Global Leadership Training Programme in Africa 2014
RESEARCH REPORT

Why People exercise violence, when they express their political opinions
Hitotsubashi University, Graduate School of International and Public Policy
2nd year
Taichiro FUJINODistination: University of Cape Town

1English Summary (1 page)

People sometimes express their political opinions to nations politicians and civil society, by exercising
violence. Generally, this violent is called riot. This research clarifies the cause lead people violent, when theyexpress their opinions. In my research, I focus on one case named “Uprising of Hangberg”. This case is riot,
broke out in 21st September 2010, at one township, named Hangberg located in Hout Bay Cape Town city. Thisis the case which residents in Hangberg use violent to protest against forced eviction by the police. Hangberg is
informal township, which was created during apartheid era. In my research, I conducted interview to find out
people’s perception of Uprising of Hangberg.
The question is why social movement in Hangberg developed to riot.

My research focuses oninteraction between residents of Hangberg and government. Around 2003, civil societies’ peaceful approachto government change the attitude from confrontation to cooperation, and government started todialogue to solve this land disputes. From 2003 to 2006, both sides were good relations. But, from 2006
to 2008, civil society generally recognized that government policy was in fact deceived residents to regain
the land. From this change, the attitude of civil society shifted to confrontation. Finally from 2008 to 2010,
governmental attitude changed by civil societies’ social movement. In case both sides show aggressive
attitude to opposite, caused violent incident. From this interaction, we need to focus on perception whenanalyzing social movement.
New finding for social movement theory is, perception. Social movements don’t develop to riot
automatically. People, who involved in social movement, recognize violent way is not the solution. Therefore, toanalyze social movement, interaction between actors is important. In this case, Uprising of Hangberg, thedistrust, civil society perceive is the key factor to develop to riot.

2Japanese Summary (1 page)

人々はしばしば暴力的な行為によって、国家や政治家、市民社会に対して政治的意思を表明することがある。しかし、暴動はその行為の手段に暴力を用いるため国家との緊張関係を増幅してしまい、政治的な意図を反映する、という当初の目的の達成を逆に困難にしてしまうものである。暴動は目的の達成という観点では非合理的な行為であるにも関わらず、現在でもアフリカの多くの国々で多く報告されているが現状である。非合理的な選択肢がアフリカではなぜ多く報告されているのか、という問題意識から人々が政治的意見を表明する際、暴力的な行為に至るその原因について言及したい。事例としては、南アフリカ共和国西ケー
プ州ケープタウン市ハウトベイ地区に位置しているハンバーグというタウンシップで 2010 年に発生したハンバーグ蜂起という暴動を事例として取り上げる。本論文で取り扱う 2010 年の事例は、ハウトベイ地区の景観を守る、という観点から発生した警察の強制退去命令及びその執行に対してハンバーグというカラード
コミュニティの市民が起こした暴動である。この暴動を事例研究として分析し、人々がなぜ暴動という一見非合理的な選択をしてしまうのか、を明らかにする。本論文では、2010 年ハンバーグ蜂起の際、実際に投石運動を行ったハンバーグ市民にインタビューを実施し、その質的データからこの問題を考察する。データ収集のため研究地であるハンバーグを訪問し、参与観察及び半構造化インタビューを 12 名に実施した。
では、2010 年のハンバーグ蜂起はなぜ暴力的なものへと発展したのであろうか。市民社会側がどのように政府を捉えていたか、からこの原因を説明する。市民社会側がハンバーグにおける土地問題に関して取り組み始めたのは環境保護法が制定された 2003 年頃からである。ハンバーグ市民は、集団地域法以降約 50
年居住していたため、ハンバーグに継続して居住できるよう政府に交渉するようになる。この時政府との交渉の窓口は HBCA である。HBCA は 2006 年に住居向上政策の実施を政府に交渉し、2008 年にはそれが実行されることが決定されていた。しかしながらその約束された住居向上政策が反故にされたことにより、市民社
会は対話から社会運動による抗議活動へとその活動を切り替えていく。このように政府は市民社会が社会運動を実施する、という行動予測が立っている中で協調と敵対のどちらの選択をするのだろうか。市民社会が社会運動を実施する中で政府が対話を続けることで解決することはむずかしい。そのため、政府は自己利益最大化のために警察による強制執行を 2,010 年に実施し、警察と市民の相互作用によって暴動へと発展しているのだ。
本論文ではアクターの認識に重点を置いて暴動を分析している。市民社会が政府に対して不信感を抱き、それが政府に対する敵対的な行動につながっているのだ。政府の土地問題に対する真摯なコミットメントを確保するための手段として市民社会は暴力を選択してしまっているのだ。そしてその敵対的な行動が政府による警察の動員へとつながっているのだ。警察と市民社会の間での相互に敵対行動を取ったことが暴動の原因となっている。しかし、その敵対行動を引き起こしたのは、不満ではなく、政府に対して市民社会が持っていた不信感である。
3

