Violence fills the gaps in public democratic participation

Why are South Africans resorting to violence to express their dissatisfaction with government policies, and taking actions that appear to be so counterproductive?

Residents of the Limpopo town of Vuwani, where the schools were recently burnt down, are quoted as saying that violence is the only way to ensure that politicians listen.

This view is widespread and points to a major problem with the participatory aspects of South Africa’s democracy.

This flaw is highlighted by a recent survey of t he Gauteng adult population conducted by the South African Institute for Advanced Constitutional, Public, Human Rights and International Law (Saifac) at the University of Johannesburg. It reveals a sense of alienation and dissatisfaction with the functioning of representative and participatory democracy in South Africa.

Of the random representative sample of 608 adults, the survey revealed that only 40% of people believe Parliament represents them, with less than half agreeing that their politicians were responsive to their needs.

More than 60% of the sample perceived participation in, and access to, democratic institutions as a problem. For instance, 71% found contacting their MP difficult, 61% said the same about challenging a violation of their rights in court and 68% expressed difficulty in lodging a complaint at the Human Rights Commission.

The survey also reveals limited participation in more demanding political activities, such as attending meetings with national or provincial representatives (22% to 24%) or taking part in strike activity (33%).

The survey suggests that South Africans do value democratic processes.

This can be gleaned from the high levels of voter participation in elections among Gauteng residents, the fact that a majority regularly discusses politics with friends and family and that more than three-quarters follow the news daily. Encouragingly, 82% agreed that South Africa needed strong opposition parties.

These findings reveal a need to enhance participation in South Africa’s democracy and to render its institutions more accessible to the people.

When controversial decisions are taken, leaders must engage deeply and seriously with the views of the public. The courts and the chapter nine institutions must be more accessible, and information campaigns should be undertaken to enhance public awareness of how to use them. More radical forms of participation, such as participatory budgeting, should be considered.

Some groups in civil society are attempting to take participation into their own hands. A good example is the campaign Bua Mzansi, led by Corruption Watch, to increase public participation in the decision to appoint the next public protector.

The Public Protector Act allows for such an appointment without participation from the broader public.

The campaign seeks to bolster public involvement in the nomination and vetting of potential candidates to ensure that the public has a say in who succeeds Thuli Madonsela , who has played a pivotal role in exposing government mismanagement.

A key indicator of the success of a constitutional order is whether a Constitution can channel social conflict and disagreement into formal political institutions.

The violence that erupts in the course of protest actions suggests that conflict-mediating institutions are not performing their stabilising role.

In the end, what is needed is a more responsive leadership and an active commitment to strengthening the participatory aspects of our democratic system.