MPs trivialise GBV in ‘scandalous’ exchanges, activists charge

Gender-based violence (GBV) activists were enraged by the display of dirty politics at the State of the Nation address (Sona) debate on Tuesday and expressed their concern about how policymakers tended to end the dialogue after using it to score political points off each other.

ANC MP Boy Mamabolo questioned Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) leader Julius Malema on whether he had abused his wife behind closed doors. Malema initially refused to answer and carried on reading his prepared speech, despite the standing question.

At the insistence of several other MPs, mainly from the ANC, Malema responded: “Your president abused his [ex] wife. I have never abused neither my ex or my wife, I have never beaten up my wife… I have a history of love.”

That rumour, which surfaced from the EFF in 2017, was denied by the now late ex-wife of President Cyril Ramaphosa, Hope (Nomazizi) Ramaphosa, who expressed her shock and disappointment at the time.

After being asked to leave the house following his utterances, Malema told parliament: “You come to me with nonsense? I’ll give you nonsense. I can leave the house, but Nomazizi must rest in peace.”

He was followed out by all the EFF MPs, some of whom shouted insults as they left.

Unimpressed, gender activist Letlhogonolo Mokgoroane said what she watched was “mansplaining”.

“We can’t use gender-based violence as a political game. What does it mean when you take the lived experience of others? The conversation [highlighted] that the people who showed they were concerned [about gender-based violence] are not concerned at all!”

Also disappointed was activist Lisa Vetten, who described the exchange as a scandal rather than a political debate and said it exposed they had little understanding about gender-based violence.

“It shows why they are unable to address the problem – if they say they care so much but use it to score political points.

“If this is their understanding of GBV… then we will not see any quality legislation, but shallow changes. They have not even asked any of the women concerned if they want to be involved, which is disrespectful!”

She said, in a way, the exchange showed progress from 2009 when a president was elected despite his poor GBV track record, having been charged with rape at the time.

She said it was interesting that now politicians knew what they should not do when it came to women. The exchange, however, did not take the conversation forward at all.

Vetten added that she was yet to hear the details of the amendments to the Domestic Violence Act that Ramaphosa mentioned in his Sona.

He said there would be an emergency action plan; that government would reprioritise R1.6 billion to support this plan in this financial year and that there was also a national anti-corruption strategy and implementation plan.

He added: “There has been progress in several areas. We will amend the Domestic Violence Act to better protect victims in violent domestic relationships and the Sexual Offences Act to broaden the categories of sex offenders, whose names must be included in the national register for sex offenders. And we will pass a law to tighten bail and sentencing conditions in cases that involve gender-based violence.”

Politics and gender expert Amanda Gouws believed Ramaphosa was repeating things the country had heard before and said “he was not applying his mind to the problem”.

Referring to the debate, she said: “It was very upsetting that the men are using something serious for political point-scoring – and to think these are members of parliament that have to make policy?

“This is unacceptable. I think both [Ramaphosa and the exchange] are trivialising a very big problem that is at the heart of citizenship of women in the country.”

– jenniffero@citizen.co.za

For more news your way, download The Citizen’s app for iOS and Android.