To build the society that we want to live in, which principle do we think is more important — mercy or justice? This was the topic of the latest of the discussion groups that I attended. At first most of us had our knee-jerk opinion — we had decided on our principles and decided which was more appropriate for us. But as the discussion went on we began to question these immediate reactions and wonder if perhaps we were being a little too hard or too soft on ourselves and others.
To even start talking about this topic, we sort of need to get our heads around which is which, and whether they are in fact opposed at all. Can you have justice without mercy? Is blanket mercy just? Is justice antithetical for mercy — is it the search for retribution and punishment? And if it is, then where does restorative justice fit in? Let me tell you, it wasn’t light Wednesday evening conversation.
The creator of the particular discussion topic said that what had interested her was Prof Jansen’s decision in the Reitz 4 saga. That she felt mercy was the right decision in that case because it created a more open space for the discussion of racial tensions and issues that obviously existed. Other members of the group were vehemently in favour of punishment. She thought that what the 4 had done was inexcusable. That there was no space for mercy, because to give them mercy was to deny justice to the people involved in the video — the victims of their crimes. I was, unusually for me, a fence-sitter. I battled with the idea that these 4 should be excused, and allowed to continue as though nothing had happened. But in order for societal healing to take place what good would punishing them have done?
It would obviously acknowledge that what they did was inexcusable — that in a society based on the constitutional premise of non-racialism then activities like this cannot be accepted. The perpetrators need to be accountable to their actions, and accountable to a public that wants them to apologise. So let’s say that the rector had decided to expel them, to punish them and deny them the access to their education … is the feeling then that things would be all better. That this form of retributive justice would somehow heal the situation?
But complete mercy here also seems unjust. To let them off the hook and absolve them through letting this issue slide denies the community and the victims of their racism the right to dignity. It says to all of us who found their actions unforgivable that we must forgive, without apology or request for forgiveness. Can we forgive, without an apology? Should we?
But what is appealing about mercy is it forces us to admit that we are all flawed, and that to continue to deny that these tensions exist, or to expect them to cease to exist with the expulsion of 4 young men is only to strap on a giant pair of rose-tinted glasses and look the other way.
What is also appealing about this whole dilemma is that it forces us to tackle what is problematic about this situation. Are we all so angry because they have damaged the society, the premise that we live in the rainbow nation each of us in our own colour pressing up against people of other colour in a glorious arching unity? Have they destroyed our bubble, popped it and allowed us to see that the elephant in the room has not gone away simply because we’ve draped it in a colourless blanket. Are we unable to forgive because we can’t find a similar instance of hurtful behaviour in our own actions?
For me what was most upsetting about the whole ordeal was not the big picture but the small one. To try and empathise with the staff who these young men violated left me reeling with pain and anger. How could these young men, so self-assured and selectively ignorant, deny the dignity of the people who worked with them? This is where the injustice is. But now … where from here?
What would be the resolution that most of us would seek? Do we want an eye for an eye? Or are we ready to admit that this is not productive? Or do we forgive, because we recognise that it is also part of carrying on?
For me, I want more than either of these options. But I’m just not sure what …
Author
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
