Forget the lie of ‘white genocide' – the real crisis is a broken economy
This week, three seemingly unrelated events unfolded within 24 hours that, when viewed together and holistically, paint a sobering picture of the state of our nation.
On Monday, 12 May 2025, 59 white Afrikaners boarded a chartered flight to the United States under the guise of seeking refuge from a so-called 'white genocide' in South Africa.
It's a false concept that has been peddled by well-funded right-wing disinformation networks, a dangerous narrative designed to distort the truth of our country for political currency.
At its core is a grievance about race-based laws and an apparent inability to remain in South Africa due to exclusion from economic opportunity.
The following morning, I sat as a member of the Department of Trade, Industry, and Competition (dtic) portfolio committee as the department presented to Parliament its latest report on B-BBEE.
What was meant to be a tool of redress, of economic justice, and of meaningful participation has instead become deeply flawed. Ownership is still not transformed. Most Charter Councils aren't even operational. Reporting is dismal. Only 35% of JSE-listed companies submitted reports in 2022. Black ownership in the formal economy has stagnated. And the poorest remain the poorest.
Also on Tuesday, Stats SA released the latest Quarterly Labour Force Survey for the first quarter of 2025. Data is by its nature straightforward and devoid of bias or emotion. And the data showed the following: since 2014, unemployment among black South Africans has increased by 6.7%. Among white South Africans, it has declined by 1%.
At the same time, the average monthly income of a white-headed household is R24,646. For a black-headed household, it is five times smaller at R5,297.
When the myth of 'white marginalisation' is fed to the world, we must confront it not just as false, but as an inversion of the truth.
Still, it would be dishonest to pretend that things are going well for anyone. They aren't – and this is the tragedy. Everyone is suffering. There is no group that is thriving in this stagnant, failing economy. We are, quite frankly, in a lose-lose scenario, in a race to the bottom.
When there's no growth, we are forced to fight over scarcity. Like animals circling a drying watering hole, we begin to turn on one another instead of challenging the real cause of our hunger: a government that has failed to deliver growth, failed to transform and failed to govern.
In Tuesday's dtic committee, I made the point that transformation must become truly broad-based. Empowerment without ownership is tokenism. And it is showing in these numbers.
We must stop fighting for crumbs in the old economy and start building new economies, these being township economies, rural value chains and digital frontiers. That's how we create ownership from the ground up. But even this alone is not enough.
South Africa's crisis is not just a crisis of stagnation, which breeds inequality. For over a decade, we've grown at an average of just 1% per year. That is slow collapse. And until we get serious about expanding the economy, we will remain trapped in this cycle – fighting each other, instead of fighting for a better country.
Build One South Africa has proposed a Growth Charter, which we consider a serious roadmap to 5% GDP growth in three years. It includes:
Investing in SMMEs, which already contribute 40% to GDP, but receive only 6% of bank loans;
Modernising infrastructure, particularly through public-private partnerships to unlock water, transport and energy solutions;
Reforming the labour market to make hiring easier and promote youth employment;
Securing energy and ending load shedding by diversifying generation and decentralising the grid; and
Expanding trade and industrial policy to open new markets and back value-added manufacturing.
South Africa needs not just transformation, but a growth-driven economy. We need both equity and expansion. We need both ownership and opportunity. We need to build.
So yes, let's confront the lies. Let's reject the myths of 'white genocide'. But let's also reject the false comfort of symbolic policies that fail to deliver real change.
