Tshepo Madlingozi: 20 Years of TRC - TAKING STOCK OF THE SOUTH AFRICAN TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION COMMISSION 20 YEARS LATER: NO TRUTH, NO RECONCILIATION AND NO JUSTICE
by Tshepo Madlingozi, Chairperson of Khulumani Support Group at the 3rd INTERNATIONAL COLLOQUIUM OF THE INSTTUTO HUMANITAS at UNISINOS, Brazil 16 September 2015
The document provides background information on the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) in South Africa. It discusses the TRC's formation in 1995 to promote reconciliation after apartheid and its three main tasks: to investigate human rights violations between 1960-1994, identify victims for reparations, and grant amnesty to perpetrators who fully disclosed their crimes. Archbishop Desmond Tutu chaired the TRC. Its goals were to acknowledge and record victims' experiences, hold some parties accountable to prevent future abuses, and foster a culture of tolerance rather than covering up past violations.
As the country gears up for a year of intensified advocacy for the resolution of the many issues left incomplete by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission on the eve of the 20th Anniversary of the commencement of the TRC's work in 2016, the continuing challenges that have resulted from the failure to complete the work initiated by the country's TRC, were presented to the UCT Medical Class of 1975 at its reunion on Saturday 21 November 2015 in Cape Town.
An Unresolved Struggle for Reparations, Redress & Restitution in South Africa Khulumani Support Group
This document summarizes perspectives on reparations and redress for racial injustices in South Africa. It discusses the views of thinkers like Bryan Stevenson, Ta-Nehisi Coates, and Hillary Beckles who argue that countries must address the lasting impacts of policies like slavery, segregation, and colonialism. It notes that resistance to reparations in South Africa reflects a failure to understand how these historical actions have harmed people and that reckoning with moral debts is needed for true peace and healing. The document advocates for a 10-point plan of reparatory justice, including apologies, cultural programs, and debt cancellation to address inequalities and move towards repairing damage from the past.
This talk was given as part of the DD Network day, in June 2017, exploring the relationship between disability, citizenship and wider social movements to advance a richer and more welcoming community life.
DD Network convened an important event in Madison, Wisconsin to explore the relationship between the learning from advocates of inclusion and the wider world of advocates for democracy and social justice. In this talk Dr Simon Duffy of the Centre for Welfare Reform argues that the experience of people with disabilities offers powerful lessons for the kind of social change we need and the limitations of working in narrow silos. He provides evidence of the extreme targeting of people with disabilities in the UK's austerity programme and the dangers of scapegoating and meritocracy. He proposes that we need to take the necessity of the welfare state much more seriously and integrate it into our thinking about constitutional reform.
The welfare state is fundamentally good but is currently designed in a way that disadvantages the poor and disabled. It has become corrupted through myths and an unjust targeting of benefits cuts towards vulnerable groups. A better system would decentralize power, support citizenship and strong local communities, provide basic securities as rights, and respect families and communities.
Simon Duffy explores how the concept of citizenship can provide a valuable framework for understanding the meaning of deinstitutionalisation, self-directed support and welfare reform.
The document contains a collection of quotes from various historical figures critiquing government overreach and advocating for limited government. Many of the quotes warn about the dangers of large, powerful government that overtaxes citizens and grows beyond its proper role. They argue that too much government intervention in the economy can undermine individual liberty and prosperity.
The document provides background information on the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) in South Africa. It discusses the TRC's formation in 1995 to promote reconciliation after apartheid and its three main tasks: to investigate human rights violations between 1960-1994, identify victims for reparations, and grant amnesty to perpetrators who fully disclosed their crimes. Archbishop Desmond Tutu chaired the TRC. Its goals were to acknowledge and record victims' experiences, hold some parties accountable to prevent future abuses, and foster a culture of tolerance rather than covering up past violations.
As the country gears up for a year of intensified advocacy for the resolution of the many issues left incomplete by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission on the eve of the 20th Anniversary of the commencement of the TRC's work in 2016, the continuing challenges that have resulted from the failure to complete the work initiated by the country's TRC, were presented to the UCT Medical Class of 1975 at its reunion on Saturday 21 November 2015 in Cape Town.
An Unresolved Struggle for Reparations, Redress & Restitution in South Africa Khulumani Support Group
This document summarizes perspectives on reparations and redress for racial injustices in South Africa. It discusses the views of thinkers like Bryan Stevenson, Ta-Nehisi Coates, and Hillary Beckles who argue that countries must address the lasting impacts of policies like slavery, segregation, and colonialism. It notes that resistance to reparations in South Africa reflects a failure to understand how these historical actions have harmed people and that reckoning with moral debts is needed for true peace and healing. The document advocates for a 10-point plan of reparatory justice, including apologies, cultural programs, and debt cancellation to address inequalities and move towards repairing damage from the past.
This talk was given as part of the DD Network day, in June 2017, exploring the relationship between disability, citizenship and wider social movements to advance a richer and more welcoming community life.
DD Network convened an important event in Madison, Wisconsin to explore the relationship between the learning from advocates of inclusion and the wider world of advocates for democracy and social justice. In this talk Dr Simon Duffy of the Centre for Welfare Reform argues that the experience of people with disabilities offers powerful lessons for the kind of social change we need and the limitations of working in narrow silos. He provides evidence of the extreme targeting of people with disabilities in the UK's austerity programme and the dangers of scapegoating and meritocracy. He proposes that we need to take the necessity of the welfare state much more seriously and integrate it into our thinking about constitutional reform.
The welfare state is fundamentally good but is currently designed in a way that disadvantages the poor and disabled. It has become corrupted through myths and an unjust targeting of benefits cuts towards vulnerable groups. A better system would decentralize power, support citizenship and strong local communities, provide basic securities as rights, and respect families and communities.
Simon Duffy explores how the concept of citizenship can provide a valuable framework for understanding the meaning of deinstitutionalisation, self-directed support and welfare reform.
The document contains a collection of quotes from various historical figures critiquing government overreach and advocating for limited government. Many of the quotes warn about the dangers of large, powerful government that overtaxes citizens and grows beyond its proper role. They argue that too much government intervention in the economy can undermine individual liberty and prosperity.
This document discusses the oppression of marginalized groups throughout history in South Africa and how similar issues persist today. It describes apartheid, where whites oppressed blacks by controlling resources, education, and healthcare. Today, xenophobia (prejudice against foreigners) has replaced apartheid in some ways. The document argues that greed for power and economic dominance has historically driven the oppression of less privileged groups. It claims current issues could be reduced by reforming the gap between rich and poor through shared ownership and access to production, which would decrease want and conflict. The conclusion cites Haile Selassie's speech about how oppression will continue "until the basic human rights are equally guaranteed to all without regard to race."
The presentation is based on a philosophical paper which outlines both the causes of the current attack on the welfare state and recommends new thinking about the purpose and structure of the welfare state
EADI Conference 2014 - The Broker panel session - Presentation Marc Vandepittereinoutthebroker
This document discusses inequality and its relationship to democracy. It notes that inequality creates a fundamental contradiction with democracy as the wealthy elite seek to maintain their privileges against the interests of the poorer majority. Throughout history, elites have worked to limit democracy through mechanisms like census voting and neutralizing organizations of the poor. The document argues that today's concentrated economic power has enabled a "silent takeover" of the state and media, shaping democracy in a way that does not threaten wealth redistribution. To truly address inequality, it claims we must also address issues with the current form of democracy and corporate influence over policy debates.
The document critiques the current rhetoric around welfare reform and argues that while the welfare state is fundamentally good, it has been designed wrongly and many beliefs about it are false. It makes six main points: 1) the welfare state benefits society but is designed incorrectly, 2) many common beliefs about its costs and effects are untrue, 3) it is paradoxically biased against the poor, 4) the current reform agenda risks further corrupting the system, 5) citizenship rather than charity should be the guiding principle, and 6) a better system is needed that supports communities and basic securities for all as a matter of rights.
