Showing posts with label South Africa. Show all posts
Showing posts with label South Africa. Show all posts
Diarmuid Breatnach ✍ On Thursday last week, in Johannesburg, South Africa, over 74 residents perished in a fire sweeping through one of a number of “illegal” buildings, home to some of the city’s poor who are desperate for somewhere to live.

How is this possible? we may ask. Didn’t the South African people win their struggle after many years of sacrifice? Didn’t Mandela and the ANC lead them to victory in 1994?

The huge South African majority people fought a long and hard struggle against the domination and exploitation of a European settler minority and institutional racism. But they also fought against capitalist exploitation and imperialist plunder of their rich natural resources.

Despite the riches of those natural resources in gems, precious metals and minerals,[1] most non-white Africans[2] in South Africa lived in abject poverty with poor health care, scarce or non-existent infrastructures and services, including education and training.

In the decades leading up to the fall of the formal apartheid system, that struggle was led by the ‘triple alliance’ of the (banned) African National Congress,[3] the National Union of Mineworkers (of S.A.) and the (banned) Communist Party of South Africa.

Their struggles defeated the apartheid system and in April 1994 all residents of South Africa were enfranchised. National elections brought the ANC to government[4] and Nelson Mandela, a political prisoner for 27 years but freed not long before, was elected President.

Yet shortly after that great change, it was noted that the living standards of the mass of people were even lower than before, that the settler capitalists continued to reap their profits and that imperialism had actually intensified its penetration of the South African economy.[5]

Today approximately 55.5 percent (30.3 million people) of the population is living in poverty at the national upper poverty line (~ZAR 992) while a total of 13.8 million people (25 percent) are experiencing food poverty. Municipal services to the huge ‘townships’ are unreliable at best.

Almost one in every three work-available people is unemployed and only 95% of the population have basic literacy, which means that one in 20 doesn’t have it.

It is in that context that we can begin to understand hundreds of people living in an “illegal” building without even a fire escape, obliged to take the risk of such accommodation, in a land that continues to be rich in great wealth which however, never comes near the mass of people.

Pacification Processes

In the 1990s a number of people began to promote processes to resolve a number of long-ongoing conflicts around the world, mostly where imperialism or colonial settlers were oppressing the people of a country. The promoters called them “peace processes”.

Palestine was the first of those in which a “peace process” was introduced and South Africa was next in 1994, followed by Ireland in 1998. As it took root in one country, former resistance activists went from there to other conflicts to encourage people there to embrace the process too.

In fact the progress of this process seemed like the US imperialist ‘dominoes’ theory, only in reverse: rather than ‘communism’ in one country influencing people in another to go the same way, capitulation in one country was used to infect the next.

Palestinian and South African delegates attended Sinn Féin congresses to promote their ‘peace process’ to the party’s membership; subsequently SF delegates in turn joined South African ones in selling the process to the Basque national liberation movement.[6]

Some movements declined to imbibe the process wine but those that drank it found their movements split, their leaderships increasingly accommodated to their people’s exploiters and nowhere at all were any of the movement’s principal objectives achieved.

Except, that is, in South Africa, where at least the people were enfranchised. But the right to vote is intended to help shape the polity for improvement and that has not happened in South Africa. The ANC, NUM and CPSA of the ‘triple alliance’ have become part of the system instead.

Western imperialism recognised the vulnerability and isolation of the minority settler regime, convincing its leadership to concede mass enfranchisement rather than suffer revolution. And in order to prevent the mass going ‘too far’, they brought the resistance leaders into the deal.

Bishop Tutu[7] once remarked that “The ANC stopped the gravy train just long enough to get on it”, which angered his friend, Nelson Mandela. But when forty striking miners were murdered by police of the ANC Government with NUM collusion in 2012, Mandela did not condemn them.

This corruption did not grow overnight. Jacob Zuma,[8] while President of the ANC, has been formally accused of rape, indicted a number of times and eventually convicted of financial corruption. Winnie, Mandela’s ex-wife led a clique accused of political corruption and murder.

Cyril Ramaphosa, now President, was a millionaire even during the apartheid regime while General Secretary of the National Union of Mineworkers and, because the striking mineworkers in 2012 were rejecting the NUM as corrupt, is widely believed to have organised the massacre.

There should have been many signs of this corruption in the ANC prior to entering government – and there were.

The ANC ran concentration camps notably in Angola, Zambia, Tanzania and Uganda where they punished and even killed “dissidents”.[9] And in South Africa perhaps they had their own Steakknife[10] to organise “Pirelli necklacing”[11] for alleged informers.

Mandela knew about the camps and the “necklacing” but did not condemn them, possibly out of mistaken solidarity or ‘the greater good’ theory, as acted upon by some of the solidarity movement abroad.

Ronnie Kasrills, a senior member of the Communist Party of SA and formerly on the ANC’s National Executive Council, who now criticises the pacification process, claims they were concentrating on the political process and took their eye off the economic one.

And no doubt many at home and abroad thought all this could be sorted out once the domination of the white settler regime was broken and African majority had the vote. But political plants grown in contaminated soil do not grow healthy fruit.

And so we come to 74 people or more poverty-stricken dead and well over a hundred injured by fire in a building owned by the City, which is run by a black South-African administration that doesn’t care, in a state run by a corrupt black South African government in partnership with the settler class.

Pacification processes murder dreams but kill physically too: in massacres and avoidable disasters but also by overwork, ill-health, work injury, despair, substance abuse, suicide, and the many ways in which the capitalist-imperialist system causes misery wherever it lives.

Footnotes

[1] South Africa holds the world's largest reported reserves of gold, platinum group metals, chrome ore and manganese ore, and the second-largest reserves of zirconium, vanadium and titanium. In 2021, South Africa's diamond production amounted to 9.7 million carats, an increase on the previous year’s 8.5 million carats. The country ranked fifth among the world's largest diamond producers by volume.

[2] The racialcategories introduced by the Apartheid regime remain ingrained in South African society with South Africans officially continuing to classify themselves, and each other, as belonging to one of the four defined race groups (Blacks, Whites, Coloureds and Indians).

[3] Banned by the South African settler government from 1960 until early 1990; now a mass party in government.

[4] The ANC is still in government at the time of writing without a break since 1994.

[5] See The Shock Doctrine – the rise of disaster capitalism by Naomi Klein (2007).

[6] Palestine faded as a promoter of the pacification process since it had failed spectacularly there, its mass rejection resulting in the resistance upsurge of the Second Intifada followed by the fall of Al Fatah and the Palestinian Authority from their leadership position and the huge turn to the Islamist Hamas by a society generally voting along political rather than religious lines.

The Spanish ruling class was interested only in crushing the Basque resistance and made little attempt to sweeten the surrender of the leadership (Arnaldo Otegi and company) who nevertheless capitulated. Other areas where the process landed or attempted to do so were Colombia, Sri Lanka, Turkey (Kurdish national liberation movement), India, Phillipines (both latter agrarian movements). Only in Colombia was it adopted by both the rulers and the resistance and proved a disaster for the latter.

