Reservation of Separate Amenities Act, 1953 | |
---|---|
Parliament of South Africa | |
| |
Citation | Act No. 49 of 1948 |
Enacted by | Parliament of South Africa |
Enacted | 9 October 1953 |
Royal assent | 5 October 1953 |
Commenced | 9 October 1953 |
Repealed | 15 October 1990 |
Repealed by | |
Discriminatory Legislation regarding Public Amenities Repeal Act, 1990 | |
Status: Repealed |
Separate Amenities Act, Act No 49 of 1953, formed part of the apartheid system of racial segregation in South Africa. Act legalized the racial segregation of public premises, vehicles and services. Only public roads and streets were excluded from the Act. The Section 3b of the Act stated that, the facilities for different races did not need to be equal, while Section 3a, made it legal not only to supply segregated facilities, but also to completely exclude people, based on their race, from public premises, vehicles or services. In practice the best facilities were reserved for whites while those for other races were inferior. [1] [2] [3]
Before the enactment of the Act in 1953, the courts in South Africa, applied common law, in the absence of any other law to challenges concerning race and use of amenities basing their decision on one of the presumption of equality between the different races in the country. [4]
R v. Plaatjies 1910, prevented a municipality from separating races at a swimming stream. [4] While in 1915, Williams and Adendorf v. Johannesburg Municipality, prevented trams in the city from being segregated. [4] In 1934, Minister of Posts and Telegraph v. Rasool, held that the former could not a create greater right for one race versus another, in this case at a postal facility through segregation. [4] And in 1950, an Indian taxi driver, challenged and won when his licence to drive white passengers was stripped from him, in Tayah v. Ermelo Local Transportation Board. [4]
Segregation at railway stations was challenged several times in court. In R. v. Abduraham 1950, the court found in the favour of the defendant when it was established that by providing White European only signs, the railways had discriminated, in the application of a 1916 railways act, against non-whites for not providing an area where they could get away from White Europeans. [4] When facilities were provided and found to be inferior to White Europeans, as was challenged in R. v. Lusa 1953, the courts found the railways could not provide unequal treatment. [4]
The Reservation of Separate Amenities Act would therefore be introduced and enacted in parliament to bring certainty to the right to have separate amenities protected by a law, giving those reserving areas for different races the legal right not to provide an alternative service or facility for other races. [4]
The bill was brought to parliament in 1953, by C. R. Swart, Minister for Justice, with its main purpose to reduce contact between Whites and non-Whites in social settings. [5] : 5 He was quoted in Hansard stating:
If a European has to sit next to a non-European at school, if on a railway station they are to use the same waiting rooms, if they are continually to travel together on the trains and sleep in the same hotels, it is evident that eventually we would have racial admixture, with the result that on the one hand one would no longer find a purely European population and on the other hand a non-European population.
— Hansard 1953 col. 1053
[5] : 5
He made it clear in a further statement before parliament that the governments legislation would end all further court action to apply equality of amenities to all the races in South Africa:
It was never the intention of Parliament to say…that if you reserve something for one group, equal provision should be made in every respect for the other group. In our country we have civilised people, we have semi-civilised people and we have uncivilised people. The Government of this country gives each section facilities according to the circumstances of each.
— Hansard 1953 cols. 1054-5
[5] : 5
The Act was reinforced and supported by several other Apartheid laws that ensured social segregation. [6] : 21 The Group Areas Act defined that the word 'occupation of a particular area set aside for Whites', meant excluding non-whites from restaurants, tea rooms, eating rooms, and clubs. [6] : 21 Liquor Act, 1928 amended 1977, required a special permit to allow different races to drink together. [6] : 21 The Motor Transport Act, amended in 1955, required taxis and buses to have certificates stating what races could be conveyed. [6] : 21 The State-Aided Institution Act, amended in 1957, granted boards of intuitions funded by the state, the right to determine the hours, conditions, and restrictions of their venues for use by non-whites, and covered libraries, museums, art galleries, public parks, and zoos. [6] : 21
Municipalities quickly made use of the Act to pass by-laws that reserved certain areas for whites only.