Dr Simon Duffy gave this talk at a City of Birmingham Think Tank event on 15th June 2016. This talk explores the reasons for the attacks on the welfare state and how the design of the welfare state could be changed to advance citizenship for all.
The document discusses how the privileged are able to overlook problems with government services that the poor struggle with daily. It notes that government bureaucracies often deliver terrible quality services to the poor, and the press tends to ignore or be unaware of the pain this causes. It argues that if a government cannot effectively implement its policies, then it cannot properly govern. The document promotes the idea that interfaces to government can and should be simple, beautiful, and easy to use for all citizens.
Modern Liberalism evolved in response to the failures of Classical Liberalism during the Great Depression. Classical Liberalism failed to meet the needs of the masses, risking revolt and systemic collapse. Franklin Roosevelt introduced the New Deal, expanding executive power to intervene in the economy. This marked the beginning of Modern Liberalism in the United States. Modern Liberalism, influenced by the ideas of Keynes, takes from economic surpluses to provide assistance during downturns. This evens out booms and busts, preventing the accumulation of desperate populations that could destabilize the system. Canada provides an example of the stability and popularity of the Modern Liberal system, with an economy that has not drastically declined under its established form of governance.
This conference is aimed at activists who want to discuss our collective way forward. It will be a day for participatory discussion, bot a platform-led event. The organisers have no fixed objective, just an awareness that we are losing. The ruling class adapt their tactics, and we have failed to do so; we will not win if we just repeat the same ways of organising.
2019: Eternal Sanguinity And Monster Of Institutional MalignancySantosh Jha
Given the global trend of average person becoming less aware of his or her milieus and average person becoming slave to political narrative of societal and cultural ‘Realities’ in the milieus, there does not seem any initiative for institutional reforms. It is rather more probable that in years to come, conflicts shall completely color the Consciousness and Cognition of average person and masses shall turn into happy tools in the hands of handful of politicians and corporate, who shall recipe over the ‘conflicts’ to dish out to masses to ensure their own unbridled agenda…
Dr Simon Duffy presented these slides to a meeting of the Socialist Health Association SHA) which was also joined by members of Disabled People Against the Cuts (DPAC) on 18th June 2016. He proposed that the whole social care system was flawed and based on old-fashioned institutional models that were dangerous and undermined people's citizenship. He proposed radical reform and the creation of an effective right for independent living.
2. theoretical foundations of global governanceHelen Sakhan
The document outlines three major theoretical foundations of global governance: liberalism focuses on human progress through cooperation, interdependence, and international institutions; realism emphasizes states' pursuit of power and security in an anarchic system; and Marxist theory views global governance as reflecting the interests of dominant capitalist states and classes that control production.
This document discusses comparative social policy and welfare regimes. It summarizes Esping-Anderson's three welfare regimes based on stratification and decommodification. It notes critiques of Esping-Anderson's narrow data and ignoring of unpaid labor. Gender is an important element of welfare regimes. Family forms are changing in Europe with increased cohabitation and births outside marriage. The pace of gender equality's private and public spheres varies across countries putting family pressure on fertility. [/SUMMARY]
Presentation the three worlds of welfare capitalismXaveria Desi
The document outlines Esping-Andersen's theory of three worlds of welfare capitalism. It discusses how welfare states can be categorized into three regimes - Liberal, Corporatist, and Social Democratic - based on how they stratify social classes and commodify or decommodify labor. The Liberal regime minimizes decommodification and contains social rights to a clientele of low-income dependents. The Corporatist regime preserves status differentials through occupation-specific benefits. The Social Democratic regime promotes universal solidarity and preemptively socializes costs to allow choice beyond family or market dependence.
Slavery in Utopia is reserved for serious criminals sentenced to death elsewhere. These slaves are either imported and forced to work in chains or come from Utopia itself, having failed to control their impulses despite virtue teachings. Voluntary slaves also exist. The slaves care for the terminally ill, who can choose euthanasia with priest and judge approval, making the act considered religious and holy.
Comparative Social Structures and Welfare Week 4 LectureUniversity of York
1. The document discusses different typologies that have been proposed for classifying and comparing welfare states, focusing on Esping-Andersen's "Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism" model of liberal, conservative, and social democratic regimes.
2. This model is based on levels of "decommodification" but has been criticized for oversimplifying differences and leaving out other regimes like Mediterranean or East Asian countries.
3. While typologies provide analytical usefulness, welfare states are complex and subject to change, so future development may differ from past patterns.
This document provides an overview of political science and democracy. It discusses several key topics:
1) It examines different definitions and views of democracy throughout history, from Aristotle's negative view of democracy allowing the uneducated masses too much power, to Lincoln's view of democracy as government by and for the people.
2) It traces how democracy became rehabilitated during the Renaissance and Enlightenment as it became linked to liberalism and opposition to tyranny.
3) It discusses Gandhi's advocacy for democracy in post-colonial India and his view that the weakest should have the same opportunities as the strongest.
4) It provides some key characteristics of democracy such as free and fair
- Political thinkers have historically distinguished between competent political elites and the incompetent masses, though this distinction is controversial in democracies.
- Democratic and totalitarian regimes differ in how the ruling elite maintains power and allegiance - democratic elites use persuasion and allow themselves to be voted out, while totalitarian regimes use force and intend to rule for life.
- Contemporary liberal democracies are often described as "rule by competing elites" where elites gain power through elections and are replaced when incompetent, though who exactly comprises the political elite remains contentious.
This document discusses the possibility of reaching a worldwide consensus on human rights. It argues that while the concept of human rights originated in Western societies, the values of democracy and human rights are increasingly accepted on a global scale. However, full agreement faces challenges, as other cultures may interpret concepts like individual rights and dignity differently. Still, the document believes that separating the philosophical principles from legal frameworks allows for the values like life, liberty and equality to be adopted more universally. It also acknowledges the important role of non-governmental organizations in advocating for human rights around the world.
If it is legitimate, what are acceptable and unacceptable methods of.pdfarshicollection001
If it is legitimate, what are acceptable and unacceptable methods of rebellion?
Solution
Rabat – For a rebellion against a government to be useful and to benefit people, it should be
legitimate in the sense that it should at least be morally and politically right.
Morally, it should be against injustice, and politically it should be for the benefit of the people
and not to the benefit of an elite, political group, or military junta. In other words, it should be
for the long term benefit of the nation. History shows us that revolutions often lead to positive
post-revolutionary political systems, such as the case of France after the 1789 revolution.The
abolition of the Old Regime and the Declaration of the rights of Man and the Citizen are legacies
which constructed modern democratic France. These positive changes brought through popular
rebellion can be contrasted with disastrous results such as in the case of the Bolshevik revolution
which led to state totalitarianism disguised under the name of communism.
That said, citizens should have a legitimate right of rebellion against governments who
deliberately do not protect their personal security because such governments lose their political
and moral legitimacy in failing to protect the security of the nation. This will be supported by the
following ideas: First, the fundamental reason for the existence of governments is to protect the
security of the people. Second, one should assess whether that government voluntarily or
involuntarily does not protect the security of its citizens (a despotic and corrupt government
which fails to protect security of the people should not be assessed the same way as a
government supported by the people but which fails to protect the latter because of other factors
such as war or external threats). Finally, it is the right of the people to revolt against their
government because governments should not have a higher importance than the people. In fact,
the people are the raison d’etre of the government or state.