[7] A Christian bishop and campaigner for most of his life against the rule of the settler minority.

[8] South African politician who served as the fourth President of South Africa from 2009 to 2018. Zuma was a former anti-apartheidactivist, member of the ANC’s military wing Umkhonto we Sizwe, and president of the ANC from 2007 to 2017.

[9] See Sources.

[10] MI5 codename for senior Provisional IRA member Freddie Scappaticci who led the guerrilla organisation’s internal security department, which tortured and executed alleged informers.

[11] A car tyre, doused in flammable fuel, was placed over the terrified victim while still alive and set alight, often in front of a crowd.


What are Johannesburg’s 'hijacked buildings' and why do people live there?


Diarmuid Breatnach is a revolutionary, singer, writer and anti-imperialist socialist activist.

Pacification Kills Too

People And Nature ☭ Friends in South Africa have responded to the articleRussia and South Africa: the oppressors make a deal”, by Bob Myers, published on People & Nature last month. Here are two comments, by Tom Lodge and Lesego Masisi, and a further comment by Bob.


Tom Lodge: ‘Treating Russia’s rulers as allies is short-sighted’

I think the African National Congress (ANC) and the South African Communist Party (SACP) are making a mistake in supporting Russian operations in Ukraine. [South African foreign minister] Naledi Pandor’s arguments are stretching the professed “neutrality” stance very thin. That said, Bob Myers’s article has too many mistakes to be taken seriously.
 
Protesters in Durban against the Russian invasion
of Ukraine, March 2022. 
Photo from GGA

For example, Nelson Mandela in 1946 accompanied JB Marks on visits to the mineworkers’ compounds during the strike, speaking to kinsfolk who were among the isibondas who helped to supply local leadership. Far from opposing the strike, Youth Leaguers drew inspiration from it.

In 1957, local ANC leaders helped lead the Alexandra Bus boycott and the ANC helped organise solidarity boycotts elsewhere on the Rand. The politics of the boycott was complicated, and the ANC weren’t the only actors involved. There were disagreements over strategy, but it is simply untrue that the ANC refused support. The ANC bus owner was Richard Baloyi, but by the 1950s he no longer owned a bus company having been bought out by PUTCO in the aftermath of bus boycotts in the 1940s.

On Russia and Ukraine. That the ANC continues to have a sentimental regard for Russia is understandable, given the historic associations between Moscow and the anti-apartheid struggle (to which Ukrainians made a signal contribution as well). Naledi Pandor’s proposal that a multi-polar world might offer better developmental opportunities has merit. But Russia’s rulers preside over a criminalised capitalist autocracy. Treating them as allies is short-sighted.

Lesego Masisi: ‘It is not practical to take a stance that aids unilateralism’

One can’t be easily convinced by the contents of Bob Myers’s article, and what it ought to do, if they are grounded in solid analysis of current international geo-economics, in addition to a solid analysis of historical developments. Such lazy analyses seek to absorb some feeble/unsure leftists into right-wing and liberal (right-wing sympathisers) propaganda and conspiracy. It honestly takes away from South Africa’s sovereignty and its ability to think for itself.

This obviously does not mean that those who are involved in serious academia and the Genuine left are oblivious to the failures of the ANC in South Africa, and the Global Left, particularly in the context of historical institutional path dependency analysis, structuralist analysis and post-structuralist analysis of our current issues and how we found ourselves here today.

These are not well understood topics/concepts amongst ordinary leftists, and are also quite lacking in everyday political engagements in South Africa.

Additionally, many of the issues faced today in nation-states that were previously colonised, such as stunted development, incoherence between structures of governance and limited inclusion of the ordinary public in strategic decision-making, originate from the inheritance of a policy direction, or path, from the former colonisers, with often little motivation and resources to create a new policy path.

Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov and South African
foreign minister Naledi Pandor at their meeting last month

These policies obviously don’t ignore their enabling legislative components, which are drafted in such a way so as to talk left, but walk right. This is tied to accommodating the various stakeholders, who include the former colonial regimes, especially in nations that didn’t experience a Cuban-style forms of insurrection and transfer of power.

Had these concepts been commonplace in the entire progressive space, in sober engagements, in governance, in realpolitik, and not just in academia, it would have been far easier to organise our people, and youth, in a meaningful way to challenge internal class domination and hegemony, and by extension, challenge imperialist global hegemony.

This hegemony manifests itself to essential social institutions for our individual and collective development, and the juridico-political and ideological landscape of the country, to achieve its purpose. Notwithstanding the fact that it would have been extremely difficult for some leftists to be wallowed by these type of divisive and propagandistic articles.

With regards to Russia and South Africa’s relations, it is not practical to take a stance that aids unilateralism, which is antithetical to SA’s foreign policy direction, as well as the interests of its people. This is obviously not playing into the hands of Russia, as it is often echoed by the same right-wing sympathisers, who seek to undermine South Africa’s sovereignty and ability to think for itself regarding its relations with Russia and label any independent-thinking nation (usually nations in the Global South and BRICS member states) as Putin sympathizers. Reductionist much? A classic Pro-Western tactic.

The ANC-led South African government is seemed to be oblivious to the exaggerated human rights violations by western media done by Russia since they politically align with Russia, as much as they do with the EU, US and other nations that contrast each other, just as a truly Non-Aligned country. On top of this, the Ministry of International Relations and Cooperation in South Africa re-affirmed that the conflict should be resolved diplomatically, with both parties opening themselves up to compromise and promoting the interests of peace.

However, Ukraine has been accepting military packages from the US, amongst other Ukrainian sympathisers, such as the $858 million defence aid that was approved by US Congress a few weeks ago, and an additional $3.7 billion package from 2023 onwards, which obviously suggests that Ukraine is allowing itself to be used as a Western proxy, to cause aggression with Russia, and enable the global arms trade to continue to profiteer off of the lives of many innocent Ukrainian women and children, instead of mediating to resolve the conflict in a sharply impartial way. Who benefits from the global arms trade?

What is to be done?

Bob Myers: ‘The ANC used working class militancy for its own ends’

My article on the recent agreements between South Africa and Russia has been criticised by some comrades in South Africa and I will try to answer them. First of all let me say that most of what I wrote was drawn from my experiences in SA in the 1990’s. Here is a link to a much longer piece I wrote about those times.

In case people don’t have time to read this longer bit let me just explain that my relationship with trade unionists in South Africa began when I helped the South African metal workers’ union, NUMSA, organise the UK tour by BTR Sarmcol strikers. At the time I was a metal workers’ shop steward in a BTR factory in London, so that was the link between us.

Most of what I wrote in the piece on the People and Nature blog came out of my discussions with NUMSA members in Durban, Port Elizabeth (as it was then) and Cape Town. The story of the bus boycott, as I wrote it, was told to me by many people. If it turns out that this was an “urban myth”, then I admit I got it wrong.

