Traditional and Khoi-San Leadership Act

While a new law sees the formally recognising Khoi and San communities, its critics say it also opens up vulnerable communities to exploitation by mining companies.   Like the rest of us too, not only the Khoi san peoples, we all are in the same position.

*

Daar is moontlik heelwat gemengde reaksies met die aanvaarding van die betrokke wetgewing en teenstrydighede wat vermeld word –  dit wat die Khoi san volke gevra het en dit wat die ANC leier Ramaphosa onderteken het –  is dit steeds ongrondwetlik of nie, as dit teen daardie volke se wil “geteken” word.   

Goeie vraag of daar aan hul volke se “vereistes” voldoen is want geen “sondes” van die huidige of vorige regering is volgens hul woordvoerder aangespreek nie, wat dit ookal mag beteken nie.   

Feite dat die Britte die “kroongebiede” of die sogenaamde leiers wat eeue gelede daartoe ingestem het, of afgedwing is, of ander reservate,  wat reeds voor die ABO geskep is, word natuurlik nerens vermeld nie.     Waarom persone blameer vir ‘n Britse kroongebied of reservaat onder Shepstone beleid?  Wie het eerstens hiertoe ingestem?

Hoekom moet ons vandag pa staan, of verantwoordelikheid neem vir die Britte se kolonialisme met reservate en kroongebiede (vanaf ongever 1840).

Waarom is ons vandag steeds deel van die Britse Statebond – is onregverdig om ons die skuld te gee, want in 1961 het ons vorige regering uitgetree uit die Britse Statebond uit.

*

Die twee Boere republieke wat onafhanklik was, het self onder die Britte deurgeloop en met geweld geannekseer, konsentrasiekampe, moord en doodslag, ‘n dorre afgebrande landskap.  Daar bly hierdie ewigdurende tennisbaan effek waar die Boere en Afrikaners gedurig gemanipuleer word, die skuld kry vir wat ons nie gedoen het nie.  Is tyd dat die regering en al hul ondersteuners uittree uit die Britse Statebond en die wil van volke doen, want elkeen soek hul eie leiers en gebiede.   

*

*

The law, which has been praised for acknowledging the independence and culture of the Khoisan, makes several provisions, including the protection and promotion of relevant institutions.  “Furthermore, the Act directs that the kingship or queenship, principal traditional community, headmanship, headwomanship and Khoi-San communities must transform and adopt customary law and customs in a manner that is consistent with the principles contained in the Bill of Rights and Constitution” , the Presidency said in a statement.   “While certain traditional structures and leadership positions have been recognised by law in compliance with Constitutional prescripts, there has never before been statutory recognition of the Khoi-San.” 

Civil society had anticipated that Bill, signed in Parliament in February, would be sent back after two panel reports – one led by former President Kgalema Motlanthe and another being the president’s own Advisory Panel into Land Reform – warned that it would amount to a breach of fundamental Constitutional rights.

“The bill will almost certainly be challenged for undermining constitutional rights. If government starts to transfer the title of land from state to traditional leaders, that will also be legally challenged”, said Aninka Classens, chief researcher at the University of Cape Town’s Land and Accountability Research Centre.

Classens further adds that in light of the two reports’ recommendations, Ramaphosa had strong legal grounds on which to refer the Bill back to parliament.

https://www.thesouthafrican.com/news/khoi-san-leadership-act-what-does-it-mean-2019/

*

Statements made in the Citizen on 29 November 2019

While a presidential statement on the Act hails it as aiding the “protection and promotion of the institutions of traditional and Khoisan leadership”, the controversial new law’s critics say it also increases the ability of government, traditional leaders and mining companies to expand at the expense of some of South Africa’s poorest communities.

It seems that the problems civil society have with the law have very little to do with its recognition of Khoisan leadership, with this aspect of it in fact widely supported by members of civil society, the Land and Accountability Research Centre’s Aninka Claasen told TimesLive.

Rather, it’s the fact that the Act applies not just to the various first nations communities which make up the Khoisan, but to all traditional leaders. And some, such as Claasen and national coordinator of the Alliance for Rural Democracy (ARD) Constance Mogale, believe it will allow these leaders and councils to sign deals with mining companies without the consent of the communities these deals will affect.

Chief !Garu Zenzile Khoisan of the Gorinhaiqua Cultural Council told The Citizen that while he felt the Act was a tentative first step towards the “recognition, restitution and restoration of the Khoi and San”, he was against the parts of it that could be abused by traditional leaders.

