Special Hearings — Children's Hearings — 1997-05-22

MR KAMALDIEN: Context.  The Act requires a description of the context within which violations were perpetrated on the young.
 For the majority of the young in South Africa, the context into which they were born and in which they grew was one of conflict.  They had to make choices to do with avoidance, participation, leadership, often in full awareness of the likely consequences.  This was true of girls and boys, young women and men, white and black youth.  For some there was a history of resistance against the State that they followed.  There were powerful networks of connections that drew them into political activities.  For others engagement in political activity resulted in deep divisions within families so that nurturance was withdrawn and the domestic arena was made vulnerable to forces from the outside.  Many of the young were carried into conflict with the rush of their peers and few were prepared for the sorts of violations that were meted out to them.  The nature of the conflict tore apart community forms of trust, and networks of informers made the lives of many of them dangerous on a day-to-day level.  The context for many was one that caused the young to judge their elders and, again, trust and security were destroyed as they judged the elders harshly and took up action that went against elders' command.  
 The actions of the young were criminalised.  Protest was outlawed under States of Emergency that did not distinguish between the treatment of adults and children.  The provisions of the Child Care Act and the Criminal Procedure Act were abrogated as children were tortured, interrogated and imprisoned very often, without access to legal counsel, and without the knowledge of their parents.  Political protest was re-invented as the crime of Public Violence, giving licence to the State to act with the full force of the violent means at its disposal.  Protesting children acquired criminal records which stand to this day.

MR POLONGWANA: Places of worship provided sanctuary to communities in troubled times.  They were repeatedly violated.  Trust in centres of healing were broken as hospitals were raided and medial records seized.  Schools, even those for the very young were legitimate targets of the security forces, as teachers and pupils alike were teargassed and beaten up in the classroom.
 So for many of the young, the atmosphere in which they grew up was one of real, imminent danger, pain, the real possibility of failure and a consciousness of the burden of responsibility they often carried for others' lives.  
 The established professional associations of lawyers, medical doctors and mental health specialists such as psychologists, largely failed to condemn this abuse, effectively giving it licence to proceed.

MR KAMALDIEN: The legacy and the future.  Those who grew up under our violent past will carry the traces of their experience into adulthood.  Many have suffered the loss of loved ones.  Many carry both physical and psychological scars.  The life chances of many have been damaged through aborted education.  Some have no doubt grafted the skills learnt during the times of political violence onto criminal violence as they strive to survive amid a sea of poverty.  But perhaps the most disturbing and dangerous aspect of the legacy for the future of the nation, is the fact that those who sought to transform the country, and in the process gave up so much, see so little change their immediate circumstances.  However, the period of the struggle also nurtured resilience, wisdom, the leadership and tolerance.  It produced men and women of extraordinary calibre, who despite their suffering, have shown unprecedented patience with their former oppressors.
 There is another legacy.  The TRC has heard the testimony of perpetrators of gross human rights violations towards the young.  Many of them have their own children.  Many of these children are likely to have deeply conflictual images of their parents as a result of these hearings.  The Act requires us to consider, with compassion, their most difficult situation.  This is a group, who with their families, live with these facts in silence - as unrecognised victims.  The Commission needs to find ways to help them deal with this pain.  A similar concern must be expressed for the white youth who fought in defence of a white South Africa, and who were convinced by their military and political masters that their suffering and acts of violence were just.  Once they were heroes.  Now they are a forgotten embarrassment on the trash heap of apartheid's bloody past.

MR POLONGWANA: Finally, what of the perpetrators themselves?  The Act asks for the description of "... the perspectives of those persons responsible for the commission of the violations".  Gross human rights violations were committed by persons operating with the State security forces;  those in the organisations opposed to the State;  those in the community structures and individuals acting in pursuit of their own ends.  The perspectives of violaters were, therefore, broad and an account of them would encompass the history of this land.  However, the relation to the violation of the rights of children and youth certain perspectives should be carefully examined.  Especially the perspectives of those who say they acted under orders, or that their actions were derived from moral and ideological pressures within their communities that they could not withstand.  It has to be asked whether such perspectives exonerate choices that were made in committing gross violations against the young.
 Here we seek to understand notions of individual will in relation to the command of authorities;  and of evil in relation to personal culpability;  and forgiveness in the relation to repentance.  Depending on the interpretations made of violations of the human rights of the young and depending on the meanings assigned to those acts, we may be able to reconsider the character of childhood and adolescence as framed in the new South Africa.  
 Truth must need lead to reconciliation.  This requires acknowledgement: of the wrong done to the young, of the price they have paid, of the achievement they have made in helping to secure a democratic state.

MS KWASHANE: And it requires action:  in securing the basic needs of the young, in providing a good education, training and work experience, in building communities that can secure their best interests, especially their safety and the integrity of their bodies, in tackling the sources of violence in the home and the community all of which demands the commitment of resources and the restructuring of institutions, especially the institution of the family.  South Africa is now signatory to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.  This commits the State and all adult South Africans to ensure that the rhetoric of the Declaration is translated into concrete action to improve the conditions and nature of South African childhood.  It is easy to sign conventions.  It is a lot more difficult to convince those with power to commit sufficient financial, personnel and material resources to making the provisions of the convention a reality. It is necessary that this be done in order to overcome the ravages of apartheid and address the situation of those who gave their formative years to political struggle.  It is in the interests of a productive, peaceful and just future of South Africa that this be done.   Finally, reconciliation requires an awareness of the nature of childhood. On the basis of that awareness, the nation must ensure that each adult who comes into contact with a child is worthy of the privilege.  History will record the role that the young played in securing liberation.  History will also record the achievements of the nation in relation to the wellbeing of the young.  Let us not be found wanting.  Thank you.