Who is to Blame for the Violent Protests? Is it the State or Criminal Elements?
By Nontando (Guwa) Ngamlana
South Africa has seen a wave of protests characterised by violence across most of its provinces recently. And many of these violent protests appear to have a recurring theme: people are tired of empty promises. But who incites violence in these protests—the protestors or the law enforcement officials?
Many reasons for the protests are offered, but it would appear that they are mostly fuelled by dissatisfaction with the delivery of basic municipal services, such as access to sanitation, safe drinking water and electricity. It is interesting to note that it is mostly the informal settlements that embark on these protests. One wonders whether the old townships, such as Mdantsane, and Motherwell and KwaZakhele in Port Elizabeth, experience the same service delivery challenges as those in informal settlements.
It is also interesting to note that the protests started before the national election in March/April, but they did not slow down even after the election. Towards the end of his term, there was general consensus amongst South Africans that President Thabo Mbeki was not a ‘people’s person’ and this would in a way explain the frustration of trying to get people’s voices heard, as expressed through the protests. With the election of President Jacob Zuma–‘a man of the people’–there were high levels of expectation and excitement amongst many South Africans. Many more promises of a better future were made to South Africans. But, South Africa’s poorer communities are running out of patience. After all, as they say, they received similar promises in 1994.
Professor Le Roux, from the School of Public Management and Administration at the University of Pretoria, wrote an article in 2005 reflecting on the 2004 national elections. He stated that similar demonstrations had occurred in 21 local communities in different parts of the country, for precisely the same reasons.
According to analysts, the key reasons or causes for these protests include the allegations of rampant corruption and nepotism within local government. The deployment of ANC comrades to positions they are not qualified for is another issue that has been cited as a cause for the protests.
Speaking at a SALGA conference in April, Minister Sicelo Shiceka admitted that many municipalities are ‘in a state of paralysis and dysfunction’. According to the Minister, local government is perceived to be incompetent, disorganised and ‘riddled with corruption and maladministration’. He indicated that if what he had found in the North West Province was indicative of the state of municipalities elsewhere in the country, there might be need to declare a national state of emergency on local government.
There have also been allegations that there is a third force inciting service delivery protests for personal gain. But, even if a third force existed, the fact remains that it could very well be riding on peoples’ legitimate grievances, which are numerous.
The most disconcerting part, however, is that most of the protests in South Africa —from service delivery to wage increment demands—have been characterised by violence. Minister Membathisi Mdladlana strongly condemned violent wage increment protests by municipal workers in July 2009. What was supposed to be a peaceful wage increment demonstration deteriorated into countrywide chaos as marchers caused havoc by looting, harassing street vendors and spilling refuse on the street in many of the major cities. A wage increment demonstration by members of the South African Defence Force also turned violent and police were called in. Conflict broke out between the police and the marchers.
South Africa overcame a similar situation before during the apartheid regime, when the majority of black South Africans decided that the state was not working for them anymore and a revolution began in an effort to overthrow the state. Violent protests were seen throughout South Africa where citizens were defying and undermining the state. State buildings were destroyed, tyres were burned and streets were barricaded; these are all scenes that we have witnessed in recent protests.
Back then, the state responded by sending in law enforcement officials who would start shooting at protestors with rubber bullets and tear gas. This was how the apartheid government silenced the voices of black South Africans. We have seen the same happen in most of the recent protests; the police arrive at the scene and start shooting at unarmed civilians. In comparison, are South Africa’s poorer citizens declaring that the state no longer works for them, and are they undermining the state as in the past? Who is violent in these protests, the protestors or the police?
And what is the role of media in these violent protests? Some say the media fuels the protests by the way they report the news, which seems to encourage others to protest as well. Others believe the media is only doing its job, and that the problem is government’s reaction to these protests. It gives a clear message that the only effective way of getting the government to listen to people’s views and challenges is through protesting. Interestingly most of the protests happened in winter perhaps signalling the effect of the season’s harsh realities, which exacerbates the absence of life’s immediate necessities.
One of the challenges South Africa has faced in post-1994 period has been the ‘silencing’ of critical voices within society. Emasculating SANCO and other critical voices in society has left fewer spaces and forums through which people can voice their concerns and channel them to government. As the 2009 national election fades away from the minds of most South Africans and as the space for a strong civil society organisation remains void, the harsh realities of unfulfilled promises remain and the possibility of more protests looms large.
