Special Hearings — Faith Community Hearings — 1997-11-17

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much. Did you say your colleague was going to participate   in answering questions?
REV.

REV WESLEY MABUZA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Dr Mgojo?
DR.

KHOZA MGOJO: Mr chairperson, our only disadvantage is that we didn't get that   text. So we shall be asking questions having not studied the text. Having said   so, the theology of liberation - how far has the theology of liberation been   influenced by what is called "black consciousness" or "black   theology"? Are these things related? Is that the basis of this theology?   "Black consciousness" or "black theology"?
REV.

REV WESLEY MABUZA: That is correct, Commissioner. We talk of theology of liberation   in the context of contextual theology and that would involve black theology,   and that would be influenced by all the other dynamics black consciousness,   economic conditions and so forth, in the country.
DR K.

KHOZA MGOJO: Thank you. Would I be right to say that the concern of the Contextual   Theology, mostly, related to what is happening now is that you think that there   is a lack of restorative justice? You have said that even perpetrators, they   just go free, having not been asked to do anything. Is that your basis that   it lacks, in fact in your very short submission, you have also quoted some of   the flaws of the TRC and when a person reads around this, you find that things   have been made easy for the perpetrators. Am I right?
[UNKNOWN] Chairperson, we are only interpreting and also elaborating on what   the membership of the ICT on the ground has said. We work with cells which are   contextual theology units. Those are people at grassroots level who reflect   on what is happening, who reflect on the feelings, who reflect on everything   they are experiencing. What has been coming through is that there is some kind   of resentment to the fact that people go away with impunity and people are not   calling for the execution of others, they are not calling for the jailing of   others, but they are saying some form of mechanism that will show that people   are taking responsibility for what they have done would in fact be a step ahead.   People have quoted, for example, one of the cases during submissions here at   the amnesty hearings, from Derby-Lewis for example. Sorry to mention a name,   but we have to. Saying he has gone back to the law, and said that the law does   not require me, to even to say sorry, but we know that some other people have   said sorry. So we in the happening, but we are saying people want something   more feasible out of the process. 
REV.

REV WESLEY MABUZA: I just also want to add that I think the main test of any   process is its delivery and what is happening at the moment seems to be more   delivery for the perpetrators than there is for those who were victims, and   in addition as we mentioned in our submission earlier, is that just even looking   at face value, there is very little difference of that kind of recognition from   those not just who were perpetrators, but the group to which those belong. To   show that kind of acceptance of the past and attend to it with the humility   it deserves. There is a claiming of rights, almost unequalled even before apartheid,   from those who had rights even before. And therefore the delivery is really   the one that should determine, rather than ourselves pontificating on whether   the TRC is a good process or not.

<UNKNOWN>: Just to add one more thing, Chairperson. This is one of the   reasons why ICT felt that the churches should have their own TRC, because with   our church authority, church leaders and so forth, it is possible to get through   to the membership, who are people that are part of the community and some of   whom are involved in these kinds of atrocities, or whatever was happening in   the past. 
DR K.

KHOZA MGOJO: Thank you, that is very interesting. Earlier this morning, there   was a question which was posed by Reverend Finca about the churches themselves   and now there is a suggestion here that the churches need to have their own   TRC. How is this going to happen Will the churches be judging themselves when   they have this TRC or not?

<UNKNOWN>: Thank you very much for that question. We wouldn't know what   turn the churches would follow, but I think that the opening address of the   Chairperson of the commission has already said that it will not be to sing praises   to the church. There are many things we would like to say about the church,   but I think some of us would be dishonest if we were to say those things in   this kind of forum. We want to believe that we belong to the church. There are   contradictions. Our own church, the Methodist Church, for example is now being   led by a black person who has to account for the deeds of white leaders, and   so these are some of the things that I think can be clarified. The fact that   the church can go further than that and the fact that the church has already,   in its own way begun to look at, I don't think that the church begins to look   at repentance by an act of parliament. It looks at repentance from its own position   and I think this needs to be recognised. We want to believe that then we will   be free to speak to our own body what we want to say because we want to correct   and build it. It is difficult at this stage, to just stand up and say the church   was this or that, because we belong to the church, and we are not forced to   belong to it. 
DR.

KHOZA MGOJO: Last question, Mr Chairperson, so that the other people can ask   a question. ICT has worked very closely with the SACC and many people believe   that there was ICT because there was the SACC. Most of the people who formed   the ICT are the people who came from that kind of background. How is the working   relationship going to happen between the ICT and the SACC?
REV.

REV WESLEY MABUZA: I thank you very much, sir. I think we need to look at   how the two bodies operate. The first one operates from the fact that it is   more of an institution which is answerable to churches and church leaders and   thereby there are some constraints where we like it or not, because there are   certain things that the SACC cannot just do without going through the heads   of churches, and going through is the operative word. But with the ICT, ICT   is a freewheeling body and would like to remain that way and there are lots   of convergences with what the SACC does. We want to believe that we compliment   what the SACC does and I am sure that the SACC would be the last body to want   to see this child die, and so I am sure that I speak for the general secretary.   Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: I hope that you are not getting too agitated, because time we   can sort of adjust. We were going to have tea at 11, but I think we ought to   finish this and we'll sort of just move things up, so Bishop Michael it gives   you time to recuperate. AnyBongani?
REV.

BONGANI FINCA: James King BurmanI don't know if I'm pronouncing the name   correctly, the Chief Executive of the Institute of Race Relations published   an article in the Daily Despatch of October 7th, where he makes a stinging attack   on Liberation Theology, and how it inspired violence in the townships. I am   not quoting verbatim, but he says that the people who come before the amnesty   committee now to apply for amnesty for necklacing people in the townships are   nothing but victims of the propaganda that came from Liberation Theologians   who are now sitting back and not taking ownership. He calls for the churches   and for the Theologians who were involved in this to use the avenue of this   hearing to make public confessions and ask for forgiveness. I would like you   to comment on that. I think he expects us to raise the question and get an answer.   I don't know whether you saw the article.
REV.