JAMIL F. KHAN | Democratic institutions must be protected from rising religious fundamentalism

The minister of Sport, Arts and Culture, Gayton McKenzie, last month cancelled South Africa’s national pavilion presentation at the Venice Biennale, citing foreign interference and the decision to reallocate the platform to artists who “promote our country”.

The work Elegy by visual artist Gabrielle Goliath, who was chosen to represent South Africa, speaks to the perpetual death of women and queer people in South Africa, the Herero and Nama genocide in Namibia committed by Germany, and the Palestinian genocide in Gaza committed by Israel.

If we speak of and believe in something like “the soul of a nation”, South Africa’s soul would be found in our commitment to resist and condemn apartheid and colonialism and all forms of domination, wherever they exist.

Besides my own misgivings about the way legal culture deifies judges to the point of theatre, the response to this issue raises questions about partiality, especially on a matter also attached to religious fundamentalism.

This would not be the first time a judge in this country was revealed to have allowed personal religious views to affect their judgments. Former Chief Justice Mogoeng Mogoeng, upon retiring, declared his fundamentalist Christian beliefs that have given many cause to reinterpret his lenient judgments in rape cases.

Though this cannot be proven, it is necessary for us to remain suspicious of the decisions of powerful figures such as judges and politicians, regarding matters imbricated in religious politics, as is the matter of Israel, and its right to exist, which is justified biblically.

The rise of Christian fundamentalism in response to Israel’s religious propaganda requires a position on Palestine and Israel to be substantiated.

We are not entitled to religious beliefs where those beliefs justify harm to other people, and because of how deep religious indoctrination can go, we must be vigilant of its influence over powerful institutions in a country that claims to separate church and state.

When thinking about how, for many in South Africa, religious affiliation is experienced as a natural identity, as inherent as their genetics, we must consider how much of that logic filters into the way they make decisions in their professional lives.

Goliath and her team are appealing the decision, hoping for a legally informed decision that reflects our commitment to free speech, artistic expression and resistance to apartheid and colonialism.

The rise in religiously motivated decision-making, confirmed or unconfirmed, in the highest offices in our country demands our attention.

Apartheid in South Africa itself was executed largely on religious grounds, guided by a belief that God had given this land to settlers, who still own most of it today. Israel’s right to exist is hinged on the interpretation of a biblical promise that God has given Palestine to settlers.

We must also keep studying our history, as I fear, the more we “move on,” the more we forget the details of how one of the most famous crimes against humanity was allowed to endure for 46 years.

If we do not know the details of our past, we will not recognise it as it still tries to return, time and time again. Our nation’s right to religion cannot ever override our collective responsibility to refuse silence in the face of injustice.

Dr Jamil F. Khan is an award-winning author, doctoral critical diversity scholar, and research fellow at the Johannesburg Institute for Advanced Study.