JOINT STATEMENT BY THE CHAIRMAN - DIALLO TELLI (GUINEA) - AND THE RAPPORTEUR - MATRIKA PRASAD KOIRALA (NEPAL) - ON THE OCCASION OF THE PUBLICATION OF THE SECOND INTERIM REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE, JULY 18, 1963(1)
The Special Committee on the Policies of Apartheid of the Government of the Republic of South Africa has approved a second interim report to the Security Council and the General Assembly in order to acquaint them with the grave new developments which have taken place in the Republic of South Africa since the publication of its first interim report and to submit conclusions reached by the Special Committee to cope with the serious situation prevailing in the Republic of South Africa.
On this occasion, the Special Committee wishes to stress the extreme seriousness and anxiety with which it views the present situation in the Republic of South Africa, a situation arising from the pursuit of the policy of apartheid, and its conviction that effective international action should be taken urgently by the Council in order to halt the further drift of events to disaster.
The Special Committee wishes to emphasise that, in its view, the situation in the Republic of South Africa does not raise questions concerning a peculiar political or social system, nor that of the inability of a Member State to live up to the high ideals of the Charter.
The fact is that a Member State has persistently violated the fundamental principles of the Charter, defied numerous decisions of the principal organs, and shown contempt towards the Organisation and the almost unanimous voice of its Members.
The Special Committee wishes to emphasise the fact that this situation constitutes a serious threat to international peace and security and can lead to incalculable consequences. In this connexion, the Special Committee notes with great satisfaction the important statement by the President of the United States of America, on 17 July, that the racial policy of South Africa, firstly, is inimical to the future of South Africa, secondly, is repugnant to the United States, and thirdly, constitutes a threat to the peace. The international community has the inescapable obligation to end this threat before it assumes such serious proportions that it can no longer be brought under control.
The present Government of the Republic of South Africa offers for all time no other future to its non-white population than perpetual subordination. Though it describes itself as engaged in a struggle for the survival of the white population, it deliberately imperils their own safety and offers them no other destiny than a hopeless struggle for domination. Indeed, the Minister of Transport only recently warned a group of white school children: "In the coming generation you must be prepared to sacrifice everything... you must be prepared to die." To this coming generation the United Nations must open other doors for the future.
The present policies of the Government of the Republic of South Africa, which are directed on the one hand towards aggravating racial discrimination and, on the other, towards denying any possibility for peaceful change, point towards an inevitable clash within the country unless prompt action is taken by the Security Council. And such a clash would result in serious international repercussions.
South Africa has been described as a microcosm of the world. Its racial groups are derived from or have close kinship with the people of many Member States. South Africa could be an example to the world if all groups within the country were permitted to live together in amity on the basis of equality. But it has become, instead, a source of international friction and a threat to the peace and security in Africa and the world.
The Special Committee feels that as the Government of the Republic of South Africa has not paid heed to the repeated appeals and demands of the United Nations, the time has come for the Organisation to utilise all its resources under the Charter to deal with the policies of apartheid as a matter of urgency. The course of events since the adoption of General Assembly resolution 1761(XVII) shows that any further delay in necessary action, and any mere repetition of a simple abhorrence of apartheid, would be self-defeating.
The Special Committee recalls the Security Council resolution of April 1, 1960, following the Sharpeville incidents which represented an important turning point in South Africa. Sharpeville was the warning of the consequences of apartheid.
The Security Council made a clear decision that it was imperative to abandon the policies of apartheid and bring about racial harmony based on equality.
The late Secretary-General, Mr. Hammarskjold, was charged with the mission of contacting the Government of South Africa and reporting on means to ensure respect for the purposes and principles of the Charter.
The mission of the Secretary-General was frustrated by the Government of South Africa which ignored the advice of the Security Council and continued unashamed with its disastrous policies as if nothing had passed.
The Special Committee feels that the situation is so grave and the threat of international conflict so evident that the Security Council must without delay take the measures required to maintain peace and security in Africa and the world.
APPEAL BY THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE TO ORGANISATIONS AND EMINENT PERSONALITIES, ASKING THEM TO EXERT ALL THEIR INFLUENCE TO INDUCE THE SOUTH AFRICAN GOVERNMENT TO REFRAIN FROM EXECUTING POLITICAL LEADERS, MARCH 23, 1964(2)
The United Nations General Assembly has entrusted the Special Committee on the Policies of Apartheid of the Government of the Republic of South Africa with the task of keeping the various aspects of the South African Government's racial policies under constant review. The latest developments in South Africa are causing grave concern to the Special Committee which has pointed out, in its report of 23 March 1964 to the General Assembly and the Security Council, that the intensification of racial discrimination and the brutal repressive measures being taken against individuals and organisations opposed to the policy of apartheid are creating a situation which becomes more explosive with each passing day and will, if it continues, inevitably have serious international repercussions.
The Special Committee is concerned, in the first instance, with the trials of hundreds of persons, including many prominent leaders of the movement for racial equality, which are now under way. These trials, conducted under arbitrary laws which violate the fundamental principles of universal justice and human rights and which prescribe the death penalty for acts of resistance to the policy of apartheid, are continuing despite the unanimous appeals of both the General Assembly and the Security Council for their abandonment and for the liberation of all persons imprisoned, interned or subjected to other restrictions for having opposed the policy of apartheid. These trials, which have already resulted in the passing of death sentences on three prominent political leaders,(3)
may well do irreparable harm to the efforts of the United Nations to find a peaceful solution to the situation in South Africa.
The Special Committee has therefore decided to address an urgent appeal to you to exert all your influence to induce the Government of South Africa:
We have the honour to send you herewith for your information the report of the Special Committee of March 23, 1964, in which the Committee gives an account of recent developments and makes recommendations for appropriate international action.
COMMUNIQUE OF THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON DEATH SENTENCES IN SOUTH AFRICA, OCTOBER 9, 1964(4)
At a special meeting held today, the Special Committee on the Policies of Apartheid of the Government of the Republic of South Africa expresses its grave concern over the news that the appeals of Mr. Vuyisile Mini, Mr. Wilson Khayinga and Mr. Zinakile Mkaba, leaders of the African National Congress in Port Elizabeth, against the death sentences passed on them in March 1964 have been rejected.
It notes that the trial of these militant opponents of the policies of apartheid is in violation of the repeated resolutions of the General Assembly and the Security Council calling on the South African Government to end its ruthless repressive measures against the opponents of the policies of apartheid and seek a peaceful solution based on racial equality. It recalls that the Security Council, in its resolution S/5761 of June 9, 1964, urged the South African Government "to renounce the execution of the persons sentenced to death for acts resulting from their opposition to the policy of apartheid".
The Special Committee, therefore, urgently demands that the South African Government refrain from the execution of the death sentences, which would seriously aggravate the situation in South Africa, and take steps to comply with the resolutions of the General Assembly and the Security Council.
The Special Committee urgently appeals to all States, organisations and individuals to utilise all their influence to save the lives of Mr. Vuyisile Mini, Mr. Wilson Khayinga and Mr. Zinakile Mkaba and to persuade the South African Government to grant an amnesty to all persons imprisoned, interned or subjected to other restrictions for having opposed the policy of apartheid.
APPEAL BY THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE TO MEMBER STATES FOR AID TO FAMILIES OF PERSONS PERSECUTED BY SOUTH AFRICAN GOVERNMENT FOR OPPOSITION TO APARTHEID, OCTOBER 26, 1964(5)
The Special Committee on the Policies of Apartheid of the Government of the Republic of South Africa has been concerned for some time with the urgent need for relief and legal assistance to persons persecuted in the Republic of South Africa for acts arising from their opposition to the Government's racial policies which have been repeatedly condemned by competent organs of the United Nations.
The Special Committee felt that these victims of persecution are entitled to assistance by the peoples of the world, not only because of humanitarian reasons, but also because they have faced persecution in struggle for racial equality which is enshrined in the United Nations Charter as a fundamental purpose of the Organisation. Indeed, assistance by the peoples of the world would be an effective means to express solidarity with the opponents of racial discrimination and to counter growth of racial bitterness in South Africa.
It may be recalled that, on the recommendation of the Special Committee, the General Assembly adopted resolution 1978 B (XVIII) on December 16, 1963, requesting the Secretary-General to seek ways and means of providing relief and assistance, through the appropriate international agencies, to the families of all persons persecuted by the Government of the Republic of South Africa for their opposition to the policies of apartheid.
In view of the acute and urgent need for assistance, and after consultation with the Secretary-General, the Special Committee has decided that an appeal should immediately be addressed to Member States and organisations to contribute urgently and generously to existing relief organisations, pending the conclusion of other appropriate arrangements.
In spite of all Security Council and General Assembly resolutions demanding the abandonment of the policies of apartheid, the Government of the Republic of South Africa has continued to implement its repressive laws providing extremely harsh penalties for belonging to or furthering the aims of the major African political organisations and for acts of protest and resistance against the Government's racial policies. The implementation of these laws has resulted in the detention of thousands of persons, many of whom are being tried or awaiting trial, thus facing long periods in prison or life imprisonment or even death sentences.
Hundreds of persons have been imprisoned under Section 17 of the General Law Amendment Act of 1963, which provides for the detention of persons without trial for periods of 90 days at a time. Numerous persons have been subjected to banishment, house arrest, banning orders and other restrictions which often prevent them from pursuing their occupations. The distress and misery caused by these repressive actions to the families may easily be imagined. Numerous families have been deprived of their breadwinners. Children have been separated from one or both of their parents.
When brought to trial, many an opponent of the policies of apartheid faces financial difficulties and has to rely on benevolent organisations for legal assistance, support of families and payment of bail.
It appears from communications received by the Special Committee from organisations concerned with relief and assistance to the victims of repression in South Africa that they are in urgent need of funds to provide even minimum legal assistance and relief to numerous persons who have been jailed or brought to trial under repressive laws.
The Special Committee is attaching herewith communications received by it from three organisations - Amnesty International, Defence and Aid Fund (International) and Joint Committee on the High Commission Territories - which have been engaged in relief and assistance for the victims of persecution by the Republic of South Africa and which offer their services in implementing the purposes of General Assembly resolution 1978 B (XVIII).
The Special Committee notes that Amnesty International, sponsored by eminent personalities from many countries, "adopts" prisoners and detainees in South Africa who do not advocate violence and also assists refugees from South Africa.
The Defence and Aid Fund, established in the United Kingdom in 1956, with Canon L. John Collins as Chairman, has so far contributed about 300,000 to the victims of the policies of apartheid and maintains contact with South Africa through local committees. Its efforts have been appreciated by prominent South African opponents of apartheid including Chief Albert Luthuli, winner of the Noble Peace Prize.
The Joint Committee on the High Commission Territories, representative of a number of voluntary organisations, is concerned with relief and assistance to South African refugees in the High Commission Territories(6) and in Northern Rhodesia.(7)
The Special Committee also notes that the World Council of Churches has, in July 1964, earmarked $60,000 for legal aid for political prisoners in South Africa and for assistance to their dependents, and is seeking further contributions for this purpose.
The Special Committee wishes to make an urgent appeal to Member States to contribute generously to the fulfilment of the purposes of General Assembly resolution 1978 B (XVIII) through these voluntary organisations or through other appropriate channels of their choice, and to give the widest publicity to this appeal in order to encourage charitable foundations, organisations and individuals in their countries to make generous contributions.
At an emergency meeting held today, the Special Committee on the Policies of Apartheid of the Government of the Republic of South Africa expressed its shock and profound indignation over the news of the execution of Messrs. Vuyisile Mini, Wilson Khayinga and Zinakile Mkaba, three African National Congress leaders in Port Elizabeth.
The Special Committee strongly condemns this ruthless and criminal act which not only constitutes a challenge to world public opinion, but also a flagrant violation of resolutions of the General Assembly and Security Council, particularly of the resolution of the Security Council (S/5761) of 9 June 1964 urging the South African Government "to renounce the execution of persons sentenced to death for acts resulting from their opposition to the policies of apartheid".
The Special Committee draws the attention of the international community to the grave and irreparable consequences which are bound to result from the course being followed by the South African Government. It reaffirms its determination to redouble its efforts, in the discharge of its mandate, to assist the General Assembly and the Security Council to adopt decisive measures to ensure an urgent solution to this problem.
The Special Committee urges all States, particularly those States which by still maintaining close relations with South Africa bear a special responsibility in this matter, now to take energetic steps, in accordance with the resolutions of the General Assembly and the Security Council, to ensure the abandonment of the disastrous policy of apartheid of the South African Government.
COMMUNIQUE OF THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE CONCERNING FURTHER DEATH SENTENCES IN SOUTH AFRICA, MARCH 9, 1965(8)
At an extraordinary meeting held today, the Special Committee on the Policies of Apartheid of the Government of the Republic of South Africa noted with grave concern and indignation that the South African Government is continuing trials of opponents of apartheid for their membership in and support of organisations opposed to apartheid or for acts resulting from their opposition to apartheid. Severe sentences are being imposed on the accused under arbitrary laws, which violate the fundamental principles of justice and human rights and which are designed to impose the policies of apartheid and to suppress all opposition to it.
The Special Committee views with great indignation in particular that death sentences were passed on February 23, 1965 on three Africans from Port Elizabeth - Samuel Jones, Nolali Petse and Daniel Ngondeni - and that the appeal against the death sentence of Frederick John Harris, former Chairman of the South African Non-Racial Olympic Committee, was rejected on March 1, 1965. The Special Committee restates its view that these men and other opponents of apartheid who are continually brought to trial under different charges in South Africa are not criminals but true patriots of South Africa who are the victims of an oppressive regime which has denied to them all avenues for political discourse.
These trials and sentences are in open defiance of repeated resolutions of the General Assembly and the Security Council, in particular the Security Council resolutions S/5761 and S/5773 of June 9 and 18, 1964, urging the South African Government to renounce the execution of persons sentenced to death for acts resulting from their opposition to the policies of apartheid, and to grant an amnesty to all persons imprisoned, interned or subjected to other restrictions for having opposed the policies of apartheid.
These trials and sentences, moreover, are leading to a further aggravation of the situation in South Africa and make a peaceful settlement ever more difficult.
The Special Committee, therefore, urgently demands that the South African Government desist from its present course in compliance with the resolutions of the General Assembly and the Security Council.
The Special Committee urgently appeals to all States, and especially the major trading partners of South Africa, organisations and individuals to utilise all their influence to persuade the South African Government to comply with these resolutions and to renounce the executions and arbitrary trials.
The Special Committee wishes to draw the attention of the Security Council, particularly of the permanent members of the Council, to the fact that these sentences can only further aggravate an already grave political situation in the Republic of South Africa.
MESSAGE BY THE CHAIRMAN OF THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE TO THE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON SOUTH-WEST AFRICA, OXFORD, 23-27 MARCH 1966In the two decades during which the United Nations has considered the situation in South West Africa, the General Assembly alone has adopted no less than seventy-three resolutions expressing the concern of Member States for the fulfilment of the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
Neither these resolutions nor the three advisory opinions of the International Court of Justice have succeeded in persuading the Pretoria regime to abide by its obligations toward the people of South West Africa and the international community.