And let us remember that when the economy grows, hope grows. When people work, dignity returns. And when a country believes again, it can begin again. Let's stop managing decline and start building growth. DM
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Maverick
5 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
In this era of spyware, Parliament must codify safeguards in surveillance law
Considering the proliferation of sophisticated surveillance technologies such as spyware, South Africa has a unique opportunity to implement a meaningful surveillance safeguard that can serve as a model regionally and globally by fixing the flaws in the Rica Bill. It has been more than four years since the South African Parliament began the reform of the Regulation of Interception of Communications Act (Rica). In 2021, the Constitutional Court declared the law unconstitutional and directed additional constitutional safeguards for surveillance. The 36-month timeline set by the court has long past, and warrant applications are delayed or unprocessed, leaving South Africa vulnerable to internal and external threats. A major factor behind this delay is Parliament and the Justice Department's minimalist approach, which conflicts with the court's mandate to address fundamental constitutional problems in the Rica Bill. The original bill passed by Parliament failed to remedy all constitutional flaws, so President Cyril Ramaphosa refused to assent and referred it back to Parliament. As the DA's Werner Horn predicted in 2023, 'the idea of a future wholesale review was a way of delaying the process which was likely to take years'. Considering the proliferation of sophisticated surveillance technologies such as spyware, South Africa has a unique opportunity to implement a meaningful surveillance safeguard that can serve as a model regionally and globally by fixing the flaws in the Rica Bill. This article explains how South Africa can achieve it. Indefinite suspension of notification keeps surveillance secret and grants permanent impunity The first flaw in the Rica Bill is the weak notification system. The introduction of a mandatory notification to surveillance subjects within 90 days of warrant expiration is a positive step; however, the implementation will probably fail. It allows suspension under vague conditions, i.e. whenever a court finds notification 'has the potential to negatively impact national security' for any period the court deems appropriate. Without clear limitations, suspension will be granted in many more cases for much longer than necessary (as found by the European Court of Human Rights in Bulgaria's notification system). Such a broad notification suspension makes accountability and remedy virtually impossible. Consider the case of journalist Sam Sole, a director of the amaBhungane Centre for Investigative Journalism, who was the plaintiff of the 2021 Constitutional Court case. Like many other targets Sole suspected he was being monitored, but lacked proof. That evidence emerged by good fortune when official intercept extracts were included in documents in another case. Sole's case is far from rare. Right2Know reports case studies where journalists only found out about the surveillance on them 'through accident, coincidence, or via a confidential source — without which it would be impossible to get any recourse'. If surveillance evidence is used in a criminal case, the subject may challenge its legality, but such cases are rare in practice. The Rica Bill does little to change the status quo, leaving the situation where, in Jacques Pauw's words, journalists 'can't do anything' with '(their) phone and emails (being) monitored'. The prospect becomes even more concerning when we consider the persistent instability the intelligence community has faced since 1994. This organisational weakness has been a root cause of surveillance abuse, notably identified by the 2018 Presidential High-Level Review Panel and the 2009 Commission of Inquiry. Yet, while the president-led reforms have led to some positive changes, they remain incomplete. International human rights law requires that people be notified of surveillance without jeopardising government interest The access to remedy is a human right. International and regional bodies consistently stress that states must provide victims of illegal surveillance access to an effective remedy (e.g. UN General Assembly, Human Rights Council, Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression, Human Rights Committee [see, recommendations to South Africa ], and African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights). The knowledge of secret surveillance is the first step in achieving a remedy. Suspension thus should be strictly limited when it is necessary and proportionate to a specific legitimate aim, and should be subject to oversight. Notably, the European Court of Human Rights (e.g. in 2024 and 2022), and the European Court of Justice repeatedly clarified that notification must be provided to the surveillance subjects as soon as it can be made without jeopardising the purpose of surveillance. However, the current Rica Bill stands in contrast. It is doubtful that, without a clear condition and upper limit on suspension, notification would be issued immediately after the threat abates. Another problem with the notification system under the Rica Bill is its silence on what should be notified. To ensure access to remedy, the notification must include sufficient information so the surveillance subject could substantiate a claim to have the legality of the surveillance reviewed by a competent body. This, at a minimum, includes details such as who sought and conducted the surveillance, why and when it was done, and what information was obtained. In