The Western Cape people, a distinct community defined by our unique culture, values, and aspirations, have endured decades of governance that disregards our democratic will. As the Cape Independence Advocacy Group (CIAG), we champion the inalienable right of our people to self-determination—a right enshrined in South African and international law.
The question of whether Pretoria holds all the cards in our pursuit of Cape Independence is misguided.
The true power lies with the Western Cape people, whose compelling case for secession, rooted in the national government’s catastrophic failures and our distinct identity, cannot be ignored without severe consequences for South Africa’s legitimacy and stability.
The Western Cape, as recognized in our provincial constitution, is home to a people who are ethnically, culturally, and ideologically distinct from South Africa’s national majority. We are predominantly ethnic minorities, with a free-market, Western-leaning ethos that values accountability, efficiency, and individual liberty. Yet, despite a provincial majority never having voted for the African National Congress (ANC), we have been subjected to its rule, even within the current Government of National Unity (GNU), where the Democratic Alliance (DA) lacks the influence to alter harmful national policies.
The ANC’s governance has been a spectacular failure, plunging South Africa into a crisis marked by the world’s highest crime rates, stagnant GDP growth lagging behind peer nations, and an unemployment rate at 43% among working-age adults, with youth around 60%. These failures tear at the social fabric, leaving communities fractured and hopeless.
The mismanagement of Western Cape tax revenue exacerbates this crisis.
The majority of our hard-earned taxes are funneled to a central government notorious for cronyism, corruption, and inefficiency. Funds that could improve our schools, hospitals, and infrastructure are squandered on bloated bureaucracies and failed state enterprises. Meanwhile, national policies like affirmative action and land reform disproportionately disadvantage our ethnic minority population, favoring the national majority and fueling an influx of economic migrants who strain our resources. These migrants, often illegally settled, receive preferential access to jobs and services due to national legislation, sidelining long-standing Western Cape residents. This systemic disenfranchisement underscores why independence is not just a desire but a necessity for our people’s prosperity.
A referendum is the democratic cornerstone of our quest for independence.
The South African Constitution empowers our Premier to call a provincial referendum without national approval, a rare provision that reflects our legal pathway to self-determination. Alternatively, the Cape Independence movement is prepared to organize its own referendum, as Veneto did in 2014, to reflect the will of our people. Independent polls consistently show majority support among Western Cape voters for such a vote, signaling a powerful mandate for change. This mandate, once established, carries profound legal and political weight, compelling our government to act and forcing Pretoria to the negotiating table.
Section 235 of the South African Constitution affirms our right to self-determination, stating it may be exercised “within a territorial entity in the Republic or in any other way.” The Constitutional Court has clarified that this right is not subject to parliamentary veto but requires good-faith negotiation to formalize agreements. South Africa’s ratification of international treaties, such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, reinforces this right within domestic law.
Critics argue that South Africa’s unitary state structure, emphasizing territorial integrity, implies that secession is incompatible with the constitutional order. However, the Constitution contains no explicit prohibition on secession, and Section 235’s provision for self-determination, supported by international law’s stance that unilateral declarations of independence (UDIs) are not prohibited, as affirmed by the International Court of Justice in its 2010 Kosovo Advisory Opinion, suggests that secession remains a viable option when backed by a clear democratic mandate.
While international law does not explicitly mandate negotiation based on such a mandate, the 1998 Reference re Secession of Quebec ruling by the Supreme Court of Canada provides a persuasive precedent for our case. The Court held that a clear majority vote on a clear question for secession triggers a constitutional duty under Canadian law for the national government to negotiate in good faith, guided by principles of federalism, democracy, constitutionalism, and minority protection. This principle aligns with our constitutional framework, where a clear mandate from the Western Cape people would similarly compel Pretoria to negotiate.
If a referendum confirms our people’s desire for independence, the Western Cape government must approach Pretoria to negotiate terms, addressing trade, borders, infrastructure, and debt allocation.
These talks, akin to the three-year Brexit process, would require both parties to prioritize mutual benefit.
The Western Cape’s economic strength, contributing significantly to South Africa’s GDP, gives us leverage. Our province’s established institutions, including our parliament and constitution, and our defined borders meet international statehood criteria, positioning us for global recognition. Pretoria’s leverage as the national authority is tempered by the risk of destabilizing the broader South African economy if it obstructs our path.
Should Pretoria refuse to negotiate in good faith, a UDI becomes a legitimate option.
International law supports this, particularly if South Africa denies our rights, as seen in cases like Kosovo’s independence. A violent response from Pretoria would provoke global condemnation, inviting sanctions and isolation, as history demonstrates with parent states that suppress self-determination. The international community prefers negotiated settlements but highlights respect for democratic mandates. Our prior efforts to secure greater autonomy, consistently rejected by Pretoria, show we have exhausted less disruptive options, strengthening our case for secession.
International recognition is critical for our place on the global stage.
Based on discussions with foreign entities, we are confident that sufficient countries would recognize an independent Western Cape, particularly given our democratic process and economic viability. Both the Western Cape and the remaining South African state can function independently, with our province’s tax base and resources ensuring sustainability. The DA-led Western Cape government’s repeated requests for autonomy, met with Pretoria’s insistence on a unitary state, underscore that secession is our only viable path to self-governance.
The power lies with the Western Cape people.
Our democratic will, expressed through a referendum, is the catalyst for change. Pretoria cannot dismiss this mandate without undermining its own legitimacy. The failures of national governance—economic collapse, rampant crime, and systemic corruption—make our case for independence compelling. Our distinct identity, rooted in a commitment to free-market principles and Western values, demands a government that reflects our priorities. Pretoria’s best course is to negotiate a peaceful, mutually beneficial separation, as obstruction risks domestic instability and global repercussions.
The Western Cape people hold the cards, and we are ready to shape our future as a sovereign, prosperous nation.
* Published in South Africa Today
