South African youth share their challenges and hopes
Aqeel Madhi.
Image: Supplied
Ahead of Youth Day on June 16, young South Africans shared the challenges faced by the youth and their thoughts on how far they believe we have come as a country, 31 years into democracy.
Aqeel Madhi, 27, of uMhlanga, said the challenges faced by the youth were not new.
'Youth unemployment sits at 62.4% compared to the national rate of 32.9%. We are also dealing with gender-based violence (GBV) and what I believe is an under-discussed mental health crisis. Only 5% of our national health budget goes to mental healthcare.'
Madhi, a machine learning engineer, said youth were not given opportunities to show what they could do.
'We are capable, energetic and willing. If we are truly the future, then every South African, every institution, and every level of government should be working with us to secure this country's future, not putting the burden solely on us.'
Video Player is loading.
Play Video
Play
Unmute
Current Time
0:00
/
Duration
-:-
Loaded :
0%
Stream Type LIVE
Seek to live, currently behind live
LIVE
Remaining Time
-
0:00
This is a modal window.
Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window.
Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque
Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps
Reset
restore all settings to the default values Done
Close Modal Dialog
End of dialog window.
Advertisement
Next
Stay
Close ✕
Ad loading
Madhi said if the issues faced by the youth were not addressed, the consequences would be devastating.
'We will entrench intergenerational poverty transmission. Research consistently shows South Africa has among the world's lowest social mobility, with poor education quality being a major factor keeping families trapped in cycles of poverty. Failure to address these issues will also further erode our economy and increase crime and mental health problems.
'However, Ubuntu is what I love most about being South African, and it is our solution. Every person, institution, and government level must come together to fix this youth crisis which requires an emergency-level response,' he said.
Irfaan Mangera.
Image: Supplied
Irfaan Mangera, 28, of Lenasia, said the youth faced an overwhelming set of crises.
'The most urgent being lack of access to quality education and skills training, youth unemployment, mental health challenges, systemic inequality, and political exclusion.
'Over 60% of young people are unemployed. GBV, food insecurity, and a failing education-to-employment pipeline are not just issues, they are symptoms of a broken system that is not listening to or investing in its youth meaningfully.'
Mangera, a youth activist and human rights, strategy and campaigns consultant, said young people had always been the engine of change in South Africa.
'From the 1976 uprisings to #FeesMustFall and even now as advocates in their communities. We must continue to organise, conscientise, and mobilise collective and people's power. We also need to enter and transform institutions, from student councils to Parliament.
'The youth must also take up space not only in protest but in policy, public service, entrepreneurship, the arts, and community leadership. Our role is not to wait our turn; it is to lead differently and with values that are rooted in equality, dignity, respect and a commitment to constitutional democracy.'
Mangera said if the challenges were not addressed with urgency, South Africa risked becoming a democracy in name only.
'Where our rights are not protected, and the elite of society continue to garner insurmountable privileges while the most vulnerable suffer the most inhumane conditions, the generation left behind will become a breeding ground for despair, violence, populism, and political instability. We will have failed our own Constitutional promise and betrayed the dreams of those who fought and sacrificed for our freedom. The cost will be borne not only by the poor but by the soul of the nation, which is becoming visible with each passing day.'
He said while there had been constitutional and infrastructural gains since 1994, for millions of South Africans, particularly the youth, democracy had not delivered justice and inequality had grown.
Abigail Haridew.
Image: Supplied
Abigail Haridew, 22, of Chatsworth, said youth unemployment remained a crisis.
'However, beyond this, lies a far more insidious issue: the erosion of hope. Many young South Africans, myself included, feel disillusioned by persistent inequality, political instability, and the unfulfilled promises of post-apartheid progress.
'When the pathways to personal growth and national contribution appear blocked or corrupted, the result is a generation that feels increasingly detached from civic engagement and national identity. This disengagement can manifest in mental health struggles, increased substance abuse, or migration in search of better opportunities abroad."
Haridew, a third year student at the University of KwaZulu-Natal's Nelson R Mandela School of Medicine, said young people had more power than they sometimes realised.
'While we face serious challenges from unemployment to inequality, we can't afford to sit back, and hope things change on their own. We need to take action in our own spaces, whether that means starting youth-led initiatives, raising awareness on social media, volunteering in our communities, or simply supporting each other through education and mentorship."
She added that the government needed to take real action to support young people, not just make promises.
'We need better access to quality education and training that actually prepares us for jobs that exist in today's world. More support is needed for youth-owned businesses, internships, and programs that help us gain experience. Mental health services must be made more available, especially in schools and rural areas.
'Most importantly, the government needs to involve young people in decision-making because we know the problems. We live through them every day. If the government works with us and not just for us, we can create a future that gives all young South Africans a fair chance.'
Bilqees Akoodie.
