Silencing Dissent in South Africa and Beyond

by Geopolitical Insights, Monthly Sub-feature

The Silencing of Dissent

Reading Time: | Word Count:

Across the globe, pro-Palestinian protesters have faced hostility from law enforcement agencies, raising urgent questions about the right to dissent and the protection of freedom of expression.

Fortunately, there are principled lawyers fighting for the rights of those facing repression.

What many might be surprised at is that even in South Africa, a nation with a proud history of resistance and a constitutional commitment to human rights, one which has taken Israel to the International Court of Justice, accusing it of genocide in Gaza, its policing of pro-Palestinian activism has been oppressive.

Peaceful demonstrations have been met with hostility, like the manhandling of a priest in Cape Town, during a protest against a pro-Zionist conference. And the arrest of four individuals, including a minor, wearing “Red Card for Gaza” T-shirts and waving Palestinian flags at a recent football match at Loftus Versfeld in Gauteng, is emblematic of a broader, troubling trend: the use of police force to silence voices of solidarity and protest.

The South African Policy Framework: Rights and realities

Yet South Africa’s POLICY AND GUIDELINES: POLICING OF PUBLIC PROTESTS, GATHERINGS AND MAJOR EVENTS, signed in 2011, was crafted to move away from the repressive, apartheid-era policing of dissent. The policy explicitly states that: “The Bill of Rights in the Constitution provides that ‘everyone has the right, peacefully and unarmed, to assemble, to demonstrate, to picket and to present petitions'”.

It further emphasises that policing should be community-oriented, respect constitutional rights, and avoid generating violence. The Standing Order 262 on Crowd Management stresses that “the use of force must be avoided at all costs,” and police must show “the highest degree of tolerance.”

The events at Loftus Versfeld are a stark contradiction to these guidelines. Such actions not only undermine the spirit of the Constitution but also erode public trust in law enforcement.

The Regulation of Gatherings Act: Protecting or restricting protest?

The Regulation of Gatherings Act 205 of 1993 was designed to ensure that “every person has a right to peaceful participation in gatherings, with the protection of the police.” However, the Act also places significant responsibilities on protest organieers and allows for criminal prosecution if gatherings are deemed unlawful or disorderly.

This duality – protection of the right to protest, but with heavy restrictions – creates a gray area that can be exploited to suppress dissent. The recent arrests at Loftus Versfeld suggest a worrying trend toward interpreting pro-Palestinian protest as a threat to public order, rather than as an exercise of constitutional rights.

Policing dissent: South Africa in the African Context

South Africa is not alone in facing criticism for its handling of pro-Palestinian and other protests. Across Africa, law enforcement responses have varied, but a pattern of heavy-handedness is evident:

  • Egypt: Pro-Palestinian demonstrations are routinely banned, and participants face arrest, detention, and intimidation.
  • Kenya: Protests against rising costs and taxes in 2024 were met with brute force and the disappearances of activists
  • Morocco: While some protests are tolerated, activists have reported harassment and surveillance by security services.
  • Nigeria: Police have dispersed pro-Palestinian rallies, citing security concerns, and have occasionally used force against demonstrators.

These examples highlight a continental challenge: balancing the need for public order with the imperative to protect fundamental rights. South Africa’s policy documents acknowledge international standards, such as the UN Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials, which state that force should be used “only when strictly necessary.” Yet, the reality on the ground often falls short.

Silencing dissent: The global picture

The suppression of pro-Palestinian activism is not unique to Africa. In the United States, United Kingdom, France, and Germany, pro-Palestinian protesters have faced bans, arrests, and aggressive policing; often justified under the guise of maintaining public order or preventing hate speech. These actions have drawn condemnation from human rights organisations, who argue that such measures are disproportionate and serve to chill legitimate dissent.

Upholding the right to protest

The South African government’s own policy framework is clear: policing of protests must respect constitutional rights, minimise violence, and foster public trust.

As pro-Palestinian activism continues to grow worldwide, it is imperative that governments and law enforcement agencies uphold the right to protest, resist the temptation to silence dissent, and ensure that policing is guided by the principles of tolerance, restraint, and respect for human rights.

The right to peaceful protest is a cornerstone of any democracy. As South Africa and other nations grapple with complex political realities, it is vital that law enforcement upholds, not undermines, this fundamental freedom.

 

References:

This piece was written for the May 2025 edition of Postscripts, Shamillah Wilson’s monthly round-up of what’s been happening in feminist circles, her work, and some recommended reading suggestions.

Author: Shamillah Wilson

Author: Shamillah Wilson

This post was first published 27 May 2025.

Shamillah Wilson is a writer, speaker, thought leader and feminist life coach. She supports activists and leaders to navigate systemic challenges and to achieve greater fulfilment, freedom and success as they work to transform our world into a just place for all.

share the post

WORKING TOGETHER

Let's have a call