The South African regime has been emboldened to violate its obligations and defy the United Nations mainly because its trading partners and friends, including some of the great Powers, have been unwilling to join in effective measures to force compliance by that regime with its obligations. It has been encouraged by the willingness of some Powers to compromise the fundamental principles of self-determination of peoples, as reflected for instance in the suggestion by the "Good Offices Committee" in 1958 that the possibility of annexation of part of South West Africa by the South African regime should be investigated. It has continued with its criminal policy in the hope that the decisions of the United Nations will remain toothless so long as certain Powers are unwilling to match their deeds with their words and the requirements for a solution.
The contentious proceedings instituted by the Governments of Ethiopia and Liberia before the International Court of Justice were designed to end the hesitations of these Powers and to confront them with a clear-cut choice.
Whatever the exact terms of the judgement, these Powers will soon be faced with the choice - whether they are prepared to take all peaceful measures, and make the necessary sacrifices, to fulfil the international obligation to the people of South West Africa or whether they will prefer the profitable intercourse with the racist regime in South Africa. The world cannot accept any more excuses for inaction: it will demand that all States take the requisite measures to fulfil the responsibilities of the international community.
The people of South West Africa are entitled to expect from the international community decisive measures to ensure the fulfilment of the sacred trust of the Mandate and all assistance to enable them to achieve the rights recognized in the United Nations Charter, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples.
The United Nations Special Committee on the Policies of Apartheid of the Government of the Republic of South Africa, of which I have the honour to be the Chairman, has repeatedly drawn attention to the grave dangers of racism in South Africa and recommended adequate measures to resolve the situation. It has called for universal economic sanctions against the South African regime as the only effective peaceful means for this purpose. I may recall that the International Conference on Economic Sanctions against South Africa, held in London in April 1964, made concrete recommendations in this respect.
The Special Committee has emphasized that racism in South Africa is not a local aberration but a serious threat to international peace and security. The imposition of the inhuman policy of apartheid on the South West African people, the collusion of the South African regime with the racist authorities in neighbouring African territories and its plans for perpetuation of racism in the whole of Southern Africa show clearly the imperative need to destroy the bulwark of racism in South Africa without further delay and to promote a non-racial society based on the dignity of man.
The support of public opinion all over the world is essential to resolve, as peacefully as possible, this grave situation which threatens peace in Africa and the world, and which carries the seeds of a disastrous racial conflict.
STATEMENT BY THE CHAIRMAN OF THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON THE CONVICTION OF MR. ABRAM FISCHER, Q.C., May 4, 1966
The main "crime" of Mr. Fischer, in the eyes of the South African authorities, is his constant and brave fight against that racist regime's policies of apartheid. They have not forgiven him for his able defence of the accused in the five-year-long treason trial of 1956-1961 in which all 156 accused were acquitted. He was also the leader of the defence in the Rivonia trial of Nelson Mandela, Walter Sisulu and others. Persecution by the South African authorities is not new to Mr. Fischer for, as he said in the Johannesburg Magistrate' Court on 24 September 1964:
"I have been harassed by the Special Branch for the past fourteen or fifteen years.... They have been watching my house, tapping my telephone, my house and office have been raided on a number of occasions. ...."
All this was done because he had dared to oppose the inhuman and the cruellest of cruel policies of an authoritarian regime. In this he is not alone. As Mr. Fischer himself said, at the time when he went into hiding, the 2,500 political prisoners being held in South Africa were not criminals but the staunchest opponents of apartheid. At that time he also pointed out that in South Africa discriminatory laws had multiplied each year, that bitterness and hatred of the Government was growing daily, that organizations were outlawed and their leaders banned from speaking or meeting, that the people were hounded by laws requiring them to carry passes, and that torture by solitary confinement and worse had been legalized by an elected parliament. Mr. Fischer wanted this intolerable system changed.
There are hundreds of persons now in South Africa gaoled because of their opposition to this system. They are still in gaol in spite of repeated General Assembly and Security Council resolutions asking the South African Government to grant unconditional release to all political prisoners and to all persons imprisoned, interned or subjected to other restrictions for having opposed the policy of apartheid.
There are already world-wide repercussions of Mr. Fischer's trial and conviction. The various anti-apartheid movements in the world have made public protests against it. However, the South African Government cannot feel secure as long as there are fighters and opponents of apartheid. Yet the fight against apartheid is gaining strength every day. The United Nations General Assembly in its resolution 2054 (XX) of 20 December 1965 firmly supported "all those who are opposing the policies of apartheid and particularly those who are combating such policies in South Africa".
Any sentence passed against Mr. Abram Fischer will be considered by all freedom-loving people as a crime against justice and human brotherhood. As I have said earlier, Mr. Abram Fischer is not alone in his courageous fight: he has with him the conscience of mankind and the sympathy of the United Nations.
[Mr. Fischer was sentenced to life imprisonment on May 9, 1966.]
STATEMENT BY THE CHAIRMAN ON A LOAN BY THE WORLD BANK TO A SOUTH AFRICAN COMPANY, AUGUST 2, 1966
According to a press release issued at Headquarters on 29 July 1966, the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development has approved a loan equivalent to $20 million to the South African Electricity Supply Commission (ESCOM). According to the Bank's announcement, the loan will be guaranteed by the Government of the Republic of South Africa.
Since its establishment the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development has made eleven loans to South Africa, totalling $241.8 million. The first group of loans, seven in number, were given directly to the Government of South Africa. The second group of loans were given to the Electricity Supply Commission with South Africa as a guarantor.
It might be recalled here that the Special Committee, in its last annual report of 10 August 1965 had recommended that all international agencies, in particular the specialized agencies, including the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development and the International Monetary Fund, should take all necessary steps to deny all economic assistance to the Government of South Africa without precluding, however, humanitarian assistance to the victims of apartheid. On the basis of that recommendation, the General Assembly in operative paragraph 10 of its resolution 2054 A (XX) invited the specialized agencies:
While most of the specialized agencies have extended their co-operation in that respect, it is a matter of great regret that the International Bank had decided to give another loan to South Africa in violation of the appeal contained in the General Assembly resolution 2054 A (XX). Moreover, it seems that the decision of the International Bank was not taken until the judgement of the International Court of Justice concerning South West Africa had been rendered. This shows once more that the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development is lending its support to a regime whose criminal policies of apartheid have been universally condemned, by generously rewarding it with a $20 million loan.
On behalf of the members of the Special Committee I would like to express profound indignation at the complicity of the Bank with the torturers of the African people.
LETTER BY THE CHAIRMAN - ACHKAR MAROF (GUINEA) - TO U THANT, SECRETARY-GENERAL OF THE UNITED NATIONS, ON ILL-TREATMENT OF PRISONERS IN SOUTH AFRICA, FEBRUARY 3, 1967(9)
I have the honour, on behalf of the Special Committee, to request you to draw the urgent attention of the Commission on Human Rights to the continuing ill-treatment of prisoners, detainees and persons in police custody in the Republic of South Africa, particularly the numerous opponents of apartheid who have been imprisoned under arbitrary laws.
The Special Committee has always been gravely concerned over this matter and has reported on it to the General Assembly and the Security Council. A number of documents of the Special Committee, a list of which is attached, contain alarming evidence of ill-treatment of such persons in prisons and police stations.
In its reports of November 30, 1964, and August 10, 1965, the Special Committee suggested the establishment of an international commission composed of eminent jurists and prison officials to investigate the charges of torture and ill-treatment of prisoners in South Africa. The suggestion was not pressed in the General Assembly because it was hoped that the expression of international concern might persuade the South African Government to improve conditions so as to conform with civilised standards and the regulations in South Africa itself.
However, evidence of the continuing ill-treatment of prisoners, detainees and persons in police custody is still being received. Those being subjected to this ill-treatment include not only acknowledged leaders of the people and opponents of apartheid who have been persecuted under legislation which violates the fundamental principles of human rights, but also thousands who have been imprisoned for the infringement of apartheid laws.
As the Special Committee observed in its report of October 21, 1966, the ruthless measures of the South African Government seem to be increasingly designed to wreak vengeance against the opponents of apartheid. In the view of the Special Committee, such measures contravene international standards of behaviour and the Universal Declaration of Human rights.
The Special Committee, therefore, hopes that the Commission on Human Rights will consider the matter urgently and take steps to secure an international investigation with a view to ameliorating the conditions of these victims.(10)
APPEAL BY THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE TO MEMBER STATES AND NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANISATIONS FOR THE OBSERVANCE OF INTERNATIONAL DAY FOR THE ELIMINATION OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATION(21 MARCH), FEBRUARY 3, 1967(11)
The General Assembly of the United Nations, in its resolution 2142 of October 26, 1966, proclaimed March 21 as "International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination". A successful observance of this occasion by Member States will, it is hoped, help to promote further measures necessary to attain the goal of complete elimination of all forms of racial discrimination and apartheid.
The decision to proclaim the International Day was made by the General Assembly after it had reaffirmed that racial discrimination and apartheid were denials of human rights and fundamental freedoms, and constituted offences against human dignity. It recognised that wherever these evil policies were practised they became not only a serious impediment to economic and social development, but an obstacle to international cooperation and peace. The Assembly was deeply concerned that despite the decisive condemnation by the United Nations of the evils of racial discrimination and apartheid they continued to exist in some countries and territories. It reiterated that such policies and practices on the part of any Member State were incompatible with the obligations assumed by it under the Charter of the United Nations.
The General Assembly considered it appropriate to choose March 21 as the day on which to observe the International Day as it commemorated the anniversary of the massacre of peaceful demonstrators against racial discrimination in Sharpeville, South Africa, seven years ago. This tragic incident focused the attention of the world on the inherent dangers of apartheid and the evils of its philosophy.
The commemoration of the International Day is of particular concern to the Special Committee on Apartheid in view of the special responsibilities which have been assigned to it by the General Assembly regarding the policies of apartheid of the South African Government. The Special Committee is convinced that no action against apartheid will be completely effective unless it is taken at an international level on a coordinated basis. If the significance of the International Day can be fully publicised, and steps initiated to promote some of those further measures necessary to eliminate racial discrimination and apartheid, the principles and objectives of the occasion will have been served admirably. For these reasons, the Special Committee earnestly appeals to all States, organisations and individuals to commemorate this occasion in as effective a manner as possible.
The anniversary of the Sharpeville massacre is a particularly appropriate time to concentrate all efforts to keep the question of racial discrimination and apartheid before the conscience of the world. The events of March 21, 1960, should be a spur to energetic and decisive efforts to eliminate these inhuman practices. On that day, tens of thousands of Africans held peaceful demonstrations all over South Africa against the humiliating pass laws which restrict their freedom of movement and employment. In Sharpeville, an African location near Vereeniging, police fired at a peaceful rally of Africans killing 68 persons and wounding nearly 200 others.
The Sharpeville demonstration was one of a series of protests against apartheid. Demonstrations, work stoppages, and the burning of passes took place all over the country. The work boycott on March 28 was reported to be 90 percent effective. Thirty thousand Africans marched into Cape Town on March 30 in an amazingly peaceful and disciplined demonstration. These manifestations were met with indiscriminate violence and brutality by the police.
Scores of lives were lost. Langa and Nyanga, African locations near Cape Town, were surrounded by the police who prevented food from going in so that the workers would be forced by hunger to go back to work. Later the police went into locations and assaulted people who had remained at home.
These repressive measures shocked world opinion and brought home the urgent need for international action to eliminate the cause of the tragedy, namely, the oppression and humiliation of millions of people by a Government which practised racial discrimination as a State policy. Many heads of State and Government, parliaments, organisations, church groups and individuals around the world voiced concern and condemned racism. Boycott campaigns were organised and funds were collected for the relief of the victims.
The Sharpeville incident was a turning point in the United Nations consideration of the question of apartheid. It led to the adoption by the Security Council on April 1, 1960, of resolution S/4300. This resolution took into account "the strong feelings and grave concern aroused among Governments and peoples of the world by the happenings in the Union of South Africa", and recognised that the situation in that country was one that had led to international friction, and if continued might endanger international peace and security. It deplored the policies and actions of the South American Government and called upon that Government to initiate measures aimed at bringing about racial harmony based on equality, and to abandon its polices of apartheid and racial discrimination.
There was hope at the time that world concern and the mounting tension in South Africa itself would lead to a reassessment of policy and a change in the situation. Unfortunately, this hope was not fulfilled. The South African Government proceeded with more arbitrary laws, mass arrests, stronger repression and an intensive build-up of its military and police forces. The Sharpeville massacre must be regarded as a grim reminder, not only of the profound injustice of apartheid, but also of the fact that people who live under the system of apartheid have no prospect of liberating themselves from oppression, unless international opinion can be marshalled on their side and international action can be taken to liberate them.
The Special Committee hopes, therefore, that the commemoration of the International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination will result in more effective action, at governmental and non-governmental level, to help terminate the dangerous situation in Southern Africa. The Committee suggests the following as among the activities which might be undertaken by Governments and non-governmental organisations:
The Special Committee on apartheid trusts that this appeal will meet with a positive response and would welcome information on the steps which are taken by States and organisations to commemorate the International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination. It is to be hoped that the proclamation of this day will bring about an increased awareness by the peoples of the world of their responsibility in eliminating the scourge of racial discrimination in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the United Nations Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination and the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.
APPEAL BY THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE FOR THE COMMEMORATION OF INTERNATIONAL DAY FOR THE ELIMINATION OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATION (21 MARCH), JANUARY 12, 1968(13)
Last year the United Nations observed March the 21st as the International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination. The day was chosen by the General Assembly as it commemorated the anniversary of the massacre of peaceful demonstrators in Sharpeville, South Africa, who were protesting against the racist policies of the Government of South Africa.
By resolution 2307 (XVII) of December 13, 1967, the General Assembly has again appealed to all States and organisations to observe this International Day which falls on March 21, 1968, so as to demonstrate their solidarity with the oppressed people of South Africa. The occasion this year will acquire special significance, as it falls within the International Year for Human Rights.
The General Assembly attaches the highest importance to the commemoration of this event, for, if widely celebrated, it will serve to focus international attention on the urgent need for eliminating policies of racial discrimination and apartheid wherever they may exist. The Assembly has recognised that both policies, when practised, seriously hamper economic and social development, and present obstacles to international cooperation and peace. Furthermore, the United Nations has made it clear that the practice of racial discrimination and apartheid by any Member State is incompatible with obligations assumed under the Charter of the Organisation.
It is necessary to recall the warning of the Secretary-General, U Thant, in his message on International Day 1967, when he said:
"The doctrine and practice of racial supremacy in the world of today are not only wrong, they are incalculably dangerous."
This view is shared by the overwhelming majority of Member States of the United Nations and has particular relevance in the situation that has developed in South Africa.
The Government of South Africa, by its complete disregard for the rights of non-White people and in defiance of world opinion, has set the country on a collision course. It has adopted the most shocking measures to deny the non-White people their political and social rights, and has continued to use its economic and military power to suppress the efforts of the oppressed population to seek remedy by peaceful and constitutional means. The mounting discontent and frustration which is widespread amongst the non-White population has, in view of the majority of Member States of the United Nations, created a situation which constitutes a threat not only to the peace of the area but to the development of harmonious relations between peoples of different colours and races in South Africa and beyond.
The United Nations is convinced that urgent and decisive international action is necessary to save the situation and to secure the elimination of apartheid in South Africa. It should be noted that the legitimacy of the South African people's struggle for human rights and fundamental freedoms, irrespective of race, colour or creed, was reaffirmed by the United Nations General Assembly in its latest resolution on the question.
