With labour and ANC organisations flexing their muscles post-elections it is time for the relevant ministers, leaders and organisers of protests and strikes to start drawing to the attention of the participants therein that they are always subject to the laws of our country.
While striking and protesting are two democratic methods of expressing people’s unhappiness with an issue or an employer, they are not a licence to start attacking people physically, abusing them verbally or breaking the laws of South Africa.
Two examples come to mind:
Yesterday in Pretoria members of the National Union of Metalworkers were outside the South African Reserve Bank protesting high interest rates that had resulted in job losses and pay cuts in their industry. Many South Africans would support their cause and join them if it wasn’t so cold, petrol so expensive and, let’s face it, naafiness being next to godliness.
Having said that breaking through a police barrier and threatening to storm the SARB is not a protest, it’s unlawful behaviour which at the very least constitutes assault (threats are assault). It is also not a trend that the government or police should encourage or allow to develop. Once started a culture of violence is very difficult to stop.
If, for example, the party whom they would like to receive their petition is not available, then they must be made to understand that a proxy will just have to do. The protest itself signals people’s displeasure with an issue or person and the fact that the party concerned arrived late is not confirmation that people can disrespect others and behave like thugs.
If organisers take the people out on strike or on a march then it is their responsibility and duty, in terms of the law and out of respect to their fellow South Africans, to ensure that while people are under their banner they do not commit criminal acts.
If they fail to ensure that discipline is maintained then organisers must be held civilly and criminally liable, along with those that are caught, for any acts or damages occasioned by unlawful conduct.
The second example involves Western Cape Premier Helen Zille against whom Umkhonto we Sizwe marched in order to try and compel an apology for her recent comments regarding President Jacob Zuma.
While I am of the opinion that Zille’s comments — in this regard — could have been held off for a reasonable period, I certainly do not believe the military veterans march was justified. Yes they are fully entitled to protest but the facts of the matter are that what Zille said was a matter of court record and her function as opposition leader requires her to lead the examination and criticism of both the government and the president.
Having said that and if the veterans must march then they must ensure that they remain within the strictures of the law. Moreover, as in the case of Tito Mboweni above, if the party to whom they wished to present their petition was not available, then they should hand it to the proxy nominated therefore. Zille at the relevant time was in fact with the president.
There has to be zero tolerance of unlawful behaviour at strikes now because later when we get to some of the mass marches that we have witnessed in the past, trying to explain to protestors that their conduct is now unacceptable will be too little too late.
This is a tragedy just waiting to happen.
** You have to admit that the spontaneous refusal to hand MEC Bonginkosi Madikizela the memorandum because he is “Zille’s boyfriend” is hysterically funny. Some of these chirps are becoming as good as the English football chants.
A prince with dignity and determination
Prince Ngarambe’s goals are to become Rwanda’s first transgender model and to uplift the country’s youth
The EFF’s principles are unshakeable
Unlike the ANC, the core values of the freedom fighters do not change with each leader it elects
