How Sanda's death uncovers the Belgian racism problem
picture by Yassine Atari
When after countless unsuccessful attempts it becomes completely impossible to ignore the monster any longer, Belgium admits - never unanimously and always reluctantly - that racism ‘might be’ a factor. It should be one of the first grounds to look at when people of color fall victim to any kind of violence by white people, as racism is an inherent element of the society we live in. But unfortunately, it has to be repeated over and over again, to the point of exhaustion, that racism is a structural problem, that this country is built on and maintained by racist mechanisms that play an important role in, among others, the labor market, housing market and in education. Every so often a research or incident comes to surface that demonstrates this, to which - almost always the same - people react angry and indignant. Every so often people of color also relive their own trauma because of this. But racism itself remains untouched and actively protected. Racism makes Belgium go round.
In an interview on August 10, member of the Christian-democratic political party CD&V and current Secretary of State for Asylum and Migration, Sammy Mahdi, said about the Reuzegom case: "I don't see why the word racism should be brought up again." It was already known by then that a video surfaced of the members of Reuzegom harassing a Black man who was begging for some money and sang to him the well-known colonial and racist song “Cut off hands, the Congo belongs to Sanda Dia/ to us”. A rather clear indication of at least anti-blackness within the group and an additional reason to investigate racism as a motive in the murder of Sanda. "I don't see why" is a dishonest statement, "I don't want to see" sounds more sincere. Furthermore, complaining about racism being “brought up again” places the problem - as always - with those who dare to mention racism, not with racism itself.
Sadly, this is also something that Sanda's friends, Sven Mary (the lawyer who represents father Ousmane Dia) and the opposing party seem to agree about: racism will not be discussed.
PERSONAL VERSUS COLLECTIVE GRIEVING PROCESS
At the end of July, Sanda's friends create an Instagram page to commemorate him. They set the tone with their very first, still unadjusted post. They find it important to make it explicit that racism is not a factor in the Reuzegom case. The caption underneath the first photo of Sanda reads: “Furthermore, we, his best friends, would like to emphasize that this is neither a race issue nor a plea against student hazing. The main goal certainly remains to remember our fantastic friend. ”
From interviews with those best friends, it is clear how white Sanda's close group of people were. This is merely an observation, not a reproach, but an observation important to make. It partly explains the topics his friends choose to highlight in their public statements. These topics are about processing their hurt and striving for justice as part of a personal grieving process, but the focus is explicitly shifted away from racism or justice on a collective level. On top of that, words such as "Furthermore, we, his best friends..." seem to be used to legitimize their position and statements and instrumentalize the friendship. I think back on how many people of color deny racist experiences (often as a survival strategy), so it doesn't seem inconceivable to me at all that white people don't recognize racism, even when their best friend is a victim of it.
The latest Instagram post shows a screenshot of The New York Times article with the headline “A Black Belgian Student Saw a White Fraternity as His Ticket. It Was His Death ”. While the article in the title already makes a link between Sanda's skin color and his presence in a white fraternity, a caption under the post is carefully limited to: “Sanda's story has now reached America. It is even front page news. Unfortunately, there is still no view of JusticeforSanda. (…) ”. Again, despite the referenced article that talks about precisely that, no connection is made with racism itself. The focus is on reaching a major American newspaper and the prominent position of the article.
Sanda's friends contribute in determining the narrative and at the same time their personal relationships with him form a buffer against possible criticism. These two elements (determining the narrative and the buffer) make it difficult to create space for the collective grieving process that racism brings forward. A collective grieving process, primarily and mainly for people of color who know what it is like to be in a completely white environment and what kind of toxicity that can create. It painfully brings us closer together in a place where Sanda's friends never had to meet him. Not wanting to mention racism while it is clearly present is saying that people of color cannot be part of the grieving process, which implies a disregard of Sanda's suffering in its entirety, even if he himself was not (yet) hyper aware of it. Sanda's death was a tragedy, the mere idea of commemoration rather than far-reaching justice as the main goal would be a second tragedy and shows a blindness to other possible victims of color who move in similar circles. Such racism-denying narratives stand in the way of forceful condemnation and necessary social change.
FROM LAWYER TO JUDGE AND THE LAWS IN BETWEEN: THE LEGAL SYSTEM ALSO UPHOLDS RACISM
Lawyer Sven Mary stated: “(…) we will not make the claim that Sanda died because of his skin color. The file is already filled with crimes. ” Why won't “we” do that? When does a lawyer decide that there are enough other crimes to build a case around when representing a victim or a victim’s family? Why don't "we" at least ask that racist motives will be investigated? His statement reminds me of lawyer Vic Van Aelst who defended the Turkish woman Songül Koç, survivor of the racist attack by Van Themsche who shot a Black woman and a white toddler who was in her care dead in 2006. In a television interview leading up to the trial, Van Aelst expressed that the trial was not about racism. In a later interview, after Koç hired another lawyer because of his statement, Van Aelst said: “Songül Koç also knew very well that I did not want to make a trial about racism out of this, that I do not think that is the main motive at all for the murders. But you feel that the case is being blown up from all sides, just to turn it into a racist murder. ” It was in Koç's interest to include racism as the main motive for the attack. Still, as her lawyer, Van Aelst failed to represent those interests and to place them above his own “will”. Similarly, Mary fails to transcend his own reticence and lack of knowledge about racism.
