Advert
Advert – scroll down
Displaying the 5 latest comments.
Submitted | first-name | support | concern | top-concern | message |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2026-04-19 10:38:13 +02:00 | Justin | No I do not | Breach of Trust: The 1994 Negotiated Settlement | Redundancy: The Bill of Rights is Sufficient | It has been a fundamental part of the constitution since the beginning, this is just an attempt by the Mk party to undermine peaceful enclaves like Orania. They have always been against Orania and this is about nothing more than that. |
2026-04-19 10:25:24 +02:00 | Audrey | No I do not | All of the above | Breach of Trust: The 1994 Negotiated Settlement | |
2026-04-19 10:24:20 +02:00 | Derrick | No I do not | All of the above | Collective Rights vs. Individual Rights | I support the right of the people in Orania to self-determination and to live out their culture, language, and beliefs peacefully. I believe every group and individual should have the freedom to pursue their way of life, just as I value the freedom to live mine and associate with whomever I choose. Respect for others means we don’t have to agree on everything, but we can coexist without interfering in each other’s communities. For that reason, I don’t support the MK party’s position on removing Section 235 from our Constitution, nor the proposals under the 24th Amendment Bill that would impact it. Section 235 protects the right to self-determination for communities, and that principle matters in a diverse country like ours. Upholding it helps ensure all South Africans feel their identity and choices are respected under the law. We build a stronger South Africa when we protect each other’s freedoms while treating one another with dignity. |
2026-04-19 10:10:24 +02:00 | Leon | No I do not | All of the above | Breach of Trust: The 1994 Negotiated Settlement | |
2026-04-19 10:04:48 +02:00 | Lindie | No I do not | All of the above | 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.