Review the constitution or encourage officials to enforce it?

For 30 years, SA has been lauded globally for having one of the best and most inclusive constitutions in the world.

However, three decades down the line, is it still keeping up with the ever-changing cultural, political and legal landscapes, or has it served its purpose as a “pilot document” that now needs to be reviewed and brought in line with the current state of affairs?

These were among a series of loaded questions tackled by academics on Tuesday night when they participated in a community dialogue hosted by The Herald, in association with Nelson Mandela University’s Centre for the Advancement of Non-Racialism and Democracy (CANRAD).

The thought-provoking discussions revolved around questions of the relevance of the constitution in its current form and whether it still serves the interests of South Africans.

If so, does it accommodate African values?

Or are there fundamental shortcomings in the Bill of Rights that need to be addressed to make it more relevant and appropriate? 

In his keynote address, academic and civil servant Dr Ngengelezi Masuku likened the constitution to a first date, where you will always put your best foot forward to impress your counterpart.

But at some point the romance needs to fall away and poignant issues cannot be shirked and need to be tackled head-on.

“On the global stage the South African constitution is praised, but in practice it is not always as great as it seems,” Masuku said.

“It is a pilot project from 30 years ago, and many of the issues we experience now did not even exist back then.

“Perhaps it is time to review the constitution.”

He raised several issues around gender equality, access to technology and the internet, better crime prevention in poorer neighbourhoods and townships, and issues around language at learning institutions that should be considered as basic human rights in a modern SA.

He touched on how the constitution was still heavily rooted in European law and lacked an “African flair and posture” and often ignored cultural laws.

In turn, Dr Adelaide Kamoro of NMU’s Transformation Office, agreed to many of the points raised by Masuku, but also argued an alternative to reviewing the constitution should be holding to account those officials elected to enforce it.

She used the right to equality as an example, saying that it addressed many of the issues around gender and language Masuku raised.

“The constitution makes provision to address inequality. But who has to enforce those rights?

“Our elected officials? So is the challenge then the constitution itself, or the application thereof?”

Kamoro agreed with Masuku, likening the constitution to a seed that needed to grow and develop when it no longer resonated with its people.

Fielding questions from the audience, the two speakers were asked how questions around the constitution should be framed without sounding “anti-constitution”, and while they agreed it was time to ask the difficult questions, it also needed to be done carefully.

It was discussed that harsher obligations needed to be put on elected officials.

Kamoro also put the ball in the court of the potential future leadership, addressing the members of structures such as the university’s Student Representative Council.

“How will these future leaders act when they are in powerful positions?

“Can we trust them with a little now so that we can one day trust them with a lot?”

The dialogue facilitator, senior programme officer of the Democratic Development Programme Sphamandla Mhlongo, also put a poignant question to the students present, asking them how many of them were eligible to vote for the first time earlier this year and how many of them chose not to do so.

“That is one of the best forms of public participation, yet so many people chose not to take part.

“Then you cannot criticise or question the constitution,” Mhlongo said.

The Herald editor Rochelle de Kock closed the dialogue, praising the participants for their thought-provoking discussion and encouraged further engagement on the subject matter.

“What are we actively doing to push for the change we want to see?” she concluded.

HeraldLIVE