CSDA-SA

https://lnkd.in/dWGbVfCk Justice can be understood in practical terms (eye for an eye). Or justice can be approached in philosophical terms. Philosophical approach would allow the country to evaluate whether to base its policies on punitive or rehabilitative approach. The punitive approach is based on an eye for an eye principle. But this approach has no intention help wronged people- but simply focus on ensuring whoever perpetrated abuse is punished. This justice approach lack restorative - and more over compound people who receive punishment correctly so (for perpetrators) or incorrectly so (for victims of injustices). Imagine if LPC existed to reward excellence in terms of ethical conduct and public review of legal practitioners. This would allow the Professional Body to grade and up grade those who serve the public with flying colours- and the public will know in advance the grade of a professional they are dealing with way in advance... And this will force those that need to rehabilitate to serve under well graded practitioners to improve their grading. This approach will be pro-active than reactionary- and it will also be in line with objectives of Alternative Dispute Resolution meant to address adjudication overload- not only to Judicial but to all mechanisms of conflict adjudication. The challenge with this approach is that it means the Professional Bodies in general will have to be repurposed at a legislative level- as these bodies were originally designed to achieve gatekeeping by the industry itself- and subsequently used to advance professional jealous - which you may find most of their cases are even helping the public but advancing gatekeeping- And that coming across as frustration to the public as public complaints takes forever to be resolved- while reports by peers are prioritised. This is where appreciation of the decolonisation of our institutions become important.

https://lnkd.in/dWGbVfCk     

https://lnkd.in/dWGbVfCk   

To understand this please read https://lnkd.in/dWGbVfCk   

Engaging the world. Growing slowly.

Reconstruction of trust is a basic existential necessity. Trust! petty as it may sound- but all what people yearn for today is just to trust- and be to trusted. Colonial conquest completely obliterated this capacity to trust and be trusted. Colonial system ought to take full responsibility before this fast paced globalisation is reduced into a winner take all; “one big animal farm- where all people are equal, but some people more equal than others”. The risk of being a coloniser today, is that you set up colonisation system that will be a minimal benchmark to colonise your offspring in the future. The planet is older than 400 years – you might have sustained colonisation for 300 to 400 years. However, that is not a guarantee you will colonise for 4 000 or 4 000 000 years. If you colonise, you are developing a precedence that others must follow. If you try to perfect colonisation, you are writing a blue paper that will be studied. The risk is those that study it without your knowledge- they can perfect it and out-manoeuvrer. Germeny might and Soviet Union might have attempted and did not succeed in the past. But it does not mean those who can attempt in the future will always fail. China and Japan have demonstrated demonstrated that rules of engagement are no longer the same. And no one has monopoly in defining rules of confrontation. The current generation owe it to the future generation, to choose peace over rage, inclusion over exclusion, and sharing hoarding. Now everyone know planet earth has enough resource and resource replenishing system for everyone to live a decent lifestyle of peace and abundance. If education, religion, justice, economy and recreation were all designed to build trust, peace and shared prosperity- there would be no reason not to trust- and be trusted. https://lnkd.in/dTQJyCTN

https://lnkd.in/dTQJyCTN ABSTRACT Reconstruction of trust is a basic existential necessity. Petty, as it may sound- but today all people want just to trust and be trusted. Colonial conquest completely obliterated ability to trust and be trusted. As a result the fast paced globalisation project can easily be reduced into; “one big animal farm- where all people are equal, but some people more equal than others” Trust is the missing cornerstone for resolving all our historic injustices. If only people could fostering a society capable of truth, peace and selfless development of the planet. The planet rewards all those who diligently serve it. In South Africa—and globally—centuries of colonization have left a legacy of distrust that undermines efforts at reconciliation and growth. Trust reconstruction requires moving beyond traditional methods of conflict resolution that have consistently failed to address the root causes of inequality and discord. This article examines the enduring influence of colonialism in South Africa, focusing on its systemic role in perpetuating inequality, mistrust, and conflict. It critiques the judicial system and legal fraternity for enabling post-colonial conflicts and challenges politicians to confront their reliance on colonial strategies. Highlighting the shift from overt colonialism to covert systems of control post-World War II, the article frames ongoing socio-economic crises and mistrust as deliberate colonial legacies. Analyzing South Africa’s historical eras—spanning Dutch, British, Boer, apartheid, and democratic periods—the article explores how colonialism systematically dismantled Indigenous values like Ubuntu, replacing them with exploitative systems that foster division. It critiques policies like Black Economic Empowerment, arguing for more inclusive legislation that promotes sustainable generational wealth and social mobility. Employing historical analysis, systemic critique, and legal reasoning, the study exposes the failure of current legal and policy frameworks to address conflicts rooted in colonial designs. It advocates for a paradigm shift where colonizers and the colonized engage in truth-based dialogue, relinquishing both power and authority to build a trust-based society. Finally, it calls for alternative dispute resolution mechanisms prioritizing trust, fairness, and historical justice to achieve sustainable and equitable development.

