I do not wish to endorse any of the methods of the police in dealing with protesters at the World Summit. Nor am I fooled by the government’s sudden commitment to implementing the law. It won’t last longer than the conference.
However, I cannot but observe that the protesters are out of line. As a veteran ex-protester (mostly Jan Smuts Avenue, circa 1968), I support peaceful protest within the law. The apartheid government did not give us that right. The African National Congress government, for all its faults, does give us the right.
However, the government is also seeking to protect the right of citizens to go about their business without being prevented from doing so by whatever protests happen to be taking place at the time.
If the protesters can protest within the law, there is no reason for them to break the law by making their own decisions as to how and where they will conduct their protests.
It would appear the protesters are not satisfied with conducting protests that will enable others to go about their business. They insist on being able to mount protests that will cause disruptions. Which is why they are getting arrested. And probably enjoying it, too, because each arrest gives them opportunity to make political capital.
I note with concern the emergence of a breed of non-working individuals who can best be described as “professional protesters”. And whatever the nominal reason for their particular protest — often something about which they are generally pretty naive or ignorant — the real issue here is the right to break the law.
The law in the matter of staging protests is a reasonable one and therefore the protesters’ demand that they should be allowed to break it without facing arrest is unreasonable.
I trust the government’s new zeal to implement the law will be extended to other forms of crime, and will continue long after the conference is over. — Ron McGregor, Cape Town
I watch with a heavy heart as scarce resources get used up in such an extravaganza as the World Summit and the same names and groups profit from the business of protests.
Ever since momentum towards the World Summit began to gear up, so did that from another quarter — that of professional protesters who have made protesting their business.
Just as the world’s institutional powers attempt to “green-wash” and stake their claims to sustainable development, so the protest lobby gains credibility in making sure its struggles are sustainable, never-ending.
Credibility of the real struggler lies in being at the forefront of the Great Protest to ensure there is adequate media coverage for gearing up further resources for future protests.
There is nothing wrong with protest agendas. Protests create the much-needed tension to spark off the energetics of social change agencies. Seattle was great; it had to happen. But to replicate another Seattle on African soil? With the Northerners again at the forefront, orchestrating the struggle agenda?
It is time for those committed to social change to start reflecting on the business of protest; to take critical enquiry deeper and engage with the politics of protest itself, the vested interest groups within the protest lobby.
It is time we begin to extend the principles of sustainability to personal lifestyles. Let’s face it, for those at the forefront of the sustainable development industry, protesting along, this is their career opportunity — another book, another lecture tour. While those who are really rooted in their indigenous wisdom plod along, oblivious to the manner in which their knowledge is being bartered by sustainable development gurus — for a price. — Nirmala Nair, Cape Town
The lie of the land
It is horrifying to observe the implementation of President Robert Mugabe’s land policy. It should be regarded as an abomination by all peace-loving people of Africa, because as long as leaders like Mugabe cling to power by military rule, Africa is doomed to disaster.
His land policy is nothing but thuggery. If you take anything that belongs to others without their consent and without compensation, it is theft. The person taking the land is therefore a thief, not a democratic ruler.
Mugabe is casting a shadow of shame over Africa, for which we are awaiting condemnation by other leaders in the continent. There is a dreadful silence among them. This in itself is a declaration of support for Mugabe and his land policy.
The Southern African Development Community (SADC) countries are also, it seems, in support of these acts of robbery. Their silence is confirmation of their conspiracy.
President Thabo Mbeki and his local puppets are hesitant to act. Unfortunately, it is useless to say that Africa should speak out because the only message Mugabe appears to understand is action, not diplomatic mumbles. Smart sanctions are the answer.
However, we must act soon or his people will die of hunger. Alternatively they will revolt, stream across our borders and South Africans will suffer because breadwinners of a nation are being driven out and their land stolen by their own government. –Hendrick Makgabo Shilabe, Ekurhuleni
The white Zimbabwean farmers (and their supporters in South Africa) have demonstrated they are prepared to drive Southern Africa to the dust to pursue their selfish interests and hold back land reform.