Image: Supplied
Bilqees Akoodie, 30, of Johannesburg, said youth faced structural unemployment, deepening both economic and spatial inequality, exclusion from decision-making and a failing public infrastructure.
'We carry the weight of historical injustice and the burden of a system that has failed to transform meaningfully post-apartheid. We are also the first digital generation, navigating both real-world exclusion and virtual visibility, without the material support to turn our ideas into impact. Meritocracy is undermined by networks of nepotism, tokenism, and bureaucratic gatekeeping. Racial quotas are not the root problem; unequal distribution of power and opportunity is.'
Akoodie, a legal scholar and advocate for international justice, said the youth are not a demographic box.
'We are political actors, caregivers, innovators, and organisers. Our role is to transform and not just inherit this democracy. Youth-led activism is powerful, but it must also be sustainable, strategic, and policy-literate. We have to claim space not only in protest but in boardrooms, courtrooms, and parliaments without being co-opted or diluted.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Citizen
an hour ago
- The Citizen
SA can fix its borders with a TV show – here's how
If police officers knew they'd be on TV, they would do their best to make sure they're not embarrassed in front of the whole nation. Julius Malema isn't special. Controversial rock star Marilyn Manson is also having trouble getting into the UK. One must be pretty envious of a country where border control actually means something and has the desired effect. Our minister of home affairs has launched the awkwardly named Operation New Broom to deal with illegal immigration, but why do we need all that effort? We have TV, we have an audience starved for good local content, and we have the knowledge that true crime makes for compelling television. If people needed rapper Xzibit to have a TV show to get their rides pimped and we need a depressing end to our Sunday night in order to uncover corruption, why not extend that energy? ALSO READ: Home Affairs committee raises alarm over border authority underfunding Where is our South African border show? Can you imagine? There would be no need for a Bheki Cele 'stomach in – chest out' speech! If they knew they'd be on TV, the cops would make their bodies enviable just not to be embarrassed in front of the whole nation. Imagine if you then made it competitive. Which cop busts the most border crossings this week? Though this is South Africa, so it may get to a point of which cop scores the highest bribe. Whatever. In this economy, we'll have to take any injection to the budget. Gosh, what if we got the army involved too and made it a team sport. We can identify the most common time for immigration illegalities and have a live feed. Our local TV doesn't have to be relegated to dull reruns and R50 giveaways. Best of all, we already pay the cast. The extras will likely be deported so the production cost can be kept down. The newsroom can make use of the footage, so there's a win for the station there and we're pretty sure to win an Emmy. If you look at the Emmy winners from the last couple of years, surely a South African illegal immigration policing show will outdo RuPaul's Drag Race. Call the show 'Operation New Broom' for all I care, but please make it happen. ALSO READ: Home Affairs launches Operation New Broom to tackle illegal immigration I know it's sad to admit that we need a TV show to inspire some dedication to the work we desperately need done in the country, but if this is how it must happen then let it be so. And you absolutely know that there will be a spin-off as well: 'Surviving SA Cops' – teams of illegal immigrants compete to avoid being busted. Not only will it bring in the ratings but what's left of our intelligence services would welcome the insight into the latest tricks of the trade. Oh South Africa, the gold mine we sit on is not just under the ground. Ninety-nine problems and we can't make a TV show out of even one? Australian border patrol? Who cares about some Middle Eastern aunty trying to smuggle a bit of za'atar into the outback? Dog the Bounty Hunter? I don't think anybody can take a dude who introduces himself to a bunch of school kids as Uncle Dog seriously. But South African cops? Boy oh boy, do we love ourselves a good popo story. From the police officer who was delighted to be videoed on the iPhone of the driver who pays her salary to our being treated to exquisite asynchronous marching, there's entertainment value to law enforcement. That kind of stuff shouldn't be limited to TikTok and YouTube. If it's happening and its entertaining, then let the masses see it… and let those who are tasked with enforcing the law have whatever inspiration they require to get the job done. If inspiration comes from being on TV, then let's do it. What have we got to lose? NOW READ: BMA intercepts and detains over 6 000 people trying to enter or leave SA illegally
IOL News
2 hours ago
- IOL News
The Constitutional Court at 30: Time for a critical reflection
