This lecture was delivered by Professor Vadim Rogovin at the Ruhr University in Germany in December 1996.
Today when many speak of the collapse of socialism, it is appropriate to pose the following question: what has collapsed with the ruling regimes in the Soviet Union and other countries? What were the aims of socialism and to what extent were they realised in the so-called socialist countries? Why was socialism in the Soviet Union twice betrayed, first by Stalin and the Stalinists and a second time by Gorbachev and his clique?
When we consider these questions, we arrive at the conclusion that the aim of socialism is the establishment of social equality among men.
It is no accident that official public opinion has always judged the conditions in those countries with nationalised property from the standpoint of the extent to which the principles of social equality were upheld. In this regard one sometimes comes across interesting examples.
One of my colleagues, who is frequently in Spain, related the following story: a well-known singer, a dissident from Cuba, recently appeared on Spanish television. With tears in her eyes she spoke of the privileges which existed in Cuba. She reported that party bureaucrats who were sick got single rooms in the hospitals, i.e., enjoyed privileges. All those who heard the program could only think "look at the privileges they have in Cuba!"
No one noticed that on the same day, a Madrid newspaper reported that the president of a leading stock company didn't attend a major shareholders' meeting because he had flown to his doctor in America, in a private aeroplane, for a consultation. The incident didn't provoke any particular attention. After all who could expect any sort of social equality and justice under capitalism?
Although such facts have been often used for openly demagogic purposes, ordinary people using their moral and social instincts have regarded the privileges which existed in the Soviet Union and the other nominally socialist countries as something which has distorted their picture and ideal of socialism.
Marxism has repeatedly raised the question of social equality and attempted to resolve it, in both a practical and theoretical sense. In their estimation of the Paris Commune, Marx and Engels regarded the fact that the wage of an official was not to exceed that of a worker to be of great significance. They regarded this measure as an effective way of preventing the state from being transformed from an instrument which serves society into an institution which stands above society.
Lenin developed this idea in his book The State and Revolution. He wrote that the masses yearned for a government which guaranteed low prices and fair wages and which itself did not consume too much money. Such a government is in principle impossible under capitalism.
Lenin emphasised that in the Second International at that time there was a tendency to pass over these Marxist ideas in silence, treating them as naive conceptions out of sync with the times, rather like those ideologues of Christianity who, following the transformation of the church into a state institution, forgot that Christianity was originally revolutionary.
Shortly after the October Revolution a number of measures were adopted with the aim of reducing the social differences between specific groups. In order to preclude privileges for the functionaries, a so-called party maximum was introduced, i.e., an upper limit for the incomes of party officials. In the 1920s, for example, the following was standard practice: a factory director who was a party member received 300 rubles for his work. The director of a similar factory who was not a party member could expect an income of 500 rubles.
In the 1920s there were workers who for a time occupied the position of town party secretary and then returned to their original place at the work bench. This didn't occur because of any blot on the record of the worker/party secretary. Rather it was a perfectly normal transition.
The situation changed in 1923 when Lenin, as a result of his illness, withdrew from leading positions. Now the emerging bureaucracy worked towards securing definite privileges.
It was no accident that the Left Opposition came into being in 1923 and attracted many of the old Bolsheviks. From the beginning it sounded the alarm regarding the development of bureaucratic methods inside the party and the workers state.
At the time, in the conflict between the ruling faction and the Left Opposition, relatively little was said about the question of privileges. But the social essence of the acute struggle between the two wings can only be understood in connection with the opposing positions taken regarding social equality and justice.
In 1925 a leader of the Opposition, Zinoviev, wrote that the working class strove for more social equality. It was just a brief comment in a long article. Zinoviev was not objecting in principle to the difference in wages for skilled and unskilled work. Stalin, however, concentrated his report to the 14th party conference on this small passage.
He maintained that Zinoviev was rejecting the thesis put forward in the Critique of the Gotha Program, where Marx maintains that in the transitional period between socialism and communism differences with regard to wages would continue to exist. The Opposition, according to Stalin, was attacking the income of the skilled worker as well as the meagre wages of the hard-working peasant. In reality, behind these demagogic words lay the attempt to defend those privileges which the bureaucracy had begun to accumulate.
Looking back, Trotsky remarked that Stalin's supporters, like those of the Left Opposition, belonged to the same social milieu. But the latter consciously broke away from their social interests and defended the interests of the sans-culottes -- the workers and peasants.
Following his victory over the Left Opposition, Stalin introduced decisive changes into the ideology of the ruling party. He put forward the thesis that the main principle of socialism was that everyone should be paid in accordance with his performance. In an attempt to elaborate on the content of this principle, none of the Soviet economic experts were able to explain how it was possible to compare the work of a miner with that of a doctor, the activities of a ballerina with those of a steel worker.
After Stalin's death, despite criticism of his political rule, none of his successors questioned this principle. All of them vigorously opposed what they called "levelling."
In reality the principle of payment for performance is a bourgeois principle. It only has significance when one interprets it in a liberal fashion: everyone is rewarded according to the results of his or her work, and this is realised on the free market in the interaction of supply and demand. It is clear that an immediate consequence of such market economy principles is the growth of inequality. The function of the bourgeois state is precisely to maintain this inequality.
Marx and Lenin predicted that every state arising from a socialist revolution would have a dual character: on the one hand a socialist character which defends socialised property against capitalist restoration, and on the other hand a bourgeois character, in so far as the state is obliged for a period to maintain certain privileges for a minority and preside over inequality. They therefore described the transitional state as a "bourgeois" workers state, even though there would be no bourgeoisie. According to Marxist doctrine this inequality must recede the more society develops in a socialist direction and the state correspondingly begins to wither away.
Since the middle of the 1920s, the situation in the Soviet Union developed in an opposite direction. The ruling bureaucracy excluded the workers from any sort of participation in the distribution of material goods and transformed itself into a powerful caste of those controlling the distribution of these goods. By the mid-1930s the disproportion with regard to inequality and the lack of social justice in the Soviet Union exceeded that which existed in the developed capitalist countries.
When we speak of the privileges in the Soviet Union, we must bear in mind that in the 1920s and 1930s the country was very poor and backward. That is why for us today the privileges at that time can appear inconsequential in comparison with modern-day Germany. But for the consciousness of the ordinary people, they had enormous significance. A new atmosphere developed in society. Whereas in earlier periods wealthier citizens were somewhat ashamed of their wealth, now they were proud of it.
The wife of the well-known Soviet poet Ossip Mandelstam, Nadezhda Mandelstam, wrote in her memoirs: "With us it was often the case that even a piece of bread was reckoned as a privilege." She related the case of a young man in a distribution station where the privileged received special food rations. The young man was eating a piece of beefsteak which had been allocated for his father-in-law and commented: "It tastes so good and pleasant because no one else has it."
Mandelstam added that medicine was also distributed in this way. Better medicine was reserved for the social elite. On one occasion she was admonishing a pensioned functionary when the latter retorted in an astonished voice: "What are you thinking of? Should I be treated like a cleaning woman?" Mandelstam added that this official was in reality a very decent and good-natured man, but that such attitudes had become widespread at the high-point of the struggle against levelling.
In attempting to overcome its isolation, the bureaucracy allowed other sections of the population to share in the privileges: the aristocracy of the working class, the kolkhoz (collective farm) aristocracy and, above all, the top layers of the intelligentsia. The securing of privileges could not be carried through without arousing resistance from a large part of the Communist Party. In this respect Trotsky wrote: "In a country which has undergone the October Revolution, it is not possible to cultivate inequality other than by resorting to ever more severe measures of repression."
Trotsky traced the totalitarian character of the state and its resort to mass terror to the drive of the bureaucracy to secure and retain its privileges. It could not permit social protest to spill over into open forms of class struggle.
Following Stalin's death, the social development of the Soviet Union did not follow a straight line. After the loss of its main lever of totalitarian power, the bureaucracy was forced to make certain concessions to the masses' strivings for equality.
Immediately after Stalin's death, various social reforms and social programs were introduced to improve the situation of the poorly paid and less fortunate layers of the population. In the following decade their standard of living improved, while the situation of the ruling bureaucracy, and also the better-off sections of the intelligentsia, worsened in a relative sense.
The concealed conflict between these layers of the intelligentsia and the bureaucracy, which broke out into the open in the 1960s and '70s, was rooted in this development. The external expression of this conflict was, on the one hand, the dissident movement, and, on the other, emigration.
The source of this conflict was not only the intelligentsia's striving for greater intellectual and spiritual freedom and access to power. It was also a reaction to the loss of privileges and material advantages which this layer had enjoyed under Stalin. As for the bureaucracy, it responded to the loss of privileges with an unprecedented level of corruption.
Despite the general improvement in living standards in the 1960s, one could describe the social conditions with Trotsky's words: although there was no exploitation in the classic sense of the word, the conditions of life for working people in the Soviet Union were still worse than those of workers suffering exploitation in the capitalist countries. Because it did not possess its own forms of property, the bureaucracy did not represent a propertied class in the real sense of the word. Nevertheless, it exhibited all the negative attributes of the previous ruling class.
In the consciousness of the popular masses, the formation of deep-going social differences devalued the great social achievements of the October Revolution -- the socialisation of the means of production and of the land. In the eyes of working people and the peasantry, the bureaucracy brought socialism into disrepute. It drove them, to a certain extent, to seek a solution other than socialism.
Trotsky had shown that the contradiction between the forms of property and the forms of distribution could not continue to develop indefinitely. The contradiction would have to be resolved one way or another. Either the forms of distribution would have to accommodate themselves to the socialist property relations, i.e., they would have to become more egalitarian, or the bourgeois principle would reach beyond distribution and consume the forms of property.
Proceeding from this thesis, Trotsky developed many prognoses which contained two possible variants. The first might be called revolutionary, the second, counter-revolutionary. Unfortunately the second, counter-revolutionary alternative was realised. And it was realised to an astonishing degree in conformity with Trotsky's warnings, albeit with some delay. (If even the most brilliant prognoses were realised to the letter, i.e., exactly as their authors had imagined, then we would be talking about prophecy, and history would have a mystical character.)
As Trotsky had foreseen, the first serious convulsion led to the social antagonisms rising to the surface. In the first years of perestroika, nothing indicated that things would end with the restoration of capitalism. On the contrary, in 1985, '86 and '87 Gorbachev called for more socialism and the restoration of the Leninist vision of Bolshevism.
In this context, it is interesting to note that the only politician of significance who attacked Gorbachev from the left was Yeltsin. As you are all familiar with the present-day politician Yeltsin, it is interesting to hear a few of his political utterances from earlier times.
At the 1986 party conference, Yeltsin enthusiastically and approvingly quoted Lenin's words: "Social inequality destroys democracy, leads to the decay of the party and diminishes the reputation of the party."
Three years later, he posed the rhetorical question in parliament: "Why do millions of people in our society live below the poverty line, while others literally live like lords and wallow in luxury?"
In his book, which appeared in 1991, one can read the following passage: "I cannot eat sturgeon when I know that my neighbours are not even able to buy milk for their children. I am ashamed to use expensive medicine because I know that many of my fellow citizens are not even able to afford aspirin."
And in his election campaign he promised that his policies would, in the first instance, serve the people whose incomes fell below the average. It was only due to this slogan, which appealed to the popular sense of justice, that Yeltsin was able to come to power.
The development of perestroika since 1988 has confirmed that the dismantling of the socialist foundations of society culminated in a capitalist order, or more precisely, in a capitalist chaos. This process has been accompanied by a catastrophic decline of culture and the economy.
The capitalism which is now emerging will not be a new edition of pre-revolutionary Russian capitalism, because the world has moved closer together since 1917. International finance capital is incomparably more powerful. For this reason, Russia's return to a state of semi-colonial exploitation is the only possibility. In achieving this, the forces of capitalist restoration can only realise their aims through years of civil war and the plundering of the country which Soviet power built up.
Conditions in the country over the last five years can be described in a phrase which has become quite popular in Russia of late, "creeping civil war." This creeping civil war discharges itself from time to time in a shooting war, for example with the bombarding of parliament in 1993, or the war in Chechnya which cannot be brought to an end, despite all the promises emanating from ruling circles.
