Where Protest ends and Disruption begins . . .

The president of the Azanian People's Organization (Azapo) failed to see the line between protest and disruption or maybe he did see it but was too ashamed (as he should be) to accept it. This happened during an interview on SAFM following the deplorable behaviour of individuals identified by the media (with no objection) as members or supporters of Azapo. The story is well-known by now and does not bear repeating.

I remember the days when Azapo and its students or youth with Azasm relied on debates to make their point. There was a time when Azapo was a home of the so-called intellectuals among the activists. A case in point, the likes of Dr Mangcu belonged to that organisations. The approach was that one should sell ones ideas through debates and resolve differences through logical persuassion.

The current organisation, if they be judged on the members who disrupted the election debates last sunday and by their president's views on the matter, is but a shadow of the organisation it once was.

This of course does not only attach to Azapo only. It seems to be the acceptable course of conduct to hit out, disrupt and threaten all sorts of violence against those that you do not agree with. The point that the incident raises is a valid one and one that needs to be evaluated from time to time. In this time leading up to the elections, the public broadcaster must not only seek to allocate air-time fairly to all political parties but it must be seen to be doing so. The SABC is, contrary to popular belief the public broadcaster and it must be held accountable to that mandate.

The IEC should I believe, be more vigilant and act more decisively against any and all conduct by political parties, through their members and supporters, that may jeopardise free and fair elections. I am not by these statements and views, calling for some undue limitation on free speech and expression.

Each one of us has a right to protest, to assemble and to persuade others to share our views and even join and support political parties or organisations. That right is however limited by what is fair and reasonable in an open and democratic society. It is in safe-guarding differing or dissenting views that we safeguard our own views. This is not complicated stuff.

Azapo I suppose has now achieved its intended outcome - publicity. We now know them for what they are. The question is whether, knowing what we know, they are even worth considering as a credible political party?