About the ANC and the post-war miners strike. Again, this was drawn from what people told me but I think I have abbreviated the story so much as to get it wrong. What people told me was that, post war, the older ANC leadership was becoming more and more remote from the new black working class that was emerging with its own voice. Mandela and other ANC youth leaders sensed this and saw they had to change tack if they were to have any influence on this new movement. So they adopted a much more militant stand, but they did this primarily to ensure the continued influence of the ANC, rather than to strengthen the newly emerging workers’ movement. And I have certainly read that on the day the miners’ strike started, Mandela spoke at a big ANC rally and didn’t once mention the strike. In my piece I inferred a motive for this silence which I was wrong to do.

Workers walking to work during the Alexandra bus boycott,
1957. Photo 
from South African History On Line

So if I have got facts wrong then I withdraw them, but what I stand by is the general assertion that the ANC sought to use the working class militancy for its own ends and to ultimately stifle it, not for the real emancipation of the working class from exploitation by capital. Their ability to do this was greatly helped by their relationship with the USSR that allowed them to appear as “revolutionaries”, which they were not.

Other criticism seems to assume that, because I wrote about this Russia-SA alliance as anti-working class, then somehow I must support the US/NATO alliance. This was a short article that simply set out to show that the so-called “anti-imperialism” of the Russia-SA stand was nothing of the sort, and that there was a long history of the ANC’s relationship with Russia which was always against the ability of the working class to organise itself, find its own voice.

It seems to me many people start their thinking with these imperialist blocs and their antagonisms. Of course you can’t ignore these things, but my starting point is always what is happening in the working class globally. There simply is no future for humanity if the working class cannot begin to organise itself internationally to fight for its own interests. I think it can get very boring if everything you write has to begin with some kind of summary of world affairs starting with the catagory of nations, which, through its summarising, is usually wrong.

So let me make clear that I think alliance of US and NATO countries also has as its central aim the control and suppression of the working class, every bit as much as the Russia-SA one. I chose to write about the latter only because I see so many so called radicals or “lefts” falling for this nonsense of the “anti-imperialism” of the Russia-SA alliance.

I also think that people make the mistake of thinking that a description of all the alliances and conflicts between various parts of capital leads them to an understanding of how militants should react to events such as the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

Developments in the world are not just the outcomes of competition and conflict between various elements of capital. They are, above all, the outcome of capital’s continuous need to control its eternal enemy – the working class. The global working class has to oppose the Russian invasion for its own reasons, nothing to do with the various imperial plots.

➽Discussion is always welcome on this blog. Our movement will not go far without it. Simon Pirani, 16 February 2022.

⏩ People & Nature is now on mastodon, as well as twitterwhatsapp and telegram. Please follow!

Imperialism, South Africa And The ANC ✏ An Exchange Of Views

People And Nature This posturing has a history, Bob Myers writes.

26-January-2023

The South African government of the African National Congress (ANC) has decided to join military exercises with Russia and China. They were announced during a visit to South Africa this week by Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov – who was given a warm welcome by Nalendi Pandor, the South African foreign minister.
 
Striking miners at Marikana, 2012



Lavrov denounced “colonialism” – and no doubt various “left” groups around the world will trumpet this accord as evidence that Russia, China and South Africa are “fighting imperialism”.

Last year, South Africa called on Russia to withdraw troops from Ukraine. But this week Pandor said it would be “simplistic and infantile” to ask for that now.

The ANC government uses its stance to bolster its own “anti-imperialist” credentials among its own people and among neighbouring African governments.

But this alliance is not “anti-imperialist” at all. It is an anti-working class alliance that actually has a long history.

The ANC emerged as a political movement in the early 20th century. It was the party of the small black business and professional class. With the rise of apartheid it fought for the rights of black business. It tried to appear as a spokesperson for all the oppressed black population, but there was always a problem with this as it had no interest in the real emancipation of black workers.

Two good examples of this tension can be seen in the period after world war two.

First, at the end of the war there was an upsurge of black working class militancy leading to a general strike of black miners. Nelson Mandela, at that time leader of the ANC youth wing, refused to support the strike, fearing it would undermine the ANC’s efforts to win concessions for black business.

Second, in 1957 a huge protest against bus fare increases took place in the black townships round Johannesburg. For months on end, workers walked miles to work and home again rather than pay the fare increases. The ANC refused to support this bus boycott. Not surprising as one of the bus companies was owned by a leading ANC member.

In 1974 a spontaneous general strike swept South Africa’s black working class and this forced the apartheid regime to allow trade unions to organise.The Federation of South African Trade Unions (FOSATU) grew rapidly and soon had hundreds of thousands of members. The affiliated unions were non-racial, extremely democratic and very militant.

The ANC had no role in these unions. The union conference resolutions were clear that, while they supported the ANC’s campaign against apartheid, the workers had to have their own political perspective for the overthrow of capitalism which the ANC opposed.

At the same time, outside of South Africa, the ANC was being paraded by the Soviet Union as a revolutionary, socialist organisation and was declared to be the “sole representative of the South African people”. When the apartheid regime banned the South African Communist Party (SACP) in the early 1950s, its members had all joined the ANC and their masters in Moscow then promoted the ANC as a “revolutionary” organisation.

(Many people who were taken in by this were later puzzled, when Mandela was released from jail and declared he had never been a socialist or communist.)

South Africa then became a pawn in the Cold War battle. The Soviet bloc supplied the ANC’s armed wing with weapons and training. But this armed wing was a fraud, designed to boost the image of the ANC among black Africans and cause trouble for the west in southern African affairs.

Thousands of young black South Africans left the country to join the ANC military camps in Angola and Mozambique. But the weapons and military training in Eastern Europe were a trap. Not a single soldier or gun ever went back to fight in South Africa.

Year after year these troops were used to support pro-Soviet movements in neighbouring countries, but, despite the eruption of mass revolts in the South Africa townships, the black youth who had gone to get weapons never went home to join the fight.

Eventually there were mutinies in nearly all the ANC military camps, demanding democracy in the army so they could go back to join the fight against the South African regime. These mutinies were militarily suppressed by Cuban troops and most of the leaders were tortured, executed or jailed. (For a full account of these events go to Searchlight South Africa (index here, a few PDFs on the internet e.g. here and here), or books and articles by Paul Trewhela (especially Inside Quatro (article here, information about book here) and also here, here and here) and Baruch Hirson.)

This refusal of the ANC to allow its troops to return to South Africa is no surprise. Behind the scenes the Soviet Union was holding secret talks with leading business figures in South Africa to negotiate the end of apartheid, a system that was hugely costly to South African mining industries whereby they had to pay large numbers of white workers high wages. The Soviet Union was trying to use its influence to end the struggles in South Africa in order to get favourable deals with the USA when the Soviet economy was collapsing.

But these negotiations to end apartheid faced a huge stumbling block. While the ANC was feted around the world amongst progressives and union organisations – thanks to the Soviet Union’s backing – inside the country it had zero organisation and little influence on the enormously militant working class who were not just against apartheid but against capitalism too.

No system change could take place in South Africa while this rampaging working class were beyond the ANC’s control.

