SUBMISSIONS ON THE SOUTH AFRICAN LANGUAGE BILL [B23-2011] AS PER INVITATION BY PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON ARTS AND CULTURE
Introduction
We really applaud the contributions and the developments made on the Bill from the previous version to the stage that it is today. It is clear that various stakeholders were consulted to share their insight on the Bill. Nevertheless, we feel that some sections still need to be revisited and corrected. Hence comments below.
THE OBJECTIVES OF THE ACT :
MONITORING AND REGULATION OF THE USE OF OFFICIAL LANGUAGES
Words such as “regulate” and “monitor” in section 2(a) should be clarified and defined in section 1; they are subject to many interpretations and can mean anything to anyone. These words can be swayed so as to provide for where a particular language may or may not be used, thereby setting stringent restrictions that will be justified by the interpretation of these two words.
The concernis how government will execute the monitoring and regulating process to ensure that justice is done.
We believe that government should prioritise the Bill’saccreditation, capacitating human personnel in the language practice profession. If this is not persued’ it may create challenges and hinder progress and the development of languages, and it might even fail to address the challenges that the Bill seeks to address
In monitoring and regulating, standards, norms and values of the language profession must be set and outlined, to ensure that a professional service is provided in the public sector at a required standard. Oncethe language practice is professionalised,the needs analysis should per sector and its purpose should be done be done to ensure that a service which is provided is sustained.
The legislation must ensure that one of the watchdog institutions such as PanSALB, the Commission for Protecting the Rights of Cultural, Religious and Linguistic Minorities; National Language Units, Provincial Language Committees, and the South African Human Rights Commission are not just toothless dogs in matters that relate to language rights and use but rather should be seen to be enforcing rules and constitutional rights. These watchdogs should also be able to guard against promotion of languages at the expense of other’sby using the pretext to pursue other motives’ which may delay the progress of promotion and use of official languages.
Government, through the Minister of Arts and Culture, must take drastic steps and remedial efforts in case where the watchdog fails to enforce compliance by every government department, entity or enterprise to promote the equitable use of official languages.
Establishment of Language Policy in public entities and public enterprises
The current appalling state of language use by public entities and public enterprises is as the result of a lack of the existence or implementation of alanguage policy. The constitutional rights of most indigenous language users and speakers have been compromised by this state of affairs evidentin public entities and public enterprises.
To address this situation, public entities must be forced,through legislation,to embrace a language policy in their operational strategic planning. By so doing, these public entities and public enterprises will be in a position to consolidate and bring cohesion and citizenry assurance for the language communities they are servicing.Patriotism and citizenship would be consolidated throughinitiatives regarding language use and promotion by government among various language communities in the persuance of service delivery.
In the process of establishing a language policy, stakeholders within or related to those public entities and public enterprises must be given a platform on which to present those inputs which should be incorporated in the language policy.For instance, if a particular public entity or public enterprise is situated in a community which is very diverse in terms of language groupings, initiatives should be madeto establish what the community’s demographics and should be used to inform which official languages would best serve the language community as a whole without prejudice and alienation regarding those who are not represented in the demographics.
section 4(2) (d): This will take us back to the era where we had the two-language policy.It is not advisable for a national department to have a two- language policy for government purposes, as this would merely help the two privileged language speakers and alienate others who are not catered for by the two-language policy. That would constitute a violation of the basic human right of having access to information and also to the possible attrition of languages which have not been adequately developed and intellectualised. We suggest that all languages must be given equal consideration, for economic reasons; demographics must inform service delivery for each language.
section 4(3)(b):The language policy to be displayed in national departments, entities or enterprises should not mean that someone speaking a different official language from that of the language policy in the department, entity, enterprise should not be assisted or should be alienated because he/she speaks a different language, the department concern should assist anyone regardless of which language is used.
Clause 4, the two-language policy has a shortcoming of being open to the expression of tribalism.
