BAA 'undermined dignity of blacks'

2010-07-20 15:34

Cape Town - The Black Authorities Act (BAA) has undermined the dignity of black people in South Africa and caused much suffering, the Rural People's Movement (RPM) said on Tuesday.

In a submission to the rural development and land reform portfolio committee, Eastern Cape RPM president Nomonde Mbelekane said the act had also "damaged the authority of chiefs".

It changed them from being representatives of the people to collaborators with apartheid. They served the apartheid boss and not the people, she said.

The committee is holding public hearings on the proposed repeal of the 1951 BAA - one of the cornerstones of apartheid.

Mbelekane said the RPM viewed the BAA as "the mother of tribal authorities in rural areas".

"We also see it as something that gave powers to chiefs and put us under boundaries that made things difficult for us."

This law had led to putting together people under one chief even if that was not the case before, payments of levies and dues to chiefs by those under their rule, the establishment of apartheid homelands, and division and disunity among people, even those who were related to each other.

The RPM also did not view the BAA as different from new laws that "do the same".

These new laws tripled the negative effects of controlling human lives in many different ways. Tribal leaders had been given more powers than they had under the BAA, Mbelekane said.

'Not what we fought for'

In particular, the RPM was angry about the Traditional Leadership and Governance Framework Act, which gave tribal authority a new life.

"This is not what we fought for. We thought that we were free when Cyril Ramaphosa came to Peddie in 1991 to dissolve all headmen.

"We are now very surprised that our struggle has come to nothing, thanks to the Framework Act.

"We did not even get a chance to hear about this Framework Act. Why was it passed? Our views were not asked for. We see it with many problems and disadvantages for us. We see it as giving chiefs the same advantages as the BAA.

"Chiefs believe that the land is theirs to own and control. Anyone who wants a site or a field has to go to the chief for an allocation," she said.

The RPM wanted to know whether the Framework Act and traditional courts bill were not "children of the BAA".

"We ask government to ensure that the rights of rural people do not suffer.

"As women, we do not really like chiefs that much. We voted for a democracy of the people by the people. We did not vote for individuals.

"We see chiefs as filling their own stomachs. We prefer municipalities. We see abuse only from chiefs. We do not want the government of the chiefs in rural areas."

The RPM also wanted clarity on the role of municipalities and ward councillors.

Was government giving with the one hand and taking with the other? Was government removing the BAA while also keeping its tribal authorities in place?

"We ask for a chance for our views to be heard. If not, it is going to be difficult for us to vote again in the future," Mbelekane said.

In a statement earlier, the University of Cape Town's Law Race and Gender Research Unit said the proposed repeal of the BAA appeared to be mere window-dressing.

Even if it was scrapped, the spirit of apartheid would live on in new laws governing "traditional" communities, it said.

- SAPA