Introduction
In the 19th century, most African countries were occupied by western powers seeking to expand their territorial boundaries and jurisdiction. South Africa was considered an attractive destination by colonialists due to its economic and social advancement than other parts of Africa. The country suffered a distinctive form of colonialism characterized by racial segregation called apartheid. The colonial administration developed laws designed to marginalize and oppress the natives, causing the black people to ensure monumental, institutionalized human rights violations. However, in 1994, the country attained freedom leading to the election of the first black president, Nelson Mandela (Brookes, 2022). After that, the government needed to make peace with the colonial rulers. Therefore, a Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) was established to bridge South Africans and foster peaceful coexistence. The TRC considered a form of transitional justice, emerged as a robust solution despite a few limitations.
Summary of Case Study Topic: South Africa Apartheid
Apartheid in South Africa evolved from an initial act of colonization through legislation, segregation, integration, and neo-apartheid. The southern part of Africa was economically and socially progressive during the 19th century compared to other regions of Africa (Gade, 2017). At the beginning of the century, the western powers seeking to expand their empires started to focus on Africa, dividing the continent into colonial protectorate zones. The initial settlers in South Africa were the Dutch East India Company, and later the British, Germans, and French settled there (Feenan, 2018). Collectively, the European colonial powers dealt with the aboriginal Africans as inferior people.
The western invaders started to treat the natives in violent and discriminatory ways marking the beginning of apartheid. The British developed legislative acts, such as the Natives Land Act of 1913, to institutionalize their discriminatory actions. Under the act, black Africans were only allowed to claim 7 percent of the country’s land (Gumede and Biyase, 2017). By the 1930s, the ruling National Party’s continued on a path of legislation to e force the apartheid. In 1950 the Population Registration Act developed a mechanism for classifying South African inhabitants based on race (Govender, 2022). In 1953, the Bantu Education Act further segregated black students from whites. The Group Areas Act of 1950 introduced forced racial segregation based on residence, marriage, and the use of public facilities, such as public transportation, schools, and even hospitals (Hugo, 2018). Black South Africans had access to the poorest healthcare and housing conditions as they were employed in the lowest-paid positions. Whites enjoyed a disproportionate share of resources, including access to the best residential areas, the right to use the best and most well-equipped schools and best-trained educators, and access to the best-paying careers.
The administration kept developing similar policies to seize and maintain control of the economy and social order of South Africa. Additional segregation included places of burial where whites would be laid to rest in cemeteries with decent markings, while dead black people were covered up in graveyards without any signage. The Bantu Authorities Act of 1951 and the Bantu Homelands Citizenship Act of 1970 expanded the apartheid by ejecting black South Africans from those required to vote for parliamentary representation (Kwet, 2020). However, Lephakga (2018) indicates that in the 1970s, rising confrontations with the natives caused the apartheid regime to find a solution to relieve the racial pressures in the country. As a result, a new integration policy was put in place as a way of levelling up some of the institutionalized racial imbalances. In particular, the laws were adjusted to allow black South Africans to pursue education and careers and to vote.
Despite the hope that the apartheid system would collapse, the colonial master later dropped integration efforts. In the 1980s, the National Party felt it was losing control and enforced additional segregation policies to hold power (Moya, 2021a). The colonialists enforced apartheid with brutal violence as well as shame and humiliation. The new approach instituted measures to cause further segregation while overlooking the social and economic disparities. South African Anglican Archbishop Desmond Tutu depicted living under apartheid in a way that “Your dignity is not just rubbed in the dust. It is trodden underfoot and spat on. Our people are being killed as if they were but flies. Is that nothing to you who pass by” (Lixinski, 2017). The country’s problems worsened and are considered the root cause of the economic and social inequalities experienced in the country until today.
Human Rights Violations
Apartheid in South Africa caused numerous human rights violations to the natives. In general, the most common transgressions entailed the unwillingness to uphold the right to fair living conditions, freedom from violence, and inequality under the law. Pertaining living conditions, article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) calls for the provision of a standard of living adequate for the well-being and health of citizens (Moya, 2021b). However, during the apartheid era, the conditions were utterly disregarded, with an open violation of the international human right as stipulated. The rulers infringed the right to adequate healthcare through social and racial segregation in hospitals.
