Advert
Advert – scroll down
Displaying the 5 latest comments.
Submitted | first-name | support | concern | top-concern | message |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2026-08-30 17:32:46 +02:00 | David | No I do not | All of the above | Breach of Trust: The 1994 Negotiated Settlement | |
2026-08-27 12:30:41 +02:00 | Andy | No I do not | Democratic Pathways: Closing Peaceful Avenues | ||
2026-08-26 22:36:05 +02:00 | Desne | No I do not | All of the above | Breach of Trust: The 1994 Negotiated Settlement | |
2026-08-26 17:45:17 +02:00 | Susanna | No I do not | Breach of Trust: The 1994 Negotiated Settlement | ||
2026-08-26 17:08:44 +02:00 | Johannes | No I do not | Breach of Trust: The 1994 Negotiated Settlement |
-
- Supporters, led by the MK Party, argue that Section 235 is a “dormant” provision that has never been turned into law. They believe it creates a “theoretical basis” for “territorial fragmentation” and allows communities like Orania to operate as “exclusionist enclaves” outside the spirit of a unified South Africa. For them, the Bill of Rights is the only protection needed for cultural and linguistic diversity.
-
- Opponents, including the Cape Independence Party and the Freedom Front Plus, argue that Section 235 is a “non-derogable right” and a cornerstone of the 1994 constitutional settlement. They contend that individual rights (Sections 30 and 31) are fundamentally different from the collective right of a community to sustain and govern itself. They warn that removing this “safety valve” will not eliminate the demand for self-determination but will instead push it toward more radical, extra-constitutional paths.