President Appears to be Disregarding the Law on Cape Independence, says CIAG
The Cape Independence Advocacy Group (CIAG) is disappointed that President Ramaphosa has opted to respond to its good-faith approach with empty political rhetoric rather than in a legally substantive manner.
Given the well-publicised legal concerns raised surrounding previous trips to the US by AfriForum and the DA, the CIAG offered the President, the Western Cape Premier, and the Minister of International Relations and Cooperation the opportunity to advance any bona fide legal issues which they believed existed prior to the CIAG delegation finalising its US travel arrangements. To date, none of these three individuals have chosen to do so. The President has instead elected to respond via the media.
In responding, the President has expressed his personal “very strong dim view” of the proposed trip, emphasising the need for collective nation-building. Given that the President’s own party and government are the primary drivers of race-based policy in South Africa, that they are currently undermining private property rights and home language education, and that they are trying to use social engineering to unnaturally force exact demographic representation onto one of the world’s most ethnically, linguistically, and culturally diverse national populations, this exhortation is beyond laughable.
Perhaps more seriously, the President himself appears to be disregarding the law. His statement that no part of South Africa will be allowed to secede is legally indefensible.
Self-determination is a jus cogens right of international law which South Africa is obliged to uphold. Secession is recognised as one of the legitimate means through which to exercise self-determination.
Since 1994, South Africa has signed and ratified the African Charter on Human and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, all of which guarantee the right of self-determination to all people. This includes the Western Cape people.
Section 235 of the South African Constitution expressly makes provision for the self-determination of communities other than the South African people as a whole. While certifying section 235, the Constitutional Court ruled that the phrase “as determined by national legislation” was not intended to deny communities self-determination by subjecting them to the requirement of majority consent in the national parliament. Instead, it required good-faith negotiations between the community (in this case, the Western Cape) and the South African Government.
In his careless response, the President has already pre-determined the outcome of any such negotiations, a statement which now has great legal significance. The President can no longer be said to be acting in good faith.
The CIAG would respectfully like to refer the President to paragraph II(h) in report A/HRC/37/63, which was made by the UN Human Rights Council to the General Assembly and states:
(h) The principle of territorial integrity has external application, i.e., State A may not invade or encroach upon the territorial integrity of State B. This principle cannot be used internally to deny or hollow out the right of self-determination of peoples, which constitutes a jus cogens right (see A/69/272, paras. 21, 28, 69 and 70);
The CIAG reiterates that it is committed to pursuing Cape Independence via peaceful, legal, and democratic means, based upon the democratic will of the Western Cape people as established in a provincial referendum.
DATE: 21 March 2025
