United Nations

United Nations GENERAL ASSEMBLY FOURTEENTH SESSION Official Records FOURTH COMMITTEE, 910th MEETING Thursday, 15 October 1959, at 10.45 a.m. NEW YORK CONTENTS Page Agenda item 38: Question of South West Africa (continued): () Report of the Good Offices Committee on South West Africa; (b) Report of the Committee on South West Africa; (g) Study of legal action to ensure the fulfilment of the obligations assumed by the Union of South Africa in respect of the Territory of South West Africa Heating of petitioners (continued) ...... 137 3. He did not wish any specific country to become the Administering Authority, for there was always a danger of the same situation arising and of the inhabitants being confronted with a Government having an indirect interest in the economy of the Territory. In his view, three or four countries should be selected to form an international council for the administration of South West Africa. Such a council would also act in an advisory capacity to the Legislative Assembly until the inhabitants were ready for independence. It might well be composed of the States which were members of the Committee on South West Africa, since they had an intimate knowledge of conditions in the Territory. Chairman: Mr. L. N. PALAR (Indonesia). AGENDA ITEM 38 Question of South West Africa (continued: (a) Report of the Good Offices Committee on South West Africa (A/4224); (b) Report of the Committee on South West Africa (A/4191, A/C*4/413, A/C.4/422, A/AC.73/L.13); (c) Study of legal action to ensure the fulfilment of the obligations assumed by the Union of South Africa in respect of the Territory of South West Africa (A/3625; A/3906, part II; A/4191, para. 8; A/AC.73/2) HEARING OF PETITIONERS (continued) At the invitation of the Chairman, Mr. Hans Johannes Beukes, Mr. Sherman M. Bull, Mr. Mburumba Kerina, Mr. Jariretundu Kozonguizi, Mr. AllardK. Lowenstein and the Reverend Michael Scott took places at the Committee table. 1. U TIN MAUNG (Burma) paid a tribute to the sense of duty and moral courage of the petitioners and to the moderation which they had shown in their statements. At the 904th meeting Mr. Kerina had implied that no useful purpose would be served by attempting to persuade the Union of South Africa to abide by its international obligations and had said that it was high time that South West Africa was placed under the United Nations Trusteeship System. He asked Mr. Kerina how soon, in his view, the Territory should be placed under trusteeship and which country should be the Administering Authority. 2. Mr. KERINA said that a substantial basis existed for taking the case to the International Court of Justice. The status of the Territory under the Mandate had been violated by the transfer of responsibility for the affairs of the indigenous inhabitants to the South African Government, by the direct administration of the Eastern Caprivi Zipfel by the Union and by the redefinition of boundaries within the Territory. It was a matter of urgency that South West Africa should be placed under the Trusteeship System. 4. U TIN MAUNG (Burma) said that he had been touched by the tone of the tape- recorded message from the chiefs!/ and by their earnest plea to the Committee. Mr. Kerina had referred in his statement to the vicious character of "apartheid" which had infected the consciences of the Prime Minister, Mr. Verwoerd, and the members of his party. He asked Mr. Kerina whether he thought that the architects of "apartheid" were so steeped in that doctrine-which was as bad as, if not worse than, Fascism-that any appeal to them for a change of heart would be rejected as sheer weakness. 5. Mr. KERINA observed that the late Mr. Strijdom, the former Prime Minister, addressing an audience of Afrikaaners, had said that they had nowhere else to go and could only fight for their existence on the soil of South Africa. The legislation of the Union and of South West Africa revealed a people determined to keep the non-White inhabitants in complete servitude, so long as they themselves could maintain their position and their interests. No change of heart where South West Africa was concerned was to be expected of the Nationalists. Not only were the indigenous inhabitants refused any share in the government, but it was made clear through the laws that the indigenous inhabitants were not considered as equals but as servants. 6. U TIN MAUNG (Burma), referring to the petition from the Ovamboland Peoples' Organisation read out by Mr. Kerina at the 904th meeting, asked Mr. Kerina whether it was correct to say that the appeal made in that petition was not only on behalf of the Ovamboland people but also on behalf of all the indigenous inhabitants of the Territory. He also asked what would happen if the action taken by the United Nations did not come up to their expectations. 7. Mr. KERINA said that the Ovamboland Peoples' Organisation spoke for all Africans in the Territory. The feeling of the petitioners that the time had come for action, especially for legal actlon before the International Court of Justice, was sharedby the inhabitants of the Territory, and another postponement would have serious repercussions among them. When they had 1/ For the text of the recorded message, see A/C.4/425. A/C.4/SR.910 114W)v

