LEGAL TO SUE HOR DAMAGES DUE TO TORTURE?
“In recent months, South Africa's racist apartheid government has continued its political wit ch-hunt trials, condemning a new series of victims to long terms in the country's foul prisons and executing some.despite world-wide protests and appeals for clemency.
The use of torture by the police in securing "evidence" in these cases is becoming more and more brazen. Several recent incidents: will serve to indicate the situation,
In October two young detainees. took the extraordinary | measure of suing for damages totaling R5,000 [one rand = $1, 40] because of injuries suffered during torture.
The two were Alan Brooks, a 24eyear-old lecturer at the University of Cape Town, who sued for R4,000; and Miss Stephanie Kemp, a 22-year-old physiotherapist.
They sent letters of demand to Minister of Justice Vorster and. the two cops whom-.they. accuse of assault, Det.-Sergt. J.F.P. "Spyker" | van Wyk and Det. ~Constable T. T. Zandberg. we: - Both» of these victims were detained under the infamous law giving the police the right to hold "suspects" for indefinitely. renewable periods of ninety days without bringing charges,
Brooks stated that after being arrested July 22, he was held for'a number of days. Then in the early hours of Sunday, August:2, he was taken into a sound-proof room at Caledon Square. There he was assaulted by van Wyk and gandberg.
ae "Among: other injuries which he suffered during this session of "questioning" was @ " broken right ankle.
Stephani Kemp, an idealistic. girl of great charm, was detained on July 12. Her siege of "questioning" began on “August 1 at ll ae Me and ran continuously untid 2 aeM. on August 2.
Various members of the Security Branch questioned her during this. period, subjecting her to "undue, harsh, physical. and mental stress and strain." Sometime during the night and early morning, she stated, she was assaulted by Det.=Sergt. van Wyk and rendered dazed and semiconscious.
‘She has ‘asked for R2,000.in damages. from the Wind ster of Justice.
- The-attorney for the two victims said that he had not been permitted.to see either of them while they were detained under the 90-day law, They were finally charged with "sabotage" along with three other defendants,
It is not likely that the legal action taken by Stephanie Kemp and Alan Brooks will get very far in the machinery of apartheid justice. In October, nine political prisoners and the wife of a tenth in 90-day custody appealed to the Supreme Court for an order declaring: the methods’ of interrogation used. by the police to be un+ lawful.’ Mrs. Adelaide Joseph, the wife of a detainee, appealed for. an interdict restraining the police from maltreating her husband Paul Joseph. :
She filed more than: forty pages. of.affidavits from former: 90= day detainees substantiating her charges on the interrogation methods used by the police on political prisoners. 7
A common affidavit was that victims are’ “compelled to stand in one spot for up to sixty hours at a time and are often submitted to physical assault, by the’ police. :
The court postponed the application to give. ‘the police an. opportunity to reply to the charges.
. , Johannesburg ‘Security Police. Chief, Col. “Johan George Klindt made a "partial" reply. : According. to the October 21 Cape Argus, he said "he wanted to make it very clear that a person being interrogated could sit if he wished when undergoing questioning in a room in ‘Which there were sufficient chairs." ¢ a
As for the rest, "It was not in the public interest to disclose the ways in which detainees were questioned, but that the police under his ‘command. had strict; instructions never to assault.a. prisoner,’ Lone
In the same account in the “Cape ‘Argus, a Johannesburg ‘attor~ ney, J. G. Joffee, “said he had taken scores of statements..in the past year from 90-day detainees. . In. almost every subsequent: case in which he appeared certain State witnesses -- not defence witnesses -had testified under oath of assaults by the police."
In another suit of similar character, the Pretoria ‘Supreme __ Court ruled November 6 in favor of the police, Mrs, Lesley Erica Schermbrucker appealed against an order by Justic Snyman-in the Rand Supreme Court. She had, asked the cotirrt to declare the method of... interrogation. being used on her husband to be illegal and to -have.. her husband brought into court.to give evidence,
Snyman ruled that he could not order Colonel Klindt, the head of the Johannesburg Security Police, to bring a detainee into court for any purpose,
When this decision was appealed by Mrs. Schermbrucker, the Pretoria Supreme Court upheld the: judge in the lower court, They. held:that-there were "other avenues left open by. legislation for: -— © gaining information about treatment of detainees." Among. these
avenues is "visits of the magistrate."
This alleged avenue, however, has been exposed by the "90- Day Protest Committee," as largely fictitious. The chairman of the committee, J. Hamilton Russell, declared that it was "doubtful" whether a visit once a week by a magistrate constituted an effective safeguard. against abuse of the "vast" police powers during interrogation, — vi
"at least two detainees have died by hanging and one jumped to his death during an interrogation," Russell pointed out, "Five have had ‘their minds so affected that they have had to receive psychiatric treatment or be sent to mental institutions. There have been» complaints of beat ings-up and electric¢shook treatment. "
“Under the law, a magistrate is under’. no obligation to take any action, even if.a detainee complains of ill-treatment.
Nog. course," stated Russell, "the magistrate may disbelieve the complainant because he sees no * external signs of. third-degree maltreatment.
"Tf a detainee has been electrically shocked or suffocated with a plastic bag, or been made to stand for 24 or 48 hours y there will be no visible signs of injury. | o:
"Remember, too, that a magistrate is not qualified, as a: doce» tor or psychiatrist would be, to notice mental deterioration caused . by solitary confinement even if it were obligatory for the same. magistrate to visit the same detainee each week, But no detainee has any right to see his own doctor, or for that matter anyone at all.
"In | fact, “he has no rights, whatsoever,
"The police: can do with him what they will.
"Let us presume ‘that a magistrate comes across an obvious case of ill-treatment such as a broken leg or a broken jaw, . It is: true. that he: ‘is under no legal. obligation to do anything: about: tte” a
"As the law stands he need not make any further investigation | of the complaint. He need not report it to any other authority. But obviously he would not wish to overlook such an abuse of power."
However, the law does not provide any instructions as to how a magistrate should act in such a case. .
-. Russell cited evidence that. detainees, even if they have been injured, are afraid to report it=to the magistrate. They are afraid, even if he is not accompanied by the police, that he will tell them and that they “might revenge themselves by further maltreatment or torture,
AN. END