SAHRC has lost the plot....

Seems we all got the same canned response. Even though my complaint asked them very specific questions regarding their interpretation of their mandate and interpretation of the relevant clauses in the Constitution.

I am still considering my options and whether I should reply by asking them straight out to answer the questions I posed.
Indirectly I suppose some would consider the exercise a waste of time. However, I see it differently. Should this matter ever come to court (I do not have the funds to pursue this beyond laying complaints as a citizen of SA) these complaints and the rather poor answer should all come into play. We cannot sit back and do nothing.
 
Last edited:
Yeah... Someone thought it would be a good idea to just issue the same canned response without even looking at the contents of the complaint. Def not a waste of time since it's just more evidence that can be given to someone who can pursue this in court.
 
Geoff.D said:
Seems we all got the same canned response. Even though my complaint asked them very specific questions regarding their interpretation of their mandate and interpretation of the relevant clauses in the Constitution.

I am still considering my options and whether I should replay by asking them straight out to answer the questions I posed.
Indirectly I suppose some would consider the exercise a waste of time. However, I see it differently. Should this matter ever come to court (I do not have the funds to pursue this beyond laying complaints as a citizen of SA) These complaints and the rather poor answer should all come into play. We cannot sit back and do nothing.
Click to expand...

ToxicBunny said:
Yeah... Someone thought it would be a good idea to just issue the same canned response without even looking at the contents of the complaint. Def not a waste of time since it's just more evidence that can be given to someone who can pursue this in court.
Click to expand...

I recall some article where it was mentioned that afriforum will challenge this in court.
 
ponder said:
I recall some article where it was mentioned that afriforum will challenge this in court.
Click to expand...
I do as well.. I think maybe it will be worthwhile forward the complaints as well as the canned responses to them..
 
ToxicBunny said:
I do as well.. I think maybe it will be worthwhile forward the complaints as well as the canned responses to them..
Click to expand...

https://www.afriforum.co.za/afriforum-oppose-hrc-ruling-malema-hate-speech/
AfriForum to oppose HRC ruling on Malema hate speech
Click to expand...
AfriForum will oppose the ruling of the Human Rights Commission (HRC) – that utterances by Julius Malema, leader of the EFF, against white people does not amount to hate speech – in court. It is extremely concerning for the civil rights organisation that the HRC in essence with this ruling justifies blatant hate speech and the incitement of violence against a minority group. Further, the HRC also found today that Malema is not guilty of hate speech on various charges that were submitted against him between 2016 and 2018.



In 2016 Malema had the following to say about white people: “…They found peaceful Africans here. They killed them. They slaughtered them like animals. We are not calling for the slaughtering of White people, at least for now. What we are calling for is the peaceful occupation of the land and we don’t owe anyone an apology for that…”

Hate speech is forbidden in terms of Section 10 of the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act, 2000 (Act No. 4 of 2000). This Act determines that no person may publish, propagate, advocate or communicate words based on one or more of the prohibited grounds, against any person, that could reasonably be construed to demonstrate a clear intention to (a) be hurtful; (b) be harmful or to incite harm; (c) promote or propagate hatred.

The HRC, in its ruling about Malema’s utterances against white people, admits that the statement criticises white people and that it could be offensive for some white people, upset them, or lead them to argue that it is racially biased: “However, it is clear that White colonial settlers did occupy Black land, by both violent and non-violent means. It is also clear that currently White people, albeit a political minority, have significant economic power. Importantly, this statement is about how White people behaved historically. It is not about how they are behaving now. Mr Malema also specifically says he is not calling for the killing or slaughtering of White people now. He is only calling for the occupation of their land.”

