No. 04: Silenced by Nation-Building: African Immigrants and Language Policy in the New South Africa

All people in South Africa have constitutionallyguaranteed language rights. To what extent do these rights apply to non-citizens and are they actually observed by various state departments and officials? This report presents the results of a preliminary investigation into this question by focusing on the rights and treatment of foreigners in South Africa, particularly foreigners from other African countries. The report was commissioned by the Southern African Migration Project (SAMP) as part of a broader programme to understand the reception and treatment of non-South Africans in the new South Africa. Our aim, as authors, is to encourage government departments and nongovernmental organisations (NGO’s) to continue to work towards policies which enhance the guarantee of multilingualism enshrined in the Constitution, and which enable marginalised constituencies to be recognised and heard. The report focuses on the national departments of Home Affairs, Safety and Security, and Justice. These are the main points of immigrant and migrant contact with the state, and therefore the most likely to require policy guidelines. Other departments dealing with immigrants – such as Correctional Services, Defence, Health, Education and Welfare, as well as their provincial counterparts – will also require investigation in order to get a comprehensive picture account of current language policies and practices. To this end, the report includes recommendations for further research. Two assumptions inform this report. Firstly, we assume that the interests of structures like the Pan South African Labour Board (PanSALB) as well as NGOs are distinct from the interests vying for power within government and state structures. We therefore conclude that various civil society groups and possibly the PanSALB will actively defend the Constitution and advance a progressive and inclusive approach to language policy that benefits everyone. In a country where language has been used to divide and undermine certain political, social, economic and cultural interests, it would seem necessary for language policy to become central in the elaboration of democracy and human rights. Secondly, we assume that it is in the long term interests of the new political order in South Africa to use sensible language planning to maintain peace (by promoting tolerance of diversity), and prosperity (by using linguistic resources effectively). It should be possible for nongovernmental interests to forge a consensus with government on the use of language policy to promote and sustain democracy (through promotion of diverse voices, in an inclusive and participatory political system). However, the research for this report provided a striking reminder that few state officials have considered the impact of language policy (and its absence) on broader issues of transformation. Although faced daily with language capacity problems, and the visible manifestation of contested uses of language, state officials interviewed tend not to see a link between their immediate concerns and the role of language policy in providing solutions in both the short and long term. Furthermore, senior civil servants are not necessarily aware of the link between language policy at departmental level, and national priorities of reconstruction and development. Administrative justice and state bureaucratic procedures concerning migrants and immigrants are currently not informed by an explicit, coherent language policy. In some cases there may be violations of constitutionally guaranteed language rights, particularly in situations involving detained persons where their rights, including the written provision of reasons for negative administrative action, are not adequately communicated; and in courts where inadequate language facilitation discriminates against individuals on the basis of language and place of origin. Reasons for the lack of a coherent policy include: Absence of co-ordination between legislative and bureaucratic decision-making on language issues; Inadequate understanding in most government departments of the role and function of language policy; Poor co-ordination within and between departments on language issues; Lack of consultation, negotiation and transparency in decision-making within departments; Inadequate human resource management, including the management of linguistic resources which exist within departments; Avoidance of multilingual policy due to the current power struggle between newly appointed, English speakers in the civil service, and existing Afrikaans speakers; The weak capacity of African migrants and immigrants to advocate on their own behalf; and Increasing xenophobia against, and exclusion of, African immigrants, which is partially an expression of the ambiguity of nation-building. The nature of internal departmental policies and practice, including that of language, directly impacts on public service delivery. The absence of language policy in general contributes to the lack of policy regarding language facilitation for immigrants. This contributes to an overall governmental silence about the legitimate linguistic and cultural presence of other Africans in South Africa. This silence has the potential to obscure real and potential human rights abuses by government, civil society and South African citizens. It is in the interests of democracy and the integrity of the new Constitution to reach into the silence and make apparent the presence and rights of speakers of officially unacknowledged languages of African provenance. The actions taken to make this policy area explicit and to ensure the upholding of the Constitution for marginalised constituencies, can contribute to making language policy and practice part of inclusive democratic state building rather than exclusive nation- building. Redress and correction of the current situation would provide an opportunity to replace the idea of “language as a problem” with “language as a resource”. Hence, immigrants’ linguistic and cultural resources could be recognised as contributing to South African reconstruction and development, and the multilingual abilities of civil servants would be acknowledged, promoted and rewarded. Owing to the complex power dynamics within the state bureaucracy, it is necessary to assign particular responsibility within government and state departments for redress and corrective action, and for organisations of civil society to be made aware and become vigilant on the issue of language access

