September 13, 1991(1)
Mr. President,
Distinguished Delegates,
The duty of the international community is to encourage the speedy end of apartheid through negotiations. It is in this context that I wish to express the deep appreciation of the Special Committee against Apartheid to the Secretary-General for his Second Progress Report on the Implementation of the United Nations Declaration on Apartheid and its Destructive Consequences in Southern Africa.(2)
The report, which covers the period between July 1990 to end of August 1991, provides an objective assessment of major developments in South Africa and highlights some of the most important problems facing the South African people as they are embarking on the process of peacefully ending apartheid.
The Secretary-General eloquently underlines in his report that the process that started more than a year ago in South Africa experienced serious difficulties over the last twelve months. In particular, he noted with grave concern, "the wave of violence that engulfed the country during this period became a severe test of confidence and a serious obstacle to the evolving political dialogue". While recognising that the most basic laws of apartheid were repealed by last June, the Secretary-General observed that many of "the concomitant attitudes and practices, as indeed the consequences of these laws, do persist". He emphasises that delays in implementation of the measures necessary to create a climate necessary for negotiations, "particularly with regard to political prisoners and exiles, the perceived ineffectual response to violence and disclosures of secret funding of organisations, led to tensions and a crisis of confidence in the governing structures".
The Secretary-General points out that recent peace initiatives hold the promise that the momentum which started more than a year ago can be restored. He believes that a meeting of all parties concerned to discuss matters relating to the drafting of a new constitution and to transitional arrangements is now at the top of the political agenda and that such a meeting could improve the atmosphere for negotiations and free political activity. He, however, calls on the international community to be cautious during the process, which might be relatively lengthy and even vulnerable and to keep in mind the ultimate common objective, which is the establishment of a united, democratic, non-racial South Africa at the earliest possible time.
Distinguished Delegates,
The General Assembly, by adopting in December 1989 the consensus Declaration on Apartheid and its Destructive Consequences in South Africa, has made a major contribution to the struggle for the eradication of apartheid. That Declaration should continue to serve as a yardstick with which we can assess progress in South Africa and identify acts or omissions that have delayed the peaceful process, those who are responsible for these delays, and those who attempt to undermine it both inside and outside South Africa.
I would like to take this opportunity to review with you the thrust and objectives of the Declaration, and assess, on the basis of the Secretary-General's Report, what has been accomplished until now and what remains to be done.
The Declaration encourages the people of South Africa to join together to negotiate an end to the apartheid system and to agree on all measures that are necessary to transform their country into a non-racial democracy. The Declaration provides guidelines for the process of negotiations. It takes the view that "the parties concerned should, in the context of the necessary climate, negotiate the future of their country and its people in good faith and in an atmosphere which, by mutual agreement between the liberation movements and the South African regime, would be free of violence". At least five measures were to be taken by the South African regime in order to create the necessary climate for negotiations.
Twenty-one months after the adoption of the Declaration and on the basis of the Report of the Secretary-General, to what extent have these measures been taken?
First, regarding the unconditional release of all political prisoners and detainees: what appears clear from the report of the Secretary-General is that there has been a long delay in the implementation of this measure and, according to the national liberation movements and many South African organisations, this measure has not yet been fully met. In this regard, it should be noted that the African National Congress (ANC) had decided last year to engage with the Government in a discussion of the implementation of these measures and the creation of the necessary climate. The General Assembly commended the ANC for this decision which led to the Groote Schuur and Pretoria Minutes in June and August of 1990.
According to the South African authorities, 1,145 prisoners claiming political status have been released until now. And according to the Human Rights Commission of South Africa, 946 prisoners are still in jail, 160 of whom are held in the homeland of Bophuthatswana. The ANC notes in this regard that the Government narrowed the originally agreed upon guidelines on political prisoners, including unrest-related prisoners. The PAC reminds us that some of Sharpeville Six and the Uppington 14, are still in jail.
It appears that while a large number of political prisoners have been released, hundreds of others are still in jail because the authorities claim that their offences were serious and were not of a political nature. I believe it is imperative that this matter be resolved quickly so that this obstacle to negotiations is removed. The Secretary-General, in paragraph 57 of his report is making some suggestions on a possible procedure for expediting the release of the remaining prisoners.
The related issue of the return of exiles was also treated by Pretoria in a dilatory fashion. Out of an estimated 30 to 40 thousand exiles, relatively few have returned. After several months of difficult negotiations, finally the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees signed an agreement with the authorities which will allow the presence of the High Commissioner's office in South Africa. The Special Committee commended the efforts and achievements of the United Nations High Commissioner in this regard.
The bans and restrictions on organisations and persons have been lifted but members of organisations living abroad still have to go through indemnity procedures, a fact that has particularly affected the external leadership of the PAC.
