The regime has continued to use its emergency powers to impose several restrictions on every aspect of resistance and opposition. Detentions have increased and organised activity has been impeded. (See ORGANISATIONS CURBED) Information on the repression is hard to obtain.
During August and September increasingly severe restrictions on all forms of media reporting of popular resistance and police and army repression were imposed, despite the partial success of a legal application brought by the major newspaper companies. For this reason it is impossible to fully document the operations of the South African Defence Force, the various police forces and related structures.
Education in black schools continued to be disrupted by the presence of soldiers on school premises and the closure of schools; in townships where rent boycotts have been in force residents have been evicted and their protests put down with force.
MEDIA CENSORSHIP
Farreaching media curbs contained in the emergency regulations were reported in the last issue of FOCUS. In August the Argus Printing and Publishing Company, South African Associated Newspapers, Natal Newspapers and the Natal Witness newspaper made an application in the Natal Supreme Court against the government, the State President, the Minister of Law and Order and the South African Police Commissioner. They asked for an order declaring six of the emergency regulations void and without force and effect in law. (See FOCUS 66 p.1)
In court on 20 August two orders issued by the Commissioner of Police in terms of Section 7(1) of the regulations were conceded by counsel for the government to be technically invalid, as they had not been promulgated in the Government Gazette. All reporting, without permission, of information on the conduct of the 'security forces' in relation to the State of Emergency and public safety and order had been banned, while a second order, at first banning journalists from all African residential areas, but later amended, had prohibited them from reporting in any area where unrest was occurring. (S 21.8.86)
In the following fortnight newspapers were able to publish more detailed accounts of events in the African townships, although still heavily restricted by the remaining emergency regulations and by a network of others laws governing information on 'security' matters. However, on 3 September a fresh police order in terms of section 7(1)(c) of the emergency regulations was promulgated in the Government Gazette. This imposed far harsher restrictions on all forms of media reporting.
In terms of the order no journalists may be near or 'within sight' of any unrest, restricted gathering or 'security force' action. Furthermore, 'announcing, disseminating, distributing, taking or sending any comment on or news in connection with any security action' is prohibited. The order defines a 'security action' in broader terms than before, to include 'any actions to terminate unrest...to protect life or property in consequence of any unrest' and 'any follow-up action after any unrest has been terminated or has ended, including...any action taken against a person who participated or who is suspected of participating in that unrest'. This includes the arrest of any person under the emergency regulations or the Internal Security Act, or for any offence committed during unrest. 'Unrest' is broadly defined to encompass 'any unlawful gathering, concourse or procession of any number of persons, any attack on a force or member of a force' and 'any conduct which constitutes a public disturbance or riot...' (DN 4.9.86)
On 21 August the Natal Supreme Court concluded its examination of the emergency regulations, declaring certain clauses void. These included Section 11, which allowed the Minister of Law and Order or a commissioned officer to seize copies of any publication containing material considered by the Minister to be 'subversive' or detrimental to the 'public safety and order' or the termination of the State of Emergency; Section 12, providing for the banning of all future copies of a publication considered 'subversive' by the Minister; Section 10(b), prohibiting the possession of a 'subversive' statement; and Section 7(1)(d), under which the Commissioner of the South African Police might issue orders which he deemed necessary for the 'public safety and order', or to terminate the State of Emergency. (GG 12.6.86; DD 5.9.86)
The court considered that some of these regulations were 'worded too widely', and could simply be reformulated. It upheld the validity of sections banning the utterance or dissemination of 'subversive' statements and the filming, recording and photographing of public disturbances, strikes, boycotts and the conduct of the 'security forces'. (Tel 5.9.86)
In another development, the Bureau for Information announced that no pictures of damage due to unrest could be taken during or after an incident, without prior permission. (BBC 6.8.86)
Although the Minister of Law and Order stated in August that his department had not investigated any newspaper or journalist for possible offences under the emergency regulations, news reports had nevertheless been interfered with. Police confiscated for a second time copies of the Sowetan newspaper in August, while the Weekly Mail newspaper announced plans to sue the Minister for having improperly delegated the power to confiscate copies of the newspaper in June.