In addition, black people were subjected to underfunded health facilities, denoted by a lack of sufficient resources and medical personnel. Furthermore, the white rulers suppressed the well-being of the natives through poor working conditions. The authorities transported black African men from rural areas to work for whites in the cities (Miering, 2017). They were forced to live in close rural regions that lacked electricity and had insufficient access to clean water, food, and emergency services. The infringements demonstrated that apartheid sought to impose racial discrimination in diverse aspects of life.
The white settlers further violated the right to freedom from violence as provided for by international human rights standards. Article 5 of the UDHR states, “No one shall be subjected to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment” (Moya, 2021a). Nonetheless, the brutal and excessive police force was subjected to black people, particularly in reacting to political protests. An example is the 1960 action where police shot at a gathering of unarmed black protesters in the black township of Sharpeville. The police killed over 67 protestors, and 180 people were injured (Murambadoro, 2020). The Terrorism Act of 1967 gave the police sweeping powers to help the government curtail the freedom from violence, especially targeting specific people who rebelled against the apartheid system (Nooyo, 2021). The administration used the law to capture and imprison prominent leaders of the rebellion movement, including Nelson Mandela. The supposed anti-terrorism law became a tool for terrorizing the non-white locals of South Africa.
Another human rights violation occurred in the form of widespread and systemic breaches of the right to equality before the law. The whole apartheid system was based on the segregation of people of color in granting privileges, fairness, and protection to citizens. Therefore, the white supremacist government automatically eliminated the black community’s liberties in providing opportunities. Pietersen (2021) indicates that the denial of equality before the law resulted from the apartheid’s racial segregation in South Africa between whites and non-whites. The whites managed to execute an ideology of inequality by favoring one group and systematically abusing the other.
Approaches to Justice: South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission
Truth and Reconciliation Commissions (TRCs) had gained momentum to deliver justice before the end of apartheid. From the 1970s, TRCs had become popular in providing transitional justice, which is why South Africa preferred the approach (Olifile, 2020). Once apartheid ended in 1994, a new government was established headed by a black president for the first time, Nelson Mandela. A new constitution was inaugurated, which provided for the design of some reconciliation process instead of conducting trials or prosecutions. As a result, the South Africa TRC was set up in 1995 to deal with cases of human rights violations during the apartheid era. The TRC was mandated to establish a public catalogue of the apartheid period through the experiences and narrations of the perpetrators and victims.
The South African TRC was developed uniquely to make it adaptable to African benchmarks. The TRC was designed to emphasize forgiveness as a way of fostering peace by investigating violations committed between 1960 to 1994 (Swart and van Marle, 2017). It comprised 17 members and was divided into three committees; the human rights violations committee, the repatriations and rehabilitation committee, and the amnesty committee (Reddy, 2017). The TRC conducted investigations into political crimes of mass violence performed on behalf of the state by white and black South Africans. Its mandate was to foster cohesion, unity, and purely satisfactory reconciliation. The TRC required that participants bring out the truth regarding gross human rights infringements. It conducted its procedures through an official investigation unit that applied fairness in inquiries through fair processes that the perpetrators wholly and unreservedly accepted.
Case Outcome and Implications
The TRC was required to publicly publish its report detailing the planners, perpetrators, and victims. Perpetrators were needed to fully admit the infractions they committed and had to connect the crimes to a political rather than personal motivation. The final report showed that 21,000 people opened up about their involvement (Swart and van Marle (2017). The commission established that men and women, both old and young, committed close to 38,000 gross infractions of human rights (Svard, 2020). Most perpetrators who came forward were black, providing a broad outline of the past with absolute transparency. The commission mainly attended to women who had come forward on behalf of dead men with whom they had relations. Most of the families of people who were murdered or went missing desired to have their remains buried.
Furthermore, the South Africa TRC granted immunity to police and soldiers involved in committing brutalities. However, they were required to prove that they were acting within a defined chain of command. Yoon (2017) states that the commission received 7,112 amnesty applications, of which 849 were granted while 5,392 were denied, and the rest were revoked. The TRC granted amnesty somewhat without following strict trial rules and procedures for punishment or retribution. Instead, it followed a different path based on preference for telling and hearing a factual account of events. The approach helped to address the pains and resentment whites and non-whites harbored over the apartheid era.