As far as the country's devastation is concerned, history has never witnessed such destruction of the productive forces in peacetime as has taken place in Russia and the other former republics of the USSR over the last five years. A certain continuity between the earlier and present regimes can be observed. One could say that the present regime has taken over the bad sides of the former Soviet regime and has multiplied the evil with the addition of the bad sides of capitalist society.
Trotsky said: "The secret income of the bureaucracy is nothing other than theft, and outside this relatively legal theft exists an illegal ultra-theft to which Stalin" -- and today Yeltsin -- "closes his eyes because these thieves are his closest social support." The ruling bureaucracy cannot react in any other way than to resort to systematic thievery. This creates a system of bureaucratic gangsterism.
When one considers the tragic fate of our country, one can justifiably say that the October Revolution brought much more for the workers in other countries than for the workers of the Soviet Union. The challenge of socialism forced the capitalist countries to make quite large social concessions to their working classes. The intervention of the state into the relations of production, distribution and exchange in order to resolve social problems is a general law of this century which present day capitalism still has to take into account.
In all the capitalist countries in the second half of the 20th century there was a certain limitation of capitalist freedom. This included, for example, a minimum wage and other guarantees for working people in the advanced capitalist countries. Over decades an active redistribution took place: on one side, the development of social programs for those possessing little, on the other side, a strict control over income, and based on this a strict taxation policy. These measures not only influenced the social situation, but also the economic. They increased demand in the population and were a countervailing tendency to overproduction in the developed capitalist countries.
However, capitalism has still not been able to abolish social inequality. This inequality can be seen in every country, and also between developed and less developed countries -- in the current terminology, between North and South.
It is important to note that the break-up of the Soviet Union into a series of second-rate states has presaged the destruction of the welfare state in the advanced capitalist countries. The attempt is being made to eliminate social gains which were achieved over decades.
At the same time, I would like to stress that up until now no real socialist path has been attempted in any country which called itself socialist. The socialist alternative, which was developed by the Left Opposition in the 1920s and '30s, consists in containing inequality by strict economic measures and, with the increasing development of society, ensuring that the different social groups become more and more equal.
As long as the contradiction between the privileged and the poor exists in the world, the basis remains for the development of new social and political movements. The success of these movements will depend on the degree to which they draw lessons from the negative and positive experiences of socialist construction.
Source: World Socialist Web Site
Tuesday, December 29, 1998
Tuesday, December 22, 1998
Soros warns of "market fundamentalism"
The growing realization over the past 12 months that the so-called "Asian meltdown" is in fact a crisis of the world capitalist system has brought a series of warnings from within ruling circles about the dangers posed by the unrestricted operations of financial markets.
The World Bank, for example, has implicitly criticized the prescriptions of its sister organization the International Monetary Fund insisting that the primary role of fiscal and monetary policy must be to shore up aggregate demand and "expand the social safety net."
The London-based newspaper the Financial Times has published numerous articles and comment pieces over the past months warning that unless central banks take corrective action there is a danger that the world can plunge into a 1930s-type depression. Likewise, The Economist magazine has issued several warnings over the past 12 months that the rise in share values on Wall Street signifies the development of a "bubble economy" the collapse of which could have far-reaching consequences.
Some of the most strident warnings about the state of global financial markets have come from the international financier George Soros, who achieved international notoriety after his Quantum Fund made around $2 billion at the expense of the Bank of England during the sterling currency crisis of 1992.
Soros began the year with an article in the Financial Times warning that the Asian financial crisis--at that stage dismissed by US president Clinton as a "glitch" along the road--could set off a world deflation tendency unless action were taken to counter it.
When the financial crisis spread to Russia in August, Soros published a letter declaring that its banking system was on the point of collapse. The following month, during testimony to the US Congress, he pointed to wider implications of the Russian events, warning that the global capitalist system was "coming apart at the seams."
He told the Congress there was a need to "rethink and reform" the global capitalist system and that as the Russian experience had shown "the problems will become progressively more intractable the longer they are allowed to fester."
Rethinking the capitalist system, Soros insisted, had to begin with the recognition that financial markets are inherently unstable. The global capitalist system was based on the belief that markets, if left to their own devices, would tend to return to an equilibrium position. But this view was false and "instead of acting like a pendulum financial markets have recently acted more like a wrecking ball, knocking over one economy after another."
Now Soros has brought together his fears about the operations of the international financial markets in a new book entitled The Crisis of the Global Capitalism. The book itself does not contain any significant new insights into the operations of world capitalism, much less any solutions to the crisis. But it is not without interest that a major participant in the international financial markets should voice his concern that the entire world capitalist system is heading for a disaster.
Soros sets out his concerns in the opening paragraph: "We live in a global economy, but the political organization of our global society is woefully inadequate. We are bereft of the capacity to preserve peace and to counteract the excesses of the financial markets. Without these controls, the global economy, is liable to break down."
And on the next page Soros continues this theme: "The development of a global economy has not been matched by the development of a global society. The basic unit for political and social life remains the nation-state. International law and international institutions, insofar as they exist, are not strong enough to prevent war or the large-scale abuse of human rights in individual countries. Ecological threats are not adequately dealt with. Global financial markets are largely beyond the control of national or international authorities."
There is nothing particularly original in these thoughts. Soros has merely pointed to the central contradiction of world capitalism identified by Marxists throughout this century--that between the development of a global economy and the division of the world into rival competing nation-states.
According to Soros, the chief danger to stability is the emergence of what he calls "market fundamentalism"-- the belief that the common interest is best served by individual decision-making and that attempts to maintain the common interest by collective action distort the market mechanism. "It is market fundamentalism," he insists, "that has rendered the global capitalist system unsound and unsustainable."
Soros notes that the present situation is not the first time that a global capitalist economy has developed. The first version of the global economy developed at the end of the nineteenth century. However, despite being sustained by major imperial powers, with a common ideological outlook and a stable monetary system based on gold, the system broke down.
"The nineteenth-century incarnation of the global capitalist system," he writes, "in spite of its relative stability, was destroyed by the First World War. After the end of the war, there was a feeble attempt to reconstruct it, which came to a bad end in the crash of 1929 and the subsequent Great Depression. How much more likely is it, then, that the current version of global capitalism will also come to a bad end, given that the elements of stability that were present in the nineteenth century are now missing?"
Soros is critical of the moves by the IMF, the US Treasury and the leaders of the G7 to improve the flow of information on financial markets to try to prevent the emergence of crises in the future. The prevailing doctrines about the operation of financial markets have not changed and the assumption is that with perfect information markets can take care of themselves. He insists that the "debate" must be broadened.
"It is time to recognize that financial markets are inherently unstable. Imposing market discipline means imposing instability, and how much instability can society take? ... To put it bluntly, the choice confronting us is whether we will regulate global financial markets internationally or leave it to each individual state to protect its interests as best it can. The latter course will surely lead to the breakdown of the gigantic circulatory system, which goes under the name of global capitalism."
Soros insists that to "stabilize and regulate" the global economy and prevent such a breakdown, a global system of political decision making is necessary. However in advancing this "solution" Soros runs up against the real contradictions and conflicts generated by the system of rival capitalist nation-states.
"A global society," he writes, "does not mean a global state. To abolish the existence of states is neither feasible nor desirable; but insofar as there are collective interests that transcend state boundaries, the sovereignty of states must be subordinated to international law and international institutions."
However, as Soros himself acknowledges, the greatest opposition to this idea is coming from the United States which is "unwilling to subordinate itself to any international authority." In other words, at the very point where the development of a truly global economy requires the creation of international institutions to prevent a breakdown of the whole system, the divisions between the most powerful nation-states are deepening, thereby rendering such collaboration increasingly difficult, if not impossible.
There are many examples of this process: the increasing inability of the major capitalist powers of the G-7 to reach agreement on economic policies, the conflicts within the IMF over funding and policy issues, the trade tensions between the US and Europe and between the US and Japan, the development of the euro as an international currency to challenge the dollar, and the recent breakdown of the APEC summit, to name but a few.
And in the two weeks since the publication of Soros' book, one of the most graphic examples of "unilateralism" has occurred with the US onslaught against Iraq aimed at securing its interests against its capitalist rivals in the resource-rich Middle East and central Asian regions.
Soros has pointed to some of the central contradictions of the world capitalist system. But the proposals he advances make clear that the representatives of the bourgeoisie, even where they are conscious of the disasters which the market system is producing, are unable to advance any program which can lead civilization out of the impasse in which it now finds itself.
Source: World Socialist Web
The World Bank, for example, has implicitly criticized the prescriptions of its sister organization the International Monetary Fund insisting that the primary role of fiscal and monetary policy must be to shore up aggregate demand and "expand the social safety net."
The London-based newspaper the Financial Times has published numerous articles and comment pieces over the past months warning that unless central banks take corrective action there is a danger that the world can plunge into a 1930s-type depression. Likewise, The Economist magazine has issued several warnings over the past 12 months that the rise in share values on Wall Street signifies the development of a "bubble economy" the collapse of which could have far-reaching consequences.
Some of the most strident warnings about the state of global financial markets have come from the international financier George Soros, who achieved international notoriety after his Quantum Fund made around $2 billion at the expense of the Bank of England during the sterling currency crisis of 1992.
Soros began the year with an article in the Financial Times warning that the Asian financial crisis--at that stage dismissed by US president Clinton as a "glitch" along the road--could set off a world deflation tendency unless action were taken to counter it.
When the financial crisis spread to Russia in August, Soros published a letter declaring that its banking system was on the point of collapse. The following month, during testimony to the US Congress, he pointed to wider implications of the Russian events, warning that the global capitalist system was "coming apart at the seams."
He told the Congress there was a need to "rethink and reform" the global capitalist system and that as the Russian experience had shown "the problems will become progressively more intractable the longer they are allowed to fester."
Rethinking the capitalist system, Soros insisted, had to begin with the recognition that financial markets are inherently unstable. The global capitalist system was based on the belief that markets, if left to their own devices, would tend to return to an equilibrium position. But this view was false and "instead of acting like a pendulum financial markets have recently acted more like a wrecking ball, knocking over one economy after another."
Now Soros has brought together his fears about the operations of the international financial markets in a new book entitled The Crisis of the Global Capitalism. The book itself does not contain any significant new insights into the operations of world capitalism, much less any solutions to the crisis. But it is not without interest that a major participant in the international financial markets should voice his concern that the entire world capitalist system is heading for a disaster.
Soros sets out his concerns in the opening paragraph: "We live in a global economy, but the political organization of our global society is woefully inadequate. We are bereft of the capacity to preserve peace and to counteract the excesses of the financial markets. Without these controls, the global economy, is liable to break down."
And on the next page Soros continues this theme: "The development of a global economy has not been matched by the development of a global society. The basic unit for political and social life remains the nation-state. International law and international institutions, insofar as they exist, are not strong enough to prevent war or the large-scale abuse of human rights in individual countries. Ecological threats are not adequately dealt with. Global financial markets are largely beyond the control of national or international authorities."
There is nothing particularly original in these thoughts. Soros has merely pointed to the central contradiction of world capitalism identified by Marxists throughout this century--that between the development of a global economy and the division of the world into rival competing nation-states.
According to Soros, the chief danger to stability is the emergence of what he calls "market fundamentalism"-- the belief that the common interest is best served by individual decision-making and that attempts to maintain the common interest by collective action distort the market mechanism. "It is market fundamentalism," he insists, "that has rendered the global capitalist system unsound and unsustainable."
Soros notes that the present situation is not the first time that a global capitalist economy has developed. The first version of the global economy developed at the end of the nineteenth century. However, despite being sustained by major imperial powers, with a common ideological outlook and a stable monetary system based on gold, the system broke down.
"The nineteenth-century incarnation of the global capitalist system," he writes, "in spite of its relative stability, was destroyed by the First World War. After the end of the war, there was a feeble attempt to reconstruct it, which came to a bad end in the crash of 1929 and the subsequent Great Depression. How much more likely is it, then, that the current version of global capitalism will also come to a bad end, given that the elements of stability that were present in the nineteenth century are now missing?"
