INDIGENOUS FIRST NATION ADVOCACY SOUTH AFRICA MEDIA STATEMENT
SECTIONS OF THE ELECTORAL ACT DECLARED UNCONSTITUTIONAL
Our Consciousness is Broken
The genetic fabric and moral make-up of South Africa is Broken.
It took us a while to release this statement because we tried to understand the judgment and its implication. Many asked what benefit the ConCourt judgment will have on the lives of ordinary citizens and especially the First Nation People (Classified as Coloured) who continue to be violated on their ancestral land. As a founding member of the New Nation Movement, IFNASA demonstrated our commitment to rewrite the wrongs of colonialism, apartheid, and the miscarriage of justice since democracy was introduced over twenty-six years ago. We hope that the victory will become clearer in the next few provincial and government elections.
The Indigenous First Nation Advocacy South Africa (IFNASA) and others, in our Constitutional Court challenge and the subsequent victory fundamentally serve a diversity of curative, remedial, and healing measures, which is long outstanding. Those who ushered the general populace into the democratic epoch, decided to be overly reliant on the colonial and apartheid styled policies and socio-economic technology and the consequences are disturbing, if we consider the preservation of spatial planning, racial categorization and the pervasive economic flow which stubbornly continue its direction away from the masses of the country. The new dispensation architects, instead of imagining an African society linked to the constitutional value system, deeply rooted in our human authenticity, unpardonably copied extravagantly and wastefully from those who oppressed us and the evidence are glaringly visible when you walk the wasteland called city streets in the metros of the country and when we peep into the political administration of society, particularly the unresponsiveness of the education system, the social safety-net which boast more than seventeen millions grant recipients on a monthly basis and the financial powerlessness of the citizens generally. These realities made us realized as ordinary citizens that the inborn fabric of our humanity is wrecked and unless we offer agency and the re-imagination of our society, collectively we are condemned.
The stubbornness not to recognize the First People who occupied the territory called South Africa today is symptomatic of confounded or confused humanity, broken consciousness, and we as South Africans must refuse to participate in the continued amnesia suffered by the engineers of our democracy. It is imperative that we acknowledge the First People of the land in the constitution of the country because the principles of first is one of the best ways to reverse-engineer the complex difficulties we experience as a country, while the recognition holds the potential of unleashing the creative possibility of this country. It is said, “reasoning from first principles,” the idea is to break down complicated problems into basic elements and then reassemble them from the ground up. The current situation demands that South Africa go back to the foundation and build from the ground up, because in our unassuming estimation the continued violation of the ‘First’ law, brings with it an unimaginable calamity. The Indigenous First Nation Advocacy South Africa call upon South Africans to help restore those who were on the land ‘First’ so that we all could find peace and our rightful place under the South African sun.
Conceivably, we are elated by the outcome because our constitution has partially proven not just an abstract or intellectual document, as the Constitutional Court Judges affirmed in case number CCT110/19, it is a living organism who derives its lifeforce and essence from the prudency of the Justices. It has not a superlative, but a real existence; and wherever it cannot produce in a visible form, there is none. Our constitution is an entity antecedent to our government, and the government is only the creation of the constitution. The constitution of our country is not the act of our government, but of the expression of the people constituting the government. It is the body of elements, to which you can refer, and quote article by article; and which contains the prescripts and principles on which the government is established, the manner in which it is organized, the powers it has, the mode of elections, the duration of Parliaments, or by what other name such bodies may be called; the powers through which the executive part of the government exist; and in fine, everything that relates to the complete establishment of our civil government, and the principles to which we are bound. Our constitution, therefore, is to the government what the laws made afterward by that government are to a court of judicature.
Notwithstanding, the same constitution is equally the ‘most ambiguous’ piece of law which contradicts its own founding statements in Chapter 1 of the South African constitution when it mentions that the: “…The Republic of South Africa”, defines South Africa as “One, sovereign, democratic state” and lists the country’s founding values as ‘Human dignity, the Achievement of Equality and the Advancement of Human Rights and Freedoms’. Non-racialism and non-sexism.” Yet the same constitution discriminates against the First Nation People who occupied the land called South Africa in Section 25 subsection 7 where prohibits us to claim land we lost before 1913. In this context, the constitution of the country perpetually fails to provide Human Dignity, Equality, and Justice for those who continue to be wrongly Classified Coloureds.
The court of judicature does not make the laws, neither can it alter them; it only acts in conformity to the laws made, and the government is in like manner governed by the constitution. We need to impress upon the legislators in parliament to correct the injustice.
Refreshingly, the Con-Court of South Africa in one sense opened up the political space, when they agreed with us that ‘accountability’ in the current political dispensation is burdened generally with self-interest and self-serving political personas, with very little to no grasp of the hurt and anguish they inflict on South Africans.
We submitted to the court the following and we quote from the judgment: “What is now before us is the application for leave to appeal (the Western Cape High Court decision). It concerns the question of whether, to the extent that it allows individuals to be elected to the National Assembly and Provincial Legislatures only through membership of political parties, the Electoral Act is constitutional. Put differently, does this channeling to membership of political parties infringe certain rights enjoyed under the Bill of Rights by individuals or, more specifically, would-be independent candidates?”
There is both an intrinsic and influential value to the application and judgment, while we are convinced that history will be generous with those who had the courage to arrest the unbearable callousness meted against unsuspecting citizens. Essentially, the court challenge was about the impunity with which generally speaking, the state and its functionaries are maladministering the affairs of the nation and the negligence to hold those who scarph accountable for the misappropriation of public resources. The judgment is therefore treasured to the extent that it restores the conception of active citizenry, elevates the importance of both participatory and direct democracy, manifested in the people’s liberty to be represented by the most deserving public representatives and bureaucrats.
A robust belief of freedom includes the freedom from constant and intrusive government failure to deliver services to its citizens, when we scrutinize the auditor general’s reports yearly, while political actors continue to fail in creating enabling environment where the letter and the spirit of constitutionality are affirmed so that the past injustices could be dealt a decisive blow. From this VantagePoint, the continuous constitutional violation by the Electoral Act post-1999 was objectionable for the simple fact that the Independent Electoral Commission (IEC) was undertaking elections with no license constitutionally speaking, assaulting the protection and privilege offered by the constitution.
This aspect of the protection of our rights in the judgment highlights the pernicious effects of democracy, rather than the inherent greatness of the collective African people. Encroachments on individual privacy to represent their community clearly undermine the thoughtfulness of the constitutional developers as far as political representation is concerned.
We are exploring the concept of Independent Candidates as a way to spice up politics and political accountability, clearly lacking in the current political environment. IFNASA with its alliance partners is fully conscious about the concerns as far as Independent candidates are concerned. IFNASA cannot support anyone who wants to ascend to political office based merely on insulting other political formations. We firmly believe that anyone who aspires political office needs to have ‘Substantive Alternative Political Offering’ as far as our social construct is a concern and particularly a viable economic system. We would like to invite especially those espousing political office, those with unpopular viewpoints, those who are tired of the injustice of being side-lined or overlooked, to consider Independent candidates as a potential alternative. A new platform of accountable and responsive servant leaders. We call you to Action South Africans. Remember, IFNASA remains a cultural advocacy platform, which must remain non-partisan. However, we will continue to influence the political discourse because of the reckless politicians and an uncaring State.
“Restore the First Nation People of South Africa, so that everyone can be Restored”.
Indigenous First Nation Advocacy South Africa
29h July 2020
066 250 4948