As mentioned above, the fundamental reason for the existence of the state is to protect the
security of the people. If not, what is the state’s purpose? To be at the service of a political or
financial elite? Such as what we witness in a number of nation-states? In western political theory
at least this fact is not desirable. In Hobbes’ canons, the sovereign’s existence is meant to take
human being’s out on an undesirable state of nature which is a ‘war of all against all’ (Hobbes)
and to introduce the latter in a civil society where security is guaranteed by the sovereign. That
is, a society where government guarantees security, stability ‘and happy life as far as it is
possible’ (Hobbes).
Some would argue that these values of justice and equality are desired by the people only in the
western liberal world. It will be argued here that the opposite is true. Justice and equality is a
universal aspiration. This can be proved by analyzing current world affai.
This document discusses several issues with democracy as it currently exists. It argues that democracy is coming under scrutiny in countries like the US and UK, and is seen as sliding towards oligarchy and autocracy due to money's influence over politics. Lobbying and corruption are seen as polluting the political process. The document questions why democracy is being forcibly exported through violence when it is not even in good shape in Western countries. It concludes that recent events support the view that democracies often "waste, exhaust, and murder themselves."
This document discusses the relationship between human rights and conflict through examining a case study on Syria. It provides background on the conflict in Syria, noting it started as a rebellion against President Assad due to human rights abuses, but turned into a civil war. The document analyzes the conflict through the lens of various articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, finding that even before the civil war, there were widespread abuses of articles protecting the rights to life, liberty, freedom from torture, and equality before the law. As the civil war intensified, grave human rights violations have become commonplace on a daily basis.
This document discusses the oppression of marginalized groups throughout history in South Africa and how similar issues persist today. It describes apartheid, where whites oppressed blacks by controlling resources, education, and healthcare. Today, xenophobia (prejudice against foreigners) has replaced apartheid in some ways. The document argues that greed for power and economic dominance has historically driven the oppression of less privileged groups. It claims current issues could be reduced by reforming the gap between rich and poor through shared ownership and access to production, which would decrease want and conflict. The conclusion cites Haile Selassie's speech about how oppression will continue "until the basic human rights are equally guaranteed to all without regard to race."
The presentation is based on a philosophical paper which outlines both the causes of the current attack on the welfare state and recommends new thinking about the purpose and structure of the welfare state
EADI Conference 2014 - The Broker panel session - Presentation Marc Vandepittereinoutthebroker
This document discusses inequality and its relationship to democracy. It notes that inequality creates a fundamental contradiction with democracy as the wealthy elite seek to maintain their privileges against the interests of the poorer majority. Throughout history, elites have worked to limit democracy through mechanisms like census voting and neutralizing organizations of the poor. The document argues that today's concentrated economic power has enabled a "silent takeover" of the state and media, shaping democracy in a way that does not threaten wealth redistribution. To truly address inequality, it claims we must also address issues with the current form of democracy and corporate influence over policy debates.
The document critiques the current rhetoric around welfare reform and argues that while the welfare state is fundamentally good, it has been designed wrongly and many beliefs about it are false. It makes six main points: 1) the welfare state benefits society but is designed incorrectly, 2) many common beliefs about its costs and effects are untrue, 3) it is paradoxically biased against the poor, 4) the current reform agenda risks further corrupting the system, 5) citizenship rather than charity should be the guiding principle, and 6) a better system is needed that supports communities and basic securities for all as a matter of rights.
Dr Simon Duffy gave this talk at a City of Birmingham Think Tank event on 15th June 2016. This talk explores the reasons for the attacks on the welfare state and how the design of the welfare state could be changed to advance citizenship for all.
The document discusses how the privileged are able to overlook problems with government services that the poor struggle with daily. It notes that government bureaucracies often deliver terrible quality services to the poor, and the press tends to ignore or be unaware of the pain this causes. It argues that if a government cannot effectively implement its policies, then it cannot properly govern. The document promotes the idea that interfaces to government can and should be simple, beautiful, and easy to use for all citizens.
Modern Liberalism evolved in response to the failures of Classical Liberalism during the Great Depression. Classical Liberalism failed to meet the needs of the masses, risking revolt and systemic collapse. Franklin Roosevelt introduced the New Deal, expanding executive power to intervene in the economy. This marked the beginning of Modern Liberalism in the United States. Modern Liberalism, influenced by the ideas of Keynes, takes from economic surpluses to provide assistance during downturns. This evens out booms and busts, preventing the accumulation of desperate populations that could destabilize the system. Canada provides an example of the stability and popularity of the Modern Liberal system, with an economy that has not drastically declined under its established form of governance.
This conference is aimed at activists who want to discuss our collective way forward. It will be a day for participatory discussion, bot a platform-led event. The organisers have no fixed objective, just an awareness that we are losing. The ruling class adapt their tactics, and we have failed to do so; we will not win if we just repeat the same ways of organising.
2019: Eternal Sanguinity And Monster Of Institutional MalignancySantosh Jha
Given the global trend of average person becoming less aware of his or her milieus and average person becoming slave to political narrative of societal and cultural ‘Realities’ in the milieus, there does not seem any initiative for institutional reforms. It is rather more probable that in years to come, conflicts shall completely color the Consciousness and Cognition of average person and masses shall turn into happy tools in the hands of handful of politicians and corporate, who shall recipe over the ‘conflicts’ to dish out to masses to ensure their own unbridled agenda…
Dr Simon Duffy presented these slides to a meeting of the Socialist Health Association SHA) which was also joined by members of Disabled People Against the Cuts (DPAC) on 18th June 2016. He proposed that the whole social care system was flawed and based on old-fashioned institutional models that were dangerous and undermined people's citizenship. He proposed radical reform and the creation of an effective right for independent living.
2. theoretical foundations of global governanceHelen Sakhan
The document outlines three major theoretical foundations of global governance: liberalism focuses on human progress through cooperation, interdependence, and international institutions; realism emphasizes states' pursuit of power and security in an anarchic system; and Marxist theory views global governance as reflecting the interests of dominant capitalist states and classes that control production.
This document discusses comparative social policy and welfare regimes. It summarizes Esping-Anderson's three welfare regimes based on stratification and decommodification. It notes critiques of Esping-Anderson's narrow data and ignoring of unpaid labor. Gender is an important element of welfare regimes. Family forms are changing in Europe with increased cohabitation and births outside marriage. The pace of gender equality's private and public spheres varies across countries putting family pressure on fertility. [/SUMMARY]
Presentation the three worlds of welfare capitalismXaveria Desi
The document outlines Esping-Andersen's theory of three worlds of welfare capitalism. It discusses how welfare states can be categorized into three regimes - Liberal, Corporatist, and Social Democratic - based on how they stratify social classes and commodify or decommodify labor. The Liberal regime minimizes decommodification and contains social rights to a clientele of low-income dependents. The Corporatist regime preserves status differentials through occupation-specific benefits. The Social Democratic regime promotes universal solidarity and preemptively socializes costs to allow choice beyond family or market dependence.
Slavery in Utopia is reserved for serious criminals sentenced to death elsewhere. These slaves are either imported and forced to work in chains or come from Utopia itself, having failed to control their impulses despite virtue teachings. Voluntary slaves also exist. The slaves care for the terminally ill, who can choose euthanasia with priest and judge approval, making the act considered religious and holy.
Comparative Social Structures and Welfare Week 4 LectureUniversity of York
1. The document discusses different typologies that have been proposed for classifying and comparing welfare states, focusing on Esping-Andersen's "Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism" model of liberal, conservative, and social democratic regimes.
2. This model is based on levels of "decommodification" but has been criticized for oversimplifying differences and leaving out other regimes like Mediterranean or East Asian countries.
3. While typologies provide analytical usefulness, welfare states are complex and subject to change, so future development may differ from past patterns.
This document provides an overview of political science and democracy. It discusses several key topics:
1) It examines different definitions and views of democracy throughout history, from Aristotle's negative view of democracy allowing the uneducated masses too much power, to Lincoln's view of democracy as government by and for the people.
