Special Committee on begins work for 1972

http://www.aluka.org/action/showMetadata?doi=10.5555/AL.SFF.DOCUMENT.nuun1971_02

Use of the Aluka digital library is subject to Aluka’s Terms and Conditions, available at http://www.aluka.org/page/about/termsConditions.jsp. By using Aluka, you agree that you have read and will abide by the Terms and Conditions. Among other things, the Terms and Conditions provide that the content in the Aluka digital library is only for personal, non-commercial use by authorized users of Aluka in connection with research, scholarship, and education.

The content in the Aluka digital library is subject to copyright, with the exception of certain governmental works and very old materials that may be in the public domain under applicable law. Permission must be sought from Aluka and/or the applicable copyright holder in connection with any duplication or distribution of these materials where required by applicable law.

Aluka is a not-for-profit initiative dedicated to creating and preserving a digital archive of materials about and from the developing world. For more information about Aluka, please see http://www.aluka.org Special Committee on Apartheid begins work for 1972

Alternative title Notes and Documents - United Nations Centre Against ApartheidNo. 1/71 Author/Creator United Nations Centre against Apartheid Contributor Farah, Abdulrahim Abby Publisher Department of Political and Security Council Affairs Date 1971-01-00 Resource type Reports Language English Subject Coverage (spatial) Coverage (temporal) 1971 Source Northwestern University Libraries Description Text of the statment by the Chairman of the Special Committee, H.E. Mr. Abdulrahim Abby Farah (Somalia). The Anglican Dean of Johannesburg - Latest Victim of the "Terrorism Act." Format extent 11 page(s) (length/size)

http://www.aluka.org/action/showMetadata?doi=10.5555/AL.SFF.DOCUMENT.nuun1971_02

http://www.aluka.org UNIT ON APARTHEID

UNIT ON APARTHEID DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL AND SECURITY COUNCIL AFFAIRS NOTES AND DOCUMENTS* January 1971 SPECIAI kNorfl-" rvity LKary APRP 2 ' 1/2 C'WITTPEE ON AP R.U D BEGINS WORK FJR 1971 TEXT OF STATEMENT BY THE CHAIRMAN OF THE SPECIAL COWMITTEE,-H.E. MR. ABDULRAHIM ABBY FARAH (SOMALTA), JANUARY 19, 1971 THE ANGLICAN DEAN OF JOHANNESBURG - LATEST VICTIM OF THE "TERRORISM ACT" No. 1/71 *All material in these notes and documents may be freely reprinted. Acknowledgement, together with a copy of the publication containing the reprint, would be appreciated.

SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON APARTHEID BEGINS WORK FOR 1971 The Special Committee on A partheid. now with an expanded membership and broader terms of reference, met on 19 January 1971, and elected the following officers: Chairman: H.E. Abdulrahim Abby Farah (Somalia) Rapporteur: Mr. Uddhav Deo Bhatt (Nepal) Chairman of the Sub-Committee on Petitions: Mr. Ahmed Cucif (Algeria) Chairman of the Sub-Committee on Information on Apartheid: Mr. Yeop Adlan-Rose (Malaysia) (Election of vice-chairmen was deferred to a later meeting.) The Committee's membership was expanded in pursuance of a decision by the General Assembly at the last session. It now consists of: Algeria, Ghana, Guatemala, Guinea, Haiti, Hungary, India, Malaysia, Nepal, Nigeria, Philippines, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Trinidad and Tobago and the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic. (It has not yet been possible to fill two more seats allocated to Western Europe.) The mandate of the Special Committee was revised by the General Assembly at its last session. The Committee has been requested "constantly to review all aspects of the policies of apartheid in South Africa and its international repercussions, including: "a. legislative, administrative and other racially discriminatory measures in South Africa and their effects; "b. repression of opponents of aprtheid; "c. efforts by the South African Government to extend its inhuman policies of apartheid beyond the borders of South Africa; and "d. ways and means of promoting concerted international action to secure the elimination of apartheid."

