Transcript: “We Can Design Different”: Law, Exclusion, and Racial Justice, with Pheona Matovu
Host: Jen Ang
Quote: Pheona Matovu
At least at this point in time, I’m not quite sure that I would put equality in the same sentence with law.
Jen Ang
Hello and welcome to the Lawmanity podcast where we explore the complex relationship between law and activism and discuss the different ways that law can oppress people but can also lead to real social change.
I’m Jen Ang, a human rights lawyer and activist based in Scotland and your host on the Lawmanity podcast.
This week we are speaking to activist and legend Pheona Matovu. Pheona is the co-founder of award-winning social enterprise Radiant and Brighter community interest company, a leading voice on culture, ethnic diversity and inclusion. Radiant and Brighter work with organisations and their leadership across Scotland to reflect and review their systems, structures, and policies. The organisation has developed diversity training, inclusion, anti-racism, and intercultural competence programmes, working with public, private, and third sector organisations.
Pheona is also a Women’s Enterprise Scotland role model ambassador and board member of the Productivity Institute and also an Associate Director for Common Purpose and has been involved in structural change work with several steering groups across Scotland. Pheona is furthermore a fellow member of the National Advisory Council for Women and Girls alongside me, and – as if she needed to be any busier – a PhD student at the University of Glasgow where she is pursuing research in anti-racism practice.
Welcome, Pheona, to the podcast. I’m so excited that you’re here with me today.
Pheona Matovu
Thank you, thank you. And with that introduction, I’m about to get through the roof. “Legend” – I don’t know if anybody has ever called me “legend” before, so thank you!
Jen Ang
I know, I know it’s always difficult to be introduced, isn’t it? But genuinely, I’m so pleased that you found the time to speak to me this week. I think it’s often the case when you work alongside other people, as we do on the National Advisory Council, I always wish that I had more time to actually ask you things like the questions we’ll go through today and never seems the right time. So this podcast was a great excuse to basically take a little of your time!
So, Pheona, today’s questions are all about the relationship between law and activism from your perspective as an activist, but someone who’s also now researching and teaching in this role. And the first question is a really big one: so do you feel that the law works equally for you or for your community, however you choose to define community, and why or why not?
Pheona Matovu
I don’t think, at least at this point in time, I’m not quite sure that I would put “equality” in the same sentence with “law”. I think the law is there to do something else other than equality.
So my work is with adversely racialised communities, people who experience exclusion from systems, from processes, primarily. But I also work, of course, with organisations looking at what policies they can put in place. And, in my research, one of the areas, of course, that I do touch on is the human rights, which obviously come from the law about discrimination against people on the basis of colour. Now, when we think about where it started, where human rights started, we’ve come so far it’s barely recognisable that it had anything to do with racism. And so I think the law is, I don’t know, it just, it leaves you in a place where should we be doing something different? Should the law be rethought? It feels like we keep adding layers to either dilute equality or increase power for those that hold power.
So I wouldn’t say it works. I think it does what the system wants it to do, which is often around exclusion. I understand that it is important to have the law, of course, but I don’t think it has been designed equitably in order to achieve equity.
Jen Ang
I like how you framed that idea that the law is working as it’s designed to, but that sometimes the design is in order to exclude, actually.
I just wondered, can you give examples maybe from your own activism, or the work of Radiant and Brighter even, of places where the law isn’t working to equally protect people, or, where the law, it feels like, is unequally excluding people from important things?
Pheona Matovu
So I have worked over a period of 17 years with people who seek refuge and who seek asylum. And one of the elements around asylum seeking, of course we know that the Convention expects that people should be protected if they’re seeking asylum. However, what we know is that when people are seeking asylum, they are expected to go to court to present their case, because the law stipulates that they have to present a case. But when you think about people who are presenting the case, they are already operating from a position of being disempowered just by putting them in a position where they have to express themselves by law rather than express themselves by the experiences that they have. What does that do to society? What does that teach us? That asylum seekers or people who are seeking asylum – I don’t even like the language “asylum seeker” – but people who are seeking asylum, it says to us that they should be dealt with by the law, when in fact we should be dealing with them on the basis of humanity and dignity. And so if you even begin to question that then people, of course, will respond with the law. This is what the law stipulates, this is what you should do. But is that what we want for humanity?
But that’s just one example. I could spend a whole day giving you examples here, you know that. But for me that is painful. It’s critical that we rethink. Why would you put somebody who is going to tell their story of perhaps by having been raped, having been beaten, having been damaged by war, to actually go into the courts to express themselves and be judged by law? How can you judge a situation so dire with the law? You know, that’s just one example.
Jen Ang
Yeah, no, absolutely a powerful question. And when you describe the situation that people are put into in those real-life terms, it makes it so much clearer or starker what you mean by, you know, the law isn’t necessarily designed for the protection of people, even if that’s what it’s supposed to do on the tin. Absolutely.