2) It traces how democracy became rehabilitated during the Renaissance and Enlightenment as it became linked to liberalism and opposition to tyranny.
3) It discusses Gandhi's advocacy for democracy in post-colonial India and his view that the weakest should have the same opportunities as the strongest.
4) It provides some key characteristics of democracy such as free and fair
Similar to Tshepo Madlingozi: 20 Years of TRC - TAKING STOCK OF THE SOUTH AFRICAN TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION COMMISSION 20 YEARS LATER: NO TRUTH, NO RECONCILIATION AND NO JUSTICE
- Political thinkers have historically distinguished between competent political elites and the incompetent masses, though this distinction is controversial in democracies.
- Democratic and totalitarian regimes differ in how the ruling elite maintains power and allegiance - democratic elites use persuasion and allow themselves to be voted out, while totalitarian regimes use force and intend to rule for life.
- Contemporary liberal democracies are often described as "rule by competing elites" where elites gain power through elections and are replaced when incompetent, though who exactly comprises the political elite remains contentious.
This document discusses the possibility of reaching a worldwide consensus on human rights. It argues that while the concept of human rights originated in Western societies, the values of democracy and human rights are increasingly accepted on a global scale. However, full agreement faces challenges, as other cultures may interpret concepts like individual rights and dignity differently. Still, the document believes that separating the philosophical principles from legal frameworks allows for the values like life, liberty and equality to be adopted more universally. It also acknowledges the important role of non-governmental organizations in advocating for human rights around the world.
If it is legitimate, what are acceptable and unacceptable methods of.pdfarshicollection001
If it is legitimate, what are acceptable and unacceptable methods of rebellion?
Solution
Rabat – For a rebellion against a government to be useful and to benefit people, it should be
legitimate in the sense that it should at least be morally and politically right.
Morally, it should be against injustice, and politically it should be for the benefit of the people
and not to the benefit of an elite, political group, or military junta. In other words, it should be
for the long term benefit of the nation. History shows us that revolutions often lead to positive
post-revolutionary political systems, such as the case of France after the 1789 revolution.The
abolition of the Old Regime and the Declaration of the rights of Man and the Citizen are legacies
which constructed modern democratic France. These positive changes brought through popular
rebellion can be contrasted with disastrous results such as in the case of the Bolshevik revolution
which led to state totalitarianism disguised under the name of communism.
That said, citizens should have a legitimate right of rebellion against governments who
deliberately do not protect their personal security because such governments lose their political
and moral legitimacy in failing to protect the security of the nation. This will be supported by the
following ideas: First, the fundamental reason for the existence of governments is to protect the
security of the people. Second, one should assess whether that government voluntarily or
involuntarily does not protect the security of its citizens (a despotic and corrupt government
which fails to protect security of the people should not be assessed the same way as a
government supported by the people but which fails to protect the latter because of other factors
such as war or external threats). Finally, it is the right of the people to revolt against their
government because governments should not have a higher importance than the people. In fact,
the people are the raison d’etre of the government or state.
As mentioned above, the fundamental reason for the existence of the state is to protect the
security of the people. If not, what is the state’s purpose? To be at the service of a political or
financial elite? Such as what we witness in a number of nation-states? In western political theory
at least this fact is not desirable. In Hobbes’ canons, the sovereign’s existence is meant to take
human being’s out on an undesirable state of nature which is a ‘war of all against all’ (Hobbes)
and to introduce the latter in a civil society where security is guaranteed by the sovereign. That
is, a society where government guarantees security, stability ‘and happy life as far as it is
possible’ (Hobbes).
Some would argue that these values of justice and equality are desired by the people only in the
western liberal world. It will be argued here that the opposite is true. Justice and equality is a
universal aspiration. This can be proved by analyzing current world affai.
This document discusses several issues with democracy as it currently exists. It argues that democracy is coming under scrutiny in countries like the US and UK, and is seen as sliding towards oligarchy and autocracy due to money's influence over politics. Lobbying and corruption are seen as polluting the political process. The document questions why democracy is being forcibly exported through violence when it is not even in good shape in Western countries. It concludes that recent events support the view that democracies often "waste, exhaust, and murder themselves."
This document discusses the relationship between human rights and conflict through examining a case study on Syria. It provides background on the conflict in Syria, noting it started as a rebellion against President Assad due to human rights abuses, but turned into a civil war. The document analyzes the conflict through the lens of various articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, finding that even before the civil war, there were widespread abuses of articles protecting the rights to life, liberty, freedom from torture, and equality before the law. As the civil war intensified, grave human rights violations have become commonplace on a daily basis.
This document discusses the oppression of marginalized groups throughout history in South Africa and how similar oppression continues today through xenophobia. It analyzes how apartheid systemically oppressed blacks to empower whites. Similarly, today the government stokes xenophobic attitudes to distract from failures, causing citizens to attack foreigners. The root cause is the desire for economic power and dominance over others. True liberation requires narrowing social class gaps through equitable access to production and ownership, adopting a growth mindset like foreigners who build prosperity rather than fighting over scarcity. Lasting peace requires accepting all people as equal.
This document summarizes and analyzes the role of truth commissions in transitional societies that have experienced serious human rights abuses. It examines cases where truth commissions were used, such as in South Africa, Haiti, Uganda and Timor-Leste, and compares them to cases where other approaches were taken, like trials in Rwanda or blanket amnesties in Lebanon. It argues that truth commissions are generally more effective than other options at creating national unity and identity, which leads to more stable, rights-respecting democracies. However, each country's situation is unique, and truth commissions have limitations.
BLA-Message to the Black Movement- A Political Statement From the Black Under...RBG Communiversity
This document is a political statement from 1976/1977 by the Black Liberation Army (BLA) Coordinating Committee. It provides an overview of their political positions and perspectives from the viewpoint of the armed front. The BLA believes that capitalism is in crisis due to exploitative relationships that benefit the ruling class. They argue that the oppression of Black people in America is the most advanced in the world. The BLA calls for the building of a national Black liberation front to achieve total control over the destiny of Black people through socialist relationships and utilizing the science of class struggle adapted to their unique conditions.
The document discusses left-leaning political, economic, and social views across a wide range of topics including war, religion, gender, economics, governance, and social services. It advocates for nonviolence, social justice, equality, workers rights, and expanded public services and housing. It is broadly supportive of socialist and progressive policies and views capitalism as exploitative of workers.
The document discusses the term "The Black Holocaust" and its meaning and controversy. It refers to the atrocities committed against Black people during the transatlantic slave trade from the 16th to 19th centuries, where over 12 million Africans were taken from their homes and transported as slaves to the Americas. During this period, Black people faced brutal treatment, torture, rape and murder. Some argue the term inappropriately compares it to the Jewish Holocaust, while others say it draws attention to the scale and impact of the atrocities against Black people and their ongoing legacy. The document also discusses the term "Black genocide" and how some use it interchangeably with "The Black Holocaust" while others see it as a broader term encomp
This document provides a summary and analysis of an academic journal article about the crises of democratization in Africa. Some key points:
1) The article argues that analyses of Africa's democratization crises have failed to properly focus on its economic dynamics and drivers.
2) It contends that while the West presents democracy as something that can be imported to Africa, their actions through capital regimes have historically undermined Africa's economic progress and strengthened their own democracies.
3) The "capitalist law of uneven development" aids advanced capital in places like Europe and North America while underdeveloping democracy in Africa. This is seen as the root cause of Africa's democratization crises.
Globalization has connected people across borders but also deepened divisions. Cultural policy can help strengthen civil society by smoothing the transition to a global community and promoting inclusion, participation, and pluralism. By funding arts programs and networks that empower diverse voices and facilitate cooperation, cultural policy fosters social trust and civic responsibility, which are integral to civil society.
