The gang rape of a nine-month old baby in Upington has thrown a harsh light on two South African realities the extraordinarily high levels of sexual violence and the cruel and perverse nature of much violent crime. Teenage hijackers kill motorists for no discernible reason; housebreakers terrorise and torture hapless residents; and men, often in groups, rape old-age pensioners and children.
This has everything to do with South Africa’s violent past. In the township upheavals of the late 1980s the norms and taboos that hold society together were undermined as children threw hand grenades, witnessed violent death and torture and burned people alive.
To repair South Africa’s moral fabric will take many years, and violent crime is not the sole product of government failure. The guilty parties in the child rape are, in the first place, the rapists. But we have to continue believing that society can be improved and the state has a key role. Particularly on sexual violence, the government has to provide the right moral leadership, instil a sense of national urgency and provide a legal framework that does more to deter violent sex offenders.
Our leaders’ record is not impressive. As with HIV/Aids, President Thabo Mbeki has contrived to downplay the rape scourge by quibbling over statistics. By joking on television that they had witnessed no rape while on air, ministers Penuell Maduna and Steve Tshwete conveyed a flippant macho indifference. Democratic Alliance leader Tony Leon’s bland expression of shock at the Kimberley outrage, and referral of the matter to the DA’s safety and security spokesperson, infuriated a child rape activist this week
The government’s swift move to change the anti-defection clause contrasts with the delays over a new rape law, now three years in the making. It is alleged Law Commission researchers are constantly pulled off the project to work considered more urgent. The refusal to supply anti-retroviral drugs to rape victims as of right projects a poverty of official concern.
Law can only change behaviour slowly, but it does have a normative impact. With reported rapes climbing steadily to 52 000 last year, half of them child rapes mandatory sentencing is having little deterrent effect. The aim must be to raise the pitiful 4% conviction rate, so that rape is no longer a risk-free crime. The under-resourced, understaffed and low-status sexual offences unit has to be upgraded. Cases typically take 18 months to reach court, compared with three to six months in Europe. This is a factor in the 60% “leakage” of cases withdrawn either by the victim or the victim’s guardian, or because of the many victims and perpetrators who become untraceable.
But statutory change is not enough. Just as critical is an offensive involving political, church, union, educational and community leaders, on the attitudes that underlie sexual violence. Rapists are not psychotic misfits; most are known to their victims, and gang rape is viewed by some youngsters as a legitimate weekend team sport. There is a view that women who wear tight clothes, or go out at night, want or deserve to be raped. Communities apply intense pressure on victims not to report rape, on grounds that exposure may destroy the perpetrator.
The Upington incident has brought a horrific and apparently worsening problem into sharp focus. As the public service advertisement we carry this week underlines, it is time for decisive action not just by the authorities, but all South Africans.
Light a fire under Mugabe
If the perpetrators of the atrocities in the United States on September 11 can be said to have done any a favour, Robert Mugabe is no doubt one of them. With world attention focused elsewhere, the Zimbabwean president has had greater freedom to tighten his thuggish grip.
Mugabe has been helped in this by uncharacteristically idiotic statements at the weekend by Welile Nhlapo, Deputy Director General of foreign affairs. Nhlapo criticised the Zimbabwean opposition, the Movement for Democratic Change and the embattled independent press in Zimbabwe for receiving funds from Britain and other, mainly Western, sources.
What can possibly be wrong in getting such money? Does Nhlapo not remember that democrats inside South Africa and in the media relied upon these and similar funds in the struggle against apartheid?
From whom does Nhlapo believe Zimbabwean democrats should seek funds? From an Indonesian dictator, as the African National Congress did a few years ago? From as distinguished a democrat as Moammar Gadaffi, as the African National Congress has?
Nhlapo has we hope unwittingly given encouragement to further repression in Zimbabwe. We hope fresh moves this week against the courageous Daily News and the rest of the independent press, and the decision to exclude observers from that country’s elections, have not been a result of his words. Similarly, we hope this is not the explanation for the detentions on Thursday of two outstanding local journalists, Geoff Nyarota and Wilfred Mbanga.
Nhlapo must be corrected. South Africa must make it clear to Mugabe we will tolerate none of this. It is time to light a fire under him.