CHAPTER 4:
ANALYSIS OF THE FINDINGS
4.0. Introduction
Regarded in the past as an apartheid city, Johannesburg has
been becoming more and more aware of its exclusionary features and is
trying to become a more inclusive city, where everybody can participate
in the life of the city without discrimination. That is why in 2000,
in an official long-term development strategic plan called
Joburg 2030, the City announced its vision for the future which
consists of «becoming a World Class African City (WCAC) by increasing
prosperity and improving the quality of life of its residents. In the newly
published
2006 Growth and Development Strategy (GDS), the City has
re-emphasised its desire to become a WCAC for all (Seedat, 2006). This
chapter aims to examine whether Johannesburg
is a WCAC, by analysing research findings against the
conceptual framework presented in
Chapter Two.
In this chapter, the analysis of the findings of my fieldwork
will focus on four issues. The first one will concern notions of `citizenship',
community, and participation. The second will deal with the way the `just city'
approach is being promoted in the inner city; and the last issue will talk
about the strengths and potential of the Johannesburg's CSOs in
promoting social transformation in the City.
4.1. `Citizenship', Community, and Participation
4.1.1. Citizenship
Citizenship is a confusing term, in the sense that,
«although the idea of citizenship is nearly
universal today, what it means and how it is experienced are
not» (Kabeer, 2005: 1). In a cit y such as Johannesburg, for instance,
many people do not know what citizenship is about. For most people, the idea of
citizenship is always linked to the belonging of each person to his/her home
country; in order words, it is linked to the nationality of each person. And
yet, people talk more and more about the idea of inclusive citizenship, in
which citizenship refers also to
a set of obligations, rights, and values that `citizens'
(as residents of a city) should fulfil,
respect., and promote. That is why Ansley states that citizenship
may mean many things but
sometimes it «signifies a formal, legal status, and, at
other times, a substantive set of citizenly
obligations and rights» (Ansley, 2005: 200); while
Wheeler (2005) believes that citizenship can be defined in terms of
«national identity, individual rights or formal democratic
processes» (Wheeler, 2005: 111). Both Ansley and Wheeler define
citizenship as a status derived from the membership of a collectivity
or a country, and as a system of rights and obligations that
incorporates justice, equality and community (Hill, 1994: 9). In other
words,
it is important to understand that the idea of citizenship
cannot only be limited to someone's belonging to a particular state (in terms
of nationality), but also as a complex of obligations and practices that can
help citizens (residents) to create just, equal, and united community.
From a classical liberal theorist's perspective, the idea of
citizenship expresses adherence to four values, including justice,
recognition, self-determination, and solidarity (Kabeer, 2005).
In this subsection, my purpose is to analyse the FM' s
experiences in the inner cit y in relation
to these four values.
Justice
Chapter Two, subsection 2.2.1 (c), spoke about justice as
equality, based on Oelofse's (2003) conceptualisation of justice which is
focused on normative values such as non-discrimination, fairness,
integration, protection of citizens' (residents') rights,
empowerment of least advantaged people, and equality of treatment. In other
words, justice requires cities to adhere
to all these values listed. Considering FM's experiences in
the inner city of Johannesburg, it is clear that most of these values are
neglected. Their basic right to work, for example, is violated and
they are not equally treated compared to the South Africans. Mr. Coulibaly from
Ivory Coast (see Chapter two), for instance, stated that he was excluded from a
job position because of his refugee permit; and yet, his refugee status gives
him the right to work in SA. With regard to the integration of FMs into the
South African society, xenophobic attitudes of
the majority of local people is one of the factors preventing
better social relationships South
Africans and FMs living in the inner city.
In Justice as Fairness (1971), Rawls distinguishes
two principles of justice. The first is the principle of equality, and the
second is the principle of difference. The second principle states that, in a
society, people should be given the same opportunity according to their merit.