Essay Writing Starters - Easy Words To Use As SentencMonica Cordova
The document discusses Cecil B. DeMille's 1915 film The Cheat and his portrayal of the "new woman" emerging in society at that time. It explains that the film illustrates the rise of consumer culture and how women were taking on characteristics as commodities as they entered the public sphere. The film uses the character of Edith to both depict this new modern woman but also highlight the dangers of losing traditional social status and morality. While initially showing the accurate society of the time, the narrative later deals with these issues surrounding women's roles and increased commodification with decreased privatization.
Similar to Tshepo Madlingozi: 20 Years of TRC - TAKING STOCK OF THE SOUTH AFRICAN TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION COMMISSION 20 YEARS LATER: NO TRUTH, NO RECONCILIATION AND NO JUSTICE (13)
This document provides details about the Khulumani v. Barclays National Bank Ltd. et al lawsuit brought by victims of apartheid-era violence in South Africa against multinational corporations that aided the apartheid regime. It describes how companies in industries like oil, armaments, banking, transportation, and technology provided material support to South Africa between 1960-1993 despite international sanctions. This support was instrumental in allowing the regime to carry out crimes against humanity like killings, torture, and forced removals. The lawsuit aimed to hold these corporations accountable for their complicity in human rights abuses during apartheid.
Ongoing Advocacy for a Comprehensive Reparations Programme in South Africa fo...Khulumani Support Group
KHULUMANI WORKS ON REPARATIONS SUBMISSIONS TO ASSIST THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE TO ACHIEVE JUSTICE AND REPARATIONS FOR VICTIMS OF APARTHEID GROSS HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS
Khulumani Support Group (www.khulumani.net) and member organisations of the South African Coalition on Transitional Justice are working on submissions to the Department of Justice to assist in their adoption after so many years of a comprehensive programme of reparations to redress the damage suffered by victims in their contribution to the liberation struggle in South Africa. 2016 marks the 20th Year since the commencement of the TRC in April 1996.
Dr Cath Byrne who completed her PhD with Khulumani Support Group almost 20 years ago through the University of Santa Cruz in California, USA, returned in 2005 to conduct follow up interviews with victims and survivors who had received the Individual Reparations Grants.
This year Cath summarised her findings regarding the experiences of those relatively few survivors of apartheid gross human rights violations, who had received the benefit of a R30,000.00 once-off grant. These findings are summarised in the attached Power Point presentation. Cath has expressed the hope that these findings might inform Khulumani's ongoing advocacy for reparations.
Cath produced a book of the 30 narratives told to her that had formed the basis of her PhD. The book is called All That Was Lost and was launched by Khulumani with all 30 families present, at an event held in Freedom Square, Kliptown followed by a lunch at the Soweto Hotel.
Khulumani wishes to sincerely thank Dr Cath Byrne for her continued and continuing concern for the lives of survivors of apartheid gross human rights violations.
Back to basics: towards community rehabilitation programs for those whose liv...Khulumani Support Group
This document discusses proposals for establishing community rehabilitation programs in South Africa to address the harms caused by apartheid violations. It outlines principles from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission that rehabilitation should help victims overcome damage, restore dignity, and prevent future abuses. It argues that the government has failed to adequately implement reparation and rehabilitation efforts, restricting funds and excluding many victims and communities. It proposes establishing an Apartheid Victims' Trust Fund to support victim-centered, community-based rehabilitation projects throughout the country.
The monthly Transdisciplinarity Seminar held at the Environmental Learning and Research Centre was led by the Khulumani team in Makana Municipality on 21 August 2014.
The topic was 'Complexity in Community Relationships' and focused on the requirements for 'the dominated' to act to change their circumstances through making organised and effective demands through asserting a tactical agency. This is defined as 'discerning and making use of possible opportunities to find a way or to use one's own means.'
Moving from victimhood to empowered citizenship (Khulumani's mission) requires that the dominated link historical consciousness, critical thinking and emancipatory behaviour.
Reconciliation: Cheap or costly by Dr. Marjorie Jobson - Khulumani Support GroupKhulumani Support Group
A presentation by Dr. Marjorie Jobson, National Director of the Khulumani Support Group in South Africa & Juan Kariem, as part of a workshop 'Reconciliation: Cheap or Costly' in the Grahamstown Cathedral on 10 July 2014.
Submission of Presentation made by Tshepo Madlingozi at the 6 October 2012 Se...Khulumani Support Group
Khulumani Board Member, Tshepo Madlingozi made a presentation to a seminar held in Frankfurt, Germany last Saturday, October 6, 2012 that was focused on the ANC at 100 years. The seminar was entitled ANC: From Liberation Movement to Ruling Party.
The title of Tshepo's presentation was 'Revolt of the poor' and search for a Post-Apartheid South Africa.
Tshepo highights that Khulumani Support Group was amongst the first of the country's post-apartheid social movements and that it has had to contend with a very challenging social and economic landscape that has seen growing retrenchments, deepening poverty and growing difficulty in citizens being able to pay for services that results in water and electricity cut-offs and housing evictions.
View full article: http://goo.gl/3v4iE
सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने यह भी माना था कि मजिस्ट्रेट का यह कर्तव्य है कि वह सुनिश्चित करे कि अधिकारी पीएमएलए के तहत निर्धारित प्रक्रिया के साथ-साथ संवैधानिक सुरक्षा उपायों का भी उचित रूप से पालन करें।
Capital Punishment by Saif Javed (LLM)ppt.pptxOmGod1
This PowerPoint presentation, titled "Capital Punishment in India: Constitutionality and Rarest of Rare Principle," is a comprehensive exploration of the death penalty within the Indian criminal justice system. Authored by Saif Javed, an LL.M student specializing in Criminal Law and Criminology at Kazi Nazrul University, the presentation delves into the constitutional aspects and ethical debates surrounding capital punishment. It examines key legal provisions, significant case laws, and the specific categories of offenders excluded from the death penalty. The presentation also discusses recent recommendations by the Law Commission of India regarding the gradual abolishment of capital punishment, except for terrorism-related offenses. This detailed analysis aims to foster informed discussions on the future of the death penalty in India.
A Critical Study of ICC Prosecutor's Move on GAZA WarNilendra Kumar
ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan's proposal to its judges seeking permission to prosecute Israeli leaders and Hamas commanders for crimes against the law of war has serious ramifications and calls deep scrutiny.
Indonesian Manpower Regulation on Severance Pay for Retiring Private Sector E...AHRP Law Firm
Law Number 13 of 2003 on Manpower has been partially revoked and amended several times, with the latest amendment made through Law Number 6 of 2023. Attention is drawn to a specific part of the Manpower Law concerning severance pay. This aspect is undoubtedly one of the most crucial parts regulated by the Manpower Law. It is essential for both employers and employees to abide by the law, fulfill their obligations, and retain their rights regarding this matter.
Indonesian Manpower Regulation on Severance Pay for Retiring Private Sector E...
Tshepo Madlingozi: 20 Years of TRC - TAKING STOCK OF THE SOUTH AFRICAN TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION COMMISSION 20 YEARS LATER: NO TRUTH, NO RECONCILIATION AND NO JUSTICE
1. TAKING STOCK OF THE SOUTH AFRICAN TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION COMMISSSION 20
YEARS LATER: NO TRUTH, NO RECONCILIATION AND NO JUSTICE
by Tshepo Madlingozi, Chairperson of Khulumani Support Group
3rd INTERNATIONAL COLLOQUIUM OF THE INSTTUTO HUMANITAS at UNISINOS, Brazil 16 September
2015.
