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
Friday, October 30, 1998
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
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
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)