- 2 - TEXT OF STATEMENT BY THE CHAIRMAN OF THE SPECIAL COMITTEE ON APARTHEID, H.E. Mr. Abdulrahim Abby Farah (Somalia), 19 January 1971 (The following is the text of a statement made by the Chairman of the Special Committee on his election.) Cn being elected to chair this Committee for the third successive year, I am conscious not only of the honour that you have accorded my country and myself, but also of the heavy responsibilities that are involved. My own contribution to the task thatilies ahead will be facilitated by the fact that my Government is totally committed to the struggle against prtheid. It does not entertain any illusions that the basic human rights and the political rights of the non-white population of South Africa will be secured by compromises in the stand taken by the United Nations in. its campaign against apartheid. That campaign has not been as successful as we would wish, for reasons which are familiar to you all. But my Government believes that it was never more necessary than at the present time to continue, with unabated vigour, the task of keeping the question of apartheid before the conscience of the world, of providing assistance to the oppressed, and continuing to search for ways and means of combating apartheid. The alternative is to abandon the oppressed majority in South Africa to their enslavement by the white minority. The months ahead will be important ones for this Committee. This is the International Year for Action to Combat Racism and Racial Discrimination - a campaign in which the question of apartheid must necessarily figure largely. The seven resolutions on a arheid passed by the General Assembly during its twenty- fifth session make clear our goals and responsibilities. It is for us now to draw up an action programme which will enable us to realize them. The advocates of a dialogue with South Africa .mong other matters, we have to consider what we. must say to those who advocate a dialogue with South Africa, who maintain that the United Nations should persuade the racist regime there to change its policies through contact and not by ostracism and those who object to any form of coercive measures arguing that the United Nations should suit its actions to its capabilities. Cn my part I would submit that these are the rationalizations of those who profit from the current political order, and of those who are on the threshold of exploiting the South African market of human misery. The representatives of South Africa's main trading partners speak of United Nations' proposals for remedying the situation proposals carefully formulated and made within the provisions of the