“According to the HRC’s ruling it is further important to take into account the factual, social and historical context in which Malema made his utterances, and also that the identity of the group targeted by his utterance must belong to a vulnerable group. The HRC also relies on a court ruling which determined that vulnerable people must be allowed to express their anger and pain by means of the use of robust speech. With this the HRC insinuates that white people are not a vulnerable group, despite the fact that this group is a minority group in South Africa. It is also concerning that the HRC argues that individuals from certain race groups must be allowed to utter racist things, provided that it is done in the right context,” says Ernst Roets, Deputy CEO of AfriForum.​
According to Roets, the HRC’s ruling is in further contrast to a working papers of the United Nations’ Forum on Minority Issues which determines that minority status is not dependent on poverty: “To be clear, minority status and poverty are not co-terminus; in fact, membership in a strong, cohesive minority community may even improve the economic prospects of minorities because of factors such as solidarity, communal ownership of goods and wealth, or the psychological benefits of taking pride in one’s ethnic, religious, cultural or linguistic identity. It is also sometimes the case that minority communities are economically dominant (for example because of specialization in certain fields of employment), while still being denied a range of human rights, in particular access to political power and protection from discrimination.”

AfriForum cannot allow that individuals with political power, such as Malema, get away with racist utterances. Support AfriForum in this battle: SMS “Haatspraak” to 32782 (R1).
Click to expand...


https://www.politicsweb.co.za/politics/afriforum-to-take-on-sahrc-over-malema-its-not-hat
https://ewn.co.za/2019/03/28/mixed-reaction-to-sahrc-s-findings-on-malema-statements
https://ewn.co.za/2019/03/28/mixed-reaction-to-sahrc-s-findings-on-malema-statements
 
Bit more evidence that the SAHRC has lost the plot entirely...

Investigations underway after expired medicine was found at a Clicks pharmacy | Life

After customers complained that a particular pharmacy was selling expired medication, flu medication past its sell-by date was found inside the store, during a surprise visit by South Africa's human rights watchdog.
www.health24.com www.health24.com
The Limpopo branch of the South African Human Rights Commission (SAHRC) has launched an investigation after customers complained they had been sold expired medication at a Clicks Pharmacy.
Click to expand...

Surely if this Clicks pharmacy was/is selling expired medicine, it should be referred to the South African Pharmacy Council and SAHPRA (new MCC). I would love to know what the SAHRC thinks they will accomplish with an investigation that is so far beyond them...
 
ToxicBunny said:
Bit more evidence that the SAHRC has lost the plot entirely...

Investigations underway after expired medicine was found at a Clicks pharmacy | Life

After customers complained that a particular pharmacy was selling expired medication, flu medication past its sell-by date was found inside the store, during a surprise visit by South Africa's human rights watchdog.
www.health24.com www.health24.com


Surely if this Clicks pharmacy was/is selling expired medicine, it should be referred to the South African Pharmacy Council and SAHPRA (new MCC). I would love to know what the SAHRC thinks they will accomplish with an investigation that is so far beyond them...
Click to expand...

Looking at some of their recent rulings, I will not be surprised if they even manage to pull this one off too.
 
ponder said:
Something along the lines of clicks ships off all their expired meds to black areas... kinda like med schemes only victimising black doctors :whistling:
Click to expand...

Ahh silly me... you are so right... its all a conspiracy to victimise the previously disadvantage..

Have at it SAHRC! Make yourself more relevant..
 
Temujin said:
Its right here...

It'll be spun as racist clicks stealing the dignity of 'our people'
Click to expand...
They will try of course... but what can they actually achieve other than some random ruling, which will get buried in court cases by clicks (and possibly the real groups responsible for this).
 
ToxicBunny said:
They will try of course... but what can they actually achieve other than some random ruling, which will get buried in court cases by clicks (and possibly the real groups responsible for this).
Click to expand...

clicks will capitulate and apologise due to social media outrage like h&m, mnet, standard bank etc did, you shout racism and they cower...
 
ponder said:
clicks will capitulate and apologise due to social media outrage like h&m, mnet, standard bank etc did, you shout racism and they cower...
Click to expand...

True, they will.... but they have a bigger problem on their hands, and that are the actual regulatory bodies who will be breathing down their necks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X