Courts can’t heal SA’s racial rift

Any grouping in our society which is based on race – and deliberately excludes from its membership any South African simply because of the colour of their skin – is racist, both in the definition of the word and in the law.

That much has been confirmed by the decision of the Electoral Court to deregister Black First Land First (BLF) as a political party.

Section 16 (1) (c) of the Electoral Commission Act of 1996 says the Electoral Commission of SA may not register any party to contest any election if that party excludes people based on race, skin colour or ethnicity. So, in terms of the law, the Freedom Front Plus (FF+) was correct to challenge the decision of the IEC to allow the BLF to fight the recent elections.

The BLF has made a point of its appeal to blackness ever since its formation around the time Jacob Zuma and the Guptas were starting to feel the heat as their state capture project began unravelling.

It also pushed the racist, divisive line of “white monopoly capital” which, ironically, emanated mainly from British spin-doctors Bell-Pottinger in London.

BLF and its leader, Andile Mngxitama, have also continued to spew racist invective.

The Electoral Court decision is not, as some might see it, a restriction on freedom of speech.

In this country, which is still emerging from a bloody past shaped by racial discrimination, the lawmakers have decided to, effectively, outlaw racism.

That is why so many people have been charged with hate speech, in various judicial forums. Until the law is changed, it must be upheld. It is that simple. But, the mere existence of an organisation like the BLF shows how bitterly divided along racial lines we still are as a society.

And that rift cannot be healed in any court of law.