LAWYERS' COMMITTEE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS UNDER LAW BRIEFING PAPER ON THE UNITED DEMOCRATIC FRONT TREASON TRIAL state y. Mawalal Ramgobin and 15 Others, The Supreme Court of South Africa (Natal Provincial Division) Pietermaritzburg, South Africa August 1985 Southern Africa project Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law 1400 Eye Street, N.W. Suite 400 Washington, D.C. 20005 -. LA WYERS' COMMITTEE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS UNDER LAW SUITE 400 • 1400 EYE STREET, NORTHWEST. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005 • PHONE (202) 371-1212 CABLE ADDRESS: LAWCIV, WASHINGTON, D.C. BRIEFING PAPER ON THE UNITED DEMOCRATIC FRONT TREASON TRIAL State v. Mawalal Rarngobin and 15 Others, The Supreme Court of South Africa (Natal Provincial Division) Pietermaritzburg, South Africa August 1985 Prepared by the Southern Africa Project of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. ---------------------------------------------- TABLE OF CONTENTS Part I: Background to the Treason Trial 1 Section 1: The New Constitution and the Detention of Leading Members of the United Democratic Front..... 1 Section 2: Bail Denied 14 Section 3: The Charge of Treason.............................. 24 (A) The Indictment.......................................... 24 (B) Treason, Historically and in Law in South Africa 25 (i) The Situation Prior to 1961 25 (ii) 1961-1978 38 (iii) 1979-1985 ••.••••••••••0. .....•.................... .. 42 Part II: The United Democratic Front Treason Trial 52 Section 1: The Main Count - Treason........................... 52 Section 2: The Alternate Charges 59 (A) Terrorism Under the Internal Security Act of 1982 59 (B) Terrorism Under the Terrorism Act of 1967 65 (C) Furtherance of Objects of an Unlawful Organization 69 (D) Furtherance of the Objects of Communism 70 (E) Furtherance of the Objects of Communism and/or the ANC .. 71 Appendix A: Profile of Defendants Appendix B: Organizational Profile - UDF and affiliates cited in the indictment -- Appendix C: Copy of the Freedom Charter In September, 1985, in the Supreme Court of South Africa (Natal Provincial Division) sixteen prominent black community and labor leaders will stand trial for treason. The accused are members of one of the most important opposition groups in the country, the United Democratic Front. The trial will take place in the context of the deepening political crisis in South Africa, which most recently has been manifested by the government's declaration of an indefinite State of Emergency in 36 magisterial districts. In the following. pages we have discussed the background to this trial and its important legal and historical dimensions. ****** Part I: Background to the Treason Trial Section 1: The New Constitution and the Detention of Leading Members of the United Democratic Front The United Democratic Front (UDF) was launched as a national organization in August 1983 at one of the biggest political rallies seen since the era of mass, legal opposition politics in the 1950s. The UDF's primary aim was to coor- dinate opposition to the new constitution introduced by the ruling white Nationalist Party. The proposed new system of government simply entrenched apartheid by excluding the 1 participation of the 73 percent black (African) majority and giving only limited participation rights to the country's Indian and Coloured (mixed-race) population. A continued white monopolization of power was guaranteed through the ethnically separate, tricameral parliamentary structure and the nature of the new executive presidency. At the launching rally in August 1983 the unp representa- tives declared: We stand for the creation of a true democracy in which all South Africans will participate in the government of our country. We stand for a single, unf ragmented South Africa, a South Africa free of Bantustans and Group Areas• .•• we join hands as community, women's, students', religious, sporting and other organiza­ tions and trade unions to say no to apartheid. We say no to the Republic of South Africa Constitu­ tion Bill -- a Bill which will create yet another undemocratic constitution in the country of our birth. In the face of the final total exclusion of the majority from direct representation at national government level, the unp responded by spearheading a boycott of the tricameral parliamentary elections scheduled for August 22 and 28, 1984. Within a year of its formation the unp had won the support of more than 600 affiliated organizations of all races and in all parts of the country. Their tactics employed around the election issue were peaceful and open, and ultimately highly successful. The election results indicated an overwhelming rejection of the 2 --------------------------------------------- new constitution. Only 18 percent of the eligible Indian and Coloured voters went to the polls. Throughout the UOF-organized campaign against the elections police repression was constant. Activists were harassed and assaulted, pamphlets and petition forms