Soros is critical of the moves by the IMF, the US Treasury and the leaders of the G7 to improve the flow of information on financial markets to try to prevent the emergence of crises in the future. The prevailing doctrines about the operation of financial markets have not changed and the assumption is that with perfect information markets can take care of themselves. He insists that the "debate" must be broadened.
"It is time to recognize that financial markets are inherently unstable. Imposing market discipline means imposing instability, and how much instability can society take? ... To put it bluntly, the choice confronting us is whether we will regulate global financial markets internationally or leave it to each individual state to protect its interests as best it can. The latter course will surely lead to the breakdown of the gigantic circulatory system, which goes under the name of global capitalism."
Soros insists that to "stabilize and regulate" the global economy and prevent such a breakdown, a global system of political decision making is necessary. However in advancing this "solution" Soros runs up against the real contradictions and conflicts generated by the system of rival capitalist nation-states.
"A global society," he writes, "does not mean a global state. To abolish the existence of states is neither feasible nor desirable; but insofar as there are collective interests that transcend state boundaries, the sovereignty of states must be subordinated to international law and international institutions."
However, as Soros himself acknowledges, the greatest opposition to this idea is coming from the United States which is "unwilling to subordinate itself to any international authority." In other words, at the very point where the development of a truly global economy requires the creation of international institutions to prevent a breakdown of the whole system, the divisions between the most powerful nation-states are deepening, thereby rendering such collaboration increasingly difficult, if not impossible.
There are many examples of this process: the increasing inability of the major capitalist powers of the G-7 to reach agreement on economic policies, the conflicts within the IMF over funding and policy issues, the trade tensions between the US and Europe and between the US and Japan, the development of the euro as an international currency to challenge the dollar, and the recent breakdown of the APEC summit, to name but a few.
And in the two weeks since the publication of Soros' book, one of the most graphic examples of "unilateralism" has occurred with the US onslaught against Iraq aimed at securing its interests against its capitalist rivals in the resource-rich Middle East and central Asian regions.
Soros has pointed to some of the central contradictions of the world capitalist system. But the proposals he advances make clear that the representatives of the bourgeoisie, even where they are conscious of the disasters which the market system is producing, are unable to advance any program which can lead civilization out of the impasse in which it now finds itself.
Source: World Socialist Web
Monday, November 30, 1998
COMPETITION ACT 89 OF 1998
To provide for the establishment of a Competition Commission responsible investigation, control and evaluation of restrictive practices, abuse of dominant, position and mergers; and for the establishment of a Competition Tribunal responsible to adjudicate such matters; and for the establishment of a Competition Appeal Court; and for related matters.
The people of South Africa recognise:
That apartheid and other discriminatory laws and practices of the past resulted in excessive concentrations of ownership and control within the national economy, inadequate restraints against anti-competitive trade practices, and unjust restrictions on full and free participation in the economy by all South Africans. That the economy must be open to greater ownership by a greater number of South Africans.
That credible competition law, and effective structures to administer that law are necessary for an efficient functioning economy.
That an efficient, competitive economic environment, balancing the interests of workers, owners and consumers and focussed on development, will benefit all South Africans.
IN ORDER TO-
provide all South Africans equal opportunity to participate fairly in the national economy; achieve a more effective and efficient economy in South Africa;
provide for markets in which consumers have access to, and can freely select the quality and variety of goods and services they desire;
create greater capability and an environment for South Africans to compete effectively in international markets;
restrain particular trade practices which undermine a competitive economy;
regulate the transfer of economic ownership in keeping with the public interest;
establish independent institutions to monitor economic competition; and give effect to the international law obligations of the Republic.
Source: SABINET
The people of South Africa recognise:
That apartheid and other discriminatory laws and practices of the past resulted in excessive concentrations of ownership and control within the national economy, inadequate restraints against anti-competitive trade practices, and unjust restrictions on full and free participation in the economy by all South Africans. That the economy must be open to greater ownership by a greater number of South Africans.
That credible competition law, and effective structures to administer that law are necessary for an efficient functioning economy.
That an efficient, competitive economic environment, balancing the interests of workers, owners and consumers and focussed on development, will benefit all South Africans.
IN ORDER TO-
provide all South Africans equal opportunity to participate fairly in the national economy; achieve a more effective and efficient economy in South Africa;
provide for markets in which consumers have access to, and can freely select the quality and variety of goods and services they desire;
create greater capability and an environment for South Africans to compete effectively in international markets;
restrain particular trade practices which undermine a competitive economy;
regulate the transfer of economic ownership in keeping with the public interest;
establish independent institutions to monitor economic competition; and give effect to the international law obligations of the Republic.
Source: SABINET
Saturday, November 7, 1998
ANC paves the way for a travesty of justice
The Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) findings on human rights violations do nothing to provide justice for the victims of apartheid rule in South Africa. The truth is that the reconciliation it advocates is impossible because, behind the thin veneer of democracy provided by the ending of apartheid, South Africa is still characterised by appalling poverty and inequality.
Source: World Socialist Web
Source: World Socialist Web
Friday, October 30, 1998
Pretoria's Words: 'Extrajudicial Killing'
Following are excerpts from the final report issued by South Africa's Truth and Reconciliation Commission today:
Primary Finding
On the basis of the evidence available to it, the primary finding of the Commission is that:
The predominant portion of gross violations of human rights was committed by the former state through its security and law-enforcement agencies.
Moreover, the South African state in the period from the late 1970's to early 1990's became involved in activities of a criminal nature when, amongst other things, it knowingly planned, undertook, condoned and covered up the commission of unlawful acts, including the extrajudicial killing of political opponents and others, inside and outside South Africa.
In pursuit of these unlawful activities, the state acted in collusion with certain other political groupings, most notably the Inkatha Freedom Party (I.F.P.). . . .
Certain members of the State Security Council (the state President, Minister of Defense, Minister of Law and Order, and heads of security forces) did foresee that the use of words such as ''take out,'' ''wipe out,'' ''eradicate,'' and ''eliminate'' would result in the killing of political opponents.
P. W. Botha
During the period that he presided as head of state (1978-1989) according to submissions made to and findings made by the Commission, gross violations of human rights and other unlawful acts were perpetrated on a wide scale by members of the South African Defense Force, including:
The deliberate unlawful killing and attempted killing of persons opposed to the policies of the Government, within and outside South Africa.
The widespread use of torture and other forms of severe ill treatment against such persons.
The forcible abduction of such persons where were resident in neighboring countries.
Covert logistical and financial assistance to organizations opposed to the ideology of the A.N.C. . . .
Inkatha
The Commission finds that in 1986, the South African Defense Forces (S.A.D.F.) conspired with Inkatha to provide the latter with a covert, offensive paramilitary unit (or ''hit squad'') to be deployed illegally against persons and organizations perceived to be opposed to both the South African Government and Inkatha. . . The Commission finds . . . that the deployment of the paramilitary unit in KwaZulu led to gross violations of human rights, including killing, attempted killing and severe ill treatment. The Commission finds the following people, among others, accountable for such violations: Mr. P. W. Botha, Gen. Magnus Malan, Chief Mangosuthu Buthelezi. . . .
The A.N.C.
While it was A.N.C. policy that the loss of civilian life should be ''avoided,'' there were instances where members of its security forces perpetrated gross violations of human rights in that the distinction between military and civilian targets was blurred in certain armed actions, such as the 1983 Church Street bombing of the South African Air Force headquarters. . . . In the course of the armed struggle, the A.N.C., through its security forces, undertook military operations which, though intended for military or security force targets, sometimes went awry for a variety of reasons, including poor intelligence and reconnaissance. The consequences in these cases, such as the Magoo's Bar and Durban Esplanade bombings, were gross violations of human rights in respect of the injuries to and loss of lives of civilians.
Individuals who defected to the state and became informers and/or members who became state witnesses in political trials . . . were often labeled by the A.N.C. as collaborators and regarded as legitimate targets to be killed. The commission does not condone the legitimization of such individuals as military targets and finds that the extrajudicial killings of such individuals constituted gross violations of human rights.
The commission finds that, in the 1980's in particular, a number of gross violations were perpetrated not by direct members of the A.N.C. or those operating under its formal command, but by civilians who saw themselves as A.N.C. supporters. In this regard, the Commission finds that the A.N.C. is morally and politically accountable for creating a climate in which such supporters believed their actions to be legitimate. . . .
A.N.C. Camps
The Commission finds that suspected ''agents'' were routinely subjected to torture and other forms of severe ill treatment and that there were cases of such individuals being charged and convicted by tribunals without proper regard to due process, sentenced to death and executed.
Winnie Mandela
The Commission finds that Ms. Madikizela-Mandela was central to the establishment and formation of the Mandela United Football Club, which later developed into a private vigilante unit. . . . The Commission finds that those who opposed Ms. Madkizela-Mandela and the Mandela United Football Club, or dissented from them, were branded as informers and killed. The Commission finds that Ms. Madikizela-Mandela . . . is accountable, politically and morally for the gross violations of human rights committed by the Mandela United Football Club.
The Commission finds further that Mrs. Madikizela-Mandela herself was responsible for committing such gross violations of human rights.
Source: New York Times
Primary Finding
On the basis of the evidence available to it, the primary finding of the Commission is that:
The predominant portion of gross violations of human rights was committed by the former state through its security and law-enforcement agencies.
Moreover, the South African state in the period from the late 1970's to early 1990's became involved in activities of a criminal nature when, amongst other things, it knowingly planned, undertook, condoned and covered up the commission of unlawful acts, including the extrajudicial killing of political opponents and others, inside and outside South Africa.
In pursuit of these unlawful activities, the state acted in collusion with certain other political groupings, most notably the Inkatha Freedom Party (I.F.P.). . . .
Certain members of the State Security Council (the state President, Minister of Defense, Minister of Law and Order, and heads of security forces) did foresee that the use of words such as ''take out,'' ''wipe out,'' ''eradicate,'' and ''eliminate'' would result in the killing of political opponents.
P. W. Botha
During the period that he presided as head of state (1978-1989) according to submissions made to and findings made by the Commission, gross violations of human rights and other unlawful acts were perpetrated on a wide scale by members of the South African Defense Force, including:
The deliberate unlawful killing and attempted killing of persons opposed to the policies of the Government, within and outside South Africa.
The widespread use of torture and other forms of severe ill treatment against such persons.
The forcible abduction of such persons where were resident in neighboring countries.
Covert logistical and financial assistance to organizations opposed to the ideology of the A.N.C. . . .
Inkatha
The Commission finds that in 1986, the South African Defense Forces (S.A.D.F.) conspired with Inkatha to provide the latter with a covert, offensive paramilitary unit (or ''hit squad'') to be deployed illegally against persons and organizations perceived to be opposed to both the South African Government and Inkatha. . . The Commission finds . . . that the deployment of the paramilitary unit in KwaZulu led to gross violations of human rights, including killing, attempted killing and severe ill treatment. The Commission finds the following people, among others, accountable for such violations: Mr. P. W. Botha, Gen. Magnus Malan, Chief Mangosuthu Buthelezi. . . .
The A.N.C.
While it was A.N.C. policy that the loss of civilian life should be ''avoided,'' there were instances where members of its security forces perpetrated gross violations of human rights in that the distinction between military and civilian targets was blurred in certain armed actions, such as the 1983 Church Street bombing of the South African Air Force headquarters. . . . In the course of the armed struggle, the A.N.C., through its security forces, undertook military operations which, though intended for military or security force targets, sometimes went awry for a variety of reasons, including poor intelligence and reconnaissance. The consequences in these cases, such as the Magoo's Bar and Durban Esplanade bombings, were gross violations of human rights in respect of the injuries to and loss of lives of civilians.
Individuals who defected to the state and became informers and/or members who became state witnesses in political trials . . . were often labeled by the A.N.C. as collaborators and regarded as legitimate targets to be killed. The commission does not condone the legitimization of such individuals as military targets and finds that the extrajudicial killings of such individuals constituted gross violations of human rights.