The armed troops appear to have been largely withdrawn from townships except from areas where there is unrest. According to the Congress of South African Trade Unions (COSATU), special forces including those involved in Angola and Namibia have been present in some townships and were implicated in atrocities in those particular areas.
While the state of emergency has been lifted, the Internal Security Act was only partially revised. It still allows detention without trial for 10 days, which according to the Black Sash, is no guarantee for the safety of a detainee.
Political trials based on the Internal Security Act which can be considered political are still being held in South Africa, although executions of political offenders have indeed ceased.
So, as Distinguished Delegates can see, the overall record is mixed. It is unfortunate that several problems still remain in the way of full implementation of the measures necessary for a climate conducive to negotiations. But even more serious is the fact that the wave of violence that has swept the country has severely disrupted this climate and free political activity. The Secretary-General pays special attention to this matter. Commenting on violence he observes that reaction to change was manifested in a variety of ways "from violent acts by those opposing the democratic transformation of the country or wishing to obtain political advantage prior to negotiations to less overt activities by elements connected with the system. In this respect, the impartiality of the security forces has been called into question and the potential for destabilization by extremist groups remains a cause for concern".
Most political parties and organisations of South Africa commented at length on the extent and causes of violence as shown in the Report of the Secretary-General. The Black Sash for instance referred to the "overwhelming circumstantial evidence of outbreaks of violence being orchestrated, of existing conflicts being used to exacerbate violence, of political partiality" and alleged that a programme of internal destabilisation has been launched with the aim of weakening the ANC. COSATU elaborates further on this matter and underlines "the failure of the authorities to take decisive action to stop the violence, or bring the culprits to book, despite frequent and detailed information supplied to them".
The report of the Secretary-General reviews also initiatives taken to curb the violence both by the authorities which obviously were not effective, and by religious and business leaders which, it is hoped, will succeed. The Draft National Peace Accord is expected to be discussed and signed at a convention which is scheduled to meet tomorrow. It is heartening that, in spite of the flare-up of violence witnessed in the last days, the authorities, ANC and the Inkatha Freedom Party appear still to be committed to this peace process.
I am sure I speak for all of you if I express our strong hopes that this initiative will finally succeed and the senseless massacres will end. In this context, I note that COSATU recommends that the international community should monitor the implementation of this accord and actively work with the National Peace Committee which will oversee the implementation of the accord.
Distinguished Delegates,
The Secretary-General points out that the repeal of most of the basic apartheid laws was a most notable development during the period. Indeed, the Separate Amenities Act, the Group Areas Act and the Land Acts have been repealed and the Population Registration Act has been revised. The authorities indicate that "more than a hundred discriminatory laws and regulations were abolished over the past 12 months". This has been a positive development and was welcomed by most political parties, movements and organisations in South Africa and by the international community. But as a South African organisation indicates in the report, "it is becoming increasingly clear that while the legal pillars of apartheid have been removed the practices of apartheid are very much in place". Put differently, the repeal of apartheid legislation has not repealed the legacies of apartheid.
As it appears in the report, discriminatory practices and exclusionary tactics are still the order of the day. Repeal of these Acts has done little to change the daily lives of the black majority. The current land ownership and occupation pattern is entrenched and no real efforts have yet been made to redress past injustices. In this regard, no less than the South African Chamber of Business notes that "apartheid has been the cause of historical injustices and the redressing of these will require economic policies that go beyond the repealing of social laws and functional deregulation. This means that the socio-economic infrastructure, particularly in the fields of housing and education, should receive the highest priority in future state expenditure programmes".
The allocation of 38.2 per cent for social spending in the 1991-92 budget compared to 36.5 per cent for the previous year, can be only characterised as a minuscule step in the right direction. As mentioned in the Report of the Secretary-General, the persistent socio-economic inequalities, coupled with the rising expectations of the majority of the South African population, can make the social fabric of the country even more fragile and thus impede the democratisation process. It is clear that as the Secretary-General suggests, the private sector would have to play a more important role than it has until now within a comprehensive national programme of redress. It is also clear that the international community would need to come in with a positive programme of assistance to the victims of apartheid.
The present conditions in education, employment, land, housing and health, in particular, are not just appalling but indeed tragic. In this context, I wish to mention here that the Special Committee against Apartheid took the initiative to organise with UNESCO, a conference on the Educational Needs of the victims of Apartheid which was held in Paris last June, and where representatives of donor countries and organisations heard from South African educators about the dismal conditions in education and the immediate steps that need to be taken.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
The United Nations Declaration set out in its paragraph 8, guidelines to the process of negotiations. I wish to emphasise in this context that the Declaration calls on the parties concerned to negotiate in good faith.