Prof. Bheki Mngomezulu The Constitutional Court is an apex court in the land. Its responsibility is to uphold the country's constitution and to protect human rights. Over the years, significant changes have occurred within this institution. The court has been led by different judges, passed different judgements, and interacted with various high-ranking individuals and political parties. This has earned the court accolades and criticisms from different people. Having existed since the dawn of democracy, it is the opportune moment to reflect on how the court has performed. In so doing, it is fair to consider both its highs and lows. In 1993 as the country drew closer to turning a new page by moving from a racial era to the current political dispensation, an interim constitution was passed. It was this interim constitution which guided the first democratic election in 1994. The motivating factor was that at the time the judiciary was predominantly white male. As such, it lacked legitimacy since it did not represent the multiracial South African community. It was necessary, therefore, to establish a court that would protect the Constitution against anyone. The Constitutional Court formerly opened its doors on 15 February 1995. It then facilitated the adoption of the 1996 constitution which is currently in place. As was expected, the new constitution confirmed the existence of the Constitutional Court which has 11 judges. These include the Chief Justice, Deputy Chief Justice and 9 other judges. It used interim offices before moving to the Constitution Hill in Braamfontein where it currently sits. The signature case for the court was the case between the state and Makwanyane in 1995 on the death penalty. At the centre of this case was whether it was constitutional or not to use the death penalty under the new political dispensation. Delivering its judgement on 6 June 1995, the court unanimously agreed that indeed the death penalty was against the country's constitution, especially Sections 10 on human dignity, 11 on the right to life, and 12 on freedom and security of the person. This was a landmark case which saw South Africa ending the death penalty which led to the loss of life of many liberation fighters at the hands of the apartheid operatives and their racist government. Since then, the court has passed judgements on various cases including equality, violence, socio-economic rights, and political cases. There have also been cases on privacy and religion. But while it is true that the court has tried its level best to uphold the constitution, and to interpret the constitution as part of its contribution to democratic consolidation, there have been instances where the court has been on the receiving end of the South African public. The question is why has the public been critical of this court? Importantly, what should the court do to redeem its public image? The first concern about this court is that it spends more time dealing with political cases. Even parliament runs to this court about issues which should be resolved by parliament. In this regard, the concern is that the court is too accessible to politicians. Political parties like the DA have frequented the court about issues which should have been addressed by parliament. This has tarnished the image of the court. Another accusation against the Constitutional Court is its weaponisation by the political elite. Some judges are accused of being too sympathetic to certain politicians while being excessively harsh against others. The removal of Adv. Busisiwe Mkhwebane from her position as Public Protector and the impeachment of Judge Hlophe were interpreted by the public as evidence of the politicisation of the court. The argument was that the court was used to fight political battles. Whether these accusations are true or not is not the main issue. What is concerning is that the court has lost credibility in the public eye. The Zondo Commission had many instances which painted the court in a bad light. Firstly, the public was concerned about the appointment of Chief Justice Raymond Zondo to head the Commission. Part of the reason was that Zondo was not the best candidate that was recommended by the Judicial Services Commission (JSC) to President Ramaphosa. Justice Mandisa Maya received the nod. However, Ramaphosa used his constitutional prerogative and appointed Zondo to be the Chief Justice. As the Commission carried out its work, the Constitutional Court was drawn in. Firstly, Zondo was seen to be lacking objectivity. He was accused of being too harsh against Former President Zuma but too soft on President Ramaphosa. This resulted in Zuma refusing to return to the Commission. Zondo approached the Constitutional Court directly. Not only did he lay a charge against Zuma, but he also prescribed a sentence of two years. This raised eyebrows because the litigant also assumed the position of a judge. In its judgement, the court forced Zuma to return to the Commission. It also removed his right to remain silent – the same right which had been given to other witnesses like the late Dudu Myeni. Once again, the court was accused of being biased. When Justice Sisi Khampepe was appointed Acting Chief Justice, she read her judgement against Zuma in an angry tone. She sentenced Zuma in absentia to 15 months in prison. This resulted in the loss of many lives, loss of jobs, and the destruction of the infrastructure. Many businesses which closed in 2021 never recovered. This tainted the image of the court. Given these instances, the second question about the future of this court becomes relevant. Going forward, the court should take these criticisms seriously, identify those that are factual and act on them, but also consider the rest that have not been substantiated and investigate them to confirm their authenticity. The two main issues that the court should take seriously include too much accessibility to it by politicians and the weaponization of the court by politicians. Failure to address these would further tarnish the court's public image. * Prof. Bheki Mngomezulu is Director of the Centre for the Advancement of Non-Racialism and Democracy at Nelson Mandela University. ** The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of IOL, Independent Media or The African.
