Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
16 January 2024 | Story Valentino Ndaba and Dr Cindé Greyling | Photo Sonia Small
Dr Catherine Namakula
According to Dr Catherine Namakula, language-fair trial rights are entrenched as constitutional imperatives in many African countries.

Dr Catherine Namakula is Senior Lecturer of Public Law at the University of the Free State and a member of the United Nations Human Rights Council’s Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent. In her latest book, Fair Trial Rights and Multilingualism in Africa, she incorporates a ‘language-fair trial rights code’ – an amalgamation of 31 principles proven by case law and trial practice as best approaches to ensuring language-fair trial rights.

The code advances the minimum language guarantees for vulnerable participants, especially persons with speech and hearing disabilities, sign language users, accused persons making confessions, and victims of gender-based or sexual violence. Bult discussed her research in more depth with her.

Your research spans multiple jurisdictions in Africa, from the Sahel region to the Horn of Africa and the Cape. What country-specific practices have you found regarding fair trial rights in these regions?

Language-fair trial rights are entrenched as constitutional imperatives in many African countries. They are non-negotiable. Nigerian and Kenyan courts have exceeded rhetoric and lip service to language-fair trial rights and actually declared trials absolute nullities due to lack of comprehension of proceedings by accused persons. Indigenous languages are languages of record in Ethiopia, Rwanda, Somalia, and Tanzania.

Rwanda elevates the standard of linguistic competence of an accused to thorough competency, whereas in Lesotho this translates to the mother tongue. In Canada, even jury panellists are subjected to language competency tests, and in South Africa, judges are assigned cases according to their proficiency in the language indicated by the trial participants as the preferred language of trial. Almost all the studied countries express no compromise on the principle that a confession must be recorded in the language used by the person making it.

Multilingualism is a significant challenge in legal processes across Africa. What were some of the most common issues or difficulties related to language that you identified during your research, and how do these impact the fairness of trials?

There is a gap bordering on disconnection between the formal courts and the population they serve – to the extent that legal processes are perceived as elitist and foreign, mainly because of the language question. Trials require unequivocal expressions, whereas African tradition for the most part considers sexual language as pervasive. This constrains the trial and punishment of sexual violence.

Investment in the standardisation of sign languages is limited, making the trial of persons with speech disabilities in their ‘home-made’ languages impracticable. There is heavy reliance on translation and interpreting to propel trials, often leading to resource constraints and recourse to controversial measures, such as engaging police officers as interpreters.

Transplanting African customs from indigenous languages to fit court situations by way of translation leads to loss of meaning and watering down of concepts. African courts battle with evaluating interpretative competency against the backdrop of a lack of training of judicial interpreters on the continent. Measuring linguistic comprehension is an actual challenge for courts, often manifesting in asking people whether they know what they do not know, but this research presents the objective test based on special circumstances advanced by the Supreme Court of Justice of Ontario that would resolve this hurdle.

Your book also mentions the potential applicability of lessons from African jurisdictions to those outside of Africa.

Contrary to popular opinion, the study confirms that African languages are already serving as channels for trials; they are not merely colloquial speech, but carriers of identities and human dignity. They should not be ignored but recognised and promoted. A trial that must proceed in a language that an accused person does not understand is a trial in absentia and the safeguards governing such trials must apply.

As the legal landscape and languages in Africa continue to evolve, what recommendations or measures do you propose to improve existing approaches to ensuring fair trials in multilingual contexts?

Decolonial discourse and reparation to Africa from the legacies of enslavement, colonialism, and apartheid should characterise the rise in esteem of African languages in all spheres of society. The use of intermediaries in Kenya and South Africa to protect and support vulnerable victims – especially children and victims of gender-based violence – in their communication with the courts should be emulated by other countries and extended to persons who are illiterate, in order to mitigate the intimidating sophistication of the courts on our people.

News Archive

Competition emphasises value of mother-tongue education
2017-11-02

Description: Public Speaking Competition  Tags: Public Speaking Competition  

At the recent Multilingual Debating Competition were, from the left: Anita Muller,
local facilitator; William Magwa, master of ceremonies; Dr Chrismi-Rinda Loth,
project coordinator in the Unit for Language Facilitation and Empowerment; and
Mabatho Ntsieng, project facilitator in Community Engagement.
Photo: Supplied

The Multilingual Public Speaking Competition has been an annual event in Philippolis since 2013. The competition was established as a result of the Multilingual Information Development Programme (MIDP), a project sponsored by the province of Antwerp in Flanders, Belgium. 

The competition is jointly hosted by the Unit for Language Facilitation and Empowerment (ULFE) at the University of the Free State (UFS) and the Department of Community Engagement, also from the UFS. 

Debating in your home language
Grade 6 to 9 learners from four schools participated in this year’s competition. Bergmanshoogte Intermediate School, Madikgetla Primary School, Williamsville Primary School, and Springfontein Primary School each entered their three best speakers per grade. 

Olerato Tshiloane, a Grade 7 learner from Madikgetla Primary School, was named best speaker overall. 

Everyone debated on ‘Heritage’
The overall theme of this annual event was ‘Heritage’. Thirty six learners debated in their mother tongue on aspects of this theme, such as its definition, the role it plays in their lives, and the importance thereof. According to Dr Chrismi-Rinda Loth from ULFE, learners have to present their speeches in their mother tongues. “This emphasises the value of the mother tongue/home language within a teaching context,” she says.

This year’s competition saw 20 Afrikaans speeches, 13 in Sesotho, and three in isiXhosa. The multilingual adjudication panel was composed of teachers from the participating schools, and the head adjudicator from the Afrikaanse Taal- en Kultuurvereniging (ATKV). The ATKV is a partial sponsor of the competition and also provides the participation certificates. 

Dr Loth says ULFE and Community Engagement are looking forward to continue their collaboration, thus contributing to the empowerment of the community.

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