History Grade 12 P2 NSC November Mock 2026 Addendum (Eng)

Mock hlayiso mock exams Practice Series: Grade 12 NSC Preparation WWW.HLAYISO.COM NATIONAL SENIOR CERTIFICATE GRADE 12 HISTORY P2 ADDENDUM MOCK EXAMINATION 2026 This addendum consists of 11 pages. Copyright reserved Please turn over

History/P2 2 Hlayiso/Mock 2026 NSC – Addendum Mock QUESTION 1: HOW DID THE BLACK CONSCIOUSNESS MOVEMENT CHALLENGE THE APARTHEID STATE IN THE 1970s? SOURCE 1A The source below was compiled by the examiner from various historical accounts. It explains why black students formed the South African Students’ Organisation (SASO) and outlines the philosophy of Black Consciousness. By the late 1960s the two main liberation movements, the African National Congress (ANC) and the Pan Africanist Congress (PAC), had been banned since 1960. Many of their leaders, such as Nelson Mandela and Robert Sobukwe, were in prison, while others had gone into exile. Open political opposition by black South Africans had largely been silenced, leaving a political vacuum (gap) inside the country. At this time many black university students belonged to the National Union of South African Students (NUSAS), a multiracial organisation. Black students increasingly felt that NUSAS was dominated (controlled) by white liberal students who spoke on behalf of black people and who could never fully share the experience of oppression. Black students also felt that their own concerns were not taken seriously in the organisation. In December 1968 a group of black students, among them Steve Biko, a medical student at the University of Natal (Black Section), decided to form an organisation of their own. The South African Students’ Organisation (SASO) was formally launched at the University of the North (Turfloop) in July 1969, with Biko as its first president. SASO promoted the philosophy of Black Consciousness. It taught that black people first had to free their minds from the feeling of inferiority (being less worthy) created by centuries of colonialism and apartheid. Black people had to take pride in their history, culture and appearance, and rely on themselves rather than on white sympathisers to win their freedom. The term ‘black’ was used for all those who were oppressed by law because of the colour of their skin – Africans, coloureds and Indians. SASO’s slogan, ‘Black man, you are on your own’, expressed this idea of self-reliance. [Compiled by the examiner from various historical accounts] Copyright reserved Please turn over

History/P2 3 Hlayiso/Mock 2026 NSC – Addendum Mock SOURCE 1B The source below was compiled by the examiner from various historical accounts. It focuses on the spread of Black Consciousness organisations and community projects, and on the response of the apartheid state, in the early 1970s. From 1972 the ideas of Black Consciousness spread beyond the universities. The Black People’s Convention (BPC) was formed in 1972 as a political organisation for adults, so that workers, church members and community groups could also be reached. In the same year the South African Students’ Movement (SASM) was established for learners at secondary schools, especially in Soweto. Black Consciousness leaders believed that black communities had to solve their own problems without depending on white charity or on the government. The Black Community Programmes (BCP) were set up in 1972 to run projects in health care, education, home industries and leadership training. One of the best-known projects was the Zanempilo Community Health Centre, which opened in 1975 at Zinyoka near King William’s Town. It was run by Dr Mamphela Ramphele and provided health care to a poor rural community. The apartheid government soon regarded Black Consciousness as a threat. In March 1973 Steve Biko and seven other SASO leaders were placed under banning orders. Biko was restricted to the King William’s Town district and was not allowed to speak in public, to be quoted in the press or to meet with more than one person at a time. Despite these restrictions he continued to work quietly for community projects. In September 1974 SASO and the BPC organised ‘Viva FRELIMO’ rallies, including one at Curries Fountain in Durban, to celebrate the coming to power of the Front for the Liberation of Mozambique (FRELIMO) after Portugal agreed to give up its colony. The government banned the rallies. When they went ahead, the police dispersed the crowds and arrested many leaders. Nine of them were later convicted under the Terrorism Act in what became known as the SASO/BPC trial. [Compiled by the examiner from various historical accounts] Copyright reserved Please turn over

