Social Justice Activist and Director of the Institute for Healing of Memories, Father Michael Lapsley says former apartheid-era president FW De Klerk needs to be a much greater listener to the pain of the victims of apartheid.
Various groups and parties are calling for De Klerk to be stripped off his Nobel Peace Prize despite an apology and retraction of his earlier remarks on apartheid.
Speaking to SABC News on Tuesday, Father Lapsley says De Klerk will need ” to take the initiative and go to communities and be willing to listen to them if they are willing to listen to him because people are very doubtful about his sincerity…”
Watch: Father Michael Lapsley speak on FW De Klerk apology
Apology too little too late
Also reacting to De Klerk’s apology, struggle veteran, Sheila Sisulu, suggests that De Klerk be forced to spend time with the real victims of apartheid.
De Klerk retracted the statement that he released on Friday after the EFF demanded that he leave Parliament where he was attending the State of the Nation Address. Sisulu says his apology is too little too late.
“So he got into a hole and he’s still trying to dig himself out of it and he’s going deeper and deeper he better just apologise retract and do time. You know, do time working with people to understand how hurtful what he said was.”
Last week during a televised interview with the SABC News, the former deputy president said he did not believe that apartheid was a crime against humanity. This was followed by condemnation from political parties, civil society and South Africans on social media.
Many feel it is a case of “too little, too late” as De Klerk’s comments have angered many South Africans.
Rules governing Nobel Prizes
Rules governing the awarding of Nobel Prizes have poured cold water on demands that former apartheid-era president FW De Klerk be stripped of the Nobel Peace Prize he received jointly with former president Nelson Mandela.
Our Correspondent Sherwin Bryce-Pease reports that efforts to see De Klerk tried by the International Criminal Court in The Hague for crimes against humanity appear unlikely.
Paragraph 10 of the Nobel Foundation’s Statutes are clear – No appeals may be made against the decision of a prize-awarding body with regard to the award of a prize meaning options to seek the revocation of the De Klerk award are slim to none.
It states further that should divergent opinions be expressed concerning the award of a prize, this may not be included in the record or otherwise divulged.
In addition, the Rome Statute which establishes the International Criminal Court names the Crime of Apartheid as among the list of Crimes Against Humanity in Article 7 but Article 11 says the Court has jurisdiction only with respect to crimes committed after the entry into force of the Statute which happened only in July of 2002.
South Africa as a States Party, acceded to the Statute in November 2000, years after the official policy of Apartheid had ended. -Additional reporting by Sherwin Bryce-Pease
5 QUOTES ON DE KLERK’S UTTERANCES ON APARTHEID by SABC Digital News
