The Johannesburg daily *Star* reported that leading advocates had replied to the Minister by saying that the State often caused repeated delays in security trials because it did not supply enough particulars to the defence. The lawyers had pointed out that there was another side to protracted security trials, as in political trials the State often kept people for six months or longer before bringing them to trial. The accused were then given only about six weeks to find finances and an attorney who in turn had to instruct counsel. Often the venue of political trials was far away from the accused's home or his legal representative's place of business and the State often gave information to the defence lawyers only a week before a major trial. (*Star* 16.5.78)
John Dugard, Professor of Law at the University of the Witwatersrand, wrote in reply to the Minister that the S.A. legal profession had a proud tradition in respect of the defence of political offenders. He said that the legal profession must "vigorously resist all attempts on the part of the government to intimidate specialist lawyers in political trials - which I fear is the purpose of Mr. Kruger's latest utterances on the matter. The profession should also resist all efforts to cut off foreign funds for political trials, as without such funds the best defence will not be available." (*Star* 19.5.78)
The *Sunday Express* reported on 21.5.78 that "lawyers who handle political cases, this week hit back at the Minister of Justice's allegations. Several advocates claimed it was "the presence of the Security Police - 'their former interrogators' - in court, which intimidated witnesses."
Advocates told the *Express* that adjournments were always determined by the court, that there were sound legal arguments for such postponements and that defence teams had enormous difficulties preparing cases in the time the State allocated.
One advocate said State witnesses who had spent months in solitary confinement and under interrogation were often so intimidated that "they had learned their evidence off by heart". Others revealed they had "enormous difficulty" persuading important witnesses for the defence to give evidence - "they are terrified to come to court and be identified by the phalanx of Security Policemen who always line the benches." (S.Ex. 21.5.78)
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ACT
In fact in spite of Mr. Kruger's remarks, there is evidence that many recent security trials have taken place very speedily under the Criminal Procedure Act, with accused being brought to trial and sentenced to jail terms of up to 15 years without the knowledge of their families or legal representatives. (For description of Criminal Procedure Act see FOCUS 12 p.15)
The Johannesburg *Sunday Express* reported cases of this kind in an article of the same issue (21.5.78). They quoted four cases where attorneys had informed the security police that they were acting for detainees, yet neither they nor the detainees' families were advised of the trial dates. When further enquiries were made, they were informed that the detainees had already been charged, convicted and sentenced and were serving prison terms. Among the cases were:
- Sipho Madondo (19), detained incommunicado under the Terrorism Act and tried and sentenced in Ermelo in March 1978 to 12 years, was defended by a pro deo lawyer in a trial which lasted three hours. (see FOCUS 16 p.10)
- Petrus Molefe (23), who was detained in February 1978, was brought to trial in April without the knowledge of his family or legal representative, and was jailed for 15 years. As far as his lawyer could ascertain he was not represented at all. The lawyer had advised the Security Police nine days after Mr. Molefe's detention that he was representing him.
"We get absolutely no co-operation from the Security Police in our efforts to defend our clients. On the contrary they seem to go out of their way to prevent us finding out when and where a detainee is to be charged. (S.Express 21.5.78)
What is clear from all this is that a great many trials in South Africa are taking place under the Criminal Procedure Act, but that since the so-called "15 Minute-trial" in Pietermaritzburg (see FOCUS 12, p.11; 14 p.6) this fact has not been reported in newspapers, so that it has been impossible to report this in FOCUS.
Equally disturbing was a report in the U.S. Christian Science Monitor by Staff correspondent June Goodwin on 11.4.78, about trials in a "special makeshift court" in Algoa Park, a suburb of Port Elizabeth.
Demonstrations and disturbances by black youth have been particularly strong in the Port Elizabeth area.
Ms. Goodwin reports that local newspapers are reporting little of what is happening in this room in the Algoa Park police station which has been turned into a courtroom. "There is no public gallery. Blacks who want to be spectators are turned away at the entrance to the police station. Police in camouflage uniforms carrying automatic rifles walk around the station", she writes.
She reports a recent case in this court of a boy getting an 18 month sentence for stoning a police Land Rover and causing R10 damage. Hundreds of young blacks have appeared in this court in the last few months. One lawyer handles almost all the cases.
While Ms. Goodwin was in court, four boys aged 14 to 16 were on trial for sabotage and arson. "Two of the boys had no lawyer. They sometimes testified they carried out the alleged stonings and burnings of buildings. They sometimes denied that they did anything like that.
"Two of the boys said that they had been beaten by the police to produce their statements. The magistrate found the four guilty of sabotage and gave them the minimum sentence - five years in jail. No evidence was produced that proved the boys committed the alleged actions. The magistrate said, essentially, that it had not been proved that the boys did not commit the acts for which they had been charged. In other words, it would appear that contrary to much of Western justice, they were guilty until they could prove themselves innocent," Ms. Goodwin writes. (Christian Science Monitor, 11.4.78)
The last two sentences, as well as other factors, make it clear that what she calls "these peremptory proceedings" are taking place under the Criminal Procedure Act.
IDAF ANNUAL CONFERENCE
The Fifteenth Annual Conference of the International Defence and Aid Fund for Southern Africa was opened by the Fund's President, Canon L. John Collins, in London on 5 May 1978. The conference received reports from its affiliated national committees and representatives from Great Britain, Ireland, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United States of America on their work during the past year.
The Fund, which has been providing humanitarian relief in Southern Africa - through legal defence in political trials, aid to families and other dependants, help to refugees - and keeping the conscience of the world alive to the issues at stake, has benefited from increased support during the year from the United Nations Trust Fund for South Africa, from Governments and affiliated national committees.
In spite of the increased contributions to the Fund, the conference recognised the urgent need for greater contributions, especially arising out of its work in Zimbabwe. The conference appealed particularly to the British Government to match the support given to the International Defence and Aid Fund by the Scandinavian and other sympathetic Governments.
Canon Collins reiterated the warning that until South Africa is free from racial oppression, 'there will be neither justice nor freedom nor peace in Southern Africa for anybody - nor indeed, perhaps throughout the whole of Africa, if not the whole world.' President: Canon L. John Collins (Britain)