Strengths and Weaknesses of South Africa TRC
The South Africa TRC opened up the past events and human rights violations committed over three decades of the apartheid era. It uncovered the role played by the administration in enforcing the commitment of crimes out into the open, which made it difficult to refute the truth. , South Africans, in general, felt that the TRC did an excellent job transitioning the country to democracy with participation from all. Baijnath (2017) states that the hearing sessions were extensively broadcast in print and non-print media, including newspapers, television, radio, and online. The sessions were conducted in public places and even in people’s homes. In addition, the TRC hearings focused on the sufferers and their families. The victims were allowed to face their abuser and demand an apology. There was no room for ignoring events thousands of South Africans endured involving abuse and denial of the right to basic dignity. By telling their stories, the victims had a chance to begin a new life. Many considered that testifying before the TRC was a point of transformation.
On the other hand, the TRC should not have been the only way to expose and offer solutions to crimes and numerous human rights violations perpetrated under apartheid. Over the many years of the administration by the National Party, thousands of people may not have been heard and could be suffering in silence. The new administration could have been addressed the injustices through other means to boost widespread healing in a deeply divided society (Benyera et al., 2019). The TRC ignored the daily infractions and more common violence committed during apartheid. The ordinary people did not get to participate in the proceedings since they considered that the average white South Africans had profited simply by being white. The same pattern continues until whites continue to benefit despite the end of apartheid.
The TRC did not get the proper respect and cooperation from superior people, including senior politicians from past administrations, top military levels, and senior security forces leaders. The current generation of South Africans continues to question how satisfactorily the new regime handled matters of apartheid. There seems to be a slow implementation of recommendations, including reparations and suspension sentences for high-ranking government officials. There continues to be challenges in the judiciary, economy, and education system that may have been attended to properly (Werle and Vormbaum, 2022). The victims continue to feel disillusioned, given the strengthened habitat of impunity and the failure to hold perpetrators of crimes responsible for their actions.
Theoretical Ideas: Transitional Justice
The resolve by the South Africans to use the TRC is considered a form of transitional justice. Transitional Justice entails varied approaches that parties caught up in a conflict they desire to solve can use to attain eternal peace. The concept was put together by scholars from the United States American academics in the 1990s who wished for a solution to violence and crime based on honoring the components of human rights (Rodriguez, 2021). This form of justice has three typical main elements establishing the truth, guaranteeing accountability for all transgressions, atrocities, and offenses, and fostering peace and reconciliation. The ultimate objective of transitional justice is to show how the justice system can bring together conflicting parties to end major conflicts. Transitional justice is characterized by a dilemma between achieving peace for all and delivering justice to the victims. It involves ways for parties to forgive each other adequately and reach a moment where they can stay together, minus the fear that past violence or evils may reoccur.
The case of South Africa TRC brings to the fore the African donation to establishing standards and strategies of transitional justice. Even as transitional justice is not rooted in Africa, the African actors have contributed by distilling the process (Sesay, 2022). Its local application in South Africa established the need to go beyond legal instruments and pay attention to conflict resolution’s emotional, social, and cultural components. The TRC plays a leading role in adapting, developing, and dispersing international transitional justice benchmarks. A key innovation entails changing the emphasis from a retributive to a restorative approach to justice.
Conclusion and Recommendations
Colonialization in Africa was practiced differently as the western powers imposed their rule and control over the region. The European powers in South Africa practiced racial segregation based on whites and non-whites. The apartheid regime evolved from the 19th century to the late 20th century in 1994. It became worse in the 1930s under the National Party government. Through apartheid, the colonial rulers committed many crimes and human rights violations through the unwillingness to uphold the right to fair living conditions, freedom from violence, and equality under the law. The South Africa TRC emerged as a strong support for delivering justice through restoration.
Even though the TRC could not wholly reconcile the community, it proved to be a crucial tool for transition. The new administration could have been addressed the injustices through other means to boost widespread healing in a deeply divided society. It could have set up a fund to support people whose families suffered in the hands of colonialists. The finances would have supported orphans and widows in reducing daily suffering of the families. The is need to continue promoting reconciliation through ensuring justice and equity is delivered to every South African in the judiciary, social, political, economy, and education system.