138, General Assembly - Fourteenth Session - Fourth Committee heard of the establishment of the Good Offices Committee on South West Africa, they had thought that it was another conciliatory move and had been prepared to suffer for a further year provided that good results came of it. If nothing was done, South Africa would be able to tell the people that even, the United Nations was not prepared to fulfil their wishes, and the inhabitants of the Territory would lose confidence and be forced to make final decisions themselves. The petitions concerning the Hoachanas Native Reserve made it evident that the people there were ready to die rather than to endure a further periodof suffering under the South African Government. 8. U TIN MAUNG (Burma) said that Mr. Kozonguizi had stated at the 102nd meeting of the Committee on South West Africa that the Territory was an experimental ground since it was a fertile soil for all the "apartheid" policies (A/4191, annex V, sec. 4). He asked him which adjacent territories were watching that experiment. 9. Mr. KOZONGUIZI recalied that the existing Government in South Africa had come to power in 1948 by advocating "apartheid". "Apartheid" had existed before 1948 and indeed ever since the White man had come to South Africa, but the present Government had introduced segregation to a degree which had not been known before. Restrictions on movement had been intensified and the Group Areas Act had been introduced enabling the Government to move families from one place to another. In South West Africa, however, many such policies had, already been in force before 1948; the situation in the Territory was the ideal at which the Government aimed for South Africa itself and it had been for that reason that he had spoken of it as an experimental ground. All the countries which were neighbours of South West Africa were watching, for they felt that their political future was threatened. They realized that South West Africa had an international status and they would feel happier if they could have seen some indication that a more democratic form of administration was being introduced there. 10. U TIN MAUNG (Burma), referring to the remarks made by Mr. Kozonguizi, at the 909th meeting, with regard to the wages paid in the Territory, asked what was the pay of an African police constable and that of the lowest grade European policeman. 11. Mr. KOZONGUIZI replied that he was unable to give the exact figures of police wages, but he knew that African policemen were no better paid than African teachers, whose salaries he had given earlier. Africans in the political branch of the police were somewhat better paid; he knew of one such man who was receiving £40 per month. 12. U TIN MAUNG (Burma) saidthatwhen Mr. Kozonguizi had been speaking before the Committee on South West Africa he had referred to a Mr. Sryman, who had then been the mayor of Windhoek. He asked whether the petitioner knew what salary that gentleman received. 13. Mr.. KOZONGUIZI said he had no idea what the mayor's salary was. 14. U TIN MAUNG (Burma) thanked the petitioner for his replies. He explained that a number of other questions he had intended to put had already been asked by other delegrations. 15. Mr. KENNEDY (Ireland) referred to the statement made at the 884th meeting by Mr. Louw, the Minister of External Affairs of the Union of South Africa, that Mr. Beukes's intention in leaving Africa had been not to go to Norway to pursue his studies but to travel to New York to give evidence before the United Nations. He asked what boat Mr. Beukes had wished to board at Port Elizabeth, whether that boat had been bound for Oslo and what kind of tickets he had had. 16. Mr. BEUKES explained that he had not been in possession of a ticket when he had been arrested. He had intended to see the Norwegian Consul-General at Port Elizabeth to make arrangements for his journey, after which he would have procured a ticket. The first port of call of the boat he was to have taken would have been Amsterdam. 