The inadequacy of the legal system begins long before lawyers make such nonracism statements. It starts in auditoriums where racism is rarely, if ever, a topic in the discussion of different legal subjects in which it could be relevant and in the law schools that form the basis of Belgian law studies. It can also be felt in the laws that are made, such as a lax, almost useless anti-racism law or the existence of, for example, the racist anti-burqa and anti-niqab law created on the basis of Islamophobia. A study by economist Prof. Dr. Bielen (UHasselt, 2019) shows that suspects with an Islamic name are more often sentenced than suspects with a Western name in similar cases and that the chance of acquittal is three times lower. Racial (implicit) biases cannot be ruled out at any level of the legal system, not even in front of a judge. If lawyers themselves cannot even name racism, refuse to bring it inside the court room, we are even further away from home.
SHOWING TRUE COLOURS
That racism denial brings us to the question whether they, the friends and the lawyer, are in a position to make such statements in the first place. Can they (quickly enough) recognize racism from their position, which is based on whiteness? And if they cannot recognize racism, how much value can be attached to their statements about it?
The possible friendship or legal representation does not diminish the importance of “positioning” every person who takes up a role in the Reuzegom case. The statements made are not separate from the individuals, and the individuals are not separate from their background to which a social value is attached. People who are never at the receiving end and/or who have no significant expertise are not in the best position to speak about racism, and especially its absence. The person who dares to say publicly that he is no longer hiring women does not sound like the most appropriate person to talk about discrimination, let alone racism in particular. Racism is not about subjective opinions of those who are not affected by it, but is about objectively observable elements. The fact that best friends or a lawyer of the victim’s family claim that racism is not a factor says nothing about whether or not racism was indeed a factor. That they look at grass and call it purple doesn't make a meadow any less green.
FOREVER THE SUBALTERN
Repeated facts show that Sanda's skin color did indeed play a role in how he was treated. He was seen by the Reuzegom members as a Black person and therefore as lesser, someone who they could address with the n-word, who was inferior to white people and had to serve them. Three Reuzegom members are photographed in Ku Klux Klan outfit and then there is the previously mentioned video in which a Black man is subjected to racist violence. Racist behavior was part of the Reuzegom culture. How could this inhumane way of looking at Black people not have played an element in how they viewed Sanda, firstly Black before student, even though he moved around in their white environment?
Those various facts show that the Reuzegom members see Black people as subhumans. Why then, on that basis, would it be far-fetched reasoning that they made Sanda suffer more - consciously or unconsciously - than the other pledges? If Sanda is a subhuman to them, why treat him humanly? A subhuman can handle more humiliation and torture, right? There are several researches on racial bias in the medical world regarding the pain assessment of Black patients and the racist bias that they can tolerate more pain which leads to poor or no treatment. Why would a bunch of white undergraduates with a history of racist violence be immune to this bias?
And yet, still, racism cannot be mentioned. The fear of racism, the word, seems far more greater than that of racism, the power apparatus.
MORE CONCERNS ABOUT INTERNATIONAL REPUTATION THAN RACISM ITSELF
Only when the racism that is widespread here makes international news, it briefly seems like it is being taken a little more seriously. After the The New York Times article, I hoped at least that the racist violence of the Reuzegom members would be a more important element in the conversations. But the national articles that followed were mostly about how those Americans linked racism to the case, not about how racism is indeed a significant factor.
"The New York Times sees Sanda Dia's death as a symbol of racism" (De Standaard). The New York Times sees, but as of yet, we do not. "According to the newspaper, the death of Sanda Dia is part of a bigger problem in our country: cultural divisions, racism and extremism." (Het Nieuwsblad). According to The New York Times, but as of yet, not according to us. Het Nieuwsblad goes even further and accuses the newspaper of “playing that alleged race card”, but it is especially those who do not want to talk about racism, who use that race card as a means to silence victims of racism. "Belgium is gradually gaining the reputation of a country where racism and neo-Nazism are tolerated." (De Morgen). Racism is only mentioned when talking about the stain on Belgium’s international reputation, not in relation to its victims in this very country.
Belgian society is inherently racist, the Belgian legal system is inherently racist, the Belgian academic world is inherently racist, Belgian media is inherently racist. Only when Belgium finally decides to take racism itself seriously and to tackle it in a profound, active way at those many levels will Sanda and other victims of racial violence before and after him know justice. Everything else, including in court, will be theatrics.
published on De Wereld Morgen (original language: Dutch)