Operation Dudula gives SAHRC 10 days to respond to demands, act against undocumented foreign nationals
The group demonstrated on Thursday, beginning in Braamfontein at the Socio-Economic Rights Institute (SERI), accusing it of protecting the rights of foreigners.
READ: Operation Dudula submits memorandum to SAHRC over 'deprioritisation of migrant rights'
They were met with a counter-protest by Abahali Basemjondolo.
Representative Thapelo Mohapi said: "We will not allow a group of fascists to attack our democracy, civil society organisations are the ones who hold government to account. They are the ones who protect our constitutions and protect our human rights, but if we allow one group of fascists opening a can of worms, we won't agree."
Operation Dudula president, Zandile Dabula, said: "Because they are both victims of Nigerians, the people that you are protecting and advocating for at all costs with our tax money. This is South African Human Rights Commission, but you guys have turned it into foreigners' human rights commission."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
IOL News
18 hours ago
- IOL News
Dudula clinic protesters should've faced fines or sentences, says KZN violence monitor
Three women from Operation Dudula were let go with a warning after being arrested for blocking foreigners from gaining access to a clinic in Soweto recently. Despite this, the vigilante group has continued with its operation, disregarding the message from the Orlando Magistrate's Court. KwaZulu-Natal violence monitor Mary de Haas told IOL that the Operation Dudula members should have been fined or given a suspended sentence. "It goes beyond the protesters; the people who should have stopped it were the police and hospital security," De Haas said. "There should have been some sort of penalty, not just a warning." But what does a 'warning' denote? Criminologist Thabang Bogopa explained that when people are released on warning, it means that they were charged, but given free bail. "The South African Constitution allows for people to be given free bail. For example, if students are striking at a university, the best thing for them would be to be charged, released, given free bail, and a court date for them to appear in court. "This allows the state to go and gather more evidence and send in the case docket to the prosecution for a decision regarding the enrollment of the case," he said. The women's case is scheduled to return to court on September 10. However, Bogopa added that the state might struggle with witnesses.
The Citizen
a day ago
- The Citizen
‘We are truly sorry': Open Chats Podcast issues apology to coloured community after backlash
This is the second apology the Open Chats Podcast issued, after the first failed to calm the storm. The Open Chats Podcast team has released an apology to the coloured community and all South Africans after intense backlash over racist remarks made during episode 128. The controversy sparked national outrage, legal action and calls for cancellation. Now, the hosts are taking public steps toward accountability and education. Backlash over episode Episode 128 of the Open Chat Podcast ignited a firestorm. Remarks made about the coloured community were widely condemned as racist, sexist and deeply offensive. The clip quickly went viral, drawing outrage across social media. This prompted the Patriotic Alliance (PA) to file charges against the hosts. The controversy escalated when old tweets from PA leader and sports minister Gayton McKenzie were shared, showing him using the K-word. This sparked renewed debate and even calls for his resignation. The fallout spread far beyond the original podcast audience. It turned into a national talking point. ALSO READ: Zuma's former fiancée LaConco makes acting debut in Mzansi Magic's 'Genesis' Previous apology rejected The podcast's initial apology failed to calm the storm. Many South Africans viewed it as insincere, with TikTok users posting videos criticising the tone and delivery. The backlash only deepened calls for cancellation and heightened demands for genuine accountability. This week, in episode 131, the hosts released a new apology. They say it is 'serious, unreserved, and from the heart'. 'We take full accountability' 'We wish to unconditionally and unreservedly apologise for the hurt and harm we caused to the coloured community and South Africa at large. Our statements in episode 128 were racist, sexist, unfortunate, irresponsible, reckless, and unAfrican. We take full accountability for our utterances,' the Open Chats team said. The team acknowledged that their words had caused 'outrage and offence' across racial lines. They recognised that their right to freedom of expression could not be exercised in ways that stripped others of their dignity. Content removed and call for calm Episode 128 has since been removed from all official platforms. However, the hosts expressed regret that clips continue to circulate independently. They urged the public to stop sharing the content to prevent further harm. They have also committed to undergoing formal education on race relations at a reputable higher-learning institution, to ensure such incidents are not repeated. Working with the Human Rights Commission While the team had initially intended to approach the South African Human Rights Commission (SAHRC) on their own, several political parties had already taken that step. The podcast's legal team is now liaising with the SAHRC to reach a resolution. They said they will comply fully with any directives issued. In a direct appeal to political parties critical of the podcast, the hosts invited open dialogue. They suggested a recorded discussion could take place in the future. Plea for forgiveness Closing their statement, the Open Chats Podcast hosts expressed remorse. 'We are disappointed with ourselves and the blatant disregard we showed when talking about a vulnerable group of people. We remain remorseful and request the forgiveness of the coloured community of South Africa. We are truly sorry for the damage we've caused.'