1. Introduction
People sometimes express their political opinions to nations politicians and civil society, by exercising
violence. Generally, this violent is called riot. Because the violence by riot, effects to not only the target, butalso unrelated citizens, riot is regarded as a social evil. On the other hand, social movement, which just protest
their political opinions without violent, is said that collective action by people is regarded as part of democracy.
Riot and social movement is same from the point of expressing political opinions. However, when social
movement turns to riot, it turns to extremely difficult, because violence makes the relation between thegovernment worse1. Although riot is irrational to achieve the goal of social movement, many riots are reported
in African continent. Therefore, this research clarifies the cause lead people violent, when they express theiropinions.

2. Study Area
In my research, I focus on one case named “Uprising of Hangberg”. This case is riot, broke out in 21st
September 2010, at one township, named Hangberg located in Hout Bay Cape Town city. This is the casewhich residents in Hangberg use violent to protest against forced eviction by the police. Hangberg is informal
township, which was created during apartheid era.
During Apartheid, people were distinguished by the race, and greater part of the land is distributed to“white” and residential area of other race is strictly limited, by Group Area Act. Currently the end of apartheid
does not mean the end of residential distinction, because of an income gap by race. The residential area,
which was distributed to African, is really small not enough to respond to the populations. From the situation,
people can’t maintain their daily lives in their authorized land, and started to build houses in government
owned land, illegally. This problem is regarded as informal settlement issue. After the apartheid, however,
government planed to compensate by money to relocate, this policy didn’t work efficiently and people didn’t

1

McDoom Shahabudin Omar, “It`s Who You Know: Social Networks, Interpersonal Connections, and Participation in Collective

Violence.” Institute of Development studies-at the University of Sussex. Available on http://www.hicn.org/wordpress/wpcontent/uploads/2012/06/HiCN-WP-140.pdf, (accessd 19/11/2014)4

give back the land to government. From this conflict, Uprising of Hangberg was outbreak. This kind of riot isreported in some township.
There are two reasons why I choose uprising of Hangberg to clarify my research question. One is that
this event is categorized as riot, was rationally chosen by the people. In Hangberg, discussion about land to
government was started around 2003, and civil society formed non-violent protest in 2008.

However,

Hangberg formed many kind of peaceful protest to achieve their land right before 2010, residents in Hangberg
turn to choose violent option to conduct throwing stone, arson, and destruction to the public. Furthermore,
after the Uprising of Hangberg in 2010, riot is happened in every September until 2014. From the above, I
regard this case as not unintentional riot, but interaction between government and civil society developed toriot. To reveal the mechanism why civil society chose violent, this is the best case to focus on the interaction.

3.

Methodology

To clarify the question, I conducted fieldwork supported by UNU and UCT. I was in South Africa from
5th September 2014 to 4th November 2014. First half of the stay, I gathered basic information about Cape Town,
Hangberg and Riot. Especially, history and specific feature of Cape Town and Apartheid is necessary for getting
and analyzing data in fieldwork. Basic information about Hangberg is not uploaded in South Africa Government
Official web page, because this township is smaller than other township and it is informal. I got other research
conducted in Hangberg to learn the characteristic of this township.