The hypocrisy of South Africa’s press is staggering. Comments are always sought by the “liberal” press from Ian Smith, an evil man comparable to PW Botha. Anti-government statements from opposition politicians and journalists are printed as fact in headlines and later retractions get a footnote.
What about these facts? The United States instituted land reform in Japan after World War II. Zimbabwe’s election was no more controversial than those in Zambia, Kenya and Lesotho. The one-party state of Uganda has never been threatened with expulsion from the Commonwealth.
Zimbabwean peasants have access to land for the first time in their lives. There is a simple application process for all citizens to obtain redistributed land. The racist former colonialists have failed to seize power though their Movement for Democratic Change lackeys and have two choices — council flats in Britain or farms in other SADC countries where they will not be permitted to interfere in local politics.
Your correspondent, Chido Makunike, is living in a dream land. A “well thought out and fully funded” land tenure pattern? Who is going to supply funding now that Britain has reneged on the Lancaster House agreement? Blacks are not interested in catching up with the whites — they simply want to own their land. The head of one Zimbabwean farmers’ organisation recently admitted that more than 50% of farm workers were not Zimbabwean citizens. No wonder Zimbabweans come to South Africa! –Sam Herbstein, Germiston
The announcement of Mugabe’s “War Cabinet” filled me with dread. What if Mad Bob should lose it even more? Then I relaxed in the knowledge that we will shortly have some submarines with which to defend ourselves.–Martin Knowler, Johannesburg
Little cause for celebration
It is amazing in this day and age of “equality” that religious persecution is so rife within our government’s structures.
I know there are many major issues across the spectrum, but one my fiancée and I have run into recently is the simple fact that because we are not religious we are prescribed by government to have a small, impersonal, 15-minute wedding in a Home Affairs office, while any person with a religious mind may get married in the beautiful Cape wine lands with as many people as they like in attendance.
Alternatively we can choose to be hypocrites and find a friendly minister who will tone down the religion in a wedding service or get married first and have a fake wedding later. Neither of which sits well and both seem to defeat the idea behind the event.
It would appear that Home Affairs has purposefully moved in this direction as a couple of years ago I gather we would have been able to be married in a magistrate’s court or, if we asked nicely, get a magistrate to marry us in the beautiful Cape wine lands. Now Home Affairs will only marry you in a Home Affairs office with two witnesses in attendance.
Where exactly is the equality in this? Something that is supposed to be a happy experience and time of great celebration of two people joining their lives together is forcefully turned into a tacky affair by one’s own government.–Patrick Vine, Cape Town
Doctor got it all wrong
We would like to rectify incorrect information that refers to the Health Professions Council of South Africa (HPCSA), which was published in the article “Doctor criticised for treatment of rape victim” (August 23).
The HPCSA is of the opinion that it is necessary to correct a misconception that has been created due to the incorrect statement made by Dr ZT Magwentshu regarding the removal and restoration of a practitioner’s name from the register.
Firstly, in terms of Section 36 (1) of the Health Professions Act No 56 of 1974 any person who practises as a medical practitioner while not registered commits a criminal offence and on conviction shall be liable to a fine or to imprisonment. It is therefore incorrect to say that “it was not illegal for her to practise as a doctor” in terms of the section referred to earlier.
Practising a profession that falls under the jurisdiction of the HPCSA without being registered constitutes a criminal offence and may have serious legal consequences for the practitioner concerned. Our key mandate is to protect the public and when we discover that a practitioner has been practising without being registered the legal department of the HPCSA would refer the matter to the police for investigation of criminal charges.
It is also incorrect to say that “sometimes” if a practitioner does not pay the HPCSA removes that person’s name from the register, because this implies that we are being inconsistent with the manner in which we apply our regulations.