The Special Committee has considered it necessary to recite these developments so as to remind all States and organisations of the serious situation with which the United Nations is confronted. It hopes that in commemorating International Day this year, all States and organisations will utilise the occasion to the maximum to promote a widespread awareness of the situation in South Africa and to marshal the support of peoples everywhere in the campaign against racial discrimination and apartheid.
The Committee suggests the following as among the activities which might be undertaken by Governments and inter-governmental and non-governmental organisations:
The Special Committee trusts that this appeal will meet with a positive response and would welcome information on the steps which are taken by States and organisations to commemorate the International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination.
LETTER BY THE CHAIRMAN - ACHKAR MAROF (GUINEA) - TO ANTI-APARTHEID MOVEMENTS AND NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANISATIONS, JANUARY 12, 1968(14)
The Special Committee has always attached great importance to the activities of anti-apartheid movements and other non-governmental organisations in promoting international efforts to eradicate apartheid. To this end it has sought to encourage maximum cooperation between the United Nations and these organisations.
In its report of October 17, 1967, to the General Assembly and the Security Council, the Special Committee stressed that, while the United Nations should intensify the dissemination of information on the activities of United Nations organs concerned with apartheid, other international organisations and States, as well as non-governmental organisations, should be asked to cooperate in the effort to secure widest international support for action against apartheid. The Committee suggested, too, that non-governmental organisations should join with member States to keep the South African people informed of the international campaign which is being conducted on their behalf. In order to promote coordination and strengthening of the international effort against apartheid, the Special Committee further suggested that steps should be taken be publicise the activities of inter-governmental and non-governmental organisations in this regard.
The General Assembly, in resolution 2307 (XVII) adopted on December 13, 1967, took into account this report of the Special Committee and made a number of important recommendations. It invited all States to encourage the establishment of national organisations for the purpose of further enlightening public opinion on the evils of apartheid; requested all States to commemorate during the International Year for Human Rights, March 21, 1968 - the International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination - with appropriate solemnity, in solidarity with the oppressed people of South Africa; requested the Special Committee to intensify its efforts to promote an international campaign against apartheid; and asked the Committee to consult with inter-governmental and non-governmental organisations and submit a report on measures which might appropriately be taken to ensure the widest dissemination of information on the evils of apartheid and the efforts of the international community to secure its elimination.
In the light of the above, the Special Committee feels that it would be most useful if it could receive regular and detailed information on the activities of all organisations which are engaged in the campaign against apartheid.
The Special Committee would, therefore, appreciate being informed of activities planned and undertaken by your organisation against apartheid, and would also appreciate receiving at your earliest convenience information on the constitution and officers of your organisation. It would be very helpful if the Special Committee could receive any publications or printed material which your organisation may have issued in the past on the question of apartheid.
The Special Committee looks forward to a continued and close cooperation with all non-governmental organisations engaged in the campaign against apartheid and hopes that the year 1968, which has been designated by the United Nations as the International Year for Human Rights will be marked by significant progress towards the elimination of this evil.
LETTERS BY THE CHAIRMAN - ABDULRAHIM ABBY FARAH (SOMALIA) - TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE SECURITY COUNCIL AND THE CHAIRMAN OF THE COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS CONCERNING TRIAL IN NATAL, MARCH 18, 1969(15)
The Special Committee on the Policies of Apartheid of the Government of the Republic of South Africa expresses its grave concern and indignation at the current trial of twelve Africans in the Natal Provincial Division of the Supreme Court of South Africa under the notorious Terrorism Act of 1967 and the Suppression of Communism Act which violate all canons of law and unjustly provide for death sentences.
The Special Committee notes in particular:
The Special Committee recalls, in particular, that the General Assembly in resolution 2396 (XXIII) of December 2, 1968, expressed its grave concern over the ruthless persecution of opponents of apartheid under arbitrary laws and the treatment of freedom fighters who were taken prisoner during the legitimate struggle for liberation; condemned the Government of South Africa for its cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment of political prisoners; called once again for the release of all persons imprisoned or restricted for their opposition to apartheid; appealed to all Governments to exert their influence in order to induce the Government of South Africa to release all such persons and to stop the persecution and ill-treatment of opponents of apartheid; and declared that freedom fighters taken prisoner during the legitimate struggle for liberation are entitled to treatment as prisoners of war under international law, particularly the Geneva Convention relating to the Treatment of Prisoners of War of August 12, 1949.
The Special Committee considers the institution of the new trial as a challenge to the authority of the United Nations, as a step towards the aggravation of racial conflict and, indeed, as a further evidence of those inhuman acts resulting from the policies of apartheid which have been recognised as a crime against humanity.
APPEAL BY THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE, ON THE OCCASION OF THE INTERNATIONAL DAY FOR THE ELIMINATION OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATION, FOR RELEASE OF SOUTH AFRICAN POLITICAL PRISONERS, MARCH 21, 1969(16)
The United Nations has constantly been concerned about the plight of all those persons who have become victims of oppression in South Africa. The Government of the Republic of South Africa has not relented in expanding its legislation in its efforts to silence and intimidate the leaders of the oppressed people of South Africa and the militant opponents of its policies of apartheid. Thus, the South African Government has progressively closed all avenues of peaceful change in the country. Under arbitrary laws which violate all canons of justice thousands of persons have been imprisoned for long terms, many for life; many others are detained in solitary confinement, and a host of others placed under house arrest or served with banning orders, for their opposition to apartheid.
Today, on the occasion of the International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, the Special Committee on the Policies of Apartheid of the Government of the Republic of South Africa solemnly appeals to the international community to redouble efforts in order to secure the unconditional release of all these persons. The Special Committee launches this appeal, in the spirit of General Assembly resolution 2396 (XXIII) of December 2, 1968, urging all governments, organisations and individuals to intensify their efforts to order to induce the Government of South Africa to release all persons imprisoned or restricted for their opposition to apartheid and to stop the persecution and ill-treatment of opponents of apartheid...(page missing).
In 1964 the Special Committee drew attention to the trial of these persons - "The Rivonia trial" - in which Nelson Mandela, Walter Sisulu, Govan Mbeki, Ahmed Kathrada, Dennis Goldberg and Raymond Mhlaba were ultimately sentenced to life imprisonment, in complete disregard of resolutions of the Security Council and the General Assembly, which called on the Government of South Africa to abandon the trial and to grant unconditional release to the defendants.
Opponents of the South African racial policies have also been detained without trial for, the Minister of Justice, under the Suppression of Communism Act, is empowered to issue banning and house arrests orders, if he is satisfied that the persons concerned "engage in activities which are furthering or may further the achievement of the objects of Communism". The use of the power to issue banning and house arrest orders appears to be based on the assumption that the purpose of the provision is to penalise opposition to apartheid by defining it as the furtherance of the "objects of Communism". This arbitrary measure has been applied so widely that Mrs. Helen Suzman, a Progressive Party Member of Parliament, aptly described it as a "scandalous abuse of unbridled power of the State to condemn people without trial to a twilight existence in their own country".
Mrs. Helen Joseph, who was the first person in South Africa to be placed under house arrest, is now serving her second five-year term. Banning and house arrest orders, some of which are extremely restrictive, as the Special Committee has pointed out in a number of its reports, have been served on hundreds of persons, including not only members of organisations which had been declared unlawful, but also many persons who have been active in such lawful organisations as the National Union of South African Students and the South African Institute of Race Relations.
The Government of the Republic of South Africa has not only refused to heed appeals by the Security Council and requests by the General Assembly calling for the release of all political prisoners and an end to the persecution of opponents of apartheid, but has resorted to more stringent and repressive measures to suppress any opposition to its racial policies.
These measures are numerous and include, in particular, the Criminal Procedure Amendment Act of 1965 which empowers the Attorney General to order the arrest of any person "likely" to be State witness in certain classes of offences and hold him incommunicado for up to six months at a time, and the Terrorism Act of 1967, under which thirty-seven Namibians were tried in 1967-68 and thirty-three sentenced to long imprisonment terms. Under this Terrorism Act which has been described by the International Commission of Jurists as a shocking piece of legislation because "it abolishes many of the safeguards normally provided in criminal law and procedure to ensure a fair trial and creates an offence which for lack of clarity and for breadth of scope must be without parallel" - twelve South Africans, against whom charges have recently been preferred, are at present under trial. They face a minimum sentence of five years' imprisonment and a maximum penalty of death. The Special Committee has drawn attention to this trial in a communication dated March 18, 1969, addressed to the President of the Security Council which is attached to this appeal.
These few cases illustrate the broad pattern of the plight of all those who have been languishing in South African jails, who are detained or restricted because they have stood up for the principles of the United Nations Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in opposing the policies of apartheid.
Mr. Robert Sobukwe said in 1959: "Freedom of the African means freedom of everyone, including Europeans in this country... People will live and be governed as individuals, and not as sectional groups... We believe that everyone prepared to accept and give loyalty to Africa is an African."
Nelson Mandela at the Rivonia trial also spoke in similar vein when he stated: "I have cherished the ideal of a democratic and free society in which all persons live together in harmony and with equal opportunities. It is an ideal which I hope to live for and achieve. But if needs be, it is an ideal for which I am prepared to die."
To secure the release of such leaders is to promote the determined objective of the United Nations in finding a peaceful solution to the conflict in South Africa. This is an urgent task more so because, as the Secretary-General warned in September 1968, "recent developments point to the danger of violence which, though limited in scope at this stage, might well have grave consequences for the future of southern Africa and for international harmony".
The Special Committee has therefore decided to address this appeal to all States to exert their influence to induce the Government of South Africa:
STATEMENT BY THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE CALLING FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE OF MRS. WINNIE MANDELA AND 21 OTHER AFRICANS REARRESTED AFTER TRIAL IN SOUTH AFRICA, FEBRUARY 25, 1970(17)
The decision of the South African authorities to rearrest the 22 Africans who had been found not guilty in Pretoria under the Suppression of Communism Act on February 16 and to charge them of offences under the internationally condemned Terrorism Act, is convincing evidence of the determination of the South African Government to convict these unfortunate persons at all costs.
The 22 Africans, including Mrs. Winnie Mandela, wife of Nelson Mandela, leader of the African National Congress now serving a sentence of life imprisonment, were charged in October 1969 with being office bearers, members or active supporters of the African National Congress, and furthering the aims of the organisation, after being detained for some five months.
The Special Committee was already concerned about the fate of the accused because some of them were tortured during interrogations prior to the trial according to affidavits filed by the defence counsel. Now the Committee fears for their lives not only because they can be detained indefinitely in solitary confinement without trial but also because they can even be sentenced to death if they are convicted under the notorious Terrorism Act. They can be held incommunicado and may not be permitted to see or communicate with anyone, including their relatives or their legal counsels.
The International Commission of Jurists had described the Terrorism Act as a shocking piece of legislation because "it abolished many of the safeguards normally provided in criminal law and procedure to ensure a fair trial and creates on offence which for lack of clarity and for breadth of scope must be without parallel". The crime of "terrorism" is defined so broadly that it ceases to have any meaningful boundaries. It includes, for example, undergoing any training outside or inside South Africa which could be useful to any person intending to endanger the maintenance of law and order. Attempting, consenting or taking any steps to undergo such training, and inciting, instigating, commanding, aiding, advising, encouraging or procuring another to undergo such training also constitutes terrorism.It goes so far as to declare that any act which embarrasses the administration of the affairs of the State constitutes terrorism. The onus of proving that he did not commit or intend to commit such act is placed on the defendant, a reversal of the normal burden of proof. The Terrorism Act provides for summary proceedings for offences involving the death penalty. Thus the basic procedural safeguards are now being denied the accused whose very lives are at stake. It should be recalled that the United Nations has repeatedly called for the repeal of this obnoxious piece of legislation.
On February 21 the South African security police was formally accused of assaults, threats and torture by the accused. The accusations were heard in an urgent application before the Supreme Court in Pretoria for an order protecting the 22 Africans.
The Special Committee fears for their lives because last year alone, five persons who were detained under the Terrorism Act died in mysterious circumstances. while South Africans have attributed their death "to natural causes", there has been, in some cases, disquieting evidence to the contrary, including the testimony of a world-renowned expert in forensic medicine who stated that electric shock torture had been used by the South African authorities.
A number of South Africans and Namibians have already been convicted under the Terrorism Act. Indeed, this act has become one of the most effective repressive measures against the opponents of apartheid. It is obvious that, after failing to secure their conviction under the Suppression of Communism Act, the South African Government is determined to persecute the 22 Africans by subjecting them to provisions of the Terrorism Act. The Special Committee considers that the accused are illegally detained since they are held under a universally condemned law the repeal of which has been requested by the United Nations. It therefore calls for their immediate release.
It decides to ask the Secretary-General to renew his efforts for the unconditional release of all those opponents of apartheid who are imprisoned or detained under the repressive laws of South Africa as called for by the General Assembly and the Security Council, and to ask him to be good enough to urge the International Committee of the Red Cross to arrange for its representative to see to the welfare of the 22 accused while they remain in custody. The Special Committee further decides to transmit this communique to the Commission on Human Rights for urgent attention at its current session.
[Reply by the International Committee of the Red Cross(18)
In a reply to a letter from UN Secretary-General U Thant, on 9 March, the President of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), Marcelle A. Naville, stated that authorisation to visit prisoners held in South Africa under the Terrorism Act in police custody "has not yet been obtained from the South African Government". His organisation is continuing representations in this respect, Visits had been made in 1964, 1967 and 1969 to convicted political prisoners serving sentences in South Africa.]
APPEAL FOR THE OBSERVANCE OF THE INTERNATIONAL DAY FOR THE ELIMINATION OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATION (SHARPEVILLE DAY), FEBRUARY 10, 1971
This year the observance of the International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination has a special significance because it falls within 1971, a year designated by the General Assembly for intensifying and concerting action to combat racism and racial discrimination wherever those practices may exist.
The Special Committee on Apartheid has been encouraged in the past by the response of anti-apartheid movements and other non-governmental organizations to its appeals to initiate or be associated with special programmes that would mark this special day and help to promote the cause of racial harmony in their respective communities. The Committee trusts that this year we can again count on the co-operation of non-governmental organizations so that our collective efforts will make 1971 a memorable year in the struggle against racial discrimination.
There is ample evidence in many places of the world of the inhumanity and injustice which are created by racial discrimination, but nowhere is this more forcibly demonstrated than in southern Africa where racist minority regimes, motivated by a philosophy of racial superiority, have seized power illegally and have deprived the majority of the people, who are non-white, of their human rights.
As in all situations which are unjust, the perpetrators must resort to increasingly harsh and unjust measures in order to maintain their authority and their privileges. This is the situation which confronts us in South Africa today. The Special Committee is convinced that every concerned person, individually or as part of a group, can play a part in the international campaign against apartheid and all other forms of racism.
There are a variety of ways in which non-governmental organizations can take action to combat racial discrimination. They can, for example, organize meetings and discussion groups in order to engender interest and to disseminate information on the question as a number of organizations have already done; they can withdraw from or refuse involvement in firms and banks which help to bolster the South African racist regime through economic and financial co-operation; they can bring pressure to bear on sports organizations to exclude South Africa teams which are selected on a racial basis; and they can collect contributions in support of United Nations Trust and Educational Funds, and in support of liberation movements and other organizations which are active in the struggle against apartheid. Of course there are other ways in which organizations can give tangible expression to their concern over racial discrimination either at the political, legal, social or cultural level. Naturally it will be for each group to select the most appropriate form of action.