the case of Sole, while he (because of unique circumstances) learned of the interception, it was not enough for accountability. The government continues to insist that the application document justifying Sole's interception 'cannot be found', leaving Sole still 'left in the dark' as to whether the intrusion was legally valid. A concern that a robust notification system may deter agencies from using interception reflects a lack of understanding among agencies. The system does allow for notification to be suspended when necessary. Training is needed to ensure agencies understand that the notification framework is designed to strike a careful balance between government interests and transparency, and it should be implemented accordingly. Advanced surveillance technologies like spyware make the importance of notification even greater for accountability New tools like spyware make surveillance more intrusive and sophisticated. Spyware enables secret access to any data on a targeted device and even the alteration of data. International human rights experts are concerned that spyware may only be justified by necessity and proportionality principles in extremely limited situations. Spyware, like Pegasus by NSO Group, has been widely abused by governments worldwide to target journalists, human rights defenders, lawyers, and politicians. In South Africa, Ramaphosa's mobile phone was targeted in 2019 by Rwanda using spyware. One of the unique challenges posed by spyware is that of documenting its actual use. Some spyware can self-delete traces of itself on the target device. Moreover, many spyware operations are conducted by private vendors, adding another layer of opacity around who is conducting the surveillance. In fact, many accountability efforts related to Pegasus stem from leaked documents. This unique level of secrecy undermines the effectiveness of accountability mechanisms across the globe. For instance, in Ireland, individuals who believe they are subject to surveillance can appeal to a complaints referee to examine the legality of interception. However, individuals are less likely to realise they are being targeted by spyware. 'One-sided' warrant application process requires safeguards to prevent authorisations based on false claims The other major defect in the Rica Bill is the lack of solutions to ex parte — or one-sided — hearings. Under Rica's existing procedures, the government applies for a warrant in an ex parte hearing with only the judge and government representative present. While the exclusion of the surveillance subject from the process is necessary to achieve the goal of interception, this is a departure from traditional adversarial hearings where the judge can hear from advocates on either side of the issue. As a result, in the Constitutional Court's words, 'blatant mendacity may be the basis of an approach to (the judges)', like the journalists of The Sunday Times, who were subject to real-time interception based on 'unadulterated lies' that they were suspected ATM bombers; and the illegal surveillance over Saki Macozoma. Such misconduct is not unique to South Africa. In the United States, the FBI fabricated an email to carry out surveillance on Trump campaign advisor Carter Page, whom the FBI suspected of having ties to the Russian government. There are probably more cases that have not surfaced due to the 'complete secrecy' surrounding surveillance practices, which the Constitutional Court identifies as a root cause of abuse in surveillance. A public advocate system would help protect South African privacy rights One solution referenced by the court and supported by researchers and civil society is the introduction of a public advocate system, which is designed to bring an adversarial element to the hearing. A security-cleared lawyer would act in the interest of the excluded party (in this case, the individual subject to surveillance). While communication with the excluded parties is prohibited, public advocates typically have access to all information held by the government, including national security information, and they can submit claims, cross-examine evidence or witnesses, and challenge legal arguments. Such a system aligns with the principle confirmed by the European Court of Human Rights that 'measures affecting fundamental human rights must be subject to some form of adversarial proceedings', 'even when national security is at stake'. At least Canada, the UK, Australia, Sweden, the US, New Zealand, Denmark, Norway and Hong Kong have introduced public advocate systems since the 1980s and improved the systems, including in the context of surveillance authorisation. Notably, these countries have either maintained their public advocate programme or expanded their application. The European Court of Human Rights recognised the public advocate system as a method to address ex parte concerns, and human rights bodies have recommended that states consider including a public advocate system in the warrant application process. Governments explicitly confirmed its effectiveness. Public advocates have demonstrated impact on outcomes. Public advocates' arguments have led courts to negate warrant applications. Existing studies based on interviews with public advocates and government agencies confirm a positive trend, with public advocates increasingly successful in raising the standard for government evidence and warrant applications. The system can improve the quality of warrant applications and help reduce the burden on judges. Parliament should consider public advocate system now The Department of Justice disfavours the public advocate system without fully understanding its effectiveness because it is a new concept in South Africa. Its reluctance is evident in its lacklustre