Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
23 July 2024 Photo Barend Nagel
Nhlanhla Simelane
Nhlanhla Simelane is a second-year Language Practice student, majoring in South African Sign Language. He is also a former Chairperson of Signals – a student association that is aimed at promoting SASL and Deaf awareness.

Opinion article by Nhlanhla Simelane, Student Assistant: South African Sign Language and Deaf Studies, Faculty: The Humanities, University of the Free State.

It has been a year since the president signed off on the amendment bill to include South African Sign Language (SASL) as one of the country’s official languages. And one may wonder, what has changed since then? After all, many individuals and organisations, including the Deaf Federation of South Africa (DeafSA), the National Institute for the Deaf (NID), and Deaf rights activists from the Deaf community, believed that official recognition of sign language would lead to significant developments for SASL and the Deaf community.

Since then, SASL has mostly benefited from exposure from the SASL Indabas that PanSALB held on 9-10 March 2023 and another one on the 1-2 February this year. These Indabas were aimed at “discussing the standardisation of SASL and mapping a way forward”. They included several stakeholders, including our very own institution. They also had an impact on the development of SASL in various institutions, including UNISA and University of Cape Town (UCT), and it is hoped that this influence will extend to other institutions.

However, one must not overlook the fact that despite being a minority language, SASL already enjoyed significant language rights. For example, the South African Schools Act recognised it as an official language in 1996. The Use of Official Languages Act of 2012 provided another benefit that was not even enjoyed by the other 11 official languages; with this act, state entities had to establish a language policy outlining the use of official languages for public communication, specifically if a member of the public chose SASL as their preferred language. It also benefited from protection under the South African Sign Language Charter, launched by the SASL NLB (National Language Board) in 2020, roughly three years before it became official. Even Prof Theodorus du Plessis, Professor Emeritus in the Department of South African Sign Language and Deaf Studies, University of the Free State (UFS), in a previous opinion article, mentioned that there would be little to gain from officially recognising SASL, aside from the added symbolism associated with such a move. As a matter of fact, SASL had more to lose than gain due to its official recognition, as you will learn later in the article.

A human rights level

On a human rights level, which is more relevant to those living with hearing impairments in the country, the officialisation of SASL still had no significant effect on any of their human rights. This is simply because these persons already enjoyed their rights. However, what the officialisation cost the Deaf community* is the privilege as mentioned earlier that the Use of Official Languages Act of 2012 provided – users of SASL having the right to choose SASL as their language of interaction with the state – the very one that official languages do not enjoy. This is thus a disadvantage to the Deaf community, considering that they already suffer from a lack of interpreters in the county. An article by Nicky Bezuidenhout early this year highlighted that there is a “lack of access to crucial services like healthcare and justice due to a shortage of qualified South African Sign Language (SASL) interpreters”. Therefore, many Deaf people rely on untrained or unqualified individuals and mostly even family members to act as interpreters. This was mostly the case in my life, being a CODA (Child of a Deaf Adult) and having to interpret for my parents. And besides my proficiency in SASL, there was still the matter of a breach of confidentiality. This is a common problem for many people. Therefore, more SASL interpreters (SASLi) are needed. Additionally, it is up to everyone to take it upon themselves to learn SASL through the various provisions that are available today.

More development for SASL as a language

Thankfully, the UFS, among a few other institutions such as the Wits University, North-West University as well as the Durban University of Technology, makes such a provision through its SASL short course. Another way to learn is through mobile applications such as DEAFinition and the NID SASL Dictionary. The previous platforms also offer inexpensive online courses. This way, one can be equipped with SASL fundamentals to at least be able to hold a conversation without the need for an interpreter. Furthermore, we can only anticipate that since SASL is officially recognised, it will become more accessible in higher education institutions, as mentioned earlier, and will be included in the South African school curriculum, particularly for mainstream schools. As a result, more people will have the opportunity to learn SASL. Moreover, we can expect to see an increase in the number of qualified teachers with not only teaching skills but also proficiency in SASL.

Nonetheless, it has only been a year and matters regarding language plans and policies often require a great amount of resources, with time being the greatest of all. We can only hope that its officialisation has indeed led to the cultural acceptance of SASL and the relevant community, promoting substantive equality, and preventing unfair discrimination based on disability. But more importantly, we hope that this is not the end of the road for SASL in terms of its development as a language.

