PO BOX 7315 Roggebaai 8012 25 June 1987 Dear ECC, re : LAGQ participation in Ivan’s CO campaign We are writing to you at this late stage before Ivan’s campaign moves into -full swing because of our extreme concern about the way in which ECC has dealt with the issue of Ivan’s gayness. The positive feedback on the issue during Ivan’s national tour and the intensifying campaign against Ivan and one of our members have brought the issue to a head. We are fully aware that this campaign has a particular focus and that ECC is a single-issue campaign. We agree that the conduct of the campaign needs to be determined by political criteria. As progressive lesbians and gays we are acutely aware of the interconnections between various strands of the struggle towards a democratic SA. We perceived this particular campaign as one through which we could express our support for your efforts at challenging the system. We believed that, because of the particular juncture of the personal and political issues around which this campaign is based and the crucial role of Ivan who is gay, we (LABO and ECC) could work towards a common objective without negating the particular focusses of each. LAGO is finding it extremely difficult to participate with full motivation in the ECC campaign group in an atmosphere where there is a lack of mutual respect, especially on ECC’s side. We believe that the following are some of the ways in which this has manifested itself: * failure to consider the deep effects, political and personal, of your refusal to allow Ivan to deal with his gayness as an integral part of his personal and political development, * the situation of the argument regarding potential losses in terms of stereotypical generalisations ie. the perceived automatic revulsion of your "broad constituency", * failure to consider potential gains eg. gay conscripts * inadequate consideration of the process of coming out on your own terms and the degree to which the person doing so gains control versus the total loss of control when one is "found out" or "smeared out", * refusal to accept the reality of an intensifying campaign directed against Ivan focussing on his sexuality and to evaluate the harm this will do, # the manipulative way in which the issue o-f accountability to ECC was used to force Ivan to remove an integral part o-f his statement. We believe that the fulfilment of the following conditions would help us establish the mutual respect that is presently lacking and would enable us to continue participating as LAGO in ECC’s campaign: # Ivan be free to deal with the gay issue as he sees fit, # Ivan’s membership of LAGO be mentioned in his CV together with all his other organisational commitments, # a LAGO message of support for Ivan/the campaign be included in all media where lists of organisations supporting Ivan/the campaign are mentioned, appear in advertisements etc., # the inclusion or non-inclusion in Ivan's statement of his experiences as a gay person (insofar as these relate to his political development) be reassessed at an appropriate time before Ivan’s trial when the full statement is reproduced as evidence and for publicity. A further suggestion is that we hold a joint LAGO-ECC workshop at a later more appropriate .time to examine E C C ’s response to lesbians and gays within its own constituency and other related issues. We feel that it is unfortunate that we have had to resort to the formality of a letter to ensure that our concerns will be adequately addressed. We want to stress that this letter is intended in a spirit of compromise and above all with the aim of working together to take forward Ivan's campaign successfully. We trust that this has been received in the comradely manner in which it was intended and we look forward to a speedy resolution to these problems enabling us to continue working together. Aluta continual LAGO Detainee Clinic Grouping 25 June Here are the minutes of the last two detainee workshops. Organisations have now indicated that we proceed further with setting up the clinic. Accordingly, we are asking organisations to come to a follow-up workshop on Sunday 12 July at 2pm at the Lutheran Youth Centre, Athlone. There are a'number of issues that still need to be thoroughly discussed (training, venue, transport, employee, etc) but we feel priority should be given to setting up the controlling/ co-ordinating structure for the clinic. This means that organ­ isations/reps should have mandates about: 1) Representation on the committee a)-Do those who work in the clinic elect their own controlling committee ? (i.e. committee does not ' neccessarily have reps from evey participating organ­ isation. ) -Is the committee made up of a set number of represen­ tatives from participating organisations ? Do these reps have to be people working in the clinic -Can the entire working body of the clinic form the committee ? -Are reps going to rotate ? -Who are going to be the organisations reps ? 