During August United States and British news agencies were reported to be consulting government officials after some of the newsreel they had sent out of South Africa had failed to reach its destination. (WM 1.8.86; S 11.8.86)
MILITARY AND POLICE
Following the ruling by the Natal Supreme Court in August, described above, brief isolated reports of police and military activities were carried in the South African press. In addition, some incidents have been reported by the media outside South Africa.
From the limited information available, it is evident that police and military operations have followed the same pattern as in the previous State of Emergency. From police stations or temporary army bases, townships have been patrolled by police and troops in armoured vehicles. They have attacked and broken up gatherings, meetings or demonstrations, and carried out unprovoked attacks on residents, firing teargas and rubber bullets and using shotguns. To prevent mass funerals of victims of police or army violence, specific areas or whole townships have been sealed off, and stadiums and other meeting points occupied. Townships have been cordoned off for systematic house-to-house searches.
During day-to-day operations, detainees have often been held for hours in armoured vehicles. Police and troops have swooped on specific residences or places of work to carry out detentions. For example, in June police raided most of the major supermarkets in Worcester, detaining a large number of people. In Johannesburg, police detained 999 members of the Commercial Catering and Allied Workers' Union on strike at a dairy. On release from detention two weeks later, 750 of the workers were dismissed from their jobs. A number of people who have been detained, including children, have made statements and affadivits testifying to being tortured and beaten by police and soldiers. (CT 21.8.86; Obs 24.8.86)
Some townships have been subjected to virtual sieges by the police or soldiers. Zwelethembwa near Worcester was subjected to a dusk-to-dawn curfew. An army camp was established on its outskirts and large towers with searchlights erected. At night the searchlights swept across the township, often resting on the houses of community leaders. When residents participated in the nationwide strike on 16 June the police and troops retaliated by detaining over 150 people. In July troops tried to break a boycott of the local beer hall by distributing leaflets inviting residents to a free party at the hall. When this was boycotted, troops again raided homes and beat up local people. (CT 15.8.86; GN 21.8.86)
In Tumahole, outside the town of Parys in the Orange Free State, police were reported to be roaming the streets with a local 'vigilante' group known as the 'A-Team'. They reportedly whipped people found on the street after 9 pm and beat children who were late for school. Allegations of similar activities by the police or army in a number of other townships in the Transvaal and Cape were reported. In New Brighton, Port Elizabeth, troops erected a barbed wire barricade around the township, manned the few exit points, and searched vehicles. (WM/GN 21.8.86; S Star 24.8.86)
Large numbers of police and troops have been deployed in African schools. The issuing of identity documents (see below) was carried out at gunpoint in many areas, and detachments of troops have remained in occupation of some schools. Soldiers have carried out military exercises in the schoolyards, broken into classrooms to detain students, and interrupted classes. At some schools soldiers or police have been stationed in the classrooms, administering corporal punishment with whips. (S Star 3/24/31.8.86; WM 7.8.86; 4.9.86)
In these operations, a growing role has been played by police falling under the Black Local Authorities or Town Councils. The Town Council police force is a relatively new one, consisting of about 6,000 men who have been recruited mainly from rural areas, then given three months' training, armed, and sent into the townships. They have been responsible for some of the worst violence in recent months, including the massacre in Soweto in August during the rent protest. (see RENT BOYCOTT below). A further 10,000 Town Council police are due to be trained.
The South African Police force is training an initial complement of 1,000 auxiliary 'special constables'. They will be armed and deployed in the townships after three months' training. Some new police stations have been built and a new college for the training of Indian police men opened. According to the Minister of Law and Order, the regime intends increasing the current ratio of 1.7 policemen to 1,000 citizens to 2.9 for every 1,000 as a matter of 'urgency'. (DD 11.8.86; Star 3.9.86; GN 22/23.9.86)