A notable exception to the segregation that was implemented following the Act was the Johannesburg Zoo and Zoo Lake. Due to requirements in the "Deed of Gift", under which the land for the zoo and lake was acquired, segregation was not permitted and consequently, the zoo and public park where the lake is located were open to all races from the time they were established. [7]
In 1960, an amendment to the Act was made when beach segregation was introduced. It enabled local authorities to make beaches and the adjacent sea exclusive to certain races. [5] : 142
Interpretations and modifications to the spirit of the Act were made by the government starting in 1970's and early eighties but were subject still, in some cases, to decisions made by Provincial Authorities, Department of Community Development, and local authorities. Some of the changes were:
Prior to 1979, public libraries were segregated but after that year, local authorities could open them to all races. [8]
Separate public hospitals were created for different races, but private hospitals had their own discretion as to who they admitted. [8]
After 1979, a permanent permit could be granted to allow multi-race audiences at theatres, prior to that, temporary permits had to be applied for. [8] However, separate entrances, seating, toilets, and refreshment areas still applied for non-white audiences. [8]
Permits could be applied for to be granted "International status" to serve non-white customers. [8] By 1979, clubs could decide who could be members. [8]
In 1957, small cinemas could seat non-whites in separate seating if they obtained a permit. [8] By 1978, drive-inns could apply to for a permit to be open to all races. [8] Finally in 1983, cinemas could apply for multi-racial status. [8]
Hotels granted an "International status", were able to accommodate and serve non-whites. [8] Dancing between races in those hotels were restricted until 1982. [8] Swimming pools were open only to white and non-white guests at that time. [8] By March 1985, it was acknowledged that restrictions like these were being ignored by the government. [8] Restaurants required the same "International status" to serve non-whites and then from January 1985, relaxed. [8]
From 1976, post offices began removing their separate facilities with only twenty percent still separate in 1985. [8] Game parks, nature reserves and pleasure resort run by the state were said to have become multi-racial in the 1970s. [8]
In areas reserved for whites under the Group Areas Act, parks could only be used by Black domestic workers accompanied by white children. [8]
Beaches were segregated according to race and individual beaches were reserved for certain races as determined by provincial authorities and not the local authority. [8] The Act stated that equal facilities were not required. [8] There were two exceptions. Temporary permits could be granted and Black domestic workers caring for white children were allowed on whites-only beaches. [8] On 16 November 1989, President F.W. de Klerk ordered that beaches be opened to all races and that local authorities amend their by-laws. [9]
On 31 October 1984, State President P.W. Botha instructed his President’s Council to investigate consolidating the Group Areas, Reservation of Sperate Amenities, Slums, and the Community Development Acts. [10] : 95 The Council reported back on 10 September 1987, recommending no consolidation but expressed a number of recommendations. [10] : 95 One was that the Reservation of Separate Amenities Act needed to be repealed. [10]
On 5 October 1987, State President P.W. Botha announced before the House of Assembly that the President’s Council had recommended the repeal of the Separate Amenities Act. [11] He stated that the law would not be repealed before alternative policy guidelines were approved. [11] He stated that if the law was repealed with nothing else in its place, the situation would revert to events before 1953 and that common law would prevail. [11] While stating he was wasn’t blind to a reality of a multiracial society, he had to consider the wishes of those in their communities who wished to use their own institutions. [11] He stated that some amenities would have to be used by all races however that a just and balanced solution was required and acknowledged that the Act, had never been a success. [11]
In February 1988, the South African Police were ordered by the Commissioner of Police to no longer arrest people breaking the law concerning the Separate Amenities Act. [12] Their names could be taken and referred to the state prosecutor's office. [12]
By November 1988, the local governments in the Transvaal, governed by the Conservative Party, reintroduced and enforced the segregation laws enabled by the Separate Amenities Act. [13] Their actions were condemned by white opposition parties and local governments and calls were made to the National Party to have the law repeals. [13]
On 16 November 1989, President FW de Klerk announced that it was time to repeal the Separate Amenities Act and would do so after discussions about its implications and measures implemented. [14] One aspect of the law, he could instantly change was opening beaches to all races. [14] The proposal to repeal that act was recognised by the President’s Council back in 1978. [14]
The proposed repeal and the opening of beaches were immediately condemned by the Conservative Party, with Koos van der Merwe, Chief Information Officer, calling the move a path to a mixed South Africa and a Black government. [14] The Democratic Party expressed support for the move and a move towards a negotiated constitution. [14] The Mass Democratic Movement described it as a step forward. [14] Mangosuthu Buthelezi, Inkatha Freedom Party, described it as an indication de Klerk wanted to bring about change and the repeal would be a point of no return. [14] Boerestaat Party leader Robert van Tonder described it as step backwards and would create a third world, socialist, English speaking African state and called for a sperate state for Afrikaaners. [15]
On 20 June 1990, the South African Parliament voted to repeal the Act, [16] and on 15 October 1990, it was finally repealed by the Discriminatory Legislation regarding Public Amenities Repeal Act. [17] [18]
Racial segregation is the separation of people into racial or other ethnic groups in daily life. Segregation can involve the spatial separation of the races, and mandatory use of different institutions, such as schools and hospitals by people of different races. Specifically, it may be applied to activities such as eating in restaurants, drinking from water fountains, using public toilets, attending schools, going to films, riding buses, renting or purchasing homes or renting hotel rooms. In addition, segregation often allows close contact between members of different racial or ethnic groups in hierarchical situations, such as allowing a person of one race to work as a servant for a member of another race. Racial segregation has generally been outlawed worldwide.
Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896), was a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision ruling that racial segregation laws did not violate the U.S. Constitution as long as the facilities for each race were equal in quality, a doctrine that came to be known as "separate but equal". The decision legitimized the many state "Jim Crow laws" re-establishing racial segregation that had been passed in the American South after the end of the Reconstruction era in 1877. Such legally enforced segregation in the South lasted into the 1960s.
Separate but equal was a legal doctrine in United States constitutional law, according to which racial segregation did not necessarily violate the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which nominally guaranteed "equal protection" under the law to all people. Under the doctrine, as long as the facilities provided to each race were equal, state and local governments could require that services, facilities, public accommodations, housing, medical care, education, employment, and transportation be segregated by race, which was already the case throughout the states of the former Confederacy. The phrase was derived from a Louisiana law of 1890, although the law actually used the phrase "equal but separate".
Hendrik Frensch Verwoerd, also known as H. F. Verwoerd, was a Dutch-born South African politician, scholar in applied psychology, philosophy, and sociology, and newspaper editor who was Prime Minister of South Africa from 1958 until his assassination in 1966.
The National Party, also known as the Nationalist Party, was a political party in South Africa from 1914 to 1997, which was responsible for the implementation of apartheid rule. The party was an Afrikaner ethnic nationalist party, which initially promoted the interests of Afrikaners but later became a stalwart promoter and enactor of white supremacy, for which it is best known. It first became the governing party of the country in 1924. It merged with its rival, the South African Party (SAP), during the 1929-1939 Great Depression, and a splinter faction, the Re-United National Party became the official opposition during World War II and won power in 1948. With the National Party governing South Africa from 4 June 1948 until 9 May 1994, the country for the bulk of this time was only a de jure or partial democracy, as from 1958 onwards non-white people were barred from voting. In 1990, it began to style itself as simply a South African civic nationalist party, and after the fall of apartheid in 1994, attempted to become a moderate conservative one. The party's reputation was damaged irreparably by perpetrating apartheid, and it rebranded itself as the New National Party in 1997 before eventually dissolving in 2005.
The Separate Representation of Voters Act No. 46 was introduced in South Africa on 18 June 1951. Part of the legislation during the apartheid era, the National Party introduced it to enforce racial segregation, and was part of a deliberate process to remove all non-white people from the voters' roll and revoke the Cape Qualified Franchise system.
The Bantu Education Act 1953 was a South African segregation law that legislated for several aspects of the apartheid system. Its major provision enforced racially-separated educational facilities; Even universities were made "tribal", and all but three missionary schools chose to close down when the government would no longer help to support their schools. Very few authorities continued using their own finances to support education for native Africans. In 1959, that type of education was extended to "non-white" universities and colleges with the Extension of University Education Act, 1959, and the University College of Fort Hare was taken over by the government and degraded to being part of the Bantu education system. It is often argued that the policy of Bantu (African) education was aimed to direct black or non-white youth to the unskilled labour market although Hendrik Verwoerd, the Minister of Native Affairs, claimed that the aim was to solve South Africa's "ethnic problems" by creating complementary economic and political units for different ethnic groups. A particular fear of the National Party that most likely led to the passing of this legislation was the rising number of children joining urban gangs.
Apartheid was a system of institutionalised racial segregation that existed in South Africa and South West Africa from 1948 to the early 1990s. It was characterised by an authoritarian political culture based on baasskap, which ensured that South Africa was dominated politically, socially, and economically by the nation's minority white population. Under this minoritarian system, white citizens held the highest status, followed by Indians, Coloureds and black Africans, in that order. The economic legacy and social effects of apartheid continue to the present day, particularly inequality.
