Back to all interviews
Freedom Collection

Interviews with Frene Ginwala

Interviewed May 20, 2024

There was this thing about amnesty, and I was one of the people who said I’m not applying for amnesty. I didn’t do anything wrong, and amnesty from somebody like de Klerk, I just will not do it. A number of us refused to apply for amnesty on political basis. Some did, some didn’t. That was an individual choice. The ANC [African National Congress] never forced us. When we went to the TRC [Truth and Reconciliation Commission], we did say we accepted responsibility as the leadership for anything done in the name of the ANC, so we claimed responsibility even if someone else took the action. On an – overall, we didn’t claim amnesty for any individual act. So that was policy.

[Frederick Willem de Klerk (1936 – ) served as President of South Africa from 1989 – 1994. Under de Klerk’s leadership the apartheid system was dismantled, the African National Congress’ (ANC) 30 year ban ended, political prisoners were released and majority (multiracial) elections were established. The ANC is a political party that served as the most prominent resistance movement against South Africa’s apartheid system, at times resorting to violence through its military wing, Umkhonto we Sizwe. It was officially banned by the South African government from 1960 to 1990. As apartheid collapsed, the ANC’s leader, Nelson Mandela, was elected President of South Africa in 1994 and established a democratic government. The South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission was set up by the Government of National Unity in 1995 to investigate violence and human rights abuses committed under apartheid by all segments of society.]

Now, when we were coming back [1990] and as we were landing, I remember sitting next to somebody else and holding hands and wondering what was going to happen. I don’t think we were afraid, but already people had come back, and some of the lawyers were saying, “You watch it. We’re not gonna get you out of prison if they lock you up.” But we were not really worried about that.

And it was some concern. We didn’t know what we were going to find. We theoretically knew what was happening in South Africa, but practically we didn’t know. So there was concern, not for oneself, but concern for the unknown. Let me put it that way.

Most of us didn’t trust the National Party government or de Klerk, and so there was a lot of concern of that, not so much for personal reasons, but for what sort of position are we going into. I was immediately conscripted into setting up the Women’s League again, reviving it.

[The National Party, founded in 1914, ruled South Africa from 1948 to 1994. Its following included mostly Dutch-descended Afrikaners and English-speaking whites. The National Party was long dedicated to policies of apartheid and white supremacy. By the early 1990s, the party had moved toward sharing power with South Africa’s black majority. Nelson Mandela (1918 – 2013) was a South African anti-apartheid revolutionary and politician who served as the first post-apartheid President of South Africa from 1994-1999.]

Before I knew it, I was part of Mandela’s secretariat. I was anxious to set up the research department. This was a constant problem, and I kept saying we will need the research department here if we are going to negotiate. So anyway, I was doing both things in a sense setting up, but I didn’t spend a lot of time in his secretariat. I was there for meetings and things like that, but much more as the negotiations went on, preparing for the negotiations.

At the women’s end, we were setting up the Women’s National Coalition. We managed to set it up as the most representative body until the Parliament was elected because every political party was there. It was a coalition. We took a decision as women, we are not setting up one women’s movement. Let people keep their – it’ll be less threatening. [The Women´s National Coalition in South Africa launched in 1992 to bring together groups of women across political, economic, racial, cultural and religious lines and ensure their common interests were reflected in South Africa’s post-apartheid constitution.]

But let us – and our question was simply what change is coming? What change do we, as women, want? And we then put up a Canadian-funded, largest participatory research program that at least they told us was there where we put up big news sheets outside supermarkets, come and write what you want changed. We asked the churches. Now it was strange that, because of South Africa’s apartheid and thing, people – women, domestic workers did not have weekends off, but the Mothers Unions used to meet on Thursdays at the churches. So we asked the churches, on three consecutive weeks, please ask the Mothers Union meetings what it – to write down what it is they want changed as women. How it affects them.

And we got these thousands of replies and this was all put together into a women’s charter. So that was something I was very much involved in as well. So I was doing a whole range of things, and too busy to be too worried about what was going to happen, but we were convinced that, once there were negotiations, there was no argument that could be made, and this was true, because our teams were all sorts of people.