SOUTH AFRICA:

T R I A L B Y T O R T U R E

- The Case of The 22.

Published by:The International Defence and Aid Fund,

2, Amen Court,London, E.C.U.

- 2 -

TRIAL BT TORTURE

The Case of The 22

C O N T E N T S

Page

Foreword 3I. The Accused and the Charges 6II. The Arrests 10

III. The TTial 12IV. The Torture Ordeal 21

V. Fiendish Torture 30VI. The Court Refuses 37VII. The Two Who Would Not Testify HoVIII. The Question of Justice h1

FOREWORD

The South African Government spends an enormous amount of money on propaganda. Hostile world reactions to the Sharpeville shootings of i960 and still more the consequent flight of capital, affected even the isolationist Afrikaners very deeply and over the last ten years universal efforts have been made to present South Africa favourably to the outside world. This effort and the vast sums of money expended upon it, have met with consider­able success. Large numbers of people, particularly British business men, politicians, journalists and others have been invited to South Africa, taken on guided tours, fed with various kinds of "information" and have returned to tell travellers' tales of the success of apartheid, of the happiness of the coloured people, of the stability and tranquillity of this smiling and beautiful land where white people certainly enjoy the highest standard of living in the world.

The International Defence and Aid Fund is not in the above sense a propagandist organisation. It does not have vast sums of money to spend, and even if it did it could make better use of it. But in the course of its work it does acquire a great deal of information about life in South Africa, particularly as it affects the non-European majority of the population. This information is always scrupulously checked and counter-checked. Then, if it seems appropriate, it is made public; we believe in letting the facts about South Africa and its practice of Apartheid speak for themselves.

If South Africa is so stable and peaceful it seems curious that so many (nearly all black or Coloured) people are imprisoned, banned, detained incommunicado in solitary confinement for months on end, harassed, spied upon, informed upon and, when all else fails, submitted to savage physical and mental torture.

For a long time now we have been receiving increasingly horrifying stories of the activities of the police in political

- k -

trials. The latest is the trial of the 22 which involves among others Mrs. Winnie Mandela, wife of the African National Congress leader Nelson Mandela, now serving a life sentence on Robben Island. A certain amount of information about this trial has already appeared in the British press, but it has seemed to us important to try to collect together as much factual information as possible and to present a readable as well as a documented and consistent account of this appalling case. In my opinion, this is precisely what this pamphlet does. And I believe it is of paramount importance that the world, and the whites in South Africa, should know clearly and in detail what methods are being used to impose the dogma of Apartheid upon some 15 million allegedly grateful non-Europeans.

At the present time, in Great Britain, there is widespread controversy surrounding the proposed visit of the white South African cricket team. This has produced, as a kind of side issue, discussion about the nature and practice of Apartheid.To read the correspondence columns of British newspapers, to study the utterances and writings of some public figures in Britain, is to be made aware once again of the success of South African propaganda machine and of widespread ignorance about the true nature of the present policies of the white South African Government. This Government in fact maintains a police state of a peculiarly corrupt and vicious nature; the evidence is in this pamphlet.

But people have a remarkable capacity for not believing what they do not want to believe, and not seeing or hearing what they do not want to see or hear. This capacity is very evident among white South Africans, and also unfortunately among the British people whose interest it is to do business with South Africa, to play games with white South Africa and to visit South Africa for holidays in the sun. "Bridges" such as these have existed for more than $0 years and "whites only" have been happily and blindly going backwards and forwards across them. Meanwhile, the imposition of Apartheid has become progressively more inhuman, more vicious, more cruel, more intransigent, and literally more murderous.

Surely the time has now been reached when the "bridge builders" realise that this activity is valueless and serves only to endorse the policies of Apartheid,

White South Africans cannot claim, as the Germans under Hitler, that they do not know what is being done in their name. They know, and the overwhelming majority do not heed. And they will continue to close their eyes and to stop their ears so long as the rest of the world accepts them comfortably, so long as it trades with them, plays with them, holidays with them, so long as it too closes its eyes and stops its ears.

It is against some such background as this that I hope this pamphlet will be read. Everything here is authenticated, and the accounts of torture are taken from sworn legal affidavits. For those who are Christians, I would add one further plea: the present white South African Government proclaims itself as the upholder and defender of Christian values and the Christian way of life in Africa; it invokes a religious sanction for the infamous practices that are here described. Blasphemy such as this must be continually and relentlessly exposed.

L. JOHN COLLINS

* * * * *

- 6 -

TRIAL BY TORTURE

I. THE ACCUSED AND THE CHARGES

Seventeen men and five women were arraigned before the South African Supreme Court in Pretoria on December 1, 1969 on 21 charges under the Suppression of Communism Act.

The scene of the trial was the Old Synagogue, which had been used in the 1956-60 Treason Trial and other political trials of large groups. The atmosphere at the opening of the proceedings was familar to South African political trials: armed police guarded the court buildings. They stood at all entrances with sub-machine guns; they were seen to frisk civilians entering the courtyard; women spectators were not permitted to take their handbags into the courtroom and were ordered to leave the bags outside on a cement path; journalists were made to produce their Press identification cards.

Inside the courtroom, constables armed with automatic pistols sat behind and at the ends of the rows of accused.

