History Grade 12 P2 2024 Addendum (Eng)

NATIONAL SENIOR CERTIFICATE GRADE 12 JUNE 2024 HISTORY P2 ADDENDUM This addendum consists of 10 pages.

2 HISTORY P2 (ADDENDUM) (EC/JUNE 2024) QUESTION 1: WHY DID CIVIL SOCIETY IN SOUTH AFRICA RESIST THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE BANTU LOCAL AUTHORITIES ACT DURING THE 1980s? SOURCE 1A The extract below explains reforms introduced by Prime Minister PW Botha in the South African parliament in 1983 that triggered mass civil society protest. During the 1980s, the apartheid government came under increasing internal pressure. The National Party attempted a political solution to the crisis it faced by creating the cosmetic Tricameral Parliament. This system of governance tampered with, but did not challenge apartheid. Botha’s ‘New Deal’ aimed to reinforce this situation by creating “black local authorities” in the townships. Africans living in townships would be allowed to vote for these authorities – but not for the national government in the Republic of South Africa. At the same time, black local authorities would be paid by, and remain under control of the national government’s Bantu Administration Board – white officials appointed by the whites-only government. The reforms had the opposite effect to what the apartheid regime intended. Reforms provided renewed impetus (motivation) for the resistance movements and the 1980s was a decade which became a turning point in South African history. Popular protest by masses of ordinary South Africans against the apartheid regime reached its height in the 1980s. These included strikes, mass protest, school, rent and consumer boycotts. The homes of ‘sell-outs’, government buildings and beer halls were attacked. The government responded with extreme brutality and repression by declaring a State of Emergency that lasted for much of the 1980s. [From sahistory.org.za/article/1980s-and-crisis-apartheid. Accessed on 19 November 2023.] Copyright reserved Please turn over

(EC/JUNE 2024) HISTORY P2 (ADDENDUM) 3 SOURCE 1B The extract below describes the reasons for the formation of civic organisations in the 1980s. Community or civic organisations were formed at a local level to oppose the control of the apartheid state and to promote the interest of local communities. Civics were organised from the bottom up, and although the ANC was banned, most civics identified with the ANC. Civics tackled ‘bread and butter issues’ such as rent, municipal services, public transport and poor recreational and child-care facilities. Civics sought to improve the quality of life of township residents and played a major role in the resistance of the 1980s. There were frequent, violent confrontations with the security forces. The government had established Community Councils served by black councillors who were responsible for township administration. These Community Councils were financed by rent and service charges from local residents. Councillors were regarded as collaborators (traitors) or ‘sell-outs’ and councils were rejected by communities as they imposed apartheid structures. Councillors and black police officers were forced to flee the townships, forced to resign or faced violent deaths. Civic organisations in street and area committees attempted to form alternative institutions of administration and justice in an attempt to establish ‘people’s power’ against white minority rule. Protest against poor services took the form of boycotts, in which residents refused to pay rent or service fees to the municipality. In 1985, Oliver Tambo, leader of the ANC in exile, said: ‘In this coming period we shall need to pursue with even more vigour (energy) the destruction of the organs of government in order to render the country ungovernable.’ [From https://www.sahistory.org.za/article/liberation-organisation. Accessed on 19 November 2023.] Copyright reserved Please turn over

4 HISTORY P2 (ADDENDUM) (EC/JUNE 2024) SOURCE 1C The source below is an extract from a book by K. Jochelson. It explains the rent boycott that the Vaal Civic Association (VCA) embarked on in July 1984 after a new rent increase was announced. Evidence that political consciousness in the townships had become increasingly combative (aggressive) emerged when the rent boycott spread to 54 townships countrywide. This involved about 300 000 households and cost the state at least R40 million per month. The rent boycotts were a response to both economic and political grievances. The Vaal local authorities had for years managed to make a profit – which they did by raising the cost of renting township houses from an average of R11,87 per month in 1977 to R62,56 per month in 1984. In l984 this was R10 per month higher than any other township. In July 1984 the Lekoa Town Council announced a new rent increase. A United Democratic Front (UDF) affiliate called the Vaal Civic Association (VCA) to mobilise opposition to the rent increase. The VCA had been launched in October 1983 to oppose black local authorities’ elections. When rent increases were announced the VCA organised an anti-rent campaign. It issued press statements against the increase, distributed pamphlets and held meetings in all the affected areas: Boipatong, Sebokeng, Evaton Small Farms, Sharpeville and Bophelong. Police opened fire on a march called by the VCA to protest higher rents and rates. People fought back. Violence spread across the Witwatersrand. [From ‘Rent Boycotts: Local Authorities on their Knees, Work in Progress, No. 44 September/October 1986 by K. Jochelson] Copyright reserved Please turn over

(EC/JUNE 2024) HISTORY P2 (ADDENDUM) 5 SOURCE 1D The poster below was designed by the Vaal Civic Association (VCA) inviting communities to a meeting to oppose the decisions made by the local black authorities. [From https://www.saha.org.za>udf>civics.html. Accessed on 19 November 2023.] Copyright reserved Please turn over