The commission finds that, in the 1980's in particular, a number of gross violations were perpetrated not by direct members of the A.N.C. or those operating under its formal command, but by civilians who saw themselves as A.N.C. supporters. In this regard, the Commission finds that the A.N.C. is morally and politically accountable for creating a climate in which such supporters believed their actions to be legitimate. . . .
A.N.C. Camps
The Commission finds that suspected ''agents'' were routinely subjected to torture and other forms of severe ill treatment and that there were cases of such individuals being charged and convicted by tribunals without proper regard to due process, sentenced to death and executed.
Winnie Mandela
The Commission finds that Ms. Madikizela-Mandela was central to the establishment and formation of the Mandela United Football Club, which later developed into a private vigilante unit. . . . The Commission finds that those who opposed Ms. Madkizela-Mandela and the Mandela United Football Club, or dissented from them, were branded as informers and killed. The Commission finds that Ms. Madikizela-Mandela . . . is accountable, politically and morally for the gross violations of human rights committed by the Mandela United Football Club.
The Commission finds further that Mrs. Madikizela-Mandela herself was responsible for committing such gross violations of human rights.
Source: New York Times
Thursday, October 29, 1998
HRW Welcomes Release of South African Truth Report
Human Rights Watch welcomed the release of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's (TRC) draft report as an important step in establishing the truth about past human rights abuses committed in South Africa.
It is disturbing to see South Africa's political leadership undermine the vitally important work of the truth commission," said Kenneth Roth, Executive Director of Human Rights Watch. "The draft report offers all South Africans and the world at large the opportunity to learn from South Africa's suffering during apartheid. We call upon those responsible for the abuses committed by all sides to rise to this historical occasion and acknowledge their role in human rights abuses. Such acknowledgment is an essential step in reconciliation."
At a ceremony in Pretoria today, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, the chairperson of the Commission, handed over the five-volume report to President Nelson Mandela. The report documents the widespread human rights abuses committed during the apartheid era in South Africa, implicating many apartheid government officials as well as the ANC and other liberation organizations.
Human Rights Watch expressed disappointment with the TRC's decision to excise findings from their draft report implicating the last president of the apartheid era, F.W. De Klerk. Human Rights Watch urged the TRC to take the necessary steps to ensure that all those proved responsible for abuses would be named in its final report.
Human Rights Watch condemned the attempt by the ruling ANC to prevent the release of the draft report, and urged its leadership to take responsibility for the abuses committed during its liberation struggle. ANC Secretary-General Kgalema Motlanthe attempted to block the release of the TRC report through a court application which was rejected early today. In the application, the ANC accused the TRC of "criminalizing the struggle for the liberation of the people of South Africa," and argued that if the ANC had to be bound by the requirements of the laws of war, South Africa's liberation struggle might have failed.
Human Rights Watch emphatically rejects the view advanced by the ANC that it should be held to a lower standard of scrutiny because it was fighting a just war against an oppressive system. The abuses committed by the ANC during its liberation struggle, including the targeting of innocent civilians in bombing campaigns and the torture and summary executions of suspected collaborators at ANC camps, cannot be justified by reference to the justice of its struggle. The objectives of any military or political campaign do not affect the obligations of all parties to respect the rules of war and the principles of international humanitarian law.
"The argument advanced by the ANC that they should not be held accountable for their abuses because they were committed in the furtherance of a legitimate struggle are directly contrary to the principles of international law," said Peter Takirambudde, Executive Director of the Africa Division of Human Rights Watch. "We urge the ANC to take responsibility for the abuses committed by its forces during the apartheid era, and to stop hiding behind the legitimacy of its struggle against apartheid."
Human Rights Watch strongly supports the call by the TRC to prosecute individuals who committed gross human rights violations and did not seek amnesty. Calls for a blanket amnesty should be rejected, as all individuals had the opportunity to seek amnesty from the TRC.
Source: Human Rights Watch
It is disturbing to see South Africa's political leadership undermine the vitally important work of the truth commission," said Kenneth Roth, Executive Director of Human Rights Watch. "The draft report offers all South Africans and the world at large the opportunity to learn from South Africa's suffering during apartheid. We call upon those responsible for the abuses committed by all sides to rise to this historical occasion and acknowledge their role in human rights abuses. Such acknowledgment is an essential step in reconciliation."
At a ceremony in Pretoria today, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, the chairperson of the Commission, handed over the five-volume report to President Nelson Mandela. The report documents the widespread human rights abuses committed during the apartheid era in South Africa, implicating many apartheid government officials as well as the ANC and other liberation organizations.
Human Rights Watch expressed disappointment with the TRC's decision to excise findings from their draft report implicating the last president of the apartheid era, F.W. De Klerk. Human Rights Watch urged the TRC to take the necessary steps to ensure that all those proved responsible for abuses would be named in its final report.
Human Rights Watch condemned the attempt by the ruling ANC to prevent the release of the draft report, and urged its leadership to take responsibility for the abuses committed during its liberation struggle. ANC Secretary-General Kgalema Motlanthe attempted to block the release of the TRC report through a court application which was rejected early today. In the application, the ANC accused the TRC of "criminalizing the struggle for the liberation of the people of South Africa," and argued that if the ANC had to be bound by the requirements of the laws of war, South Africa's liberation struggle might have failed.
Human Rights Watch emphatically rejects the view advanced by the ANC that it should be held to a lower standard of scrutiny because it was fighting a just war against an oppressive system. The abuses committed by the ANC during its liberation struggle, including the targeting of innocent civilians in bombing campaigns and the torture and summary executions of suspected collaborators at ANC camps, cannot be justified by reference to the justice of its struggle. The objectives of any military or political campaign do not affect the obligations of all parties to respect the rules of war and the principles of international humanitarian law.
"The argument advanced by the ANC that they should not be held accountable for their abuses because they were committed in the furtherance of a legitimate struggle are directly contrary to the principles of international law," said Peter Takirambudde, Executive Director of the Africa Division of Human Rights Watch. "We urge the ANC to take responsibility for the abuses committed by its forces during the apartheid era, and to stop hiding behind the legitimacy of its struggle against apartheid."
Human Rights Watch strongly supports the call by the TRC to prosecute individuals who committed gross human rights violations and did not seek amnesty. Calls for a blanket amnesty should be rejected, as all individuals had the opportunity to seek amnesty from the TRC.
Source: Human Rights Watch
Wednesday, October 28, 1998
EXECUTIVE MEMBERS’ ETHICS ACT 82 OF 1998
To provide for a code of ethics governing the conduct of members of the Cabinet, Deputy Ministers and members of provincial Executive Councils; and to provide for matters connected therewith.
INSPECTION OF FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS ACT 80 OF 1998
The purpose of the Inspection of Financial Institutions Act is to provide for the inspection of the affairs of financial institutions; the inspection of the affairs of unregistered entities conducting the business of financial institutions; and for matters connected therewith.
Appointment of inspectors
(1) The registrar may from time to time appoint inspectors under this Act.
(2) The registrar must furnish every inspector with a certificate of appointment signed by the registrar.
(3) An inspector must, before commencement of an inspection or the examination of any person, produce his or her certificate of appointment.
(4) An inspector may, with the consent of the registrar, appoint any person to assist him or her in carrying out an inspection.
Source: SABINET
Appointment of inspectors
(1) The registrar may from time to time appoint inspectors under this Act.
(2) The registrar must furnish every inspector with a certificate of appointment signed by the registrar.
(3) An inspector must, before commencement of an inspection or the examination of any person, produce his or her certificate of appointment.
(4) An inspector may, with the consent of the registrar, appoint any person to assist him or her in carrying out an inspection.
Source: SABINET
The voice of 'Prime Evil'
In the South African media, Eugene De Kock has been described as a mass killer, a psychopath known to the public as "Prime Evil". He's an unlikely villain. With his carefully combed hair and thick glasses, he looks more like a librarian than a ruthless assassin. And in the post-apartheid era of truth and reconciliation he has also become something of a hero, a man of integrity in a community of denial.Truth and reconciliation has been hard to come by in South Africa. Only one former apartheid cabinet minister has sought amnesty for his role in the political crimes of the last white government. Every other minister has dodged the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, and passed off the crimes of the apartheid era as the work of a few rotten apples.
De Kock is one of the foul fruits grown from the tree of apartheid. When he admitted to his crimes in front of a Truth and Reconciliation Commission he was applauded by a black audience. They were commending him for his honesty, and his willingness to identify senior politicians on whose orders he carried out his dirty work. De Kock disputes the label of psychopath, arguing that he never took pleasure in killing his victims. It was a job he said, and he was acting under orders from the very top.
Eugene De Kock is on a crusade to finger his old bosses who let him fall for his crimes once he had outgrown his usefulness as an apartheid killing machine. He still gives them sleepless nights with his clarity and vision in recalling that dark era when a white government was prepared to cling to power by any means necessary.
The flaw within the Truth and Reconciliation Commission may be that such brutal honesty will not be put to good use. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission chose only the last three decades of the apartheid era for its frame of reference. It's a small period of South African history in which an awful lot of crimes were committed under the name of apartheid. But almost two and a half years on from the first investigative hearing, this Commission of Truth has been left with a huge lie: that it was not the apartheid leaders who were responsible for the heinous crimes of that era, but the foot soldiers like Eugene De Kock.
The ministers who guided and co-ordinated the evil strategy of apartheid have used the Truth Commission like a Catholic confession box. They have taken their pew and spoken softly only of the crimes they want to confess - and the Commission has absolved them of their sins, blessing them as they leave to forget about that awful past.
Source: BBC
Friday, October 16, 1998
NATIONAL PROSECUTING AUTHORITY ACT 32 OF 1998
The purpose of the National Prosecutions Authority Act is regulate matters incidental to the establishment by the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, of a single national prosecuting authority; and to provide for matters connected therewith.
WHEREAS section 179 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 (Act No. 108 of 1996), provides for the establishment of a single national prosecuting authority in the Republic structured in terms of an Act of Parliament; the appointment by the President of a National Director of Public Prosecutions as head of the national prosecuting authority; the appointment of Directors of Public Prosecutions and prosecutors as determined by an Act of Parliament;
AND WHEREAS the Constitution provides that the Cabinet member responsible for the administration of justice must exercise final responsibility over the prosecuting authority;
AND WHEREAS the Constitution provides that national legislation must ensure that the Directors of Public Prosecutions are appropriately qualified and are responsible for prosecutions in specific jurisdictions;
AND WHEREAS the Constitution provides that national legislation must ensure that the prosecuting authority exercises its functions without fear, favour or prejudice;
AND WHEREAS the Constitution provides that the National Director of Public Prosecutions must determine, with the concurrence of the Cabinet member responsible for the administration of justice, and after consulting the Directors of Public Prosecutions, prosecution policy which must be observed in the prosecution process;
AND WHEREAS the Constitution provides that the National Director of Public Prosecutions may intervene in the prosecution process when policy directives are not being complied with, and may review a decision to prosecute or not to prosecute;
AND WHEREAS the Constitution provides that the prosecuting authority has the power to institute criminal proceedings on behalf of the state, and to carry out any necessary functions incidental to instituting criminal proceedings;
AND WHEREAS the Constitution provides that all other matters concerning the prosecuting authority must be determined by national legislation;
Source: SABINET
WHEREAS section 179 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 (Act No. 108 of 1996), provides for the establishment of a single national prosecuting authority in the Republic structured in terms of an Act of Parliament; the appointment by the President of a National Director of Public Prosecutions as head of the national prosecuting authority; the appointment of Directors of Public Prosecutions and prosecutors as determined by an Act of Parliament;
AND WHEREAS the Constitution provides that the Cabinet member responsible for the administration of justice must exercise final responsibility over the prosecuting authority;
AND WHEREAS the Constitution provides that national legislation must ensure that the Directors of Public Prosecutions are appropriately qualified and are responsible for prosecutions in specific jurisdictions;
AND WHEREAS the Constitution provides that national legislation must ensure that the prosecuting authority exercises its functions without fear, favour or prejudice;
AND WHEREAS the Constitution provides that the National Director of Public Prosecutions must determine, with the concurrence of the Cabinet member responsible for the administration of justice, and after consulting the Directors of Public Prosecutions, prosecution policy which must be observed in the prosecution process;
AND WHEREAS the Constitution provides that the National Director of Public Prosecutions may intervene in the prosecution process when policy directives are not being complied with, and may review a decision to prosecute or not to prosecute;
AND WHEREAS the Constitution provides that the prosecuting authority has the power to institute criminal proceedings on behalf of the state, and to carry out any necessary functions incidental to instituting criminal proceedings;
AND WHEREAS the Constitution provides that all other matters concerning the prosecuting authority must be determined by national legislation;
Source: SABINET
Wednesday, October 7, 1998
Man Is Guilty in the Killing, For Sport, of a Firefighter
A 22-year-old Long Island man was convicted yesterday of murdering a total stranger -- an off-duty New York City firefighter out for a jog -- for no reason other than pure, random sport in January 1997.