- 3 Charter - as if they themselves were free from the obligations imposed by the Charter. They speak as though they are unaware that the capacity of the United Nations and its aims and objectives are set by its Members. If some Members refuse to see the responsibilities of membership of the United Nations, it is for no other reason than narrow self-interest. On the question of dialogue - and this is very important - I should like to be shown one instance over the past 2C years where the white minority Government of South Africa has indicated that it was prepared to enter into discussion on its apartheid policies with anyone critical of them. Not even South Africa's main trading partners, despite their close association with the regime, have been able to persuade it to abandon its racist policies. Basis for a meaningful dialogue I believe that when we speak of dialogue, the most important consideration must be whether or not the possibility exists of a dialogue between the white minority and the black majority of South Africa. Without this, dialogue between the international community and South Africa is meaningless. In other words no dialogue on race relations within South Africa can have any practical meaning unless it is predicated on the truth that all men are entitled without discrimination to equal political, social and other human rights. The non-white people of South Africa have asked for a dialogue on this basis and the whites have rejected these just demands. Presence of black diplomats no breakthrough South Africa's so-called outward policy is sometimes cited as a sign of a thaw in her attitudes to race relations. But the handful of black diplomats who are now being welcomed in Pretoria are there for one reason alone: the mutual benefits of trade with South Africa and aid to their countries. In their official capacity they are able to enjoy some of the courtesies and decencies reserved for the "white baas", but what happens to their compatriots who wish to visit the country as ordinary travellers? They are either refused entry or, if allowed in, are given the same offensive treatment as that reserved for South Africa's non-white population. Those who claim that the presence of black diplomats is a breakthrough in South Africa's racial policies - are either deluding themselves or are deliberately trying to spread a smokescreen over the realities of the situation. The example of the United States My delegation believes that in dealing with artheid we can profit from other examples of entrenched racial discrimination. Those who say that dialogue can be effective in ending racism in South Africa should take into account the experience of the United States. Although the United States constitution accepts as basic tenets the equality of man and the equal rights of citizens, for many decades after the abolition of slavery the Federal Government was unable to persuade a large proportion of the people to abandon an oppressive and inhuman racism. It was only when Civil Rights legislation began to be introduced and enforced initially by coercive measures that meaningful progress was made. Dialogue nothing more than wishful thinking The South African problem, as we know, has much greater dimensions, since apartheid is based on a philosophy of government held by the ruling Nationalist Party. The most charitable thing that one can say to those who counsel dialogue with South Africa is that they are indulging in wishful thinking. In most cases, as in the case for example of a Foreign Minister who said recently that South African money has no colour, it would be nearer the mark to say that they have no compunction about investing in the misery of millions of their fellow men. Indifference to African aspirations One of the ironies of our present situation is that many of those who recommend dialogue on apartheid with South Africa are not even prepared to take part in a dialogue on the question within the United Nations. As in previous sessions, South Africa's main trading partners, such as the United States, the United Kingdom and France, refused to contribute to the debate on the question. They did not come forward with a single suggestion: yet, they were ready with their usual negative criticism when resolutions had been passed. These same States are not even prepared to sit on this Comnittee or on its related Committee - the Committee of Twenty-four on decolonization. In boycotting this Committee since its inception and in walking out of the Committee of Twenty-four, these Powers have displayed indifference and insensitivity to African needs and aspirations. This attitude is calculated to-destroy whatever trust some Africans may still hold in the sincerety of those Powers towards questions affecting the rights and interests of black populations under white minority rule. A busy year ahead As I said earlier, this will be an important and busy year for our Committee. Our mandate, in brief, is to increase our efforts to accumulate and sift the evidence that indicts atheid as a crime against humanity; to disseminate this information as widely as possible; to consult with all those inside and outside the United Nations, who are concerned to bring about justice in South Africa, on the most effective means of carrying on the anti-apartheid campaign; and to formulate appropriate recommendations for the consideration of the General Assembly. My delegation believes that it will be particularly important to coordinate our efforts with those of the specialized agencies, regional organizations and non- governmental organizations which are playing a vital role in changing the climate of opinion on apartheid from apathy to action with consequent repercussions in South Africa itself.

THE ANGLICAN DEAN CF JCHANNESBURG LATEST VICTIM CF THE "TERRORISM ACT" (Cn January 27, 1971, the Chairman of the Special Committee on Aprtheid, H.E. I'ir. Abdulrahim Abby Farah (Somalia), expressed the indigantion of the Committee at the detention of the Anglican Dean of Johannesburg, the Very Referend Gonville Aubrey fFrenchBeytagh, under the notorious Terrorism Act. He declared: "This use against men of faith and peace of the provisions of an Act ostensibly passed to combat terrorism is a new proof of the hypocrisy of the South African regime which resorts to describing as a terrorist any person willing to raise his voice in support of freedom and human dignity." The Committee requested the Unit on Apartheid to publicize details on "this latest brutality of the Pretoria regime." The Dean was charged on January 28 with assisting the African National Congress of South Africa and the Communist Party and released on a bail of 5,0CC Rand ($7,CO). He was ordered to hand over his British passport.) On the night of 20 January 1971, the South African Security Police arrested the Anglican Dean of Johannesburg, the Very Reverend Gonville Aubrey fFrench- Beytagh and detained him at the Security Police Headquarters in Pretoria. Earlier, eight detectives had searched his office in St. Mary's Cathedral in the heart of Johannesburg. The Bishop of Johannesburg, the Most Reverend Leslie Stradling told the press that night that the police had informed him that the Dean was being detained for the night. "They said he would be able to get legal advice but not before tomorrow morning." The next morning, however, it was disclosed that the Dean was being detained under the notorious Terrorism Act of 1967. Under this Act, the Security Police can hold the prisoner incommunicado with no access to family or lawyers or anyone else. Indeed, the police refused to permit the Bishop of Johannesburg to see the Dean in prison. On 21 January, the British embassy sent a note to the South African Government asking for facilities for visits by British consular officials to the Dean. The British consul was allowed to visit him the next day. Particular concern was expressed for the health of the Dean as he has heart trouble. When he was arrested he had no time to pick up the