Group Areas Act was the title of three acts of the Parliament of South Africa enacted under the apartheid government of South Africa. The acts assigned racial groups to different residential and business sections in urban areas in a system of urban apartheid. An effect of the law was to exclude people of colour from living in the most developed areas, which were restricted to Whites. It required many people of colour to commute large distances from their homes to be able to work. The law led to people of colour being forcibly removed for living in the "wrong" areas. People of colour, who were the majority at the time, were given much smaller areas to live in than the white minority. Pass Laws required people of colour to carry pass books and later "reference books", similar to passports, to enter the "white" parts of the country.
Facilities and services such as housing, healthcare, education, employment, and transportation have been systematically separated in the United States based on racial categorizations. Notably, racial segregation in the United States was the legally and/or socially enforced separation of African Americans from whites, as well as the separation of other ethnic minorities from majority and mainstream communities. While mainly referring to the physical separation and provision of separate facilities, it can also refer to other manifestations such as prohibitions against interracial marriage, and the separation of roles within an institution. The U.S. Armed Forces were formally segregated until 1948, as black units were separated from white units but were still typically led by white officers.
The Natives Land Act, 1913 was an Act of the Parliament of South Africa that was aimed at regulating the acquisition of land. It largely prohibited the sale of land from whites to blacks and vice-versa.
The system of racial segregation and oppression in South Africa known as apartheid was implemented and enforced by many acts and other laws. This legislation served to institutionalize racial discrimination and the dominance by white people over people of other races. While the bulk of this legislation was enacted after the election of the National Party government in 1948, it was preceded by discriminatory legislation enacted under earlier British and Afrikaner governments. Apartheid is distinguished from segregation in other countries by the systematic way in which it was formalized in law.
Legislation seeking to direct relations between racial or ethnic groups in the United States has had several historical phases, developing from the European colonization of the Americas, the triangular slave trade, and the American Indian Wars. The 1776 Declaration of Independence included the statement that "all men are created equal", which has ultimately inspired actions and legislation against slavery and racial discrimination. Such actions have led to passage of the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments to the Constitution of the United States.
Law enforcement in South Africa is primarily the responsibility of the South African Police Service (SAPS), South Africa's national police force. SAPS is responsible for investigating crime and security throughout the country. The "national police force is crucial for the safety of South Africa's citizens" and was established in accordance with the provisions of Section 205 of the Constitution of South Africa.
South African citizenship has been influenced primarily by the racial dynamics that have structured South African society throughout its development. The country's colonial history led to the immigration of different racial and ethnic groups into one shared area. Power dispersion and inter-group relations led to European dominance of the state, allowing it to directly shape citizenship although not without internal division or influence from the less empowered races.
Internal resistance to apartheid in South Africa originated from several independent sectors of South African society and took forms ranging from social movements and passive resistance to guerrilla warfare. Mass action against the ruling National Party (NP) government, coupled with South Africa's growing international isolation and economic sanctions, were instrumental in leading to negotiations to end apartheid, which began formally in 1990 and ended with South Africa's first multiracial elections under a universal franchise in 1994.
The Extension of University Education Act, Act 45 of 1959, formed part of the apartheid system of racial segregation in South Africa. This act made it a criminal offense for a non-white student to register at a formerly open university without the written permission of the Minister of Internal Affairs. New universities were then established for various non-white groups.
The Industrial Conciliation Act, 1956, formed part of the apartheid system of racial segregation in South Africa. It prohibited the registration of any new 'mixed' unions and imposed racially separate branches and all-white executive committees on existing 'mixed' unions. It prohibited strikes in 'essential industries' for both black and white workers and banned political affiliations for unions. Clause 77 legalized the reservation of skilled jobs to white workers, as the Bantu Building Workers Act of 1951 had done in the construction trade, 'to ensure that they will not be exploited by the lower standard of living of any other race'.
The Discriminatory Legislation regarding Public Amenities Repeal Act, 1990 is an act of the Parliament of South Africa that repealed legislation permitting racial segregation in public facilities: principally the Reservation of Separate Amenities Act, 1953 and the Reservation of Separate Amenities Amendment Act, 1960, but also related sections of other acts as well as provincial ordinances.
{{cite book}}
: CS1 maint: others (link){{cite book}}
: CS1 maint: others (link){{cite book}}
: CS1 maint: others (link){{cite book}}
: CS1 maint: others (link){{cite book}}
: CS1 maint: others (link){{cite book}}
: CS1 maint: others (link)