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

Tswelopele hosts first LGBTQI panel discussion
2016-10-05

Description: LGBTQI  Tags: LGBTQI

Tshepang Mahlatsi, Zane Thela, Dionne van
Reenen, Dr Thierry Luescher and Galeletsang
Soato, at the Brotherhood with no Limit panel
discussion held at Tswelopele residence on
the Bloemfontein Campus.
Photo: Supplied

Ignorance about issues relating to the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer and Intersex (LGBTQI) community is a threat to mankind. This is according to Tshepang Mahlatsi, former Prime of Tswelopele residence, regarding LGBTQI concerns at University of the Free State (UFS).

House Tswelopele on the Bloemfontein Campus hosted a panel discussion, Brotherhood with no Limit, on 19 September 2016 to discuss issues affecting the LGBTQI community, which has often been on the receiving end of criticism, hate speech and bigotry.

Academics take stance at LGBTQI discussion

The panel, which consisted of staff members and students, opened the discussion to everyone on campus. The panel comprised Zane Thela, Programme Coordinator: Gender and Sexual Equity Office: Student Affairs; Dionne van Reenen, Assistant Researcher; Dr Thierry Luescher, Assistant Director, Directorate for Institutional Research and Academic Planning, and Mahlatsi.

Creating a safer environment for LQBTQI dialogue

“The message that we were putting across was simple. We as a house cannot allow society to define our own brothers for us,” Mahlatsi said. The responsibility of students and student leaders was to stand in solidarity. He said it was not fair that in the 21st century people were still fighting to be recognised for who they were and what they identified themselves as. This issue had been discussed at Tswelopele before and it was not that much of an issue, Mahlatsi said. “However, this was the first formal one [discussion] where we had speakers who are more informed on the topic.”

The panel discussion also aimed to challenge other residences that still do not allow such talks to take place in a safe environment.

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