Unfinished business: Uncovering the buried crimes of apartheid regime
EDITORIAL: Unfinished business - Uncovering the buried crimes of apartheid regime
Lukhanyo Calata never had the chance to know his father. In 1985, when he was just three years old, his father, Fort Calata, was brutally murdered alongside Matthew Goniwe, Sparrow Mkonto, and Sicelo Mhlauli. Collectively, they became known as the Cradock Four.
Despite two inquests into their deaths, no one has ever been held accountable for their kidnapping, assault, or the gruesome act of setting their bodies alight following their arrest at a roadblock set up by the Security Branch near Port Elizabeth (now Gqeberha).
In 1999, six former police officers connected to the Cradock Four's arrests and murders appeared before the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC), seeking amnesty. Their application was denied. Yet, even after this, no prosecutions followed.
For decades, Calata has sought answers, questioning why - more than 30 years after the democratic election of the ANC - justice remains elusive for the Cradock Four. This week, a third inquest got under way, seeking to uncover who was truly responsible for the death of the anti-apartheid activists.
This inquest comes shortly after the announcement that retired Constitutional Court justice Sisi Khampepe will lead a judicial inquiry into whether there were deliberate attempts to block the investigation and prosecution of apartheid-era crimes. Beyond the Cradock Four, there are an estimated 400 unsolved cases from South Africa's apartheid era.
In this week's Friday Briefing, News24's legal journalist, Karyn Maughan, delves into the law enforcement paralysis that followed the TRC and its devastating impact on the families of victims.
Lukhanyo Calata, in his contribution, writes poignantly about his family's anguish and the pain of asking questions when no one remains alive to provide answers.
Additionally, in this week's edition, in-depth writer Muhammad Hussain interviews ActionSA parliamentary leader Athol Trollip regarding the party's proposal to amend the Constitution.
Explore these insightful contributions below.
The apartheid government got away with murder... and SA needs to know why
There is compelling evidence that apartheid-era atrocity cases were not prosecuted because of alleged political interference from the ANC government. And, Karyn Maughan writes, it's crucial this toxic subversion of accountability is finally explained – and confronted.
Read the rest of the submission here.
An ANC failure: The long journey for justice for the Cradock Four
Lukhanyo Calata, son of Fort Calata - one of the Cradock Four who were brutally murdered - shares his reflections on a renewed inquest into apartheid-era atrocities. He argues that these proceedings, including an inquest into the Cradock Four's deaths, will expose the harm inflicted by the ANC and unravel the reasons behind the historical obfuscation.
Read the rest of the submission here.
Q&A with Athol Trollip | ActionSA constitutional change: 'If people want to call it xenophobic, so be it'
ActionSA parliamentary leader Athol Trollip speaks to in-depth writer Muhammad Hussain and defends his party's submission to modify the Constitution's 'South Africa belongs to all who live in it' principle.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Bloomberg
5 hours ago
- Bloomberg
South Africa's DA Stays in Coalition; to Boycott Dialogue
South Africa's fractious coalition government survived after the second-largest party opted against leaving following its ultimatum to President Cyril Ramaphosa for firing one of its members from his executive, while saying it will boycott his national dialogue. Ramaphosa set up a panel that includes business leaders, actors and the captain of its national rugby team to guide the talks on the country's development path amid a weak economy. The project is set to cost about 740 million rand ($42 million).
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Yahoo
South Africa's DA party withdraws from national dialogue amid coalition dispute
JOHANNESBURG (Reuters) -South Africa's Democratic Alliance party has withdrawn from a national dialogue but stopped short of leaving the coalition government after President Cyril Ramaphosa fired one of its deputy ministers, DA leader John Steenhuisen said on Saturday. The national dialogue is a process launched by Ramaphosa to unite the country after last year's election, which saw his African National Congress lose its parliamentary majority for the first time in three decades, forcing it to team up with the DA to form a government. The two parties are far apart ideologically and have clashed repeatedly over the last year, as the DA has accused the ANC of acting against its interests and without proper consultation. Steenhuisen said the DA federal executive had also considered tabling a motion of no confidence against Ramaphosa, but decided against it. However, he said the party was "in the process of losing confidence in his ability to act as a leader not of the ANC, but of the GNU (Government of National Unity)." Ramaphosa sacked deputy trade minister Andrew Whitfield this week over an unauthorised trip to the United States, and said the DA should nominate a replacement.
