De Klerk’s apology is ‘too little, too late’

FW De Klerk has withdrawn and unreservedly apologised for his “apartheid is no crime against humanity” statement but his apology was has been rejected as little too late.

In a statement issued this afternoon, De Klerk said he noted the vehement reaction to his response to the EFF’s attack on him at the State of the Nation address on Thursday night. He said he agreed with the Desmond and Leah Tutu Foundation that this is not the time to quibble about the degrees of unacceptability of apartheid because the system was totally unacceptable.

“The FW de Klerk Foundation has accordingly decided to withdraw its statement of 14 February unconditionally and apologises for the confusion, anger and hurt that it has caused,” he said.

He highlighted that by 27 April 1994, under his leadership, the whole legislative framework of apartheid had been dismantled and the way had been opened for the adoption of our present non-racial democratic Constitution. He acknowledged that the international crime of apartheid did not disappear with the demise of apartheid in South Africa and that in 1998 it was included in the Statute of Rome, which established the International Criminal Court.

De Klerk cited Article 7 (1) which defined a ‘crime against humanity’ as acts “…committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack.” “It includes ‘the crime of apartheid’ as a crime against humanity and defines it as “inhumane acts …committed in the context of an institutional regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime.”

De Klerk said: “The FW de Klerk Foundation supports this provision. It can also be seen as the legislative expression of Nelson Mandela’s statement during his inaugural address that “never, never and never again shall it be that this beautiful land will again experience the oppression of one by another. The FW de Klerk Foundation remains deeply committed to national reconciliation and to the achievement of the foundational values on which the Foundation is based – including human dignity, the achievement of equality, the advancement of human rights and freedoms; non-racialism and non-sexism, the supremacy of the Constitution and the Rule of Law and a genuine multi-party system of democratic governance.

Advocate Dali Mpofu, former political activist and ex-national chairperson of the Economic Freedom Fighters, said De Klerk’s apology was unacceptable.

Mpofu this week initiated a social media campaign in which he gauged support for a case to approach the Nobel Foundation to take back the Nobel Peace Prize it gave to De Klerk over his statement. The Twitter- based campaign received 10 000 retweets within 8 hours and Mpofu said this was enough to launch the campaign and take the matter to Oslo, Norway to request for the withdrawal of the award that De Klerk received alongside icon Nelson Mandela.

“His apology is half-hearted – it’s too little too late and it came 30 years later. We cannot accept his apology at this stage,” Mpofu said.

Mpofu’s sentiment was echoed by political analyst, Dr Ralph Mathekga who said the apology should be welcomed, but it came too late as it had already caused immeasurable damage to many in South Africa. It would be difficult for De Klerk to be trusted again with reconciliation project after what he said.

“People will now question the role of the FW de Klerk Foundation as to whether it stood for the rewriting of the South African history as it pertains to apartheid,” Mathekga said.

He said those who demanded for the recall of the Nobel Peace Prize given to De Klerk had a right to do so. He said the award should go to people who deserved it.

People would want to know what was the meaning of the apology and would question whether the Foundation and De Klerk would initiated project that would show their remorse for what they said to defend apartheid.

Mathekga said it’s one thing to apologise because of pressure, it’s another to act in a manner showing that one regretted what he said or did. He said the jury was still out whether the De Klerk and his foundation meant what they said in the apology. “What do they mean by this apology, are they going to undertake activities that would show that they are committed to reconciliation and nation building?” Mathekga said.

But another political analyst, Xolani Dube said South African had a sickness of dwelling in the past which prevented them from going smoothly into the future and that is what was happening now. “This is not about De Klerk but about a country that was at war with itself.

“There are ugly truth and ugly individuals that are playing with our emotional and intellectual intelligence. We must not let the past define our future, we need to be resilient emotionally and intellectually. We cannot undo the legacy of apartheid if we are emotionally and intellectually weak. We have relatively defeated the past, therefore let not the devils of the past encroach into the space of the now and the future,” Dube said.

ericn@citizen.co.za
or more news your way, download The Citizen’s app for iOS and Android.