After three days of deliberation, a jury in Suffolk County Court in Riverhead convicted the man, William P. Sodders, of one count of second-degree murder in the shooting death of James Halversen, 30, in Centereach, N.Y., on Jan. 3, 1997. Mr. Sodders is scheduled to be sentenced on Nov. 4. He faces a sentence of 25 years to life in prison.
It was not known whether Mr. Sodders's lawyers planned to appeal, and they could not be reached for comment last night. But for prosecutors, the conviction concluded a case that was particularly chilling because Mr. Sodders had intended to shoot a stranger just for the thrill of it. ''We're gratified with the jury's decision,'' an assistant District Attorney, William T. Ferris, told reporters yesterday outside the courthouse in Riverhead. ''They made the correct decision in this case. We're very thrilled.''
Mr. Halversen joined the Fire Department in 1992. Assigned to Hook and Ladder Company 174 in East Flatbush, Brooklyn, he quickly established a reputation as a free spirit who relished all sorts of challenges, be they sports or the strategy of firefighting. He was also regarded as a family man and a tireless worker who took after-hours jobs as a roofer and handyman to help support his family.
On Jan. 3, 1997, Mr. Halversen drove from his home in Centereach, his golden retriever at his side, for his usual jog at the Centereach High School track. But a few hours later, his wife, Rosalie -- who was eight months' pregnant with twins -- found her husband unconscious at the track and shot several times in the chest and legs.
A few days later, Mr. Sodders was turned in by his father, Patrick Sodders. Mr. Sodders said that his son's girlfriend, whom he identified only as Nicole, had told him that she knew that the younger Sodders had been in the vicinity of the high school track on the night of the murder.
Father and son worked as mechanics at the same bus company on Long Island. But the elder Sodders described his son, an 11th-grade dropout, as a violent young man with a history of psychiatric problems, who used drugs, bullied his brother and sister, and enjoyed violent movies like ''Natural Born Killers,'' which depicts random violence. And because he feared that William would harm Nicole -- the mother of his son's infant daughter -- or family members, he decided to contact the police.
During the trial, Mr. Ferris told of Mr. Sodders and a friend, Eric W. Calvin, going out driving on Jan. 3 ''looking to hurt someone.'' He said that Mr. Sodders test-fired a 9-millimeter handgun on the way to the track, and chose Mr. Halversen as a target.
At the track, Mr. Ferris said, Mr. Sodders bent over, pretending to tie a shoelace as Mr. Halversen approached. Finally, the prosecutor said, Mr. Sodders rose and fired point-blank, striking Mr. Halversen in the chest. There was no robbery, no exchange of words, no demand of surrender, prosecutors said.
Mr. Sodders then returned home to eat dinner and watch a television movie with Mr. Calvin, Mr. Ferris contended during the trial.
At several points during the trial, Mr. Halversen's widow wept openly. Many members of Mr. Halversen's fire company attended the trial as well, and displayed a picture of Mr. Halversen at the station house.
Yesterday, after the verdict was rendered, Lieut. Brian Foley of Hook and Ladder 174 said that the firefighters were relieved that the ordeal was over.
''This was like a weight lifted,'' Lieutenant Foley said.
Source: New York Times
After three days of deliberation, a jury in Suffolk County Court in Riverhead convicted the man, William P. Sodders, of one count of second-degree murder in the shooting death of James Halversen, 30, in Centereach, N.Y., on Jan. 3, 1997. Mr. Sodders is scheduled to be sentenced on Nov. 4. He faces a sentence of 25 years to life in prison.
It was not known whether Mr. Sodders's lawyers planned to appeal, and they could not be reached for comment last night. But for prosecutors, the conviction concluded a case that was particularly chilling because Mr. Sodders had intended to shoot a stranger just for the thrill of it. ''We're gratified with the jury's decision,'' an assistant District Attorney, William T. Ferris, told reporters yesterday outside the courthouse in Riverhead. ''They made the correct decision in this case. We're very thrilled.''
Mr. Halversen joined the Fire Department in 1992. Assigned to Hook and Ladder Company 174 in East Flatbush, Brooklyn, he quickly established a reputation as a free spirit who relished all sorts of challenges, be they sports or the strategy of firefighting. He was also regarded as a family man and a tireless worker who took after-hours jobs as a roofer and handyman to help support his family.
On Jan. 3, 1997, Mr. Halversen drove from his home in Centereach, his golden retriever at his side, for his usual jog at the Centereach High School track. But a few hours later, his wife, Rosalie -- who was eight months' pregnant with twins -- found her husband unconscious at the track and shot several times in the chest and legs.
A few days later, Mr. Sodders was turned in by his father, Patrick Sodders. Mr. Sodders said that his son's girlfriend, whom he identified only as Nicole, had told him that she knew that the younger Sodders had been in the vicinity of the high school track on the night of the murder.
Father and son worked as mechanics at the same bus company on Long Island. But the elder Sodders described his son, an 11th-grade dropout, as a violent young man with a history of psychiatric problems, who used drugs, bullied his brother and sister, and enjoyed violent movies like ''Natural Born Killers,'' which depicts random violence. And because he feared that William would harm Nicole -- the mother of his son's infant daughter -- or family members, he decided to contact the police.
During the trial, Mr. Ferris told of Mr. Sodders and a friend, Eric W. Calvin, going out driving on Jan. 3 ''looking to hurt someone.'' He said that Mr. Sodders test-fired a 9-millimeter handgun on the way to the track, and chose Mr. Halversen as a target.
At the track, Mr. Ferris said, Mr. Sodders bent over, pretending to tie a shoelace as Mr. Halversen approached. Finally, the prosecutor said, Mr. Sodders rose and fired point-blank, striking Mr. Halversen in the chest. There was no robbery, no exchange of words, no demand of surrender, prosecutors said.
Mr. Sodders then returned home to eat dinner and watch a television movie with Mr. Calvin, Mr. Ferris contended during the trial.
At several points during the trial, Mr. Halversen's widow wept openly. Many members of Mr. Halversen's fire company attended the trial as well, and displayed a picture of Mr. Halversen at the station house.
Yesterday, after the verdict was rendered, Lieut. Brian Foley of Hook and Ladder 174 said that the firefighters were relieved that the ordeal was over.
''This was like a weight lifted,'' Lieutenant Foley said.
Source: New York Times
Wednesday, September 30, 1998
HEATH SPECIAL INVESTIGATING UNIT
The Special Investigating Unit is committed to provide the highest quality professional forensic investigation and litigation service to all State institutions at national, provincial and local levels. The activities of the Unit are designed to effectively combat maladministration, corruption and fraud involving the administration of State institutions and to protect state assets and public money.
On establishment, the Special Investigating Unit was entrusted by the provisions of Section 2 of the SPECIAL INVESTIGATING UNITS AND SPECIAL TRIBUNALS Act 74 of 1996 to deal with the whole spectrum of clean administration and the protection of the interests of the public with regard to public money and public property. Section 2 (g) is an exception as it is not State related and deals with private interests of categories of the public. The provisions of Section 2 cover a wide field of unlawful action, corruption and maladministration.
The involvement and profile of the Special Investigating Unit in the field of investigating maladministration, corruption, etc. is growing all the time. The public is becoming aware of the nature of the work that the Unit can do and the potential it has for the safeguarding and recovery of the assets of State institutions. The involvement of the Unit in almost all the Provinces of our country will lead to a dramatic increase in workload. The Unit is in a phase of growing and expanding in order to cope with these increased pressures.
Cases successfuly completed and/or in respect of which orders were granted from 01 April 1998 to 30 September 1998 amount to R501 261 000.00
On establishment, the Special Investigating Unit was entrusted by the provisions of Section 2 of the SPECIAL INVESTIGATING UNITS AND SPECIAL TRIBUNALS Act 74 of 1996 to deal with the whole spectrum of clean administration and the protection of the interests of the public with regard to public money and public property. Section 2 (g) is an exception as it is not State related and deals with private interests of categories of the public. The provisions of Section 2 cover a wide field of unlawful action, corruption and maladministration.
The involvement and profile of the Special Investigating Unit in the field of investigating maladministration, corruption, etc. is growing all the time. The public is becoming aware of the nature of the work that the Unit can do and the potential it has for the safeguarding and recovery of the assets of State institutions. The involvement of the Unit in almost all the Provinces of our country will lead to a dramatic increase in workload. The Unit is in a phase of growing and expanding in order to cope with these increased pressures.
Cases successfuly completed and/or in respect of which orders were granted from 01 April 1998 to 30 September 1998 amount to R501 261 000.00
Monday, August 17, 1998
DULLAH OMAR: JOBS FOR PALS
LONG, LONG AGO MR DULLAH OMAR was a humble and serious lawyer who espoused the cause of non-racialism and liberation. He is known never to have sued a client for non-payment of fees, believing that if they did not pay, they probably could not afford to pay. Twenty years ago, he was the senior partner of a leading law firm on the Cape Flats, known first as AM Omar & Co. and then as Omar & Vassen.
In the early eighties, he turned down an invitation to join the board of the new – privately owned – Gatesville Hospital, rudely denouncing the owners as “a bunch of capitalists”. In the eighties, he went to the Bar and, as a struggle lawyer, often accompanied his clients into detention. Not that long ago when, somewhat misguidedly, corporate lawyers Sonnenbergs invited him, in his capacity as the new Minister of Justice, to open their luxurious new offices in Cape Town, he soured the occasion by observing in his speech: “The poor definitely can’t come in here.”
But now, established as Minister of Justice and a senior leader of the ANC in the Cape, things appear to have changed. The minister’s children are major beneficiaries of “empowerment” shares worth many millions, in a variety of companies. Today, the Omar family owns a R650 000 holiday house in Betty’s Bay (Dr Verwoerd’s favourite resort) and recently Omar’s wife, Hadji Farieda, was pictured at the auction of a Constantia mansion that belonged to Bulgarian mass murderer, Goran Bojovic. It was knocked down to her on a bid of R1.2m. (For advice on their big business dealings do they consult Sonnenbergs, or is it Herbsteins, where daughter Fazlan is doing her articles?) And then there is the rapidly expanding network of friends and associates of the minister who have recently acquired jobs in the Public Service. Large numbers of lawyers once connected to Omar & Co, appear to have recreated Omar & Co in a new guise – on the State’s payroll. We have compiled a list of some of them:
Source: Nose Week: Issue # 24
In the early eighties, he turned down an invitation to join the board of the new – privately owned – Gatesville Hospital, rudely denouncing the owners as “a bunch of capitalists”. In the eighties, he went to the Bar and, as a struggle lawyer, often accompanied his clients into detention. Not that long ago when, somewhat misguidedly, corporate lawyers Sonnenbergs invited him, in his capacity as the new Minister of Justice, to open their luxurious new offices in Cape Town, he soured the occasion by observing in his speech: “The poor definitely can’t come in here.”
