VIOLATING THE RIGHTS OF WOMEN AND GIRLS WILL NOT STOP HIV AND AIDS: THE FOLLY OF FORCED VIRGINITY TESTING

The print media and social media have been abuzz with the decision by the uThukela District Municipality in Kwazulu Natal to put in place a bursary scheme for girls provided they remain virgins. I did not respond immediately as I felt that it was important to discuss the issue with a range of stakeholders.  This article reflects on the events in uThukela District in the light of broader issues that impact negatively on the rights of women and girls.

Over the last week, the public debates have centered on the possible contradictions between the constitutional rights with respect to cultural rights and the rights that aim to protect women and girls from discrimination and violence.  The discussion itself provides a lens on the complexities of South African society. 

Traversing these complexities with a view to strengthening the rights of women and girls requires dialogue and engagement amongst different stakeholders.   That being said, I would like to focus on the implications of the so-called ‘maidens bursary’ on the broader struggle to improve the lives of women and girls in South Africa.

As indicated by those who have generally spoken out in favour of the ‘maidens bursary’, the South African Constitution does provide for the protection of cultural rights.  The protection of cultural rights was included in the constitution given the systemic attack on indigenous African ways of living by colonialism and Apartheid laws. 

Constitutional protection for cultural rights does not, however, provide a license for the continuation of practices of any kind that may seek to continue discrimination and violence against women and girls. 

In fact the Bill of Rights was designed to undo a legacy of discriminatory practices including those bequeathed to us through colonial laws.  It is important to remember that the apartheid era legal attacks on women’s bodies and the LGBTI communities were not derived from African law or custom but came directly from the norms and laws of European countries whose legal frameworks we inherited.  The constitutional framework we have developed therefore outlaws all discriminatory practices irrespective of its origin.

It is for this reason, therefore, that the South African constitution, with respect to cultural rights, includes a qualification that stipulates that no person or institution exercising cultural rights may do so in a manner that is inconsistent with any provision in the Bill of Rights. It is within this context that South African society must engage in a proper and detailed discussion on how we can ensure that cultural rights are respected and practiced in ways that are in line with the constitution and related laws.

This will includes looking at all practices that are harmful to women and girls.  This implies looking comprehensively at issues such as Ukuthwala, virginity testing, widow’s rituals, uk u ngena, breast sweeping/ironing, and practices such as ‘cleansing ‘after male circumcision, male circumcision itself, witch hunting and other practices that may be discriminatory and harmful.   My comments on the so-called ‘maidens bursary’ scheme is therefore situated within a discussion on harmful practices against women and girls that are not uniquely South African or African but are features of patriarchal practices across the globe.

Bathabile Dlamini is the President of the ANCWL and Minister of Social Development.