The 22 who were charged were:-

Mr. Samson Ratshivande NdouMr. David MotauMrs. Nonzoma Winnie MandelaMr. Hiengani Jackson MahlauleMr. Elliot Goldberg TshabanguMiss Joyce Nomala SikakaneMr. Nanko Paulus MatshabaMr. Lawrence NdzangaMrs. Rita Anita NdzangaMr. Joseph SikalalaMr. David Dalton TsotetsiMr. Victor Emmanuel Mazitulela j-vMr. George MokweboMr. Joseph Chamberlain NobandaMr. Simon MosikareMr. Douglas Mtshetshe MvembeMiss Venus Thokozile Mngoma

- 7 -Miss Martha Dhlamini Mr. Owen Msimilele Vanqa Mr. Livingstone Mancoko Mr. Peter Zexforth Magubane Mr. Samuel Solomon Pholotho

There were 21 charges, relating mainly to activities concerned with the African National Congress (ANC) which after campaigning for political rights for Africans for 50 years, was declared an unlawful organisation in I960. It was alleged that the accused hadj-

• Established groups and committees within the African National Congress;

• Administered and/or took the oath of the ANC;• Recruited members or encouraged one another to recruit

members for the ANC;• Arranged, attended or addressed meetings of the ANC;• Inspected trains and railway installations at Braamfontein,

Croesus, Booysens and Crown and searched for the Langeberg Co-operative with the object of finding suitable targets and methods for committing acts of sabotage;

• Devised means for obtaining explosives;• Discussed, distributed or possessed publications issued by

the overseas branches of the ANC, the South African Communist Party and the South African Indian Congress and conducted correspondence with the overseas branches of the ANC and/or with the co-conspirators;

• Prepared, discussed, distributed, possessed or concealed literature and/or correspondence of the ANC and the correspondence in the previous charge;

• Propagated the communist doctrine by means of discussions, speeches and lectures;

- 8 -• Discussed matters affecting the ANC with Philip Ralph

Golding and gave instructions to him regarding his visit to the overseas branch of the ANC;

• Discussed with Philip Ralph Golding and/or Lucas Johann Opperman steps to raise finances for the ANCj

• Visited or arranged visits to members of the ANC in prisons at Nylstroom and Robben Island, their dependents and ex­prisoners with the object of obtaining information and/or instructions for the organisation;

• Discussed the establishment of contact with guerilla fighters in the event of their arrival within the Republic;

• Arranged a funeral under the auspices of the ANC for Meremetsi Lekoto, the attendance of members and the delivery of speeches in furtherance of the aims of the organisation;

• Arranged a funeral for Lameck Loabile, the attendance of members and the delivery of speeches in furtherance of the aims of the organisation;

• Secured and made use of post-boxes and cover addresses for the delivery of mail addressed to the organisation and its members;

• Encouraged members to listen to radio broadcasts by the ANC in Tanzania;

• Encouraged feelings of hostility between the white and non-white races of the Republic;

• Discussed the feasibility of sending certain members out of the Republic and/or encouraged certain members to leave the Republic in the interests of the organisation;

• Had informal discussions and issued instructions in regard to the conducting of the affairs of the organisation;

- 9 -* They were alternatively charged with wrongfully and

unlawfully performing acts which were calculated to further the achievement of an object of communism. The object referred to was the bringing about of political and/or industrial and/or social and/or economic changes within the Republic by the promotion of disturbance or disorder.

It can be seen that about 12 main charges had been split, to make the maximum number of charges out of a minimum amount of activity. For example, that the accused had 'discussed matters affecting the ANC with Philip Golding' and as a separate charge that they had 'discussed with Philip Golding steps to raise finances for the ANC'.

The 21 charges, serious as they might be in South African law, involved actions of a most speculative nature. A number related to discussions as to what might be done about certain things that might happen in the future. The accused were not actually charged with selecting sabotage sites, or making or possessing the materials for explosives, or of establishing a means of making contact with guerilla fighters, or with other similar conduct, but only with having discussed the possibilities of such things. The charges relating to visits to Robben Island prisoners and to arranging funerals, contain inherent improbabilities. Of course, many visitors to political prisoners on Robben Island were themselves known to have been former members of the ANC but this was natural with wives visiting husbands and with brothers and fathers. Visits are on a 'non- contact' basis and are strictly supervised and political discussions prohibited, so if any information was passed back and forth it could only be meagre.

Yet it was to obtain confessions of activities such as these that the 22 men and women before the court - and many others - had been held in solitary confinement for many months and tortured by the police. Some had even died.

- 10 -

II. THE ARRESTS

The arrests had begun seven months before, at 2 o'clock in the morning of May 12, 1969.

There were thunderous knocks on the doors and windows of homes in the townships, and the beams of powerful torches. The people who were arrested woke to a sudden terror which was to become prolonged into a terrible nightmare.

In each home, police searched for many hours, and took away with than books, private letters, newspaper cuttings, typewriters, and many things which had nothing to do with politics, or which were political, but legal. Some of those arrested were journa­lists and writers, one was a poet, some were students. The police took drafts of short stories, poetry, articles; copies of the London 'Observer'; student magazines; love letters.

Those arrested disappeared from sight. The Terrorism Act, under which they were held, empowers the police to arrest any person believed to be a terrorist or having information about terrorists or about offences under the Act, and to have him detained indefinitely anywhere in South Africa. The detainees can be held for interrogation until the Commissioner of Police is satisfied that they have satisfactorily replied to all questions put to them or until the Minister of Justice orders their release.

Arrests under this law are kept secret. The authorities refuse to disclose any information about arrests under the Terror­ism Act and other detention laws. Apart from admitting in par­liament on February 3, 1970 that persons had been taken into detention during May and June 1969, the Minister would say nothing.

The identity of detainees is secret; only when relatives or friends reveal that they were taken away in the night by Security Police is it known what has happened to them. Their place of

- 11 -

detention is secret. They are not allowed to see family, friend, priest or lawyer; only police and prison officers have access to them. The law says "if circumstances permit" a magistrate will visit them once a fortnight. Worst of all, each detainee is held incommunicado in solitary confinement. As with the 90-day and 180-day Detention laws, no court has jurisdiction over the application of this law; habeas corpus being totally excluded.The police are the absolute masters and can do what they like in making use of their unfettered powers.