Joint Impact Assessment of CTA's support to IPACC (2003-2013)

This report is the result of the joint impact study of CTA support to ACP partner organisations and networks led by the CTA in Wageningen, which details the impact of the relationship and collaboration between IPACC and CTA over 7 years beginning from 2007. It follows the early stages of this study, which included the Powerpoint and the quick scan and provides an in-depth look at, not a chosen aspect of the quick scan, but what IPACC learned while doing the quick scan

Rights Mapping (Policy Brief)

Changes in resource entitlements can disrupt existing social relationships and intensify inequality. When this happens it can trigger or amplify conflict. The risk of conflict is higher when one group becomes privileged over another, or where existing inequities and inequalities are exacerbated. Mapping rights can help avoid increases in conflict dimensions, as such mapping increases the visibility of rights of communities, as well as within and among communities. Rights mapping can be used to avoid conflicts by supporting local and indigenous people and those involved in decision-making to actively guard against rights erosion that increase vulnerability

Dialogue across Indigenous, local and scientific knowledge systems reflecting on the IPBES Assessment on Pollinators, Pollination and Food Production

The Dialogue across Indigenous, local and scientific knowledge systems reflecting on the IPBES Assessment on Pollinators, Pollination and Food Production report presents the main outcomes of a Dialogue across Indigenous, local and scientific knowledge systems that revisited and reflected on the key messages derived from the Assessment Report on Pollinators, Pollination and Food Production of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). The Dialogue was hosted from the 21st to the 25th of January 2019 by the Karen community of Hin Lad Nai, Chiang Rai, Thailand, and it was co-convened and jointly designed by the Inter Mountain Peoples Education and Culture in Thailand Association (IMPECT) and Pgakenyaw Association for Sustainable Development (PASD) together with SwedBio at the Stockholm Resilience Centre and UNESCO Natural Science Sector

!Ui-Taa language shift in Gordonia and Postmasburg Districts, South Africa

Includes bibliographical references (leaves 338-359).This dissertation presents a case study of the demise of !Ui-Taa languages in South Africa during the 20th century, with particular attention to N|u, the last surviving variety. The geographic focus is on Gordonia and Postmasburg Districts in the Northern Cape province. Drawing on the work of Diamond (1998), the author argues that food producing peoples (agriculturalists / pastoralists / colonialists) typically penetrate the hunter-gatherer territory and break down the ecological setting that sustains the hunter-gatherer mode of subsistence. The changes in ‘language ecology‘ (Haugen 1972) trigger transformations in social relations and place the languages of hunter-gatherers at risk of rapid language shift. This theory is in contra-distinction to the argument put forward by Brenzinger (1992a, b), Brenzinger et al (1991) and McConveIl (2000) that changes in language attitudes are the primary cause of language death. The second aspect of the dissertation deals with the particulars of the identity of the N|u language and its speakers. The speakers of N|u cail themselves N||n≠e ‘home people‘ or Sasi ‘Bushmen / eland'. Drawing on original research and the oral history, the author argues that Bleek’s (1929. 1956) categorisation of two !Ui-Taa varieties, S2 (||Ng) and 82a (≠Khomani), should be reconsidered, as these are dialects of one another. Reconsidering the distribution of !Ui-Taa languages has implications for understanding hunter-gatherer demographics and social organisation in pre-colonial South Africa

No. 04: Silenced by Nation-Building: African Immigrants and Language Policy in the New South Africa

