Chairperson, I enter this debate as a parent and, indeed, as a grandparent. I say this because any rape or murder of any child or person affects me as deeply as it does the immediate family members of that child or person. South Africans have become numbed by the pain of hearing and reading about the rape and murder of women and children.
We no longer experience shock and even our expressions of outrage are all but meaningless. We have plummeted to such depths of depravity that one needs to revisit Dante's Inferno in order to get a sense of where we are at. You would be forgiven for believing that we have returned to that stage of human development when men and women lived in caves with other wild animals and the only law was the survival of the fittest.
We read in the City Press over the past weekend of the rape of two two-year- old toddlers in Limpopo, allegedly by a 29-year-old man in one case and by a 22-year-old man in the other. Whilst it may be premature to speculate as to their guilt, one has to ask: What kind of human rapes an innocent two- year-old toddler? Would we be justified in referring to them as animals not fit to be called human, who are nothing more than beasts that prey on the innocent and vulnerable with depraved indifference?
It is time that the myth spread by certain individuals - I am reliably informed that these include certain izinyanga and traditional healers - that having sex with a child guarantees one's protection from Aids, be debunked. It is at times such as these that we have to reflect on the state of South African society.
It is my view that the solution to our challenges and our problems begins at home. As parents, we must teach our children the difference between right and wrong. We must teach particularly our boys or male children that a woman and her body is sacrosanct, as sacrosanct as that of their grandmothers, mothers, and sisters.
Sometime last year, the media reported on a United States Peace Corps volunteer who had abused five KwaZulu-Natal girls, including orphans. It is important to note that, in my view and in the view of millions of South Africans, our justice system is very highly regarded, despite the many challenges, some of which have been highlighted today. It is disturbing and alarming to read that a United States Peace Corps volunteer, Jesse Osmun, appeared in the US District Court in Hartford, Connecticut, and not in a South African court. Admittedly, Jesse Osmun pleaded guilty to engaging in illicit sexual conduct with children and faces up to 30 years' imprisonment in a US federal prison. The point, however, is that the crimes were committed on South African soil and Jesse Osmun should have been tried in a South African court, in terms of South African law, and he should serve time in a South African prison.
We want to know who agreed to the arrangement that Jesse Osmun should not be tried in the jurisdiction where he committed his crimes and horrendous acts against innocent unsuspecting children. [Applause.] We will be asking these questions of the National Prosecuting Authority. We are told in the Daily News of 13 August 2012 that -
Osmun was on an assignment at the Umvoti Aids Centre in Greytown last year, when he abused five girls aged between three and five years old.
It is a matter of record that numerous pieces of legislation have been approved that focus on the marginalised position of women and children, with specific emphasis on their advancement, and protection from all forms of abuse. These statutes were intended to come to the assistance of women and children directly or indirectly in their fight against abuse and domestic violence or inequality. We touched on some of these.
In 1995 Parliament approved the Criminal Procedure Amendment Act, which brought about comprehensive changes to the bail laws and set out comprehensive guidelines for the courts to take into consideration when deciding what is in the interest of justice; and that an accused person be kept in custody pending the finalisation of his or her trial. Many of these guidelines have a bearing on violence against women and children.
All members are aware that in 1996 the Commission on Gender Equality Act was enacted and the Commission on Gender Equality was established. In 1997 the Divorce Courts Amendment Act opened the then black divorce courts to all races, giving women access to less costly divorce proceedings and making it easier for many women to walk out of an abusive marriage or relationship.
In 1997 the Criminal Law Amendment Act was approved by Parliament, its primary provision being to deal with the death penalty. The Act also provides for the imposition of minimum sentences in respect of certain serious offences, for example, murder and rape. These sentences are more severe in certain circumstances, for instance, when the death of a woman is caused by a person in the commission of a rape or attempted rape, or where the rape victim was raped more than once, or where the rapist has previous convictions for rape, or where the victim is under the age of 16.
I have no need to refer you to the Witness Protection Act or the Prevention of Organised Crime Act of 1998. You have heard about the Domestic Violence Act, which was enacted in 1998. So there is no need for me to refer to that particular statute.
We move on and come to the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences and Related Matters) Amendment Act. It has included sexual offences and introduced measures that are aimed at addressing the plight of certain vulnerable groups. It requires a co-ordinated approach by all government departments in dealing with matters relating to sexual offences. The law relating to sexual offences have been modernised by, amongst others, the repeal of the common laws sexual offences, such as rape and indecent assault, and the replacement thereof with new statutory offences.