Over a period of several years, the ANC worked hard to gain influence inside the trade unions. They proposed a merger between their own “unions” (that had virtually no members) and the FOSATU unions. This happened and the Confederation of South African Trade Unions (COSATU) was formed.

At last the ANC and the SACP had a place in the leadership of the unions and with their years of experience of manouvering as well as murdering their opponents, they slowly took control of the unions.

A protest against electricity price rises, 2022

Democracy in the working class was eroded. Union support for the ANC’s Freedom Charter was adopted by executive decision, without any debate amongst union members who had been pushing for a workers charter. Discussion was stifled. Militant action was stopped. Many workers could not understand what had happened to the organisations they had built, taking the ANC’s radical rhetoric at face value.

With the unions under ANC control, Mandela was set free, the black bourgeoisie finally allowed its freedom and apartheid was dismantled. In 1994, with full union support, the ANC won the first post-apartheid elections and set up a tri-partite alliance of the ANC, the SACP and COSATU. This “Alliance” was used as a command structure to push through the ANC’s pro-capital agenda.

Strike and militant action were condemned as anti-ANC.

Under apartheid there was mass non-payment of utility bills. But now, under the ANC, with ex-union leaders now chairmen of the private utility companies, troops and police were sent into the townships to disconnect non-payers.

It took nearly twenty years before workers began to articulate an understanding of the real nature of the ANC, and to start to rebuild their independent organisations. Some unions, like the metal workers, broke away from COSATU saying it was just a tool of the ANC and big business.

Thousands of miners left the pro-government miners’ union – which had been led by Cyril Ramaphosa, now a multi-millionaire and South African president.

When a some of these miners went on strike at the Marikana platinum mine in 2012, the ANC sent in troops to break the strike. On 12 August that year, they shot dead 6 miners and four days later they killed another 34 miners with many more injured. This was a repeat of the Sharpeville massacre, but under an ANC government.

This is only a tiny snap shot of the anti-working class actions of the ANC government. The overall picture since they took power is that a tiny section of the black population have become fabulously rich as capital employs them to control the masses. A black middle class has flourished.

The vast mass of the working class have seen little real change in their conditions. The squalor of the township housing has not improved. Unemployment has risen, wages have fallen, violence, especially against women, has escalated. Anger has been channelled by the ANC and stooge unions against the millions of refugees from neighbouring countries.

Just before apartheid collapsed, the Soviet Union collapsed. Its state machine and its imperial ambitions were inherited by the Putin regime in Russia.

So this alliance between the Kremlin and the ANC is nothing progressive or “anti-imperialist”.

At one time the Soviet dictatorship, pretending to be “socialist” backed the ANC, likewise pretending to be socialist. Today, neither the Russian nor South African government claim the “socialist” title. Both are unashamedly capitalist but they are happy to come together to play the “anti-imperialist” card against the US.

And sections of the global “left” fall for this trick, hook line and sinker.

But this is an alliance against the working class of Russia, South Africa and the Ukraine. 26 January 2023

PS. Simon Pirani adds: Bob Myers writes that “left” groups will see the Russia-South African agreement as evidence that they are “fighting imperialism”. This logic has already been set out by Pawel Wargan of the Progressive International in the US-based journal Monthly Review. Wargan sees in the Kremlin “a state-capitalist tendency that sought greater centralisation of economic power and could, eventually, find its outlet in more socialised economic governance”, and that is being “pushed it into alignment with the broader Third World project”. Russia has “come to situate both its past and its future firmly within the Third World”. For Wargan, Ukrainians whose blocks of flats and electricity systems are daily targeted by Russian missiles are a “front line of [US] imperialism”. This disgusting logic is the antithesis of socialism, in my view.

⚫Related stuff on People & Nature


⏩ People & Nature is now on mastodon, as well as twitterwhatsapp and telegram. Please follow!

Russia And South Africa 😈 The Oppressors Make A Deal

People And NatureA guest post by Hali Healy


A court in South Africa has found five men not guilty of an armed assault on people in a community that is resisting a titanium mining project. 

The verdict, at the Mbizana District Court in the Eastern Cape on 31 August, was denounced as a “travesty of justice” by the Amadiba Crisis Committee (ACC), which unites communities on the Wild Coast against open-cast mining. The five men had been charged with attempted murder, assault with intent to do grievous bodily harm, pointing and shooting of firearms, and theft, in the “Christmas shootings” case. The victims, a group of male residents of Mdatya village, were attacked on a December evening in 2015 as they walked home from a ceremony.

The attack was the culmination of a week-long campaign of intimidation, aimed at community members who since April 2015 had coordinated a blockade, preventing access by consultants trying to carry out an Environmental Impact Assessment for the Xolobeni mineral sands project, which wants to mine a 22 kilometre stretch of the coast.

A petition being handed to Mbizana Court 13 January 2020, demanding an end
to postponements of the “Christmas Shootings” case.
Photo from 
Amadiba Crisis Committee facebook page

Given the stakes, tensions in the area have simmered for years. Episodes of violence are frequent, and opponents of the Xolobeni project often become victims of intimidation and assault. But most incidents go unreported out of fear of retribution, and the police are not trusted.

In 2016, ACC chairperson Sikhosiphi Bazooka Radebe was assassinated. Senior officers in the South African Police Service were accused of “intentionally impeding” the investigation.

After the “Christmas shootings” verdict on 31 August, the Amadiba Crisis Committee – which stands for “real development of our community” and against imposed “development” – issued a statement that ended:

This had been a five-and-a-half-year long process. There have been 15 Court appearances. The defence lawyer managed to postpone the case again and again. It ended in a travesty of Justice.
We went to the Court to get Justice. But if Justice is not being served, what is the point of going to the Court.

The Xolobeni mining project is led by Australia’s Mineral Commodities (MRC) and its South African subsidiary, Transworld Energy and Minerals Resources (initially registered in 1993 in the UK as Barleyway PLC, and 56% owned by MRC). The Environmental Impact Assessment that the communities resisted was (and still is) necessary for the proposed project to go ahead.

From the start, the project has been heavily backed by the Department of Mineral Resources and Energy, the Department of Trade and Industry (rumoured to have provided seed funding to MRC before the project had even been approved), and a handful of local political and economic elites who stand to profit enormously.

The plans have been opposed by most local residents, backed by a network of local, national and global environmental and anti-mining NGOs, scholars and journalists.

Collectively, opponents recognise the triple environmental, social and economic threat that mining poses to area, which is highly biodiverse, has a rich cultural heritage, and crucially, provides the basis of subsistence livelihoods, as well as food, for the local population.

Sigidi village, on the Wild Coast. Photo by Hali Healy

Since organising in 2007, the ACC, the main opposition movement on the ground, has argued that the project will cause displacement from land and coastal areas, deplete local water supplies, and contaminate land and waterways, destroying the community and its sustainable way of life.

Despite anti-mining campaigners facing constant violence, it is rare for these incidents to end up in the courts – and, as the ruling on 31 August showed yet again, justice is seldom delivered.

A crisis of integrity

The “not guilty” ruling was as shocking as it was disappointing. And it showed that there is a crisis of integrity in South Africa’s legal system.