“The Act must never give currency to mercenary-ism,” he said.

“I don’t subscribe to certain aspects” of the Act, he added.

“We are custodians of the land, we cannot allow traditional leaders to usurp and have the powers to do what they want.”

As an example, he mentioned the Ingonyama Trust, finding fault with the fact that it had a single trustee – amaZulu King Goodwill Zwelithini.

He said the recognition that “Nguni kings and queens” receive from government was disproportionate to that of SA’s first nations people.

“The foundation people who were the first to fight the colonial laws have no recognition compared to the Nguni,” he said.

He said he would not want the Act to further the way some “traditional leaders have ignored the broader voice of the people”.

“One of the big problems of this Act is it promotes an inequality, an anachronistic hierarchy whereby things can be done without any kind of transparency or cheques and balances.

“We don’t subscribe to that. There are a lot of things in this Act that are completely wrong.

He did, however, offer tentative praise to the parts of the Act which did indeed grant his and other first nations people formal recognition, although he said the Act was just a “starting point”.

“It gives us the kind of legal traction that is required” to address what he and others see as the marginalisation of Khoi and San people, which he said included “linguistic suppression, cultural suppression, and almost complete genocide and dispersal”.

“We experienced the apex of a cultural genocide programme, when you take people called by their own name and make them others. They made us coloureds,” he said.

He said while this had its roots in apartheid and colonialism, the current government must also take some responsibility

“The current government and all its predecessors are not absolved, because we hoped that with the advent of the democratic order, these original sins would be addressed, but they weren’t,” he said.

Presidential spokesperson Khusela Diko referred The Citizen to the department of cooperative governance and traditional affairs when questioned on the more controversial aspects of the Bill.

https://citizen.co.za/news/south-africa/government/2212640/is-ramaphosa-recognising-khoisan-communities-or-robbing-the-rural-poor/

>

Verklarings wat in die Citizen op 29 November 2019 gemaak word oor die presidensiële verklaring wat uitgereik is oor die wet wat handel oor die “beskerming en bevordering van die instellings van tradisionele en Khoisan-leierskap”, word die mening gehuldig dat die nuwe wet moontlik die vermoë van die regering, tradisionele leiers en mynmaatskappye verhoog om ten koste van die saak uit te brei van sommige van Suid-Afrika se armste gemeenskappe.

Dit wil voorkom asof die probleme wat die burgerlike samelewing met die wet het, min te make het met die erkenning van Khoisan-leierskap, en hierdie aspek daarvan word wyd ondersteun deur lede van die burgerlike samelewing, het Aninka Claasen, die “Land and Accountability Research Centre”, aan TimesLive gesê.

Inteendeel, dit is die feit dat die wet nie net van toepassing is op die verskillende gemeenskappe van die eerste nasies wat die Khoisan uitmaak nie, maar op alle tradisionele leiers.   En sommige, soos Claasen en die nasionale koördineerder van Constance Mogale, “Alliance for Rural Democracy” (ARD), meen dit sal hierdie leiers en rade toelaat om transaksies met mynmaatskappye te onderteken sonder die toestemming van die gemeenskappe wat hierdie transaksies sal beïnvloed.

Hoofman! Garu Zenzile Khoisan van die Gorinhaiqua Kultuurraad het aan The Citizen gesê dat hoewel hy van mening is dat die wet ‘n voorlopige eerste stap in die rigting van die “erkenning en herstel van die Khoi en San” was, was hy teen die dele daarvan wat misbruik kon word deur tradisionele leiers.

“Ons is ‘bewaarders’ van die land, en ons kan nie toelaat dat tradisionele leiers oorweldig en die magte hê om te doen wat hulle wil nie.”     As voorbeeld verwys hy direk na die Ingonyama Trust en vind fout daarmee dat daar ‘n enkele trustee was – amaZulu King Goodwill Zwelithini.       Hy het voorts gesê dat die erkenning wat “Nguni-konings en -koninginne” van die regering ontvang, onproportioneel is teenoor die van die eerste volkere in SA.    “Die grondslagmense wat die eerste was om teen die koloniale wette te veg, het geen erkenning in vergelyking met die Nguni nie,” het hy gesê.  Hy het gesê dat hy nie wil hê dat die wet die manier waarop sommige “tradisionele leiers die breër stem van die mense geïgnoreer het, sal bevorder nie.