Among those arrested were several teenage students, and an old man of 73 j three or four African reporters working on news­papers in Johannesburg and East London; a woman and her son; a husband and wife who left four young children; Mrs. Winnie Mandela, wife of the imprisoned African leader, Nelson Mandela, and her 18-year old sister; an Indian woman, daughter of a man whom Gandhi had adopted as his son; and two white men.

Also among those arrested were three men who were soon to die; Michael Shivute, on the night of his detention; Caleb Mayekiso,19 days after being detained; and the Imam Abdullah Haron, four months after being detained.

- 12 -

III. THE TRIAL

The trial was a summary one before a Judge and assessors, without any preliminary hearing to appraise the accused of the evidence against them.

The Prosecutor, Mr. J.H. Liebenberg, told the court in his opening address that the accused had revived the ANC in 1967 and established contact among old members in the African townships around Johannesburg and in other provinces, notably the Eastern Cape and Natal, Meetings had been held in houses, in cars and in the veld. Groups were instructed in ANC policy.

He claimed that evidence would be produced to show that the ANC was, and still is, an integral part of the communist move­ment in South Africa. Communist literature had been found in the possession of the members of the ANC in 'fair quantities'.

He spoke of correspondence with the ANC London office, and the fact that pamphlets, printed overseas and distributed in South Africa, had dealt mainly with the guerilla warfare insti­gated by members of the ANC, the South African Communist Party, and the South African Indian Congress, (note that the accused are not actually said to have distributed these pamphlets, or even had anything to do with their distribution.)

He accused them of expressing strong support for the 'so- called' freedom fighters, and said that they were prepared to support an armed uprising when the time was ripe. Much dis­cussion had taken place on the subject of military training. Serious efforts had been made to obtain explosives, or ingre­dients to make explosives, for use in acts of sabotage. On one occasion, an inspection of possible targets had been made.

Mr. Liebenberg dwelt at length on efforts made by the accused to provide some form of social welfare for the families of polit­ical prisoners, and he said that the accused had devoted much time and energy to tracing and making contact with the families or dependants of convicted ANC members. For this purpose, visits

- 13had frequently been made to prisons where such prisoners were detained. Questionnaires had been distributed in which certain details in respect of their families had to be completed. The information obtained had been transmitted to London where the ANC had arranged financial aid for the families in question. He asserted that all this was done to assure the ANC of continuous and loyal support and had inspired confidence in the ANC.

It would emerge in evidence, he went on, that Nelson Mandela had been 'frequently visited' in prison by ANC membera and that they had received messages and instructions from him.

He finished his address by saying that the State had at its disposal more than 80 witnesses, a substantial number of whom were being held in detention because of the exigencies of the case.

Yet the evidence of all these manifold activities, despite the 80 witnesses, turned out to be extremely flimsy - sometimes non­existent. There was no evidence that any explosives had been found in any of the homes of the accused. The references to 'frequent visits' to political prisoners including Nelson Mandela is very strange. The prisoners on Robben Island are allowed one non- contact visit every six months, and many relatives are unable to afford the fares from their homes to Cape Town (the island is off­shore from Cape Town) for even these infrequent visits, which are tightly controlled by Security Police. There is no way of arrang­ing 'frequent visits'.

State Witnesses

The State witnesses were either police, or else detainees.

Police witnesses gave formal evidence of searching the homes of the accused. Here again, the articles they managed to' find were hardly incriminating. In the home of Mr. and Mrs. Ndzanga the police had found press cuttings on the lack of school facili­ties for African children, and on other matters; and a photograph of Mr. Ndzanga giving the MC salute.

- Ill -

A Security officer testified to finding a number of books, none of which were banned, and press cuttings in the house of one of the accused, a 19-year-old student, Joseph Sikalala. He also recovered two school notebooks in which, in addition to algebraic equations there were some notes. The notes said that the great­est privilege was to share in the government of a country, that the main purpose of the pass laws was to harass the blacks, etc.

In all the forty, perhaps fifty, homes raided during May and June, the total of 'subversive1 documents seemed to be a copy of a pamphlet issued by the ANC in London, and one or two documents said to relate to the ANC.

The first State witness to deal with the alleged conspiracy was Philip Golding, a 2lj-year old economics graduate from Britain, who 'looked pale and shook visibly when he went into the witness box' * (A couple of months previously Minister of Police Muller had remarked, 'Golding is being held because he was deeply involved with matters which are against the country's laws. If he is lucky he will appear as a State witness in the trial. If he is not, things will go badly for him'.)

Golding told the Court how he became friendly with one of the accused while giving weekly lessons in economics to non-whites. Through him he met two other accused.

At the end of 1968, when he was going on a visit to Britain, he had volunteered to convey any messages to the ANC there. He could not deliver the messages, however, as the person he was told to contact refused to speak to him and the ANC office in London did not contact him.

He also gave evidence of discussions about raising money for the ANC, but nothing had been done.

Slowly, and with great reluctance, Golding admitted under cross-examination that he had been assaulted during interroga­tion. He had been kept standing continuously for two days and* Guardian 2.12.69

- 15 -nights. But 'I do not see the relevance of these questions', he protested when defence counsel Mr. D. Soggott asked him if he had been assaulted.

He admitted the interrogation was physically 'but not emot­ionally' painful to him, and denied that he was slapped, or that he cried. 'I am being candid', he protested when Counsel asked him to be candid. Mr. Soggott said that accused number l£ (Fholotho - Golding's former economics student) would tell the court that Golding had been heard to cry for 2k hours.

