It was asked of me to give my impressions of the touchy subject of racism and also have a look at what the Law says about it. Here I don’t mean labour law, but the laws concerning crimes against the person. I am going to be very careful about my own conclusions but rather try and draw logical reasoning from statues that exist. “That’s racist!” These words sting in my ears as it may in yours. Many of us know and have probably experienced a situation when all reasonable argument has broken down and the words are spat out. As a policeman I’ve faced them countless times from questioning to searching to the arrest of a suspect who happens to be a different race to me. No actual communication, words or actual prejudice has been inflicted and no harm has been caused but the mere uttering of the words by the other party somehow makes it true. Let’s look at the definition, in two parts, of racism. (Thanks Wikipedia) 1) “Racism, also sometimes called racialism, is generally defined as actions, practices, or beliefs that consider the human species to be divided into races with shared traits, abilities, or qualities, such as personality, intellect, morality, or other cultural behavioural characteristics, (Here we can pretty much go down to the point of being made to mark the box with your race on a document …is racist) 2) and especially the belief that races can be ranked as inherently superior or inferior to others, or that members of different races should be treated differently.” Now this can go on with each person and their God given opinions will argue ‘till the cows come home. The second part is what we are aiming at. It again will be an opinion whether any or all races are superior to another and whether they should be treated differently. I’m reminded of a very well written movie called “Thank you for smoking”. It wasn’t about smoking. It was about how to put arguments across and justify yourself without getting emotionally entangled. A son asked his dad, “Why is America the greatest country in the world?” It was a school project. The dad answered to the effect of, well we must first establish if America is indeed the greatest country in the world. Then, by what measurement? Social order, education, income per capita, unemployment, etc, etc. So could it be true for someone to be a racist, they themselves have to subscribe to a set of beliefs, not perhaps merely a word or phrase uttered? Can we then also agree that the person making the accusation (of racism) must actually too believe that other person has that set of principles? So where is the crime? In believing something to be true? Let’s explore further. What I have gathered from speaking to colleagues about the subject is that a particular word, spoken or written or a certain gesture must be truly offensive to the receiver in order for the “racism” affront to be complete. See even though there is no belief system that needed to be adhered to or even considered, the word or words themselves are those labelled “racist”. I have heard the name “darkie-ou” used by several races to describe black African people, and even some black people to themselves. In 99.9% of the instances no offence is meant or made, it is merely a term of reference. (I really don’t believe African Americans use the term “nigga” the same way, since over there, if a person of another race uses the word it is almost always deemed offensive.) However, if someone does take offence to be called or referred to as a darkie-ou is the person who said it or wrote it guilty of racism? When I first landed in Wentworth, this was the term that was used. Coloured people were called “bruin-ou”, Indians called “charou” and whites “wit-ou”. This, I remind you was used absolutely indiscriminately by everyone. If I asked someone to point a person out the response would be, “That dark charou over there.” and nobody got upset. It took me a good year to even get used to saying the terms myself because some coloured people didn’t like being called “coloured”. In fact it was quite funny watching members of the same family who were different races filling in forms at the police station. “Who’se a ‘culud’?” mom would say to dad. “You blarrie black!” Even better was a very good friend Sergeant (now Captain) Daniel Wood. He was by all counts a person of mixed race but looked to anyone and everyone else, a Zulu. Black people would tell him long stories, which he didn’t understand and at the end drawl out in a Durban surfer accent, “Bru, you laake know aam a bruin ou hey.” Hence, the context is very much the order of the day. Three years later I might have arrived fresh back in Westville and called a colleague “darkie-ou” and got myself into trouble in the first hour. Maybe the guys this side of town just do not talk to each other that way. Then we can possibly include that the local or regional culture is an influence and so we can perhaps partially conclude that the situation and circumstance needs to be taken into consideration. Could I be found guilty of racism as such since I was ignorant of the local custom and used the term innocently? (See a bit later) And is racism as such, a