INTRODUCTION
The aim of this presentation is to set out the views of Khulumani Support Group, a social
movement of victims and survivors of apartheid. On behalf of my organisation allow me to
thank the organizers for inviting us to this prestigious international colloquium. Too often
views of victims and their organisations are excluded from these very important deliberations.
I salute you for soliciting our perspectives. Our movement was formed by victims and for
victims in 1995. This year marks, for us, a 20-year milestone in our on-going struggle for
reparation, restitution, truth, reconciliation, democracy and justice.
Next year, 2016, marks the 20th
anniversary of the beginning of the Truth and Reconciliation
Commission of South Africa. The South African Truth Commission is often promoted as a
model commission. In what we can call the Global Transitional Justice Project (yes,
transitional justice is a global project, a global religion promoted by Western countries; inter-
governmental agencies; non-governmental organisations, research organisations, and
academics mostly coming from countries in the global North…) the South African Truth and
Reconciliation Commission is often proclaimed as a model for achieving peace, justice,
democracy and nation-building. The 20 year anniversary of this commission gives us the
opportunity to take stock of these claims. My presentation will be in three parts. I will first
present the perspective of victims on transitional justice. Does transitional justice actually
work for victims or is it only there to serve the political needs of elites and the historically
privileged? Secondly, I will then focus on the narrative of victims with regards to the SA
TRC. What is their experience and assessment? Finally, I will put forward the argument that
victim activism – not “participation”, or “inclusion” or “consultation” or any other term used
to put across the notion that victims are simply incorporated into an already designed process,
as if the idea is to do a favour for victims – is crucial to their empowerment and to the process
of their transformation from victims to active political subjects. The state, non-governmental
organisations or researchers can never be drivers to achieve this. Such a top-down
“empowerment” process simply repeats the political subjugation and marginalisation of
victims. The last part of my presentation therefore seeks to explain what measures we, as a
1
2. social movement of victims and survivors, have taken to push for reparation, restitution,
justice and genuine democracy.
It would be clear that our use of the designation “victim” or “survivor” is not meant to convey
the idea that we are just hapless people waiting for salvation from the state or civil society
officials. It is not insignificant that the name of our movement “Khulumani” is an isiZulu
term that means “Speak Out!” We are our makers of our history. We are our own inventors of
our future. There is no gainsaying that this is the struggle that we cannot win by ourselves –
how can we, when this struggle is simply not about the wrongs that were done to us as
individuals but it is a struggle against structures and system that are designed to ensure that
only a handful of people lord over the rest? The struggle is against neoliberal globalization
that puts a serious limit to ‘post-conflict’ being-togetherness and any thorough going social
emancipation. The struggle is against the global coloniality of power and being that arose in
the long 16th
century and that still determines which lives are grievable and which are not, and
thus which pains are worthy of honour and reparation, and which are not. The struggle is also
against the coloniality of knowledge that determines which ways of understanding the world
and thus being in the world and (re) making the world are legitimate and which are not. It is
this coloniality that tells that there is only one formula to follow to achieve healing, re-
harmonization and restorative justice. For us, the discourse and practice of transitional justice
does not exhaust all the possibilities that exist for achieving all these goals. Transitional
justice, with its telos of western-style democracy and nation building, is but one possible
route. And a very limited one at that.
1: The inherent limitation of Truth Commissions
For us at Khulumani Support Group the past 20 years have been a 20-year transition that has
benefitted beneficiaries of apartheid (white people) and a small layer of the black elite. The
most important thing to note is the following: this is not a failure of transitional justice. This
is exactly how transitional justice operates. What do I mean when I say the discourse and the
practice of “transitional justice” is precisely such that it never leads to radical transformation
of society in such a way that, for instance, the economy is redistributed and stolen land is
returned; that there is genuine social reconciliation; meaningful multiculturalism and peace?
First, I mean that empirically speaking, nobody, and I mean nobody, can point us to a
situation where transitional justice has led to the recovery of truth; to a reconciled society; to
an end to violence. In most so-called post-transitional justice countries:
2
3. • Truth about the full extent of the infrastructure of the oppressive system is not
known. The truth about commanders, secondary perpetrators, and where those who
were forcibly disappeared are is also never fully recovered.
• Violence as manifested in the pervasive war against women and young girls,
violence of impoverishment and dehumanization of poor people, and police brutality
never ceases.
• Justice in the form of the radical redistribution of economical, cultural, and
epistemological powers is never achieved. Historical injustice relating to land and the
sovereignty of indigenous kingdoms is never resolved. The economy continues to be
skewed, the culture and the epistemology of the settler-colonizers continue to be
predominant and decolonization in the form of land re-conquest never happens.
Thus, transitional justice never achieves the goals of Truth, Peace, and Justice. Without truth,
peace, and justice, reconciliation is but a charade. It is true that in most post-transition places
there is some semblance of peace; that is there is no civil war or ‘massive’ gross violations of
human rights. However, we are talking about liberal peace here. Transitional justice being a
‘post-fall of Berlin Wall’ process, together with the supposed triumph of liberalism, has as its
end goal liberal democracy. Thus peace and stability are prioritized to such an extent that the
work of reconciliation is very limited. In practice to secure the goal of peace, elite
reconciliation amongst politicians is privileged. The goal of achieving stability trumps over
the goal of achieving radical transformation of society. As such reconciliation is reduced to
that between individual victims and individual perpetrators. The result is that deep,
thoroughgoing social reconciliation is sacrificed because beneficiaries of conflict (‘ordinary’
white people in the case of settler colonialism) are exonerated. As Professor Boaventura de
Sousa Santos put it, albeit in a different context, conflict, therefore, becomes re-
individualized. Those victims who do not accept this charade are branded “bad victims,”
spoilers of peace and harmony. “Good victims” are those victims who accept moral victory
and are paraded during national days to re-tell their stories of “past” atrocities.
Transitional justice, I argue, never achieves these goals because, let us be clear about this, it is
not designed to achieve them. It follows from these that we cannot say that a truth
commission has failed if these goals are not reached. Truth Commissions are products of
transitional justice. Transitional justice is, in Africa anyway, a product of both elite
compromises and pressure from the powerful countries from the West and their inter-
governmental agencies. The work of commissions is therefore constrained by political
3
4. settlement amongst politicians and the dictates of Western countries and their agencies (the
so-called ‘international community’). Thus in most of these commission we observe that:
• their mandate and scope are often too limited;
• the period of their investigation is often too narrow; and
• their powers to investigate the role of extra-territorial actors and bring into purview
the acts of other states and nations are constrained, if not altogether excluded.
Therefore, we see a transition from war and conflict to liberal peace. As I have already stated,
however, for those who continue to suffer from structural violence in the form of the violence
of impoverishment and marginalisation of their cosmologies and life-ways, violence remains
ever omnipresent. And, finally, yes there is often a transition from dictatorship to democracy.
However, this is a transition to formal, and low-intensity, democracy. Let us take the
example of South Africa. Today South Africa is a formal democracy – elections are held, a
multiparty parliament exists, an independent judiciary is exists and freedom of expression is
mostly respected. However, because the post-1994 South African democracy is a product of
elite compromise, it is an elite democracy. The more than 10 000 social protests per year –
one of the highest in the world – show that for the majority of South Africans formal
structures of democracy do not work for them. In fact these formal structures are organized in
such that they systematically exclude the possibility of participatory democracy. Secondly,
because South Africa imposed a neo-liberal macro-economy on itself (from 1996), we are
talking about a bourgeoisie democracy, a denuded democracy where the majority is
impoverished; and it is pushed deeper into the underside of society (the “zone of non-beings”,
as Franz Fanon once called the station of black South Africans under colonialism). When the
poor majority complain against lack of participatory democracy they are simply ignored or
told to wait for the next elections. When the poor majority resists neoliberal democracy and
capitalism the police, media and non-government organisations repress them. Thus, in this
democracy, liberalism for the middle-class co-exists with illiberalism for the poor majority.