The Special Committee is fully aware of the magnitude of the challenge presented by the problem of racial discrimination. We know that the major thrust of our campaign must come from the action of Governments. But we also believe that government action can be spurred by energetic action on the part of concerned individuals and organizations. We look forward to your continued support.
COMMUNIQUE BY THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE CONCERNING BRITISH DECISION ON ARMS SALE TO SOUTH AFRICA, FEBRUARY 24, 1971(19)
The Special Committee on Apartheid views the recent decision of the Government of the United Kingdom to resume the supply of aircraft and other military equipment and spare parts to the Government of South Africa as a breach of the provision of Security Council resolutions 181 (1963), 182 (1963) and 282 (1970).
When the embargo was first called for in 1963 no exceptions were made for the continued supply of arms under existing agreements. This fact was spelt out in clearer terms in the resolution adopted by the Security Council in July last year. Similarly the resolutions make no distinction between arms for internal use and arms for external defence.
It is the consensus of the United nations, and this was borne out during the last session of the General Assembly, that arms of all types increase the capacity of the South African Government to maintain and extend its iniquitous racist policies in its territory and in those of neighbouring Namibia and Southern Rhodesia.
To justify its action, the United Kingdom Government cites the opinion of its law officers that it is legally obligated to provide the helicopters and spare parts.
Under the provisions of the Charter, Members of the United Nations have an obligation to accept and carry out the decisions of the Security Council. It is pertinent to call attention to paragraph 3 of the General Assembly resolution 2736 (XXV) which reaffirms "that in the event of a conflict between the obligations of the Members of the United Nations under the Charter and their obligations under any other international agreement, their obligations under the Charter shall prevail". The United Kingdom subscribed to that resolution.
In view of the urgent and serious nature of the matter, the Committee has decided to take action as follows:
MESSAGE CONCERNING THE INTERNATIONAL YEAR FOR ACTION TO COMBAT RACISM AND RACIAL DISCRIMINATION, MARCH 21, 1971
Extract
This year has been proclaimed the International Year for Action to Combat Racism and Racial Discrimination, and the Special Committee on Apartheid joins the appeal to members of the international community, to non-governmental organizations and to individuals, to bring about an end to racism and racial discrimination wherever they exist.
In this era of unparalleled scientific and technological achievement, an era that has extended mankind's knowledge and mastery of material things far beyond terrestrial limits, there are still some countries which have yet to build their societies so that their peoples can achieve human dignity and not fall victim of discrimination, oppression and injustice because of differences of race, colour or religion. This situation is particularly pronounced in southern Africa and will continue so long as Member States, organizations and individuals give financial, moral and political support to the present South African regime.
The Special Committee urges all concerned to take effective political social and economic action so that substantial progress can be achieved in securing for all people everywhere the full enjoyment of their rights as envisaged in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and to co-operate with the United Nations in its campaign to eliminate once and for all racism and racial discrimination at all levels.
CLOSING STATEMENT BY THE CHAIRMAN - ABDULRAHIM ABBY FARAH (SOMALIA) - AT THE FINAL MEETING OF A SPECIAL SESSION OF THE COMMITTEE, MARCH 24, 1971(20)
Now that we have reached the end of our meetings, the conclusion is inescapable that, despite the efforts that have been made by the international community to gain support for the campaign against apartheid, this support has not been sufficient to have any appreciable impact on the racist regimes in South Africa and in neighbouring territories. Much more remains to be done at governmental and non-governmental levels if we are to give effect to the principles and policies we have generally agreed should be followed in the campaign against apartheid.
There has been unanimous agreement that the political problems of southern Africa are interlocking and cannot be dealt with in isolation and that the South African racist regime is the heart and centre of the problem viewed as a whole. The statements made by the Chairman of the Committee on Decolonisation and by the President of the Council for Namibia support this view.
It is indisputable that foreign economic and financial interests are not only supporting apartheid and reaping tremendous profits from the situation, but are also using their resources to create on the international scene a climate of opinion favourable to the South African regime.
There is virtually unanimous agreement, from the evidence which has been presented to the Committee and from our own studies on the subject, that with every expansion in the economy of South Africa there has been progressive extension and intensification of racial oppression in that country.
There is also agreement that, under existing circumstances, the argument for a so-called dialogue with South Africa can only become tenable if it is predicated explicitly on the basis of dialogue between the white and non-white people of South Africa; on the basis that all in South Africa are entitled to equal political, social and economic rights without regard to race or colour; and on the basis that all have the right to participate freely and equally in the life of the country as a whole.
In the course of our four meetings, a number of interesting and valuable proposals have been made which are directed towards improving the effectiveness of the international campaign against apartheid.
We recognise the fact that all those organs of the United Nations which are concerned with this problem can do more and ought to do more. The members of the Special Committee accept the constructive criticism that has been made about the work of the Committee, and are dedicated enough and responsive enough to take such criticism in good faith and we will certainly take it into account in our future work.
The core of the problem in the United Nations centres on the attitude of certain members of the Security Council. Paradoxically, while they refuse to participate in the discussions of the Special Committee on finding a common approach to the solution of the problem, they refuse to enter into a dialogue on the subject at the United Nations; and yet they are the very ones who call for a dialogue with South Africa.
We appeal to them again to join with the Special Committee, as they have been invited to do by the General Assembly, so that effective and concerted action can be taken on the matter.
All the proposals that have been put forward during the special session and discussed this morning will be listed and issued as an official document of the Special Committee. The proposals will be studied by the Special Committee and some of them may form the basis of recommendations to the General Assembly.
PRESS COMMUNIQUE ON THE BOYCOTT OF APARTHEID SPORT, APRIL 14, 1971i
l. The recent refusal of the South African authorities to grant Mr. Arthur Ashe, a leading United States tennis player, an entry visa to allow him to contest in the South African Open championships scheduled for March-April 1970, has again drawn special attention to the fact that the policy of apartheid is strictly enforced in the field of sport in South Africa.
"2. The South African Government's position on the matter was clearly defined by Prime Minister Vorster on 11 April 1967, when he said in the House of Assembly:
"I... want to make it quite clear that from South Africa's point of view no mixed sport between Whites and non-Whites will be practised locally.., and that the other colour groups, the Coloureds, the Indians and the Bantu, practise their sport separately.... If a person, either locally or abroad, adopts the attitude that he will enter into relations with us only if we are prepared to jettison the separate practising of sport prevailing among our own people in South Africa, then I want to make it quite clear that, no matter how important those sport relations are in my view, I am not prepared to pay that price..."
3. Even while it offered to send a multiracial team to the Olympic Games in Mexico in 1968, in the hope of gaining readmission to the International Olympic Games, the South African Government firmly maintained that no multiracial sport would be allowed in the country. Members of the South African team were, therefore, to be selected during racially segregated trial games. South Africa was rightly excluded from the Olympic Games in Mexico. It is hoped that it will not be allowed to take part in subsequent games so long as it continues to violate the international code of no discrimination in sport.
4. Because South Africa refused to comply with the Olympic code of nondiscrimination and persists in imposing apartheid in sport, the Special Committee feels that it is necessary to boycott all South African racist sport organizations. It therefore calls for the strict implementation of General Assembly resolution 2397 (XXIII) of 2 December 1968, requesting all States and organizations to suspend sporting exchanges with the racist rgime and with organizations or institutions in South Africa which practise apartheid. It particularly wishes to draw the attention of the Governments and sport bodies in the United Kingdom and New Zealand to this appeal since in these countries racist sport bodies of South Africa have been able to arrange exchanges despite vigorous protests by opponents of racism.
5. The Special Committee wishes to commend all Governments which have complied with that resolution and also a number of Governments including those of Kenya, Uganda and Zambia which took a further step in instituting appropriate action against the teams and sportsmen who had violated the boycott.
6. It also commends the various organizations and individuals who have promoted or supported the boycott of racist sport bodies, particularly the anti-apartheid movements and other organizations in the United Kingdom, Ireland, Australia, New Zealand and other countries. The Committee notes with particular appreciation the widespread protests against the all-white rugby team which toured the United Kingdom from early November 1969 to the end of January 1970, and the decision taken last month by the Amateur Athletic Union of Australia to discontinue exchanges of visits between athletes of the two countries.
7. It also notes that the decision taken on 23 March by the Davis Cup Special Committee to ban South Africa from the 1970 Davis Cup competition is valid for 1970 only. The Special Committee strongly feels that this decision should continue to apply and that the International Lawn Tennis Federation should sever all ties with the South African Lawn Tennis Union, as long as South Africa refuses to agree to multiracial sport in the country and to allow White and non-White South African sportsmen to compete against each other in local South African games. The Special Committee fully supports the proposal adopted by the Supreme Council for Sport in Africa at its recent General Assembly held in Cairo from 24 to 26 March 1970 that the International Olympic Committee should, at its forthcoming session at Amsterdam (7 to 15 May), decide not only to exclude South Africa from the next Olympic Games at Munich but also to expel it from the Olympic Movement.
MESSAGE BY THE CHAIRMAN - ABDULRAHIM ABBY FARAH (SOMALIA) - TO SEVERAL AUSTRALIAN ORGANISATIONS WHICH PROTESTED AGAINST TOURS OF RACIALLY SELECTED SOUTH AFRICAN SPORT TEAMS, JULY 28, 1971(21)
The Special Committee on Apartheid has received your communication concerning your opposition against the current tour of the South African rugby team and any other such teams that might visit Australia in the future. Such a position is consonant with the letter and spirit of United Nations General Assembly resolutions calling for an international campaign for suspension of sports engagements against South Africa until it abandons its racist policies. The Special Committee is keenly following developments and trusts that your efforts and those of other anti-apartheid movements will be successful during this International Year against Racism.
COMMUNIQUE BY THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE EXPRESSING INDIGNATION AT CONVICTION OF DEAN FFRENCH-BEYTAGH, NOVEMBER 1, 1971(22)
The Special Committee on Apartheid expresses indignation at the conviction and sentencing today of the Anglican Dean of Johannesburg, the Very Reverend Gonville ffrench-Beytagh, by the South African courts. The charges against the Dean were that he opposed apartheid - a policy which all Member States of the United Nations have described as a criminal affront against the conscience and dignity of mankind - and that he had provided humanitarian assistance to people imprisoned for their opposition to apartheid and to their families.
The Special Committee pays tribute to Dean ffrench-Beytagh and call on all governments and world public opinion to denounce his conviction.
The Special Committee draws attention to the fact that the Dean has been convicted under the so-called Suppression of Communism Act, one of the laws which have been condemned by the international community as violating the fundamental principles of the United Nations Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The conviction of a man of religion under this act shows the extent to which the South African regime will go in order to stifle all opposition to its racist policies.
The Special Committee also expresses its anxiety at the continuing reports on the ill-treatment and torture of political prisoners and detainees in South Africa. Mr. Ahmad Timol died under the most suspicious circumstances during interrogation under police custody on 27 October. He is the seventeenth person known to have died under such conditions. His death follows those of such opponents of apartheid as Mr. Looksmart Ngudle, Mr. Suliman Saloojee and Imam Abdullah Haron.
The Special Committee appeals to the world to denounce the torture of prisoners as a crime and to demand that the South African regime halt the perpetration of such criminal acts.
The Special Committee recommends that the General Assembly consider an impartial international judicial inquiry into the ill-treatment and torture of prisoners by the South African regime, and that a special appeal be addressed to all national and international legal associations to use their influence in this regard.
COMMUNIQUE BY THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON REPRESSION OF SOUTH AFRICAN STUDENTS, JUNE 12, 1972(23)
Brutal repression is being carried out by the South African regime against students of all races who have declared unequivocally their opposition to apartheid, with all the inequalities, injustice and humiliation it engenders in the field of education. The latest measures of repression have included the following:
This new vicious act of repression against the people of South Africa has provoked a vigorous response throughout the world. The Government of South Africa is responding with brutality to a spontaneous movement towards solidarity among all students regardless of their origin or race. The Special Committee of Apartheid, gravely concerned over the recent events, strongly condemns the police assault against students demonstrating for justice and equality.
The Special Committee wishes to reaffirm the legitimate right of all South Africans, including the students, to struggle against apartheid and welcomes the solidarity shown by youth groups of all races in that country. This solidarity serves to confirm the well known fact that students have always protested against the injustices of apartheid in South Africa, despite constant attempts to muzzle them. The Special Committee appeals to all youth, students and other organisations throughout the world to show their firm support for the struggle of the students in South Africa by all means at their disposal.
LETTER BY CHAIRMAN - ABDULRAHIM ABBY FARAH (SOMALIA) - TO MRS. WINNIE MANDELA, DECEMBER 13, 1972(24)
The United Nations Special Committee on Apartheid was gravely concerned to hear that you were recently the victim of an assault at your home, where you have been confined by the South African Government without visitors. The refusal of the South African regime to take adequate measures to guarantee your protection and to allow your sister or brother to live with you, constitute another act of criminal negligence which has become characteristic of that regime.
The Committee has been aware of the constant harassment to which you and members of your family have been subjected for more than a decade. It holds the South African regime responsible for your safety and the safety of all those who have been subjected to similar restrictions for opposing a policy which is condemned by the United Nations and, indeed, by humanity.
On behalf of my colleagues, I would like to express our solidarity with the noble ideals for which you and so many others have accepted to pay such a heavy personal price. We shall continue to expose the injustices and cruelty that are daily being perpetrated in your land against the opponents of apartheid, and to do all in our power to give assistance to your cause.
LETTERS BY CHAIRMAN - ABDULRAHIM ABBY FARAH (SOMALIA) - CONCERNING PROTECTION FOR MRS. WINNIE MANDELA, MARCH 9, 1973(25)
Letter to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Dr. Kurt Waldheim
I have the honour, in pursuance of a decision by the Special Committee on Apartheid, to request you to be kind enough to convey to the South African Government, the grave concern of the Special Committee concerning the safety of Mrs. Nomzamo Winnie Mandela, and to seek assurances that she will be provided adequate personal protection.
As you know, her husband, Mr. Nelson Mandela, the outstanding African nationalist leader, was sentenced in 1964 to a life term of imprisonment in the Rivonia trial which was condemned by United Nations organs. Mrs. Mandela has herself been subjected to harsh restrictions for over a decade for her opposition to apartheid. Under the banning orders arbitrarily imposed on her in 1970, she is confined to her home on nights and weekends and prohibited from receiving any visitors, except her children or a doctor (for Mrs. Mandela suffers from a heart condition). She is also prohibited from communicating with any of the hundreds of other persons banned for their opposition to apartheid.
The Special Committee has been particularly concerned for her safety since its attention was drawn to reports that on November 19, 1971, three gunmen had invaded her home in the early hours of the morning and attempted to strangle her. The Committee was informed that she had been subjected to attacks on earlier occasions.
The Committee is especially concerned for her plight as it would appear that the banning orders make her vulnerable to criminal attacks and that the authorities have shown little concern for her safety. In May 1971, when three white South Africans went to her home to deliver a dog for her protection, Mrs. Mandela was charged with receiving visitors in contravention of her banning orders and was sentenced to prison.
After this latest attempt on her life, her lawyers applied to the Minister of Justice for permission to allow her brother, now living in the Transkei, to live with her. They also applied to the Chief Magistrate of Johannesburg for her sister and brother-in-law to be allowed to live with her temporarily, pending the arrival of her brother. These requests were rejected.
