History as adapted from the Book, The Forgotten People: Political Banishment under Apartheid

On the one hand the banished were individuals who broke no laws and who possessed no hidden information, but whose very presence presented a problem. Often these were community leaders or elected chiefs in the rural areas who did not accept without question government edicts; leaders who were perceived as insubordinate – “cheeky” − by one or other authority figure. On the other hand they were were those who carefully couched the language of resistance and carried out their practice of opposition in ways which were effective, but which remained within the law. If during the closing years of apartheid rule, key political opponents of apartheid were often singled out for assassination, sometimes to have their bodies burned while their killers swilled beer and roasted meat alongside the makeshift funeral, in the early decades such opponents from rural areas were condemned to the living hell of banishment in desolate places.

Banishment was deemed by the TRC to be ‘a gross violation of human rightsʼ. It was the finding of the commission that ‘all those upon whom such orders were imposed suffered a gross violation of human rights, for which the former government [is] held accountableʼ. Such a finding was welcomed. Yet, regrettably, the TRC was extremely tardy in giving due attention to banishment and tracing and recognising all those who were banished and whose human rights were violated.

Given that social memory is a terrain of contestation, the outcome was an unfortunate, if unwitting, engineering of forgetting and a skewing of social memory. To the extent that the TRC records become the ‘official repositoryʼ of information The Forgotten People: Po l i tical Banishment under Apartheid on the horrors of apartheid, this has the danger of obscuring practices such as banishment. However, more was at stake. If legitimacy or legitimating relies on the act of forgetting it also, simultaneously, relies on the act of remembering. It must be a matter of concern how very few of the banished or their families were awarded reparations or provided with special pensions.

In the case of the banished, their marginalisation is simultaneously the continuing banishment of rural actors from struggle narratives, and the perpetuation in the popular consciousness of urban people as the only or principal leaders and heroes of the national liberation struggle. Political banishment was a consequence of militant rural resistance during the 1950s and 1960s, and it is ncecesary to reinsert courageous rural communities and leaders as actors and shapers who contributed to the creation of democracy in South Africa. Unlike the Islanders, there is no monument or memorial for the banished. They remain banished from consciousness, a condition needing urgent attention. The preamble to the Constitution proclaims that we, the people of South Africa, recognise the injustices of our past to Honour those who suffered for justice and freedom in our land.

Under colonialism and apartheid a great injustice was perpetrated against those who were banished, principally because in the face of tyranny they sought dignity, justice, and freedom in South Africa. It is a constitutional imperative to recognise the terrible injustice suffered by those who were banished, and to acknowledge and honour them for their contribution to freedom and democracy in South Africa. Let us accord the last words to Helen Joseph, who did so much to highlight banishment and support the banished people and their families; ‘the forgotten peopleʼ and‘ the living deadʼ as she called them. She poignantly points out that ‘they were punished within the law, but outside justice.ʼ

In 1949, seven men from the Batlhako community in Mabeskraal (near Rustenburg) were banished to Driefontein (Vryburg, Northern Cape). Then, in 1955, Chief Jeremiah Mabe and five of his counsellors were banished from Mabeskraal to the Driefontein banishment camp. Altogether 11 people were banished from Mabeskraal, some of them multiple times. The banishment orders served in 1935, 1949, 1955, and 1956 indicate that there was conflict between sections of the Batlhako community and the apartheid state around various issues. According to state officials, the Batlhako community had an ‘unco-operative attitudeʼ towards officials, resisted the Bantu Authorities system, opposed betterment and Bantu education, demonstrated ‘continued open flouting of the laws of the country,ʼ and disregarded ‘duly constituted authority.ʼ

References: Contribution by Professor S. Badat on Banishment, Rhodes University, 2012. From the book, Forgotten People - Political Banishment under Apartheid by Professor S. Badat