The trial had dragged on since 2015, despite clear regulations stipulating that cases in regional courts must be resolved within six months of the entering of an initial plea. The lag was attributed to the fact that whenever the case came to court, proceedings had to be postponed – more than 10 times – invariably due to stalling tactics deployed by the defence.

In April 2021 this pattern continued, as one of the five accused – who happened to be an employee of the MRC-owned Tormin mine – failed to appear in court. At first the defence lawyer claimed this client had been in a car accident. Moments after a hushed phone call in the courtyard however, the story changed to one of illness, and a hastily obtained doctor’s note was presented to the court.

That time, the trial was postponed only for a day. This delay however, meant the proceedings would be rolled over to August, buying time for the defence to build its arguably weak case.

Most of the defence witnesses (9 out of 14) were close family members (brothers, sisters, and mothers) who predictably testified that the accused were with them at their homes at the time of the attacks.

The defence, lacking solid evidence of the innocence of the accused, embarked on a character assassination of the victims. The thrust of the argument was that the victims had been the actual aggressors and that the accused had merely acted in self-defence.

The defence argued that one of the victims, permanently disabled as a result of the attack, had been seen travelling short distances on foot without the aid of his walking stick.
 
Demonstrators greet the 2018 court decision that recognised
 the right to campaign against mining projects

Also notable throughout the trial was the prosecution’s obvious lack of interest in pursuing the interests of the complainants. Since the start of the trial, no one on the prosecution team had once initiated contact with any community members or their legal representatives to hear their accounts of events in December 2015.

Furthermore, the prosecution refrained from challenging any of the unfounded assertions made by the defence. The State remained silent, for example, when the defence argued in April that because one of the victims could not identify the specific model of the gun that had been pointed at him – and because no gun had been found in the possession of that accused, a full day later when he was finally tracked down by police – the victim must have been lying.

Nor did the prosecution query the contradictory testimonies of two of the accused in July, when one claimed that the group of anti-mining demonstrators had numbered more than while another asserted (before changing his story upon being prompted by his attorney) that there had been fewer than twenty.

Most perplexing, and arguably damaging of all however, was the State’s decision on 31 August not to make a closing argument at the end of the trial. When offered the chance to do so, the prosecutor declined, instead requesting that the court base its decision on the evidence adduced by witnesses.

This is indeed what the court did, but not until it had lambasted the prosecutor for failing to make a closing argument on behalf of his clients. Of this decision the magistrate observed: “The State does not believe in its case.”

Before delivering the “not guilty” verdict, the magistrate referred specifically to the account of an eleventh-hour witness called by the defence.

This witness, presented as “neutral” with regard to mining, had reported having seen “two groups fighting with sticks”, but “did not see anyone injured”. For the magistrate, this was a clear refutation of plaintiffs’ claims that they had been victims of an attack.

In reality however, this witness is known by community members to be the chair of a pro-mining “development committee” in Mdatya, one established by the five accused. The witness did not only lie about his neutrality. He also failed to mention that he had driven two of the victims to the Ntabeni Clinic in KwaZulu-Natal to be treated for their injuries.

If the State had bothered to investigate, the prosecution could have led with this evidence.

The State’s failure to submit closing arguments predictably also led to discrepancies between the evidence and the court’s findings.

For example, the court declared it had found a local Headwoman (traditional leader) to be a “liar”, despite the fact that she was not part of the case, and had not even appeared in court.

The court also repeated a baseless accusation made by the defence that one of the plaintiffs had exaggerated about his injuries to gain the sympathies of the court. This contradicted evidence submitted to the court in the form of detailed medical records that showed clearly the extent of permanent physical damage suffered by the victim.

Earlier in the year moreover, the court had challenged the accused over inconsistencies in their narratives, asking, whether there were “more than 200” who walked around threatening mining supporters during the day, or “ten?”. The magistrate even remarked (somewhat tongue-in-cheek) that the five defendants must have been “very brave indeed” to have withstood such an attack.

Dusk on the Wild Coast.
Photo by Hali Healy

In the judgement however, the only accusations of inconsistency and dishonesty levelled were against the plaintiffs themselves.

Then, before announcing his final decision, the magistrate delivered a final blow, stating that the complainants had used the court “incorrectly” to further their own anti-mining agenda. As such, he concluded, the case should never have been prosecuted.

The significance of this statement should not be underestimated, not least because it directly and incontrovertibly contradicted the expert legal opinion articulated by Vuyani Genu, Chief Prosecutor of the Mthatha cluster of the Eastern Cape.

When approached by the defence to throw out the case in 2019, Genu had replied: “Having considered your representations in this matter and having read the docket herein, I am of the view that the State has a very strong case against the accused and I therefore direct that the case must proceed.”

Nor of course, should the importance of the ruling itself be dismissed.

In a context where the murder of the ACC chairperson Bazooka Radebe remains unsolved after five years, the State’s consistent failure to vigorously prosecute pro-mining assailants speaks volumes.

It signals that supporters of contested mining projects can carry out campaigns of intimidation, using violence with impunity, under the nose of, and in some cases, with the assistance of the State.

This phenomenon that has been documented extensively by human rights and environmental justice organisations across South Africa.

It also reflects a shift in strategy on the part of the State, away from open confrontation with communities opposed to mining that are likely to attract international attention and scare off investors, toward a more hands-off approach.

In realising its land grab to secure the titanium sands of Xolobeni, the South African government is relying increasingly on political developments on the ground to generate public support for the mining of Xolobeni to proceed.

For these to efforts to succeed, the credibility not just of individuals, but of communities and the wider movements they belong to – and by extension, the viability of the sustainable and equitable economic alternatives to mining they advocate, must be undermined in the public’s eye.

This ruling no doubt assists that goal.

Implications for the movement

So what does this travesty of justice – and the lack of integrity it highlights within South Africa’s legal system – mean for allies of the Amadiba Crisis Committee, and countless other organisations seeking to use the courts to defend territory and livelihood against state-led landgrabs?

Academics like myself have an obligation to expose the nefarious methods of this so-called “developmental state”, as it seeks to strip rural communities not only of their resources, but of their heritage, and their constitutionally guaranteed rights to define their own development futures.

This is a project that is relevant to all social scientists teaching and researching in the South African context, whether we are work in fields such as geography, sociology, economics, politics, history, or anthropology, or in more interdisciplinary fields like development studies.

Scholars of law in South Africa are also duty-bound to scrutinise and raise the alarm over how the State is increasingly using legislative measures to dispossess rural communities of their resources and rights.

In light of the ACC’s 2018 court victory asserting the community’s right to say no to mining, it is no wonder that the government is now manoeuvring to circumvent the 1996 Interim Protection of Informal Land Rights Act.

Recent amendments to the Traditional and Khoi-San Leadership Act 3 of 2019, for example, will be instrumental in opening the way for co-opted traditional leaders, and specifically, Chiefs as custodians of customary land, to cut deals with mining companies without obtaining community consent.