In fact, each practitioner is responsible for the payment of the annual fees in order to stay on the register and to be able to practise. Failure to pay annual fees results in removal from the register in terms of Section 19 (1) (d) of the Health Professions Act.
Restoration of a practitioner’s name to the register is not as uncomplicated as put out to be by Dr Magwentshu in her statement, that is “they put you back as soon as you pay”. There are severe penalties, which have been prescribed in terms of the regulations promulgated in the Government Notice No R.1129 to be imposed on those persons who fail to pay their annual fees.
The HPCSA can confirm that it has reported the matter to the police for a criminal investigation and this emanates from contravention of Section 17 of the Act by the practitioner. The council will also be looking at investigating unprofessional conduct on the part of Dr Magwentshu. –Thola Nzuza, manager, Health Professions Council of South Africa
Proud and proactive
When I was growing up in Sandton, Johannesburg, and became old enough to understand what apartheid meant, I would never have believed that my once-sanctioned country would become centre stage for the world to discuss issues currently being debated at the World Summit. Well done to all, especially our President, Thabo Mbeki, for organising it.
Seeing my home town on the front page of London’s leading newspapers over the past few weeks has been surreal. It has made me think about how amazing the recent history of our country is: not only have we and our leaders managed a peaceful change in political regime, but we have succeeded in moving from political isolation to leading discussions about world issues that ultimately affect everyone. I am very proud of the proactiveness shown by my country — as if we don’t have enough problems of our own.
I think all should appreciate the ambitiousness of what is being discussed and not be too critical of this positive step in the right direction.
Having recently helped with a university reunion in London, I am reminded how many South Africans are outside of the country broadening their experiences.
The feedback I get is that the expatriate (both transient and permanent) community wants to be involved and help South Africa develop and grow. A small group of us have started talking about how we can harness this international interest. If you have ideas please e-mail [email protected]. –Lisa Morgan, London
Ignorant
Once again the government intends to force into law Bills it knows transgress the Constitution. The Explosives Bill appears to have been written by the same individuals who wrote the Firearms Control Act, copied verbatim in places. Reading both shows the drafters’ ignorance of both subjects, and their contempt for the Constitution and individuals’ rights.
As with the firearm laws, this new Bill finds one guilty on prima facie evidence, rendering the irreversible framing of political opponents and ordinary citizens a simple task. Once again you will be open to searches, forced genetic samples taken at the whim of any police officer and the illegal reverse onus when accused.
Do we want a government that does this? –Kevin Duffy, Pietermaritzburg
In brief
I am disappointed at the suspension of Margaret Legum’s insightful column. Bring her back! We need a sane voice in this globalisation-mad generation. –C Morrison
The new TV format sucks. Please make the vertical columns channels and the days of the week horizontal! –Sally Hodges
I salute Sipho Seepe and wish him well on his Fulbright scholarship in the United States. Please return so you can become president. And never forget that Robert Kirby will be your best minister of sport, science, art, forestry and the judiciary — you will not need anybody else! –Malinda Nel, Pretoria
If the writer wants to flaunt her lesbianism she is at liberty to do so (Body Language, August 30). But may we please be spared her inanities. — JP Fleuriot, Link Hills
I would like to express my disappointment in your Friday change. You tried the same change some time ago and it did not work. What makes you think it will now? –Horst Baumer
Last week there were only two pages of international news. I long for the dark days of the 1990s. Then we got 24 pages of The Weekly Mail and another 24 of The Guardian Weekly. Is this part of the dumbing down of the paper to reach a wider audience? –JK Hansen, Bellville
Please include your name and address. Letters must be received by 5pm Monday. Be as brief as possible. The editor reserves the right to edit letters and to withhold from publication any letter which he believes contains factual inaccuracies, or is based on misrepresentation. Mail & Guardian Online Talkback: The UN secretary general has hailed the World Summit “a success”, while NGO groups have branded it a “triumph for greed and self-interest”. What do you think? Have your say at www.mg.co.za/talkback