dc.description.abstract |
The 1996 Constitution of the Republic of South Africa [RSA], allows people to protest,
demonstrate, picket, and assemble when they believe their constitutional rights have
been violated. There are legislations that have been put in place to ensure that while
people are showing their dissatisfaction, they do not infringe on the rights of others by
engaging in riotous behaviour. The Regulation of Gatherings Act [RGA] (Act 205 of
1993) is one of such acts. This study explored the motivations of violent protests in
Malamulele and Vuwani in the Limpopo Province. A qualitative research methodology
was utilised and in-depth interviews and focus group discussions were used to collect
data. Purposive and snowball sampling techniques were used to sample the people
who participated in the protests that occurred in the areas of this study. Thematic
Content Analysis was used to analyse the findings from the in-depth interviews and
the focus group discussions.
The study found that the Malamulele residents were concerned about being in the
Thulamela Municipality, and some of their concerns included but were not limited to
employment and service delivery. This study found that in Vuwani, the violent protests
were influenced by the government’s inability to effectively consult residents in the
merger between Vuwani and Malamulele which was done with the intention of
quenching the violent protests that had erupted in the Malamulele area. Violence is
said to have occurred because the government was unresponsive, and it had failed to
provide adequate services and had also made unfulfilled promises.
Moreover, this study also found that people engaged in collective violence because of
anger and frustration. There were also people who promoted collective violence to
gain access to free grocery through looting. The destroying of government properties
was seen as punishment to both the community and the government. Some protestors
were emotionally disturbed when they saw buildings burning, while some children also
learnt to respond with violence when in conflicting situations. The government lost
money as they had to refurbish or replace things that they had already provided for.
However, in comparison, the participants indicated that it is easy for the government
to recover, because they only lose money while the community has to live with the
scar of collective violence and its aftermath for a long time. |
en_US |