Journalists also have a role to play, to follow and shine an international spotlight on the government’s behaviour. They can contribute by highlighting how the state is using the courts to undermine citizens’ rights to developmental self-determination, and to circumvent customary law, in the name of a “national interest” that is sure to benefit only a small handful of elites.

Of course, activists belonging to social / environmental justice movements also have a major role to play. They can pressure the State to improve its efforts to capture and prosecute perpetrators of violence against opponents to mining.

It speaks volumes that not a single arrest was ever made by the SAPS since the murder of Bazooka Radebe, nor of countless other environmental defenders including Mam Fikile Ntshangase.

The track record of the National Prosecuting Authority is similarly dire, with critics arguing both institutions are “politically compromised”, their officials conflicted between fulfilling their constitutional mandates, and imperatives of delivering findings that could stay prosecutions, in line with political objectives.

Another related task for members of social movements and NGOs thus lies in exposing relations between individuals in key state departments (mainly, of mineral resources, trade and industry, and transport), foreign and domestic mining companies, the judiciary, and the Black Economic Empowerment partners that often spring up overnight claiming to represent rural community interests from faraway cities.

Given the systemic nature of collusion in South Africa between political and mining interests, and allegations of corruption within the judiciary, activists, particularly those operating at a safe distance abroad, can play a vital watchdog function.

Through coordinated efforts, allies might be able to usefully support the ACC in its efforts to defend heritage, land and livelihood. Whether the integrity of South Africa’s legal system can hold up against the assault being led by a mining-captured state, is another issue entirely.

⏩Hali Healy is a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Anthropology and Development Studies, University of Johannesburg

More on Africa on People & Nature

Let Africa’s queer voices speak in the movement for climate justice. By Orthalia Kunene (6 July 2021)

Communities remember anti-mining activist Mama Ntshangase, and organise. By Hali Healy (26 January 2021)

A year of record climate disasters in Africa. By Nnimmo Bassey (10 February 2020)


 Keep up with People And Nature.  Follow People & Nature on twitter or instagram or  telegram or whatsapp. Or email peoplenature@yahoo.com, and you will be sent updates.

Titanium Mining In South Africa ➖ Communities Face A “Travesty Of Justice”

People And Nature features Orthalia Kunene a South African writer and grass roots activist in her community.


The fight against climate change is not only a struggle to keep our planet liveable. For many women, rising temperatures can be a direct cause of violence.

Understanding connections between heat and violence is increasingly important as we witness the warming of our planet, and anticipate more intense and longer-lasting heatwaves.

In most parts of South Africa, temperatures already often exceed 40°C.

While violence in South Africa has often been attributed to its unique historical, social and economic characteristics, the potential contribution of physical environmental factors, such as heat, has largely been ignored.

Photo by Extinction Rebellion, Nelson Mandela Bay

But a study using data from all 1158 police wards in South Africa documented higher levels of violence, including homicides, during periods of high temperature.

In Tshwane, Gauteng Province, a study assessed five years of temperature and crime data – and found that the number of violent crime incidents was about 50% higher on high-temperature days, compared with low-temperature days and with random days selected from the dataset after the warmest and coldest days had been extracted.

Another study in the same area noted seasonal patterns in crime, with violence most frequent in the summer months.

Francina Nkosi, national coordinator for Women Affected by Mining United in Action (WAMUA), says: 

Around the world, climate change-induced crises have been shown to worsen violence against women. South Africa is considered a water-scarce country, and the 30th driest country in the world. At times of prolonged drought, women and girls make more frequent and longer journeys to obtain water, which makes them vulnerable to sexual violence.

The problems caused by climate change are often piled upon those caused by poverty. Nkosi said.

In most mining affected communities, men leave home to seek a living in the cities, women, and children are left to fend for themselves, which makes them vulnerable to violence and sexual exploitation ...

Poor harvests, livestock loss, lower earnings, and food insecurity put pressure on men’s traditional role as providers. They often turn to alcohol to bear with the pressure and become more violent, towards their partners. The impacts of gender-based violence are severe and affect all members of the community.

The studies showing that women suffer higher levels of physical and sexual violence in hot weather are especially concerning in South Africa given the already high background levels of violence against women and a femicide rate among the highest in the world. In 2019, more than 2700 South African women and 1000 children were killed, according to police figures.

Why do higher temperatures increase the risk of violence?

Research has proven that changes in weather conditions, especially temperature, can profoundly influence physiology and behaviour. Heat exposure has a range of physiological impacts, affecting levels of comfort, emotional stability and sense of wellbeing.

Being in an uncomfortably hot environment creates irritability and aggressive thoughts, and reduces positive emotions such as joy and happiness. Men appear to be particularly sensitive to the effects of heat on aggression. Hot weather also alters behaviours, for example resulting in people tending to congregate outdoors, with increased opportunities for contact crimes and violence.

Additionally, alcohol use, a potent trigger for violence, can increase during hot weather, while dehydration, more common on hot days, is associated with mood disturbance, confusion and anger. It is therefore plausible that together these physiological and behavioural pathways may increase the likelihood of violence, particularly violence committed with the intention of harming other persons rather than violence where the aim is primarily to gain assets, such as robberies.

Natural disasters and sexual violence

Climate change increases the risk of storms and disasters related to them – and these, in turn, increase the risk of violence against women.

At least 15,000 women and girls in the areas affected by Cyclone Idai, which devastated parts of southern Africa in March 2019, are at risk of gender-based violence linked to disruptions caused by the storm, a recent report by the UN Resident Coordinator in Zimbabwe stated. There were several reports were made of young girls who suffered sexual abuse in a community in eastern Zimbabwe hit hard by the cyclone.

There were also concerns about women and girls being asked to provide sex in exchange for access to aid. Meanwhile, a UN Flash appeal report has noted the lack of privacy and lighting in camps for displaced persons, which can increase the risk of violence and transactional sex for female storm victims.

This situation is, unfortunately, not unique to Cyclone Idai. In Africa, the violence of climate change is already being felt in many different ways.

The changing weather patterns, heavier rainfalls, prolonged droughts, increased crop failure, livestock loss, and increasing food insecurity are affecting women and girls the most.

Women find themselves being forced to trade sex in exchange for food or rent; even attempts by women to negotiate, providing labour in exchange for food, are often rejected, Francina Nkosi of WAMUA says.

“In most disasters, women and girls are worst affected”, concluded a report by CARE (a global movement trying to save lives, defeat poverty and achieve social justice). It said that one out of five women who are refugees or who have been displaced because of a natural disaster has experienced sexual violence.

Many women are displaced during and after disasters, and that can lead to an increase in violence, due to overcrowded and unsafe living conditions in evacuation centres and temporary shelters.

What academic research shows

Sixteen articles about the relationship between rising temperatures and violence were located through targeted searches of Google Scholar and from experts in the field. Nine of the 16 studies reported an increase in homicides with a rise in temperature. While the remaining studies did not detect a significant association, they were all in the direction of a positive effect.