6 HISTORY P2 (ADDENDUM) (EC/JUNE 2024) QUESTION 2: HOW DID THE TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION COMMISSION (TRC) ATTEMPT TO PROMOTE RECONCILIATION IN SOUTH AFRICA? SOURCE 2A The following is an extract from a book written by D. Herwitz. It focuses on the reasons for the formation of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC). The Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) was formed in 1995 to investigate human rights violations since 1960 and to grant amnesty to those perpetrators who made full disclosure. The commission also had to foster (promote) reconciliation and unity among South Africans. In exchange for full confessions of politically motivated crimes, the TRC promised amnesty for those who came forward. The TRC's mandate was to be even- handed, but its composition was hardly balanced. The chairman, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, was a patron (supporter) of the United Democratic Front, the ANC’s internal front since the early 1980s … At the time, the TRC was the first restorative justice process of its kind to conduct public hearings and provide space for survivors to tell their stories in their own words. These hearings served as an important symbolic function in a country where the system of governance had been premised (founded) on the denial and silencing of, in particular, black voices. Altogether the commission received some 21 300 statements from victims and recorded some 38 000 gross violations of human rights. More than one thousand perpetrators received amnesty after full disclosure. Instead of concentrating on the context of a deed, the commission focused on the perpetrator or victim, with the result that the context was in most cases only scantily (poorly) sketched (addressed). Cross-examination of victims was not allowed in the victim hearings, but hearsay evidence was. [From Race and Reconciliation, by D. Herwitz] Copyright reserved Please turn over

(EC/JUNE 2024) HISTORY P2 (ADDENDUM) 7 SOURCE 2B The source below was taken from a book written by Mamphela Ramphele and deals with the reasons why PW Botha refused to cooperate with the TRC. Another controversial case was that of the former President, Mr PW Botha. He refused to cooperate with the TRC, rejecting it as an instrument that seeks to dishonour Afrikaner history and the contribution his ancestors made to South Africa. Tutu tried to convince him in many ways. He was given months to answer questions from the TRC. Tutu visited Botha at his home in the Wilderness, Southern Cape, to try to persuade him to accept responsibility for the policies that had been followed under his watch. Botha was without remorse until the bitter end. According to him, the Afrikaners did nothing wrong. They were only fulfilling their God-given responsibilities to defend Christian national values against terrorists and communists. Tutu treated Botha with great respect and reverence, even if he did not agree with his views. The court addressed Botha for disregarding a summons to appear before the TRC. Even in court, Tutu did not turn his back on Botha and the chance to heal the country. He proposed to Botha to admit that his government’s policies had led to misdeeds by various government officials, and that he was sorry. But Botha was stubborn to the bitter end. Some members of the commission felt that Tutu had bent over backwards to meet a culprit (criminal) who showed no remorse. This was not just any person, but someone who held a leadership position. Shouldn’t he have accepted responsibility for human rights abuses during a system of government he was the head of for so long? Others again pointed to the risks of humiliating President Botha at that time. Given the fragility of the new democracy, there was a danger that the right-wing could rise up. [From Laying the ghosts to rest by M. Ramphele] Copyright reserved Please turn over

8 HISTORY P2 (ADDENDUM) (EC/JUNE 2024) SOURCE 2C This cartoon by Zapiro focuses on PW Botha’s reluctance to appear before the TRC. [From Zapiro: The Madiba Years by J. Shapiro] Copyright reserved Please turn over

(EC/JUNE 2024) HISTORY P2 (ADDENDUM) 9 SOURCE 2D The following extract was taken from the TRC’s Final Report and comments on the reactions by some South Africans on the issue of reconciliation. To coincide with the national Day of Reconciliation, and to mark the second anniversary of the establishment of the Commission, four ‘Registers for Reconciliation’ were opened in December 1997, one in each of the regional offices. The idea of such a register had been discussed informally among commissioners and crystallised (become clear) during a radio phone-in programme, when listeners expressed a need for some way in which to articulate the regret and contrition (remorse) they felt for past wrongs. Announcing the Register, the Commission said: It has been established in response to a deep wish for reconciliation in the hearts of many South Africans; people who did not perhaps commit gross violations of human rights, but nevertheless wish to indicate their regret for failures in the past to do all they could have done to prevent such violations; people who want to demonstrate in some symbolic way their commitment to a new kind of future in which human rights abuses will not take place. We know that many South Africans are ready and eager to turn away from a past history of division and discrimination. Within a short time, dozens of people had come to the Commission offices to sign the Register, and even more used the Internet website to convey their messages. Many letters that were written to the Commission were also attached to the Register. Some of the messages were accompanied by donations to the President’s Fund for Reparations. Many asked for forgiveness. Many expressed gratitude for the opportunity “of admitting how we feel publicly at last”, to use the words of one contributor. It’s not too late – yes, I could have done more in the past, could have been more courageous. I regret that I didn’t. But now there is a new opportunity to commit to this country … to build respect for human rights, to help develop the country, to make the ideals enshrined in the constitution real. [From TRC’s Final Report, Volume 5, Chapter 9] Copyright reserved Please turn over

10 HISTORY P2 (ADDENDUM) (EC/JUNE 2024) ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Visual sources and other historical evidence were taken from the following: sahistory.org.za/article/1980s-and-crisis-apartheid. Accessed on 19 November 2023. https://www.sahistory.org.za/article/liberation-organisation. Accessed on 19 November 2023. ‘Rent Boycotts: Local Authorities on their Knees, Work in Progress, No. 44 September/October 1986 by K. Jochelson https://www.saha.org.za>udf>civics.html. Accessed on 19 November 2023. Herwitz, D. 2003, Race and Reconciliation (University of Minnesta Press) Ramphele, M. 2008, Laying the Ghosts to Rest (Tafelberg) From Zapiro: The Madiba Years by J. Shapiro TRC’s Final Report, Volume 5, Chapter 9 Copyright reserved Please turn over