BUILDING HUMAN CAPACITY AND LANGUAGE PROFESSIONALS BY HIGHER INSTITUTIONS OF LEARNING
In addition to the many functions of the NLU mentioned in section 6, we suggest that the revalorising and revitalising of “minority” languages should be made an added responsibility, and that they must foster linguistic pluralism in national departments than to opt for two language policy as stipulated in section 4(2)(d).
There is a huge number of graduates, mostly from former black universities, who graduate with language courses up to the level of masters degree. For example, manylanguage graduates and language professionals feel disadvantaged by the labour market since fewer economic opportunities which recognise the use of indigenous language are created and provided for them, hence leaving them disillusioned and seeing no reason in persuing language studies. Revitalisation and revalorisation of African languages to be used in many domains, not just in the classroom which is of utmost importance. In addition, intellectualisation of South African indigenous languages should be prioritised and those who are willing to study African languages or linguistics should be encouraged, while universities which offer these courses should be developed to cater for more South African indigenous languages
It may be a meritable argument that many people (language communities)on the ground have the feeling that we are still trapped in the colonial era because some still experience langauge barriers and constraints, as the former official languages still dominate the linguistic landscape of the country where we have eleven official languages.
Clarity on what steps should be taken against public entities and public enterprises which do not adhere to enforce this legislation? Some of the Chapter 9 institutions that have been given constitutional mandate to safeguard, promote and address concerns relating to language use and promotion have been ineffective in ensuring that they exercise this authority, or may be failing owing to their limitations as they may allege.
The Act’s objective is further stated as that of promoting language management, however, questions still remain unanswered around the democratisation of language bodies such as SATI (South African Translation Institute) that is responsible forthe accreditation of language practitioners.
THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A LANGUAGE POLICY
The establishment of a language policy should not become a futile exercise, as has been experienced at the past in some public entities and public enterprises, in terms of realising the objectives of this legislation. To ensure that the establishment of a language policy does not just become another talkshop, stakeholders within the public entities and public enterprises should be afforded an opportunity to submit their views and opinions so that these are incorporated into the establishment of the language policy. The National Language Unit should consequently become a custodian to ensure that regular updates are given in the development and implementation of the language policy. A review process should also be undertakenwith timelines stipulated to ensure that it aligns itself with the operational needs and changes of the institutions and orgranisations being established visa visthe needs it is intended to address in its day-to-day operations.
CLAUSE 5 AND CLAUSE 9
A concern exists that the monitoring and regulating responsibility given to the Minister regarding the use of official languages appears to be too much to be taken care of, given the already busy schedule that befits the Minister as a politician and a senior official of government.
Consequently it is sugggested that a ministerial task team be established by the Minister to deal with this issue and report to the Minister. Thetask team should be responsible for the day-to-day running of the issues pertaining to monitoring and regulating of official languages in public entities and public enterprises.
THE NATIONAL LANGUAGE UNIT
Clarity is needed on the role of the National Language Unit in relation to the role that PanSALB and Provincial Language Comittees arealready playingregarding language issues.
FINANCIAL SUPPORT
It is a concern that one of the cornerstones of any government undertaking is funding. The appalling state of affairs that relates to language promotion and development is the collapse that ensued due to ‘ a lack or insufficient financial support’.
SANCTIONS FOR NON-COMPLIANCE.
Clause 10 is the Bill is silent on the specifics in relation to the sanctions to be meted out for non-compliance by departments regarding the legislation. The fact that the NLU (National Language Unit) only requests the minister to `intervene` in respect of non-compliance leaves room for asoft application of the law. Alternatively, the clause should clearly cover the sanctions to be applied by the Minister in order to curb chances of non-compliance. Intervention is open to many interpretations, viz workshops, provision of written reports, etc. A strong message should be sent to the public in order to ensure that there is parity and equitable treatment of all South African languages. This Act should ultimately serve as a deterrent for ignoring the provisions of the law.
IN CONCLUSION
These are the concerns that we have noted in respect of the Bill and our additions regarding matters that we felt the Bill should include. We would greatly appreciate invited to participate in deliberations on the Bill on 17 and 18 of January 2012. If the invitation is extended, we would request the allocation of six seats.
Author: Action Group
1