But now, established as Minister of Justice and a senior leader of the ANC in the Cape, things appear to have changed. The minister’s children are major beneficiaries of “empowerment” shares worth many millions, in a variety of companies. Today, the Omar family owns a R650 000 holiday house in Betty’s Bay (Dr Verwoerd’s favourite resort) and recently Omar’s wife, Hadji Farieda, was pictured at the auction of a Constantia mansion that belonged to Bulgarian mass murderer, Goran Bojovic. It was knocked down to her on a bid of R1.2m. (For advice on their big business dealings do they consult Sonnenbergs, or is it Herbsteins, where daughter Fazlan is doing her articles?) And then there is the rapidly expanding network of friends and associates of the minister who have recently acquired jobs in the Public Service. Large numbers of lawyers once connected to Omar & Co, appear to have recreated Omar & Co in a new guise – on the State’s payroll. We have compiled a list of some of them:
- Enver Daniels, once a professional assistant in Omar’s firm, was appointed first as special adviser to the minister, and is now Chief Government Law Adviser.
- Denzil Potgieter, another Omar PA, was appointed to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. He has been elevated to the status of Senior Counsel at the Cape Town Bar, contrary to the Bar Council’s recommendation, and is tipped for judicial appointment.
- Mr Omar’s old law partner, Ramesh Vassen, was struck off the roll of attorneys when he was caught with a “short-fall” on his trust account. His appeal to have himself reinstated – after he repaid all the money he had stolen – was turned down by the Appeal Court in Bloemfontein in June. But, in the meantime, Vassen has been helped out with a job in the “service “ – as a Parliamentary liaison officer.
- Percy Sonn, once a professional assistant at Omars, is today Deputy Attorney General of the Cape.
- Shenaaz Meer, one-time articled clerk at Omars – and daughter of friend Dr Fatima Meer – first got a job at the Legal Resources Centre, and now sits on the Land Claims Court.
- David Mias, another attorney long associated with Mr Omar – he was also the escort of Dullah’s sister, Ragmat, for many years – was first appointed to run the Legal Reousrces Centre in Port Elizabeth. When it failed due to mismanagement, Mias was appointed State Attorney in Cape Town.
- Mias’s former partner, Ms Marcel Luter, was recently appointed Deputy State Attorney in Pretoria.
- Yusuf (Joey) Ebrahim, once a professional assistant in Dullah’s firm, never managed to get his law BA, but somehow UCT was persuaded to admit him to an affirmative MA course – which he never completed. In the meantime, Mr Ebrahim was made first an assessor to Judge President Friedman on the Cape Bench, and then, bless him, a judge in Bisho.
- Another prominent “Indian” attorney from the Cape Flats, Dines Gihwala, was recently made an acting judge of the Cape High Court. You may be surprised that we include him in our list of those in favour with Mr Omar. Gihwala was, after all, his arch-opponent for many years; one of those men of colour who was happy to serve on the ethnic “management” committees set up by the previous regime; the sort of “coloured” lawyer who did not want to get involved with defending “politicals”. In fact, just the sort of attorney of colour who would, in the new era, have his firm amalgamate with the ultimate in Broederbond firms, Hofmeyr Van der Merwe. So why should Mr Gihwala now have received the nod from the minister and have been appointed an acting judge? Speculation in informed circles is that the minister’s pride has been satisfied by Gihwala’s acknowledgement of his leadership. Gihwala has not only made a donation of R50 000 to ANC funds, but earlier this year persuaded the Hindu Association of Rylands Estate, of which he is a leading member, to throw a festive bash in honour of the minister. Great stuff in an election year. Not that everyone is that thrilled with the new-found affection between the two old enemies – unnamed “elements” in the Thornhill Residents’ Association – ANC stronghold of the Omar clan – expressed their disapproval by distributing a scurrilous pamphlet about Gihwala in their neighbourhood.
- Then there’s Omar’s political rival of the struggle years, Essa Moosa, who was first the UDF’s main attorney and then became ANC star Allan Boesak’s attorney. Sometimes described as a “dagga” lawyer from Athlone who made his first fortune out of International Defence and Aid Fund grants, Moose has rapidly ascended the social and Justice Department ladders from being appointed Co-ordinator of Lay Assessors. Early this year he was appointed an acting judge of the Free State High Court.
- The star in Omar’s firmament has to be Judge Siraj Desai, whose experience and undoubted ability made him a fit appointment to the Cape Bench. Judge Desai, too, started his career as a professional assistant in Dullah’s firm. Not that long before his appointment he pleased Mr Omar greatly by abandoning the more radical Unity Movement to join the ANC.
- Even old friends at the Mitchell’s Plain courts have not been forgotten. Nizaam Hendricks, long on the court staff and a frequent dinner guest of the Omars, was transferred to Pretoria as head of personnel in the department of Justice.
- Since Hendrick’s attorney wife, Gadija Behardien, also needed a job on their transfer north, the department’s head of personnel (Hendricks) was fortunately able to assist with a local post – that of deputy State Attorney in Pretoria. Hold your breath. Who is next in line for a job? Will it be Ebie Mohamed, Nita Hanmer or Dullah’s charming and attractive old friend, Nicky van Driel?
Source: Nose Week: Issue # 24
Saturday, August 1, 1998
Office of the National Director of Public Prosecutions
Section 179 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 (Act No. 108 of 1996), created a single National Prosecution Authority (NPA).
The Office of the National Director of Public Prosecutions, first headed by Mr Bulelani Thandabantu Ngcuka - and now headed by Advocate Vusumzi Patrick Pikoli, was established on 1 August 1998, in terms of section 179 (1) of the Constitution. The NPA comprises the National Director, who is the head of the Office and manages the Office; Directors of Public Prosecutions; Investigating Directors and Special Directors; other members of the prosecuting authority appointed at or assigned to the Office; and members of the administrative staff at the Office.
Legislation governing the prosecuting authority is the National Prosecuting Authority Act, 1998 (Act No. 32 of 1998). The Constitution, read with the said Act, provides the prosecuting authority with the power to institute criminal proceedings on behalf of the State and to carry out any necessary functions incidental to instituting criminal proceedings.
Background
* The Bill of Rights and Section 179 of the 1996 Constitution of the Republic of South Africa create a single prosecuting authority.
* The National Prosecuting Authority Act 32 of 1998 brings the NPA into existence.
* In August 1998, the first National Director of Public Prosecution was appointed.
* Seven Core Business Units:
o National Prosecutions Service (NPS)
o The Office for Witness Protection (OWP)
o Asset Forfeiture Unit (AFU)
o Sexual Offences and Community Affairs (SOCA)
o Specialised Commercial Crime Unit (SCCU)
o Witness Protection Unit (WPU)
o Priority Crimes Litigation Unit (PCLU)
* All the Business Units are supported by Corporate Services.
Legislation
* The following are some of the important laws that have a direct bearing on NPA activities:
o NPA Act 32 of 1998
o Witness Protection Act 112 of 1998
o Domestic Violence Act 116 of 1998
o Prevention of Organised Crime Act 121 of 1998
o Prevention and Combating of Corruption Activity 12 of 2004
The Office of the National Director of Public Prosecutions, first headed by Mr Bulelani Thandabantu Ngcuka - and now headed by Advocate Vusumzi Patrick Pikoli, was established on 1 August 1998, in terms of section 179 (1) of the Constitution. The NPA comprises the National Director, who is the head of the Office and manages the Office; Directors of Public Prosecutions; Investigating Directors and Special Directors; other members of the prosecuting authority appointed at or assigned to the Office; and members of the administrative staff at the Office.
Legislation governing the prosecuting authority is the National Prosecuting Authority Act, 1998 (Act No. 32 of 1998). The Constitution, read with the said Act, provides the prosecuting authority with the power to institute criminal proceedings on behalf of the State and to carry out any necessary functions incidental to instituting criminal proceedings.
Background
* The Bill of Rights and Section 179 of the 1996 Constitution of the Republic of South Africa create a single prosecuting authority.
* The National Prosecuting Authority Act 32 of 1998 brings the NPA into existence.
* In August 1998, the first National Director of Public Prosecution was appointed.
* Seven Core Business Units:
o National Prosecutions Service (NPS)
o The Office for Witness Protection (OWP)
o Asset Forfeiture Unit (AFU)
o Sexual Offences and Community Affairs (SOCA)
o Specialised Commercial Crime Unit (SCCU)
o Witness Protection Unit (WPU)
o Priority Crimes Litigation Unit (PCLU)
* All the Business Units are supported by Corporate Services.
Legislation
* The following are some of the important laws that have a direct bearing on NPA activities:
o NPA Act 32 of 1998
o Witness Protection Act 112 of 1998
o Domestic Violence Act 116 of 1998
o Prevention of Organised Crime Act 121 of 1998
o Prevention and Combating of Corruption Activity 12 of 2004
Office of the National Director of Public Prosecutions
Section 179 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 (Act No. 108 of 1996), created a single National Prosecution Authority (NPA).
The Office of the National Director of Public Prosecutions was established on 1 August 1998, in terms of section 179 (1) of the Constitution. The NPA comprises the National Director, who is the head of the Office and manages the Office; Directors of Public Prosecutions; Investigating Directors and Special Directors; other members of the prosecuting authority appointed at or assigned to the Office; and members of the administrative staff at the Office.
Legislation governing the prosecuting authority is the National Prosecuting Authority Act, 1998 (Act No. 32 of 1998). The Constitution, read with the said Act, provides the prosecuting authority with the power to institute criminal proceedings on behalf of the State and to carry out any necessary functions incidental to instituting criminal proceedings.
Background
* The Bill of Rights and Section 179 of the 1996 Constitution of the Republic of South Africa create a single prosecuting authority.
* The National Prosecuting Authority Act 32 of 1998 brings the NPA into existence.
* In August 1998, the first National Director of Public Prosecution was appointed.
* Seven Core Business Units:
o National Prosecutions Service (NPS)
o The Office for Witness Protection (OWP)
o Asset Forfeiture Unit (AFU)
o Sexual Offences and Community Affairs (SOCA)
o Specialised Commercial Crime Unit (SCCU)
o Witness Protection Unit (WPU)
o Priority Crimes Litigation Unit (PCLU)
* All the Business Units are supported by Corporate Services.
Legislation
* The following are some of the important laws that have a direct bearing on NPA activities:
o NPA Act 32 of 1998
o Witness Protection Act 112 of 1998
o Domestic Violence Act 116 of 1998
o Prevention of Organised Crime Act 121 of 1998
o Prevention and Combating of Corruption Activity 12 of 2004
The Office of the National Director of Public Prosecutions was established on 1 August 1998, in terms of section 179 (1) of the Constitution. The NPA comprises the National Director, who is the head of the Office and manages the Office; Directors of Public Prosecutions; Investigating Directors and Special Directors; other members of the prosecuting authority appointed at or assigned to the Office; and members of the administrative staff at the Office.
Legislation governing the prosecuting authority is the National Prosecuting Authority Act, 1998 (Act No. 32 of 1998). The Constitution, read with the said Act, provides the prosecuting authority with the power to institute criminal proceedings on behalf of the State and to carry out any necessary functions incidental to instituting criminal proceedings.
Background
* The Bill of Rights and Section 179 of the 1996 Constitution of the Republic of South Africa create a single prosecuting authority.
* The National Prosecuting Authority Act 32 of 1998 brings the NPA into existence.
* In August 1998, the first National Director of Public Prosecution was appointed.
* Seven Core Business Units:
o National Prosecutions Service (NPS)
o The Office for Witness Protection (OWP)
o Asset Forfeiture Unit (AFU)
o Sexual Offences and Community Affairs (SOCA)
o Specialised Commercial Crime Unit (SCCU)
o Witness Protection Unit (WPU)
o Priority Crimes Litigation Unit (PCLU)
* All the Business Units are supported by Corporate Services.
Legislation
* The following are some of the important laws that have a direct bearing on NPA activities:
o NPA Act 32 of 1998
o Witness Protection Act 112 of 1998
o Domestic Violence Act 116 of 1998
o Prevention of Organised Crime Act 121 of 1998
o Prevention and Combating of Corruption Activity 12 of 2004
Saturday, July 18, 1998
The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court
The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (often referred to as the International Criminal Court Statute or the Rome Statute) is the treaty that established the International Criminal Court (ICC). It was adopted at a diplomatic conference in Rome on 17 July 1998 and it entered into force on 1 July 2002. As of October 2009, 110 states are party to the statute,and a further 38 states have signed but not ratified the treaty. Among other things, the statute establishes the court's functions, jurisdiction and structure.
