Chapter 4 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS AND CONCLUSION
4.2 Preliminary issues
It has been argued in chapter 1 that the violence during protests and strikes has an adverse impact on the rights of non-protesters, in particular the right to life, dignity, equality and freedom and security of the person. Each of these rights are adversely affected in the following manner419: first, the right to life is implicated when non- protesters are being killed by the protesting mob as punishment for their non- participation in the protest or face threats of being killed as a means to persuade them to join the protest action.
The non-protesters’ right to human dignity is also implicated particularly when their freedom of choice is disregarded and they are coerced by members of the protesting
419For real life examples of incidents of violence which exemplify the violation of each of these rights, see generally the discussion in 1.2.1 to 1.2.3 above.
crowd to join the protest. It is also implicated when non-protesters are assaulted and subjected to various humiliating conduct in public as punishment for their non- participation in the protest. The non-protesters’ right to equality before the law is implicated when the perpetrators of violence are not prosecuted for their deeds, hence the non-protesters are not afforded the right to equal protection and benefit of the law. The intimidation, assault and other acts of violence directed at non- protesters impact adversely on the non-protesters’ right to freedom and security of the person.
The aforementioned rights do not constitute a closed list. There are certainly other rights which may be implicated depending of the facts of each case. For example, the right to freedom of trade will be implicated in the event that the violence during a protest leads to the disruption of business operation as a result of damage to business premises and merchandise. Freedom of trade is also implicated in the event that the protesters resort to intimidation, assault, harassment or any interference with the employees or customers of the business or their property. The right not to be deprived of property arbitrarily would also be implicated where the looting of business stock and property takes place. Freedom of press would be implicated when journalists are assaulted or prevented in any way from carrying out their duties.
From the discussion in chapter 2, the following should be common cause: first, judging from the views publicly expressed by the Democratic Alliance, the official opposition party in South Africa, it can be said that it would fall under advocates for development category.420 Other groups which are likely to follow suite include the various corporate entities under the auspices of the Employers’ Organisations to which they belong, and the middle-class to rich segment of the South African society.
The latter are entities and individuals with an interest in the property which violent protesters normally target during the course of protest action.
The advocates for the status quo are likely to comprise in the main the Congress of South African Trade Union (COSATU); its alliance partners, the African National Congress (ANC) and the South African Communist Party (SACP); as well as the government.421 Other organisations which are likely to follow suit are political parties such as the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF); various community organisations representing the poor and illiterate segment of the South African society, other trade unions outside of COSATU such as the Association of Mineworkers and Construction Union (AMCU).
420For an understanding of how this conclusion is reached, refer to the discussion in 2.8.2 above.
421Also refer to the discussion in 2.8.2 above.
The above-mentioned organisations are identified and grouped into one of the two sides to the debate on the basis of the views they have publicly expressed or appear to hold in regard to protests and strikes as well as on the basis of the constituency they represent in society. This does not constitute a closed list. Therefore, it is open for other organisations that have not been vocal about their views to also join in the debate and take whatever side they identify with.
There are also a few conclusions which I have come to during the course of the dissertation. These have to be highlighted once more (without extensively repeating the detail) for they constitute a premise from which the presentation of the arguments in this section proceeds. First, it is undisputed that the common-law crime of public violence has historically been designed to deal with mob violence and continues to be an apt offence to deal with such even today. It is a preferred offence with which the offender is charged for committing acts of public violence despite there being other common-law crimes (such as assault, malicious damage to property, arson and robbery), statutory offences (particularly those which are created in section 12 of the RGA) and civil remedies (available in terms of the common law (the law of delict) and section 11 of the RGA) which overlap with the crime of public violence.422
Second, the statistics and media reports cited in the dissertation are included for purposes of depicting a picture of the prevalence of violent protests and strikes in South Africa. These are to be accepted as indicating an upward trend in protest and strike violence. Arguments on the accuracy of the statistics and the reliability of the information obtained from press reports are not relevant for present purposes.423
Third, the prospects of a legislative response to the violence appear to be very remote. Parliament has repeatedly ignored the opportunities to enact legislation such that it is feasible to conclude that there is no forthcoming legislation or amendment of existing legislation to deal with the violence during protests and strikes. That leaves the crime of public violence and the RGA the law in place to deal with violent protests and other associated issues.424
422Refer to the discussion in 1.1 above. It is noteworthy that other common-law crimes which overlap with the crime of public violence can, in certain circumstances, be competent verdicts to the charge of public violence.
423Refer to the discussion in 1.2.1 above.
424See the discussion in 2.8.2 above.