Our people must
freely express their will
The 2004 General Elections are less than a fortnight away. Once more, every
effort will have to be made to ensure that all our people have the possibility
freely to express their will as they choose our provincial and national legislatures
and governments. Above all, this means that all our people everywhere should
be guaranteed freedom from all violence and intimidation aimed at forcing
them to vote for or against any of the parties contesting the elections.
The Electoral Law under which the elections will be held is very clear and
specific on this matter. It makes it a criminal offence to resort to these
means and methods to influence the outcome of the elections. In addition,
all the contending parties have voluntarily signed a Code of Conduct binding
them to conduct themselves in a way that both respects the law and helps
further to entrench democracy in our country.
We also hold these elections on the eve of the celebration of our First
Decade of Liberation. Both symbolically and otherwise, we have a shared duty
to bid farewell to this First Decade and welcome the Second, in a manner
that confirms that democracy in our country is alive and well.
This Second Decade of Liberation will also confront our country with the
serious challenge to surpass the Millennium Development Goals set by the
United Nations with regard to the central question of the eradication of
poverty and the elimination of all its manifestations.
Our movement has firmly committed itself to the achievement of these objectives.
In addition, we have pronounced ourselves unequivocally in favour of building
a people's contract to take our country forward towards the realisation of
these goals. We are determined to build a powerful united people's movement
to create jobs and fight poverty.
More than at any other time, this necessitates that government in all spheres,
the local, provincial and national, must enjoy the highest level of legitimacy
among the people. These masses must accept that government truly derives
its authority from the people, having been freely elected by them, and not
imposed on them through resort to violence and intimidation. Only such a
government can lead the country and secure the partnership of the people
in the people's contract we have spoken of.
Necessarily and inevitably, our country will also have to sustain the effort
to find its rightful place within the international community of nations,
effectively responding to the dynamic process of globalisation. Again this
demands that especially the government should enjoy unquestioned legitimacy
in the eyes of the peoples of the world, having been freely chosen by the
people in an open and transparent democratic process.
There are some in our country and other parts of the world who still refuse
to accept that as Africans we can build a successful, stable and peaceful
non-racial, non-sexist and prosperous democracy. These are continuously hard
at work to project as negative an image of our country as they can. The victory
they seek is the entrenchment of the notion globally that ours is nothing
more than yet another example of their negative stereotype of an African
country.
This emphasises the challenge we face to ensure that
we do nothing that would provide examples that these "Afro-pessimists" would enthusiastically
grab to substantiate their racist prejudices against everything African.
We also know that these negative elements would work to use this "proof" to
demoralise our people, the rest of our continent and peoples throughout the
world who are determined to work with us to achieve the goal of a better
life for all throughout Africa and the rest of the developing world.
Once again, this underlines the importance we must attach to the holding
of free and fair elections, to deny those who want us to fail the possibility
to advance their agenda at the expense of the most fundamental interests
of our people and others in Africa and the rest of the world who share a
material interest in our success as we work together to translate the vision
contained in our Constitution into reality.
It is for all these important reasons that we have continued to insist that
everything must be done to ensure that the 2004 General Elections should
be truly free and fair. To attain this goal, we have, among other things,
insisted that our movement, the ANC, will take firm action against any of
our members who does anything that undermines the achievement of this objective.
Our security forces have also been fully mobilised to ensure that they are
able to act speedily and effectively against anybody who tries to compromise
the effort to ensure that all our people are able to exercise their democratic
right to elect a government of their choice, without let or hindrance. In
this regard, the Police Service has made the categorical statement that it
will not negotiate with anybody who violates the letter and spirit of the
law, but will apprehend any offender to ensure full respect for the law.
Despite everything we have said, there are clear indications that a small
minority in our country is still determined to resort to force and intimidation
to undermine the democratic process and oblige the people to vote for other
than the parties of their choice, driven by fear of violence and death.
Perhaps not surprisingly, the highest incidence of violence and intimidation
we have experienced so far is in the province of KwaZulu-Natal. The media
continues to insist that it is here that we will see the most intense and
tense contest for the support of the people. The suggestion is made that
this intense contest is and will be essentially between the ANC and the IFP.
The reality is that it is in this province, KwaZulu-Natal, that our movement
has experienced the greatest incidence of violence and intimidation against
its members and supporters. This has included the assassination of our members
and instances of determined attempts to disrupt our public meetings and campaigns.
In terms of the government Presidential Imbizo process, we have visited
seven of our provinces. In all instances, with the exception of KwaZulu-Natal,
these izimbizo have proceeded without any incident suggesting the possibility
of, or likely to lead to violence.
But when we visited Tugela Ferry at Msinga, men suddenly
appeared at the venue of our Imbizo carrying "traditional weapons".
These had absolutely no place in a peaceful process of interaction between
the people and the
President of the Republic. Understanding this, none of the people who came
to the Imbizo carried weapons of any kind. The conclusion was inevitable
and correct that the armed minority group that appeared at Tugela Ferry came
to terrorise the people to limit their interaction with the President of
the Republic.
Since we joined the election campaign, directly, we have experienced two
incidents, which clearly did not contribute and could not have contributed
to the creation of a climate conducive to the holding of free and fair elections.