17. The Minister of External Affairs of the Union of South Africa had informed the Committee that he had been arrested because it had come to the knowledge of the South African authorities that he was not going to Oslo to study but that he intended to proceed to New York in order to give evidence before the United Nations. That statement was a fabrication in order to justify the action of the South African authorities; it was only after his passport had been withdrawn and he had realized the Government's intentions where his people were concerned that he had decided to come to New York. 18. Mr. KENNEDY (Ireland) recalled that at the thirteenth session the Reverend Michael Scott had referred to the difficulties connected with the holding of inter- tribal meetings in the Territory. He asked Mr. Kozonguizi whether it was possible for the var4ous sections of tribes to meet in order to express their wishes and aspirations. 19. Mr. KOZONGUIZI said that the Government had accused the Africans of turning the annual conferences between the leaders of the various tribal groups and the representatives of the Administration of South West Africa into propaganda platforms aimed at the United Nations. Government officials, on their side, had made use of such meetings to insult any who dared to criticize the policies of the Administration. Informal meetings were called from time to time on the initiative of the African people themselves without consulting the Government; for example, when the Hereros had first thought of requesting a hearing from the United Nations they had approached the Damaras and the Namas, who had agreed that they should send representatives to the United Nations. The Ovambos had been unable to nominate a representative because they were not 'sure whether they came under the authority of the chiefs in Ovamboland or whether they were an independent community. The question of the removal of people from the Windhoek Location had been dis-, cussed not only by the separate tribes concerned, but at meetings at which all the tribes had been represented. When the Reverend Markus Kooper had been expelled from Hoachanas, a group of Hereros, Namas and Damaras had gone from Windhoek to Hoachanas at night in order to ascertain exactly what had happened. 20. It was very difficult to obtain permission to hold such inter-tribal meetings. People living in the Windhoek Location could not hold a meeting unless prior permission had been obtained from the superintendent of the Location, who was of course a White man, and permission had to be obtained through the members of the Advisory Board. In the reserves, the headman -could call a meeting only after obtaining permission

910th meeting-15October1959 139 from the welfare officer. Members of the political branch of the police were instructed to attend meetings called by the people in the locations andthe reserves. 21. The Reverend Michael SCOTT added that one factor that made it impossible for Africans to organize meetings was the operation of the pass laws. For example, the Herero people were divided among eight separate reserves and could not travel from one to the other without a pass. 22. Additional obstacles were placed in the way of meetings held in connexion with petitions to the United Nations. When he had returned to the Territory in 1947 he had been granted a permit for only four hours to meet the chiefs in the Location, and that, subject to the condition that he promised not to hold any public meetings there. Meetings with the chiefs had been held outside the Location but it had been very difficult to arrange them; many meetings had been held at night. There had been a good deal of intimidation of people who had gone to the meetings to obtain news of what had happened at the United Nations. He had wished to show a film called "The Peoples' Charter", which had been lent to him by the United Nations Department of Public Information, but the only electric light in the Location was in a hall run by the municipality and permission to use the hall had been refused. 23. He had recently received a communication from Chief Hosea Kutako describing a meeting at the welfare office on 22 July 1959, at which Mr. Ja-Toivo, who had been brought along by the welfare officer, had been made to stand up so that those present could see who he was and avoid associating with him in future. 24. As another example of the difficulties confronting the Africans he recalled what had happened when he had returned to the Territory to report on his first hearing before the United Nations. Mr. Malan, the then Prime Minister of the Union of South Africa, had been in the Territory at the time, and Chief Hosea Kutako and other African leaders who had come a considerable distance for the purpose, had requested him to receive them with Mr. Scott in order that they might submit a protest against the statement made by the South African representative to the United Nations that they were men of no standing and that neither they nor Mr. Scott were representatives of the Herero people. That request -had been refused. 