All people in South Africa have constitutionallyguaranteed language rights. To what extent do these rights apply to non-citizens and are they actually observed by various state departments and officials? This report presents the results of a preliminary investigation into this question by focusing on the rights and treatment of foreigners in South Africa, particularly foreigners from other African countries. The report was commissioned by the Southern African Migration Project (SAMP) as part of a broader programme to understand the reception and treatment of non-South Africans in the new South Africa. Our aim, as authors, is to encourage government departments and nongovernmental organisations (NGO’s) to continue to work towards policies which enhance the guarantee of multilingualism enshrined in the Constitution, and which enable marginalised constituencies to be recognised and heard. The report focuses on the national departments of Home Affairs, Safety and Security, and Justice. These are the main points of immigrant and migrant contact with the state, and therefore the most likely to require policy guidelines. Other departments dealing with immigrants – such as Correctional Services, Defence, Health, Education and Welfare, as well as their provincial counterparts – will also require investigation in order to get a comprehensive picture account of current language policies and practices. To this end, the report includes recommendations for further research. Two assumptions inform this report. Firstly, we assume that the interests of structures like the Pan South African Labour Board (PanSALB) as well as NGOs are distinct from the interests vying for power within government and state structures. We therefore conclude that various civil society groups and possibly the PanSALB will actively defend the Constitution and advance a progressive and inclusive approach to language policy that benefits everyone. In a country where language has been used to divide and undermine certain political, social, economic and cultural interests, it would seem necessary for language policy to become central in the elaboration of democracy and human rights. Secondly, we assume that it is in the long term interests of the new political order in South Africa to use sensible language planning to maintain peace (by promoting tolerance of diversity), and prosperity (by using linguistic resources effectively). It should be possible for nongovernmental interests to forge a consensus with government on the use of language policy to promote and sustain democracy (through promotion of diverse voices, in an inclusive and participatory political system). However, the research for this report provided a striking reminder that few state officials have considered the impact of language policy (and its absence) on broader issues of transformation. Although faced daily with language capacity problems, and the visible manifestation of contested uses of language, state officials interviewed tend not to see a link between their immediate concerns and the role of language policy in providing solutions in both the short and long term. Furthermore, senior civil servants are not necessarily aware of the link between language policy at departmental level, and national priorities of reconstruction and development. Administrative justice and state bureaucratic procedures concerning migrants and immigrants are currently not informed by an explicit, coherent language policy. In some cases there may be violations of constitutionally guaranteed language rights, particularly in situations involving detained persons where their rights, including the written provision of reasons for negative administrative action, are not adequately communicated; and in courts where inadequate language facilitation discriminates against individuals on the basis of language and place of origin. Reasons for the lack of a coherent policy include: Absence of co-ordination between legislative and bureaucratic decision-making on language issues; Inadequate understanding in most government departments of the role and function of language policy; Poor co-ordination within and between departments on language issues; Lack of consultation, negotiation and transparency in decision-making within departments; Inadequate human resource management, including the management of linguistic resources which exist within departments; Avoidance of multilingual policy due to the current power struggle between newly appointed, English speakers in the civil service, and existing Afrikaans speakers; The weak capacity of African migrants and immigrants to advocate on their own behalf; and Increasing xenophobia against, and exclusion of, African immigrants, which is partially an expression of the ambiguity of nation-building. The nature of internal departmental policies and practice, including that of language, directly impacts on public service delivery. The absence of language policy in general contributes to the lack of policy regarding language facilitation for immigrants. This contributes to an overall governmental silence about the legitimate linguistic and cultural presence of other Africans in South Africa. This silence has the potential to obscure real and potential human rights abuses by government, civil society and South African citizens. It is in the interests of democracy and the integrity of the new Constitution to reach into the silence and make apparent the presence and rights of speakers of officially unacknowledged languages of African provenance. The actions taken to make this policy area explicit and to ensure the upholding of the Constitution for marginalised constituencies, can contribute to making language policy and practice part of inclusive democratic state building rather than exclusive nation- building. Redress and correction of the current situation would provide an opportunity to replace the idea of “language as a problem” with “language as a resource”. Hence, immigrants’ linguistic and cultural resources could be recognised as contributing to South African reconstruction and development, and the multilingual abilities of civil servants would be acknowledged, promoted and rewarded. Owing to the complex power dynamics within the state bureaucracy, it is necessary to assign particular responsibility within government and state departments for redress and corrective action, and for organisations of civil society to be made aware and become vigilant on the issue of language access