Under further cross-examination, as Soggott supplied details of what was said to have happened, Golding yielded a little: 'I believe I was assaulted in some way', he said. Then, 'I was punched a bit*. And 'I was kicked a bit'. He did not know how many times. He could not remember any details of the assault.He had no fear in relation to the police. Why is it, Soggott asked him, that you baulk at questions of what happened at Compol Buildings?* Did the police tell you that you could go if you gave evidence in accordance with the statement you made to than?

The answer was barely audible. The judge thought it was 'No,' but defence counsel said Golding had replied 'That is true'. When Golding was asked if that is what he had replied, he said he did not recall saying that. But after an adjournment, the tape recording was played back. A faint 'It is true' came up on the recording.

Golding was released from prison on December 8, and returned immediately to Britain. The Guardian (January 9, 1970) published a statement by him. 'I lost all meaning of truth and justice', he said. He described how the police jabbed fingers in his eyes and punched him, then kicked him several times as he lay on the ground. After two days and nights of sleeplessness, assaults and interro­gation he made a statement and was induced to become a State wit­ness. 'In this way I gave evidence against four Africans, one of whom was the closest friend I had in South Africa' .

Other State witnesses who were called, quite independently of

* Security Police Headquarters in Pretoria.

- 16 -each other and without having had any contact with anyone since their arrest except the Security Police, also gave evidence of similar assaults,

Mr. Herbert Nhlapo (one of the 'substantial number' of wit­nesses who had been detained for months and was still detained) said he had attended three meetings with seven of the accused where they had discussed the formation of an organisation to draw the attention of the authorities to the plight of the Africans. He said that Mrs. Mandela had suggested they should call the organisation the ANC. He later learned that it had ceased to exist.

An African (also under detention) who had been assistant librarian at the United States Information Service in Johannes­burg testified to having attended meetings with five of the accused, at one of which they had discussed funeral arrange­ments for an elderly ANC member who had died, a Mr, Lekoto, and arranged an ANC flag for his coffin. Mrs. Mandela, helped by Miss Sikakane and Mrs. Ndzanga, had duplicated a leaflet at the USIS offices one Sunday in March of 1968. The leaflet, issued in the name of the ANC, exhorted the people not to be hoodwinked into accepting the Urban Bantu Council, a duirmy body, as a form of freedom. He had also helped the women to duplicate a message of farewell to Mr. Lekoto, to be read at his funeral, Mrs.Mandela, he told the Court, had a profound knowledge of communism. She had read works by Lenin, Trotsky and Che Guevara and had expressed a great interest in 'Zhivago's History of Russia'.

A sister of Winnie Mandela, 18-year old Miss Madikizela, detained since the previous May, gave evidence of taking a parcel and written message to Mr. Vanqa (one of the accused), and also admitted to attending the funeral of a man called Laubile, in the uniform of an ANC volunteer. Under cross-examination she said she had been forced to make a statement because of threats in detention. She said she could no longer distinguish between what she knew and what the police told her. She had only made a state­ment after being threatened with ten years in jail. She was in the seventh month of solitary confinement.

- 17 -A woman who had already been in jail for three years for

•furthering the aims of the ffiC', Miss Eselina Klaas from Port Elizabeth, said she had distributed forms to families of six people who had been released from jail after serving sentences for ANC activities, and that she had delivered the completed forms to Mrs. Ndzanga, in Johannesburg, Mrs. Ndzanga and Mrs. Mandela gave her Rll and some old clothing to distribute to people in fin­ancial difficulties.

She described how she had been interrogated continuously for four days and nights, kept standing. ’The police wanted me to make a statement. I stood all the time. I was never alone*.

'I Will Not Testify Against My People1

The two next -witnesses to be called were also women, Shanti Naidoo and Brysine Mamkahla,

Shanti Naidoo took the oath and said 'I do not wish to give evidence1. Justice Bekker asked her for her reasons and explained to her that unless she had 'just* reasons according to the law, he would have to sentence her to jail in terms of the Criminal Procedure iSct.

She replied, *1 have two friends among th accused. I don't want to give evidence because I will not be able to live with my conscience if I do'.

In reply to a question from the judge, she said this was her only reason for refusing. At this stage she smiled at someone in the huge double-row dock where the 22 accused were seated. She told the judge she understood the full implication of what she was doing. He told her that she would go to prison for two months, and if she were called to give evidence again at the end of that period, and still refused, she would go back to jail again. 'I am prepared to accept it’, she said.

She told the Court she had been held since June 3, 1969, kept in solitary confinement for six months, sleeping on the floor of

- 18 -her cell. She was supposed to be entitled to 30 minutes exercise each day, but on many occasions she had no exercise at all.

She stood for five days and five nights, interrogated all the time, and she made a statement whm she could no longer stand the strain of standing. *1 lost track of time and for periods my mind went blank1.

At one stage, her mind went blank and then she dreamed she was being interrogated.

'In my dream I was speaking to the interrogation officer'.

The dream did not m^ke sense, but after coming to her senses, she had been questioned about the dream.

She said she had known Winnie Mandela for many years, and Joyce Sikakane for a year. 'It has been a good friendship,' she said. Tears came into her eyes when she said this.

She was sentenced to two months in jail, for refusing to testify.

Shanti Naidoo has a brother who is serving 12 years imprison­ment on Robben Island. Her father died some years ago; he was a leading figure in the Transvaal Indian Congress. One of the reasons she made a statement in the end, she said, was because the police had threatened to arrest her whole family.

She was followed by Mrs. Brysine Nondwe Mamkahla, who also refused to give evidence. She told the court that she was assured that if she made a statement she would be released. The promise was not fulfilled. Also, she said, 'I do not wish to give evidence against my people'.

Mrs. Mamkahla also described how she had been kept standing, and sleepless, for two days and two nights, before she made a state­ment.

- 19 -

Case Collapses

On December V~>} after twenty State witnesses had given evidence, the case was adjourned until February 16, 1969, All the accused and the witnesses were kept in jail throughout the adjourn­ment.