The common law offence of rape, for example, provided that only a male could commit the offence and the victim could only be a female. The law now recognises that both males and females commit this crime and that both males and females can be victims of the crime. Indecent assaults have also been repealed and replaced by the statutory offence of sexual assault applicable to all forms of sexual violation without consent. Other forms of sexual violence have been addressed to the extent that it is an offence, amongst others, to compel a person to witness a sexual offence being committed against another person such as a family member or friend.
A complete ban has been placed on using children or persons who are mentality disabled for purposes of prostitution, and anyone involved in any manner in the sexual exploitation of these vulnerable persons face criminal prosecution. Persons who commit consensual sexual acts with children under the age of 16 years are also subject to criminal sanction.
The Act also affords victims of sexual offences access to certain medical services, including access to post-exposure prophylaxis, and further regulates the right to apply to court for an order that alleged perpetrators be tested for HIV.
A national register for sexual offenders is being established to maintain a record of persons who have been convicted of sexual offences against children or persons who are mentally disabled. The information contained in this register will be used to inform employers, licensing and other authorities whether or not the particulars of certain persons have been included in this register. This mechanism will assist in prohibiting these persons from gaining access to vulnerable persons by means of different forms of employment or self-employment. The Protection from Harassment Act provides for the granting of a protection order against harassment similar to the protection orders in terms of the Domestic Violence Act. Since the existing civil and criminal law framework does not provide adequate recourse to victims of stalking who are not in a domestic relationship, this Act must still be put into operation. Regulations and directives which are required to supplement the Act are currently being finalised.
We have heard statistics and government being bashed; we have received or heard very few proposals that seek to find solutions. Well, we were affording you an opportunity to provide those solutions. That is why we called the debate. [Interjections.] No, no, no! Now listen, and listen carefully. I want to read to you a letter from Dr Cleeve Robertson, an emergency physician and retiring head of the Emergency Medical Services in the Western Cape. He writes thus in the Daily News of Monday 25, February 2013. Dr Robertson contends that violence is a learnt behaviour and that you are not born with it. He says the following:
Thirty-five years ago I walked into the trauma unit at Groote Schuur Hospital as a medical student and was faced with the horrible reality of violence in South Africa. The tragedy is that all these years later, although the weapons have changed, the levels of violence are, at least, as bad. South Africans are exposed to such levels of violence from birth. Violence is legitimatised politically, culturally or socially and it is normalised in sectors of society.
Listen very carefully.
The solution is a committed, cohesive response by the government and society to reduce exposure to violence at every level and opportunity. Violence in any form must become unacceptable. Pragmatism - not theory - and the culture of cheap sensational talk - the media must go through some self-examination too - must rule; and the government, nonprofit organisations and institutions must focus their collective effort on prevention rather than intervention by creating structures that promote peace.
You see, Dr Robertson was putting forward a solution. [Applause.] It is easy to come to these debates and say we are going to score points. The hon Mike Waters pointed out that certain key Cabinet Ministers were not present today. He is correct. But he also forgot to point out that the hon parliamentary Leader of the DA has not been present throughout this debate. [Interjections.] Do we draw from that that she does not care about gender- based violence? [Interjections.] The hon Ditshetelo makes a point when she asks an important but fundamental question: What does it take for us to act together? Just as the hon Bhoola makes the point: Let's fight this war together.
So, what is the way forward? The way forward, according to members of the DA, is to keep scoring points. Now ... [Interjections.] ... some of the solutions are with us; they are before us. I am saying this without having checked with the hon Annelise van Wyk; time did not permit me to do so.
The Bill providing for the collection of the deoxyribonucleic acid, DNA, for purposes of prosecuting crimes must enjoy priority. [Applause.] This is an appeal to members of the Portfolio Committee on Police. The compilation of the register for sex offenders, hon Deputy Minister Maggie Sotyu, must be speeded up, if that is possible. [Applause.]
Finally, the training of members of the SA Police Service in the very basic but fundamental act, which is securing the scene of the crime and the collecting of forensic and other crucial evidence, must enjoy priority. [Applause.] How does a warrant officer walk into a crime scene with his footwear unprotected? Do we assume from his actions that he has not been properly trained, or that he is doing it deliberately so that the perpetrator can get off scot-free? [Applause.] Mr Chairperson, finally I reiterate, the solution begins at home. Thank you. [Applause.]
Debate concluded.