The South African press has reported the contents of a letter which Mrs. Mandela's twelve-year-old daughter, Zinzi had sent to the Special Committee in January 1973. (The letter has not yet reached its destination.) In that letter, Miss Mandela was reported to have stated that the family and friends fear that an atmosphere is being built up for something terrible to happen to her. She appealed to the Committee to seek assurances from the South African Government that they will provide protection for Mrs. Mandela. It is in this connection that we appeal to you to approach the South African authorities.
You may recall that the General Assembly and the Security Council have repeatedly called on the South African Government to liberate all those subjected to imprisonment and restrictions for their opposition to apartheid. Not only has the South African Government failed to heed these requests, but it has shown callous disregard for the safety of Mrs. Mandela and others.
In view of the recent incidents concerning Mrs. Mandela and the reported appeal of Miss Mandela, referred to above, I would be most grateful if you would be kind enough to take appropriate action in response to the request of the Special Committee.
Letter to the President of the International Committee of the Red Cross, Mr. Marcel A. Naville, Geneva
On behalf of the Special Committee on Apartheid, I wish to draw your attention to alarming reports concerning the personal safety of Mrs. Nomzamo Winnie Mandela, who has been subjected to harsh restrictions in South Africa for her opposition to apartheid, and to request you to intercede with the South African authorities to ensure her adequate protection.
Mrs. Mandela, wife of Mr. Nelson Mandela, who is serving a life sentence on Robben Island after conviction in the Rivonia trial which has been condemned by United Nations organs, has been subjected to restrictive measures since 1963 for her opposition to apartheid. She is now confined to her home at nights and on weekends and holidays. Concern for Mrs. Mandela's safety has been expressed in many quarters in view of the fact that she has suffered from heart trouble and, in recent weeks, has twice been the victim of attacks. Because of the severe restrictions under the arbitrary banning orders, Mrs. Mandela remains prey to such attacks.
In the early hours of November 19, 1971, according to South African press reports, three gunmen invaded the premises of her home and attempted to strangle her. Her lawyers applied to the Minister of Justice for special permission to allow her brother, living in the Transkei, to stay with her for her protection. They also applied to the Chief Magistrate of Johannesburg for her sister and brother-in-law to live with her temporarily pending the decision concerning her brother. On November 22, 1972, the Chief Magistrate turned down her application and refused to give reasons for his decision. He ordered an all-night police guard to be posted outside her door for a few days but this guard was later removed.
The South African press has reported that Mrs. Mandela's 12-year-old daughter, Zinzi, addressed a letter to the Special Committee in January. (The letter has not yet reached the Committee). She is reported to have stated that the family and friends of Mrs. Mandela fear that an atmosphere is being built up for something terrible to happen to her. She appealed to the Committee to seek assurances from the South African Government that they will provide protection for Mrs. Mandela.
After considering these reports, the Special Committee has asked me to convey to you its request to use your good offices to secure assurances from the South African authorities that Mrs. Mandela would be provided the necessary personal protection against a recurrence of such criminal attacks.
I would be grateful if you could provide the Special Committee with information on any action taken by the International Committee in response to this request.
Letter to Miss Zinzi Mandela, Johannesburg
The Special Committee on Apartheid, of which I am Chairman, has recently learned that you have appealed to us to urge the South African Government to take stops to ensure your mother's safety. We have not yet received your letter, but we would like you to know that the Committee is indeed very much concerned about your mother's safety.
The Committee was set up ten years ago to constantly follow all developments concerning apartheid in South Africa. It is, of course, familiar with the outstanding leadership of your father in the struggle against apartheid. The Committee kept the United Nations informed of the trial of your father in 1963-1964. The trial and the sentence of life imprisonment were condemned by the Special Committee and by the General Assembly and the Security Council. The United Nations has urged the South African Government to grant an amnesty to all persons imprisoned, interned or subjected to other restrictions for having opposed the policy of apartheid.
We know too that your mother has been constantly persecuted and harassed by the regime for opposing apartheid and that she has been recently sentenced to a year's imprisonment. We are very concerned with the restrictions imposed by the Government which make her an easy prey to criminal attacks.
We want to assure you that we will do everything possible to ensure your mother's safety. We are asking the United Nations Secretary-General to use his good offices to seek assurances from the South African authorities. We are also writing to the International Committee of the Red Cross.
We will also continue to do everything possible to secure the release of your father from prison and the ending of the cruel restrictions on your mother. The cause for which your father and mother have struggled is also our cause - the cause of freedom and human dignity.
STATEMENT BY THE CHAIRMAN - EDWIN OGEBE OGBU (NIGERIA) - ON SENTENCES UNDER TERRORISM ACT, JUNE 20, 1973(26)
I have just learned of the harsh sentences handed down today against six accused in a trial recently concluded in Pretoria under the notorious Terrorism Act. The accused, a naturalised Australian, an Irishman and four South Africans, were sentenced for their activities in opposition to apartheid to terms of imprisonment ranging from five to fifteen years under a law that has been universally condemned.
In the view of the Special Committee on Apartheid and the majority of peoples and nations of the world, apartheid is a crime against humanity. The Committee has endorsed the Draft Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid, which the Economic and Social Council has recommended, and which will be considered by the General Assembly at its next session. The criminals and the terrorists are not those who are fighting for freedom and justice in South Africa but the South African regime itself.
A few weeks ago, I met with the father of John Hosey, one of the accused. Two days ago, I spoke with Mrs. Moumbaris, a French citizen, who is wife of another of the accused. She told me of the treatment that was meted out to her by the Special Branch during the four months of her detention in South Africa and that her husband, like so many other detainees, had been tortured during the period of his confinement. She also spoke of the brazen raid on her London flat by agents of the Special Branch and that no action had been taken by United Kingdom authorities.
The Special Committee calls on all organisations and peoples to do all in their power to secure the release of these and other prisoners in South Africa and to hasten the eradication of the crime of apartheid.
DECLARATION BY THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON POLITICAL PRISONERS IN SOUTH AFRICA, AUGUST 17, 1973(27)
In July 1973, the Special Committee against Apartheid considered the continued repression against opponents of apartheid in South Africa. It heard Mrs. Mari-Jose Moumbaris of France and Mr. John Hosey, Sr., of Ireland, relatives of two of the accused in a recent trial in Pretoria under the notorious Terrorism Act. Recalling its concern with the problem of repression since its inception in 1963 the Special Committee decided to issue a declaration calling for more effective action for the release of political prisoners in South Africa. This statement was issued by the Chairman of the Special Committee, Edwin Ogebe Ogbu (Nigeria) in pursuance of that decision.]
Nowhere else but in South Africa is there a government which by its official policy is committed to the goal of a society based on human inequality on grounds of so-called race and colour. Only in South Africa is racial discrimination written into the very fabric of the constitution and law. For a quarter of a century, since it came to power in South Africa, the National Party regime has embarked with increasing ferocity on a path aimed at ensuring that racial inequality and white domination are indefinitely preserved.
The tensions and conflicts that have resulted from the enforcement of this policy and the resistance by the oppressed people have led to growing international concern since the United Nations General Assembly began consideration of apartheid during the "Campaign of Defiance against Unjust Laws" in 1952.
The Sharpeville massacre of 1960 and its aftermath. including the banning of the African National Congress and the Pan Africanist Congress, convinced the international community of the need for concrete measures rather than mere appeals in order to halt the drift to disastrous conflict. It was against this backdrop of increasing international concern that the United Nations General Assembly decided in 1962 to establish the Special committee on Apartheid to keep the racial situation of the Government of South Africa under constant review.
One of the primary concerns of the Committee since its inception has been the consideration of measures to put an end to the ruthless repression carried out by the regime in order to harass, silence and punish opponents of apartheid, as such repressive measures tended to make peaceful settlement increasingly difficult. The initial meeting of the Committee coincided with massive repression in South Africa, with the arrest of thousands of persons suspected of membership in "Poqo" and many adherents of the African National Congress, and the adoption of new repressive laws, notably the so-called 90-day no-trial act of May 1963. Laws like the 90-day law, the Suppression of Communism Act, the Sabotage Act and, later, the Terrorism Act of 1967, which violate all canons of justice, are an essential complement to the apartheid legislation enacted in order to institutionalise and preserve the legacy of racial discrimination and cut off all legal avenues for social and political change.
Under these laws, numerous leaders of the black people, and a number of white opponents of apartheid, have been jailed, banished, restricted and forced into exile. Thousand of people have been held in detention without access to the courts, their families and their lawyers, often for many months at a time. Not only have they been subjected to the psychological torture of indefinite detention, but there has been overwhelming evidence in the last decade of brutal torture against many of the detainees.
In October 1963, eleven prominent leaders of the South African people, including Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela, Walter Sisulu, Govan Mbeki, Ahmad Kathrada and Elias Motsoaledi, were charged under the "Sabotage Act" in what became known as the "Rivonia trial".
In an historic moment in the United Nations General Assembly on October 11, 1963, 106 Member States recorded their votes in favour of resolution 1881 (XVII), which called for the abandonment forthwith of the arbitrary trial being prepared against them and called for the unconditional release of all persons imprisoned, interned or subjected to other restrictions for their opposition to apartheid. Only South Africa voted against the resolution. For the first time, the entire international community declared its commitment to seek an end to repression and apartheid.
Ten years have passed since the adoption of that historic resolution. In a number of subsequent resolutions, the General Assembly, the Security Council and other organs of the United Nations have repeatedly called on the Government of South Africa to liberate the opponents of the oppressive system of apartheid and to seek a peaceful solution to the situation in accordance with the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Though at times the condemnation might have restrained the South African regime from some excesses, numerous trials have taken place during this decade and thousands of persons have been subjected to detention, imprisonment and harassment, and many to brutal ill-treatment and torture.
The number of political prisoners in South Africa has diminished in recent years, since many of those who were sentenced in the early 1960s for their opposition to the regime have completed their sentences. Many of those released from prison have, however, been immediately served with banning orders or deported to reserves and resettlement camps in order to prevent them from carrying on political activities and, indeed, to punish them further by depriving them of means to earn a livelihood and lead normal lives.
Hundreds of leaders of the people and eminent fighters against racism remain in prison, many of them sentenced for the rest their natural lives under the abhorrent laws of the racist regime.
These men and women are the genuine leaders of the great majority of the people of South Africa. They are in prison because they have had the courage to struggle for the legitimate aspirations of their people. They are the fighters for the principles enshrined in the United Nations Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
They include Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela, an outstanding leader of his people for three decades and the first accused in the Rivonia trial. For almost a decade, Mr. Mandela has been imprisoned on Robben Island, where South Africa's non-white political prisoners are kept. Among the prisoners on Robben Island are Walter Sisulu and Govan Mbeki, prominent leaders of the African National Congress; Ahmad Kathrada, a leader of the Indian community who joined the struggle against apartheid while yet in his teens; John Pokela, leader of the Pan Africanist Congress; Eddie Daniels, a coloured photographer; and Neville Alexander, a brilliant scholar.
Bram Fischer, the distinguished Afrikaner jurist, forsook a life of privilege and chose to join in the freedom struggle. Now 69 years of age and ailing, he too is serving a term of life imprisonment for his opposition to apartheid.
All reports from the prisons indicate that these stalwart fighters for freedom remain full of faith in the inevitable elimination of racism and apartheid in their homeland.
We are on the threshold of the Decade of Action to Combat Racism and Racial Discrimination, which will be launched on December 10, 1973. During its forthcoming session, the General Assembly will consider the adoption of the draft Convention for the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid, which has been recommended by the Commission on Human Rights and the Special Committee on Apartheid, in order to develop the efforts to eradicate apartheid. It will consider other steps to intensify international action to secure the speedy eradication of apartheid in South Africa.
The Special Committee calls on world public opinion to keep alive the cause of the prisoners of the racist regime in South Africa, which is, indeed, the cause of all humanity.
We have a duty to demonstrate our solidarity with those who are persecuted for their commitment to the purposes and principles of the United Nation Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. We must redouble our efforts and do all in our power to free those men and women who represent the best traditions of freedom movements, and to rid the world of the scourge of racism.
The men and women persecuted by the South African regime for their opposition to apartheid and racism truly represents the people of South Africa. The National Party regime which conceived the odious policy of apartheid and continues to maintain it by force against a recalcitrant majority in no way represents the people of South Africa and should not be accorded that privilege.
The Special Committee calls on all Governments and organisations to observe October 11, 1973 as the day of solidarity with the political prisoners in South Africa and to pledge their support for more vigorous international action in support of their legitimate cause.
MESSAGE BY THE CHAIRMAN TO THE AHMED TIMOL MEMORIAL COMMITTEE, JOHANNESBURG, SEPTEMBER 19, 1973
On the occasion of the meeting organized by the Ahmed Timol Memorial Committee to commemorate the deaths in detention of Ahmed Timol, valiant opponent of apartheid, who died in detention two years ago, as well as 21 other persons known to have died in detention, I wish to commend the organizers and the participants for their action in opposition to brutal repression of opponents of apartheid in South Africa. The Special Committee remains strongly convinced that the release of leaders of oppressed people of South Africa and other opponents of apartheid is essential for a peaceful solution to this grave situation. We denounce the criminal torture and ill-treatment of persons detained for opposition to apartheid and demand punishment of culprits We pledge full solidarity with those persecuted during the struggle for freedom and human dignity recognized by the United Nations as legitimateii.
STATEMENT BY THE CHAIRMAN ON BOYCOTT OF APARTHEID SPORT, MARCH 12, 1974
The General Assembly of the United Nations has repeatedly requested all States and national and international sports organizations to cease all exchanges of sporting events with South African teams selected under apartheid policies, in violation of the Olympic principle of non-discrimination on the grounds of race, religion or political affiliation.
Time and again the Special Committee has stressed its conviction that the implementation of these requests and firm adherence to the Olympic principle by Governments and sporting organizations would demonstrate the international community's abhorrence of the practice of racial segregation and discrimination in sports in South Africa, universal support for South African sportsmen who have been struggling for non-racialism, and unequivocal opposition to white racist sports bodies and repression by the racist regime.
The Special Committee is gratified that various Governments have taken action in compliance with the relevant resolutions of the General Assembly by such measures as prohibition of the entry of racially selected South African teams to their countries, denial of any official support to contests with such teams, and advice to national sports organizations to abide by the United Nations resolutions The Special Committee has noted with satisfaction the decision of sports organizations and individual sportsmen to boycott racist South African sports bodies and racially selected South African teams, as well as the growing public support for such boycotts in many countries.
Meanwhile, the South African regime and the white racist sports bodies are engaged in various manoeuvres to deceive public opinion by some semblance of reforms, while continuing at the same time to issue banning orders against leaders of non-racial sports organizations and to resort to intimidation by withdrawal of passports, in order to prevent them from enjoying international recognition and participating in international sports contacts It has sought, by propaganda and repression, to silence non-racial sports organizations lest it suffer the odium of further international isolation.
The Special Committee is concerned that some contacts with racist South African teams are continuing because the Governments concerned have failed to take the necessary action and some sports organizations continue to collaborate with South African sports bodies The Special Committee believes that it is this non-observance of the Olympic principle that has enabled a South African team to participate in the Davis Cup tennis tournaments in the Latin American Zone.
The Special Committee commends the Latin American countries which have abided by the decisions of the United Nations and particularly Argentina's action this year to prevent its team from playing against South Africa at the risk of forfeiting the match. But it notes with regret that teams from Brazil and Ecuador have played against South Africa, and that Chile and Colombia reportedly have agreed to play against it in the finals in Bogota.