25. Mr. KENNEDY (Ireland) recalled that at the 900th meeting of the Committee the Minister of External Affairs of the Union of South Africa had referred to the disposal of surplus livestock and dairy produce. He asked Mr. Kozonguizi whether the North of the Territory could be described as a monetary economy or whether the people there traded with each other on a barter basis. He also asked how they disposed of their produce in the Police Zone. 26. Mr. KOZONGUIZI said that the economy in the reserves was essentially a subsistence economy; the people owned cattle and cultivated cereal crops, but there was no surplus for export. The people of Ovamboland and other parts of the area outside the Police Zone depended largely on imported products, so that the sons of each family were obliged to go to the Police Zone to obtain work in order to earn money to pay for them. In the reserves within the Police Zone there was provision for the people to sell their cattle and dairy produce so as to obtain money with which to supply their needs. 27. The economy of the Kaokoveld had been based primarily on bartering with cattle in Angola until a regulation had been put into effect prohibiting the inhabitants from driving their cattle across the border into either Angola or the Police Zone. They now subsisted on meat and milk and did not engage in trade of any kind. In the previous year a representative of the Kaokoveld had attended one of the annual conferences held by the Hereros with the Chief Native Commissioner and had requestedthat his people should be allowed to engage in their cattle-trading in order that they might be able to acquire cash. That was symptomatic of the growing need in the reserves to develop a monetary economy, a need arising from the repercussions of the process of industrialization in the Police Zone. 28. Mr. KERINA explained that it could hardly be said that the economy of the reserves in the north was a monetary one in the sense in which that term was understood in highly industrialized countries, though the Ovambos could, if they wished, sell their cattle to the local storekeepers for cash. In general, however, they preferred to be recompensed in kind. He mentioned in that connexion that the import of Portuguese goods from Angola was prohibited and that Angolan currency could not be converted into the currency used in South West Africa. 29. Mr. KENNEDY (Ireland) said that from some of Mr. Lowenstein's remarks he gatheredthat the African Methodist Episcopal Church in the Territory was experiencing considerable difficulty in carrying on ts work. He asked the petitioner if he could give further details on the subject. 30. Mr. LOWENSTEIN repliedthat while that situation was most pronounced in Hoachanas it prevailed to some extent throughout the Territory. In order to be entitled to any public assistance, schools in the Territory had to be accredited by the State; in the case of the African Methodist Episcopal schools such accrediting was frequently refused, with little or no explanation. He had been told that not only by members of the Church in question but also by members of the Dutch Reformed Church who, while afraid to be identified, had expressed their disapproval of such discrimination and had said that they thought the reason for it was that the African Methodist Episcopal Church was often outspokenly opposed to the present r~gime. The case of the Reverend Markus Kooper was a striking example of the difficulties with which the African Methodist Episcopal Church had to contend. In the, circumstances he thought it was a remarkalle achievement that the Hoachanas congregation had succeeded in building a church with its own funds. 31. Mr. KENNEDY (Ireland) recalled Mr. Kerina's reference during the previous session to a discriminatory statement made by a teacher in a Roman Catholic mission school.V The petitioner had not yet told the Committee the teacher's name, the year in which the incident had taken place, the Standard the petitioner had been in at that time and the language in which the statement had been made, although all those particulars had been requested by the Reverend William Devenney in his letter to the Chairman of the Committee on South West Africa (A/C.4/422). He therefore requested the petitioner to furnish that information. 2/ See A/C.4/PV.749.

