After the referendum of the white population in South Africa on 2 November 1983 had produced a large majority in support of the government, the regime focussed its political energies on finding ways of imposing its constitutional scheme on the black majority.
Immediately after the referendum a Cabinet Committee met to discuss strategy in relation to constitutional developments. According to press reports two concerns dominated government thinking: ensuring that a section of the Coloured and Indian communities are drawn into the segregated tricameral parliament; and finding ways of containing, within the political structure of apartheid, the political demands of Africans outside the bantustans.
Resistance to these plans was evident, in particular in the growth of support for the United Democratic Front (UDF) and in a successful campaign for a boycott of elections of local councils in African townships outside the bantustans, held at the end of November.
In the referendum of whites 76 per cent of those eligible to take part voted. Of those, 66 per cent answered 'Yes' in response to the question of whether they favoured the implementation of the Constitution Act passed during the 1983 Parliamentary session. The 'No' votes were 33.5 per cent with 0.5 per cent spoilt papers.
While the pattern of opinion among whites was complex in certain respects, the result was a clear expression by the white community of support for policies which entrench and maintain apartheid. During the campaign, while government spokesmen presented the proposals as reforms, the limitation of the reforms were stressed. On repeated occasions they emphasised that the new constitution would preserve white domination; that the new constitution was not a step towards integration; that the Group Areas Act would be retained and if necessary forcefully applied; and that the new parliament would have no place for representation of Africans who would have to exercise political rights beyond the local level through the bantustans.
The UDF made no specific call on white voters concerning the referendum, on the grounds that it rejected the whole process leading up to it. In a statement the UDF asserted that 'an acceptable and truly democratic constitution can only be worked out in an atmosphere which is free of fear, mistrust and harassment of one section of the population by another. That includes the release of all political prisoners, the unbanning of the banned and the return of all those who have been forced into exile'.
Along with other organisations the UDF was active in campaigning for a boycott of the elections to the Community Councils and the new local councils being set up in African townships outside the bantustans, under the Black Local Authorities Act. The new local authorities have more powers than the Community Councils, but they are still ultimately subject to the Department of Cooperation and Development, and lack a sound financial basis. In addition they are to take over powers to allocate and regulate accommodation in the townships, powers which would give them a crucial role in administering the system of influx control.
Opposition to the elections was based on a number of considerations, but primarily on the grounds that the local authority structures being set up were part of the whole political system designed to divide the black majority and perpetuate apartheid. Apart from the UDF, opposition came from a wide range of other organisations, including the Azanian People's Organisation and the Soweto Committee of Ten, as well as major independent trade union organisations.
The election results confirmed the rejection of the councils, particularly in the main urban centres. In Soweto 10.3 per cent of registered voters voted, and 11.6 per cent in Cape Town.
