3.5 D ATA COLLECTION
3.5.3 Interviews
The intention was to conduct interviews with four broad categories of people namely:
government officials from the different departments that are involved in the trusts, the current and former trustees, individuals serving in the joint management boards of the park and the Pooling and Sharing Joint Venture (PSJV) and lastly ordinary community members from the four towns in the Richtersveld. These interviews were planned for April 2020, however, following the nationwide lockdown these plans were halted until November 2020 when the University allowed some fieldwork to be conducted under new regulations. This added complexities to the processes. At this stage, the country was in Alert Level 3 which the University adhered to and added its conditions on re-granting ethics approval to conduct face-
participants’ risk profiles. This was particularly so for my study as a large bulk of my participants would have been individuals over the age of 50 who could have comorbidities that further increase their risk profile. At the same time, online methods of engagement were difficult for community members due to the socio-economic profile of the community and the location – there is limited network connection in the Richtersveld
To address these challenges, I limited the number of participants from the community to key participants. These included current and former members of the Community Property Association Committee (CPA) which is the community’s highest decision-making authority, community members who served in any of the trusts and subsidiary companies, community representatives in the Richtersveld Combined Management Committee (RCMC) and well- respected community activists. In this regard, I benefited from the relationships previously formed when I conducted research in 2018 in the same area, which meant that I had a sense of some of the key role players from the observations made in 2018. As such in many cases, I conducted follow-up interviews with key community representatives and community activists.
Given that this was a new topic, I gave them a copy of the Honours dissertation and verified the information to be used for the Master’s dissertation before proceeding with the questions prepared for the Master’s dissertation. To address a concern that the study might lack a comprehensive community voice, I conducted Google searches of community protests, which allowed me to listen to interviews where ordinary community members expressed their grievances. An example for this is an extract available here2, where a community member from Sanddrift speaks about grievances regarding community members not being allowed to mine their land. This and other extracts were enlightening in understanding the lived experiences of ordinary community members.
Conducting interviews was also complicated by the dynamics that existed within the community. There have been major conflicts that have led to court procedures. In addition, there have been several investigations that have been conducted which have revealed that some members serving in leadership capacities had vested interests in the decisions taken. For example, the Richtersveld Status Report complied in February 2017 by the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform (DRDLR) indicated that one of the contributing factors
2 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n82kVgEOm64&list=PLaMjtNZr6ZqW1kKUhs- 7QwesaZa6m_wDY&index=7
to the conflicts in the community was that some former and current CPA Committee members were alleged to have interests in the operations of the Pooling and Sharing Joint Venture (PSJV) as well as the Richtersveld Mining Company (RMC), and the Richtersveld Rehabilitation Company. This has impacted the relationship between the CPA Committee, the Richtersveld Trusts and Companies, and Alexkor. Some of these allegations were still being investigated when I conducted my research with some allegations being investigated as part of the Judicial Commission of Inquiry into Allegations of State Capture, Corruption and Fraud in the Public Sector including Organs of State (Zondo Commission). As a result, there was some reluctance from participants to speak about their involvement in the various governing structures which made it difficult to get direct answers to certain questions.
Moreover, people in the Richtersveld are closely related. This became clear to me as I became familiar with the area, and this came out in the interviews as participants were less open to speaking about the involvements of their kin members in the various leadership structures. As such, I overlayed different accounts from community members from the different factions as well as accounts of official government investigations to have multiple accounts of the events that occurred. This was a challenging process as there often were discrepancies in the different accounts because the state and the community had vested interests in portraying a particular narrative of what had occurred.
I was grateful that between 8 and 11 January 2021, the Zondo Commission heard evidence related to Alexkor, the diamond mining company. The testimonies heard in the sessions included extracts of affidavits of an independent investigator and a whistle-blower who had approached the Commission about the alleged corruption and capture of Alexkor. The independent investigator was part of the team that conducted a forensic investigation of irregularities about Alexkor and the PSJV which was commissioned by the Department of Public Enterprises which oversees Alexkor while the whistle-blower was a diamond contractor.
These testimonies, which were recorded live on each day, were invaluable as they provided a comprehensive narration of key events which were able to clarify several discrepancies that I had up until then not been able to resolve. The testimonies constituted verified sources because the witnesses were under oath and the statements benefited from the cross-examination of the chairperson of the Commission. In particular, the testimony by the independent investigator was insightful as it referenced the forensic report which is not publicly available but also spoke at length about the evasiveness of some Alexkor officials in providing the necessary
information. I highlight the latter as it speaks to challenges that I also experienced in obtaining information in this highly politicised environment. While being a student had its benefits in that people were less defensive than they might be to investigators, the study had the effect of making Alexkor officials apprehensive in general.
From the government side, multiple attempts were made to interview officials from the Northern Cape Department of Agriculture, Environmental Affairs, Rural Development and Land Reform, which were unsuccessful due to non-response. I was however able to conduct three interviews with key individuals. Firstly, Mr Alexander (Alec) Erwin served, the former Minister of Public Enterprises between 2004 and 2008 which coincided with the period when the Deed of Settlement between the community, the state and Alexkor was signed. This interview provided a Cabinet-level viewpoint of the actions of the state at this crucial period when the land claim was settled and the various trusts established. Secondly, the current Richtersveld National Park Manager, whose interview shed light on the state of the trust established to hold land rentals revenue from SANParks. Lastly, the current Municipal Manager of the Richtersveld Local Municipality, whose interview gave context to the workings of stakeholder relations that helped me to understand the Deed of Settlement better. From the mine’s side, there was an attempt to interview the current CEO of Alexkor. At the time of writing, my request to interview the CEO was still being considered by the Alexkor Board of Directors.
Figure 3.1: Interviewing the Manager: Richtersveld National Park (Source: Robin George, 2020)
Figure 3.2: Preparing to interview the Municipal Manager: Richtersveld Municipality (Source: Robin George, 2020)