-U tablets he had to take regularly. The police declined to give any reasons for the detention. Press reports indicated that the Dean may have assisted families of detained persons to receive donations from abroad. After widespread protests, the Dean was charged on January 28 and released on bail. §,ppopni of apaLrtheid Dean fFrench-Beytagh, aged 58, was born in Shanghai and carries a British passport. Educated in Britain, he has been engaged in church work in southern Africa for forty years. He had been Dean of Salisbury, Rhodesia, for ten years before arriving in South Africa in 1965. s Dean of Johannesburg he was outspoken in his opposition to aLpartheid. In 1966 he refused to say a prayer of thanksgiving at a church service for the South ifrican "republic" on its fifth anniversary, on the grounds that South Africa was not a "republic", a term defined as "common weal". He was a signatory of the "Christian Election Manifesto" and other denunciations of apartheid by clergymen. He sharply attacked Prime Minister Vorster for claiming that God was on the side of South Africa and declared: "God is not on the side of the Nationalist Party or any other Party. What really matters is whether the Nationalist Party or any other Party is on His side." He criticized the Dutch Reformed Church for its support of "the fiendish doctrine of apartheid." Gravely concerned over the inequities of apartheid, he criticized the malnutrition and the starvation in the Africa-i reserves and the forced removal of Africans to the "homelands". A week before his detention, he condemned the withdrawal of passports from a number of clergymen as a move by the totalitarian state to cut off some of the leaders of the opposition to racism. P rote sts aLgainst the detention The detention of the Dean evoked widespread protests. rn the night of the detention, prayers were said for him at a mass called hurriedly at St. Mary's Cathedral at 11 p.m. Ch subsequent days, daily prayers were held for the Dean and the church bells rung at 1 p.m. at the Cathedral. At St. George's Cathedral in and the Anglican churches in Natal, bells were rung daily for the Dean. On 21 January, Mrs. , the Progressive Party Member of Parliament, called for an immediate explanation by the Minister of Police. She said: "According to reports the Minister of Police was not informed of the detention. It seems incredible that the Security Police apparently have the authority to act without consulting the Minister." Mr. S.J.M. Steyn, leader of the United Party in the Transvaal, said: "I have just returned from Britain, where criticism of South Africa has risen to a crescendo on apartheid and the neglect of the rule of law. A government truly concerned with the interests of South Africa will act openly in this matter and not resort to undercover methods." In London, the Reverend Canon L.J. Collins, President of the International Defence and bid Fund, said: "If, as stated, he is arrested because of his outspoken criticism of apartheid, the subject of police action against clergymen, and also, allegedly, for giving money to the families of detained people, it is yet another startling revelation of the attitudes of the South African Government. In no other country that calls itself both Christian and civilised would aid to the family of a detained person be considered a crime. "In South Africa, Africans and all those opposed to apartheid, can be detained without charge for indefinite periods. If, indeed, the Dean has been alleviating the financial burdens resulting from such detentions of breadwinners, and thus given both concrete and moral support to the distracted families, he has fulfilled his Christian duty." Spokesmen of the Anglican Church in Britain expressed deep concern. Bishop Trevor Huddleston said on January 21 that the Dean's detention was "a typical act of the state." He expressed the hope that the Church in South Africa would accept it as a warning that it had to take a firmer stand against ajpartheid.

