Khampepe report on racism at SU – Language rights of Afrikaans speakers cannot pay the price for misconduct of individuals
Referring to the final report of the Commission of Inquiry into Allegations of Racism at Stellenbosch University, chaired by Emeritus Justice Sisi Khampepe, AfriForum stated that the language rights of Afrikaans speakers cannot be denied in reaction to the misconduct of individuals.
According to Alana Bailey, AfriForum’s Head of Cultural Affairs, it is particularly alarming that the use of a language can be held responsible for various behavioural problems and perceptions on campus. “Much is made of the feeling of exclusion experienced by non-Afrikaans-speaking students and staff ‒ even when the language is used in informal conversations. What about the brown, black and white Afrikaans-speaking students’ and staff’s feeling of exclusion when they are not allowed to use their language? Note that Stellenbosch is one of only two out of more than thirty campuses of public universities in the country where Afrikaans still plays a significant role as a language of instruction, and this in a province where it is the mother language of the majority of residents. These Afrikaans-speaking students therefore do not have alternative public institutions that will accommodate them when they are excluded on the basis of their language,” says Bailey.
The report’s recommendations on language are hazy, starting with the statement that English is the preferred language at the university to promote inclusivity. The fact that the university has a multilingual language policy then comes under fire with the loaded statement: “I recommend that the University consider reviewing and revisiting its language policy to remove the possibility of language exclusion through the preference of Afrikaans”. Note that the use of any other language that may be perceived as exclusionary is not even considered or mentioned at all. It is then added that the university must not deprive students of their right to study in Afrikaans, unless there is “appropriate justification” for this. The term “appropriate justification” is so vague that any motivation can be used to summarily deprive Afrikaans students of their right to mother-language education ‒ contrary to what is guaranteed in the Constitution.
“Once again, the cost argument is raised, although proof has been provided countless times that the benefits of multilingual education and access to mother-language education outweigh the costs by far. An extremely high percentage of students annually drop out and the role that the lack of mother-language education plays in this regard is never calculated in monetary terms,” she adds.
“Ideologists abuse Afrikaans against one community at the expense of the interests of the country as a whole. They exploit the unacceptable behaviour of individuals to define an entire community. Furthermore, mother-language education at all levels is increasingly becoming the privilege of the less than 10% English speakers in the country, while Afrikaans is being cut back and the use of other indigenous languages unfortunately remains limited. Parents, learners and students receive little guidance on the necessity of mother-language education and are fed the lie that monolingual English education has the greatest academic, economic and social benefits.
“Private teaching institutions are currently the only hope for a sustainable academic future for indigenous languages, including Afrikaans ‒ a tragedy and disgrace in this country with its rich cultural diversity. Response to the report will be monitored to determine a further course of action,” Bailey concludes.
