OUR country has seen a number of ugly racist incidents over the past few weeks, to a point where one could be forgiven for thinking that somewhere someone had declared a national racism month.
In Middleburg, Mpumalanga, Victor Mlotshwa was assaulted by two farmers and forced into a coffin – with a chilling threat to bury him alive.
The two sadists, Theo Martins and Willem Oosthuizen, even took pleasure in recording their vile act on video – perhaps for future viewing.
A clearly traumatised Mlotshwa can be seen pleading with his tormentors to spare his life, while more threats were piled on him.
It is clear that his humiliation was driven by racial hatred. South Africans were justified in their outrage at this incident – such behaviour has no place in our society.
To excuse this racist behaviour as another “common assault” case is a deliberate refusal to see naked racism for what it is.
Closer to home, self-confessed racist Roy Page boldly admitted to calling Thobela Macozoma a “k****r” after the latter had allegedly referred to him as umlungu.
While a debate is raging between black and white South Africans about the origins of the latter word and whether the reference to a white man as umlungu is vulgar, it is indisputable that referring to a black person as a k****r is racist and conjures up images of violence against black bodies.
That Page could equate being called umlungu to the word “k****r” beggars belief.
Coincidentally, these incidents took place around the same time that the government announced the extension of the due date for the Prevention and Combating of Hate Crimes and Hate Speech Bill to January 31 2017.
Under the proposed law the likes of Page would be criminally prosecuted for their racial hatred. The bill seeks to criminalise hate speech – as defined under the proposed law.
The extension allows for interest groups and members of the public to make further inputs on the bill.
For a country like ours, which has a history of legalised and institutionalised racism, such a law is not only desirable but also necessary.
Racists, homophobes and other bigots must not get away with their hatred and prejudice.
But what is worrying about the bill is that it is too broad and far-reaching in its definitions and if left unchallenged – instead of combating hate speech and hate crimes – it could be used to silence members of the public, whose right to freedom of speech and expression is enshrined in the constitution.
Under the bill it would be criminal to “bring into ridicule” someone based on their “occupation or trade… or marital status”.
Such an offence can be committed by way of a “gesture, display, expression, written, illustrated, visual or other descriptive matter… or an electronic communication”.
In other words, this newspaper’s brilliant cartoonist Miles could be guilty of a crime for his caricature of president Jacob Zuma (in yesterday’s edition) as the “prophet of doom” as this could be interpreted as ridiculing Zuma based on his occupation.
Ironically, even those who exposed the vicious act of Mlotshwa’s assault by sharing the video (electronic communication) of his humiliation – leading to the arrest of the perpetrators – could equally find themselves on the wrong side of the law and face punishment of a fine or a jail sentence of three years and anything up to 10 years for a repeat offender.
More worrying though is that this well-intentioned bill could be used to prosecute those who criticise public figures. Knowing how politicised our law enforcement and criminal justice institutions have been in recent times this scenario is not far-fetched.
We have already seen the Hawks dusting off apartheid-era laws in their pursuit of the political elite’s opponents.
We all know of countries where it is considered a crime to disrespect a president.
Newspapers and journalists who have been a necessary thorn in the side of government could find themselves being persecuted under this law.
Columnists would also not be spared.
Fortunately, the SA National Editors Forum (Sanef) has already indicated that the body will be formulating a submission to the relevant department highlighting their areas of concern.
Chief among them being the fact that the bill – unlike the Films and Publications Act – makes no exceptions for the media to publish material they consider to be in the public interest.
Members of the public and other interest groups have an opportunity to debate these issues and make submissions.
The bill needs to be refined to ensure that it can pass constitutional muster.
As it stands it clearly infringes on a number of rights and is open to abuse.
The last thing we need is for a well-meaning piece of legislation to be hijacked for political reasons.
No place for vile racism in our nation
In Middleburg, Mpumalanga, Victor Mlotshwa was assaulted by two farmers and forced into a coffin – with a chilling threat to bury him alive.
The two sadists, Theo Martins and Willem Oosthuizen, even took pleasure in recording their vile act on video – perhaps for future viewing.
A clearly traumatised Mlotshwa can be seen pleading with his tormentors to spare his life, while more threats were piled on him.
It is clear that his humiliation was driven by racial hatred. South Africans were justified in their outrage at this incident – such behaviour has no place in our society.
To excuse this racist behaviour as another “common assault” case is a deliberate refusal to see naked racism for what it is.
Closer to home, self-confessed racist Roy Page boldly admitted to calling Thobela Macozoma a “k****r” after the latter had allegedly referred to him as umlungu.
While a debate is raging between black and white South Africans about the origins of the latter word and whether the reference to a white man as umlungu is vulgar, it is indisputable that referring to a black person as a k****r is racist and conjures up images of violence against black bodies.
That Page could equate being called umlungu to the word “k****r” beggars belief.
Coincidentally, these incidents took place around the same time that the government announced the extension of the due date for the Prevention and Combating of Hate Crimes and Hate Speech Bill to January 31 2017.
Under the proposed law the likes of Page would be criminally prosecuted for their racial hatred. The bill seeks to criminalise hate speech – as defined under the proposed law.
The extension allows for interest groups and members of the public to make further inputs on the bill.
For a country like ours, which has a history of legalised and institutionalised racism, such a law is not only desirable but also necessary.
Racists, homophobes and other bigots must not get away with their hatred and prejudice.
But what is worrying about the bill is that it is too broad and far-reaching in its definitions and if left unchallenged – instead of combating hate speech and hate crimes – it could be used to silence members of the public, whose right to freedom of speech and expression is enshrined in the constitution.
Under the bill it would be criminal to “bring into ridicule” someone based on their “occupation or trade… or marital status”.
Such an offence can be committed by way of a “gesture, display, expression, written, illustrated, visual or other descriptive matter… or an electronic communication”.
In other words, this newspaper’s brilliant cartoonist Miles could be guilty of a crime for his caricature of president Jacob Zuma (in yesterday’s edition) as the “prophet of doom” as this could be interpreted as ridiculing Zuma based on his occupation.
Ironically, even those who exposed the vicious act of Mlotshwa’s assault by sharing the video (electronic communication) of his humiliation – leading to the arrest of the perpetrators – could equally find themselves on the wrong side of the law and face punishment of a fine or a jail sentence of three years and anything up to 10 years for a repeat offender.
More worrying though is that this well-intentioned bill could be used to prosecute those who criticise public figures. Knowing how politicised our law enforcement and criminal justice institutions have been in recent times this scenario is not far-fetched.
We have already seen the Hawks dusting off apartheid-era laws in their pursuit of the political elite’s opponents.
We all know of countries where it is considered a crime to disrespect a president.
Newspapers and journalists who have been a necessary thorn in the side of government could find themselves being persecuted under this law.
Columnists would also not be spared.
Fortunately, the SA National Editors Forum (Sanef) has already indicated that the body will be formulating a submission to the relevant department highlighting their areas of concern.
Chief among them being the fact that the bill – unlike the Films and Publications Act – makes no exceptions for the media to publish material they consider to be in the public interest.
Members of the public and other interest groups have an opportunity to debate these issues and make submissions.
The bill needs to be refined to ensure that it can pass constitutional muster.
As it stands it clearly infringes on a number of rights and is open to abuse.
The last thing we need is for a well-meaning piece of legislation to be hijacked for political reasons.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Register (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.
Trending Now
Latest Videos