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

Hearing loss a silent public health crisis in South Africa
2017-03-27

Description: Hearing loss a silent public health crisis in South Africa Tags: Hearing, Deaf, World Hearing Day
Dr Magteld Smith engages on the topic of hearing loss
and how it coincides with the commemoration of
World Hearing awareness during the month of March.
Photo: Oteng Mpete 

Communication is a principal challenge for people with hearing loss. It can be difficult to negotiate everyday interactions, whether in the workplace, on the street, in classrooms, courts, during consultations with health professionals, or even when contacting the police. The World Health Organisation’s (WHO) World Hearing Day is an annual advocacy event held each year on 3 March to raise awareness and promote ear and hearing care across the world. In many countries this awareness campaign usually starts on 3 March but many continue to create awareness for the full month of March. 

Hearing loss is a global reality
According to Dr Magteld Smith, a researcher at the University of the Free State (UFS) School of Medicine’s Department of Otorhinolaryngology, unaddressed hearing loss poses a high cost for the economy globally and has a significant impact on the lives of those affected. Interventions to address hearing loss are available in South Africa but are not accessible or affordable for most citizens. This is partly because not only persons with hearing loss but also people with disabilities experience barriers in accessing services that many of us take for granted, including health, education, employment, and transport as well as information. These difficulties are exacerbated in less-advantaged communities.

“WHO estimates that there are more than 360 million persons with hearing loss globally. The statistics in South Africa are unreliable due to the different definitions used by Statistics South Africa and the absence of training of the officials who conduct and collect statistics concerning hearing loss in South Africa,” says Dr Smith. 

According to Dr Smith, analysis from retrospective studies reflects that about 17 out of 1 000 infants are born daily in South Africa with severe to profound hearing loss. However, Dr Smith states that the number could be higher because of late diagnosis, high levels of undiagnosed and untreated hearing loss. This excludes young adults, adults and the elderly as well as children with acquired (become deaf after birth) hearing loss.

Crisis that needs urgent intervention 
Dr Smith says hearing loss is an emergency which the South African government fails to prioritise. She says that research published confirms that the risk compounding the projected increase in hearing loss that comes with an ageing population. This is a looming and silent public-health crisis.
She believes that the government should take urgent action to align research-spending with the current and projected size and impact of hearing loss. It should also collaborate across related conditions, such as vision, neurodegenerative diseases and neurological conditions. Furthermore, the government needs, and is obligated, to deliver more accessible and integrated services and develop quality standards that take account of the whole pathway – linking public health, clinical and social needs.

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