Second half of the stay, I prepared and conducted fieldwork in Hangberg. My Supervisor
Professor Divine Fuh helped me to introduce a coordinator, live in Hangberg. For foreign researcher, it istough to conduct fieldwork without a coordinator. My coordinator organized interview during my stay in
Hangberg. The method to collect data is semi-structured interview, because semi-structure interview cancope with emotional answers2. Because of the purpose of the interview is to research the mechanism ofriot, my research systematically sampled 12 informants, who involved in throwing stone activity during

2

Refer to the questionnaire in appendix
5

uprising of Hangberg. Fieldwork was conducted 6day from 26th September 2014 to 1st October 2014 and7days from 27th October 2014 to 3rd November 2014. I contacted every informant beforehand through thecoordinator, and conduct close door interview. The content of interview was mainly peoples’ perceptionsof government. Because almost all person who involved in throwing stone is male, and they went work ina weekday, for that reason, it is difficult to contact them. As the result, I conducted interview to 12
informants.

4.

Research Findings

From the interview, purpose and action of civil society became clear. Main purpose of Hangberg

is to get approval of land right. Almost all people, living in Hangberg are categorized as “Coloured” andthey were evicted and move to Hangberg at the beginning of Apartheid era. The eviction was conducted
in 1950s, and around 60 years have passed. A lot of people are born in Hangberg. Hangberg is alreadybecome their hometown now. However, buildings in Hangberg are built in public space illegally while
apartheid era. Currently, Government of Cape Town plans to evict under environmental protection act.
This is the reason people in Hangberg protest against administration.
People of Hangberg are constantly take action toward Cape Town administration since 2003, when
Environmental protection Act was enacted. When environmental protection law enacted, Hout Bay Civil
Association (HBCA), which is civil society organization formed by Hangberg residents, start negotiation to
government. Opinion of HBCA is living in Hangberg is inherit right for 50-years-residence since apartheid
started. 50-years-experience formed conscious of community. Furthermore, people in Hangberg need tostay there. Hangberg is located along the ocean, and almost of the residents are fishermen. For the
residents of Hangberg, relocation to other place means unemployment. Unemployment, is serious
problem in Cape Town, bind them to stay in Hangberg.

Their conviction that relocation causes

unemployment, is the strong motivation for HBCA to have social movement toward Cape Town
Administration.

6However, they have opportunity to have dialogue with Cape Town city, living environment was not
improved and still government refuse to approve the right to land to residents since 2003. This stagnant
between the residents and government make HBCA shift from dialogue to social movement, which justprotest their own rights by peaceful way. From the interview, protest was formed around 2008, when
government didn’t fulfill the Housing Upgrade Policy. This is the reasons why people form social
movement. When they started social movement, they formed marching, protesting in front ofadministration building and sit-in strike on the road,5.

Analysis and Discussion

The question is why social movement in Hangberg developed to riot. My research explores the reason
through analyzing perception and interaction of two actors, government and community of Hangberg. To
begin with government benefit, it is said to commercialize Hout Bay as new sightseeing spot. Hout Bay is
beautiful place to stay and tourist can enjoy seafood near the harbor. To maintain beautiful view of Hout Bay,township of Hangberg and informal settlements are big obstacles for shifting tourist place. For government,
they do not have to respect their land rights, because the land ownership is essentially belongs to government.
On the other hand, residents of Hangberg need land right. This interests conflict is the reason why the uprisingoccurred.
In 2006, HBCA negotiated with Cape Town Government to improve their living condition, and thenegotiation reached a settlement. Government promised to implement Housing Upgrading Policy. The policy
has two pillars, one is approval and the other is upgrade. First pillar allow residents to live in Hangberg unlessthey build concrete foundation. And another pillar is repair and extend the flats and provide the public services.
This settlement was the result of a compromise between HBCA and government. Government allowed them tolive temporary, for ease their tension and make residents recognize the land right is temporary. Residents ofHangberg had a distrust of the policy, but the offer of public service was attractive for them. In 2008,
government carried out Housing Upgrading Policy, but insufficient result made them further distrust. However,they approved their living, government just improve the exterior of the apartment and they just built public
7

service center and didn’t provide public services. Furthermore, government’ demolish of two apartments for the
purpose of improvement of their living condition, made residents aggressive attitude toward government.
HBCA formed social movement for protesting demolish of two apartments, and the policy was suspended. Thissuspension caused further distrust to government, and HBCA shifted from Dialogue to social movement.
This shift is based on distrust that residents of Hangberg perceived government never contribute theirliving condition. This perception made residents shift from dialogue to attitude to conflict. Under the distrust,
residents of Hangberg didn’t keep dialogue, because of the fear that Government cheating people to relocate.