Effect size ranged widely; from small effects in some studies in the USA to an estimated 17% increase in homicides per year in Africa where the temperature increase by 1°C. The findings of these studies point to a conservative estimate of a 4-5% increase in homicides per degree rise in temperature.

Countries like South Africa, which already have high levels of violence and a rapidly warming climate, are vulnerable to the consequences of climate change. We are more likely to see an increase in the number of cases of homicide and other forms of violence per year should the temperature rise by 1°C, signalling the potential for an even greater burden of violence, centered on already vulnerable groups (women and girls).

Representatives from shelters for abused women demanding more
funding outside South Africa’s parliament in 2019. Photo: Eloise Schrier

Moreover, other consequences of climate change, such as extreme weather events, will influence “eco-migration” and conflict over food and water.

Researchers from Princeton University and the University of California-Berkeley report in the journal Science that even slight spike in temperature has greatly increased the risk of personal violence.

They also found that while climate is not the sole or primary cause of violence, it undeniably worsens pre-existing social and interpersonal tension in all societies, regardless of wealth or stability.

The increase of heat or rainfall can also increase the risk of a riot, civil war, or ethnic conflict by an average of 14 per cent. There is a 4 per cent chance of a similarly sized upward creep in heat or rain sparking person-on-person violence such as rape, murder, and assault. The magnitude of violent, sexual and, property crime is higher on hot days compared to cold or random temperature days.

Researchers analysed 60 studies from several disciplines — including archaeology, criminology, economics, and psychology — that have explored the connection between weather and violence in various parts of the world from about 10,000 BCE to the present day.

Importantly, the degree to which heat impacts violence varies across settings and is contingent on factors such as gun control, gender inequalities, substance abuse, and socioeconomic vulnerability. One study in the USA, for example, showed that associations between heat and violence were considerably stronger in areas with the highest levels of social disadvantage.

Globally, women are more likely to be vulnerable to violence because of the pre-existing inequality towards them.

Women’s historic disadvantages – their limited access to resources, restricted rights, and a muted voice in shaping decisions – make them highly vulnerable to the violence caused by rising temperatures increasing aggression, and violent behaviour.

Conclusions

Women, girls, LBTQI (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and intersex), and gender non-conforming people are always among the hardest hit by the climate crisis. These groups often face increased sexual violence, unsafe labour, and an inability to reach medical centres. Climate disasters can impose terrible hardships.

While we cannot prevent these events from occurring, we can ensure that, for women and girls, climate-related disasters do not continue to rage in the form of violence.

According to Francian Nkosi, investing in women and girls creates ripple effects felt throughout entire communities and countries. Research shows that countries with high representation of women in parliament are more likely to uphold international environment agreements. Climate change, livelihoods, and violence against women and girls are extremely important intersections.

Without women’s full participation and freedom from violence, oppression, and discrimination, our efforts to address the climate crises will be an absolute failure. 1 March 2021

More about South Africa on People & Nature

Communities remember anti-mining activist Mama Ntshangase, and organise (January 2021), by Hali Healy

Climate change intensifies gender-based violence (September 2020), by Orthalia Kunene

⏭ Keep up with People And Nature.  Follow People & Nature on twitter … instagram … telegram … or whatsapp. Or email peoplenature[at]yahoo.com, and you will be sent updates. 

Global Heating, Droughts And Storms Fuel Violence Against Women

People And Nature ✒ In  South Africa, the state remains willing to sacrifice rural communities for its coal-fired development agenda, one that persists despite visible social and environmental devastation and the growing threat of climate disaster. Hali Healy writes in this guest post about the communities’ response.

Vigils were held across South Africa last month for murdered anti-coal activist Mama Fikile Ntshangase, who was brutally gunned down in front of her teenage grandson on 22 October 2020. She had dared to oppose plans by coal mining company Petmin to expand operations in the Somkhele region of KwaZulu-Natal province.

The vigil outside the Minerals Council building in Johannesburg

Vigils serve multiple important social functions. Usually held at night, they are occasions for mourning that allow the bereaved to remember the significance of their loss. Vigils also can serve as protests, drawing public attention to travesties of justice. Or they can be understood as a collective response to tragedy, one that hopefully eases the visceral pain of grief, replacing it with a sense of peace, and in the process, offering some sort of societal lesson.

Despite being held in broad daylight, the vigil for Ntshangase in Johannesburg was all of these things.

Gathered under the searing mid-day sun, a small group of some 15-20 activists, most of them women, convened in front of the offices of the Minerals Council, a powerful industry association, in central Johannesburg.

Coordinated with the assistance of the Extinction Rebellion network, they came from organisations including the Vaal Environmental Justice Alliance, the Thembelihle Crisis Community, the Pink Panthers, and from mining-affected communities around Gauteng.

They came to mourn, and to remember Mama Ntshangase as the environmental warrior that she was, engaged in a front-line struggle for human-rights in an era of climate and ecological breakdown.

They also came to protest. They protested the violation of their constitutional right to clean air. They protested the injustice of the state’s failure to recognise and safeguard their crucial work as environmental defenders.

Mama Ntshangase was not the first to die for her community, and she is unlikely to be the last. As one protestor declared, “All of us here today are literally in the firing line.”

The police, the demonstrators asserted, were part of the problem. They have systematically failed to protect activists, and have failed to investigate and prosecute the perpetrators of violence. It is widely alleged for instance, that the investigation of the murder of Xolobeni anti-mining activist “Bazooka” Radebe was interfered with by senior officials of the South African Police Service.

Keeping a watchful eye, uniformed police officers did their level best to intimidate, filming the vigil-keepers at close range, and circulating amongst them, demanding to know who had coordinated the event.

The activists also remonstrated against the complacency of the mining industry. The raison d’etre of the Minerals Council is, by its own description, to lobby for a policy, legislative and operating environment conducive to doubling investment in the sector.

The socio-economic and environmental well-being of mining affected communities, as the protesters were keenly aware, has always been low on the industry agenda.

As one demonstrator from the heavily contaminated Vaal region, about 60 kilometres south of Johannesburg decried: “In our communities, we have seen no rehabilitation, no participation’”. The Minerals Council, he avowed to the applause of fellow activists, was “one of the biggest enemies of South African mining communities”.

After a moment of silence for Mama Ntshangase, the protestors made their way to the main entrance of the Council to present a memorandum of their demands.

As they attempted to enter the building they were doused of pepper spray. The doors were then slammed shut on the coughing, spluttering activists, who broke subsequently broke into chants of “People before profit”.

Regulation has failed

So, what is the approaching danger that Ntshangase’s vigil keepers mean to alert the rest of us to? And what do we as a society need to learn from this tragedy?

The danger lies in the fact that the state remains willing to sacrifice – figuratively and literally – rural communities for its coal-fired development agenda, one that persists in spite of visible social and environmental devastation, and in spite of the daily growing threat of climate disaster.

This threat, acknowledged in South Africa’s Second National Climate Change Report has become a reality across South Africa, as increasing incidences of severe drought and storms have shown.