General Assembly - Fourteenth Session - Fourth Committee 32. Mr. KERINA said that he had heardthe statement when he had been a student in Grade B at Walvis Bay and that the language used had been Afrikaans. 33. Mr. KENNEDY (Ireland) thanked the petitioner for that information although he was not entirely satisfied with the answer, inasmuch as the name of the teacher had not been given. He then referred to the passage in Mr. Kerina's statement at the 904th meeting to the effect that Father Devenney admitted the practice of "apartheid" in the Church and asked if the petitioner had really intended to suggest that the Church admitted a practice which was imposed upon it by the State. 34. Mr. KERINA replied that he did not think that the Church, of which he was a member, accepted the policy of "apartheid". Nevertheless, it was difficult for Africans to understand how the Church, having explicitly rejected that policy within the Union, even to the point of closing its schools rather than operating them in accordance with the "apartheid" system, could agree to be governed by that system in South West Africa. He thought that the Church would do better to uphold the same principles everywhere than to sacrifice them in some instances in order to be able to carry on its work. 35. Mr. LOWENSTEIN said that from what he had observed he thought that the Church, in continuing to operate its schools despite the obligation to apply the principle of "apartheid", was unquestionably bringing certain benefits to the population and that he had been greatly impressed by the high calibre and obvious devotion to the principle of brotherhood shown by the Roman Catholic mission personnel with whom he had come in contact. At the same time he thought it was understandable that, despite the benefits received, some Africans might feel that the Church could most effectively oppose "apartheid" by refusing to operate segregated schools. 36. 'Mr. KOZONGUIZI said that it should be made clear that there was no law obliging religious schools to teach what the Government prescribed but that they must do so if they wished to receive Government subsidies. The African Methodist Episcopal Church was operating some non-segregated schools which did not use the Government-prescribed syllabuses and were not under the supervision of Europeans. The question at issue was whether it was better to provide the Africans with education even under segregated conditions or to uphold the principle of opposition to "apartheid" by refusing to continue to operate schools in the Territory. 37. Mr. KENNEDY (Ireland) observed that the Roman Catholic Church in the Union of South Africa had been one of the most stalwart bastions of human dignity and had suffered greatly for its stand on the question of "apartheid". He would like in that connexion to draw the Committee's attention to the following passages from the joint statement issued by the Bishops of South Africa after a meeting held at Pretoria in July 1957: "'Apartheid' is sometimes described as separate development, a term which suggests that under 'apartheid' different races are given the opportunity of pursuing their respective and distinctive social and cultural evolutions. It is argued that only in this manner will these races be doing the will of God, lending themselves to the fulfilment of His providential designs. "The contention sounds plausible as long as we overlook an important qualification, namely, that separate development is subordinate to White supremacy. The White man makes himself the agent of God's will and the interpreter of His providence in assigning the range and determining the bounds of non-White development. One trembles at the blasphemy of thus attributing to God the offences against charity and justice that are 'apartheid's' necessary accompaniment. "It is a sin to humiliate one 's fellow man. There is in each human person, by God's creation, a dignity inseparably connected with his quality of rational and free being. This dignity has been immeasurably enhanced by the mystery of our redemption. "No man has the right to despise what God has honoured, to belittle one whom Christ has called friend, to brand a fellow man with the stigma of inborn inferiority. It is an insult to human dignity, a slur upon God's noble work of creation and redemption. "To all White South Africans we direct an earnest plea to consider carefully what 'apartheid' means, its evil and anti-Christian character, the injustices that flow from it, the resentment and bitterness it arouses, the harvest of disaster that itmust produce in the country we all love so much. "We cannot fail to express our admiration for the splendid work done in many quarters to lessen prejudice, promote understanding and unity andhelp South Africa along that path of harmony and cooperation which is the only one dictated by wisdom and justice. "On the other hand we deeply regret that it is still thought necessary to add to the volume of restrictive and oppressive legislation in order to reduce contacts between various groups to an inhuman and unnatural minimum. "We pray God that minds may be enlightened to see the truth and hearts encouraged to act without regard to the prejudices of the past. It will take sacrifice. Yet sacrifice need not deter us whose forefathers have left us the heritage of their bravery." 38. He asked whether in the light of what he had read out Mr. Kerina still held to the truth of his earlier statement. 39. Mr. KERINA replied that he categorically held to the truth of his statement. He could not understand how the Church, having expressed the views whichthe Irish representative had quoted and having put into practice in the Union of South Africa the principle they embodied, could agree to sacrifice that principle in South West Africa. The Africans in the Territory wanted the Church to take the same position there as it had taken in the Union, closing down its schools if necessary rather than compromising on that principle. 40. Mr. DORSINVILLE (Haiti) asked Mr. Kerinaff he was correct in his impressionthatthe Dutch Reformed Church, which appeared to be the most influential of the Churches in both the Union and SouthWest Africa, supported all the Government's actions to a greater or lesser extent. 41. Mr. KERINA replied that he understood that the Dutch Reformed Church had issuedofficial statements opposing "apartheid" but he did not know whether it had ever acted to uphold that stand. The meeting rose at 1 p.m. Litho in U.N. 77401-December 1959-2.550 Litho in U.N. 77401-December 1959-2,550