And I guess that leads really nicely onto my next question, which is for you, is the law a barrier or is it a tool in the struggle to achieve greater equality for people in communities who are marginalised and disadvantaged? Or is it maybe both?
Pheona Matovu
My experience is that it’s more of a barrier. It can enable, but it is more of a barrier. And that’s not because it’s the law. It’s because I think we need to reconsider what the law does. It’s in what it does, not in what it is. What it is can be changed. We can rethink, we can remodel, we can redesign. We must consider that when these laws were put in place, perhaps the people that should have been in the rooms were not in the rooms. And so at the point of design, at the point of where the thinking was happening, there wasn’t enough critical thinking perhaps around equity. I do know I’m not a master of the law, I have very little understanding of law in how it operates and how it’s designed, because I’m not a lawyer, but I am aware that women were not even allowed to be lawyers for a while, I believe. And so if the very people that have to adhere to the law are not in the room, what is being designed and who is it being designed for and for what? So it’s in the design that there is a fault and therefore it creates barriers, it creates barriers where we are seeking to be a society that’s engaging. So here in Scotland, one of the key statements is “Scotland welcomes refugees”, right? Another statement here in Glasgow is “People make Glasgow” and we know that Glasgow is made of very many migrant communities. But those statements do not mean anything when you try to get into a system that says, hang on a minute, we don’t know who you are, we don’t understand you, and it pushes back. And so the law can do good and it perhaps has done good in some areas, but I think in the design of it, we need to rethink that, to make it do the good that it should. So it’s not that I have an issue with the law. I’m a very law-abiding person, by the way, in saying that, maybe I’ve been conditioned to do that. So, I’m one of those people that are very cautious of the law. However, one lives in conflict with keeping the law whilst knowing that it does not meet the needs of those that it should, it should protect, it should look after, it should engage and consider the way in which people experience it, particularly those that are most excluded and marginalised. But I don’t think it does that enough or even at all, in certain cases.
Jen Ang
When you’re talking about envisioning better or doing better, what for you might be the role of lawyers and, the legal system in relation to social justice movements?
Pheona Matovu
I think role of lawyers should be to uphold integrity and humanity. But to do that, I also understand that the system that is in place may not necessarily allow for that. So I think lawyers who uphold the two will come against the system. But I think, I assume that is what they would have thought… a number of them, maybe many of them would have thought, I’m going there to, you know, to uphold the law, but not against people who, who perhaps need it the most. And so I think the role should be integrity, should be humanity. But to do that there must be meaningful engagement and working with people that are most affected in ways that do not benefit the rest of us and others in the society. There is an assumption that if we exclude people, sometimes it feels like within the system it seeks to exclude to create something, but that something does not benefit any of us. And so I think the role of lawyers is to perhaps take a path that creates understanding and awareness that we can do different, that we can create a different society. And by doing that we can create different laws, we can create different. We don’t have to stick to what we’ve got. When we want it changed, we will change it. And you will see suddenly when it affects people in a way that they are impacted, the people in power, the law changes, amazingly, it does. So we can change it, we can redesign it. I think lawyers, at this stage, when I say at this stage in this generation, I should think that we will, in one way or another, have been affected by a section of the law that doesn’t work. And so we can do different. We can see different, we can design different.
Jen Ang
Amazing. And again, you’re just stepping into my final huge question, which I guess is what does different look like? But the question is this: so what does justice look like for you and for your community? What is a better version of where we are now?
Pheona Matovu
That’s a big question. Very big question. I couldn’t possibly say that I know. What I can say is that I know how that could be achieved. And even then, maybe I think I know, but I think for it to look how we want it to look, it requires engagement for my community, for the communities that I work with, for the local communities I engage with. People who are affected by poverty, people who are affected by migration, people who are affected.
When you think, for example, about migration, right. People in these Western countries who can travel to every part of the world do not actually stop to think that they can travel to every part of the world many times. There is sometimes an assumption that the immigration law works for everybody the same way. But I know as a Black woman who had to come from Africa, I understand that the hoops that you have to jump through to even just go and pay for an education, even that takes everything out of you. It takes everything out of your family, and they can choose to say, no, you are not coming. And guess what? Your money is lost. And that’s not just a little bit of money. That’s thousands of money, usually. And so I think we need to redesign in a way that we are engaging everybody in a way that is healthy and dignified for everybody. And I don’t think that that’s happening. So I think we need to consider bringing other people to the table, perhaps even those people being the core elements and the core designers of what we are looking at, particularly if it is going to affect them the most. So I think if the law affects – just an example, if the law affects children and we are adults and we are making the decisions, every single decision we might think we know, but we were children many years ago. The children right now are in a different generation. So it is important to see from the experience of young people, of children, before we start making assumptions and deciding. An example, my children, they couldn’t care less about WhatsApp; they use TikTok. If you are making and designing the law around media, the danger of thinking we’re going to use WhatsApp and Facebook and, you know, not many of them are on there, when actually we should be looking at the platforms where they are. But how do you know the platforms where they are when you are not even involved? And even if you knew the platforms, how would you know what they do on there? And so when we’re talking about the migration law, I understand every country can do its own thing, but is that what we want for the world? Is that what we want for society?