crime? Do I have a certain set of beliefs that are punishable by law? What about freedoms and rights enshrined by the constitution? Well the answer to that is simple and I cite Satanism as my example. In South Africa, you are free to worship whatever and however you please. But, certain practices within the religion may be in breach of the law. Animal cruelty, bestiality, etc. Your own private beliefs are not the problem. Offending people by what you say or do very much is. My belief system can be completely private, but the words I use to say to other people can very much be the offence/crime. According to the notes in the SAPS book on crime definitions, “A person’s dignity and privacy include all the interests which are protected by his or her rights of personality. The rights of personality covered by the term “dignity” include a person’s: sense of chastity, self-respect, feelings of piety and in general his inner peace and or mental tranquillity. These refer to the crime of Crimen-Injuria. See, a further note quite clearly explains that the act “must constitute a serious infringement on a person’s dignity or privacy before it will constitute a crime. In ordinary, rough and ready everyday life a person is expected to endure minor or trivial insults to his or her dignity.” Years ago a female colleague added the charge to a housebreaker’s docket because he swore at her and used all sorts of foul language. The magistrate dismissed that charge as he stated that as a Policewoman, she is obliged to endure such behaviour. So bugger her personal dignity, the uniform she wore apparently gave some protection form the insults. (Don’t try this at home. Trust me.) Me then searching a suspect is not racist. I don’t care if he was the one Indian guy in a crowd of Chinese. If I however state to him, that I chose him by no other reason other than his race and that I believed Indians are known to be criminals, that is becoming offensive and I could be guilty of Crimen Injuria. In order to establish whether a person’s dignity has indeed been infringed, two tests are applied: 1) The reaction of the victim is considered. Were they shocked and upset? 2) We bring in the reasonable man test. It is asked whether any ordinary or reasonable man would have regarded the perpetrator’s conduct as an infringement of the reasonable man’s dignity. If the answer to number two is yes, a court may conclude that the victim’s dignity has been infringed. This to me should then fly in contradiction to the ruling over the Policewoman as I can’t think the average police woman believes her status as such should invite or immunize her from offence. However, me arriving fresh from Wentworth would only have the second test. Should I have known that the word could have been taken in offence? How much did I know about local culture or has my entire frame of reference on the subject been from the Wenties? I would probably fail and be guilty of Crimen Injuria. My age, occupation, social awareness and education would be considered. The fact that I never had a complaint against me in Wentworth and that I went to a multiracial school in the 1980’s may work for me. It may be decided that I am more than familiar with colloquial language and that it was said as normal banter between colleagues. My intention is the key. What affect did I intend the words to make to the subject? Did I intend to insult him? Did I say it in anger because of something that has happened to me or another person? Here is where we fall a lot of the time. Emotions get the better of us. I don’t believe you cannot justify a deeply offensive remark to all and sundry who happen to share the same racial features of your target. The race of a person is as much of an identity to them as their soul and their God. You offend that and you have cut them to the bone. You actually have lost the moral high ground. The manner in which you say a word, and here I mean your tone must also be considered. Written words have a problem here. How do I evaluate something jocular as opposed to malicious? Context. The whole article, speech or story must be examined. Verbally the tone is easier to evaluate. Myself and another colleague Duma have an on-going chirp. In front of the whole charge office he will ask me why there are still white people in the police and I will respond that I can’t retire because I haven’t shot enough of his black brothers yet. What an innocent bystander won’t realise is that for months I sat next to Duma, holding his hand in tears while he was lying looking like a skeleton, dying in hospital. He was a student under me, we arrested a lot of bad guys together and grew very close over time. The doctors managed to fix him; he put on weight and came back to work. This bond certainly doesn’t give me carte blanche to talk to him as I will, but the relationship we have goes a bit further than what most colleagues and even acquaintances can go. Guard your thoughts and your mouth. Things that cannot come back: The spoken word, the sped arrow, the past, the neglected opportunity.
Posted on: Mon, 07 Oct 2013 11:01:13 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015