When the court re-convened, the Attorney-General, making his first appearance at the trial, told the court that the State was stopping its prosecution and asked for the acquittal of the accused (in terms of the Act, either remand or acquittal is required.)

Mr. Justice Bekker thereupon told the accused that the indict­ment against them had been withdrawn. He said: 'I find you not guilty and you are discharged'. As soon as the 22 accused real­ised that they had been freed of the charges against them, they began to smile and congratulate one another. Then a loudspeaker ordered the public to leave the courtroom. Police with rifles and submachine guns hustled away the small crowd of people gathered around, while other policemen escorted the 22 into a 5-ton police truck.

Instead of being allowed to go free, they were all back where they had started nine months before - in prison, incommunicado, in solitary confinement for a further indefinite period, for further 'interrogation' by the Security Police.

In an editorial headlined 'Again, South African Justice' the New York Times (February 2£, 1970) commented -

"In its treatment of 22 blacks charged with working for the banned African National Congress, South Africa seems determined to outdo even its own appalling record for 'legal' cruelty and hypocrisy. The prosecution in Pretoria was having deep trouble making a case against the defendants so it abruptly dropped the charges....

- 20 -

The prosecution was obviously embarrassed by two things: One was the triviality of its own 'evidence1 against the defendants. The other was the persis­tence of Justice Simon Bekker, rare in South African courtrooms nowadays, in inquiring into the pretrial treatment of State witnesses, some of whom had also been detained for months under the provisions of the Terrorism Act....

The prosecution's strategy seems clear: It will simply hold the defendants under the Terrorism Act until more 'evidence' can be obtained or concocted by the bestial methods that have become a hallmark of South 7\frican 'justice'."

The relatives of the men and women who had been re-arrested shared to the full the fears expressed by the newspaper: that the re-arrests under the Terrorism Act could have only one pur­pose, to obtain the evidence needed to secure a conviction, to force others to become State witnesses.

* * * *

- 21 -

IV. THE TORTURE ORDEAL

Fifteen of the relatives sought to obtain a court order to restrain the police from assaulting or torturing those they were holding for interrogation. The application asked that the court should dispense with the 'forms of service provided by the rules of the court' - the normal forms of service would entail delay that would nullify the whole point of the application.

The need for urgency could not be underlined too much. With­in a week or two the need for restraining the police might become unnecessary. The application was signed on February 20 and set down for hearing on the same day.

In support of the application, counsel acting on behalf of the relatives produced affidavits which the accused had prepared in the period between the time that they had been charged and brought to court, and the time when the case had ended so abruptly. The affidavits gave the individual experiences of each of the 22 from the time of their arrests . . .

JOYCE SIKAKANE, a young reporter and writer, was taken toCompol Buildings by the Security Police two dfiys

after her arrest. There was a room with a desk, two chairs, a sink in the corner. The window was blacked out with wooden par­titions. And underneath the sink was a small pile of bricks, grey in colour. On the floor next to the bricks, she noticed an old wet blanket and a wet sack.

Seven white Security men started the interrogation. 'What do you know about the Winnie Mandela ANC group?' She denied any knowledge, and they laughed derisively. Major T. Swanepoel, leading the interrogation, said he would break her if she refused

* to talk. 'I know how painful it is to break a woman, and I will do it with you'.

Again she refused. They threatened they would keep her in that office until she talked. They pounded the desk with their

- 22 -fists, firing questions at her one after the other without waiting for answers - what were you doing at this place, at that place? - what did you say to so-and-so? - what message did you carry from Mrs. Mandela to Dr. Ngakane? - what is your relationship with X, Y, Z? - what did you discuss in Commissioner Street in December 1968 when you met John? What did Platts-Mills discuss with Mrs. Sisulu?

Every small thing that she has done which could be construed as a 'political1 act is known. She realises that not only has she been watched and followed for months on end, but that others who have been detained have talked.

She has nothing left to conceal. The interrogation begins, in the room with the grey bricks under the sink.

Joyce Sikakane did not learn what the bricks were for, but Rita Ndzanga knew, and so did her husband Lawrence; and Sanson Ndou and Paulus Matshaba, and many others, accused and witnesses.

• DAVID MOTAU: I was taken for interrogation on l6th May at about 11.30 a.m. They ordered me to stand on the top

of two bricks. I was made to carry another brick with my hands high up. I did not stand firmly on the bricks as they were smooth. As my hands became tired an African policeman beat me at the elbows with a rubber stick. . . and on the feet. He tied my face with an old cloth. The white policeman said that I would not go out of Compol without making a statement. ’We will make you talk1.

When the second shift of interrogators came, he was hung up by the neck, his toes just touching the three bricks. The torture continued for three days and three nights, the police working in shifts. *1 was not allowed to sleep or rest, I was punched on my cheeks, mouth and kicked. When they ate they gave me some food, and I was given a small tin to urinate. I only began to talk when after a long time of ill-treatment they asked me about a meeting . . . I realised they knew*.

- 23 -

• ELLIOTT GOLDBERG TSHABANGU: *Swanepoel told me that whether I liked it or not I would stand on

these bricks and never leave that small room before I speak, I will stand on these bricks till I speak, even if I last two weeks.

I was on the bricks from Monday, 19th May to Thursday evening, May 22nd, 1969. In that small room there was a round electric light and the heat of the light burned my skull ... The pain of ny feet caused by these bricks, endless questions from the police, punches, claps, insults, my moustache plucked out . . . all these sufferings did drive me to a point where I could not distinguish between night and day. Dates were also lost to my mind.

