Hon Speaker, hon members, first and foremost, the UCDP conveys its deepest condolences to the families and friends of the 44 people who were killed since the beginning of the Lonmin tragedy. What has happened is indeed tragic. Many had sacrificed and denied themselves to go to work at Lonmin.
Working in a mine has its own risks, but they took up the challenge for themselves and for their families. They understood the risks attached to mining but surely, neither the deceased men nor their families would have thought that they would meet their end at the hand of the police, who were supposed to be their protectors. This, of course, is neither the time for pointing fingers and allocating blame, nor the time to be defensive.
The nation is mourning. In our African culture, when a person dies, the family appoints a speaker who will relate the events that led to the death. The speaker must be painstakingly honest about the events that led to the death. As much as we must allocate blame, we must not do so in a negative manner, but we must be painstakingly honest about the events that led to this tragedy.
We must be painstakingly honest when addressing those whom we hold responsible for the killings. The Lonmin tragedy is not a natural disaster. There are a number of actions that could have been taken to prevent it, and whoever fell short in dispensing their responsibility leading to this, is responsible for the massacre. There are many questions to be asked, and we hope that the mooted judicial commission of inquiry will ask and find answers to the questions. Similarly, there are many observations and innuendos to be made.
Relying on news reports, we hear defensive statements that police had no other choice but to shoot as the crowd started shooting first. Two guns were reportedly confiscated from the dead miners. The question is whether trained police officers can ever be justified for killing 35 miners because two amongst them had guns. Surely, we can do better than condoning this. There are more efficient ways of controlling crowds through the use of better protective equipment like barbed wire, tear gas and multiple water cannons, and so on.
We cannot accept that the police had no option but to shoot with live ammunition at protesters. The real reason that the police returned fire is because of the culture of violence in South Africa that is exacerbated by the police's attitude of protecting themselves before trying to protect civilians. This is a result of many things, including the shoot-to-kill call by the former Police Commissioner. It is in this light that we hold the Minister of Police responsible. His police force is ill-equipped for dealing with crowd control, yet we have seen many protests turning violent in South Africa.
If shooting with live ammunition at protesters is how they were trained to handle these situations, then we shall see more massacres at the hands of the police. South Africans are still reeling to come to terms with the Andries Tatane issue, and now this! Our Constitution, in section 92(2), states clearly that:
Members of the Cabinet are accountable collectively and individually to Parliament for the exercise of their powers and the performance of their functions.
If South Africa were the democracy it is said to be, the Minister of Police would have resigned last week. In real democracies, if officials fail, Ministers resign. We have seen this in Great Britain when Ellen Morris, the then Secretary of Education, resigned because examinations of A-level exam papers were not properly marked.
Certainly, the miners are not innocent in this tragedy. The UCDP believes that miners had every right to protest against the meagre income they receive. Four thousand rand a month is an insult compared to the difficult conditions under which they work. However, what right did they have to carry weapons, traditional or otherwise, while striking? Obviously, when they put their tools down, the mine bosses would have had time to listen to them.
Against whom did they intend using the weapons they carried? What gives striking workers the right to undermine the rule of law? This has been going on for a while, but the ruling party turns a blind eye to it because they nurse their tripartite relations more than they nurse constitutional obligations and the rule of law.
I am not a fan of the SACP, hon Ndzimande, but on the question of indecisiveness by the leadership in government, we in the UCDP could not agree more with their North West Secretary when he said, and I quote: As the SACP we want to state categorically that it should not have been allowed until when death rises for law enforcement agencies and the nation's leadership ...
... to take action.
For that, I salute the SACP. We regret the loss of lives and hope all parties have learnt a lesson from this unfortunate situation. We plead that we should all march forward in unison as we observe the period of mourning as announced by the President. Thank you. [Applause.]