I would like here to interject my own thoughts regarding the issue of good faith. I wonder how one can detect good faith in the regime, when for a year now, with the exception of the repeal of the pillars of apartheid, it has not managed to contain the violence, neither has it persuaded the majority of South Africans - and I would say the world at large - that the security forces act impartially. The South African regime has delayed the implementation of agreements made with ANC, and has acknowledged secret funding of organisations, after they were disclosed in the press. I also wonder, and probably many of you do likewise, where is the good faith in the constitutional proposals of the ruling National Party. We have all seen these peculiar constitutional proposals whose aim is transparent and whose future is doomed. In the search for "checks and balances" the National Party proposes a constitution which would be overchecked and totally unbalanced, a constitution that would give veto power to the white minority. I do not wish to make further comments about such strange matters as obligatory coalitions, collegial presidencies, and other totally undemocratic concoctions. The international community cannot seriously consider that such proposals can advance the process of dismantling apartheid. I only hope that this was a preliminary pre-negotiating stand which will be soon revised to reflect more the principles enunciated in the Manifesto(3) and in the United Nations Declaration.
But I will return to the Declaration and its guidelines. They call first for agreement on the mechanism for the drawing up of a new constitution based on, among others, the principles enunciated in paragraph 3 of the Declaration. Reading the report of the Secretary-General one can be encouraged by the fact that the position of the authorities, as expressed originally in the Manifesto issued by President de Klerk, and the proposals of ANC and PAC, have much in common and reflect to a large extent the principles enunciated in the Declaration. It seems that the Secretary-General was also encouraged since his report was prepared by the end of August before the National Party issued its latest proposals. It appears now that our optimism was rather premature.
The Declaration also provides for an agreement on transitional arrangements and modalities for the process of drawing up and adopting a new constitution, and for the transition to a democratic order including the holding of elections. On the machinery for the drawing up of a new constitution, the report notes that there is divergence of views. While a multi-party conference is seen by ANC and others as a first step towards an elected Assembly which would draft the constitution, Pretoria seems to have different views.
There is also divergence on the positions regarding transitional arrangements during the negotiations. What is important, it seems to me, is that the process should be totally democratic, ensuring that the ruling National Party does not play the role of negotiator and referee at the same time. As the Secretary-General implies, there are democratic forces in the country which can inspire general confidence and can play an important role in the transitional period. We can only express our strong hope that a meeting of all parties concerned is convened as soon as possible where all matters will be fully discussed and agreed upon. The international community, as envisaged in the Declaration, can play a role in assuring the successful transition to a democratic order.
Turning now to the Programme of Action, it appears from the Report of the Secretary-General that while the international community has remained actively seized with the issue of a political resolution of the South African question, and continued providing support to the opponents of apartheid, serious departures occurred from the international consensus regarding the need for the non-relaxation of existing measures aimed at applying pressure to ensure a speedy end to apartheid. As the Secretary-General notes, the process that started in South Africa may be relatively lengthy and vulnerable. It is for this reason that the Special Committee has cautioned those members of the international community, who appear to be over optimistic in their assessment of the developments in South Africa, not to take hasty measures which might be counter-productive to the process.
As the Secretary-General suggests "encouragement, pressure and assistance should be suitably applied as the process unfolds bearing in mind that the ultimate objective is the establishment of a non-racial democracy in South Africa". I hope that this advice is seriously taken into account by all because it is clear from the Report that while some progress has been made over the last 12 months, the achievement of the final objective is far from being in sight. The road is still fraught with dangers.
The international community has made a commitment to see that apartheid is eradicated and that South Africa adopts a new constitution which guarantees a united, non-racial, democracy. This commitment, I am sure, the international community will keep. I very much hope that when we will debate at length the item of the Policies of Apartheid of the Government of South Africa at the forthcoming 46th session of the General Assembly, the situation will have improved in that country and that negotiations will have finally started.
Finally, the pace of change in South Africa, lags behind the expectation of the opponents of apartheid inside and outside the country. It must therefore be the urgent responsibility of the international community to bring change in South Africa in line with the rapid global change in favour of democracy and respect for human rights and human dignity. The General Assembly is not in the business of praising any regime but to promote the implementation of the principles and objectives enshrined in the United Nations Charter and the observance of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
For these reasons, the Secretary-General, the Special Committee against Apartheid, and all the members of this august body, will continue to monitor closely the developments over the next three months and I am confident that we will, in concert, strengthen the process in South Africa to eradicate apartheid and create a non-racial, democratic society in that country.
In conclusion, I would like to recommend that the General Assembly adopts draft decision A/45/L.51 in which it takes note with appreciation the report of the Secretary-General, and decides to consider it further at the 46th session. The draft decision also requests the Secretary-General to continue to promote all efforts leading to the eradication of apartheid through genuine negotiations, to monitor developments in South Africa, and submit to the General Assembly during the course of next year, as appropriate, a report on further progress in the implementation of the Declaration.