Nor is the peril we face limited to climate change. As one activist, a young mother, her arms wrapped around her sleeping baby proclaimed outside the doors of the Council: “We are living the consequences of this crisis. Even the pandemic that is wrecking our lives is happening because of the systemic and widespread abuse of the natural world.”

Fikile Ntshangase

What we, and those who govern us, need to learn from this day of vigils, and learn urgently, is that calls for the reform of mining governance can no longer be ignored.

Insofar as mining policies and regulations were designed to ensure the sustainability and equitability of South Africa’s mining industry, they have failed dismally.

For example, in 2019, major news outlets reported that the Department of Water Affairs and Sanitation had found 115 mines operating without water licenses in blatant violation of the National Water Act, consuming water and disposing of effluent free of any government monitoring. This is a significant increase from 2014, when a mere 39 mines were discovered to be non-compliant.

Another report produced in the same year by the Centre for Applied Legal Studies at Wits University noted a resounding failure on the part of mining companies to fulfil promises to build houses, or to provide training, childcare or bursaries to mining affected communities. It also found that most residents lacked any awareness of the social and labour plans that are legally required of mining firms before they can be granted licenses by the Department of Mineral Resources (DMR).

This is particularly alarming, given that the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act of 2002 stipulates that mining companies must develop social and labour plans in consultation with affected communities.

Part of the problem lies in legislative weakness. For example, while the 2002 Act stipulates that mining companies must contribute to socio-economic development, it does not specify how, leaving this determination in the hands of an industry that is primarily concerned with its bottom line. Nor do any widely agreed minimum requirements or clear guidelines exist for community engagement.

Accordingly, these processes have been deemed “exclusionary and ineffectual” by legal experts.

Ambiguous policy

In addition, the policy context of mining governance is rife with ambiguity. A key problem in this regard is the way that legal roles and responsibilities overlap across national, provincial and local spheres of government, and sometimes come into conflict.

A striking example can be found in the initial application that was submitted in 2007 to mine the (still) contested titanium sands of Xolobeni.

The Department of Water and Environmental Affairs opposed the application, because of the environmental degradation it would cause, and crucially, due to the failure of the mining companies (Australia-based Mineral Commodities, and its subsidiary Transworld Energy and Resources) to address the anticipated damage.

The DMR, which has the authority to grant mining rights, is also charged with ensuring that principles of environmental protection and management, as stipulated in the 2002 Act and the National Environmental Management Act are adhered to. Based on this authority, the DMR overruled the Department of Water and Environmental Affairs and granted the mining licence – even though the former had (and still has) no official veto power over the latter.

Fitting underground fire traps in a South African mine.
Photo: wikimedia / creative commons

The absurdity of this situation, in which the department responsible for enabling grand-scale environmental degradation is also the department in charge of managing those impacts, could not be more obvious. It also points to a larger problem of political accountability.

The DMR bears ultimate responsibility for monitoring and enforcement of regulations around the social, economic and environmental impacts of mining. In theory (and in law) where mining companies are found to be non-compliant, the DMR is required to use its powers of enforcement, either by taking remedial actions, serving notices, or in the most serious cases, suspending or revoking mining rights.

In practice, however, evidence indicates that the DMR is spectacularly failing, or perhaps, deliberately neglecting, to fulfil its obligations to ensure compliance. The scale of this neglect is astounding, as a TV documentary, “Cutting Edge: Umhlaba Wethu,”, aired 19 January 2021 demonstrates.

Communities fight to be heard

Beyond the water license issue, a review in 2017 by the Centre for Applied Legal Rights found that the majority of social and labour plans were bereft of evidence of community participation at any stage of mining projects, from initial design, to operations, to termination. Nor was there evidence of any meaningful engagement with the particular social and economic dynamics of mining affected areas.

It could be argued that these failures on the part of the DMR signify a dearth of necessary organisational capacity. However, as Ben Fine, a well-known critic of the nation’s minerals-energy complex has long argued, the development of institutional capacity in South Africa has largely been a political issue, driven by civil society action and popular protest, rather than the deliberate will of leaders.

As those gathered in solidarity at concurrent vigils in Cape Town, and Nelson Mandela Bay on 10 December would doubtless agree, state priorities remain focused on undermining, rather than promoting genuine engagement with progressive, transformative grassroots development movements.

In this context, calls for the DMR to drastically improve the efficacy with which it carries out its governance duties are indeed welcome. However, if policy and legislation governing the behavior of powerful mining stakeholders remain ambiguous, the situation of mining affected communities in unlikely to improve.

Innovative proposals for improving engagement between the state, mining companies and affected communities abound. They have in fact been circulating in the public domain for years. Multiple scholars and NGOs, including the South African Human Rights Commission for example, have long argued for the development of standards for community engagement around the UN principle of “free, prior and informed consent”, and for these standards to be set in legislation.

To address the problem of overlapping roles across departments and levels of government, the establishment of an intra-governmental framework has also been suggested, to facilitate more effective cooperation amongst all government departments involved with mining governance issues.

So far, however, these proposals have fallen on deaf ears.

Instead, the Minerals Council has sought to extend its influence, announcing on 21 December 2020 a new “strategic partnership” with the Mining Indaba, the world’s largest mining conference. This annual event, attended by political and industry heavyweights from across the continent, is “solely dedicated to the successful capitalisation and development of mining interests in Africa.” By the looks of the draft programme for the upcoming Indaba in February 2021, discussions related to the social and environmental impacts of mining on communities have been kept firmly off the agenda.

As long as those organs of state responsible for governing the mining industry continue to ignore proposals for improving the governance of mining, and allow industry interests to set policy agendas, there will surely be more killings, and more vigils such as those for Mama Fikile Ntshangase.

An onus therefore falls on key allies of these rural, marginalised activists, in particular on urban-based, (relatively) well-resourced academics like myself. We can certainly join the protests, but our relative power lies in our ability to support and amplify the struggles of rural communities seeking environmental justice and economic self-determination, from our keyboards, via our peer reviewed publications, blogs and op-eds, and until the scourge that is Covid recedes, from our virtual classrooms where we influence and inspire thousands of under- and post-graduate students daily.

In addition, there is a need for legal assistance, which requires donations from generous benefactors to support pro-bono work. Journalists also have a role to play, to ensure cases of injustice and the complicity of corporate and state actors become prominent in the court of public opinion, and thus inspire collective, transformative action.

If we can find ways to cooperate effectively in support of our grassroots foot-soldiers, grief could begin to give way to hope, and the prospect of a peaceful, sustainable future for South Africa may become a reality. □ 26 January 2021.

➽ Hali Healy is Senior Lecturer in the Department of Anthropology and Development Studies at the University of Johannesburg

More on People & Nature:

■ South Africa: “climate change intensifies gender-based violence”. By Orthalia Kunene

■ 2019, a year of record climate disasters in Africa. By Nnimmo Bassey

⏭ Keep up with People And Nature.  Follow People & Nature on twitter … instagram … telegram … or whatsapp. Or email peoplenature[at]yahoo.com, and you will be sent updates. 

South Africa ➖ Communities Remember Anti-Mining Activist Mama Ntshangase, And Organise