IOL News
a day ago
- IOL News
EFF backs government in rejecting US State Department's human rights report
EFF spokesperson Sinawo Thambo says the US is hypocritical in their report on human rights. Image: File The EFF and the South African government have come together to dismiss the recent United States State Department Human Rights Report, calling out the US for its hypocrisy on human rights issues. The report claimed that South Africa's human rights record has "significantly worsened," and documented several instances of arbitrary or unlawful killings committed by the government or its agents. But both the EFF and government claim this assessment is flawed and biased. It also claimed that the EFF incited violence against Afrikaner farmers, claiming that the party achieved this by reintroducing the contentious song 'Kill the Boer' song at its gatherings and through other acts of incitement. The report said that a provincial police commissioner confirmed in July that police had fatally shot at least 40 criminal suspects in shoot-outs since April. A January report from the South African Human Rights Commission (SAHRC) was also referenced. This report detailed the 2021 unrest in KwaZulu-Natal and Gauteng, which led to 337 deaths and 3,400 arrests. However, both the EFF and the the Department of International Relations and Cooperation (Dirco) criticised the US report for applying double standard on human rights. The EFF pointed out that the US has a history of using human rights narratives to justify sanctions, isolation, and even military aggression against other nations. "It is the same tactic used in Iraq under the lies of 'weapons of mass destruction', which left over a million people dead while US corporations looted oil fields,' EFF spokesperson Sinawo Thambo said. "The US has no moral standing to lecture any nation on human rights. This is a country that cages migrant children in detention centers; that has rolled back reproductive rights and stripped millions of women of the freedom to control their bodies," The party also criticised the report for selectively presenting incidents of police brutality while ignoring the broader context of South Africa's struggle against violent crime. "These cases, picked from our broader struggle against violent crime, are inflated to serve Washington's narrative that our nation is unfit to govern itself," the EFF said. 'This report was clearly crafted to smear South Africa for daring to assert its sovereignty, reclaim its land, and stand in solidarity with the oppressed peoples of the world, particularly the people of Palestine,' Thambo said. The Ministry of International Relations and Cooperation's spokesperson Chrispin Phiri also expressed profound disappointment with the report, describing it as "inaccurate and deeply flawed." Phiri said the report's reliance on contextual information and discredited accounts is highly concerning. "The report cites an incident involving the deaths of farm workers and, despite the matter being actively adjudicated by our independent judiciary, misleadingly presents it as an extrajudicial killing," Phiri explained. The government noted that South Africa operates a transparent system where information is freely available from law enforcement agencies and Chapter 9 institutions, which are constitutionally mandated to protect and advance human rights. The government also noted the irony that the US, having exited the UN Human Rights Council, would seek to produce one-sided fact-free reports without any due process or engagement. "This is particularly striking given the significant and documented concerns about human rights within the United States, including the treatment of refugees and breaches in due process by its agencies, such as ICE," the government said. "In contrast to the US report, the UN Human Rights Office in Geneva has praised South Africa's Land Expropriation Act, signed into law by President Cyril Ramaphosa, as a "critical step in addressing the country's racially imbalanced land ownership". This recognition underscores the integrity of South Africa's legislative processes aimed at rectifying historical injustices in a constitutional and human-rights-based manner,' Phiri said.
