Does the Natal Indian Congress have a role in the future South Africa we want and deserve?

By Edwin Naidu

The Natal Indian Congress recently celebrated its 130th anniversary at Sastri College in Durban. It was a gathering of stalwarts who reminisced about the good old days while also expressing concerns about the broad ANC church, which it believes offers the country the best hope of salvation.

Indeed, this highlights the need for frank conversations about the future South Africa we want and deserve. Former Transport Minister Mac Maharaj admitted the ANC had lost its way but reminded South Africa about the importance of the Constitution and the Freedom Charter, saying South Africa belongs to all who live in it.

Indians and their place in South Africa, particularly the treatment they received at the hands of the British after arriving as indentured labourers in 1860, saw Mahatma Gandhi form the NIC in 1894 to defend Indian nationals against discrimination. The hallmark of Gandhi’s resistance was mobilisation.

Under the leadership of Dr Monty Naicker, the NIC transitioned from Gandhi’s resistance campaign in the 1940s to become a pivotal force in the anti-apartheid struggle. This evolution, coupled with the unity of the NIC, the Transvaal Indian Congress, and the ANC under Yusuf Dadoo and AB Xuma, was a testament to the power of collective action against racial oppression.

In the 1950s, Indian leaders united under the umbrella of the South African Indian Congress (SAIC), founded in 1923, and joined the ANC as part of the Congress Alliance. This unity of purpose and action, this collaboration, was a powerful force in the struggle against apartheid.

The NIC has been a cradle of leadership, nurturing a long line of leaders, each with a unique legacy of influence and dedication. From George and Vera Poonen, H A Naidoo, MD Naidoo, MP Naicker, Dawood Seedat, RD Naidoo, George Singh, AKM Dockrat, RK Gounden, IC Meer, Dr Kesaveloo Goonam, JN Singh, NG Moodley, Billy Peters, Cassim Amra, PM Harry, Kay Moonsamy, RR Pillay, SV Reddy, Mannie Pillay, Billy Nair, to Dr Monty Naicker, each leader's contribution was significant. Their resilience in the face of adversity continues to inspire, and their influence is deeply ingrained in South Africa's history.

As the years passed, the NIC's protests shifted towards the South African Indian Council and the House of Delegates' participation in the 1984 tricameral parliament elections. The elections were a failure for the apartheid government, with only a 20 percent turnout. The NIC's leading role in mobilising 80 percent of the Indian community to boycott the polls was a powerful display of their strength.

One of the disappointing aspects of their role in democracy, however, was its failure to translate that 80 percent that did not vote in the apartheid elections to cast their votes for the ANC in 1994.

But there is no doubt of the impact of the NIC on the country’s politics – and history, especially its role in forming the United Democratic Front in 1983, which mobilised against apartheid, demanding the creation of a united, non-racial, non-sexist, and democratic South Africa.

But there’s also a dark stain. In 1990, a report on a cabal within the mass democratic movement emerged, alleging that leaders manipulated processes against democratic outcomes. Leaders were also sidelined. The report was distributed for debate. Prominent NIC leaders Pravin Gordan, Zac Yacoob, Alf Carrim, Yunus Mohammed, Farouk Meer, Jerry Coovadia, and Billy Nair were listed as cabal members in the then-Natal.

History must be fair, showing it warts and all.

Democracy failed to scrap the apartheid racial tags that the struggle movement opposed en route to a non-racial society. Hence, racism remains a feature of 30 years of democracy despite former President Nelson Mandela's euphoria, and the fake unity symbolised by the Springboks in 1995 did little for race relations. The opportunity to embrace a South African identity, regardless of race, remains a missed opportunity under Madiba.

This absence of a South African identity continues to divide the country, as shown by complaints to the equality courts or the country’s human rights body. The NIC was conspicuous by its absence during the July 2021 riots.

Indian President Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, who supported the ANC’s Defiance Campaign in 1952, noted that the plight of Indians in South Africa could not be separated from the aspirations of Africans. “The people of Indian descent have had to put up with a great deal of discrimination, and we have resented that," he said. ”But the African people have to put up with something infinitely more, and … our sympathies must go to them even more than to our kith and kin there,” he said.

But racial tension remains. India is still perceived as a motherland to many South African Indians whose forebears arrived as indentured labourers on November 16, 1860. Religious traditions and social customs passed down through generations remain strong today. Long may those traditions continue.

Yet, the Constitution protects religious freedoms and beliefs. Can one not practice these but call oneself South African?

Maharaj stressed that the NIC and TIC helped imprint the goal of a non-racial SA founded on equality and democracy. However, he was clear that the ANC remains the best vehicle for transforming the country. “It is in our hands to make the ANC fit for purpose.”

This raises the question of the NIC's relevance and, certainly, its future. If they continue to exist, is it akin to suggesting that the Indians in South Africa have not evolved politically and consciously to support political parties that have political views as opposed to racial and cultural interests?

As citizens, the Constitution is sacrosanct, while the constant reminder of the Freedom Charter is indelibly aligned with the heartbeat of the struggle. If, as Maharaj insists, the ANC is the way forward, is that not a cue for the NIC to look with since its current existence perpetuates the very racism it fought against?

Underscoring this argument is the NIC's poor contribution to helping the ANC woo Indian voters during the past 30 years. The NIC’s relevance was most significant in the struggle to end apartheid. But that was achieved 30 years ago.

Still, the NIC keeps its apartheid moniker despite never going to the polls to prove its legitimacy. Like a modern-day Rip van Winkle, the NIC has awoken to celebrate a milestone anniversary. So, 130 years later, one must ask whether the NIC represents the people’s will or if it is imposing its will on people.

The crowd at Sastri College for the 130th-anniversary bash boasted many of the same old faces from yesteryear’s NIC meetings. It could have been a gathering at a SASSA office or an Indian wedding. Where is the young blood that the NIC hopes will take the organisation into the future?

Using Ela Gandhi to sustain the NIC’s Gandhian legacy will not get the NIC new supporters. Sadly, the Gandhi Settlement at Phoenix is a far cry from the kind of monument it could be to the Mahatma. Few locals visit the place, which is showcased – even in its sorry state – to get funding from India through diplomatic channels.

Much to the chagrin of Indian South Africans, when the ANC needed help obtaining a majority in Kwazulu-Natal in 2004, it turned to Amichand Rajbansi, the Chatsworth Minority Front leader. After he died in 2011, the ANC labelled him a leader committed to nation-building and unity. Yet a commission found the leader who once famously said he would “double cross that bridge when I come to it”, unfit for political office.

The NIC should follow the charismatic Raj’s example by not sitting on the sidelines, moaning, or preaching on WhatsApp groups only about issues related to the Indian community. If they want to remain relevant, they should drop the racially polarising “Indian” label as well as the provincial segregationist “Natal” from its name. Both are out of kilter in a democracy.

One would like to believe that Mahatma Gandhi, whose birthday is celebrated on October 2, would argue that since Indians are not facing the same discrimination as in 1894, the NIC should consider its role in a united nation.

Suppose the NIC truly believes that the ANC is the country’s best vehicle, as Maharaj suggests. It’s time to close shop and join the ANC in the fight against inequality and poverty to build a country where all citizens can belong as one, as South Africans.

* Edwin Naidu is a communications specialist and journalist driving social-enterprise start-up Higher Education Media.

** The views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of IOL or Independent Media.