Neither AdoptedF DUBE nor Borrowed: A PERCritique / PELJ 20 20of ( 2the3) 1 Conception of the South African Bill of Rights F Dube* Online ISSN 1727-3781 Abstract Pioneer in peer -reviewed, open access online law publications The failure of the post-apartheid government to deliver on some of the promises of the South African Bill of Rights, coupled with Author the appropriation of the Bill of Rights by the international human rights movement, create the impression that the Bill of Rights is Felix Dube a neo-liberal instrument which is irrelevant to the needs of South Africans and the realities of their circumstances. If the people of Affiliation South Africa are convinced that the Bill of Rights embraces a Western agenda more than it expresses their collective North-West University South Africa aspirations, it will lose its legitimacy. While acknowledging that the conception of the Bill of Rights is contested between the Email
[email protected] international human rights movement and some South Africans, this article shows that the Bill of Rights was neither adopted nor Date Submission borrowed from the international human rights movement. South Africans did not assimilate the International Bill of Rights but 30 January 2020 conceived their own Bill of Rights in the early decades of the 20th Century. The conception of the South African Bill of Rights was Date Revised a response to colonialism and apartheid and was not a consequence of tutelage by the international human rights 13 July 2020 movement. Date Accepted 13 July 2020 Keywords Date published International human rights movement; International Bill of Rights; human rights discourse; Bill of Rights; South Africa.