The Hill
7 hours ago
- The Hill
A year after Loper Bright, Congress has failed to step up
One year after the Supreme Court ended judicial deference to federal agencies in its landmark Loper Bright decision, Congress shows no sign of stepping up to the constitutional role the court affirmed. Instead, Congress is actively dismantling its own capacity: proposing deep cuts to the very institutions that provide the expertise, oversight and support it needs to do the job that the court squarely placed in the first branch of government. The absurdity of this mismatch was crystallized in a remarkable confluence of events this week. In one House hearing room, the Select Committee on the Strategic Competition Between the United States and the Chinese Communist Party held a hearing on 'Algorithms and Authoritarians: Why US AI Must Lead,' grappling with complex issues of geopolitical and existential import. That same day, the House Appropriations Committee released a bill proposing to slash funding for the very experts Congress relies on to understand and address these emerging issues. The bill would cut the Government Accountability Office by 50 percent and the Library of Congress (home to the Congressional Research Service) by 10 percent. These cuts would eliminate over 1,000 expert positions at the exact moment Congress needs them most. Loper Bright overturned the 'Chevron doctrine,' under which for four decades courts deferred to agency interpretations of laws considered ambiguous. Many champions of the old doctrine argued that Congress could never possess the expertise to legislate with sufficient speed or clarity to address emerging issues. As Justice Elena Kagan put it during oral argument, 'Congress knows there are going to be gaps [in any future artificial intelligence legislation] because Congress can hardly see a week into the future with respect to' AI. The court's majority rejected that argument and clarified that the Constitution places the lawmaking responsibility squarely with Congress, whether it likes it or not. And if Congress doesn't step up, the courts will decide. But one year after Loper Bright, those initial doubts appear well-founded. In the first six months after Loper Bright was decided, lower courts cited the decision more than 400 times. Rules on everything from firearm bump stocks to environmental permitting are being invalidated or reopened, but Congress has taken no meaningful steps to review or update those laws and is now actively undermining its ability to do so in the future. Congress is now expected to legislate with greater precision, define agency authority more explicitly and ensure that statutes are interpretable, enforceable and implementable. That requires subject-matter expertise, rigorous oversight and modern legislative infrastructure. But rather than invest in those capabilities, Congress is defunding them. This is more than just poor timing. It is a structural failure to respond to the new legal environment and to the most significant change driver of our time: artificial intelligence. Across the economy, AI is being deployed to write code, analyze documents, simulate regulations and accelerate research. Meanwhile, in Congress, AI is treated primarily as a risk to manage — not a capability to leverage. The House Appropriations Committee, to its credit, acknowledges the potential of artificial intelligence. In its Financial Year 2025 report, it highlighted the value of large language models to improve legislative efficiency and encouraged collaboration between GAO, the Congressional Research Service, the Congressional Budget Office and the Library of Congress. But those same agencies are being gutted. The rhetoric of innovation is paired with budgets that eliminate the very expertise required to realize it — the policy equivalent of demanding a sports car while removing the engine. Loper Bright didn't just shift legal doctrine — it shifted responsibility. If lawmakers want regulations to stand, they must write clearer laws. If they want policy outcomes, they must legislate them. And if they want to govern effectively in an age of accelerated change, they must modernize how they work. To be serious about reclaiming its constitutional role, Congress must start by rebuilding its own capacity. That means restoring funding for expert support agencies; hiring and retaining policy staff with legal, scientific and technical knowledge; and modernizing legislative technology and workflows. And yes — it means using AI to improve research, workflows and constituent engagement, so Congress can function in an era of exponential change. The Supreme Court made clear that the pen is (and always has been) in Congress's hands. The question now isn't whether Congress has the authority, but whether it will invest in the tools and talent to use it. Marci Harris is founder and CEO of and the executive director of the nonprofit POPVOX Foundation. She is a lawyer and former congressional staffer.