The treaty can be found here.
The jurisdiction of the Court shall be limited to the most serious crimes of concernto the international community as a whole. The Court has jurisdiction inaccordance with this Statute with respect to the following crimes:
(a)The crime of genocide;
(b)Crimes against humanity;
(c)War crimes;
(d)The crime of aggression.
The Court shall exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression once a provisionis adopted in accordance with articles 121 and 123 defining the crime and setting out the conditions under which the Court shall exercise jurisdiction with respect to this crime. Such a provision shall be consistent with the relevant provisions of theCharter of the United Nations.
Source: Wikipedia; International Criminal Court (ICC)
The treaty can be found here.
The jurisdiction of the Court shall be limited to the most serious crimes of concernto the international community as a whole. The Court has jurisdiction inaccordance with this Statute with respect to the following crimes:
(a)The crime of genocide;
(b)Crimes against humanity;
(c)War crimes;
(d)The crime of aggression.
The Court shall exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression once a provisionis adopted in accordance with articles 121 and 123 defining the crime and setting out the conditions under which the Court shall exercise jurisdiction with respect to this crime. Such a provision shall be consistent with the relevant provisions of theCharter of the United Nations.
Source: Wikipedia; International Criminal Court (ICC)
Wednesday, July 1, 1998
Forced labour in Myanmar (Burma)
Conclusions on the substance of the case
There is abundant evidence before the Commission showing the pervasive use of forced labour imposed on the civilian population throughout Myanmar by the authorities and the military for portering, the construction, maintenance and servicing of military camps, other work in support of the military, work on agriculture, logging and other production projects undertaken by the authorities or the military, sometimes for the profit of private individuals, the construction and maintenance of roads, railways and bridges, other infrastructure work and a range of other tasks, none of which comes under any of the exceptions listed in Article 2(2) of the Convention.
The call-up of labour is provided for in very wide terms under sections 8(1)(g)(n) and (o), 11(d) and 12 of the Village Act and sections 9(b) and 9A of the Towns Act, which are incompatible with the Convention. The procedure used in practice often follows the pattern of those provisions, in relying on the village head or ward authorities for requisitioning the labour that any military or government officer may order them to supply; but the provisions of the Village Act and the Towns Act were never actually referred to in those orders for the call-up of forced labourers that were submitted to the Commission; it thus appears that unfettered powers of military and government officers to exact forced labour from the civilian population are taken for granted, without coordination among different demands made on the same population, and people are also frequently rounded up directly by the military for forced labour, bypassing the local authorities.
Failure to comply with a call-up for labour is punishable under the Village Act with a fine or imprisonment for a term not exceeding one month, or both, and under the Towns Act, with a fine. In actual practice, the manifold exactions of forced labour often give rise to the extortion of money in exchange for a temporary alleviation of the burden, but also to threats to the life and security and extrajudicial punishment of those unwilling, slow or unable to comply with a demand for forced labour; such punishment or reprisals range from money demands to physical abuse, beatings, torture, rape and murder.
Forced labour in Myanmar is widely performed by women, children and elderly persons as well as persons otherwise unfit for work.
Forced labour in Myanmar is almost never remunerated nor compensated, secret directives notwithstanding, but on the contrary often goes hand in hand with the exaction of money, food and other supplies as well from the civilian population.
Forced labour is a heavy burden on the general population in Myanmar, preventing farmers from tending to the needs of their holdings and children from attending school; it falls most heavily on landless labourers and the poorer sections of the population, which depend on hiring out their labour for subsistence and generally have no means to comply with various money demands made by the authorities in lieu of, or over and above, the exaction of forced labour. The impossibility of making a living because of the amount of forced labour exacted is a frequent reason for fleeing the country.
A State which supports, instigates, accepts or tolerates forced labour on its territory commits a wrongful act and engages its responsibility for the violation of a peremptory norm in international law. Whatever may be the position in national law with regard to the exaction of forced or compulsory labour and the punishment of those responsible for it, any person who violates the prohibition of recourse to forced labour under the Convention is guilty of an international crime that is also, if committed in a widespread or systematic manner, a crime against humanity.
Source: International Labour Organisation (ILO)
There is abundant evidence before the Commission showing the pervasive use of forced labour imposed on the civilian population throughout Myanmar by the authorities and the military for portering, the construction, maintenance and servicing of military camps, other work in support of the military, work on agriculture, logging and other production projects undertaken by the authorities or the military, sometimes for the profit of private individuals, the construction and maintenance of roads, railways and bridges, other infrastructure work and a range of other tasks, none of which comes under any of the exceptions listed in Article 2(2) of the Convention.
The call-up of labour is provided for in very wide terms under sections 8(1)(g)(n) and (o), 11(d) and 12 of the Village Act and sections 9(b) and 9A of the Towns Act, which are incompatible with the Convention. The procedure used in practice often follows the pattern of those provisions, in relying on the village head or ward authorities for requisitioning the labour that any military or government officer may order them to supply; but the provisions of the Village Act and the Towns Act were never actually referred to in those orders for the call-up of forced labourers that were submitted to the Commission; it thus appears that unfettered powers of military and government officers to exact forced labour from the civilian population are taken for granted, without coordination among different demands made on the same population, and people are also frequently rounded up directly by the military for forced labour, bypassing the local authorities.
Failure to comply with a call-up for labour is punishable under the Village Act with a fine or imprisonment for a term not exceeding one month, or both, and under the Towns Act, with a fine. In actual practice, the manifold exactions of forced labour often give rise to the extortion of money in exchange for a temporary alleviation of the burden, but also to threats to the life and security and extrajudicial punishment of those unwilling, slow or unable to comply with a demand for forced labour; such punishment or reprisals range from money demands to physical abuse, beatings, torture, rape and murder.
Forced labour in Myanmar is widely performed by women, children and elderly persons as well as persons otherwise unfit for work.
Forced labour in Myanmar is almost never remunerated nor compensated, secret directives notwithstanding, but on the contrary often goes hand in hand with the exaction of money, food and other supplies as well from the civilian population.
Forced labour is a heavy burden on the general population in Myanmar, preventing farmers from tending to the needs of their holdings and children from attending school; it falls most heavily on landless labourers and the poorer sections of the population, which depend on hiring out their labour for subsistence and generally have no means to comply with various money demands made by the authorities in lieu of, or over and above, the exaction of forced labour. The impossibility of making a living because of the amount of forced labour exacted is a frequent reason for fleeing the country.
A State which supports, instigates, accepts or tolerates forced labour on its territory commits a wrongful act and engages its responsibility for the violation of a peremptory norm in international law. Whatever may be the position in national law with regard to the exaction of forced or compulsory labour and the punishment of those responsible for it, any person who violates the prohibition of recourse to forced labour under the Convention is guilty of an international crime that is also, if committed in a widespread or systematic manner, a crime against humanity.
Source: International Labour Organisation (ILO)
Monday, June 15, 1998
Rights Group Praises South Africa For Stand On International Court
Human Rights Watch today praised the speech of South African Justice Minister Dullah Omar at the opening day of a conference to establish an International Criminal Court (ICC).
At a speech before delegates from 156 countries in Rome, Dullah called for an ICC with the authority to make an independent decision of when to take up cases of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and aggression. He supported giving the prosecutor the powers to begin investigations on his or her own initiative.
South Africa has been a leader of the "like-minded group" of more than 50 states, which seeks to form an ICC with strong and independent powers.
Dullah spoke on behalf of the Southern Africa Development Community, which has 14 members. "The creation of the ICC will send a clear and unequivocal message that perpetrators of these crimes will not get away with impunity," he said.
"Dullah's speech was right on target," said Richard Dicker, who heads the ICC campaign for Human Rights Watch, a New York-based monitoring organization. "South Africa has been on the right side of this issue time and again."
But Dicker warned that as the conference gets underway, South Africa will likely come under heavy pressure from influential countries such as the United States to dilute the court's powers. Washington wants to curtail the authority of the prosecutor to begin investigating matters on his or her own initiative. Some countries of the Non-Aligned Movement want to have a veto power over the court's docket, enabling them to block cases that might embarrass them.
"The ICC could really make a difference in how the world punishes grave human rights abuses," said Dicker. "South Africa can play a historic role in that process - if it sticks to its principles."
Source: Human Rights Watch
At a speech before delegates from 156 countries in Rome, Dullah called for an ICC with the authority to make an independent decision of when to take up cases of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and aggression. He supported giving the prosecutor the powers to begin investigations on his or her own initiative.
South Africa has been a leader of the "like-minded group" of more than 50 states, which seeks to form an ICC with strong and independent powers.
Dullah spoke on behalf of the Southern Africa Development Community, which has 14 members. "The creation of the ICC will send a clear and unequivocal message that perpetrators of these crimes will not get away with impunity," he said.
"Dullah's speech was right on target," said Richard Dicker, who heads the ICC campaign for Human Rights Watch, a New York-based monitoring organization. "South Africa has been on the right side of this issue time and again."
But Dicker warned that as the conference gets underway, South Africa will likely come under heavy pressure from influential countries such as the United States to dilute the court's powers. Washington wants to curtail the authority of the prosecutor to begin investigating matters on his or her own initiative. Some countries of the Non-Aligned Movement want to have a veto power over the court's docket, enabling them to block cases that might embarrass them.
"The ICC could really make a difference in how the world punishes grave human rights abuses," said Dicker. "South Africa can play a historic role in that process - if it sticks to its principles."
Source: Human Rights Watch
Saturday, June 6, 1998
Human Rights Watch Condemns Killing Of Iranian Civilians
Human Rights Watch unequivocally condemns the bombing on June 3 of the Islamic Revolutionary Court in Tehran, which killed three persons and wounded dozen of others.
"We condemn this brutal attack, and the deliberate and arbitrary killing of innocent civilians which violates the most basic principles of humanity," said Hanny Megally executive director of the Middle East and North Africa Division of Human Rights Watch.
According to press reports, the People's Mojahedine Organization of Iran (PMOI), has claimed responsibility for the blast. Human Rights Watch calls on PMOI to immediately and unconditionally cease all such attacks on civilians. PMOI is an armed Iraq-based organization that has openly dedicated itself to overthrowing the Iranian government.
In response to similar attacks in the past, the Iranian government has clamped down on the civil liberties of Iranian citizens. Human Rights Watch urges the Iranian government not to take such steps in this instance.
Source: Human Rights Watch
"We condemn this brutal attack, and the deliberate and arbitrary killing of innocent civilians which violates the most basic principles of humanity," said Hanny Megally executive director of the Middle East and North Africa Division of Human Rights Watch.
According to press reports, the People's Mojahedine Organization of Iran (PMOI), has claimed responsibility for the blast. Human Rights Watch calls on PMOI to immediately and unconditionally cease all such attacks on civilians. PMOI is an armed Iraq-based organization that has openly dedicated itself to overthrowing the Iranian government.
In response to similar attacks in the past, the Iranian government has clamped down on the civil liberties of Iranian citizens. Human Rights Watch urges the Iranian government not to take such steps in this instance.
Source: Human Rights Watch
Friday, June 5, 1998
PREVENTION OF ILLEGAL EVICTION FROM AND UNLAWFUL OCCUPATION OF LAND ACT
PREVENTION OF ILLEGAL EVICTION FROM AND UNLAWFUL OCCUPATION OF LAND ACT 19 OF 1998
Commencement Date of Act: 5 June 1998
Date Modified by Sabinet: 20080925
Category: Property, Land and Environment - Land
Note: Decided Cases updated
Description: To provide for the prohibition of unlawful eviction; to provide for procedures for the eviction of unlawful occupiers; and to repeal the Prevention of Illegal Squatting Act, 1951, and other obsolete laws; and to provide for matters incidental thereto.
Database: Netlaw: SA Legislation
A copy of the Act can be found here.