It also notes with regret that the World Life-Saving Championships are scheduled to be held in South Africa - with the participation of Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom; that a South African team will participate in the Second World Women's Golf Tournament in Japan at the end of March; and that the Lions Rugby team of the United Kingdom and Ireland intends to tour South Africa in May 1974 despite strong opposition in those countries, including a statement signed, among others, by the Foreign Minister of Ireland.
The Special Committee, therefore, invites the attention of all the Governments concerned to resolution 3151 G (XXVIII) adopted by the General Assembly on 14 December 1973, which reads in part as follows:
"10. Calls upon all Governments which have not yet done so:
a) To take all necessary action to ensure the cessation of exchanges with South African sports teams selected in violation of the Olympic principle;
(b) To draw the attention of national sports organizations to the provisions of United Nations resolutions on apartheid in sports;
(c) To deny any assistance or recognition to exchanges with racist sports teams from South Africa;
(d) To end all cultural, educational and civic contacts and exchanges with racist institutions in South Africa. "
STATEMENT BY THE CHAIRMAN - EDWIN OGEBE OGBU (NIGERIA) - ON DEVELOPMENTS IN SOUTH AFRICA AND PORTUGAL, MAY 7, 1974(28)
As members are aware, there was so-called "general election" in South Africa on 24 April with the participation of the white voters only. I would have preferred to ignore this election among the whites, except for the fact that some newspapers and commentators have tried to interpret the results as a significant development which calls for reassessment of the international strategy against apartheid.
As you know, the ruling Nationalist Party has increased its strength in the white parliament, but the Progressive Party which opposes many of the aspects of apartheid has also increased its strength considerably. These results represent nothing more than a recognition within a small section of the white electorate that it is impossible to continue with racist oppression in the present form and that there should be some reforms or readjustments. We cannot ignore the fact that the Progressive Party does not advocate full racial equality.
Some people who have always opposed effective action against apartheid, and have looked for compromises with racism, are now trying to argue that these elections represent an important positive trend and that a solution may be possible by an evolution within the white electorate.
I am sure that members of this Committee will agree with me that this is an illusion which must be combated vigorously.
There can be no solution in South Africa except on the basis of the principles of the United Nations Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. As this Committee has consistently emphasised, there can be no compromise with apartheid and racism. The oppressed people in South Africa have not been fighting for changes in the form of discrimination or for a mere mitigation of oppression, but for full recognition of their inalienable rights to freedom and human dignity.
There can be no peaceful solution, as the General Assembly emphasised at the last session, without the release of the genuine leaders of the people form imprisonment and other restrictions. The United Nations has patiently tried to promote a peaceful solution. It has invited the regime in South Africa to seek a solution on the basis of the Lusaka Manifesto which was endorsed by the Organisation of African Unity and the United Nations. It has repeatedly offered its assistance towards a peaceful and a just solution on this basis.
But the United Nations cannot welcome any manoeuvres to reform and consolidate racism. It cannot agree to make a solution dependent on the wishes of the white minority only.
Those who seek to promote a solution in South Africa should not spread false hopes. They should make maximum efforts to persuade and oblige the privileged minority to seek a solution on the basis of the United Nations, by negotiations with the liberation movement which is the authentic representative of the great majority of the population in South Africa.
In the last few days, we have witnessed very significant developments in Portugal. These cannot but have repercussions in African territories where Portugal has been carrying on savage colonial wars against the African people in defiance of the United Nations.
This Committee has always recognised the interrelationship of the problems of South Africa and those of the neighbouring colonial territories. In fact, this matter is one of the items on the agenda of the forthcoming session of the Special Committee in Europe.
I am sure that all the members of the Special Committee would hope that the present changes will ultimately lead to a recognition of the independence of the African territories under Portuguese administration, though we are very well aware of the forces in Portugal which are opposed to such a development. The colonial wars have not only resulted in enormous bloodshed in African territories, but have caused death and suffering to many Portuguese. They have greatly retarded the economic development of Portugal.
The Security Council and the General Assembly have both called for a peaceful solution of the situation by negotiations between Portugal and the liberation movements for the implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples.
We have often heard from the Western Powers - especially the partners Portugal in the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation - that they were opposed to Portuguese colonialism and its colonial wars, and that they favoured the rights of self-determination of the African territories.
Today they face a serious test of their intentions. History will judge them and humanity will judge them, in the light of the attitudes and actions they display at this particular time. I would appeal to them to use all their influence to persuade the authorities in Portugal to implement honestly the United Nations Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples and the relevant United Nations resolutions. I would appeal to them to discourage any trends or manoeuvres towards perpetuating colonialism by any other means.
It is not enough to "wait and see". This is the time for imaginative and responsible action.
The vital interests of the Portuguese people and of the African peoples in the Portuguese colonies require an end to colonial wars and urgent negotiations between Portugal and the liberation movements on the modalities for the transfer of power. A settlement in the Portuguese colonies will also facilitate, I believe, a solution in South Africa.
I would hope that the white minority in South Africa will see the true significance of the recent events, including the developments in Portugal. They cannot hope to perpetuate apartheid and racism for too long. The trend of world events and the trend of world public opinion is against them, despite the apparent success they have achieved in cementing ties with a few small and remote countries. The Special Committee, for its part, will do all it can to encourage Governments and peoples to take further action.
The sooner the white minority in South Africa sees the writing on the wall and the sooner it seeks a peaceful solution in accordance with the principles of the United Nations Charter, the better for all concerned, including the white minority itself. It will only court disaster if it contemplates any adventures or intervention against decolonisation in Mozambique and Angola.
The true friends of the white minority in South Africa are those who will persuade it to abandon racism and to abandon any temptations towards further aggressions and further defiance of the United Nations. We do hope that all States concerned will exert their influence towards this end.
It is desirable to reaffirm that while we detest colonialism and racism, and will never compromise with these evils, we do not harbour hatred against the people of Portugal or the whites in South Africa. We have repeatedly stretched our hand of friendship and goodwill to them. We are convinced that it would be in their best interests to respond to the imperatives of our time so that we may be spared further bloodshed in the process of the completion of the liberation of Africa.
STATEMENT BY THE CHAIRMAN - EDWIN OGEBE OGBU (NIGERIA) - CONDEMNING IMPRISONMENT OF MRS. WINNIE MANDELA, OCTOBER 2, 1974(29)
I am shocked at the news that the appeal of Mrs. Nomzamo Winnie Mandela against a sentence of six months' imprisonment has been rejected by the Appeal Court.
Mrs. Mandela has been constantly and cruelly harassed by the racist regime in South Africa for more than a decade. She was imprisoned for 15 months in solitary confinement, despite a heart condition, on charges under the so-called `Suppression of Communism Act' and the `Terrorism Act'. After acquittal in 1970 she was subjected, by an arbitrary order of the so-called `Minister of Justice', to severe restrictions. This latest sentence of six months' imprisonment has been imposed for technical infringement of these banning orders.
Her husband, Nelson Rolihlahla D. Mandela, a leader of the African National Congress, has been in jail for more than a decade, serving a sentence of life imprisonment in the Rivonia Trial, which has been condemned by the General Assembly and the Security Council.
I would appeal to all Governments and organisations to denounce the imprisonment of Mrs. Mandela and to take all appropriate action for the release of all political prisoners in South Africa, in accordance with the resolutions of the General Assembly and the Security Council.
[Earlier on 2 October, Mr. Ogbu received the following telegram from Zinzie and Zany Mandela, children of Mr. and Mrs. Nelson Mandela:
"We appeal to you to intervene with the South African Government to secure the release of our mother and father, Winnie and Nelson Mandela. Our mother's appeal against conviction for contravening her banning order has failed and she is about to serve a six-month prison sentence. Our father is imprisoned for life on Robben Island in the cause of a free South Africa."
He sent them the following telegram in reply:
"Received your telegram concerning conviction of your mother to imprisonment under repressive legislation denounced by the United Nations. Wish assure you that the Special Committee on Apartheid will re-double efforts to secure release of your parents."]
STATEMENT BY THE CHAIRMAN - EDWIN OGEBE OGBU (NIGERIA) - COMMENDING INDIA FOR BOYCOTT OF APARTHEID TENNIS TEAM, OCTOBER 7, 1974(30)
I have learnt with great satisfaction that the All-India Lawn Tennis Federation has decided not to play South Africa in the final round of the Davis Cup tennis competition. This commendable decision is in accordance with the Olympic principle of non-discrimination in sport and the resolutions of the United Nations General Assembly calling for a boycott of racially-selected South African sports teams.
At the same time, I have noted that Basil Reay, the British secretary of the Davis Cup Nations Management Committee, is reported to have pressed the All-India Lawn Tennis Federation and the Government of India to reverse their decision. Walter E. Elcock, the American president of the International Lawn Tennis Federation, is reported to have warned that India faced possible censure or disciplinary action for refusing to play with apartheid.
I hope that the Governments of the United Kingdom and the United States of America, as well as other members of the Davis Cup nations, will take urgent steps to draw the attention of their lawn tennis associations to the relevant resolutions of the General Assembly and persuade them to exclude South African teams from the Davis Cup tennis competition so long as racial segregation and discrimination are practised in tennis clubs in South Africa.
MESSAGE BY THE CHAIRMAN - EDWIN OGEBE OGBU (NIGERIA) - TO THE ANTI-APARTHEID MOVEMENT, LONDON, NOVEMBER 7, 1974(31)
On behalf of the United Nations Special Committee on Apartheid, I wish to commend the Anti-Apartheid Movement for its campaign to end all military cooperation with the South African regime. The Special Committee has proposed a world-wide campaign to persuade all Governments to enforce the arms embargo without any exception, to cease all forms of military cooperation with the South African regime and to prevent their nationals from undertaking any activities which assist the South African regime in its military build-up. It has asked the General Assembly and the Security Council to call for abrogation of the Simonstown Agreement, which has become a pretext for continuing naval cooperation between the United Kingdom and South Africa. The Committee considers any military collaboration with the South African regime as an act against the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter, against the oppressed people of South Africa and against the cause of peace. We wish you success in your campaign.
STATEMENT BY THE CHAIRMAN - EDWIN OGEBE OGBU (NIGERIA) - ON MANOEUVRES OF SOUTH AFRICA, NOVEMBER 8, 1974
In our last report to the General Assembly, we stressed that the international efforts to eradicate apartheid have reached a new stage. The developments in the territories under Portuguese administration have radically changed the situation in southern Africa. The South African regime has become more isolated than ever and the international campaign against apartheid has gained momentum, partly because of the activity of this Committee.
This new situation represents, in my opinion, a challenge to the international community and to the South African people, not least to the white minority in South Africa.
In the last two months there has been drastic evidence of the isolation of the South African regime in the overwhelming votes in the General Assembly on the question of its credentials and in the debates in the Security Council.(32) It now remains in the United Nations, thanks only to the votes of the three Western Powers, who wield the veto. Many of the smaller Western countries, which have had traditional relations with the South African regime, have recognised that it has no right to be a Member of the United Nations.
Faced with this isolation, the South African regime is trying to make the world believe that it is embarking on some major shifts in its policies. Members might have seen the report on Mr. Vorster's statement two or three days ago, appealing for a few months' time to implement some changes, and the statement of their Foreign Minister yesterday.
If these statements represent a genuine desire for a peaceful solution, in accordance with the principles of the Charter, we would, of course, be delighted. The United Nations, the Organisation of African Unity, and the liberation movements themselves have pressed for years for a peaceful solution, because of the awareness that the alternative is a bloody racial conflict, which would have grave consequences in South Africa and beyond South Africa. The sufferers would be not only the black people, but also the white community in South Africa.
A few weeks ago, the Chief of State of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, General Yakubu Gowon, received parliamentarians from the opposition Progressive Party in South Africa. He took the opportunity to tell South Africa that the African States and the African peoples were not against the whites, but against the policies of apartheid, and the advocates and apostles of apartheid. He called on the South African whites to take a cue from Portugal and to change their attitude to the black people in South Africa.
He said: "If such a change is made and there is a move by the South African Government or by white South Africans against apartheid, the effects of such a change are bound to be felt beyond South Africa."
After the recent statements by Mr. Vorster in the white Parliament, the President of the Republic of Zambia, Kenneth Kaunda, declared, in a speech at the University of Zambia on 26 October, that if the South African regime is prepared to seek a peaceful and just solution, Africa stands ready to help create conditions for peaceful change, in accordance with the Lusaka Manifesto.
I have heard his statement quoted out of context in some cases to suit South African propaganda.
I have studied the statement of Mr. Botha(33) in the Security Council and I have followed the recent reports from South Africa in the hope that the white community and its leaders may have at last given up their dreams of eternal domination over the Africans and may be prepared to seek peace.
There is certainly some evidence that they are beginning to realise that their past course has become untenable.
But it seems to me that their thinking is still far removed from reality and that they are not yet ready to accept the minimum prerequisites for a peaceful and lasting solution. They seem to be thinking in terms of "humanising" apartheid or "reforming" apartheid - not of eliminating apartheid.
They promise to end some of the so-called "petty apartheid". This "petty apartheid" is not petty at all, in my opinion. It has caused enormous suffering and tension. Under the petty apartheid laws - such as the pass laws - about a million Africans are jailed every year. Certainly, the world would welcome elimination of this so-called "petty apartheid".
They offer increases in the wages of African workers who are now paid below starvation levels. Certainly, the world would welcome an improvement in the wages of the black workers.
They are planning greater investment in the overcrowded African reserves where the people have been forced to live under miserable conditions. Certainly the world would welcome any improvement in the living conditions in these reserves.
They are considering some concessions to the people of Indian origin and the Coloured people, who have also been subject to racial discrimination. Certainly, we would not object to any alleviation of the conditions of these communities in South Africa.
But all these reforms are in the context of stabilising and strengthening the system of apartheid. They seem also to be intended to divide the black people. While talking about these reforms, the regime is increasing its repression against the leaders of the black organisations who are totally opposed to apartheid and refuse to be associated with any apartheid institutions.
What the regime is trying to do is to make some concessions to the so-called leaders of the black people, whom it likes, in return for acceptance for apartheid. We have a name for such people.
We cannot but reject these manoeuvres and we have no doubt that they will not succeed.
As we have often emphasised, the basic problem in South Africa is not the humanitarian problem, but the political problem. There can be no solution in South Africa so long as the leaders of the liberation movements are in jail and in the absence of negotiations with the liberation movements. This is the first lesson of the developments in the Portuguese territories.
In the United Nations and in the Organisation of African Unity, we have not tried to lay down the constitution of a free South Africa. We have recognised and proclaimed that the future of South Africa is for the people of South Africa to decide, on the basis of equality of all men and women.
We have only demanded that the leaders of the liberation movement be released from prison, that the liberation movements be allowed to carry on their legitimate struggle for freedom and that there be consultations among the genuine and legitimate representatives of all the people of South Africa to decide the destiny of the country.
After the Sharpeville massacre of 1960, and in defiance of the Security Council, the South African regime chose the path of conflict and war by banning the African National Congress and the Pan Africanist Congress and resorting to repression against the leaders of the people. If the whites of South Africa now seek peace, they must retrace their path.
In his statement before the Security Council, the representative of the South African regime emphasised that his people live and belong to Africa and that their destiny lies in Africa. We would welcome this statement if this means that they no more claim to be an appendage of Europe in Africa. We have already declared that no one is against the whites in South Africa so long as they accept that they are Africans and so long as they do not claim a right to oppress the black Africans.