- 8 Persecution of clergymen The detention of the Dean follows a series of attacks against clergymen in South kfrica, especially since the decision of the World Council of Churches to support anti-racialist movements. In Pugust 197c), the passport of an Anglican priest was withdrawn. In September, two nglican priests were ordered to leave the country. In January 1971, the Reverend Father Cosmas Desmond, a Catholic priest, was refused a passport to visit his parents in London. He had written a book, The Discarded People, about forced resettlement of Africans. !iso in January, the Reverend Dr. Markus Braun, a German Lutheran minister, was ordered to leave South .frica by the end of March. He had accompanied an .'frican colleague to a religious service at a Dutch Reformed Church. in nglican clergyman, the Reverend Dale White, disclosed that his passport had been withdrawn by the Security Police. The terror act Even more significant perhaps is the fact that the-Dean of Johannesburg is the first Christian priest detained under the Terrorism .ct under which numerous South Pfrican and Namibian opponents of apartheid have been detained and brutally tortured. Several have died in detention during the three and a half years since the 'ct was promulgated, including a prominent Moslem priest, Imam Abdullah Haron. (For details see "Notes and Documents", No. 18/7-, May 1970.) Portrait of the "Fighting Priest" The following is from an article on the Dean by Chris Day in the Rand Daily Mail of January 2', 1971: It would be true to say that the 'nglican Dean of Johannesburg, Gonville fFrench-Beytagh, is one cleric who wears his dog-collar without a leash. A controversial, irreverent and dishevelled figure, he has been loved and hated throughout Southern Africa since 1939 when he was ordained as a priest. His entry to the priesthood, like the man himself, was unconventional. In fact, it followed a bash on the head. His close friend, !lan Paton, who had much to do with his religious conversion, recalls: "I first met him in Johannesburg in 1935 when he was employed by a

- 9 mining equipment firm and doing a lot of work for Toe H. "In those days he had no formal religion but expressed himself through working for Toc H. "Walking through the Braamfontein subway, he was set upon by thugs who injured his face and jaw. He awoke in hospital and while lying there, he did a great deal of thinking and decided to become a priest. "Typical of the man, he wrote to the then Bishop of Johannesburg, Geoffrey Clayton, on a postcard announcing his intention. The Bishop sent for him and said: " 'I understand you want to become a priest?' The reply was 'I don't want to, but I think I ought to.' " Born in Shanghai of British parents (they were later divorced), he was educated in England and New Zealand and before his conversion had been a teacher, clerk and hobo. Ps a hobo, he chopped wood, picked fruit, sheared sheep, milked cows and trapped rabbits - all under the name of "The Tobb"... Serving in Grahamstown, Durban, Salisbury and Johannesburg, he became known as the "Fighting Priest" through his oftenexpressed stinging views on politics. One of the stormiest periods of his career was the 10 years he served as Dean of Salisbury. His frequent and virulent views on a wide range of topics earned him floods of abusive letters, particularly when he came out against U.D.I. Using the Press, television and the pulpit as his platforms, he criticised all forms of racial prejudice and said of U.D.I.: "If one man one vote is the only basis on which the Africans would co-operate fully in the Government, then I suppose it will have to be that." He was particularly harsh on the South African Government's apartheid policy... Since he became Dean of Johannesburg in 1965, he has often used the St. Mary's Cathedral parish magazine to air his views. In one article he stated: "Some people think I don't protest enough and others think I protest too much. "Just for the record I have jotted down a list of things

-- 10 -and people about which, and about whom, I am protesting 24 hours a day. My list is: "Apartheid, the United Party, bannings, Dr. Percy Yutar, F.M. radio, S.E.D. Brown, the Bantu Laws Amendment Act, tribal universities, separate development, Piet Meyer, the Security Branch, Bantu Education, Balthazar Johannes Vorster, detentions, Christian National Education, Frank Waring, the Wemmer Hostel, P.C. Pelser, Current iffairs, Nationalists, migratory labour, , racial discrimination, the South African police, Pretoria, house arrest, , farm prisons, job reservation and separate freedoms."