Sunday Times online ( 2/2/2008 ) — 02/05/2008
POLITICAL VIGILANTISM
Mohau Pheko
Freedom of speech and association protected by SA Bill of Rights

Edmund Burke says 'all that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men and women to do nothing and say nothing'. One of the great indicators of democracy in a society is the vision of its radicals and the accessibility of its eccentrics. Equally critical is the tolerance and understanding that our society should show to its dissenters. Dissent and disagreement with ruling parties is necessary for the consolidation of democracy. Dissent presupposes that there are necessary oppositions to power that need to be freely expressed, even if they are perceived as being that of a minority opinion. They are the essence of human freedom. Dissent is critical to our democracy and the Bill of Rights enshrines this right by granting freedom of expression. Hence ‘everyone has the right to freedom of expression, which includes freedom of the press and other media; freedom to receive or impart information or ideas; freedom of artistic creativity; and academic freedom and freedom of scientific research’. The spirit behind freedom of speech is to 'promote a market place of ideas'. The Bill of Rights goes further to state that 'everyone has the right to freedom of association'. This allows all of us to create intimate associations of our choice.

Young Communist League ‘bullying and intimidating'
The Young Communist League (YCL) and ruling party alliance are fast dissolving under a feeble and weak-minded triumphalism and misguided attempts at controlling the narrative on democracy and the sacred right of freedom of expression and association. Two recent events, reported widely in our media, make me believe that there is a concerted lobby in the ruling party alliance that would prefer a form of restricted democracy. Even more insidious is the emergence of political vigilantism among members of the ruling party alliance, of bullying and intimidating anyone who dissents or holds a different opinion into silence or compliance. A case in point relates to Constitutional Court Deputy Chief Justice Dikgang Moseneke, where the YCL national secretary said in a statement: 'We doubt his integrity. He has already tainted himself.' Tainted by what? Tainted by his choice of political association with Pan Africanist roots, or perhaps by exercising his right to express that a conference involving less than 4,000 delegates does not represent the views of 44 million South Africans, when he said: 'It’s not what the ANC wants or what the delegates want. It’s about what is good for our people.' [See 'Slur on Deputy Chief Justice Dikgang Moseneke' (17/1/2008)].
 
An intimidatory piece of advice from the YCL
This, in my opinion, simply means that the Deputy Chief Justice was cautioning against power being used unfairly, and therefore felt the need to encourage those at his birthday celebration to have the courage, when required, to complain about it. The second case in point again is the recent statement by the YCL about comments made by Generations actress Winnie Ntshaba, who is reported to have said: 'We know what the ruling party does to people who oppose them. They kill them. They tried to kill Buthelezi on a number of occasions.' In responding, the YCL said: 'These are gutter comments embedded in anti-ANC propaganda as represented by the Inkatha Freedom Party and its Bantustan and political mercenary Mangosuthu Buthelezi. Ntshaba should focus on her fledgling acting career and desist from being used as a political pawn.' [Generations is a South African television drama series. – ed]
 
Are restrictions on democracy the new environment in SA?
This line of response is disruptive, and vaguely threatening. It conveys the message, 'I know where you live and work and I’m going to deal with you'. When and where did the YCL and ruling party alliance get a monopoly on all the facts needed to run our country? Does this mean that they alone have the true picture of our society? When did dissent become associated with being unprofessional? When did dissent lose its currency in consolidating democracy? Is restricted democracy the new environment for South Africa , where a vocal minority has the right to dismiss and insult its critics in terms that question their intellect and choices? If this is the mood emanating from the Polokwane conference, we are likely to experience increasing attacks on those who respectfully disagree.
 
When bullying and harassment culminate in…murder
The greater question is how will we defend our hard-earned freedom if a vocal minority continues to attack those who are 'different', demonising disagreement and forcing self-censorship on those who evaluate and speak out? Political vigilantism creates forced unity. In reality, this is not unity at all - and it should have no place in a democracy. Our country needs intelligent, vigorous, passionate and public debate without fear of political intimidation and vigilantism. Are we beginning an unimaginable chapter in our young democracy where bullying, harassment, intimidation, vandalism, assault, and finally murder become an action taken against people perceived as ‘different’? We need to constantly reaffirm the spirit behind the Bill of Rights, not just to emphasise that you are human and have freedom and rights, but to recognise that within that humanity you can be unreservedly different.
 
A word of warning from the McCarthyite witch-hunt in the US
Journalist Edward R Murrow said in 1954 [at the height of the anti-Communist hysteria led by Senator Joe McCarthy in the United States – ed]: 'We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty. We must remember always that accusation is not proof, and that conviction depends upon evidence and the due process of law. We will not walk in fear, one of another. We will not be driven by fear into an age of unreason if we dig deep in our history and our doctrine, and remember that we are not descended from fearful men and women, not from men and women who feared to write, to speak, to associate and to defend causes that were for the moment unpopular.'