History/P2 4 Hlayiso/Mock 2026 NSC – Addendum Mock SOURCE 1C The source below consists of a summary compiled by the examiner and a press photograph of the events in Soweto on 16 June 1976. The photograph, by an unknown press photographer, was published in The San Francisco Examiner on 16 June 1976. In 1974 the Bantu Education Department issued an instruction known as the Afrikaans Medium Decree. It required black secondary schools to use Afrikaans and English equally as languages of instruction, with subjects such as mathematics and social studies to be taught in Afrikaans. Many learners and teachers rejected Afrikaans as the language of the oppressor. Members of the South African Students’ Movement (SASM), who had been influenced by the ideas of Black Consciousness, discussed the issue in their schools and formed an action committee (later the Soweto Students’ Representative Council) to organise a protest. On the morning of 16 June 1976 thousands of learners marched peacefully through Soweto carrying placards. The police confronted them and opened fire. The uprising quickly spread to other parts of the country, and by the end of the year hundreds of people had been killed. [Compiled by the examiner from various historical accounts] South African police officers aim their firearms at protesting learners in Soweto, 16 June 1976. [From: The San Francisco Examiner, 16 June 1976] Copyright reserved Please turn over

History/P2 5 Hlayiso/Mock 2026 NSC – Addendum Mock SOURCE 1D The source below was compiled by the examiner from various historical accounts, including the findings of the inquest and the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. It explains the death of Steve Biko in detention and the response of the apartheid government. On 18 August 1977 Steve Biko and his fellow activist Peter Jones were stopped at a police roadblock near Grahamstown. Biko was detained without trial under the Terrorism Act and taken to Port Elizabeth, where he was held by the Security Police. During his detention Biko was kept naked and in leg irons. While being interrogated (questioned) at the Security Police offices in Port Elizabeth he was assaulted and suffered serious head injuries. Although doctors examined him, he did not receive proper medical treatment. On 11 September 1977, in a semi-conscious state, he was placed naked in the back of a police Land Rover and driven more than 1 000 kilometres to Pretoria. He died in a cell at Pretoria Central Prison on 12 September 1977. The Minister of Justice, Jimmy Kruger, caused outrage when he told a National Party congress that Biko’s death ‘leaves me cold’ (‘dit laat my koud’). An inquest later in 1977 found that no one could be held responsible for his death. Biko’s death caused anger in South Africa and across the world. On 19 October 1977 the government banned SASO, the BPC, SASM and other Black Consciousness organisations, as well as the Christian Institute. It also closed The World and Weekend World newspapers, and their editor, Percy Qoboza, was detained. Many Black Consciousness leaders were detained or fled into exile, but the ideas of the movement continued to inspire resistance; the Azanian People’s Organisation (AZAPO) was formed in 1978. [Compiled by the examiner from various historical accounts] Copyright reserved Please turn over

History/P2 6 Hlayiso/Mock 2026 NSC – Addendum Mock QUESTION 2: HOW DID THE TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION COMMISSION (TRC) ATTEMPT TO DEAL WITH SOUTH AFRICA’S VIOLENT PAST? SOURCE 2A The extract below was taken from the section titled ‘National Unity and Reconciliation’ at the end of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, Act 200 of 1993 (the Interim Constitution). It explains why the negotiators agreed that amnesty would be granted for crimes committed during the conflicts of the past. This Constitution provides a historic bridge between the past of a deeply divided society characterised by strife, conflict, untold suffering and injustice, and a future founded on the recognition of human rights, democracy and peaceful co-existence and development opportunities for all South Africans, irrespective of colour, race, class, belief or sex. … The adoption of this Constitution lays the secure foundation for the people of South Africa to transcend* the divisions and strife of the past, which generated gross violations of human rights, the transgression of humanitarian principles in violent conflicts and a legacy of hatred, fear, guilt and revenge. These can now be addressed on the basis that there is a need for understanding but not for vengeance*, a need for reparation but not for retaliation, a need for ubuntu but not for victimisation. In order to advance such reconciliation and reconstruction, amnesty shall be granted in respect of acts, omissions and offences associated with political objectives and committed in the course of the conflicts of the past. [From the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, Act 200 of 1993] *transcend: rise above; move beyond *vengeance: punishment inflicted as revenge for a wrong Copyright reserved Please turn over