It was
mentioned earlier that people having the same degrees in
medicine, for instance, should be
given equal job opportunities. In the inner city of Johannesburg,
based on the outcomes of my
fieldwork, it is obvious that educated FMs do not have the same
job opportunities as South
Africans. The lack of the South African ID book is the major
cause of their unemployment.
Findings of my fieldwork showed that CSOs are aware of
injustices facing FMs in the inner city. Regarding the violation of the FMs'
basic right to work and seek for asylum, Lofell from JCW (Johannesburg
Child Welfare) said that her organisation lobbied with other
Johannesburg CSOs to challenge government decision which prohibited
asylum seekers to work in SA. As a result, refugees and asylum seekers can
work now in SA.
With regard to the detention of illegal immigrants, as well as
the illegal detention of FMs and their repatriation towards their home
countries, Jacob from LHR emphasised that his organisation created
a special unit that continuously challenges the SAPS on this issue, and
keeps the LG informed on the same issue. As a result, many FMs who were
illegally detained
in the Lindela Detention Centre have been released, and the
DHA delivered permits to those who would have been repatriated because of their
lack of documents or because they lost their permits.
Recognition
Recognition which Kabeer talks about refers to the
«intrinsic worth of all human beings, but also recognition of and
respect for their differences» (Kabeer, 2005: 4); the practice of
citizenship requires recognition of all human values, as well as the
respect of differences (cultural, religious and so on) between the
residents. Chapter Two of this report reviewed some literatures on the
relevance of difference and cultural diversity in cities. Young, Healy,
Fainstein, and Sandercock regard differences between groups as
the most important characteristic of cities, and believe that diversity
should be adopted as a guiding value in cities (Young, 1990; Healy, 1996;
Fainstein, 2005; and Sandercock, 1998, 2005, and 2006). Sandercock also
emphasises that, in cities, diversity should be celebrated rather repressed;
and
the claims (material and non-material) of minorities
need to be recognised and facilitated (Watson, 2002: 32). During my
fieldwork, some informants stated that South Africans are hostile to
foreigners and critical of some of their cultural elements such as fashion. Mrs
Mbala (2006) from Congo-Brazzaville, for example, explained me how
suspicious and mistrustful
the majority of South African are when they see Congolese women
wearing their traditional
clothes called pagnes. This proves that the CoJ needs
to encourage its residents (particularly
black South Africans) to respect other people's cultures, and
teach them how they may learn from other people's cultures, without neglecting
their own culture.
In one of her recent articles on multiculturalism and
interculturalism, Sandercock emphasises
the importance of building intercultural cities, in which
residents may encounter and respect their cultural diversities. She calls
this process `mongrelisation', `mélange', `change by fusion', and
`change by conjoining'. According to Sandercock, in intercultural cities, no
one should consider his/her culture as superior to other people's cultures
(Sandercock, 2005 and
2006).
According to Kabeer, the search for recognition of the worth of
all human beings and respect
for their differences often first takes the form of what Hannah
Arendt (1986) called `the right
to have rights, to be recognised as full persons,
despite their difference, and hence as full citizens' (Kabeer, 2005:
4).
Based on the outcomes of my fieldwork, FMs are not recognised
as `full persons' in the inner city; in the sense that they do not have the
right to a `voice'; that is, the City does not give them the opportunity to
express their opinions on the city's life. And yet, talking about
immigrants in England, Sassen states that the presence of `others' (immigrants)
should not be neglected because they are part of the city, given that they
contribute to its day-to-day life. Consequently, they should be given the
opportunity to be heard, because they could always have something to say for
the transformation of the city (Sassen, 2006).
My fieldwork's findings also show also that FMs contribute a
great deal to the development
of the inner city, in terms of the job opportunities
that they offer to the other residents, especially to South Africans. In
Hillbrow, for instance, most of the night clubs, supermarkets, and game shops
belong to FMs, especially Nigerians. Emeka (2006), for example, owns
a small shop where he works with four South Africans. All of them
are married and have children that they feed with the money that they
receive from him. Emeka has the equivalent
of an Honours Degree but he has never managed to find a job that
he is qualified for, simply
because he is a Nigerian (Emeka, 2006).
