The African National Congress, in its Constitutional Proposals for a democratic South Africa published for discussion and comment earlier this year, envisages a united, democratic, non-racial and non-sexist South Africa, with a justiciable Bill of Rights to protect rights and freedoms of all citizens. The ANC favours elections being held on the basis of proportional representation, so that the parliament which emerges is as inclusive as possible.
It is cause for concern that the Nationalist Party proposals are available only through the press, as this is a matter of vital importance to all South Africans. This is a debate that should be open so as to enable the people of this country not only to know what is happening, but also to participate in the process.
It is regrettable to have to say that the NP proposals are a recipe for disaster, designed to deny a future South African government the power to truly liberate the country from the misery that apartheid has wrought. The proposals attempt to create a weak parliament and executive, hamstrung by arrangements requiring broad consensus amongst small interest groups. They are no less than an attempt to disguise an effective minority veto, designed to prevent effective government by a majority party.
While respect for the law and appropriate checks and balances are essential for democratic government, the NP proposals do not indicate what their Bill of Rights would contain. Yet, to ensure checks and balances, they propose mechanisms that will be unique to South Africa, ensuring that whites retain the accumulated privileges of apartheid under the guise of constitutional principle.
The proposals will paralyse democratic government by, amongst other things, locating the levers of power within a rotating multi-party presidency and a multi-party cabinet, operating on the basis of consensus. It is universally accepted that in a democracy parties have the right to exist, to organise and to compete for support, as well as to take part in elections. It is a further principle of democracy that the party which wins the majority of seats in parliament has the right to form the government, and to govern the country in terms of the rules and procedures of the constitution. A party which loses the elections assumes the traditional role of opposition.
Coalition governments are formed voluntarily. Yet the South African goverment wants to make coalition government a constitutional principle, together with measures to paralyse any attempts of the party with the most votes to use its strength for social reconstruction.
We find it unacceptable to have a second house, constituted in a totally undemocratic manner, with the power to block legislation. The proposal means that the majority in the lower house will be able to draft and pass legislation, but minorities in the upper house will be able to veto it, making a mockery of the democratic process.
The proposal makes provision for all regions, whatever their size, to have an equal number of representatives in this house. This is obviously loaded against areas where Africans are the overwhelming majority. Furthermore, they propose that every party that obtains more than 10% of the vote would have an equal number of representatives in each region's representation in the second house. Thus if, for instance, the ANC received 70% of the votes in the PWV, all parties that obtained 10% of the vote would have equal representation. Thus minor parties have as much power as the majority party in the upper house, enabling them to veto legislation.
The other major feature of the NP plan, the division of South Africa into nine autonomous regions, is a continuation of the process of fragmentation that has been the hallmark of Nat policy since 1948. According to this plan, each autonomous region will have its own government, and this arrangement is entrenched in the constitution. This is not participatory democracy, but a ploy to strip the central parliament of essential powers. Disparities between rich and poor regions will be entrenched, and the devise will prevent national reconstruction.
With regard to local goverment, the provisions to redraw municipal boundaries to ensure non-racial local government with one administration and one tax base, are a step forward. But the rest of the proposals negate this progress by entrenching existing residential patterns and favouring property owners. The proposal for the establishment of "neighbourhood committees" to enable existing communities to prescribe and create regulations relating to norms and standards as well as security matters mean only one thing - the maintenance of group area arrangements under another name.
While we affirm the need to protect the fundamental rights of all South African citizens, regardless of colour, creed or gender, even from government, it is our view that a constitutional artifice that compels consensus in the executive arm of government and that thwarts democracy is unworkable.
It is this very approach that has caused the tragic conflict in a country like Lebanon.
The Nat proposals are a cynical attempt to deny the people of South Africa their basic freedoms, universally acknowledged as rights. If the NP is serious about seeking peace through negotiations, we urge them to withdraw these proposals and join us in seriously addressing the question of democracy.
The ANC warns that taken in its totality, the NP proposals will make South African wholly ungovernable.
Issued by the Department of Information and Publicity PO Box 61884 Marshalltown 2307 4 September, 1991