History/P2 7 Hlayiso/Mock 2026 NSC – Addendum Mock SOURCE 2B The extract below was taken from section 3 of the Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act (Act 34 of 1995), the law passed by Parliament that established the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. It sets out the objectives of the Commission. The objectives of the Commission shall be to promote national unity and reconciliation in a spirit of understanding which transcends the conflicts and divisions of the past by – (a) establishing as complete a picture as possible of the causes, nature and extent of the gross violations of human rights which were committed during the period from 1 March 1960 to the cut-off date … (b) facilitating the granting of amnesty to persons who make full disclosure of all the relevant facts relating to acts associated with a political objective and comply with the requirements of this Act; (c) establishing and making known the fate or whereabouts of victims and by restoring the human and civil dignity of such victims by granting them an opportunity to relate their own accounts of the violations of which they are the victims, and by recommending reparation measures in respect thereof … [From the Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act 34 of 1995, section 3] Copyright reserved Please turn over

History/P2 8 Hlayiso/Mock 2026 NSC – Addendum Mock SOURCE 2C The diagram below was compiled by the examiner. It shows how the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) was organised. The TRC began its work in December 1995 and held its first public hearing in East London in April 1996. TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION COMMISSION (TRC) Established by the Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act 34 of 1995 Chairperson: Archbishop Desmond Tutu Deputy chairperson: Dr Alex Boraine 17 commissioners appointed by President Nelson Mandela HUMAN RIGHTS AMNESTY COMMITTEE REPARATION AND VIOLATIONS • Considered REHABILITATION COMMITTEE applications for amnesty COMMITTEE • Collected statements from perpetrators • Considered the from victims • Applicants had to needs of victims • Held public hearings make full disclosure identified by the TRC where victims of their crimes • Recommended told their stories • Crimes had to be reparation (compensation) • Investigated gross politically motivated to the government human rights violations • Granted or • Suggested ways committed between refused amnesty to restore the 1960 and 1994 dignity of victims FINAL REPORT Handed to President Nelson Mandela on 29 October 1998 [Diagram compiled by the examiner] Copyright reserved Please turn over

History/P2 9 Hlayiso/Mock 2026 NSC – Addendum Mock SOURCE 2D The source below was compiled by the examiner from various historical accounts. It highlights some of the challenges and criticisms that the TRC faced. Not everyone supported the TRC. In 1996 the Azanian People’s Organisation (AZAPO) and the families of three well-known victims of apartheid – Steve Biko, Griffiths and Victoria Mxenge, and Dr Fabian and Florence Ribeiro – went to the Constitutional Court. They argued that the amnesty provisions took away their constitutional right to have the killers of their loved ones prosecuted in court and to claim damages from them. On 25 July 1996 the Constitutional Court ruled against them and found that amnesty was permitted by the Interim Constitution as part of the negotiated settlement. Some leaders of the former government refused to co-operate. Former State President PW Botha ignored a subpoena (legal order) to appear before the Commission, calling the TRC a ‘circus’. He was convicted of contempt in 1998, but the conviction was overturned on appeal in 1999. Former President FW de Klerk went to court to stop the TRC from publishing a finding against him, and that part of the final report was blacked out. The African National Congress (ANC) also tried, without success, to stop the publication of findings that it had committed human rights violations in its camps in exile. Many victims were disappointed. Most of the more than 7 000 applications for amnesty were refused, but perpetrators who were granted amnesty could no longer be prosecuted or sued. Many senior politicians and generals never applied at all. The TRC recommended that victims receive regular reparation grants over six years. In 2003, however, the government announced a once-off payment of R30 000 to each victim identified by the TRC. Critics argued that this was not enough to make up for the suffering that victims had experienced. [Compiled by the examiner from various historical accounts] Copyright reserved Please turn over