In these two incidents, one in the rural areas near Pietermaritzburg, IFP
members gathered at a point where, after prior arrangement, we were going
to interact with the local community. In this instance, fortunately the SAPS
intervened and moved the IFP group some distance away from where we were
to have our interaction. This was to ensure that there would be no conflict
between the supporters of the ANC and the IFP.
The second incident occurred at Mangosuthu Technikon in Durban. In this
instance, members of the IFP once more mounted a demonstration at the exact
spot where again by prior arrangement, we were to address the students studying
at this institution of higher learning.
The IFP members tried to block the road leading to the area where we would
address a rally. Again the SAPS intervened and moved these members off this
road to allow unobstructed access to the rally. Once more, this helped to
ensure that conflict was avoided, as might have erupted if our convoy had
had to force its way through the group of IFP members who had deliberately
positioned themselves across an access road.
It was at this point that I said publicly that I would speak to the Minister
of Safety and Security to ensure that the police were properly instructed
to act firmly and immediately against anybody, regardless of political affiliation,
who engaged in activities likely to violate the law with regard to the process
of campaigning for votes.
Again the intervention of the SAPS and the tolerance of the ANC supporters
ensured that there was no violent conflict, which could easily have happened.
But more seriously some violence occurred perhaps a fortnight later, after
the IFP had held a rally at Folweni in KZN. After this rally had concluded,
an ANC supporter was killed allegedly by IFP members who travelled from the
rally to a residential area nearby, to act against people who had not attended
the rally.
On the same day, a man and his wife, again supporters of the ANC, were killed
in cold blood at their home at Ixopo in the KZN Midlands. It had previously
been reported that this was one of the areas where there was high tension
between members of the ANC and the IFP.
Acting on a similar report concerning the area of Shobashobane again in
KZN, leaders of the ANC and the IFP jointly visited this area to urge everybody
to respect the law and avoid all activities that might result in violence
and intimidation. This was necessitated in particular by the fact that on
Christmas Day in 1995, members of the IFP had carried out a terrible massacre
in this area, killing many supporters of the ANC.
Preceding this visit to Shobashobane, the Minister of Safety and Security,
Charles Nqakula, had led an ANC campaign group to Ulundi to interact with
the residents in this part of our country, which has variously been described
as a stronghold of the IFP.
Once again, as in the KZN Midlands, at Mangosuthu Technikon, and earlier
at Tongaat, IFP members mounted a demonstration presumably to counter the
presence of the ANC campaigners. Again the SAPS intervened, having deployed
in considerable numbers, to ensure that no conflict ensued between the supporters
of the ANC and the IFP.
We can, of course, site other instances of political violence in KZN, some
of them resulting in the death of members and supporters of the ANC. Fortunately,
both the SAPS and the IEC have announced that they are convinced that political
violence in KZN will not reach too high a level, compromising the possibility
to hold free and fair elections in this province, and indeed in Gauteng,
where other instances of ill advised actions by supporters of the IFP have
taken place.
The cause for concern about KZN in particular derives
both from these various incidents and then history of political violence
in this area. In its Report,
the TRC said that it had identified "the IFP as the primary non-state
perpetrator of gross human rights abuse in South Africa from the latter 1980s
through to 1994", when thousands of people were killed.
It went on to say about the IFP that "At a time
when it portrayed itself nationally and abroad as a liberation movement,
the IFP, through the intervention
of its senior members, was receiving direct financial and logistical assistance
from the highest echelons of the apartheid state's security apparatus. Evidence
before the Commission indicates that Inkatha's opposition to the South African
government's policies had changed to covert collaboration by the second half
of the 1980s, and the two had united against a common enemy, the UDF/ANC
and their affiliates."
It is now the openly stated position of the IFP that it considers the ANC
as its principal opponent in the contest for the votes of the people of KZN,
the one province in our country where it hopes to win power. To make doubly
certain that it achieves this result, it has entered into an alliance with
the DA in the so-called Coalition for Change, the right wing formation we
discussed in the last edition of ANC TODAY.
The violent incidents we have spoken of arouse the
fear that the what the TRC reported on concerning the earlier violence
against "the UDF/ANC
and their affiliates" could occur again, to intimidate the people into
ensuring an IFP/DA victory in the one province they believe they could govern
together as the Coalition for Change.
Interestingly, in the Mail and Guardian interview
we cited in our last Letter, the President of the IFP said: "We and
the DA share values and principles. Several of our conferences in the past
were addressed by Helen Suzman; (Frederick)
van Zyl Slabbert addressed joint meetings. It's not as if the coalition (for
change) is just opportunistic."
We hope that these ideological allies of long standing, the IFP and the
DA, which have nor combined in a formal united front, will now do everything
they can to discourage all their shared supporters from trying to secure
an electoral victory for their Coalition through the use of violence and
intimidation.
At the same time, the ANC will also have to work hard and consistently to
ensure that its own members and supporters do not engage in any activity
likely to undermine a free and fair outcome of the elections especially in
KZN. This includes those instances where provocative actions might have been
deliberately undertaken to incite violent conflict.
All participants in the elections must not help to create the situation
where after the elections, the losers will be given the possibility to claim
that they lost because the elections were not free and fair, even though
such violence as might have occurred would have been initiated by the losers.
Our country will continue to rely on the law-enforcement authorities strictly,
firmly and expeditiously to ensure respect for the law by everybody, regardless
of political affiliation. The masses of our people must be guaranteed the
right freely to express their will, without let or hindrance by anybody.
|
