Generational victimhood in post-apartheid South Africa
| Published date | 01 January 2018 |
| DOI | 10.1177/0269758017732175 |
| Date | 01 January 2018 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Article
Generational victimhood in
post-apartheid South Africa:
Perspectives of descendants
of victims of apartheid era
gross human rights violations
Cyril K Adonis
Human Sciences Research Council, South Africa
Abstract
In post-apartheid South Africa, insufficient consideration is given to how historical injustices affect
currentgenerations and how theycould affect future generations.This has implicationsfor issues such
as intergenerational justice and equity. Framed within historical trauma theory and the life-course
perspective,this paper exploresnotions of victimhoodin post-apartheid Africa.It draws on qualitative
interviews conducted with 20 children and grandchildren (10 females and 10 males) of victims of
apartheid-era gross human rightsviolations. The interview data, which were interpretively analysed,
yielded a number of salient themes. Participants’ sense of victimhood is anchored in their continuing
socio-economic marginalisation deriving from the structural legacy of apartheid, as well as the per-
vasive racism that continues to bedevil South Africa well into the post-apartheid era. This is com-
pounded by the perceived lack of accountability for historical injustices and the responsibilities that
they perceive the government to have towards them. Given this, the paper argues for a reconcep-
tualisation of the notion of victimhood and giving greater consideration to the impact that the
structural legacyof apartheid has on the contemporary existential realities of BlackSouth Africans.
Keywords
Victimhood, historical trauma, life-course, gross human rights violations, apartheid
Race-based oppression, discrimination and exploitation in South Africa can be traced back to the
arrival of the Dutch settlers in 1652, as well as the British colonists who ruled from the 18th
century until 1910. These practices were expanded and formalised into a system of legitimised
Corresponding author:
Cyril K Adonis, Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC), 134 Pretorius Street, Pretoria, 0002, South Africa.
Email: cadonis@hsrc.ac.za
International Review of Victimology
2018, Vol. 24(1) 47–65
ªThe Author(s) 2017
Reprints and permission:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0269758017732175
journals.sagepub.com/home/irv
racism called apartheid (an Afrikaans language term meaning ‘separateness’) when the National
Party gained power in 1948 (Gibson, 2004). By the time democracy was achieved in 1994,
colonialism and apartheid had left in its wake a deeply unequal and fragmented society. It could
be argued that apartheid had been an acutely traumatic experience for Black South Africans.
Research also suggests that trauma can be transmitted from one generation to the next (Volkan,
1996). According to Terreblanche (2002), apartheid resulted in the entrenchment of poverty for
many Black South Africans.
Despite this, it appears that insufficient consideration is given to how injustices perpetrated
during apartheid affect current generations, and how they could potentially affect future genera-
tions. This has implications for issues such as intergenerational justice and equity, as well as the
country’s capacity to forge a socially cohesive society. This paper explores the notion of genera-
tional victimhood in contemporary South Africa. Its main aim is to understand how children and
grandchildren of victims of apartheid-era gross human rights violations conceptualise victim
identity in relation to historical injustices. Within the context of the Truth and Reconciliation
Commission (TRC), gross human rights violations were defined as (a) killings, abductions, torture,
severe ill treatment of any person; or (b) any attempt, conspiracy, incitement, instigation, com-
mand, or procurement to commit an ac t referred to in (a) (Promotion of Nation al Unity and
Reconciliation Act 1995). It is hoped that this will deepen our understanding of the impact that
the structural legacy of apartheid has on the contemporary existential realities of Black South
Africans, and offer lessons for addressing the legacies of historical injustices in societies emerging
from protracted inter-group conflict and repression.
Defining victimhood
Within the context of gross human rights violations, it could be argued that the only people who
could legally lay claim to victimhood would be primary victims of gross human rights violations,
for example those who have been tortured, killed, injured, etc. Yet, defining who a political victim
is can be problematic because it tends to transverse the conventional legal abstract definition of
who is a victim and who is not (Huyse, 2002). According to Jacoby (2015), political victims are
often identified without asking why these particular victims and not others come to be recognised,
by whom, and for what purpose. This ubiquity makes it difficult to make sense of competing claims
of victims, especially in disputed political contexts (Jacoby, 2015).
For Montville (1989), victimhood includes: (a) a history of violent trauma, aggression and loss;
(b) a belief that the aggression and violence suffered is not justifiable by any standard; (c) a
constant fear that the aggressor could strike again at any time; and (d) the perception that the
world is indifferent to the victim group’s plight. In addition to this, Bouris (2007) asserts that there
is a set of important and relatively constant characteristics inherent in the victim identity. These are
innocence, purity, the lack of responsibility, the absence of guilt and moral superiority. The idea of
innocence is grounded in the belief that one has not done anything wrong to invite or deserve the
victimisation (Bouris, 2007). Indeed, the phrase ‘innocent victim’ is frequently used to highlight
the notion that nothing was done to provoke victimisation (Huyse, 2002).
Bouris (2007), however, reminds us that in post-conflict societies, the definition of vict im
should be embedded in the broader context. It should not only encompass legal considerations,
but also socio-political factors, culture and the victim’s own perception of whether he or she is a
victim (Huyse, 2002). Bar-Tal et al. (2009) further contend that a sense of personal victimhood is
grounded in a set of beliefs, attitudes, emotions and behavioural tendencies. For Aquino and Byron
48 International Review of Victimology 24(1)
To continue reading
Request your trial