conclusion from preliminary research on the global landscape of the system. It only scratched the surface of some literature, failing to consider the latest rules, ignoring positive trends, and saying 'each country has a very different model of a public advocate, and that this role is not necessarily enabled by state surveillance legislation'. Given the emergence of spyware, the department should conduct more in-depth research into implementation models in other countries and carry out a detailed feasibility assessment of introducing the public advocate system within South African law, particularly in sensitive cases involving press freedom or source confidentiality. The department has failed to show an alternative solution. It argues that an automatic review mechanism would remedy the one-sided warrant hearing. Under this mechanism, all warrant decisions would be reviewed by another judge immediately after the original decision was made. However, such a system is simply less effective and incurs greater costs in both time and money compared with the public advocate system. As Professor Jane Duncan, who has written and worked extensively on public oversight of security agencies, has noted the review judge is likely to 'mirror the decisions', as review judges 'will still be making decisions based on the same one-sided secret evidence'. South Africa has the opportunity to implement a meaningful safeguard to be a model regionally and globally Parliament and the State Security Agency have justified concerns about the legislative gap and the resulting damage to state security. But South Africa is uniquely situated as a state that understands the damage a 'skewed notion of national security' can cause when it is 'weaponised and calculated to subvert the dignity of the majority of South Africans'. South Africa should not miss the present opportunity. The world is watching. Many countries, in Africa and beyond, are updating their surveillance laws. As the Constitutional Court stated, 'the right to privacy is singularly important in South Africa's constitutional democracy.' The world is waiting for South Africa to demonstrate its commitment to constitutional democracy — something that is urgently needed in the current global context. DM Hinako Sugiyama is a public interest lawyer licensed in both Japan and New York, USA, specialising in issues related to surveillance, human rights, and democracy. She currently supervises the work of the International Justice Clinic at the University of California, Irvine School of Law.
IOL News
12 hours ago
- IOL News
Cradock Four inquest resumes after nearly 40 years of silence
The inquest into the deaths of activists Sicelo Mhlauli, Fort Calata, Matthew Goniwe and Sparrow Mkhonto, known as the Cradock Four, has resumed for the third time. The four men were killed by Apartheid security forces in June 1985. Image: File picture: Benny Gool/Independent Media Archives More than 39 years after the murder of the Cradock Four and decades of unanswered questions, the third inquest into the deaths of the Cradock Four officially got under way at the Gqeberha High Court, in the Eastern Cape on Monday. The families of Fort Calata, Matthew Goniwe, Sparrow Mkhonto and Sicelo Mhlauli are hoping this renewed legal process will finally bring closure and accountability for the brutal killings of the four anti-apartheid activists who were tortured in 1985. The family's legal representative, Howard Varney, said that the death of the four young men was meticulously planned by the Apartheid security branch. "According to autopsy reports, Mhlauli died from stab wounds; Calata died from stabbing in the heart; Mkhonto died from a gunshot wound to the head and (was) stabbed in the heart. Mhlauli's body was found with a missing hand. "It is quite apparent that before death, the four were brutally tortured and mutilated. The Apartheid police created a cover story saying they were killed by elements from the Azanian People's Organisation (AZAPO) in a factional dispute. We intend to demonstrate that the death of the Cradock Four was brought about by way of a calculated and a premeditated decision by the Apartheid regime. It was meticulously planned by the security branch in an official operation," he stated. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Next Stay Close ✕ Advocate Tembela Ngukaitobi, who represents some of the Goniwe family members, said he is hopeful that the truth will eventually come out in the latest inquest. "There is a high possibility that the full truth will emerge and some level of closure for the families would put an end to psychological trauma," he said. Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development Mmamoloko Kubayi attended the first day of the resumption of the inquest with departmental spokesperson, Terrence Manase indicating that 'this inquest forms part of ongoing efforts by the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development to address unresolved cases from the apartheid era and to advance justice and closure for affected families and communities". The inquest into the deaths of the four activists was previously halted due to funding challenges. Kubayi indicated that the state has in the past funded and supported multiple inquests and prosecutions, adding that a presidential Commission of Inquiry will determine whether anyone in government deliberately stalled these cases. 'It is worth to note that even now, President Cyril Ramaphosa has opened and appointed a commission to deal with the issues. I think we must allow for the commission to determine from where we are sitting that there hasn't been any deliberate delays in prosecuting or even bringing the cases that relates to apartheid crimes into court,' the minister said.
