No human or civil rights for the white minority or Afrikaner in South Africa
21 December 2011
By Sonia Hruska
By Sonia Hruska
No human or civil rights for the white minority or Afrikaner in South Africa
Minority Rights - Does the Afrikaner qualify for human rights given their history or does it only pertain to the minorities of the rest of the World
The right to identity has secured a prominent place in the discourse of human rights and certain privileges, like inherent right to life, that safeguard minorities against gross human rights violations are basic human rights for any member of the human race, but ironically, it excludes the Afrikaner. Thus Afrikaners cannot make claim to minority or human rights or the right to self determination. Neither can we claim protection via International law because we are automatically excluded as we “might”, reflect a desire to go back to apartheid.
In her book, Minority protection in post-apartheid South Africa: Human Rights, Minority Rights and Self-determination, Kristin Henrard, expert on minorities and human rights and professor at Erasmus University Rotterdam, explicitly states that Article 27 ICCPR (http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/ccpr.htm), the international law provision on minority rights par excellence, is generally referred to when the right to identity is directly related to minority protection.”
Article 27 states: “In those States in which ethnic, religious or linguistic minorities exist, persons belonging to such minorities shall not be denied the right, in community with the other members of their group, to enjoy their own culture, to profess and practice their own religion, or to use their own language.” But what if you are not allowed to exercise that right because you are not allowed the right to identity?
She further continues to state: “the right to identity has secured a prominent place in the discourse of human rights” but then furthermore states that ” but at the same time confines the scope of such special measures. Minority protection cannot be used to support claims for measures that would institute certain privileges for (members of) minority groups that cannot be justified by the demands of substantive equality. In this regard, one can think of some of the demands of a section of the Afrikaner minority in post-apartheid South Africa as they (might) reflect a desire to go back to apartheid times or preserve affluence and advantages obtained during apartheid.”
To summarize an expert, who is informing human rights and minority rights policy for the UN: The Afrikaner will not be afforded the rights as set out in the ICCPR and is denied the right to an identity. They cannot claim human, civil, minority rights or the right to self determination. Will somebody then please tell me how two wrongs make a right?
Furthermore, during the African Human Rights Day conference in Parktown, held on Oct 21 2009 it was obvious how this denial of human rights to Afrikaners gives the government unlimited right to intimidate and dehumanize Afrikaners with approval from the Human Rights Commission. According to the Human Rights Commission chairman: “as a Sotho whose ancestral lands were taken away before 1930 he, as a member of the black majority, was not prepared to make any kind of concessions to the civil rights of the Afrikaner minority.” Thus confirming that the Afrikaner are excluded from enjoying civil rights in South Africa and in direct violation of: Article 3, of the ICCPR: The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to ensure the equal right of men and women to the enjoyment of all civil and political rights set forth in the present Covenant. At the same conference, the IEC president, Pansy Tlakula said: “South Africa does not need a special dispensation to cater for indigenous groups and minorities as its Constitution protects and guarantees the cultural, linguistic and religious rights of all her people,” Which again shows that they are denying their true intentions, the collective punishment strategy of the white minority under the constitutional veil.
It should then rather read: The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to ensure the equal right of men and women, excluding the Afrikaner in South Africa, to the enjoyment of all civil and political rights set forth in the present Covenant.
The above then clearly explains how warnings by Dr Gregory Stanton are ignored although they would have been accepted as early warning mechanisms to draw the attention of Member States to situations where racial discrimination has reached alarming levels if it was any other minority group. It also explains why whites are being raped, tortured and murdered under the blanket excuse that it is just crime, but it does not explain the hours of torture they have to endure and where often nothing is stolen.
It will also explain why Afrikaner students are denied their right to education and why whites are being denied access to work and the economic sector through affirmative action and black Economic Empowerment.
ICCPR which Ms Henrard refers to is the “International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights” as adopted by the United Nations Human Rights Council and the preamble should then read as follows:
http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/ccpr.htm
“The States Parties to the present Covenant, considering that, in accordance with the principles proclaimed in the Charter of the United Nations, recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family (except Afrikaners) is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,
Recognizing that these rights derive from the inherent dignity of the human person (except for Afrikaners),
Recognizing that, in accordance with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the ideal of free human beings (except Afrikaners) enjoying civil and political freedom and freedom from fear and want can only be achieved if conditions are created whereby everyone may enjoy his civil and political rights, as well as his economic, social and cultural rights,
Considering the obligation of States under the Charter of the United Nations to promote universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and freedoms (except for Afrikaners),
Realizing that the individual (except Afrikaners), having duties to other individuals and to the community to which he belongs, is under a responsibility to strive for the promotion and observance of the rights recognized in the present Covenant,”
Even more ironically, Article 1 should then also read:
“1. All peoples (except Afrikaners) have the right of self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.
2. All peoples (except Afrikaners) may, for their own ends, freely dispose of their natural wealth and resources without prejudice to any obligations arising out of international economic co-operation, based upon the principle of mutual benefit, and international law. In no case may a people be deprived of its own means of subsistence (except Afrikaners) .
3. The States Parties to the present Covenant, including those having responsibility for the administration of Non-Self-Governing and Trust Territories, shall promote the realization of the right of self-determination, and shall respect that right, in conformity with the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations (except for Afrikaners) . “
Thuli Madonsela, Public Protector quoted the preamble of the constitution of South Africa at the 2011 Annual Human Rights Law Lecture, on Friday, 30 September 2011. What she meant to say was: We the people of South Africa…to:
• Heal the divisions of the past and establish a society based on democratic values, social justice and fundamental human rights; except for Afrikaners/whites
• lay the foundation for a democratic and open society in which government is based on the will of the people and every citizen is equally protected by law; except for Afrikaners/whites they cannot exercise their rights because they may use it to revert to apartheid
• Improve the quality of life of all citizens and free the potential of each person; ….” except for Afrikaners/whites they cannot exercise their rights because they may use it to revert to apartheid
• Heal the divisions of the past and establish a society based on democratic values, social justice and fundamental human rights; except for Afrikaners/whites
• lay the foundation for a democratic and open society in which government is based on the will of the people and every citizen is equally protected by law; except for Afrikaners/whites they cannot exercise their rights because they may use it to revert to apartheid
• Improve the quality of life of all citizens and free the potential of each person; ….” except for Afrikaners/whites they cannot exercise their rights because they may use it to revert to apartheid
“What does this promise of democracy, human rights and freedom mean for the ordinary person that I often refer to as Gogo Dlamini. How does this play out in an ordinary person’s daily life and interface with the state and those that exercise public power.”
Dunno Thuli, you are supposed to be my protector, you tell me how then am I suppose to protect myself if not through international law and under protection of the Human Rights Commission?
The double standards practiced by the UN are legendary, now the question remains if the global community will remain silent against the backdrop of the Genocide of the white minority.
The white minority and Afrikaners/Boers will have to challenge this gross violation of their human and civil rights collectively on international level.
Time to set aside our differences and tackle one of the most demanding challenges that we have faced as a nation as it determines our future and the future of our children. We know where we are heading if we continue on our current course, let us then build bridges to change it… Nobody is going to do it for us, the ball is now in our court….