Still on the bricks they worked in turns dictating what they wanted to be written, forcing me to say Ja baas, Ja baas. Any­thing I said was translated to their own liking. Swanepoel did clap me on my face very hard changing hands, left, right, left, right, and said 'Kaffir, ek sal vir jou wakker-maak (I will make you wake up) . . . Communist, why don't you frightenl

*Now during these four days and three nights on these bricks my feet and legs were swollen, the whole body was paining and numb; I could not walk when I came down from the bricks. Going to the toilet was restricted’.

• NANKO PAULUS MA.TSHABA: While standing on the three bricks he was beaten with a sjambok. 'I was

punched several times. A karate blow sent me spinning in the air and I fell hard on the floor. They warned me they would assault me until I died’.

• RITA ANITA NDZANGA: *MEy first interrogation took place on l6th ---- May, I was taken to a room at the back of

Compol Buildings. Major Swanepoel called me by a name. I kept quiet and did not reply. Other Security Police continued to ques­tion me. Day and ni^it is the same in this room because of the thick heavy planks covering the windows.

'I remained standing. It was late at night. One policeman

- 21* -came round the table towards me, and struck me. I fell to the floor. He said 'Staan op* (stand up) and kicked me while I lay- on the floor. I sat flat on the floor'.

They poured water on her face. A new team of interroga­tors came in - Major Swanepoel and one other. ‘You will stand on your feet until you decide to speak1 thqy told her. When they began reading other statements to her, she began to make a statement.

She was taken out for questioning a second time and then for a third time on July 23. In a kitchen a white Security man hit her and she fell and began to scream ... 'They closed the windows. I continued screaming. They dragged me to another room, hitting me with their open hands all the time. In the interrogation room they ordered me to take off my shoes and stand on three bricks. I refused to stand on the bricks. One of the white Security police climbed on a chair and pulled me by my hair, dropped me on the bricks. I fell down and hit a gas pipe. The same man pulled me up by my hair again, jerked me, and I again fell on the metal gas pipe. They threw water on my face. The man who pulled me by the hair had his hands full of my hair. He washed his hands in the basin. I managed to stand up and then they said: 'On the bricksl' I stood on the bricks and they hit me again -while I was on the bricks. I fell. They again poured water on me. I was very tired. I could not stand the assault any longer. I asked to see Major Swanepoel. They said: 'Meid, jy moet praat' (Girl, you must talkl)

LAWRENCE NDZANGA: (Rita Ndzanga's husband): 'When I refusedto make a statement they called an .African

policeman ... He brought bricks. He said !I will show you'.He showed me a balcony with a rope hanging from it'.

Ndzanga stood on the three bricks. They hit him and kept him standing the following day. Major Swanepoel refused to let him go to the toilet and he passed water while standing.

- 25 -• DOUGLAS MTSHETSHE MVEMBE is 73 and he was unable to balance on

the bricks. So they handcuffed him and tied a rope through the handcuffs and to a grating above his head, his feet touching the bricks. Later in the afternoon they undid the handcuffs and tied his hands up outstretched. ’It looked as if I was on the cross’. His toes just managed to touch the bricks. At night there was a terrible heat above his head; sweat poured down and blocked his ears so he could not hear what they were saying. 'I would thirst and ask for water ... After many pleas for water they would give me a drop and then withdraw the mug from my mouth'.

Three days and nights later, Douglas Mvembe told them he accepted every word they said or all what they knew and said and that he would sign it. So he was taken down and the statement was slowly compiled. 'But I didn’t sign it’, the old man said.

JOSEPH SIKA.LALA., one of the several teenage students who had~~ been detained, was given the full measure of

bricks and blows. He was also made to catch and kill with his bare hands cockroaches when they ran all over the interrogation room. Under the assaults he became groggy and cried. He was not allowed to urinate. Later, when he was taken back to his cell he was given food to eat with his bare hands, the hands he had not been permitted to wash after killing the cockroaches.

The grey, wobbling bricks - 'they had no balance ... they would dance' - hands held up, kicks, blows, a sjambok beating knees, feet, genitals, the ugly words and threats: ’kaffer, jou lewe is niks werd; jy sal doodgaan' (kaffir, your life is worth nothing; you will die) - but most of all the sleeplessness, the sheer fati­gue, the confusion, the blurring, after days and nights, the hope­lessness when death seems not far away ... in this way the detain­ees were induced to talk, and some to sign the statements. But even so, defiance remained. ’The statement was written, the dictation lasted six days. On the final day they asked: ’Do you want to read it? I replied: ’Why should I?' They said: ’There may be some alterations or if you disagree with something*‘ I

- 26 -asked him: 'If I disagree with something, can it be altered?'He said: 'Yes'. I told him then: »i disagree with the whole statement, it should all be altered. But my objections were ignored. I was forced to sign, but I refused to swear'.

For WINNIE MANDELA, there were no bricks. Perhaps because of ------------ world attention centred on her name, per­

haps because they knew she suffers from a heart condition, she remained seated during the five days and five nights that they demanded a statement from her. They wanted her to live at least until she had given them information. On the third day she showed the police her blue and swollen hands and feet. Major Swanepoel said: 'For God's sake, leave us some inheritance when you decide to pop itj you cannot go with all that information'.

After that, each time the police changed shifts they would ask if her heart had not stopped yet, and sarcastically beg her to leave some of that 'wealth of inheritance'.

Her interrogation began on May 26. They continued to fire questions at her throughout the whole day and night, although the teams of interrogators were changed many times.

Dizzy spells and palpitations started on the second day. Already she was very tired and would close her eyes and bow her head - then they would bang the table loudly and clap their hands. The teams went off to sleep in turn, but she remained sitting and awake.

From the second night 'I heard noises which sounded like either a scuffle or bracing against furniture, coming from some­where towards the right of the room. These noises seemed to be a great source of amusement to the interrogators who would burst out laughing, and they would say, Now the truth trill come outj or - It will be your turn next'.

