Archives as a tool to support land restitution in South Africa

Archives have become acceptable evidence in the context of land restitution to prove events that occurred in the past during land dispossessions. Although researchers agree that archives are not always available and accessible when restitution claimants seek them due to loss, restrictions, and lack of intellectual control. In South Africa, the National Archives and Records Service of South Africa (NARSSA) is legally required to collect archives from governmental bodies in order to preserve the country's documentary heritage for future use. For example, the NARSSA Act (Act No. 43 of 1996), as amended, states that "public records identified in a disposal authority as having enduring value shall be transferred to an archives repository when they have been in existence for 20 years." The purpose of this study was to explore the use of archives as a tool to support the land restitution in South Africa with the view to establish whether the Commission on Restitution of Land Rights (CRLR) was sourcing evidence on land claims in accordance with the legal and policy framework. Snowball sampling was used to select restitution claimants, while purposive sampling was used to select CRLR project officers and NARSSA archivists. Interviews and document analysis were used to collect qualitative data from oral testimony. The findings indicate that South Africa's legal and policy framework for sourcing evidence for land claims fails to provide the public with effective and efficient access to and use of available archives in the NARSSA holdings. This is because archival legislation, such as the NARSSA Act, as well as other pieces of legislation and policy guidelines, are deafeningly silent on the use of archives as evidence. As a result, there are a large number of unresolved land claims to redress land dispossession injustices caused by missing information, language barriers, and archive restrictions. Therefore, the study concludes that if archives are not transferred to an archive repository for safekeeping and future use, and oral histories from marginalised communities are not collected and documented, project officials may dispute the validity of the land claims. As a result, South African citizens' land rights will be denied, as land grabbers will believe they are entitled to land that does not belong to them. While developing a legal and policy framework for the use of archives as evidence in land restitution, the NARSSA should consider digitising land restitution collections and making them freely accessible online.Information Scienc