Date: 15/02/2010
Source: The Democratic Alliance
Title: DA: Mazibuko: Speech by the DA National Spokesperson, during the Debate on the State of the Nation Address, Parliament

Mr Speaker,
Honourable President,
Honourable Members,

Recently an important debate has emerged amongst the people of South Africa, not only in the media but also, without doubt, in countless taverns, around braais and dinner-tables, and within a vast number of homes, schools, campuses, churches and other places of congregation and discussion all over our beautiful country.

The Honourable President failed to deal with this burning issue in his speech on the state of our nation, Mr Speaker, possibly because of the way in which some of the traditional customs which are associated with his culture, and my culture, and the culture of all those South Africans who self-identify as AmaZulu, have recently been pushed into the spotlight in this national debate on whether cultural identity and practice should ever be allowed to supersede our humanity, and the human rights to equality and dignity which are enshrined in our Constitution.

In particular, the practices of lobola, polygyny, and the ritual bare-handed slaughter of a bull during the annual Nguni feast of Ukweshwama, are customs practised by AmaZulu which have recently been singled out for censure, sparking a long-overdue debate on the meaning of culture in contemporary South Africa. Within the context of this debate the words "It's my culture" have increasingly come to be accepted as legitimate responses to questions probing the necessity or indeed acceptability of such customs. For example, to the question "Can we claim that women have equal rights in democratic South Africa, if at the same time we legitimise their exchange between families for cattle and money?" one will often hear the response "It is an important part of our culture." And so the debate is closed.

Mr Speaker, no discussion of where we are as a nation today, and where we are going can be complete without engaging with the subject of culture - or "neo-traditionalism" as it is referred to in some quarters. Yet while some analysts, commentators and members of the public continue to grapple with this subject, politicians have mostly been conspicuous by their silence.

Given our racially-divided and ethnically-chauvinistic past, the tendency towards knee-jerk reactions on both sides of the debate is understandable. But Mr Speaker, we cannot allow inflated sensitivities about the possible motives of those who question our cultural practices to justify keeping in place some customs which violate gender equality, put young people - especially girls - at risk, and deny our humanity as a people.

During the furore surrounding the revival of the Nguni ritual of bare-handed bull-killing during the annual feast of Ukweshwama, Sunday Times columnist, Fred Khumalo, branded the custom reprehensible and declared: "African culture? Not in my name." He argued that - as with the cruel practice of bull-fighting in Spain, or fox-hunting in the United Kingdom, about which similar debates rage on in those countries - the defensive resort to culture in order to justify dated customs and practices slows the progress of any society which claims to be compassionate, equal, and committed to doing no harm. Why, he asked, was the animal not rather humanely slaughtered with a single stab of a spear; a symbolic ritual which could invoke the ancestors whilst sparing the animal unnecessary pain?

Khumalo outlined his position thus: "Negligible beliefs, customs, traditions all get conflated under the shapeless umbrella called culture. Culture is something bigger than that, something more potent, something more intelligent. Culture is forward-looking, culture is dynamic - just like humanity."

In her book, Laying Ghosts to Rest - which has already been quoted once in this House today - Dr Mamphela Ramphele refers to what she calls the ghost of ethnic chauvinism, which she argues must be named and laid to rest in order for South Africa to embark upon the road to true transformation, which, crucially, includes the realisation of equal rights for women and the protection of children at risk. Dr Ramphele, referencing Prof. Thandabantu Nhlapo, identifies a series of "notorious provisions [of customary law] that need urgent review." Amongst them:

"The levirate - which is the continuation of the deceased husband's marriage through a brother of male relative;
Polygyny;
Child betrothal and forced marriages linked to family obligations; and
Lobola or bohadi - which exchanges women and cattle between families"

She argues: "These weighty matters need to be resolved to enable us to align customary practices with the precepts of our Constitution"

In April of 2009, the late Minister in the Presidency, Dr Manto Tshabalala-Msimang, visited a village in the OR Tambo District municipality in the Eastern Cape, where the practise of ukuthwala - the child betrothal and forced marriage of girls as young as 12 years old, carried out by abducting them - had reached such epic proportions that girls were dropping out of school at the rate of 20 per month in order to be married off to men often old enough to be their fathers.

The Minister condemned the practise, describing ukuthwala as a form of violence against women, and acknowledged that "patriarchy and patriarchal attitudes still persist in South African society and at times manifest themselves in negative and harmful ways against women and girls."

Yet in its report to the Portfolio Committee on Women Children, Youth & People with Disabilities in August 2009, the SAPS was still at pains to emphasise the need to: " ...uphold the law whilst retaining the respect for culture and tradition." when dealing with the criminal matter of child abduction in this context. Again, the ghost of ethnic chauvinism compels the police service to treat the abuse of women and children's rights with kid gloves - all in the name of "culture".

Mr Speaker, in order for this debate to move forward, it is up to us as elected representatives - both in this House, and particularly in the National House of Traditional Leaders, which is entrusted with the task of transforming and adapting custom and customary law to comply with the Bill of Rights and the Constitution - to look these issues in the eye and begin to engage honestly and openly about whether we can continue to preach equality, whilst continuing to endorse customs which marginalise women and children and denigrate our humanity.