“Een van die groot probleme van hierdie wet is dat dit ‘n ongelykheid bevorder, ‘n anachronistiese hiërargie waardeur dinge gedoen kan word sonder enige vorm van deursigtigheid of kontroles en teenwigte.   ‘Ons onderskryf dit nie. Daar is baie dinge in hierdie wet wat heeltemal verkeerd is.

‘Dit gee ons die soort wettige traksie wat nodig is’ om aan te spreek wat hy en ander sien as die marginalisering van Khoi- en San-mense, wat volgens hom ‘taalonderdrukking, kulturele onderdrukking en byna volledige volksmoord en verspreiding’ insluit.

‘Ons het die toppunt van ‘n kulturele volksmoordprogram ervaar wanneer jy mense met hul eie naam noem en hulle ander maak. Hulle het kleurlinge gemaak, ”het hy gesê.

Hy het gesê hoewel dit sy oorsprong het in apartheid en kolonialisme, moet die huidige regering ook verantwoordelikheid neem

“Die huidige regering en al sy voorgangers is nie vrygestel nie, want ons het gehoop dat met die koms van die demokratiese bestel hierdie oorspronklike sondes aangespreek sou word, maar dit het nie,” het hy gesê.

President Khusela Diko, presidensiële woordvoerder, het The Citizen na die departement van samewerkende regering en tradisionele sake verwys toe hy ondervra is oor die meer kontroversiële aspekte van die wetsontwerp.

*


Ingonyama Trustgebied, was ‘n ooreenkoms wat reeds voor 1994 onderteken is deur verskeie partye tydens Kodesa se onderhandelingsfase.

Die Ingonyama trustwetgewing is slegs vir die Zoeloevolk, wat reeds voor 1994 se verkiesing geskryf en onderhandel is, waarmee toegestem is, ook aanvaar is, en waarvolgens die Zoeloes aan die verkiesing van 1994 deelgeneem het.

Hierdie Trustgebied is slegs in Kwazulu-Natal (60%) gelee, waar dit slegs vir die gebruik van die Zoeloevolk is.  Onderling is dit sedert 1840-tot datum, onderverdeel (9-18) in verskeie hoofmanstamme, nes wat dit ook in ander volke onder kommunale grondeise (CPA wetgewing) gedoen is.  Dit was die ou Zoeloeland (tuislandgebied).

Die Khoi san hoofman het egter voorlopig die dele van die wet aangeprys, wat inderdaad formele erkenning aan sy en ander eerste nasies gegee het, hoewel hy gesê het dat die wet slegs ‘n “beginpunt” is.  Na 25 jaar beteken dit eintlik nie veel nie.  Wat het nou eintlik in 25 jaar verander – daar was grondeise (CPA) wat ook uitgedeel was.   Watter verskriklike sondes is nou nie aangespreek nie?

Word die grondeise wat gerieflik sedert 1994 die lig gesien het, eenkant op ‘n podium geplaas en waarvan Khoi San groot voordeel getrek het uit alles en selfs miljoene rande ontvang het, nie net grond en bates nie, daar word voordele ontvang uit die Sanpark en ander inkomstebronne – heelwat CPA’s (grondeise).

Heelwat grondeise is reeds in 2007 aan die Khoi san volke toegeken.  Groot gedeeltes grondgebiede, ou Kroongebiede is aan die Khoi san volke deur Thabo Mbeki toegeken onder CPA wetgewing.     Waarvan Richtersveld die grootste is, wat miljoene hektaar grond beloop.

Richtersveld – Diamonds

Is die ontginning van minerale wat landwyd plaasvind nie wat reeds vir 25 jaar gebeur nie, daarom word daar ook geen rehabilitasie op uitgediende myne gedoen nie.   Ons gaan aan die einde met ‘n land sit, wat erg besoedeld is, water en voedsel gaan onbekombaar word.   Met al die korrupsie in die land, soos Eskom, SAL, Denel en ander maatskappye, gaan die huidige regering voort met hul ekonomiese rewolusie.

Die regering steur hul nie dat oor die 8000 myne ongerehabiliteerd is nie, solank elkeen hul pond vleis kry is die saak reg .  Heelwat van die myngebiede was produktiewe plase waar voedsel produseer is en beloop miljoene hektaar grond, wat ook nooit in enige grond oudit gewys word nie.   Die regering het hul nog nooit aan enige tradisionele leier gesteur nie, hoekom sal hulle dit nou doen?

