Abstract Two approaches to private-law scholarship are critiqued in this article. The first problematic approach identified is that of ‘private-law purism’ that aims to segregate so-called ‘proper’ dominant private law from everything else. In its classical form, private-law purism involved purifying South African private law (which is largely built on Roman-Dutch foundations) from English influences. In its contemporary form, private-law purism involves shielding dominant South African private law from human rights. The key issue with classical and contemporary purism illustrated in this article is that purism is built on a racist ideology that promotes epistemicide, originally brought about by conquest. The second potentially problematic approach identified is ‘transformative private law’ that aims to push private law in a more egalitarian direction through infiltrating the discipline with human rights. Although transformative private law is a significant rebellion against purism, the epistemic roots of human rights are perhaps as Western as dominant private law. Transformative private law thus has a neo-colonial flair. For that reason, a fusion of human rights with dominant private law will not necessarily result in a decolonial system of private law. Instead of the purist and transformative approaches to the study of private law, it is argued that Africanisation through conceptual decolonisation – a critical study of private law through African philosophy, not limited to the invocation of ideas with legal authority – could be one way of ensuring a more forceful response to the colonial problems of dominant private law and human rights.

中文翻译：

---

对私法和人权的非殖民主义批判

摘要 本文批判了两种私法学术研究的方法。确定的第一个有问题的方法是“私法纯粹主义”，其目的是将所谓的“适当的”占主导地位的私法与其他一切分开。在其经典形式中，私法纯粹主义涉及从英国的影响中净化南非私法（主要建立在罗马-荷兰的基础上）。在当代形式中，私法纯粹主义涉及保护占主导地位的南非私法不受人权影响。本文阐述的古典和当代纯粹主义的关键问题是，纯粹主义建立在一种种族主义意识形态之上，该意识形态促进了最初由征服带来的杀戮知识。确定的第二个可能有问题的方法是“变革性私法”，旨在通过将人权渗透到纪律中来推动私法朝着更加平等的方向发展。尽管变革性私法是对纯粹主义的重大反叛，但人权的认识根源可能与占主导地位的私法一样西方。因此，变革性的私法具有新殖民主义的气息。出于这个原因，人权与占主导地位的私法的融合不一定会导致私法的非殖民化体系。与私法研究的纯粹主义和变革性方法不同，有人认为通过概念去殖民化的非洲化——通过非洲哲学对私法的批判性研究，