With regards to crime in the inner city, there are some
South Africans who complain that
Nigerians are drug dealers and are destroying their
country. This may be true as there is evidence showing that some
Nigerians have been trafficking drugs, but those who accuse them of
being drug dealers ignore that the fact that they do also contribute a great
deal to the reduction of crimes, especially in Hillbrow, because of their
presence. Inspector Naidoo, for instance, confirmed this hypothesis, arguing
that not all the Nigerians living in the inner cit y are drug dealers:
«Most of them are educated but they run businesses in the inner city
because they did not find jobs... and their presence in some places in Hillbrow
(such as in High Point) has significantly reduced crime» (Interview
with Naidoo, 2005), in the sense that their presence terrifies these
criminals commonly `Tsotsis'
The fact that the majority of South Africans do not recognise
the rights of FMs, impacts on their social relations with FMs in the
inner city. From the FMs' side, most of them avoid having strong
relationships with black South Africans, because of the xenophobic attitudes of
the latter towards foreigners. This came from an argument presented
by Mungoma from Uganda who said «Most of my friends are
foreigners like me. I do not like to have South African friends because
most of them do not like us...» (Interview with Mugoma, 2005). The same
reaction may be recorded from the South Africans' side, in the sense that most
fear the
`others' that they consider as a `strangers'. Talking
about People in Cities, Krupat (2005) questions and condemns this
kind of behaviour, saying that the urban life is full of strangers; and, in
cities, people should make an effort to interact with each others (Krupat,
2005: 130); and for Young, «cities involve the being together of
strangers; finding affinity with some should not lead to the denial of a
place for others» (Young, 1990: 70).
The mistrust that exists between local people and FMs
may compromise any attempt to promote an inclusive city, where all
the residents of Johannesburg can participate in its development, and
give their views on issues such as crime, which affects the quality of life of
all. As Krupat states, citizens should be aware that cities are full of
strangers; that is, they are full of people or groups of people who are
different from each other. As Young (1990), Healey (1996), and
Sandercock (1998) said, differences among groups are what characterises cities,
while acceptance of difference provide the moral basis for urban
life. That is why diversity in cities should be adopted as a guiding value.
The question that one may ask is: is diversity a guiding value in the
inner city of Johannesburg? Based on the findings of my
fieldwork, I fell that the answer may be no, as
there are so much inequalities and
discrimination between SAs and FMs. The hope is that in the near
future, it will become more
inclusive, because in the recently published Growth and
Development Strategy (GDS), the
City's vision is to build in long-term a more inclusive city for
all, in which all the benefits that the city will generate will be equally
shared among all its inhabitants (Johannebsurg, 2006).
Self-determination
The value of self-determination refers to «people's
ability to exercise some degree of control over their lives» (Kabeer,
2005: 5). It is about giving them the opportunity to spell out what they
consider to be essential to their dignity as human beings. According to Kabeer,
this may include public participation in activities such as community
forums and public decision- making processes. The self-determination value,
based on the idea of participation, is linked
to Fainstein's conceptualisation of a democratic city inspired by
Fisher's (1990) populist idea
of the citizens' participation in the decision-making process.
In a city, all residents should be given equal opportunities to express
themselves on issues affecting their lives, as well as the life of their city.
In the inner city of Johannesburg, representatives of FMs are usually ignored
when residents should discuss on matters affecting their lives. They are
usually regarded as
`outsiders'. Inspector Naidoo, from the Hillbrow Police
Station, is aware of this fact when he argued that, Hillbrow, migrants
complained that they do not participate in the community forums. Yet
they may have something to say on issues such as crime, robbery,
police harassment and incitement to corruption and prostitution. Mouhamar, for
instance, stated that one day he was curious to attend the Yeoville community
forum. Surprisingly, he noticed that «all the discussions were taking
place in Zulu... I felt like a stranger because I could not even listen to
everything that they were saying» (interview with Mouhamar, 2006).