The representative of the South African regime also said that the white people are not better than the black people. He claimed that his regime does not condone discrimination purely on the grounds of race or colour. We know very well that this is utterly untrue: his regime came to power in 1948 by arousing white fears of a "Black Peril" and that it has greatly intensified racial discrimination and oppression. But we have confidence that there can be a peaceful solution if it is prepared, even now, to negotiate on the basis that there should be no discrimination on the grounds of race or colour.
The South African representative also claimed that his people - the Afrikaners - had struggled against colonial rule and that they accept the right to self-determination. I do not wish to comment on the war between the British and Boer Republics in 1899, except to note that it was a struggle in which the rights of the great majority of the people of South Africa were ignored. The parliamentary politics of South Africa, in the ensuing decades, consisted of deals between the Afrikaners and the British at the expense of the black Africans. That time is now past. The interests of the black people who constitute the great majority of the people must now be paramount.
I would also like to recall that the struggle of the Boers in 1899 was an armed struggle in which tens of thousands of people died. It was a struggle in which many freedom-loving people from outside South Africa went to fight with the Afrikaners. If the Afrikaners really respect their own struggle for freedom, they should equally respect the right of the African people to struggle by all means for their freedom. They should respect the leaders of the African National Congress of South Africa and the Pan Africanist Congress of Azania, who have risked their lives and their freedom in the struggle for liberation.
They should honour leaders like Robert Sobukwe and Nelson Mandela as South African patriots and discuss with them the future of their common homeland.
When they are prepared to follow this course, they will have the goodwill of the whole of Africa and the whole world.
A few days ago, Alan Paton was reported to have said that the three votes in the Security Council meant a "stay of execution" for the South African whites. I believe that the expression was not quite appropriate. No one is trying to execute the whites of South Africa. In my own statement in the Security Council I said it was no pleasure to propose the expulsion of South Africa. I appealed again to South Africa to follow the path of a peaceful settlement, in accordance with the principles of the Charter. The white community, under its present leadership and by its present policies, has been marching towards suicide while the United Nations and the Organisation of African Unity have been trying to save them from disaster.
So long as the white community and its leaders pursue their present course the international community has no choice but to take collective action to eradicate apartheid. We must first of all redouble our efforts to implement the arms embargo in order to minimise the danger of violence. We must exert economic and other pressures to make the white community realise that it cannot continue on its present collision course. We must give full support to the liberation movements, in their struggle for freedom by all means of their choice, including armed struggle.
The test to any government or any organisation which claims to oppose apartheid is its attitude towards such collective measures.
MESSAGE BY THE CHAIRMAN - EDWIN OGEBE OGBU (NIGERIA) - TO COMMITTEE FOR HUMAN RIGHTS, JOHANNESBURG, DECEMBER 2, 1974(34)
[This message was sent to the Committee for Human Rights, which was planning to organise rallies throughout South Africa on Sunday, 8 December, two days before United Nations Human Rights Day. According to a letter received by the Special Committee from the Johannesburg body, human rights committees had also been set up in Durban and Cape Town to disseminate as much information as possible about "the real situation in South Africa" and to organise mass rallies "focussing on South Africa's continued non-adherence to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights". The plight of the persons detained by the South African security police would be highlighted, "but all activities will aim at pointing out that fundamental change in South Africa is needed, and not the piecemeal rationalisation programmes" of the South African Government.]
I am delighted to hear of the formation of the Human Rights Committee in South Africa in support of the movement for a society free of discrimination on grounds of colour, class, belief or sex, and I regard it as a privilege to be able to send a message for its observance of the Human Rights Day.
The Human Rights Day commemorates the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948. That historic Declaration was the result of the struggles and sacrifices of numerous men and women, in all continents and of all racial origins, to build a better world. It sets up norms which all nations and all peoples have pledged to attain.
As Chairman of the United Nations Special Committee on Apartheid, and as an African, I am deeply concerned over the situation in South Africa where the regime, elected by a privileged minority of the population, has isolated itself from the international community by rejecting the principles of the Universal Declaration and by trying to reinforce and perpetuate racial discrimination. The international community cannot acquiesce in the gross violation of human rights and the massive suffering that apartheid and racial discrimination have caused in South Africa. It cannot but be gravely concerned over the wider repercussions of this situation.
Those who seek to consolidate racism in this part of Africa cannot and will not succeed, however hard they may try to mislead the world and however ruthless they may be.
South Africa, with people of various racial origins, has often been called a microcosm of the world. It could have set an example by sincere efforts to establish a society in which all the people of the country can live together in harmony.
We are aware that oppression and discrimination have a long past in South Africa. And we recognise that the dismantling of that legacy is no simple task. It requires a firm commitment to human dignity and determined efforts to attain the norms of the Universal Declaration.
The United Nations has repeatedly appealed to the South African regime to abandon its racist policies and enable all the people of the country to determine its destiny on the basis of full equality, irrespective of race, colour or creed. It has shown great patience, while insisting that a change of direction and a meaningful progress towards true equality must begin. These appeals have been in vain and the international community has had to embark on various measures to secure compliance with its Charter and with the Universal Declaration.
In 1948, the year when the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted, South Africa faced a crossroads. The white minority, blinded by prejudice and greed, chose the wrong course and drifted apart from the rest of humanity at the cost of immense suffering and tension.
Today, South Africa is again at the crossroads in a very different context. Most of Africa has now attained independence and has declared that the cause of the oppressed people of South Africa is the cause of Africa. Most of the world is acutely aware of the inequity of apartheid and committed to do its share to eradicate it. The choice, especially before the white community, is clear. It is a choice between a grave conflict and a peaceful and just solution in the interest of all the people of the country. Whatever the course it chooses, however, there is no doubt that racism is doomed and freedom will prevail.
We, in Africa and the rest of the world, recognise that South Africa belongs to all its people, irrespective of race and colour. We affirm that only the people of South Africa can and should decide the destiny of that country. But it is our duty to support the cause of freedom and to frustrate the manoeuvres of the privileged group to dispossess the great majority of the people and impose unilateral and unjust solutions, such as the Bantustans which can only provoke further conflict. This duty we will perform by ever more concerted international action.
Concerned as we are for peace in southern Africa and beyond, we welcome every sign of a trend towards peaceful settlement of the situation in South Africa. The people of South Africa can count on the goodwill of Africa and the world in any efforts towards such a solution.
But we will continue to make it clear that there can be no solution without the enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms, including the right to vote, by all the people of South Africa, regardless of race, colour or creed.
There can be no solution so long as the regime continues to follow its vengeful policy of repression against the opponents of apartheid and even their dependents.
Let Nelson Mandela and other Black leaders be released from Robben Island! Let Mangaliso Sobukwe and other fighters against apartheid be freed from house arrest and other restrictions! Let Bram Fischer and other whites who espouse a non-racial society be freed from Pretoria Central Jail! Let all of them be enabled to play their rightful role in deciding the future of South Africa!
I commend the members of the Human Rights Committee because they intend to strive for truth and focus on the essential elements of a just solution in South Africa.
I would like to take this opportunity, through you, to convey to all the people of South Africa, except the incorrigible racists, our friendship, our concern and our solidarity in their efforts to secure a solution based on the principles of the United Nations Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Many South Africans have set inspiring examples in the struggle for freedom and equality. They have included not only the Africans, but the Coloured people and the people of Indian origin, as well as the whites - Afrikaner and English-speaking. The movement for freedom in South Africa has been a precursor to similar movements in many other countries. It was not without significance that the late Chief Albert Luthuli was the first African to be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize and the United Nations Human Rights Award.
We reaffirm our faith that the glorious tradition of the struggle for freedom in South Africa will prevail over the bitter legacy of racism.
[Letter from South African Committee
The Committee for Human Rights, in its letter to the Special Committee on Apartheid, said that the South African Government was attempting to convince the Western world that change was imminent in that country, and the world seemed to be "easily misled" on the matter.
White election results, the speeches of "homeland leaders", black entertainers in white concert halls, "multinational" sports teams, and even a "multi-national" delegation to the United Nations all seemed to be interpreted as "cracks in the edifice of white supremacy", the letter stated.
"But these peripheral concessions are nothing other than the elimination of certain tangible racialistic irritants, the effects of which will be to consolidate the power basis for the perpetuation of white supremacy. Those, both internationally and domestically, who believe that significant change is occurring in South Africa are those whose interests in South Africa are such that they must uphold such changes as a rationalisation for their exploitative practices in South Africa.
"Significantly, while (Prime Minister John) Vorster and (Ambassador R.F.) Botha were proffering assurances of change to the world, at least thirty-five young black people were detained under section 6 of South Africa's notorious Terrorism Act. This section empowers the security police to detain any person indefinitely, in solitary confinement and without access to lawyers, courts, family or friends."
The letter went on to say that allegations of torture while in detention had been widespread, and at least 22 people were known to have died while detained by the security police.
"All the people presently held in detention are associated in some way with the Black Consciousness Movement in South Africa, and it is clear from the detentions and other actions that Vorster's apartheid regime will in no way tolerate real oppositions", the letter stated.]
STATEMENT BY THE CHAIRMAN ON THE BOYCOTT OF APARTHEID SPORT, DECEMBER 5, 1974
On behalf of the Special Committee on Apartheid, I am obliged to express concern over the continued contacts by some sports organizations with racially selected sports teams from South Africa in contravention of the Olympic principle and the resolutions of the General Assembly.
In October-November, an all-white South African Springbok Rugby team toured France despite protests by many organizations and individuals in France This team has now begun a visit to Italy. It is scheduled to play on 11 December in Brescia, where the mayor has declared his opposition to the match.
It is reported that a French Rugby team would tour South Africa in 1975.
A South African team has participated in the World Amateur Baseball Tournament in Tampa, Florida, in November. Other teams participating in this tournament were from Canada, Colombia, Italy, Nicaragua and the United States.
On the other hand, many sportsmen and sports bodies have shown their adherence to the Olympic principle The All-India Lawn Tennis Federation refused to play the South African team in the Davis Cup final and forfeited the possibility of winning the Cup.
In November, John Conteh - who has won European, British and Commonwealth light-heavy-weight boxing championships and was voted Sportsman of the Year by Sports Writers' Association in Great Britain - declared that he would not fight in South Africa. It would, he said, be against all my principles and an affront to my integrity and my conscience. By this decision he could risk forfeiture of the world title. The tour of Italy was subsequently cancelled because of widespread public opposition.
On behalf of the Special Committee, I would request all Governments concerned to take appropriate measures, in accordance with the relevant General Assembly resolutions, to prevent sporting contacts with South African bodies which practise apartheid. I would appeal to all public organizations to take appropriate action against sports bodies which remain insensitive to the problem of racism and continue to maintain contacts with racist South African bodies despite the opposition of their own Governments.
I would like to emphasize that the racist regime of South Africa derives encouragement from the continuing sports contacts and regards them as essential for its foreign policy. The adjustments it has made in its sports policy do not conform to the Olympic principle; it continues to enforce racial segregation of sportsmen and even spectators.
International sports organizations must cut off all contacts with racist sports bodies in South Africa and recognize the non-racial sports bodies which exist for many codes of sport. The South African regime has persecuted these non-racial bodies by banning orders against their leaders, denial of passports and police action to prevent sports even between Coloured people, Indians and Africans. They deserve the solidarity and support of the sports bodies in the rest of the world.
APPEALS BY THE CHAIRMAN - EDWIN OGEBE OGBU (NIGERIA) - FOR RELEASE OF ABRAM FISCHER, IMPRISONED AFRIKANER JURIST, DECEMBER 17, 1974(35)
Edwin Ogebe Ogbu (Nigeria), Chairman of the Special Committee against Apartheid, sent urgent appeals today to Secretary-General Kurt Waldheim and to the Secretary-General of the International Committee of the Red Cross, asking them to use their good offices to secure the release of Bram Fischer, an Afrikaner jurist, who is seriously ill in prison in South Africa.
Mr. Ogbu also appealed to all Governments and organisations to take action to secure Mr. Fischer's release.
In a statement today, the Chairman of the Special Committee said:
"I am shocked at the news that Abram (Bram) Fischer is seriously ill in prison in South Africa.
"Bram Fischer, a prominent Afrikaner jurist, has devoted many years of his life to the struggle for freedom and equality in South Africa. He has earned the respect of the oppressed people of South Africa and all opponents of racism because of his steadfastness and courage.
"On the other hand, he has provoked the bitter enmity of the South African regime which has not only sentenced him to life imprisonment in 1966 under its notorious repressive laws, but has been vengeful in its treatment of this courageous man in prison. Despite the serious illness and the appeals of many South Africans, it has not released him and has even restricted visits by his family to the hospital.
"I have today sent urgent appeals to the Secretary-General of the United Nations and to the Secretary-General of the International Committee of the Red Cross, requesting them to use their good offices to secure the release of Bram Fischer.
"I also urgently appeal to all Governments and organisations to take all appropriate action towards that end."
Letter to Secretary-General
In his letter to Secretary-General Waldheim, Mr. Ogbu stated that, according to South African press reports, Mr. Fischer was suffering from cancer and was "very weak, frail and in great pain".
The letter went on to say that Mr. Fischer had been on crutches for two months.
"Members of his family were allowed to visit him at the hospital where he is now confined, but new orders were issued on 6 December that there could only be two visits a week", the letter stated.
Mr. Fischer, who is now 66 years old, is a prominent jurist from a well-known Afrikaner family of South Africa. His grandfather was Prime Minister of the Orange River Colony and his father was Judge President of the Free State.
"He dedicated himself to the struggle for a non-racial and democratic society in South Africa and fully associated himself with the liberation movement. He defended numerous persons accused under discriminatory and repressive laws. He was the defence counsel in the 'Treason Trial' of 1956-1961 in which 156 leaders of the Black people and other opponents of racism were charged. He was the chief defence counsel in the 'Rivonia Trial' of 1963-1964 in which leaders of the African National Congress and their allies were charged.
"Shortly after the conclusion of the 'Rivonia Trial', which was condemned by the United Nations and world opinion, he himself was charged with various political offences under the notorious repressive laws of South Africa, and convicted to life imprisonment.
"The Special Committee against Apartheid has condemned the persecution of Mr. Fischer and has repeatedly called for his release. The incarceration of this courageous and respected advocate of freedom and equality, and the callous and vengeful treatment to which he has been subjected in prison, constitute a terrible indictment of the apartheid regime.
"As Chairman of the Special Committee against Apartheid, I have the honour to request you urgently to use all your influence to secure the immediate release of Mr. Fischer so that he can spend the last days of his life in freedom."
Cable to Red Cross
Mr. Ogbu also sent the following cable to the Secretary-General of the International Committee of the Red Cross, Geneva, Switzerland:
"Shocked at news that Abram Fischer now serving life imprisonment in South Africa for opposition to apartheid is seriously ill with cancer. Press reports indicate that prison authorities have even restricted visits by family. Urgently request your intercession to secure immediate release of Abram Fischer and facilities for proper medical treatment in South Africa or abroad."
Cable to the family
In addition, Mr. Ogbu sent a cable to Mr. Fischer's family, stating that he was "deeply distressed" at the news of Mr. Fischer's illness and that he was making urgent appeals to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, to the International Committee of the Red Cross, and to Governments and organisations to secure Mr. Fischer's immediate release.