From the change of their attitude, government reacted with confrontational attitude. Basically, theattitude of Government, was negative toward approval of land rights. To make Hout Bay as newsightseeing spot, resident of Hangberg are main obstacle, because they might threaten tourists. At first,
government, sought to solve by dialogue, because land disputes were serious problem in South Africa. To
get support from the public, government need to solve by peaceful way. But, if there was no possibility tosolve by peaceful way, government put importance to getting back land from them. Residents’ attitude
generally shifted from dialogue to social movement, Government pressed them to migrate from Hangberg.
This governmental attitude was clear by the statement of Helen Zille, mayor of City of Cape Town3 .
Finally, in 2010, government mobilized Police, to forcefully demolish the sharks of Hangberg. Theinteraction between police and residents of Hangberg caused riot. Before 2010, government nevermobilized police, and sought to solve by dialogue, and residents of Hangberg never protested by violent
way, because HBCA had communication channel to government. But this mobilization make HBCA
perceive this confrontation never solved by peaceful way. From the statement by Helen Zille, residents
started to throw stone to the police first, and police reacted to the attack by shooting rubber bullets. On
the other hand, residents said that police shoot and residents react to throw stone as protesting against

3

Lewis Esther and Prince Natasha, Zille has declared war on us, avaiable on http://www.iol.co.za/news/south-

africa/western-cape/zille-has-declared-war-on-us-1.680941#.VLcUqYqsXUs, accessed 15/1/20158

police. This contradict opinions by both side might be the gap of feeling between them4. Uprising of
Hangberg was caused by the interaction between police and residents. And this interaction was producedby aggressive attitude by both sides, and developed to riot.
After the Uprising of Hangberg, government was hostile toward residents of Hangberg, and nevercommunicated with HBCA, and made new community organization, named Peace and mediation Forum.
The purpose of this organization was to mediate the Uprising of Hangberg. This organization is seemingly
a independent civil society organization. But this organization was operating by government. The leaderof the Peace and Mediation Forum was selected by city of Cape Town. and government never expect themember of HBCA. From this, inside of residents of Hangberg are divided by Peace and Mediation Forumside and HBCA side.
To analyze this interaction, the matrix below shows the expected result of the interaction. Optionof civil society and government is cooperate or conflict. And, from the finding and analysis, confrontationof both side caused riot.

Civil Society
perceive thatgovernment
Government
attitude is
Cooperation
Civil Society
perceive thatgovernment
attitude isConfrontation

Civil Society
Government perceive that civil
Government perceive that civilsocieties’ attitude is Cooperationsocieties’ attitude is Confrontation
Smooth communication between
Civil society doesn’t accept any
government and civil society, may efforts and dialogue by
result in voluntary migration andgovernment, may result in thatsufficient social security,
land dispute become deadlock
Enforcement measures like no public
service and forced displacement
without any compensate, may resultin that government regain the landbut government betray civil society.

Conflict of interest between
Government and civil society comeinto surface, may result in riot.

Figure1: Relation between Civil Society and Government over the land dispute (made by author)

4

From the interview, residents of Hangberg didn’t start violent action because they don’t want to fight in the place where they live.
9

This figure shows the result of interaction between government and civil society. Around 2003,
civil societies’ peaceful approach to government change the attitude from confrontation to cooperation,and government started to dialogue to solve this land disputes. From 2003 to 2006, both sides were good
relations. But, from 2006 to 2008, civil society generally recognized that government policy was in fact
deceived residents to regain the land. From this change, the attitude of civil society shifted toconfrontation. Finally from 2008 to 2010, governmental attitude changed by civil societies’ social
movement. In case both sides show aggressive attitude to opposite, caused violent incident. From theinterview and government document, it is clear that the government policy was insufficient for solving
land dispute. Government general relocation policy has three pillars to recover and compensate for forced
migration during apartheid. However, the policies ware not functioned effectively, because the policies
aims are to distribute land in rural area with compensation. So, government doesn’t allow people to live in
informal settlement although informal settlement was one of a legacy of apartheid. And Housing Upgrade
Policy, which Cape Town government and HBCA agreed was not fulfilled. From this interaction, not only
the fact how government and civil society tried to solve the land dispute, but also we need to focus onperception when analyzing social movement.