Thirdly, transitional justice makes sure that the democratization paradigm eclipsed that of
decolonization. Transitional justice, this cannot be emphasized enough, is always anti-
decolonization. I want to argue that the discourse and practice of transitional justice, in
historically settler states, is a transition that extends formal democracy to the indigenous
people but does not end the colonial situation. Thus elements of coloniality, white supremacy
and neo-colonialism continue side by side with formal democracy. It is a transition from
settler domination to settler hegemony.
4
5. Finally, from a geo-political perspective, I want to argue that transitional justice is a new form
of cultural imperialism. As I said earlier, we need to see transitional justice as a global project
driven by an extremely productive industry. A well-travelled international cadre of actors
theorizes the field; sets the agenda; influences the flow of financial resources; assists
governments; invites, collaborates with and ‘capacitate’ relevant local NGOs and ‘grassroots
organizations’; and monitors and evaluates TJ mechanisms and processes. These transitional
justice entrepreneurs have made available on the market guides and ‘international best
practices’ manuals dealing with all aspects of transitions from archiving to prosecutions to
memorialization.
Ultimately, the Global Transitional Justice Project is the marker, par excellence, of what
Santos (2007) refers to as the abyssal line. In terms of this colonial line, on the ‘other side’ of
the line there is no real knowledge or thinking and consequently those on the other side of the
line, the “non-Westerners”, do not really exist. Here, once again, both states and people on the
other side of the line are seen as conflict-ridden, not fully modern/ized, intellectually deficient
and in need of saving by actors who come from ‘this side’ of the line, the conflict-free,
civilized and modern side.
Contrary to the decoloniality project of delinking and taking a distance from the Euro-
centered world, protagonists of the Global Transitional Justice Project and integrationist
national elites are, therefore, pivotal to the insertion of countries and individuals from the
Global South into the post-Cold War global matrix of power. With this auto-colonial
insertion, national projects of reconciliation and nation building together with institutional
reforms, inculcation of both a ‘culture of human rights’ and an ethos of ‘good governance’ are
meant to demonstrate that these nations have reached maturity and are ready to become
members of the ‘international community;’ in a phrase, to transition onto ‘this side’ of the
abyssal line.
For our purposes the most important thing to note here is that while promising the regime of
emancipation and regulation, the twin modes of governance on ‘this side’ of the line in
contrast to appropriation and violence the very indexes of conflict on ‘the other side’ (Santos,
2007: 46), TJ mechanisms ultimately come to center on the social regulation side of things
including rule of law reforms, “free market” (de)regulation, and horizontal and vertical
accountability of the state. Additionally, as I have already intimated, because the
democratization and modernization agenda of transitional justice often result in political
liberalization being followed by economic liberalization, it follows that in almost all ‘post-
conflict’ countries the promised fruits of social emancipation remain chimera. At the same
5
6. time, while state violence gets reduced, violence as one feature of the ‘other side’ of the line
remains in most “post-conflict” countries.
In the first instance, TJ perpetuates violence is in its imposition of a liner temporality. This
temporality is a constitutive feature of Western modernity-as-coloniality because it suppresses
and disqualifies practices that are governed by other temporalities. Secondly, and related to
the first point, TJ projects often perpetuates epistemicide by making invisible or inferior
“traditional” practices of collective memorialization. The dominance of Western ways of
remembering (truth commission and criminal prosecution reports and archives, museums,
monuments, Euro-phone literature and public artworks) do not only perpetuate psychic
dislocation and what WEB du Bois calls double consciousness, they re-center Western ways
of being in the world and of narrating and imagining the new nation. I, therefore, submit that
transitional justice projects are an abettor of epistemicide – the repression and
marginalisation of the knowledge system and cosmologies of the historically colonized group.
To recap, from our perspective transitional justice is, often, a product of elite compromise and
pressure from Western states. It therefore fetishizes stability and peace and thus the goals of
(i) decolonization; (ii) material and redistributive justice; (iii) genuine social reconciliation,
(iv) peace in the form of an end to all manifestation of violence, are never achieved.
2: South Africa’s Transitional Justice
Before I talk about our narrative of the South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission,
I would like, in my personal capacity, to use this upcoming twenty year anniversary of the
South African transitional justice process to put across a counter-narrative with regard to how
the South Africa transition was achieved. First; the negotiations that paved the way to the
‘post-conflict’ situation was not Mr. Nelson Mandela’s magical work; but it was a settler-
induced process. Mandela’s liberation movement was never going to defeat the apartheid
government. The high point of the revolution against the apartheid government came in the
1980s when youth groups and community organisations went on a campaign of insurrection
that rendered the black ghettos ungovernable. The apartheid regime reacted by killing,
disappearing and detaining thousands and thousands of activists. Internationally South Africa
was becoming a pariah – cultural and trade boycotts were starting to bite. Domestically
general instability was leading to economic meltdown and increasing inflation. It was in this
context that business-leaders aligned with the very influential white Mineral-Energy Complex
began talking to the ANC with the view of saving capitalism by instigating a transition from
6
7. racial capitalism to ‘non-racial’ capitalism. At was at this stage that white big business also
forced the apartheid government to negotiate with the ANC. The designation ‘settler-induced’
is meant to imply that the popular notion that the South African transition was the result of
the conquered indigenous people and the settler colonizers coming together is in accurate at
best, and worst a myth meant to distribute the blame for the current mess South Africa finds
itself in equally.
The negotiations between the Mandela in jail and exiled ANC on the one hand and the
apartheid regime led to agreement about multi-party elections. The stumbling block became
what to do with perpetrators of apartheid. A clause was inserted in the Interim Constitution to
provide amnesty. Pursuant to this constitutional demand the TRC Act was formulated to (a)
get as complete as possible the truth of what happened; (b) offer conditional amnesty (full
disclosure but no remorse expected); (c) reparation to victims. The TRC Act confined the
commission to the period 1960 (this being the year when apartheid was declared a crime
against humanity after the Sharpville massacre) and 1994. This was an extremely limited and
arbitrary period if we bear in mind that apartheid started in 1948; that official colonialism
started in 1910 when the English and the Dutch settlers signed an agreement to establish
South Africa (as a ‘white man’s country); that land conquest began in 1652; and that the first
conflict between Europeans and the indigenous people was in 1510 when the Portuguese
viceroy to India was killed in South Africa. The story that the commission told about South
Africa was, therefore, extremely partial and contained many historical gaps. Even though it is
true that all that commissions can do is to reduce the lies circulating in society, given the fact
that South Africa is made up of polarized communities with polarized and poisoned
memories, commission did has not assist South Africa transcend its fragmented story. Rather,
a meta-narrative about what the historical injustice and the nature of conflict are is imposed.
The dominant story is that of conflict being about “apartheid” and the injustice committed
against individuals.
The truth commission began in 1996. It was the biggest commission to date: more than 22
000 statements were received and 100 hearings were conducted. Eventually only just under
17 000 were deemed to be worthy of being declared victims. If we bear in mind that South
Africa is a country of over 50 million and that apartheid proper began in 1948 it is very
limited to declare only 17 000 people to be victims. The fact of the matter is that many
people were excluded from the TRC process. Transitional justice is often a question of timing
– get the timing wrong and the eventual result is a mess. In the case of South Africa it is often
been claimed that South Africa witnessed a “peaceful transition” or a “miracle transition”.
The fact of the matter is that the during the period 1988 and 1994 more people were killed int
7
8. political killings than in any period of South African history. It was a very bloody transition.
Again, the meta-narrative of ‘peaceful transition’ or ‘miracle transition’ is myth-making.
