Suchergebnisse

AbstractThe research is motivated by the need to determine the impact of South Africa's COVID-19 regulations on its quality of democracy. It takes into account the interests of individual (liberal) rights in competition with the state's interests of public security. Theoretical assumptions, based on classical democratic theories, which rely on the separation of powers and checks-and-balance principles, were used. The South African government architecture is assessed, especially in the context of accountability and oversight requirements. For this purpose, the relationship between the legislature and executive is most relevant. The South African government decided on a state of disaster to manage the pandemic, but it is contrasted with a state of emergency as the constitutional alternative. Its implementation, especially the institutional framework used for it, is analysed. The role of Parliament during the pandemic is used as an important test of the quality of democracy. The conclusions are that South Africa's democratic principles did not degenerate during the pandemic, as concluded by Freedom House, but the pandemic's major impact was on the quality of democracy. The state of disaster's institutions, for example, were not those prescribed by legislation. Moreover, Parliament's involvement in the state of disaster's decision-making was limited. The 2021 local government election, on the other hand, was judged free and fair and its outcomes have been implemented without any public challenges. The main negative outcome is the public's trust deficit in the ANC government's use and abuse of pandemic regulations.

As the title indicates this publication is the third issue in a series of reviews. The first issue was subtitled 2010: Development or decline? (2010) and the second was New paths, old promises? (2011). These publications are edited in the Department of Sociology at Wits University as part of its Strategic Planning and Allocation of Resources Committee (SPARC) Programme. The series is intended to be a revival of the South African Review edited by the South African Research Service and published by Ravan Press in the 1980s and early 1990s. Arguably one of the best known of these series was issue seven edited by Steven Friedman and Doreen Atkinson, The Small Miracle: South Africa's negotiated settlement (1994). The latest publication should also be seen as direct competition for the Human Sciences Research Council's (HSRC) regular publication, State of the Nation. The New South African Review 3 is organised into four parts, namely Party, Power and Class; Ecology, Economy and Labour; Public Policy and Social Practice; and South Africa at Large. The four editors introduce each of the sections, consisting of 16 chapters in total. Thebook's format appears to be that of a yearbook but it is not linked to a specific year. It is therefore not in the same category as for example the South African Institute of Race Relations' annual South Africa Survey. The Review is organised around a theme, albeit very general in its formulation, and in the case of the third issue it is also not applicable to all its chapters. At the same time, though, it is not a yearbook as the choice of chapters and their foci are on the latest developments.

This article argues that the international community is increasingly becoming involved in the domestic affairs of states and that this involvement can be described as part of international responsibility to promote peace and security. The role that an external party plays as a mediator in a transition or peace process is by definition a form of intervention. This article argues that this understanding of mediation should be broadened to include the responsibility to oversee the implementation (or enforcement) of the mediated agreement. The case of Madagascar (2009–2013) is used to investigate whether such enforcement is already accepted in practice and what some of the complications are. The article's conclusions acknowledge that such a view of the mediator's enforcement responsibility will be controversial, especially when mediation is used as a strategic instrument of power politics. In mediation, more attention is normally paid to its preparations and the negotiation process than to the implementation phase. Elections, as part of a transition process, create a critical tipping point for external enforcement, because after elections an external presence will be an unpopular idea for the national role players. Enforcement by actors who have sufficient power leverage is more viable than enforcement by mediators who have little power but a great deal of political or diplomatic authority (such as former presidents or senior diplomats). Implementation enforcement is more likely when it is motivated by interest-based considerations than by normative values. In conclusion, enforcement of agreement implementation is generally supported by the international community as a rhetorical exercise, but it is not yet embraced as a norm for international behaviour.

Democratization in the South African context is essentially a state-building process, in which constitution-making plays an important part. The transition from apartheid manifested itself in two concurrent processes, namely establishing a power-sharing, interim period as well as negotiating a new constitution. The first phase in the transition process, consisting of two phases, to a large extent has determined the outcome of the final constitution in the form of 34 Constitutional Principles. The second phase is directed by the elected Constitutional Assembly (CA), which has become an institutionalized process largely detached from the population. Two concurrent processes in the final transitional phase, in addition to the CA, are the quest for white, ethnic self-determination deliberated by the statutory Volkstaat Council, and the call for international mediation by the Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP). Mediation is viewed by the IFP as an alternative negotiating strategy in order to circumvent the CA in which it has a weak bargaining position. The negotiating process has also been characterized by political violence in which the IFP is prominent. Violence in the South African context could be viewed as symptomatic of the transition (political development), but could also be interpreted as part of a negotiating strategy.