IOL News
2 hours ago
- IOL News
The National Dialogue must be revolutionary and people-driven
Protesters take part in the defiance campaign, in June 1952, in Johannesburg, by occupying places for white people. The campaign against the apartheid regime's of racial segregation was launched on 26 June 1952 by the ANC and led to the Congress of the People where the Freedom Charter was adopted on 26 June 1955 in Kliptown. Zamikhaya Maseti The much-talked-about National Dialogue is indeed a national conversation we didn't know we needed until former President Thabo Mvuyelwa Mbeki called for it. President Cyril Ramaphosa must be saluted for heeding that call. This gesture affirms that our leaders still speak and listen to one another. It is a tradition of leadership that the younger generation must urgently emulate: speak truthfully and listen earnestly. Accordingly, President Ramaphosa has announced that the National Dialogue will take place on August 15, 2025, at a venue yet to be disclosed. I will not pretend to be a seasoned logistician, but I would like to propose that Kliptown, Johannesburg, be considered as the location. I make this suggestion because Kliptown was the site where our great-grandparents gathered under difficult, illegal conditions on 25–26 June 1955, to craft a vision for a democratic South Africa. Their gathering produced the Freedom Charter, a document that became a lodestar for the liberation struggle. Today, we face an equally historic task: rebuilding the South Africa that was born of their sacrifices. A nation now fractured and drifting, in desperate need of repair. More significantly, 25–26 June 2025 marks the 70th anniversary of the adoption of the Freedom Charter. Holding the Dialogue in Kliptown would root it in the moral soil of people's struggles and remove the sting of elitism that so often surrounds state-led initiatives. It would strip the dialogue of unnecessary extravagance. The original Congress of the People saw delegates arrive by bus, taxi, train some even on horseback. In that spirit, we must question the reportedly proposed R700 million budget for this dialogue. Such an amount is not only absurd; it is morally indefensible. I am relieved that the Presidency has rejected that outrageous and outlandish budget proposal. As South Africans of all colours, classes, and convictions, we must ask the most strategic and politically relevant questions: What should be on the table? That is to say, what must be the agenda, and who defines it? Who should be at the table? Who sits where, and who speaks for whom? Are the working class, the agrarian working class, the landless masses of the people, and the unemployed adequately represented? These are not rhetorical questions. They go to the very heart of the dialogue's legitimacy. We cannot assume that 'broad representation' will occur naturally or that it should be left solely to the Preparatory Committee. I do not claim to have all the answers, but I do insist that all South Africans must grapple with these questions. A particularly troubling issue is the class composition of the Eminent Persons appointed to guide the process. By and large, they are drawn from the polished ranks of South Africa's middle class if not the elite. The rural poor and the agrarian working class are conspicuously absent. The assumption that the inclusion of traditional leaders covers their interests is false. Many of these institutions remain untransformed, misogynistic, patriarchal, and disconnected from the democratic impulses of the poor. In short, the selection of Eminent Persons leaves much to be desired. Perhaps their exclusion reflects the disorganisation of rural voices, but that is no excuse. The National Dialogue must reflect the totality of South African life. It is ostensibly aimed at navigating South Africa through deep and interconnected crises: a crisis of governance, a crisis of political legitimacy, social fragmentation, and economic despair. The critical question is whether this initiative is a bold act of national renewal or just another elite performance, obsessed with appearances while the nation quietly disintegrates. For the dialogue to have any integrity, it must begin with representative legitimacy. The poor, the unemployed, farmworkers, shack dwellers, and students still fighting financial exclusion cannot be passive spectators. The tragedy of South African democracy is that the people are so often spoken about, rarely spoken to, and rarely allowed to speak for themselves. Will this Dialogue include the real South Africa, or will it be another exercise in managerialism, dominated by technocrats and polite middle-class professionals? The timing of this dialogue is not neutral. It must be seen in light of the failure of the political class to resolve the legitimacy crisis that followed the 2024 general elections. The resulting Government of National Unity (GNU), a patchwork of ideological contradictions, has failed to inspire public trust. This dialogue, then, risks becoming a substitute theatre, a democratic therapy session designed to manage anxiety rather than resolve it. If so, this is not dialogue it is deflection. We must insist that the dialogue confronts structural questions: economic power, historical redress, and the unresolved land question. These matters cannot be handled delicately or deferred indefinitely. We must also address the scourge of bureaucratic unaccountability. Any serious conversation about building a capable and ethical State must begin with real consequence management for public servants who loot, obstruct, or undermine public trust. This national dialogue must not be pacifying; it must be revolutionary. It must be uncomfortable, radical, and people-driven. It must speak to power, not for it. It must demand a reckoning with the nation's unfinished business. We cannot afford a dialogue that dances around the contradictions of our society. We cannot whisper reform in a house already burning. The President may have opened the floor, but it is up to the people to seize the space not as polite guests but as the rightful architects of South Africa's democratic future. If this Dialogue becomes another elite jamboree, it will bury us deeper in disillusionment. But if it becomes a genuine space for democratic reimagination, a re-founding moment, then perhaps, just perhaps, the Republic may begin to heal. * Zamikhaya Maseti is a Political Economy Analyst with a Magister Philosophiae (M. PHIL) in South African Politics and Political Economy from the University of Port Elizabeth (UPE), now known as the Nelson Mandela University (NMU). ** The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of IOL, Independent Media or The African.
