effort to create peace amongst all people. He was alienated from the Broederbond and defrockedrom the church.

In his speech, Rev. Chikane also said that South Africa did not succeed in collaborative partnerships in terms of the economy. “We need collaborative action to change our economy. This specific failure can destroy all that we have built together.”

“All South Africans can be like ‘Oom Bey” and make a contribution, especially in terms of the economy. To deal with this challenge, we can all contribute. This is important because due to a poor economy, many people are desperate and desperate people can destroy any relationship that we might have built so far.”

At this event, the university and Kagiso Trust also announced the winners of a poetry and essay competition that coincided with this last Beyers Naudé lecture for 2012. The award ceremony looked at the creativity of the learners, how they expressed themselves as well as the novelty of their work. Students as well as learners from schools in the Free State participated in the competition and first, second and third place winners received cash prizes as well as a book from Rev. Frank Chikane for their brilliant work.
 

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