2) Internal accountability -How are decisions taken ? -How is day - to - day running effected ? 3) External accountability -Relationship to mass-based organisations -Non-sectarianism It would be up to the meeting to decide if we are ready to form a structure and whether such a structure is an interim structure The meeting would also have to decide how much of the other . outstanding issues (training, employee, etc) can be dealt .with by any structure that emerges and give some guidelines for how these issues should be taken fufcther.The meeting must bear in mind that the process of consultation with mass-based organis­ ations is a continuing one and before any major decisions are taken in future, consultation must have occurred. There .are many detainees still in prison. Let us take forward their struggle. b)Medico-legal Detair.ee ..orkshop Minutes of 17 and 24- Lay 1987 Unfortunately,no lawyers were present on the second Sunday for this part of the discussion.However,good ,safe records Organisations present:0ASSSA,3SG,Blaclc Sash,L3AP,I)PSC (Gape were seen to be important and photographic equipment must Town,Athlone,Woodstock,Townships),DTT, be purchased.A comprehensive referral list must be avail­ RMG,Rape Crisis,Steenberg Advice Office, able for specialist cases. DETU,Justice and Peace Deta inee Support Group,Bonteheuwel Parent's Support Group, HV.'S,DLO,UWCO Neighbourhood Care Project. 6.Blueprint, Apologies:C0SATU,T3AM a)Venue It must be centrally placed.The possibilities of Athlone This is a short summary of discussion at the workships. and Salt River must still be clarified.The Clinic should have enough rooms for all the activities(consulting,admin, 1.Relationship to Hass-based Organisations: counselling,waiting-space,etc).It could initially be set up in an established GF's rooms to use facilities. Whilst the clinic needs to be rooted in and answerable to organisations,it cannot be aligned with any one organisation. -,b) Hours The relationship with DPSC’s must be especially close.One way Times need to be varied.3g:4~7pm once a week,7-10pm once a of ensuring this is the presence of a DFSC rep on the Clinic week and one session on a weekend (Saturday morning). Committee.lt is not realistic to expect organisations to sit on Feedback on the best time is still needed. a clinic committee which decides on aspects of the day-to-day running of the clinic.Its accountability can be measured by c) Transport t. the effectiveness of the service run.Minutes of the meetings Transport should be provided , if neccessary, to and from should be routinely circulated to organations and liason with the clinic.Reimbursement can be made for transport but the organisations could take place via the permanent office worker. whole issue of transport needs further discussion. Folicy decisions will be made at a bia nnual/annual meeting. Mass-based organisations (eg:CAYCO Bonteheuwel and others who d)Security have expressed interest) should have the opportunity to staff Other similar clinics elsewhere have not had security prob­ the clinic if they want to participate. lems. However, no names would be kept at the Clinic.3ach person will be given a number and records would be kept by 2.Referrals number only. Referral can come from any organisation.DLO ,DPSC,DC are particularly important avenues.The establishment of the clinic e)Finances wouldn't exclude detainees seeing their own doctors they are Funding for the clinic can be raised through 33G who receives happy with. its funding via NAMDA.The Clinic Committee will control the . Clinic finances and be accountable to its funding sources. 3.Internal Accountability The participating organisations need to discuss this further. The Clinic committee would be drawn from people working in the f)Staff Clinic belonging to participa ting organisations.In addition At each session 1 or 2 doctors,at least one counsellor and DPSC and other mass-based organisations interested in partic­ a reception person need to be present,as well as translators ipating in the structure (eg:CAXC0 Bonteheuwel) need to be and child minders where appropriate.lt was. emphasised that represented. the clinic should aim to provide counselling in the person's home languaga.Continuity was also important for treatment. 4.Rural Areas Anyone working in the Clinic would need to go through some The Clinic will initially operate in Cape Town and can partially training first.This would probably be in the form of a work­ service the rural areas.It could liase with L3AF and Black Sash shop dealing with: who work in the rural areas,as well as any other organisations 1.Counselling skills active in the rura 1 areas.Field workers for other organis­ 2.Political context of repression ations could receive training via the clinic.The clinic must 3.Psychological effects of detention be seen as a multistage process.