Reasons for Protests
• Unfulfilled promises
• Dissatisfaction with service delivery
• Voice of the people not being heard
• Deployment of unqualified ANC comrades
• Corruption and nepotism in local government
• Lack of a critical voice representing civil society
South Africa has seen a wave of protests characterised by violence across most of its provinces recently. And many of these violent protests appear to have a recurring theme: people are tired of empty promises. But who incites violence in these protests—the protestors or the law enforcement officials?
Many reasons for the protests are offered, but it would appear that they are mostly fuelled by dissatisfaction with the delivery of basic municipal services, such as access to sanitation, safe drinking water and electricity. It is interesting to note that it is mostly the informal settlements that embark on these protests. One wonders whether the old townships, such as Mdantsane, and Motherwell and KwaZakhele in Port Elizabeth, experience the same service delivery challenges as those in informal settlements.
It is also interesting to note that the protests started before the national election in March/April, but they did not slow down even after the election. Towards the end of his term, there was general consensus amongst South Africans that President Thabo Mbeki was not a ‘people’s person’ and this would in a way explain the frustration of trying to get people’s voices heard, as expressed through the protests. With the election of President Jacob Zuma–‘a man of the people’–there were high levels of expectation and excitement amongst many South Africans. Many more promises of a better future were made to South Africans. But, South Africa’s poorer communities are running out of patience. After all, as they say, they received similar promises in 1994.
Professor Le Roux, from the School of Public Management and Administration at the University of Pretoria, wrote an article in 2005 reflecting on the 2004 national elections. He stated that similar demonstrations had occurred in 21 local communities in different parts of the country, for precisely the same reasons.
According to analysts, the key reasons or causes for these protests include the allegations of rampant corruption and nepotism within local government. The deployment of ANC comrades to positions they are not qualified for is another issue that has been cited as a cause for the protests.
Speaking at a SALGA conference in April, Minister Sicelo Shiceka admitted that many municipalities are ‘in a state of paralysis and dysfunction’. According to the Minister, local government is perceived to be incompetent, disorganised and ‘riddled with corruption and maladministration’. He indicated that if what he had found in the North West Province was indicative of the state of municipalities elsewhere in the country, there might be need to declare a national state of emergency on local government.
There have also been allegations that there is a third force inciting service delivery protests for personal gain. But, even if a third force existed, the fact remains that it could very well be riding on peoples’ legitimate grievances, which are numerous.
The most disconcerting part, however, is that most of the protests in South Africa —from service delivery to wage increment demands—have been characterised by violence. Minister Membathisi Mdladlana strongly condemned violent wage increment protests by municipal workers in July 2009. What was supposed to be a peaceful wage increment demonstration deteriorated into countrywide chaos as marchers caused havoc by looting, harassing street vendors and spilling refuse on the street in many of the major cities. A wage increment demonstration by members of the South African Defence Force also turned violent and police were called in. Conflict broke out between the police and the marchers.
South Africa overcame a similar situation before during the apartheid regime, when the majority of black South Africans decided that the state was not working for them anymore and a revolution began in an effort to overthrow the state. Violent protests were seen throughout South Africa where citizens were defying and undermining the state. State buildings were destroyed, tyres were burned and streets were barricaded; these are all scenes that we have witnessed in recent protests.
Back then, the state responded by sending in law enforcement officials who would start shooting at protestors with rubber bullets and tear gas. This was how the apartheid government silenced the voices of black South Africans. We have seen the same happen in most of the recent protests; the police arrive at the scene and start shooting at unarmed civilians. In comparison, are South Africa’s poorer citizens declaring that the state no longer works for them, and are they undermining the state as in the past? Who is violent in these protests, the protestors or the police?
And what is the role of media in these violent protests? Some say the media fuels the protests by the way they report the news, which seems to encourage others to protest as well. Others believe the media is only doing its job, and that the problem is government’s reaction to these protests. It gives a clear message that the only effective way of getting the government to listen to people’s views and challenges is through protesting. Interestingly most of the protests happened in winter perhaps signalling the effect of the season’s harsh realities, which exacerbates the absence of life’s immediate necessities.
One of the challenges South Africa has faced in post-1994 period has been the ‘silencing’ of critical voices within society. Emasculating SANCO and other critical voices in society has left fewer spaces and forums through which people can voice their concerns and channel them to government. As the 2009 national election fades away from the minds of most South Africans and as the space for a strong civil society organisation remains void, the harsh realities of unfulfilled promises remain and the possibility of more protests looms large.
Reasons for Protests
• Unfulfilled promises
• Dissatisfaction with service delivery
• Voice of the people not being heard
• Deployment of unqualified ANC comrades
• Corruption and nepotism in local government
• Lack of a critical voice representing civil society