Daily Maverick
13 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
Inside the mind of a monster — understanding the psychology of child abusers
With more than 13,000 child abuse crimes reported in 2023/24, experts warn that perpetrators often hide in plain sight as teachers, clergy and even parents. Daily Maverick explores who these perpetrators are and whether they can ever be rehabilitated. Year after year South Africans are inundated with sobering statistics painting a heartbreaking picture of the severity of the scale of crimes committed against children. From murder, to rape and kidnappings, daily newsfeeds are polluted with these disturbing stories. Childline South Africa has reported receiving more than 500 calls a day related to child abuse and neglect. In 2023/24, the South African Police Service's (SAPS) annual crime report revealed that 13,053 crimes against children were reported in that period. The Teddy Bear Clinic, which provides psychosocial support for victims of child abuse, reportedly sees at least 800 clients a month. Some of the most high-profile cases of crimes against children in South Africa have shocked the nation, not only for their brutality but because of who the perpetrators are. From mother and father, to teachers and caregivers, these cases expose a disturbing truth: child abuse is rarely committed by strangers. Instead, it is often hidden in plain sight – behind familiar faces, inside homes, classrooms and churches. These stories force us to confront uncomfortable questions about who abuses children, why they do it and if the justice system in its current form is equipped to stop this from happening. In a chilling exploration of child abuser psychology, experts set out the diverse yet disturbingly familiar faces of perpetrators, ranging from violent outcasts to charming community leaders, and the burning question of whether cycles of child abuse can be broken. But, they warn against simplistic profiling and note that even among individuals raised in the same household or with similar backgrounds, only one may go on to commit such crimes. This underscores the intricate and unpredictable interaction between individual characteristics and environmental influences. The perpetrator's labyrinth Understanding the psychology of child abusers is a complex, often disturbing endeavour. Dr Marcelle Londt, former head of the Department of Social Work at the University of the Western Cape (UWC) with 43 years' experience working with victims and perpetrators of sex crimes inside and outside South Africa's prison system, states firmly: 'There's no typical profile. They're a heterogeneous group.' However, her extensive clinical and academic work reveals common characteristics and behavioural patterns that offer a chilling glimpse into the minds behind these crimes. Rigid religious families One significant group emerges from 'extremely rigid religious families', presenting a high moral standing while harbouring a dark, clandestine side involving child pornography or child sex workers. Londt notes the profound cognitive dissonance: 'It's difficult for people to understand, here's this man of God… yet there's this dark side to him.' This high religiosity, coupled with a rigid moral ground and shamefulness around psychosexual development, creates a volatile dynamic where secret, illicit behaviours can flourish. Adverse childhood experiences Another category comprises individuals from 'very chaotic backgrounds,' often marked by 'very, very bad experiences, adverse child experiences'. These individuals tend to be more violent, frequently cycling in and out of prison, directing their anger and chaos at society. 'They were born into families where they would not have a hope or a chance of making a good life for themselves,' Londt said, explaining how early life trauma can fuel a cycle of aggression and reoffending. Perpetrators who pose as 'nice guys' Perhaps the most insidious group are the 'nice guys'. Londt describes them chillingly: 'They look like us. They behave like us. They even smell better than us. And you'll find them in churches. You'll find them in leadership.' These individuals are highly seductive, luring victims into relationships and leaving these victims with a profound sense of guilt, believing they could have prevented the abuse. These perpetrators' ability to present as respectable members of society makes them particularly dangerous, since they often go undetected for long periods. One case of this was in 2016, when convicted paedophile Brian Shofer (58) was found dead in his Lentegeur police station cell after apparently hanging himself with a mattress lining, just days after appearing in court on a rape charge. Shofer, who had previously been jailed for sexually abusing boys on the Cape Flats, was arrested earlier in the week of his death for allegedly raping a boy over several years, beginning when the victim was 12. Shofer had worked as a private tutor for children, and was seemingly respected in the community before his atrocities came to light. The incestor A specific, deeply disturbing subset is the 'incestor', whom Londt describes as a paedophile 'too lazy to go and find his own victims'. These individuals often target single parents with psychosocial challenges and multiple children, creating opportunities for increased access by encouraging sleepovers for children and their friends. Londt vividly likens them to 'the lion who lays in wait at the water hole, where animals come and drink water', suggesting a predatory, opportunistic nature built for 'choice'. Empathy deficit, childhood trauma and wounded origins Beyond these categories, Londt identifies common personality issues and traits across many offenders. While not necessarily psychiatrically ill, they exhibit traits of narcissism, sadism, self-centredness and profound deficits in empathy. 