6. Conclusion
New finding for social movement theory is, perception. Social movements don’t develop to riot
automatically. People, who involved in social movement, recognize violent way is not the solution. Therefore, toanalyze social movement, interaction between actors is important.
In this case, Uprising of Hangberg, the distrust, civil society perceive is the key factor to develop to
riot. And still now, the conflict between government and Hangberg is not solved and government mobilizes
police annually to demolish informal settlement. To solve this land dispute, confidence building is necessary
approach for both sides.

7.

Reflection on the GLTP in Africa
10What I learned from staying in Cape Town through GLTP is difficulty to get data from fieldwork.
Communication to informants is not easy task. I need to understand how people suffer from land dispute andempathy with residents of Hangberg before conducting my fieldwork. And empathy is really difficult because
the culture and their life is totally different from Japan. I couldn’t understand unless I spent time in Hangberg
community. Also, researcher need to care their emotion when interview. During the interview, informants weresometimes filled with emotion and they answer my question by emotional way, therefore I couldn’t get theanswer what I want to get.
GLTP gave me great opportunity to face a lot of difficulty, and I learn how to overcome these
difficulties by Professor Fuh. He taught me that people are not object, researchers need to listen what theysaid, and if the answer is not what I want, this is new finding.
I never get this experience by doing fieldwork and dialogue with people. I am really appreciate thisprogram and want to use this experience for my job. I am working in IT company, which analyze big data by
quantitative way. But from my experience in South Africa, quantitative way is important for testimony, but tofind something new, I need to listen real voice. I use my experience to manage data in business.

11

References

Acemoglu Daron and Robinson James.A, (2001), A theory of Political Transition, The American Economic

Review vol.91, no.4
Afrobarometer. (2002). Violent Social Conflict and Conflict Resolution in Nigeria (Vol. No.2). Afrobarometer
Briefing Paper.
Baier, A. (1986). Trust and Antitrust (Vol. 96(2)). The University of Chicago Press.
Blumer, H. (1969). Collective Behaivior. Barnes and Noble.
Brass, P. (1997). Theft of an Idol: Text and Context in the Representation of Collective Violence. Princeton
University Press.
Briceno-Leon, R. a. (2002). Violence and Globalization in Latin America (Vol. 50). Current Sociology.
Charles, T. (1978). From Mobilization to Revolution. Longman Higher Education.
Coleman, J. (1988). "Social Capital in the Creation of Human-Capital". American Journal of Sociology.
Coleman, J. (1989). foundations of Social Theory. Harvard University Press.
Coletta, N. C. (2000). Violent Conflcit and the Transformation of Social Capital: Lessons from Cambodia,

Rwanda, Guatenala and Somalia. The World Bank.
Collier, P. A. (2000). Greed and Grievance in Civil War (Vol. 18). World Bank Warking Paper Series.
Davis, D. E. (1999). The Power of Distance: Rethinking Social Movements in Latin Americas (Vol. 27(2)).
Latin American Perspectives.
Diamond, L. (1994). Toward Democratic Consolidation (Vols. Vol.5, No.3 ). Journal of Democracy.
Eisinger, P. K. (1973). The condition of protest behaivior in American cities (Vol. 67). The American Political
Science Review.
Fearon, J. D. (2003). Ethnicity, Insurgency, and Civil War (Vol. 90). American Political Science Review.
Fearon, J. (1995). Rational Explanation of War (Vol. 49). International Organization.
12

Hirschman, A. O. (1970). Exit, Voice and Loyalty:Responses to Decline in Firms, Organizations, and States.
cambridge: Harverd University Press.
Jimenez, A. C. (2011). Trust in anthropology (Vol. 11(2)). Anthropological Theory.
K, E. P. The condition of protest Behavior in American cities (Vol. 67(1)). The American Political Science Review.
McDoom, O. S. (2011). It’s Who You Know: Social Networks, Interpersonal Connections, and Participation in

