Speaking in Confused Tongues: Constructing Babelian Towers in Constitutional Times

The South African Constitution recognizes the use of 11 official languages within "provincial" and "national" government on the basis of "parity of esteem". However, it does not specifically refer to the recognition and use of language in tribunals. Any perceived attribution is couched in generic terms that are open to interpretation, as evidenced in the cases of Matomela, Damoyi and Pienaar. The employment of a single language policy in court proceedings, as advocated in Matomela and Damoyi is probably the most sensible, pragmatic and plausible language policy imaginable. Such a position would be desirable to ensure speedier and simpler proceedings. However, it would, as argued in Pienaar, not only accord primacy and prominence to a single language, but would operate contrary to the spirit of plurality, multilingualism and inclusivity, which forms the bedrock of the current constitutional dispensation. Meanwhile, the dominance of English and (to a lesser extent) Afrikaans continues almost unabated, despite the principles of inclusivity championed by the Constitution.