*Footnote: It is important to make a distinction between deaf people who are deaf but do not identify as part of the Deaf community and do not use SASL (who are referred to with a lowercase “d’’), and those who are deaf and are part of the Deaf community, making use of SASL as their first language (who are referred to using a capitalised ‘D’).

• Nhlanhla Simelane is a second-year Language Practice student, majoring in South African Sign Language. He is also a former Chairperson of Signals – a student association that is aimed at promoting SASL and Deaf awareness.

News Archive

The failure of the law
2004-06-04

 

Written by Lacea Loader

- Call for the protection of consumers’ and tax payers rights against corporate companies

An expert in commercial law has called for reforms to the Companies Act to protect the rights of consumers and investors.

“Consumers and tax payers are lulled into thinking the law protects them when it definitely does not,” said Prof Dines Gihwala this week during his inaugural lecture at the University of the Free State’s (UFS).

Prof Gihwala, vice-chairperson of the UFS Council, was inaugurated as extraordinary professor in commercial law at the UFS’s Faculty of Law.

He said that consumers, tax payers and shareholders think they can look to the law for an effective curb on the enormous power for ill that big business wields.

“Once the public is involved, the activities of big business must be controlled and regulated. It is the responsibility of the law to oversee and supervise such control and regulation,” said Prof Gihwala.

He said that, when undesirable consequences occur despite laws enacted specifically to prevent such results, it must be fair to suggest that the law has failed.

“The actual perpetrators of the undesirable behaviour seldom pay for it in any sense, not even when criminal conduct is involved. If directors of companies are criminally charged and convicted, the penalty is invariably a fine imposed on the company. So, ironically, it is the money of tax payers that is spent on investigating criminal conduct, formulating charges and ultimately prosecuting the culprits involved in corporate malpractice,” said Prof Gihwala.

According to Prof Gihwala the law continuously fails to hold companies meaningfully accountable to good and honest business values.

“Insider trading is a crime and, although legislation was introduced in 1998 to curb it, not a single successful criminal prosecution has taken place. While the law appears to be offering the public protection against unacceptable business behaviour, it does no such thing – the law cannot act as a deterrent if it is inadequate or not being enforced,” he said.

The government believed it was important to facilitate access to the country’s economic resources by those who had been denied it in the past. The Broad Based Economic Empowerment Act of 2003 (BBEE), is legislation to do just that. “We should be asking ourselves whether it is really possible for an individual, handicapped by the inequities of the past, to compete in the real business world even though the BBEE Act is now part of the law?,” said Prof Gihwala.

Prof Gihwala said that judges prefer to follow precedent instead of taking bold initiative. “Following precedent is safe at a personal level. To do so will elicit no outcry of disapproval and one’s professional reputation is protected. The law needs to evolve and it is the responsibility of the judiciary to see that it happens in an orderly fashion. Courts often take the easy way out, and when the opportunity to be bold and creative presents itself, it is ignored,” he said.

“Perhaps we are expecting too much from the courts. If changes are to be made to the level of protection to the investing public by the law, Parliament must play its proper role. It is desirable for Parliament to be proactive. Those tasked with the responsibility of rewriting our Companies Act should be bold and imaginative. They should remove once and for all those parts of our common law which frustrate the ideals of our Constitution, and in particular those which conflict with the principles of the BBEE Act,” said Prof Gihwala.

According to Prof Gihwala, the following reforms are necessary:

• establishing a unit that is part of the office of the Registrar of Companies to bolster a whole inspectorate in regard to companies’ affairs;
• companies who are liable to pay a fine or fines, should have the right to take action to recover that fine from those responsible for the conduct;
• and serious transgression of the law should allow for imprisonment only – there should be no room for the payment of fines.
 

Prof Gihwala ended the lecture by saying: “If the opportunity to re-work the Companies Act is not grabbed with both hands, we will witness yet another failure in the law. Even more people will come to believe that the law is stupid and that it has made fools of them. And that would be the worst possible news in our developing democracy, where we are struggling to ensure that the Rule of Law prevails and that every one of us has respect for the law”.

 

 

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