Furthermore, when the TRC started violence was still raging in the townships. So when the
TRC began a many people could not engage with the commission because they were still
traumatised and/or displaced. Secondly, a lot of people fell through administrative gaps:
language issues and wrong classification of statement givers being two big problems. We at
Khulumani estimate than only 10% of people who fit the TRC own narrow and legalistic
definition of ‘victim’ were able to participate. So what did the TRC achieve?
If we put aside my post-conflict paradigm that a transition should be a transition that leads to
decolonization and historical justice in context of settler colonialism and use the United
Nation framework of transitional justice we still find that the TRC did not achieve much:
1. Satisfaction: some victims felt better because they received official recognition and
public acknowledgement after years of the denial of their victimization. However,
because the focus is really on stability and elite reconciliation (and thus a perpetrator-
centric process), many felt that their tears and testimonies served to legitimize the
elite compromise. The truth commission did not provide proper psycho-social support
and most victims felt re-traumatised. Related to this is the fact that victim’s wounds
were opened without any balm being put to soothe them. While perpetrators got
amnesty immediately, victims had to wait for many, many, years. The catharsis was
for the nation and not victims. Furthermore, there were, literally, only a handful of
cases of individual-perpetrator reconciliation. Thus if part of the satisfaction must be
based on the psychological and spiritual release that victims get from forgiving their
perpetrators after a genuine apology, this never happened.
2. Rehabilitation: To date a lot of our members still have bullets in their bodies, they
continue be in need of wheelchairs and prosthetic equipment, and their psychosocial
needs remain unmet. So not much rehabilitation.
3. Guarantee of non-repetition: There have been some institutional reforms such as
the establishment of ‘institutions of democracy’ such as the Human Rights
Commission, Gender Commission and the Office of the Ombudsman. All these
institutions operate either inefficiently or lackadaisically or in the context of the
Ombudsman (Public Protector’s Office) in a hostile environment. The police service
is still militarized and police brutality is rife. The culture of indemnity continues
because perpetrators who did not go to the TRC have not been prosecuted and the
state wants to give convicted apartheid perpetrators a pardon. In both cases our
movement together with our partners went to the Constitutional Court to stop these.
8
9. 4. Restitution: Only 8% of the land has been redistributed; poverty is still endemic and
black; and South Africa is the most unequal country in the world.
5. Compensation: Only a once-off payout of R30 000 was given. This pay-out is only
to those victims lucky enough to be anointed as victims by the TRC – the state still
operates on the basis of this “closed list” in making decision about who to help. The
TRC recommended a programme of community reparation for the worst affected
communities; this has not been done to date. Next month my organisation will go to
court to challenge this “closed list” policy as unconstitutional, immoral and
unnecessary. We had also gone to the USA to sue multi-national companies that
sponsored apartheid.
From the perspective of victims, then, the transitional justice process in South Africa has been
wholly inadequate. Victims feel used and betrayed. The needs of victims are overwhelming.
They include psychosocial needs, education needs, housing and other needs such as proper
memorialization mechanisms. There is no political will to resolve these issues. For victims:
the past is in the present.
I started this presentation talking about what we have learnt. Now I want to end by talking
about what we are doing as the “bad victims” to obtain reparation, justice, peace and
reconciliation.
3.’We Are Own Healers’: Victims Transformation To a Subjectivity of Active
Citizenship
First, just by building and sustaining this movement of victims and survivors we have begun a
process of self-empowerment. By belonging to a movement of other victims and survivors we
have set ourselves on a course to own healing. The way people become members of our
organisation is by filling a form and describing the nature of their harm and what needs they
still have. This self-description as a victim is, from a bio-political perspective, a beginning of
an emancipatory process. Unlike the transitional justice model of being anointed as victim by
a state body, the act of classifying yourself is the beginning of reconstructing your
subjectivity in your own terms. Second, by belonging to a movement and taking part in
activities, victims no longer feel alone and ashamed. We find that for many of our members,
when they tell their stories to other victims is often the first time they tell their stories. Telling
their stories to other victims and not to state officials, researchers or the media can be
extremely cathartic for victims.
9
10. Third, by being part of court cases where we are challenging the state or multi-national
companies – whether we win or not – victims feel that they are standing up for themselves
and fighting powerful actors. No longer will they just sit back and let other determine their
destinies. Fourthly, our theater of the oppressed programme enables us to open
epistemological and cultural spaces suppressed by colonialism and apartheid. We use theatre
to concienticise each other. Fifthly, our art workshop enable victims to unearth their pain and
express it in a way they want, as opposed to very limiting Western methodologies of
individual therapy. Sixthly, the transformation of the subjectivity of our members is evident
in the way in which they act as leaders in their communities including helping community
members on labour issues, welfare cases, organizing campaigns against sexual violence and
xenophobia and so on.
Conclusion
To conclude, from the perspective of victims and survivors, the past 20 years have been 20
years of amnesia, denialism, no reparation, no restitution, no social reconciliation and
certainly no justice. We still do not have the truth, there has been no meaningful reparation or
restitution, and anti-black racism and white supremacy continue to still stalk our land.
Selected Biography
Anghie, Antony. “The evolution of international law: colonial and post-colonial realities”.
Third World Quarterly 27, no. 5 (2006) 739-753
Bevernage, Berber. History, Memory, and State-Sponsored Violence: Time and Justice. New
York and London: Routledge. 2012.
Campbell, Susanna, David Chandler, and Meera Sabaratnam. A Liberal Peace? : The
Problems and Practices of Peacebuilding. London ; New York: Zed Books, 2011.
Dussel, Enrique. "Eurocentricism and modernity (Introduction to the Frankfurt lectures)".
boundary 2. vol. 20 (3) (1993) 65-76
Fanon, Frantz. The Wretched of the Earth. London: Penguin Books, 1963.
Grunebaum, Heidi. Memoralizing the Past: Everyday Life in South Africa after the Truth and
Reconciliation Commission. New Brunswick: NJ: Transaction Publishers, 2011.
Madlingozi, Tshepo. "Good Victims, Bad Victims: Apartheid Beneficiaries, Victims and the
Struggle for Social Justice" " In Law, Memory & Apartheid: Ten Years after Azapo V
President of South Africa, edited by Wessel Le Roux and Karin van Marle. Pretoria: PULP,
2007.
10
11. ———. "Transitional Justice Entrepreneurs and the Production of Victims." Journal of
Human Rights Practice 2, no. 1 (2010): 208-228.
Magubane, Bernard. The Making of a Racist State: British Imperialism and the Union of
South Africa, 1875-1910. Trenton, Asmara: Africa World Press, Inc. 1996
Mignolo, D. Walter. "Introduction: Coloniality of power and De-colonial Thinking" in
Globalization and the Decolonial Option edited by Walter D. Mignolo and Arturo Escobar.
London, New York: Routledge. 2010
Mutua, Mukua. "What is TWAIL?". Proceedings of Annual Meeting [American Society of
International Law], vol. 94 (2000) 31-38
Nagy, Rosemary. "Transitional justice as global project: critical reflections'. Third World
Quarterly. vol.29(2) (2008) 275-289
Quijano, Aníbal. "Coloniality and Modernity/Rationality" in Globalization and the
Decolonial Option edited by Walter D. Mignolo and Arturo Escobar. London, New York:
Routledge. 2010
Ramose, Mogobe. "I conqouer, therefore I am the sovereign: Reflections upon sovereignty,
constitutionalism, and democracy in Zimbabwe and South Africa" in The African Philosophy
Reader, edited by P.H. Coetzee and A.P.J. Roux. 543-489 London: Routledge, 2003
Santos, Boaventura de Sousa. "Beyond Abyssal Thinking: From Global Lines to Ecologies of
Knowledges." Review XXX, no. 1 (2007): 45-89
11