The "Treason" Trials at Pietermaritzburg and Delmas http://www.aluka.org/action/showMetadata?doi=10.5555/AL.SFF.DOCUMENT.nuun1986_23 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 The "Treason" Trials at Pietermaritzburg and Delmas Alternative title Notes and Documents - United Nations Centre Against ApartheidNo. 23/86 Author/Creator United Nations Centre against Apartheid; MacEntee, Patrick Publisher United Nations, New York Date 1986-10-00 Resource type Reports Language English Subject Coverage (spatial) South Africa Coverage (temporal) 1986 Source Northwestern University Libraries Description Mr. MacEntee is Chairman of the General Council of the Bar of Ireland. He observed the "treason" trials at Pietermaritzburg and Delmas, South Africa, from 21 February to 9 March 1986, on behalf of the International Commission of Jurists. The views expressed in this paper are those of the author. Format extent 20 page(s) (length/size) http://www.aluka.org/action/showMetadata?doi=10.5555/AL.SFF.DOCUMENT.nuun1986_23 http://www.aluka.org UNITED NATIONS UNITED NATIONS _ CENTRE AGAINST APARTHEID NOTES AND DOCUMENTS* 23/86 October 1986 JAN " THE "TREASON" TRIALS AT PIETERMARITZBURG AND DELMAS Report by Patrick MacEntee, S.C., Q.C. [Note: - MacEntee is Chairman of the General Council of the Bar of Ireland. He observed the "treason" trials at Pietermaritzburg and Delmas, South Africa, from 21 February to 9 March 1986, on behalf of the International Commission of Jurists. The views expressed in this paper are those of the author.] 86-28468 *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. United Nations, New York 10017 - 2 - PIETERMARITZBURG TRIAL Introduction I arrived at Jan Smuts Airport, Johannesburg, on the morning of 22 February 1986 and immediately departed for Durban. The Pietermaritzburg trial, I was informed, was being conducted in camera and it was thought unlikely that I would be admitted to court. However, I decided to go in any event. On arrival at Pietermaritzburg I made myself known to the two advocates acting for the defence, Mr. Marumo Moerani and Mr. Clifford Mailer. I was duly introduced to the Registrar of the Court and sent my ordre de mission to the presiding judge, Justice John Milne, Judge President of the Natal Division of the Supreme Court, who received me in his chambers and introduced me to the two assessors who were sitting with him. Unusually, Justice Milne was sitting with an Indian and an African, Mr. Amin and Mr. Mishali, respectively a magistrate and an attorney. I explained my difficulties arising from the court being in camera to Justice Milne, who informed that whilst the court was indeed sitting in camera, he had made an order permitting the press to be present provided they did not report anything that might lead to the witness, who was then giving evidence, being identified. Justice Milne further explained to me that he had conducted an inquiry and had heard evidence from which he was satisfied that the witness was in danger of being assassinated should his identity become known. I told the judge that I was perfectly happy to be bound by the same degree of discretion as the lawyers acting in the case for the defence, and Justice Milne said that he would discuss the matter with counsel acting on both sides of the case and that unless any of them objected to my being present, he was disposed to facilitate my attendance. Justice Milne, I understand, called counsel into court, explained my position to them, and asked them if they had any objections to my being present. Neither party had any objection and accordingly he made an order allowing me to attend. Before seeing Justice Milne I was introduced to prosecuting counsel, Mr. J. A. Oberholster and to Mr. Chris Meiring. Mr. Ishmael Mohammed, S.C., appeared in the case as a consultant, that is to say, he attended for crucial cross-examinations and submissions, leaving the routine running of the case to Mr. Moerani and Mr. Mailer. Background to the trial in Pietermaritzburg At the beginning of this trial there were 16 accused. The accused were all members of one of the most important opposition groups in South Africa -3 - - the United Democratic Front (UDF). UDF was organized in 1983 to spearhead and co-ordinate opposition to the proposed new "constitution". The new system of government by the ruling Nationalist Party gave limited participation rights to South Africa's Indian and Coloured population whilst continuing to exclude from participation the 73 per cent black majority. The tricameral parliament was established guaranteeing the white monopoly of power. The elections for the said new "constitution" were held on 22 and 28 August 1984. UDF is essentially an umbrella organization with a very large number of constituent organizations ranging from trade unions through vocational groups to comparatively small local organizations of a sports and cultural nature. The tactics employed by UDF in opposition to the new "constitution" were peaceful and legal. Nonetheless, throughout the campaign they attracted constant police harassment: activists were assaulted, pamphlets and petition forms were confiscated and canvassers were arrested. UDF support meetings were banned and election meetings dispersed. On the election days themselves police used teargas and batons against both the demonstrators and the journalists covering the event. On 21 August 1984, the eve of the elections, South African security police arrested leading members of UDF together with individuals from other organizations that had actively opposed the new "constitution". Amongst those arrested were Mawalal Ramgobin, Chanderdeo Sewpershad, M. J. Naidoo, Essop Essack Jassat, Dundubela Aubreay Mokoena, Archibald Jacob Gumede and Ephraim Curtis Nkondo. They were detained initially under section 50 of the Internal Security Act, No. 74 of 1982 (which permits a police officer to arrest without warrant anyone whose actions he believes are contributing towards "the continuance of a state of public disturbance, disorder, riot or public violence"). A person so arrested can be held incommunicado for 48 hours, following which he or she must be released or detained under a warrant in terms of section 50, subsection 1B, of the Internal Security Act, which provides for such detention where "the detention of a particular person will contribute towards the prevention of the resumption at the same place or at any other place in the Republic of such a state of public disturbance, disorder, riot, or public violence". Within 24 hours of their detention the above-mentioned accused 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 he suspects is likely to commit an act endangering the maintenance of law and order, or is likely to promote such acts. The Minister's order, delivered to each of the detained UDF leaders, stated simply that the person was detained pursuant to section 28 (1) of the Internal Security Act because the Minister believed "that the said person engages in activities which endanger the maintenance 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". The detention orders were challenged successfully in the courts and were set aside on 7 September 1984 for lack of specificity. New detention orders were immediately issued in remarkably similar terms. These new orders were in turn challenged, but (this time) unsuccessfully. -4 - In December 1984 the preventive detention orders were withdrawn by the Minister for Law and Order, but the detainees were immediately charged with high treason and were remanded in custody for trial. Other prominent members of UDF were swept up in police raids on 19 February 1985. On that date, the homes and offices of UDF members and affiliates were raided and searched and documents and records were confiscated. Other arrests were carried out later in February and eight other UDF and union leaders were charged with treason. In respect of both the eight persons charged with treason in December 1984 and those arrested and charged in February 1985, the Attorney General issued certificates under the authority of section 30 of the Internal Security Act ordering the court to deny bail. These certificates were overturned by the Supreme Court of South Africa, Natal Provincial Division, and all 16 defendants were admitted to bail in the amount of R 170,000. The defendants were required to report twice daily at specified police stations; to refrain from leaving their specified magisterial district without the permission in writing of the Attorney-General; to surrender any passports or travel documents; and to refrain from leaving his or her place of residence between the hours of 9 p.m.