and continued: “‘Tis none of your business, dear friend, for the gentleman of Caucasian extraction possesses a palm that is two times your visage. Glasses ar
expensive …”
In revolutionary zeal, I had neglected to look at the size of the offending whitey and thought onl’ of my self- righteous blackness and how I could stop this wo–an from ‘being invol
ed in this sick relationship. I looked at the man and I realised that he was big, nay immense. Worse still, he was gigantic.
He must have sensed what was going through my mind for he decided to walk over to our table and, as his shadow, cast by the candle
behind him, loomed over me, he uttered: “Hey chief, do you mind if I borrow your matches?” Now, usually, if a white person were to come up–to me and call me chief, my icy, se–thing response would be: “Can you see an Indian feather headdress on my head?” I would then proceed to tell them that, “I am not a chief, I don’t look like a chief and hose who fought against it, will appear before the
Said ANC MP Willie Hofmeyr: “The ANC never advocated Nuremberg-type trials … we have said even those who fought against apartheid should be made to account for what they did that was wrong.
“We have gone out of our way to make this process an even- handed one that does not divide the country radically.”
Commented Democratic Party MP Dene Smuts: “It has taken a long time but the process has been very good. Every single view was factored into our discussions … it was possible for the smaller parties to make significant inputs. Essentially, it’s a victory for the Constitution.”
Certain clauses of the Bill may be referred to the Constitional Court by the Cabinet.
This would ensure the Truth Commission does not immediately get bogged down in a protracted Constitutional Court
ANC MP Priscilla Jana said she was satisfied that, if looked at as a whole, the Bill was constitutional — but it was also unfortunate that people would lose their right to take civil action against anyone granted amnesty under the Bill. However, while some people will forfeit claims, many others who could never have proved their claims in court will now stand to receive some form of reparation, she
This issue, and the original Bill’s provision for amnesty hearings to be in secret, sparked an outcry among human rights organisations. Hofmeyr said the overwhelming weight of opinion was it would be difficult to challenge extinguishing people’s right to civil claims when the Constitution itself provided for amnesty. Earlier indemnity provisions erased civil as well as criminal liability, he
Provisions to hold amnesty hearings in secret — a deal forged at Cabinet level early in the process, and a position ANC MPs were never comfortable with — melted in the face of vociferous public opposition. Proof, said Hofmeyr, that transparency works.
People wanting amnesty can ask to be heard in camera, and a preliminary hearing to decide this will be heard behind closed doors. But in camera hearings will be decided by judicial criteria and the amnesty committee will have the discretion to decide what can be made public and what not.
Said DP MP Smuts: “Grounds for going in camera have been carefully drafted — we’re very happy with the way things have turned out.”
High-level discussions over the cut-off date for amnesty applications were underway this week in a bid to find a way of bringing the right wing back on board: the Freedom Front voted against every single clause of the Bill in protest against the date remaining as set down in the Constitution — December 5 1993.
The Freedom Front wanted the date shifted to May 10 1994, which would affect right-wingers on trial for last year’s pre-election bombing campaign. Only a constitutional amendment can change the date; the justice committee left it open as far as possible by having the Bill refer to no specific date but simply that referred to in the
The Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Bill as it now stands — after more than 300 amendments and 130 hours of committee sessions — provides for a Truth and Reconciliation Commission and three committees dealing with amnesty, human rights violations and reparation and rehabilitation. Each committee will produce its own report and at the end of the 18 months allowed for the process, the Truth Commission will publish a combined report.
The Bill will be debated in Parliament next week before going to the Senate. Given the degree of consensus reached, the Bill could be finalised by Parliament in May, Hofmeyr said. Commissioners could then be appointed, and could then set up offices and employ staff. He expected the Truth Commission to start operating in “July or August — but not at full steam”.
Significantly, the commission will focus not only on people who committed apartheid crimes, but also on those who fought the system. “There are not many precedents for this,” said ANC MP Jana. It’s an important factor, which shouldn’t be disregarded.”
“We shouldn’t kid ourselves that we’ll have the whole truth at the end of the day,” Hofmeyr said. “But we will have a sense of what went wrong in our country in the past.”