***
[Reply received by the Committee from the Secretary-General, Dr. Kurt Waldheim, December 18, 1994(36)
Excellency,
I have received your letter of 16 December 1974 concerning the health of Mr. Abram Fischer who is presently serving a sentence of life imprisonment in South Africa. I fully share your concern about his condition and have sent the following cable to the Prime Minister of South Africa in the hope that it will result in his immediate release.
"I have the honour to inform Your Excellency that deep concern has been expressed in the General Assembly at reports relating to the condition of Abram Fischer who is presently serving a sentence of life imprisonment in South Africa. It has been reported that he is gravely ill and suffering from a terminal disease. Members of his family were allowed to visit him at the hospital where he is now confined, but new orders issued on 6 December have reduced visits to twice a week. While it is not my intention to interfere in the domestic affairs of your country, I am impelled by humanitarian considerations to appeal to Your Excellency to grant clemency to Abram Fischer so that he may be released from prison and allowed to spend his remaining days with his wife and family. Please accept, your Excellency, the assurances of my highest consideration."
I shall keep you informed of any reply which I may receive from the Prime Minister on this matter.
Please accept, Excellency, the assurances of my highest consideration.
STATEMENT BY THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON SOUTH AFRICAN AGGRESSION GAINST ANGOLA, DECEMBER 3, 1975
The Special Committee against Apartheid expresses its grave concern at the aggression being committed by South Africa against Angola. It notes that the Defence Sub-Committee of the African Liberation Committee of the Organization of African Unity (OAU), on 28 November, described the South African intervention as "naked aggression whose magnitude and scope exceed any foreign intervention in Africa".
The Special Committee views this act of naked aggression as an attempt at further extending and consolidating its racist policies, and posing a serious threat to the security of southern Africa as a whole.
It calls on all Governments and organizations to denounce the aggression by the South African racist regime in Angola, and to take all appropriate steps to secure the immediate withdrawal of all South African military personnel, including mercenaries, from Angola.
It declares that those countries which have resisted firm action against the South African regime, with the regrettable effect of encouraging and enabling it to embark on this further act of aggression, bear a special responsibility The Special Committee hopes that they will be persuaded to cease all collaboration with South Africa and co-operate in isolating and punishing the aggressive racist regime.
MESSAGE OF THE CHAIRMAN (JOINTLY WITH THE CHAIRMAN OF SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON DECOLONIZATION AND PRESIDENT OF COUNCIL FOR NAMIBIA) TO WORLD CAMPAIGN AGAINST NUCLEAR AND MILITARY COLLABORATION WITH SOUTH AFRICA, MARCH 29, 1979
We welcome the launching today in London of the World Campaign against Nuclear and Military Collaboration with South Africa.
The campaign is an indispensable complement to the efforts of the United Nations towards the effective implementation and reinforcement of the mandatory arms embargo against the racist regime in South Africa.
We wish it all success in its activities to mobilize world public opinion in support of the total cessation of all military, nuclear and security links with the racist regime.
We are inspired and encouraged by the sponsorship of the campaign by the African heads of State and eminent leaders in the West. We commend its director, Mr. Abdul S. Minty, for his unceasing efforts to make world public opinion aware of the threat to the peace created by the apartheid regime, and assure him of our full co-operation.
STATEMENT BY THE CHAIRMAN OF DEVELOPMENTS CONCERNING SPORTS EXCHANGES WITH SOUTH AFRICA, NOVEMBER 26, 1980
Extract
In October-November alone, the French Rugby Federation team toured South Africa. The South African Springbok rugby team toured Paraguay, Uruguay and Chile. A South African golf team was allowed to participate in the Eisenhower Trophy tournament in the United States. The World Amateur Golf Council was reported to have switched the 1982 tournament from Sweden to Switzerland because of the refusal of the Swedish Government to grant visas to South Africans. The Weaver-Coetzee boxing match was staged in the bantustan of Bophuthatswana despite widespread protests.
The New Zealand Rugby Federation decided, despite the declared opposition of the Government, to invite a South African rugby team to tour New Zealand in 1981.
Several sports bodies in Western countries are actively campaigning for readmission of South Africa into international sport on the grounds of alleged changes in South Africa.
The facts are, however, that the South African claims of elimination of racism in sport, repeated periodically for over a decade and faithfully echoed by some Western sports administrators, have always proved a fraud. Only a few weeks ago, a commission set up by the Human Sciences Research Council of South Africa at the request of the regime reported that several laws must be repealed in order to eliminate racial discrimination. It added that "it would be artificial to exclude only sport from the discriminatory effect of one of these laws, the Separate Amenities Act."
In an attempt to hide the true state of affairs from being known in the world, the regime has denied passports to leaders of non-racial sport, Hassan Howa, M.N. Pather and Morgan Naidoo. It recently refused a visa to Paul Stephenson, member of the British Sports Council, to visit South Africa as guest of the non-racial South African Council on Sport.
STATEMENT BY THE ACTING CHAIRMAN CONDEMNING THE ATTACK BY SOUTH AGAINST MOZAMBIQUE, FEBRUARY 3, 1981(37)
Extract
The escalation of the acts of aggression constitutes not only a grave and urgent threat to Africa but a breach of international peace and security. This grave challenge must be met immediately.
On behalf of the Special Committee against Apartheid, I urge the Security Council to impose effective mandatory sanctions under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, to force South Africa to end its criminal acts of aggression as well as to terminate its illegal occupation of Namibia and to assist the South African people to eliminate apartheid.
MESSAGE BY THE CHAIRMAN TO CONFERENCE OF EUROPEAN MINISTERS OF SPORT, APRIL 8, 1981
The Special Committee is gravely concerned that some sports bodies, administrators and promoters have been enticed by South African propaganda and by offers of enormous financial rewards to organize sports exchanges with South Africa. They have done so in defiance of the Olympic principle and United Nations resolutions and often in defiance of advice of their own Governments. The Special Committee, therefore, considers that Governments and intergovernmental organizations must reinforce their decisions concerning apartheid in sports. Those who collaborate with apartheid sports bodies in South Africa should be warned that they risk denial of benefits of sports activities in countries which are committed against apartheid.
On behalf of the Special Committee, I would express hope that the Conference of European Ministers of Sport will consider the matter and take appropriate decisions.
MESSAGE BY THE CHAIRMAN TO THE FOURTH BIENNIAL MEETING OF THE SOUTH AFRICAN COUNCIL ON SPORT (SACOS), APRIL 14, 1981
Extract
We have admired the continued efforts by SACOS to uphold the principle of non-racialism in sport without any compromise on the Olympic principle and its publication of truthful and objective information on the situation in South African sport. We are aware that leaders of SACOS have been subjected to intimidation and persecution for this noble activity We denounce in particular the seizure of the passport of the Secretary of SACOS last June on the eve of his departure for consultations at the United Nations.
The Special Committee has pointed out that when schoolchildren are killed and maimed for demanding non-discrimination in education, no honest person can claim non-discrimination in sport. The inclusion of a few blacks in national teams is utterly irrelevant. Repression against non-racial sports bodies is also clear evidence of the effort by the regime to hide the truth.
I wish to assure you and through you the non-racial sportsmen of South Africa that the Special Committee will not relent until apartheid is totally abolished in sport, education and other fields of human endeavour
STATEMENT BY THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON GRAVE DEVELOPMENTS IN SOUTHERN AFRICA, AUGUST 26, 1981
Extract
The Special Committee notes with utmost seriousness the letter dated 25 August 1981 addressed by the President of the People's Republic of Angola to the Secretary-General (S/14643) stating that the situation could develop into a war with unpredictable consequences. It considers that the international community should urgently act on his request to put an end to the successive acts of aggression against Angola and neutralize the imminent and large-scale invasion prepared by the apartheid regime against Angola.
The aggressive nature and intent of the apartheid regime are further evidenced by the recent increase in its military budget by over 30 per cent from 1,890 million rand to 2,465 million rand and the transfer of an additional 172 million rand to the special defence account.
The Special Committee is convinced that the apartheid regime has been encouraged in its criminal and aggressive behaviour by the attitudes of certain Western Powers which have persistently prevented effective action in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Charter The vetoes cast by three permanent members in the Security Council in April to prevent the imposition of sanctions against that regime have assured it that it can pursue its crimes with impunity.
The policies and actions of the new United States administration, in the name of so-called constructive engagement with the apartheid regime, have been regarded by the latter as a licence to aggression and continued defiance of the international community The move to repeal the Clark amendment and permit intervention in the sovereign State of Angola is welcomed by that regime as evidence of the desire of a major Power to co-operate with it in destabilizing Angola and securing hegemony in the region.
In the face of these grave developments, the Special Committee calls urgently for the widest international mobilization in support of the Declaration of the International Conference on Sanctions against South Africa (A/36/319-S/14531, annexes I and II), held in Paris in May 1981. The Conference urged all Governments, organizations and individuals committed to freedom to concert their efforts and step up action to isolate the apartheid regime and support the national liberation movements of South Africa and Namibia. The Conference declared that they must demand that the Powers which continue to collaborate with the apartheid regime desist from such collaboration and facilitate mandatory comprehensive sanctions against South Africa and that they must proclaim that collusion with the crime of apartheid is an intolerable affront to the conscience of mankind
STATEMENT BY CHAIRMAN ON AGGRESSION BY SOUTH AFRICA AGAINST ANGOLA, DECEMBER 10, 1981(38)
Extract
The Special Committee has pointed out that the international community confronts in southern Africa not only a threat to international peace but repeated breaches of the peace, and acts of aggression. The Western Powers have repeatedly refused to recognize the threat to international peace, advancing unconvincing interpretations of that term. But after the admission by the Pretoria regime, who can deny the indisputable fact that there has been one more brazen act of aggression against the People's Republic of Angola and a further breach of the peace?
I hope the Western permanent members of the Security Council will be persuaded, even at this late hour, to recognize the imperative need for effective action under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations and discharge their solemn responsibilities under the Charter.
STATEMENT BY THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON GRAVE SITUATION IN SOUTHERN AFRICA, JUNE 14, 1982(39)
Extract
The Special Committee once again draws the urgent attention of the international community to the constant and continuous acts of aggression, subversion, terrorism and destabilization by the racist regime of South Africa against independent African States and also to the brutal oppression of the people of South Africa. The situation constitutes not only a threat to peace but continuous breaches of peace and, indeed, an undeclared war against the whole region.
The recent expansion of military forces of South Africa, and the frantic efforts of the apartheid regime to acquire nuclear capability and wield the nuclear threat underline the gravest dangers to peace in Africa, the Indian Ocean and South Atlantic and, indeed, the entire world.
The Special Committee notes with utmost concern the continuing collaboration by a number of Governments, corporations and institutions with South Africa, in contravention of United Nations resolutions, in the military and nuclear fields, and particularly the relaxation of the arms and nuclear embargo by the United States of America.
The Special Committee calls for urgent action for effective sanctions against South Africa - in the military, nuclear and other field - and for the mobilization of world public opinion towards that end.
STATEMENT BY THE CHAIRMAN ON THE DECISION OF INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND TO GRANT A LOAN TO SOUTH AFRICA, NOVEMBER 4, 1982
Extract
The decision of the International Monetary Fund yesterday to grant a huge credit to the racist regime of South Africa in defiance of an urgent appeal by the United Nations General Assembly was ill-conceived and most regrettable.
Some Western Governments and their financial institutions have consistently provided loans to save the Pretoria regime whenever it encountered economic difficulties because of its crimes and the resistance of the oppressed people. That was true after the Sharpeville massacre of 1960 and after the Soweto massacre of 1976.
The Special Committee has stressed that this is the time to choose unequivocally between apartheid and freedom, between a racist regime and the rest of the world. Verbal expressions of abhorrence of apartheid are meaningless when combined with massive assistance to the apartheid regime.
I appeal to all Governments and organizations not only to denounce the present credit by IMF and the recent upsurge of loans by Western financial institutions, but to increase their moral, political and material support to the national liberation movement of South Africa.
1. UN Press Release GA/AP/13, July 18, 1963
2. UN Press Release GA/AP/23, March 23, 1964
3. Vuyisile Mini, Wilson Khayinga and Zinakile Mkaba
4. UN Press Release GA/AP/38, October 9, 1964
5. UN Press Release GA/AP/42, October 26, 1964
6. Then Basutoland, Bechuanaland and Swaziland. Now independent states of Lesotho, Botswana and Swaziland.
7. Now Zambia.
8. UN Press Release GA/AP/52, March 9, 1965
9. UN Press Release GA/AP/88, February 3, 1967
10. The Commission on Human Rights established a Working Group of Jurists to investigate the situation report.
In view of the discussion in the Commission and international condemnation, the South African regime allowed the International Committee of the Red Cross to visit prisoners (but not detainees and awaiting-trial prisoners).
11. UN Press Release GA/AP/88, February 3, 1967
12. This fund was established by the Defence and Aid Fund under the Chairmanship of Bishop Ambrose Reeves.
13. UN Press Release GA/AP/117, January 12, 1968
14. UN Press Release GA/AP/118, January 12, 1968
15. UN Press Release GA/AP/155, March 18, 1969
16. UN Press Release GA/AP/157, March 21, 1969
17. UN Press Release GA/AP/177, February 25, 1970
18. UN Press Release GA/AP/189, March 31, 1970
19. UN Press Release GA/AP/206, February 24, 1971
20. UN Press Release GA/AP/224, March 24, 1971
This statement was made at the end of a special session of the Committee - attended by representatives of the liberation movements and many non-governmental organisations, as well as individual experts - to consider means to intensify the international campaign against apartheid.
21. UN Press Release GA/AP/243, July 28, 1971
22. UN Press Release GA/AP/255, November 1, 1971
23. UN Press Release GA/AP/284, June 12, 1972
24. UN Press Release GA/AP/298, December 29, 1972
25. UN Press Release GA/AP/309, March 13, 1973
26. Press Release of the UN Information Centre, London, PR/73/16, June 20, 1973
27. UN Press Release GA/AP/347, August 17, 1973
28. UN Press Release GA/AP/386, May 7, 1974
29. UN Press Release GA/AP/417, October 2, 1974
30. UN Press Release GA/AP/418, October 7, 1974
31. UN Press Release GA/AP/420, November 7, 1974.
The Anti-Apartheid Movement was holding a public meeting on 7 November to launch a campaign for the cancellation of the Simonstown Agreement of 1955 between the United Kingdom and South Africa and an end to all military collaboration with South Africa.
32. In September 1974, the General Assembly decided not to accept the credentials of the representatives of South Africa. In October, a proposal in the Security Council to recommend the expulsion of South Africa from the United Nations received 10 votes in favour; it was not adopted because of the vetoes by France, the United Kingdom and the United States. The South African representatives were expelled from the General Assembly on 12 November.
33. R.F. "Pik" Botha, Foreign Minister of South Africa
34. UN Press Release GA/AP/425, December 6, 1974
35. UN Press Release GA/AP/427, December 17, 1974
36. UN Press Release GA/AP/428, December 18, 1974
37. On January 30, 1981, South African troops raided the capital of Mozambique. Nine persons were killed, and two members of the ANC were abducted to South Africa.
38. The South African regime admitted in December 1981 that it had launched a large-scale military invasion of Angola in December 1981, advancing nearly 150 miles inside Angolan territory, and that this invasion had lasted 18 days.
39 The Special Committee transmitted this statement for the attention of the second special session of the General Assembly on disarmament and to the Security Council.