Mouhammar's experience reveals that South Africans sometimes use their
local languages to prevent foreigners from participating in communities
meetings or from expressing themselves on issues affecting their lives and
the city. Yet, in cities, a community forum is an environment in which all
residents should express themselves, discuss and evaluate their
lives as communities.
To end this exclusionary behaviour in the city, Sr. Sandra
from the Catholic Department of Refugees, in collaboration with other
members of the Johannesburg CSOs, sometimes organises meetings with the
inner city's police services and the local government authorities,
encouraging them to create structures that will allow FMs to
participate in community forums.
She also encourages them to instruct representatives of the local
communities to drop all the
barriers preventing the full participation of the FMs
in the community forums. The use of Zulu as a language of discussion is
one of these barriers. Sr. Sandra's initiative is one of the Johannesburg civil
society's efforts to promote self-determination for FMs living in the inner
city.
Solidarity
The value of solidarity (which is an African value also called
`Ubuntu') refers to the «capacit y
to identify with others and act in unit y with them in their
claims for justice and recognition» (Kabeer, 2005: 7). According to
Kabeer, in the practice of citizenship, the value of solidarity should be the
common ground between those who are included, as well as those who
are marginalised in the society. That is, in cities, the value of
solidarity requires that residents sometimes undertake common actions against
their authorities to defend and protect the rights
of the vulnerable, marginalised, and powerless people, such as
FMs. To illustrate this, Ansley cites a brilliant example of what
happened in the state of Tennessee, in the United States (US), where
all the inhabitants joined together in a series of popular protests
to force the state's authorities to give undocumented immigrants the right
to apply for a driver's license
for which they were previously excluded, due to the lack
of social security number (which was one of the requirements). Yet, in
Tennessee as in many other US locations, «there is basically no
local public transportation outside the tight central core of the larger
cities. For
the vast majority of people, including the poor people, an
automobile is a virtual necessity for even the simplest act of daily existence,
including the tack of getting to and from one's place
of work» (Ansley, 2005: 203). Consequently, most immigrants
used to drive illegally without
a driver's license and they were exposed to police harassment
and racial abuses. To end this situation, a growing population of the
native-born developed an awareness about the existence and the situation of
immigrants, and progressively they formed, together with immigrant'
rights organisations and immigrants themselves, a coalition and «managed
to put together a legislative campaign, move a bill through the general
assembly, and secure the Republican governor's signature. The programme was
implemented; and soon licenses were being issued once again to undocumented
immigrants in Tennessee» (Ansley, 2005: 204).
The practice of the value of solidarity is what Fainstein refers
to when calling for «an ethic of political solidarity, built across
different places» (Fainstein, 1997). According to me, I believe
that the ethic of political solidarity is about
sympathising with those who are in difficult
situation; Gilligan (1982) calls it `ethics of care', which
seeks to promote social justice and to consolidate social relationships among
people (Smith, 2002: 70). The spirit of solidarity may give citizens the
power to express themselves on the realities of their community and
to question the ability of their authorities to deal with problems affecting
their city.
In the inner city of Johannesburg, there is a lack of
commitment to the value of solidarity. Members of each group in the
community prefer to address the local authorities only for their own
interests, ignoring the interests of other groups. My interview with
Mungoma (see Chapter Three) revealed that South African women running business
in the Yeoville African Market complained to the manager of this market
for their own interests, forgetting the interests of FMs. According
to Arendt «the fundamental deprivation of human [and
citizenship] is manifested first and above all in the deprivation of
a place in the world [a political space] which makes opinions
significant and actions effective» (cited in Wheeler,
2005: 100). In some African cultures (such that of mine),
depriving someone of a place in the society may signify that he/she has been
excluded from the community, and consequently, his/her opinion cannot have
an impact on the society.
Considering what happened to FM women in the Yeoville
African market, the following questions may be asked: where is the African
value of solidarity? Is the `ethics of care' still necessary in the citizenship
practice in the inner city of Johannesburg?
| 