So I may not have the answer of how the law could look or what it should look like. What I think I could perhaps add to is how it’s done.
Jen Ang
So I love that answer. I love that answer. It’s not for me to tell you what it should be, but I can tell you how we find out. I know from your work as well that those are your values, and that’s very true to how you work and what’s important to you. So I love that you explain that to the audience very clearly.
We’re on to our final final question. There will definitely be people listening to this podcast or this series of podcasts, people who might want to be an activist one day, who are looking at what you’ve accomplished. They might even want to be you, and then they wonder how you get there.
So the last question is, what advice would you have, for someone who wants to pursue the kind of career that you have, or someone who might be a younger version of you? Like, what would you tell them about what, you’ve learned on this journey?
Pheona Matovu
First and foremost, I think that… one of the things that happens when you take a challenging journey or when you get to the age I am, which is, for those who will be listening, I made 50 this year. So can I just say, when I talk about making 50, I speak about it with, with appreciation. I know that people usually are cautious about their age. But just before I made 50, a few people I knew personally left and they’re no longer with us and I became more appreciative and I started to think I’m glad that I am here at 50. So that’s why I have made a big deal of it than probably anybody else I know!
But when you get to the age I am, you realise all that all the while it was okay to just be you, just be you. And also, and I completely and totally believe, it’s important to have integrity and to be authentic. Now some of the things that we, that I’ve had to be part of, they’re great things, they’re amazing things… there is a stage at which you need to know who you are and make decisions based on what you believe in. If you don’t focus on understanding and knowing yourself and the values, or you don’t get the opportunity to, because of circumstances or situations or the environments we find ourselves in, which is which… it’s difficult to know who you were when everything is screaming at you and trying to make you somebody else and to be who you were when you have to… you know, try and work within an environment that does not perhaps accept you or… but I think it’s okay to remove yourself from situations, people, environments that seek to fix you when you, when you are okay.
So I would say be you. If you don’t know who you are, take time to know who you were. Allow yourself to just know yourself and be you. And at this age, it’s something that I am learning still, but it’s a very powerful tool because you don’t have to try and be somebody else. You don’t have to try and fight things a certain way. Some people fight a certain way, others fight in different ways, others don’t fight at all. Others do not have the tools and what they need to fight. And it’s okay. It’s just okay. Just okay.
Jen Ang
Wow. Thank you for that deep and powerful advice. I’m still kind of taking it in myself and I think those are hard fought lessons. But I also think your advice would stand as, you know, a sound guide for anyone at any age who might be listening. I certainly wish I had someone like you saying that to me at an earlier stage. And I will probably listen back to this as well from time to time when I need that comfort.
So I just want to thank you so much for coming on and speaking to me, sharing, your perspective, but also that wisdom.
Pheona Matovu
Thank you so much. Thank you for having me. You know I will come to anything you’re doing. Jen. I like you so I like the way you work, I like the values you hold, I like the way you value people. And so, thank you for asking me. I’m delighted to take part.
Jen Ang
And that’s a wrap. Thank you, our lovely listeners, for joining us for another episode of the Lawmanity podcast.
If you wanted to learn more about the struggle for racial justice in Britain and specifically Scotland, as well as actions that you can take, particularly important in the current climate, to practise anti-racism in your workplace, social spaces and in public spaces, have a look at our further resources and suggestions in the episode notes.
And my dear listeners, I can’t believe it, but this episode takes us to the end of our first year-long series of the Lawmanity podcast. We’re taking a break over the summer to rest, take stock, and evaluate what we’ll be doing with Lawmanity when we return in the autumn.
Meanwhile, wishing you also a very good break. And if you love today’s episode, please do still hit the like and subscribe buttons and share our episodes with friends and colleagues who might enjoy learning a little bit about how law really works in practice and how it can be used to make the world a brighter, better place.
The Lawmanity podcast is co-produced by me, your host Jen Ang, and by the brilliant and talented Natalia Uribe. Shout out to Halina Refai for mentoring us through our first year of this incredible project. And thanks also to Amanda Amaeshi on graphics and socials. The music you’ve been listening to is always on the Move by Musicians in Exile, a Glasgow based music project led by people seeking refuge in Scotland.
Thanks so much for tuning in today. We hope you enjoyed listening and see you soon!
Additional resources for this episode are linked below:
- Radiant and Brighter: https://radiantandbrighter.com
- Radiant and Brighter Anti-Racism Journal: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Radiant-Brighter-Antiracism-Journal-Reflect/dp/1036954005