On the morning of the third day, she was permitted to take a shower. By this time her legs, feet and hands were swollen, the dizzy spells were worse, and she suffered momentary black­outs. Still she refused to answer questions, even although

- 27 -it was very clear that certain people had revealed all they knew about her to the police. She admitted meeting people from abroad, and the meetings with visitors from abroad, such as Mr. Platts-Mills, were described to her in detail, although with their own distortions or interpretations. She was told, for instance, that Platts-Mills was an Australian communist who had come to settle a dispute in the ANC leadership.

Her whole body was blue and swollen by the third night; the palpitations were worse, and she was given some tablets. They reminded her that she had brought herself to prison, and likewise she could release herself. Major Swanepoel: 'I will tell you what you are, Winnie Mandela, all you wanted was money out of all this, to buy all those nice clothes you are so fond of, and you also wanted to pretend you're a leader; and you're nothing, Winnie Mandela, we mean to prove to the world your worth . . . you are just fit for a kick in the back . . . what did you drag all this scum into politics for?'

Only one police officer allowed her to put her head between her knees when the blackouts got worse. The others continued to bang the table and clap. The noises from somewhere else in the building continued, to their great amusement.

Friday, May 30 - the fifth day. 'My clothes were soaking wet from excessive night sweating. The bodice was very tight due to oedema. I realised my failing health was to their advan­tage, because if the heart stopped suddenly the interrogators would say I died of natural causes. They seemed quite pleased about it and would ask if it had not stopped yet, each time they changed shifts. They refused to give me their names when I asked for than. Two teams would refer to me as 'office inven­tory' - 'Is office inventory still there?' I was called other names, and sarcastically promised a trip around the world to exhibit the woman who stayed awake longest of them all.

On the fifth day Major Coetzee of Pretoria came to tell her that he was so worried about her, he had not slept for three nights and even his wife had asked what was wrong. He called

- 28 -

the interrogators and they went to consult in an adjoining office. 'I was now trembling badly and could not control the muscles. I had been treated for this state by my family doctor before I developed the heart condition. The pain under the left breast was acute and I had difficulty in breathing'.

On the afternoon of the fifth day, when Major Swranepoel returned, 'I told him that if this is what my people were going through, those involved and those innocent ones, then I request that I be allowed to accept the responsibility of each and every one of their actions and that I be charged, that they be used as State witnesses, those who were prepared to give evidence'.

She was told she would have to reply to all the questions they wished to confirm before they decided whether there would be any case. 'I told him I confirmed everything that those detained had said, and I was entirely responsible for all they did. I was then flooded with so many questions at a time I could not cope without resting in between. I said yes to everything they said . . . The history they wanted from me dated from my primary school days, high school, how I came to Johannesburg, who my chief is - I said, he is on Robben Island; they wanted the name, and I said they have many names and they are Sisulu, Mbeki, Kathrada, etc. At times my mind became totally blank, I could not remember things I had known quite well before. I would take long to register questions. The oedema was at its worst, I confirmed everything they told, all was written down. The interrogation by Swanepoel's team con­tinued into Friday night. Another team took over, then later, about midnight, Swanepoel returned. The interrogation room was full, everyone fired questions, and I said yes to every­thing .'

From a large book, Major Coetzee read extracts of each and every letter that she had written abroad, and demanded explan­ations. Many times her mind went blank, and where they had their 0>jn explanations, she said yes. In the early hours of Saturday morning, Swanepoel ordered than to stop.

- 29 -

The interrogations now continued day by day, with the mats in the prison cell to lie down on at night. 'I used to wake up screaming and I found myself talking aloud, and suffered from nightmares. I also suffered from acute insomnia although heavily sedated*. The prison food - soiled vegetables mixed with soft porridge - caused vomiting and diarrhoea.

On July 18, Winnie Mandela was taken to Compol Buildings again, and Major Swanepoel asked abruptly who was Thembi Mandela? She replied, 'He is my eldest stepson', and the Major then said, 'He is dead'. He had been killed in a car accident. She was too shocked for control, and she broke down and wept.

* * * *

- 30 -

V. FIENDISH TORTURE

Section 6 of the Terrorism Act of 196?, under which these interrogations were conducted, is the most fearsome of all the various detention-without-charge-or-trial provisions in South African laws.

The name of the act should not mislead. A detainee does not have to be suspected of engaging in terrorist activities.If someone protests against a particular law, and the State considers that by so doing he or she embarrasses or endangers the State, that person can be accused of terrorism. Among other things, terrorism is defined in the Act as causing 'sub­stantial financial loss to any person or the State' - thus a boycott or a strike could result in charges of terrorismj causing, encouraging or furthering feelings of hostility be­tween whites and nonwhites; * obstructing the free movement of any traffic, land, sea or air - here again, a strike could be an act of 'terrorism', and so oould a peaceful demonstra­tion; and 'embarrassing1 the administration of the affairs of the State.

Section 6 of the Act allows for anyone to be held for the purposes of interrogation. There is no time limit on the deten­tion, nor on the interrogation itself; it can be for ever. Aid the absolute exclusion of access to the person detained by any­body at all except the Security Police gives those holding the detainee a gruesome kind of licence.

The Act, in fact, is a licence to the Security Police to torture.

But what, after all, is torture, 'the deliberate infliction

* A group of white women demonstrating against hunger in the reserves had to remove posters which read Black Hunger, White Profit to avoid possible charges under the Terrorism .Act.