*


2007 Thabo Mbeki signed those “agreements” of the Khoisan areas, and it was during his time it was handled.  The biggets land-claim in South Africa’s history was – and is – wrapped up in a scam involving a community leader and his family.
Richtersveld – KHOISAN AND CPA

*

Slegs 22% van grond in Suid-Afrika is geskik vir landbou-doeleindes terwyl net 12% vir landbougewasse aangewend kan word.
Grond geskik vir landbou-doeleindes

*

Meer as ‘n eeu gelede,  was daar rekord gehou van al hierdie Reservaat/Lokasie gebiede en hul presiese liggings, voorwaardes aan hoofmanne (chiefdoms).    Dit was na Mfecane oorloë aan swart etniese groepe deur die Britse kroon toegeken en beheer.
Trustgebiede>Tuislande>Reservate

*

Another article stated the same information about the legislation that was signed by Ramaphosa:

Ramaphosa’s office confirmed that he has signed the Traditional and Khoi-San Leadership Act into law on 29 November 2019.    The contested legislation gives statutory recognition to the Khoi-San communities, leaders and structures, and seeks to bring traditional Khoi-San institutions in line with constitutional imperatives, notably the Bill of Rights.

The Act directs that the kingship or queenship, principal traditional community, headmanship, headwomanship and Khoi-San communities must transform and adopt customary law and customs in a manner that is consistent with the principles contained in the Bill of Rights of the Constitution.”

Critics of the new law say it, in fact, disenfranchises poor communities further by placing too much power in the hands of Khoisan communities to enter into agreements without sufficient input from affected communities.

https://www.iol.co.za/news/politics/president-cyril-ramaphosa-signs-khoi-san-act-into-law-38172619
*
Previously during 2019

THE “Khoisan 6” camping at the Union Buildings have called for a collective conference of all Khoisan leaders, to be held on February 2 in the Catholic diocese in Pretoria.

The call comes in the wake of the Traditional and Khoisan Leadership Bill that was passed during a special sitting of the National Council of Provinces earlier this month.

The bill is aimed at giving recognition to Khoisan communities, leaders and structures, but also affects people living under customary rule in the former “homelands” created under apartheid.

But the Khoisan 6, who are strongly opposed to the legislation, said they were still demanding recognition of their culture and language from the president and government of South Africa.

They undertook a long, strenuous journey, walking from Port Elizabeth to Pretoria, and have been peacefully protesting at the Union Buildings for the past eight weeks.

They are willing to wait for as long as it takes to meet Ramaphosa.

“We delivered our demands to the then deputy president in 2017 and we are still waiting for him to respond to our grievances, which include that the Khoisan and their descendants, or the so-called classified coloured be afforded First Indigenous Nation Status,” they said.

They also want their culture and language, which they claim have been marginalised since the dawn of democracy, to be recognised.   “We want the land that was stolen to be given back to us and that the term coloured be scrapped.    “We will wait on him even if it takes a hundred years to answer to our desperate pleas,” said the leader of the group, Chief Khoisan SA.   “It is with these emotive issues which remain unresolved, that the Khoisan 6 have convened this conference in February.    “We are calling on all national and provincial Khoisan leaders to attend.”

The focus of the conference, according to the convener, Dr Leonard Martin, will be on identity, the land question, self-governance and international indigenous legislation.   “This is a very important matter. We have to unite as one indigenous nation and come up with a strategic plan to address the Traditional and Khoisan Leadership Bill and all the other outstanding issues confronting the Aboriginal Indigenous First Nation of South Africa or the Khoi-San/coloured nation.

https://www.iol.co.za/pretoria-news/khoisan-6-at-union-buildins-call-for-talks-in-wake-of-bill-18889609

*

Laat 'n boodskap

Verskaf jou besonderhede hieronder of klik op 'n logo om in te teken:

WordPress.com Logo

Jy lewer kommentaar met jou rekening by WordPress.com. Log Out /  Verander )

Google photo

Jy lewer kommentaar met jou rekening by Google. Log Out /  Verander )

Twitter picture

Jy lewer kommentaar met jou rekening by Twitter. Log Out /  Verander )

Facebook photo

Jy lewer kommentaar met jou rekening by Facebook. Log Out /  Verander )

Connecting to %s