Source: Sabinet, info.gov.za
Commencement Date of Act: 5 June 1998
Date Modified by Sabinet: 20080925
Category: Property, Land and Environment - Land
Note: Decided Cases updated
Description: To provide for the prohibition of unlawful eviction; to provide for procedures for the eviction of unlawful occupiers; and to repeal the Prevention of Illegal Squatting Act, 1951, and other obsolete laws; and to provide for matters incidental thereto.
Database: Netlaw: SA Legislation
A copy of the Act can be found here.
Source: Sabinet, info.gov.za
Thursday, May 21, 1998
A revealing British documentary on post-apartheid South Africa
In 1994 the Government of National Unity, consisting of the African National Congress, the National Party (a long-time pillar of apartheid) and the Inkatha Freedom Party replaced the South African apartheid regime. ANC leader Nelson Mandela took the place of F.W. De Clerk as president.
John Pilger, a respected investigative journalist, returned to South Africa 30 years after he was banned for his reports on apartheid to find out what changes have taken place since 1994. His findings were shown nationally in a documentary entitled, "Apartheid Did Not Die," aired on Britain's ITV station April 21.
Pilger says: "Yes, apartheid based on race is outlawed now, but the system always went far deeper than that. The cruelty and injustice were underwritten by an economic apartheid that regarded people as no more than cheap, dispensable labour. International corporations in South Africa, Britain, Europe and the United States backed it. And it was this apartheid, based on money and profits, which allowed a small minority to control most of the land, most of the industrial wealth and most of the economic power. Today the same system is called, without a trace of irony, the free market." This film, he adds "asks why apartheid continues by other means."
Pilger's insistence that "apartheid did not die" confuses the issue. Apartheid has ended, but capitalist oppression continues. The ANC, like bourgeois nationalist movements throughout the world, have proven incapable of putting an end to the legacy of poverty and exploitation in the oppressed nations. That is the task of the South African and international working class.
Source: World Socialist Web; International Committee of the Fourth International
John Pilger, a respected investigative journalist, returned to South Africa 30 years after he was banned for his reports on apartheid to find out what changes have taken place since 1994. His findings were shown nationally in a documentary entitled, "Apartheid Did Not Die," aired on Britain's ITV station April 21.
Pilger says: "Yes, apartheid based on race is outlawed now, but the system always went far deeper than that. The cruelty and injustice were underwritten by an economic apartheid that regarded people as no more than cheap, dispensable labour. International corporations in South Africa, Britain, Europe and the United States backed it. And it was this apartheid, based on money and profits, which allowed a small minority to control most of the land, most of the industrial wealth and most of the economic power. Today the same system is called, without a trace of irony, the free market." This film, he adds "asks why apartheid continues by other means."
Pilger's insistence that "apartheid did not die" confuses the issue. Apartheid has ended, but capitalist oppression continues. The ANC, like bourgeois nationalist movements throughout the world, have proven incapable of putting an end to the legacy of poverty and exploitation in the oppressed nations. That is the task of the South African and international working class.
Source: World Socialist Web; International Committee of the Fourth International
Monday, April 6, 1998
SAF DEFENSE CHIEF: GEORGE MEIRING
SOUTH AFRICAN PRESIDENT NELSON MANDELA HAS ACCEPTED THE
RESIGNATION OF THE COUNTRY'S NATIONAL DEFENSE FORCE CHIEF, GEORGE
MEIRING. V-O-A'S DELIA ROBERTSON IN JOHANNESBURG REPORTS THE
RESIGNATION FOLLOWS A REPORT GENERAL MEIRING MADE OF A PLOT TO
OVERTHROW THE GOVERNMENT.
Source: Voice of America
.
RESIGNATION OF THE COUNTRY'S NATIONAL DEFENSE FORCE CHIEF, GEORGE
MEIRING. V-O-A'S DELIA ROBERTSON IN JOHANNESBURG REPORTS THE
RESIGNATION FOLLOWS A REPORT GENERAL MEIRING MADE OF A PLOT TO
OVERTHROW THE GOVERNMENT.
Source: Voice of America
.
Monday, March 30, 1998
Ivorian ex-premier to quit IMF for return to politics
Ivorian former prime minister Alassane Ouattara will return to political life in time for the presidential elections in the year 2000, Radio France Internationale reported. Ouattara served as prime minister from 1990 to 1993 under the late President Felix Houphouet-Boigny, but did not stand in the divisive 1995 presidential elections. He became deputy director of the International Monetary Fund, but announced in Abidjan on Sunday that he would leave the IMF in the second quarter of 1999, when his contract there ends. "I will return home to be at the disposal of my country, and also to contribute to its development.
This implies that, having held a political office, I cannot stay out of politics," he told reporters before returning to his job in Washington. The radio broadcast his remarks. He did not say whether he would run for president, but the radio said his return ought to reunite the Rally of the Republicans (RDR) party, which it said "is torn apart at present" .
The RDR was hit by the recent defection to the government of Adama Coulibaly, the party's erstwhile second-in-command, the radio said. The RDR considers Ouattara to be its tacit candidate for the 2000 poll, the radio said.
Source: BBC
This implies that, having held a political office, I cannot stay out of politics," he told reporters before returning to his job in Washington. The radio broadcast his remarks. He did not say whether he would run for president, but the radio said his return ought to reunite the Rally of the Republicans (RDR) party, which it said "is torn apart at present" .
The RDR was hit by the recent defection to the government of Adama Coulibaly, the party's erstwhile second-in-command, the radio said. The RDR considers Ouattara to be its tacit candidate for the 2000 poll, the radio said.
Source: BBC
Tuesday, March 17, 1998
Abdul-Rahman al-Iryani, dies at 89
Abdul-Rahman al-Iryani, President of northern Yemen from 1967 to 1974, died Saturday in exile in Syria. He was 89. Mr. Iryani died in the Syrian capital, Damascus, where he had lived since 1974. He gained widespread popularity and respect as one of the leaders of the al-Ahrar opposition group, which opposed Yemen's Mutawakilite kings.Mr. Iryani was sentenced to death by beheading in 1955 for his activities with al-Ahrar, Arabic for ''the free.'' Minutes before his execution by sword, he was granted a reprieve by Imam Ahmad bin Yahya Hamidaddin.
Mr. Iryani spent more than 15 years in prison during the rule of the Mutawakilite, which ended in 1962. He served as minister of religious endowments under northern Yemen's first national government and is the only civilian to have led northern Yemen.
Source: New York Times
Friday, February 27, 1998
DEVELOPING A CULTURE OF GOOD GOVERNANCE
In this report the Commission has tried to re-think fundamentally the role and functions of the public service, and to set out a framework for transformation in which the cornerstones of social need, capacity and cost have been at the centre of our thinking. These are rigorous constraints in a country where resources are sorely stretched, social need is infinite and capacity severely constrained. It is with services in mind that we have approached the four central themes of this report: transforming the structures and functions of government; revitalising human resources management and development; stressing the central significance of Information Technology; and building effective systems for financial planning and budgeting. The latter in particular is essential for the full realisation of our priorities, if the democratic transformation of the public service and the equitable provision of services for all South Africans is to be achieved. Collectively the four themes create the parameters for change and the prerequisites for the development of a culture of good governance.
The task of transforming the public service from an institution of regulation and control to one that is people-centred, efficient, coherent and transparent is a daunting one for any government, least of all one without a democratic heritage. The desire to succeed in this respect, to surmount the over-arching impediments to change, both human and financial, and to subject the new democratic Government, so early in its life, to the independent and rigorous scrutiny of this Commission is a measure of the Government's determination to transform the country's institutions at the core "and to get it right" from the Office of the President down to every organ and agency of government at national, provincial and local levels. The challenge of our task and the immensity of our responsibilities were offset by our awareness of, and faith in, the commitment and capacity of the appointed and elected officials of the South African Government to give effect to our recommendations.
Source: Polity
The task of transforming the public service from an institution of regulation and control to one that is people-centred, efficient, coherent and transparent is a daunting one for any government, least of all one without a democratic heritage. The desire to succeed in this respect, to surmount the over-arching impediments to change, both human and financial, and to subject the new democratic Government, so early in its life, to the independent and rigorous scrutiny of this Commission is a measure of the Government's determination to transform the country's institutions at the core "and to get it right" from the Office of the President down to every organ and agency of government at national, provincial and local levels. The challenge of our task and the immensity of our responsibilities were offset by our awareness of, and faith in, the commitment and capacity of the appointed and elected officials of the South African Government to give effect to our recommendations.
Source: Polity
Tuesday, February 17, 1998
Land and Spirituality in Africa
The colonizers acquired land in an insensitive manner, driven by greed, and the process was intended to vanquish and dehumanize the original owners. This was achieved through military subjugation. The Zulu-Anglo War of I879 and the Anglo-Boer War of the early I9th Century can be traced back to the struggles for land. A number of massacres of Black South Africans were nothing other than an insensitive, greedy and cruel method for dispossessing Blacks of the land. Land was acquired with total disregard of traditional beliefs and cultures underpining our spirituality as Black Africans. Indigenous communities were stripped of their dignity, many lost their identity, languages, cultures and spiritualities. In this sense, land was acquired and used as a political tool.
After acquiring land, the colonizers commercialized it and later inflated its price. That left us with no land we could call our own. We soon found ourselves in exile in our own country. It is painful to note that churches, especially those that own land, were involved in the process which left Africans with nothing except �ubuntu�, a confused culture and a hope that God and their ancestors were still with them in their pain and happiness.
Source: World Council of Churches
After acquiring land, the colonizers commercialized it and later inflated its price. That left us with no land we could call our own. We soon found ourselves in exile in our own country. It is painful to note that churches, especially those that own land, were involved in the process which left Africans with nothing except �ubuntu�, a confused culture and a hope that God and their ancestors were still with them in their pain and happiness.
Source: World Council of Churches
Thursday, January 22, 1998
Human Rights Watch Urges Government Of Zimbabwe To Respect Human Rights While Restoring Order
Human Rights Watch called upon the government of Zimbabwe to refrain from using excessive force against protesters in Harare.
On Tuesday January 20, President Mugabe announced that he had ordered army troops into Harare in order to quell the unrest which were initially sparked by rising food prices. Minister of Home Affairs Dumiso Dabenga was quoted on International Television News (ITN) as saying: "The deployed army personnel have not been trained to use batons like the police, and they will be carrying arms and live ammunition and will not hesitate to shoot any people who are likely trouble-causers." Other sources in Harare interviewed by Human Rights Watch stated that police and army had beaten people in the street as well as after taking them into custody.
Witnesses in Harare told Human Rights Watch that military helicopters were used to indiscriminately dispense teargas in black townships in an apparent effort to quell protests. Sources in Harare also claimed that the police had used live ammunition on protesters.
The current public unrest follows closely on the heels of similar major protests last month. On December 9, 1997, violence erupted in Harare during a labor demonstration attended by tens of thousands of protesters. According to media reports, military helicopters, tear gas, and police clubs were used to disperse the demonstrators. Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU) Secretary-General Morgan Tsvangirai, one of the main organizers of the labor protest, was reportedly beaten in his office two days after the protest by unknown assailants.
Source: Human Rights Watch
On Tuesday January 20, President Mugabe announced that he had ordered army troops into Harare in order to quell the unrest which were initially sparked by rising food prices. Minister of Home Affairs Dumiso Dabenga was quoted on International Television News (ITN) as saying: "The deployed army personnel have not been trained to use batons like the police, and they will be carrying arms and live ammunition and will not hesitate to shoot any people who are likely trouble-causers." Other sources in Harare interviewed by Human Rights Watch stated that police and army had beaten people in the street as well as after taking them into custody.
Witnesses in Harare told Human Rights Watch that military helicopters were used to indiscriminately dispense teargas in black townships in an apparent effort to quell protests. Sources in Harare also claimed that the police had used live ammunition on protesters.
The current public unrest follows closely on the heels of similar major protests last month. On December 9, 1997, violence erupted in Harare during a labor demonstration attended by tens of thousands of protesters. According to media reports, military helicopters, tear gas, and police clubs were used to disperse the demonstrators. Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU) Secretary-General Morgan Tsvangirai, one of the main organizers of the labor protest, was reportedly beaten in his office two days after the protest by unknown assailants.
Source: Human Rights Watch
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)