Gay abandon(ment)...

Burundi, like South Africa, has a constitution that protects human rights. Part of this protection of human rights is the protection of people's right to practise their cultural beliefs. This is often easier said than done. Western-based conceptions of human rights often differ from local-based beliefs about rights and when these two conceptions clash it becomes difficult to judge which one takes precedence.

The Burundian government passed a law this week criminalising homosexuality. Any consensual sexual activity between two people of the same sex is punishable by two to three years in prison. President Nkurunziza described homosexuality as a 'curse'. Despite these deep seated beliefs that the president felt no shame in voicing publicly, the document was signed in secret with many human rights group unaware that it had even been drafted until after the fact. Governmental bodies relied on their 'culture' and 'customs' to legitimate the introduction of this law. It is described by Human Rights Watch as a 'disappointing step backward'.

This legitimation of human rights violations in the name of culture seems like an obvious move to slip out of the realm of criticism on the part of the leadership. Who is legitimately able to criticise culture? It is created as an a-historical, unchallengeable 'thing' that does not allow for negotiation and 'has always been so'. That is exactly the beauty of this move for governments and human rights naysayers. They can rely on something unquestionable to allow them to make statements that are politically incorrect (at the best of times) and violence inciting (at the worst of times), and cannot face any criticism for it because it is itself politically incorrect, at least in South Africa, to criticise or question another person's culture openly. So we are left biting our tongues in the hopes that someone will do something about it.

Here at home we have had no shortage of similar dangerous statements made by various political figures. For example, in the rape trial of Jacob Zuma, misogyny was the word of the day. He suggested that because of his status as a 'Zulu' boy, he was culturally expected to have sex with a woman who sat with her legs uncrossed. It was culturally rude not to have sex with a woman who so 'obviously' was 'ready' for it. Similarly he stated that as a young Zulu boy, if a gay person stood in front of him he would knock him down. He called gay people a 'disgrace'. Another prominent figure Manto Tshabalala-Msimang encouraged people to use 'cultural' remedies rather than anti-retroviral medicine when HIV positive.

Similarly, human rights are presented as inaliable, non-contingent and certain. Another universal worldview that perhaps doesn't fit into the lives of most people. They ensures that everyone is legally the same - a difficult goal to implement in a world where so few people are the same, and so few governments want to treat them that way. Like human rights, 'culture' exists and is perpetuated in the minds and beliefs of ordinary people. It is through their behaviour and actions that it is presented to us - intangible - with very real effects.

But the critical thing is that culture did not arise out of nothing. It has been moulded and sculpted by the powerful until it has met their needs and ends. It has been used as a story backdrop to ensure that people are caught up in the magic and unity of it, often without questioning the dangers it poses. Standardly 'othered' groups often remain othered by 'culture' and by legitimating fictions that seek to present it as unquestionable. When someone says that it is his cultural right to do something to another person it moves the debate about the rightness or wrongness of that action out of the sphere of logic or negotiation. The debate is ended and the winner takes it all.

So what can the ordinary person do when faced with trends of leadership that suggests disrespect and disregard, for the rights of homosexual people? How can each of us negotiate with the powerful and help them choose the right way to reshape culture for a more positive future?

My suggestion - talk. The most frustrating thing about about the Burundian case is the secrecy under which the whole thing has taken place. If your culture is something that you are proud of, then be proud, explain to others how it works and how you feel you are a part of it. More importantly, allow others to do the same.

When the time comes to make a choice between limiting others or freeing them, perhaps we can only hope that our governments will mimic our efforts, take a step back, and listen.

Footnote: For those of you interested in this story, or who want to make your voice heard to reject human rights abuses like this, please visit the human rights watch website - its incredibly proactive and useful.

zuma promises smooth transition - anybody scared?

Jacob Zuma promises a smooth transition between the current ANC government and the one that will follow after the results of the 2009 election.

Is anyone else afraid?

The status quo is less than desirable and with the pre-election opinion polls showing that the ANC will win majority (Julius Malema believes this could even be a 'three-thirds' majority, somebody please help him) I'm not convinced that we want a smooth transition. He claims the ANC has 'done what is necessary' to secure its mandate, but I'm more concerned that they've done too much or too little.

Done too much 'damage': In the past five years it has begun to become embarrassing to be led by the ANC government. A Mail and Guardian article interviewing members of the Constantia Uitsig public stated that one of the ANC posters in the area had been defaced to read 'Together we can do more damage'. I think they have it right. To begin, the leadership of the ANC has been radically overhauled and they have done little or no leading. Their current leader has been charged with both rape and corruption, and both attempts at charging him have been unsuccessful. Whether this is as a result of his innocence (though to me it appeared quite clearly as a case of cold feet on the part of our justice system) or not, Zuma's attitude and comments on both of these matters were deplorable. In the rape case Zuma made several embarrassing comments, which illustrated both his lack of understanding of the HIV/AIDS crisis in South Africa and his lack of commitment to the constitutional values of gender equality. Furthermore, he allowed his supporters to get away with verbal incitements of violence against his accuser. All this without apology and without the acknowledgement that he had a responsibility to promote support of rape survivors and encourage learning about HIV/AIDS. These duties remain unacknowledged and unfulfilled today, despite our growing culture of violence against women and continued stigma surrounding HIV.

Similarly, it appears that his attitude towards corruption is equally nonchalant. Today on e-news he was questioned about the 'cloud of suspicion' that continues to surround him. His response was (apologies if it is not exactly correct) 'what cloud?I have never seen a cloud surrounding me'. I am hoping, that this was a case of dodging the bullet by attempting to make a joke, rather than his lack of understanding of what the journo was asking. But one can never be sure.

Done too little to ensure people's rights: The same Mail and Guardian article (headline: Zuma promises smooth transtion) sees Zuma stating "we reiterate that we will use our majority responsibly and will not ride roughshod over the rights of the people, or bulldoze other parties into submission." I am not sure where Mr Zuma thinks his responsibilities lie, and I would love to find out.

What about the rights of women?, the taxpayer?, young children? Women continue to be the target of violent crime and South Africa has the highest rape rate in the world, with its victims and survivors spanning all ages, races and ethnicities. How will Zuma, himself 'culturally' unable (read unwilling) to vocalise these women's right to security, ensure that power will be used responsibly. The corruption trial against him cost the South African taxpayers millions of Rands. How will these taxes be better used by someone unable to manage his own money? The past few years have seen our education system return to a sad state of affairs with many matric students having to teach themselves due to lack of staff and poor spending on the part of provincial governments. How will Zuma encourage his government to better spend?

I am aware that a party is more than its leader. And I am aware that a government is made up of more than one party. But I am afraid for South Africa on the cusp of elections. I am not encouraged by the clouds surrounding Zuma, and I am more concerned that his vision is so tinted by his own power that he cannot see them himself.

picture: www.news24.com
mail and guardian article accessbile from www.mg.co.za