Reference List
Baijnath, M. (2017). ‘#RhodesMustFall: Nibbling at resilient colonialism in South Africa.’ Anthropology Southern Africa, 40(2), pp.154–156.
Benyera, E., Warikandwa, T., Nhemachena, A., Saidi, U., Eppel, S., Murambadoro, R., Matshaka, C., Tom, T. and Chipenda, C. (2019). Indigenous, Traditional, and Non-State Transitional Justice in Southern Africa: Zimbabwe and Namibia. Lanham: Lexington Books.
Brookes, E.H. (2022). Apartheid. Taylor & Francis.
Feenan, D. (2018). Informal Criminal Justice. Routledge.
Gade, C.B.N. (2017). A discourse on African philosophy: A new perspective on Ubuntu and transitional justice in South Africa. Lanham, Maryland: Lexington Books, An imprint of the Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group, Inc.
Gumede, V. and Biyase, M. (2017). ‘Educational reforms and curriculum transformation in post-apartheid South Africa.’ Environmental Economics, 7(2), pp.69–76.
Govender, J. (2022). ‘Limits of Social Policy: Racialized Inequality in Post-Apartheid South Africa.’ Anthropology and Ethnology Open Access Journal, 5(1).
Hugo, J.B. (2018). Advocating Transitional Justice in Africa. Springer.
Kwet, M. (2020). ‘Surveillance in South Africa: From Skin Branding to Digital Colonialism.’ SSRN Electronic Journal 10(3).
Lephakga, T. (2018). ‘APLA and the amnesty committee of the TRC? An ethical analysis of the amnesty committee of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of South Africa.’ Studia Historiae Ecclesiasticae, 44(1).
Lixinski, L. (2017). ‘Cultural Heritage Law and Transitional Justice: Lessons from South Africa.’ International Journal of Transitional Justice, 9(2), pp.278–296.
Meiring, P.G.J. (2017). ‘Bonhoeffer and costly reconciliation in South Africa – through the lens of the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission.’ Verbum et Ecclesia, 38(3), pp.18–34.
Moya, N. (2021a). ‘Banal Nationalism in the post-apartheid South Africa.’ Academia Letters, 13(4).
Moya, N. (2021b). ‘Reconciliation through Restorative Justice in Post-Apartheid South Africa.’ Academia Letters 12(3). Web.
Murambadoro, R. (2020). Transitional Justice in Africa. Springer Nature.
Noyoo, N. (2021). Promoting Healthy Human Relationships in Post-Apartheid South Africa Social Work and Social Development Perspectives. Cham: Springer International Publishing: Imprint: Springer.
Olifile M.P. (2020). ‘Rich but poor South Africa: A philosophical excursion from colonialism to post-colonialism.’ African Renaissance, 17(4), pp.75–92.
Pietersen, D. (2021). ‘Haggai’s concern for South Africa: A positive transformation to socio-economic justice as a catalyst for reconciliation.’ Verbum et Ecclesia, 42(1).
Rodriguez, D. (2021). ‘On decolonization: praxis and thinking-feeling from the South.’ Postcolonial Studies, 5(2), pp.1–3.
Sesay, M. (2022). Decolonization of Postcolonial Africa: A Structural Justice Project More Radical than Transitional Justice. International Journal of Transitional Justice, 3(1).
Svard, P. (2020). ‘Using African Truth and Reconciliation Commission documentation for truth telling and reconciliation.’ Statistical Journal of the IAOS, 5(2), pp.1–5.
Swart, M. and van Marle, K. (2017). The Limits of Transition: The South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission 20 Years on. BRILL.
Reddy, T. (2017). South Africa, settler colonialism and the failures of liberal democracy. Johannesburg: Wits University Press.
Werle, G. and Vormbaum, M. (2022). Transitional Justice. Springer Nature.
Yoon, H.C. (2017). ‘Christian Discourse of Justice and Reconciliation through the Lens of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) of South Africa.’ The Bible & Theology, 83, pp.83–117.