Collective Violence. Institute of Development studies-at the University of Sussex.
Neil, S. (1962). Theory of Collective Behaivior. London: Routldge and K.Paul.
Nick, C. (2002). Making Sense of Social Movements. Buckingham and Philadelphia: Open University Press.
Olson, M. (1965). The Logic of Collective Action. Harverd University Press.
Pettit, P. (1995). The Cunning of Trust (Vol. 24(3)). Philosophy and Public Affairs.
Phil Clark, Z. D. (2009). After Genocide Trnsitional Justice, Post-conflict Reconstruction and Reconciliation in

Rwanda and Beyond. Columbia University Press.
Roy J.Lewicki, D. J. (1998). Trust and Distrust: New Relationships and Realities (Vol. 23(3)). The Academy ofManagement Review.
Scacco, A. (2007). Explaining Individual Participation in Violent Demonstrations: New Evidence from Nigeria, .
unpublished manuscript, Columbia University.
Schumpeter, J. (1942). Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. New York: Harper and row.
Shinichi Shigetomi, a. K. (2009). Protest and Social Movements in the Developing World. Edward Elgar Pub.
Sidney, T. (1998). Power in Movement: Social Movements and Contentious Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Smelser, N. (1962). Theory of Collective Behaivior. Nabu Press.
Uslaner, E. M. (2000). Producing and Consuming Trust (Vol. 115(4)). Political Science Quarterly.
Varshney, A. (2003). Ethnic Conflict and Civil Life: Hindus and Muslims in India. Yale University Press.
13

Weigert, J. L. (1985). Trust as a Social Reality (Vol. 63(4)). Oxford University Press.
Winton, A. (2004). Urban Violence: A Guide to the Literatre. (Vol. 16). Environment and Urbanization.

<web>
Lewis Esther and Prince Natasha, Zille has declared war on us, avaiable on
http://www.iol.co.za/news/south-africa/western-cape/zille-has-declared-war-on-us1.680941#.VLcUqYqsXUs, accessed 15/1/2015
Aziz Hartley, Hangberg, authorities celebrate peace accord, available on
http://www.iol.co.za/capetimes/hangberg-authorities-celebrate-peace-accord-1.1196521#.VLcVPYqsXUs,
accessed 15/1/201514

Appendix (questionnaire)

Questionnaire No:
Interviewer’s Name:
Date of Interview:
Time Start:

Time End:

Respondent’s Name:
Age:

Sex: M/F

Occupation:

Religion:
Marriage:

the number of Children:

Address:
How long does he/she live:

1.

Where do you live in Hangberg? What kind of house do you live? (Fact)①

2.

Does your house exist above the firebreak? (Fact)

During uprising of Hangberg in 2010, did you receive any violence from police? (Fact)

Yes/No①

3.

What kind of action do you receive? (Fact)

Did you know that the eviction would be happened in 2010 beforehand? (Fact)

Yes/No15

4.

In Uprising of Hangberg in 2010, I heard that there were violent conflicts between police. In thattime, what kind of protest did you engage in to the police? (Fact)

5.

If I would move to Hangberg, what should I care the most? (How people recognize fear of worry
during their life)

6.

【Trust to Government】About eviction issue, could you tell me your opinion about government?
Does government work well? Or what is the problem do you think? (Opinion and attitude)①

Do you receive any supports (subsidy) from government? (Opinion of the governmental
support)1.

What kind of support do you receive?

2.

Is it enough for your daily life?

②

Do you go for vote? (Attitude to the government)③

Do you think what is the good point of the government?(Trust)④

Do you satisfy with government?
1.

⑤

⑥

7.

What kind of services makes you happy?

Do you trust government?
1.

(if say yes)Why do you trust, although you face eviction problem?

2.

(if say no) why you can’t trust government do you think?

Do you think what is the bad point of the government?(Distrust)【Trust to Society】There is a lot of community organization in Hangberg, do you think theseorganizations work well for eviction issues?(Opinion)16

①Have you ever belonged to any civic organization? (Fact)
1.

②

8.

Which is good organization do you think?

How do you evaluate community leader?

【Trust to individual】I feel communication between neighbors is active in Hangberg, do you have
any trouble or problems in daily lives? (Fact)①

How do you solve when you have trouble in daily lives? (Opinion)②

Do you have any concern about neighborhood, and what kind of concern do you have? Or
do you have positive idea about neighborhood? (Opinion)③

Do you know everyone in the community? (Recognition)④

Who is favorable neighbor?

Fin
Thank you very much for interview.

17