As Khoi-San descendants we believe that colonialism and apartheid robbed the indigenous people of their identity, languages and cultural heritages. We need a special mechanism that will empower us to right past wrongs.
We have raised a number of important needs: formal recognition by the government; representation in the government in accordance with the developing prescriptions of international law and our status as first nation indigenous people of South Africa. We also demand ratification of the Convention Concerning Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in Independent Countries (ILO No 169); restoration of Khoi-San land rights; revival and recognition of Khoi-San communities and traditional leadership; provision of financial support from the government to Khoi-San communities; better communication between Khoi-San communities and all levels of the government; and the adaptation of the education curriculum to accommodate Khoi-San history and language.
The issue of constitutional accommodation has been at the centre of our demands. We believe the distinct interests and aspirations of the Khoi-San people arise from our unique status as indigenous first nations. This goes beyond the government’s recognition of cultural communities or institutions of traditional leadership.
This brings me to several issues: to the right to self-determination, and to which model might be applicable to our situation.
There are two self-determination models I want to refer to: cultural self-determination and internal territorial self-determination.
Internal territorial self-determination implies political sovereignty and secession, although governments often oppose it.
Cultural self-determination implies a type of non-territorial/cultural federalism where distinguishable groups live together, but take separate responsibility for their own interest. For some, cultural self-determination is enough. For others, the only thing acceptable is complete self-determination. That is total independence. Internal territorial self-determination features somewhere between these extremes, as it finds expression in federated states of a federation or in provinces and/or regions of a unitary state.
The South African Human Rights Commission argues that the right to self-determination applies to all peoples in any territory where others subject them to domination and exploitation. Eritrea, East Timor and Kosovo provide examples of this.
The issue that arises in our case is: to what extent does the notion of self-determination apply to indigenous peoples in independent states that are democratic and how?
If indigenous peoples are peoples in terms of international human rights law and in terms of the African Charter, are they entitled to the right of self-determination and in what form? Can they secede? Can they use any means recognised by the international community, such as violence, as was the case in many liberation struggles of the past? Brian Vel, provincial secretary: Northern Cape Indigenous Khoi-San Council, Kimberley