'If you show one of those guys a picture of a burn victim, they will go all out to get support for that victim… You show him a picture of his 10-year-old daughter that was brutally molested, raped by him. He doesn't share the same empathy for his victim,' she said. This lack of victim empathy is a critical indicator; those who truly understand their risk and show genuine remorse are the ones most likely to make drastic life changes to prevent reoffending. The role of substance abuse is also significant. Londt notes that many offenders have 'mood affective disorders' (like bipolar traits, though she stresses such diagnoses don't automatically lead to abuse) and that drug use, particularly sexual stimulants, could make offenders 'completely indiscriminate', targeting anyone from infants to the elderly. The most dangerous, however, are the sadistic individuals who, said Londt, 'don't just want to molest or rape, they want to hurt, maim and kill. And those are the people that can never be in society. They're not, they can't, be rehabilitated at all.' These individuals exhibit downright cruel behaviour with no concern for consequences, and no concern for rules. Propensity to rationalise, minimise and blame A disturbing aspect of perpetrator psychology is their propensity to rationalise, minimise and blame. Londt confirms that during interviews or therapy, abusers 'rationalise, they lie, they manipulate. And when you confront them, they blame the victim.' This denial extends even to child victims, with abusers claiming the child 'wanted it' or making other perverse justifications, such as 'I raped her because she wanted to have sex with me'. This rationalisation, the minimising, the justification and denial comes with the territory, Londt said, and makes genuine rehabilitation incredibly challenging. Intergenerational nature of violence Professor Shanaaz Matthews adds another layer to understanding perpetrator psychology by highlighting the intergenerational nature of violence. She explains that violence against women and children co-occur in the same households, leading to a cumulative effect of the trauma and an intergenerational cycle of violence. Children exposed to violence learn that 'using violence is okay', leading to bullying behaviour and, later, an increased risk of perpetrating violence themselves. This learned behaviour, coupled with damaged early emotional attachments due to a lack of 'caring adult' figures, profoundly shapes individuals' ability to form secure relationships and parent effectively. Matthews's work with violent men in prisons shows that adverse childhood experiences can and do shape men who take on violent masculinities, who become really violent men. She said the ability to be empathetic and form secure emotional attachments is learnt early on, and a deficit in this area can lead to skewed expectations in adult intimate relationships. However, she cautions against profiling, noting that even within the same family, only one individual might become a perpetrator, demonstrating the complex interplay of individual and environmental factors. Breaking the cycle Can cycles of child abuse be broken? The answer is complex, requiring a multipronged approach that combines rigorous rehabilitation with robust prevention. Londt believes that some perpetrators can be held accountable and respond to community-based programmes, while others require imprisonment first. However, she maintains that, with a third group of people, 'nothing can be done with them. They will come out and they'll keep on perpetrating.' For those capable of change, meaningful behavioural shifts are possible, but demand profound self-awareness. Londt's programme, Catts (Child Abuse Therapeutic and Training Services), focuses on helping offenders understand the mechanisms of what they did and how they maintain it, including grooming strategies and how they removed protective measures from victims. The primary goal of any perpetrator intervention is the principle of no more victims. Londt said another aspect of this was to hold perpetrators accountable, restore their dignity and equip them with skills to prevent relapse, rather than simply amplifying their guilt and shame. Both experts strongly advocate for early intervention. Matthews stresses that to shift it is very hard, but it is possible in adulthood. However, it requires far more work than what it is to intervene early. Matthews said that prevention interventions are needed all along the life cycle, including identifying at-risk families during pregnancy, improving parenting practices and providing trauma-informed programming really early on with children who have been exposed to violence. Schools, she said, were a great platform for delivering scalable programmes that teach life skills and social-emotional capacity, transforming schools into places of safety and learning. Londt also stressed that society must acknowledge that, systemically, 'if we don't clean up our society, if we don't stop cutting funding for programmes that are supposed to strengthen families, if we don't look at where our adolescence is going', the individual pathology will not be enough to stem the tide. DM