History/P2 10 Hlayiso/Mock 2026 NSC – Addendum Mock QUESTION 3: WHAT IMPACT DID GLOBALISATION HAVE ON DEVELOPING COUNTRIES AFTER THE END OF THE COLD WAR? SOURCE 3A The source below was compiled by the examiner from various historical accounts. It explains how the end of the Cold War contributed to the spread of globalisation. The fall of the Berlin Wall in November 1989 and the collapse of communist governments in Eastern Europe brought the Cold War to an end. In December 1991 the Soviet Union itself was dissolved and broke up into fifteen independent states. The United States of America was left as the only superpower, and many people argued that free-market capitalism and liberal democracy had triumphed over communism. Countries that had followed socialist or state-controlled economic policies now moved towards the free market. Trade barriers were lowered, state-owned companies were privatised (sold to private owners) and governments welcomed foreign investment. In 1995 the World Trade Organisation (WTO) replaced the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and set rules for international trade. Advances in technology, such as the internet, satellite communication and mobile phones, allowed money, goods, ideas and information to move around the world faster than ever before. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank, in which the USA and Western European countries had the greatest influence, played a key role. Many developing countries, especially in Africa and Latin America, were deeply in debt. To receive loans they had to agree to structural adjustment programmes (SAPs). These required governments to cut spending, remove subsidies, privatise state companies and open their markets to foreign competition. This set of policies became known as the ‘Washington Consensus’. [Compiled by the examiner from various historical accounts] SOURCE 3B The extract below was taken from the United Nations Millennium Declaration. It was adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations, attended by world leaders, at the Millennium Summit in New York on 8 September 2000. We believe that the central challenge we face today is to ensure that globalization becomes a positive force for all the world’s people. For while globalization offers great opportunities, at present its benefits are very unevenly shared, while its costs are unevenly distributed. We recognize that developing countries and countries with economies in transition face special difficulties in responding to this central challenge. [From the United Nations Millennium Declaration, 8 September 2000] Copyright reserved Please turn over

History/P2 11 Hlayiso/Mock 2026 NSC – Addendum Mock SOURCE 3C The cartoon below was drawn for this examination. It comments on the relationship between developed and developing countries in a globalised world economy. ‘Keep up! We’re all in FIRST CLASS: PROFITS · TECHNOLOGY the same ocean now!’ · INVESTMENT NORTH DEVELOPED COUNTRIES ROPE GLOBALISATION DEBT DEVELOPING COUNTRIES [Cartoon drawn by the examiner] SOURCE 3D The source below was compiled by the examiner from various historical accounts. It focuses on opposition to globalisation and on some of its effects on developing countries, including South Africa. By the late 1990s an anti-globalisation movement had emerged. In November and December 1999 tens of thousands of trade unionists, environmentalists, farmers and students protested in the streets of Seattle in the USA during a meeting of the World Trade Organisation. They argued that global trade rules favoured rich countries and multinational companies. In July 2001 a meeting of the G8 (the world’s leading industrial nations) in Genoa, Italy, was accompanied by mass protests in which a young protester was shot dead by the police. In January 2001 activists from around the world gathered at the first World Social Forum in Porto Alegre, Brazil, under the slogan ‘Another world is possible’. Critics pointed out that structural adjustment programmes forced many African governments to cut spending on health care and education, to charge fees for services and to dismiss workers from state companies. At the same time some developing countries benefited from new investment, cheaper technology and the rapid spread of mobile phones. In South Africa the government adopted the Growth, Employment and Redistribution (GEAR) strategy in 1996, which followed many free-market principles. Tariffs (taxes on imports) were reduced, and local clothing and textile factories struggled to compete with cheaper imports, especially from China. Many factories closed and thousands of workers lost their jobs. [Compiled by the examiner from various historical accounts] Copyright reserved