Conciliatory-fundamentals for trust deficit, when colonizers and politicians are mendacious Author: 1Mandisi Mrwebi, M.Sc in Biochemistry, University of Stellenbosch and 2Cele Sustainable Development Agency (CSDA) N.U 16, Mdantsane, East London, Eastern Cape, South Africa, mandisi@csdagency.info l +27 61 417 6417 l +2781 361 1855 Published by: CSDA Date: 14 November 2024 Problem Statement Analysing South African situation and trust deficit as a product of colonial “divide and rule” strategy. Hypothesis 1. This study hypothesise that law graduates are not adequately equipped to mitigate the risk of justice system highjack to fuel societal hostility. 2. It also postulate that slavery and colonisation era was characterised by predatory (ego conquiro of Dussel’s Thesis) 3. This investigation assumes that post-colonial era is modelled after mechanism of action by infectious parasite (meant to trap colonised population at the bottom of the pyramid in accordance to Maslow’s Theory of Human Motivation). This hypothesis assert that colonial domination’s survival rest fully on the principle of self-hate (in biological context presented as Acquired Immune Disorder Syndrome). 4. This paper further hypothesise that CODESA and TRC in South Africa were rollout as a programme of Rule of Law (ROL) Report that was published by Center for Development Information and Evaluation (CDIE)- as an Agency for International Developments. “In 1994, the Center for Democracy and Governance was established to serve as the Agency�s focal point for this critical area of sustainable development. During the recent reorganization, the Center was moved to the new Bureau for Democracy, Conflict, and Humanitarian Assistance and renamed the Office of Democracy and Governance. The primary purpose of the DG Office is to promote the transition to and consolidation of democratic regimes throughout the world. While the Agency�s reorganization may bring shifts in structure, the DG Office is currently organized in line with the Agency�s four democracy-related objectives: 1) strengthening rule of law and human rights, 2) more genuine and competitive political processes, 3) increased development of a politically active civil society, and 4) more transparent and accountable government institutons” 5. TRC’s in South African and Argentina’s where designed to be resentment divergent mechanisms. Colonial rule was found to fuel resentment towards colonisers. This made traditional colonisation to be deemed as unsustainable development strategy. The only way to ensure sustainable development of imperials was to divert resentment and create self-hate. This article hypothesise that a Bishop presided over a process that will be a firm foundation for self-hate. https://lnkd.in/dZJhNu8x

The article, further acknowledge that the colonial system tactics of abuse entailed extensive divide and rule. The divide and rule used all material resource in the disposal of the coloniser to brew deep conflicts among the victims of colonisation. Necessitate the need to intentionally extend alternative disputes resolutions among the victims of colonisation. Arising from a dialectic concern of whether the "Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act" No. 34 of 1995 in July 1995" is in fact constitutional or not. Aside from the fact that crucial components of TRC Terms of References were lifted from this act. To what degree was TRC intended to effectively all victims of Colonial Abuse? More importantly is section 20 (7) (a) of the act that necessitated the commission to comply to the clause that "no person who has been granted amnesty in respect of an act, omission or offence shall be criminally or civilly liable in respect of such act, omission or offence, and nobody or organization or the State shall be liable, and no person shall be vicariously liable, for any such act, omission or offence. What is debatable is whether perpetrators of colonial abuse were absolved from any form of legal recourse- whether they participated or not to TRC as identified ADR process. The formulation of the relevant act outside the scope of the interim constitution of 1993, was to make sure the relevant was unconstitutional. While those who participated where protected by what was to be latter challenged as unconstitutional. Mandisi Mrwebi wrote an article suggesting it is important to be critical when settling disputes that involves power imbalances. In assessing whether in the absence of a constitutional legislative framework, the dispute resolution conducted through TRC meet the threshold of arbitration. According to Kumuti arbitration is an ADR (alternative dispute resolution) method where the disputing parties involved present their disagreement to one arbitrator or a panel of private, independent and qualified third party “arbitrators.” The arbitrator(s) determine the outcome of the case. While it may be less expensive and more accessible than trial, the arbitration process has well-defined disadvantages. Some of disadvantages include the risk of losing. The risk of being disadvantaged by formal or semi-formal rules of procedure and evidence. Parties may potentially loss of control over the outcomes after transferring authority to the arbitrator . https://lnkd.in/dZJhNu8x