were confiscated and canvassers arrested. UOF sponsored meetings in a number of areas were banned, and rallies were sometimes violently broken up by the police. On the election days themselves police used teargas and batons against demon- strators as well as journalists covering the event. On the eve of the elections the South African Security Police arrested leading members of the UOF, along with indi- viduals from other or~anizations which had actively opposed the new constitution. Amongst those arrested were Mewa Ramgobin, George Sewpershad, M. J. Naidoo, Essop Jassat, Aubrey Mokoena, Archie Gumede, and Curtis Nkondo, all of whom are now facing trial for treason. The individuals detained on August 21 were detained initially under section 50 of the Internal Security Act, No. 74 of 1982. 1 Within 24 hours of their detention they 1Hereinafter referred to as the Internal Security Act (1982). This particular provision of the Act allows a police officer to arrest anyone without a warrant if he is of the opinion that that person's actions are contributing towards "the continuation of a state of public disturbance, disorder, riot or public violence" anywhere in the Republic. A person arrested under section 50 can be held incommunicado for 48 hours, following which he or she has to be released or redetained under a warrant in terms of section 50 (1) (b), which states that "the detention of a particular person will contribute towards the prevention of the resumption, at the 3 were served with six-month 'preventive detention' orders under the provisions of section 28 of the Internal Security Act. Section 28 permits the Minister of Law and Order to detain a person merely under suspicion that the person is likely to commit an act endangering the maintenance of law and order or is likely to promote such acts. 2 The Minister's Order delivered to each of the detained UDP leaders, stated simply that the person was detained pursuant to section 28(1) of the same place or at any other place in the Republic, of such a state of public disturbance, disorder, riot or public violence." 2section 28. Detention of certain persons in a prison in order to prevent commission of certain offences or endangering of security of State or of maintenance of law and order - (1) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in any law or the common law contained, the Minister may - (a) if in his opinion there is reason to apprehend that a particular person will commit an offence referred to in section 54(1), (2) or (3); (b) if he is satisfied that a particular person engages in activities which endanger or are calculated to endanger the security of the State or the maintenance of law and order or that he propagates or promotes or is likely to propagate or promote such activities; or (c) if he has reason to suspect that a particular person who has been convicted of an offence specified in Schedule 2, engages or is likely to engage in activities which endanger or are calculated to endanger the security of the State or the maintenance of law and order, or propagates or promotes or is likely to propagate or promote such activities, by a written notice signed by him and addressed to a member of the Prisons Service, as defined in section 1 of the prisons Act, 1959 (Act No. 8 of 1959), who is in charge of a prison referred to in section 20(1) (a) of the said Act, direct that the said person be detained in that prison. 4 --------------------------------------------- Internal Security Act because the Minister believes "that the said person engages in activities which endanger the mainten- ance of law and order." In each case the Minister alleged that "by acts and utterances the said person did himself and in collaboration with other persons attempt to create a revolutionary climate in the Republic of South Africa thereby causing a situation endangering the maintenance of law and order." Unlike section 29 of the Internal Security Act which authorizes detention for interrogation for unlimited periods, section 28 detainees may only be held for periods specified in the Minister's notice. Nevertheless the Minister may in effect. extend the detention indefinitely following a pro forma review process. The review procedures are entirely internal, and the detainee is denied the right of legal representation before the review committee. One section 28 detainee, Abel Dube, was originally detained on April 21, 1982, and placed under section 28 on November 13, 1982 for a period of twelve months. This period was renewed for a further yea .3 In addition to the possibility of indefinite detention the detained activists were confronted with a permanent ban against any future involvement in political organizations. Under section 16 of the Internal Security Act the Director of Security Legislation is authorized to maintain a "Consolidated 3rn October 1984 Dube was released and banished for 3 years to the remote town of Messina in the northern Transvaal. 5 List" of individuals who, among other things, have been detained under the provisions of section 28.