- 31 -of extreme pain, especially to extort a confession or as a pun­ishment'? There is no means which can be used to classify degrees of torture, nor is there any standard of endurance to inflicted pain or mental suffering. The public demands that if a pulitical prisoner claims he has been tortured, then he must have some horrible physical details to recount. 'Were you tortured?' the reporter asks the released prisoner. And it is not enough for him to reply, 'Solitary confinement is torture', or 'I suff­ered terrible mental torture'. The press wants something more solid: electric shocks, lashes, the rack.

Yet somehow it is necessary for people to understand the terrible significance of the different kinds of torture which have been perpetrated under the Terrorism Act and under other detention laws in South Africa.

Uncertainty itself is torture, and for the women, the bitter heartache of children abandoned, of whom they are permitted to hear no word. 'I had left them screaming and this simply haunted me.I could not eat or sleep. They clung to me as I was being taken away.'.

Nor is it possible to describe briefly and clearly the tor­ture of prolonged solitary confinement in an empty prison cell with nothing to do, nothing to read, for days, weeks, months on end. The detainees are not given any work, nor are they allowed books or writing materials. This is a very terrible type of torture, inflicted without a single blow. Time, in a bare cell with its sleeping mat and blankets rolled into a corner in accor­dance with the regulations, with the sanitary bucket; and nothing else; time then becomes so infinite, yet so devoid of any stages, that afterwards it cannot even be talked about. It is compressed into nothing.

This continues for twenty-four hours a day. The regulation half-hour exercise outside the cell is often cut down, or not given at all. No one speaks to the prisoner.

In this great void that must be endured, trivialities

- 32 -inflate to fill a whole world. The rattle of keys at an unex­pected hour, or voices shouting when usually it is quiet; the sound of movement, footsteps, slamming doors - these can lead to hours of fearful speculation. Apprehension is the main ingredient of life. 'After my arrest I was kept in a cell next to a door where the staff kept knocking all the time. The knock was so loud that each time I got a fright'. What does it mean? What are they doing? What is happening? What will become of me?

Then the interrogators come with their questions and their lies. You have been betrayed, they say. By whom? First, by the jews, the white-jew-communists and the coolie-communists. Then by your own comrades. Evidence of that betrayal is produced.

Lies are told about fellow-detainees. 'Winnie Mandela is begging us to allow her to become a State witness' . 'He then told me that Mrs. Mandela was sorry and had asked him to tell me that I should accept the offer (to become a State witness) made to me by Major Swanepoel'. 'Winnie said you are a young girl, she will be sorry if you spend your young years in jail' (this was to persuade the girl to become a State witness).

Jealous suspicions are planted. Detainees are told of special arrangements made for other detainees - money and rent provided for some families while their own families are starv­ing. They are told that this one, or that, is an informer and bits of information pieced together are presented to make it seem true. Racial antagonisms are inflamed. Bribes are offered. 'After you have given evidence we will give you a passport and you can leave the country'. One detainee was offered a job in the South African consulate at Malawi.Lawrence Ndzanga was told that Winnie had betrayed them all and sold her husband, Nelson Mandela; that his children would suffer; that his wife had already confessed . . . 'I was on bricks all the time . . . I was told I would be a State wit­ness. Major Swanepoel said the jews were misleading me, they wanted to take the money of the African people'.

- 33 -Threats and promises prey on the minds of the prisoners.

Noyaniso Madikizela told the court she became a State witness because she was threatened with ten years in jail. The image of terror and power presented by the Security Police make the threats real.

Threats prey on the minds of prisoners, and fear for their families. The arrest of someone loved, particularly if they were not politically involved, can cause agonising regret and may force the detainee to talk to try and obtain the release of the innocent. The detainee, in this twisted way, is given power to inflict indefinite punishment on someone loved - or to obtain their release.

Peter Magubane was told that Winnie Mandela was pregnant, and that if he told them everything about her activities, they would give her a pill to end the pregnancy, but if not, they would smear her name. On the third occasion when they said this, and demanded details of her private life, Magubane told the police that he was tired of this, he respected her a great deal, and she was a person of very high moral standards. Magubane was detained to try and make him a State witness - he became one of the accused.

Humiliation is another form of torture; being forced to urinate in one's trousers; being made to strip naked and searched in a particular manner. Always among the well-drilled teams of ruthless and bullying men there is one, just one, who is kinder than the others; who lets you sit for a few minutes when the others are out of the room; lets you drop your head on a table without banging it to shock you awake; one who manages to indi­cate that he does not really like the rough methods the others used. This one, the kind one, is the nodal point of betrayal.

It is easy afterwards, when the chance comes to talk to others, to consider what has been said and done, to see the obvious traps and detect the lies. But to the person in soli­tary confinement it is not easy. Logic is lost, reason is con­fused. Truth is mixed with lies, and truth and lies become one.

Collection Number: A3299 Collection Name: Hilda and Rusty BERNSTEIN Papers, 1931-2006

PUBLISHER: Publisher: Historical Papers Research Archive Collection Funder: Bernstein family Location: Johannesburg

©2015

LEGAL NOTICES:

Copyright Notice: All materials on the Historical Papers website are protected by South African copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, or otherwise published in any format, without the prior written permission of the copyright owner. Disclaimer and Terms of Use: Provided that you maintain all copyright and other notices contained therein, you may download material (one machine readable copy and one print copy per page) for your personal and/or educational non-commercial use only.

People using these records relating to the archives of Historical Papers, The Library, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, are reminded that such records sometimes contain material which is uncorroborated, inaccurate, distorted or untrue. While these digital records are true facsimiles of paper documents and the information contained herein is obtained from sources believed to be accurate and reliable, Historical Papers, University of the Witwatersrand has not independently verified their content. Consequently, the University is not responsible for any errors or omissions and excludes any and all liability for any errors in or omissions from the information on the website or any related information on third party websites accessible from this website.

This document is part of the Hilda and Rusty Bernstein Papers, held at the Historical Papers Research Archive, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.