VOL. 6, NO. 12 (December, 1996) PP.184-87
WHITE MAN'S JUSTICE: SOUTH AFRICAN POLITICAL TRIALS IN THE BLACK
CONSCIOUSNESS ERA by Michael Lobban. New York: Oxford University
Press, 1996. 288 pp. Cloth $65.00. Reviewed by Stacia L. Haynie,
Department of Political Science, Louisiana State University.
Michael Lobban has written an extensive and detailed account of
the South African political trials of the 1970s. Lobban's work
focuses on the government's fear of both action against, and the
expression of opposition to, the apartheid system. From the
perspective of the apartheid government, any action or speech
aimed at changing apartheid was necessarily criminal. If, as the
government believed, the white population would never voluntarily
relinquish power, change could never occur peacefully. Thus to
suggest a system with a voice for black South Africans meant
inevitable violence. To stress the illegitimacy of apartheid,
much less work toward a truly democratic polity, constituted
terrorism. The government feared the very idea of equality for
all South Africans.
To contain the spread of such terroristic notions as equality and
freedom, white South Africa believed containing the
"leaders" espousing such thoughts could suppress the
extension of such ideas to the black population at large, which
the government persisted was pleased with its lot, and would
remain so without the interference of a troublesome few
"revolutionaries." The trials were one avenue of attack
to hold on to the fabric of apartheid, which even in the 1970s
was beginning to unravel.
Lobban juxtaposes the trials of the black student groups, such as
Black People's Convention and the South African Students'
Organization, with those of the white student groups, such as the
National Union of South African Students. Students in both groups
were tried for the ideas they espoused. Lobban asserts that white
students fared significantly better during their trials than
their black cohorts. Lobban also asserts that by punishing the
leaders the government sought to intimidate others who might
choose to join the fight; isolating the leaders from the
followers would cut the head from the body.
Paradoxically, the trials provided an avenue for those on trial
to speak their ideas publicly, one of the few forums available,
and the trials were covered fairly openly by the press. To prove
the government's nebulous terrorism and conspiracy charges, the
state detailed the philosophies of those on trial; and exposed
the abuses of apartheid in the process. Descriptions of the
barbaric forced removals, the detentions, the coerced confessions
and other human rights abuses were exposed publicly for all of
South Africa, as well as the larger international community. Thus
the major trials Lobban examines, were the very avenues many
groups used to expand their influence. For example, Lobban notes
the testimony of one accused:
In fact I witnessed the GG truck carrying people with everything
that they have, and they are dumped at Gazankulu, there is an
area there where they were dumped, and that area had no water and
there were no houses. What they did they built tents, the
ordinary tents that one might take when he goes for a picnic....
I even visited the situation because my sister had to be removed
with her husband (p. 61).
While the student trials focused on the illegality of the ideas
of these groups, the latter trials focused on groups with more
specific goals than enlightenment. Following the 1976 Soweto
uprising, white South Africa could no longer claim the masses
were content. The uprising began as a protest march against the
compulsory use of Afrikaans in the secondary schools. As Lobban
states, "The riots changed the world which the authorities
were used to dealing with. Instead of policing a handful of
activists, they now faced many thousands actively opposing the
state" (p. 145).
Several statutes were passed to ease the burden of the
prosecutors. First, the jurisdiction of the lower courts was
expanded increasing the numbers of courts available to try those
accused. Second, the state altered its criminal procedures
shifting the burden of proof for those alleging inadmissible
confessions. Police misconduct was generally difficult to prove,
and thus confessions were often the easiest route to conviction.
Lobban details the trial of ten individuals accused of conspiring
"to send and receive messages, literature, and money from
the African National Congress in Swaziland, to recruit members
and set up routes to smuggle them out of South Africa, and to
obtain medical supplies for use by terrorists (p.168)." The
defense focused on alleged abuse and torture of the accused; one
in fact died during detention. The state asserted a heart attack
brought about the untimely demise, despite abrasions over most of
the accused's body, three cracked ribs and three subarachnoid
hemorrhages as well as other injuries. Despite substantial
evidence of police brutality, the judge refused to believe white
policemen "could lie with the fluency that black men
could" (p. 184). Not surprisingly, the state won its case.
Following the Soweto uprising, ever increasing numbers of blacks
were joining the ranks of exiled ANC members, and the number of
armed insurrections increased concomitantly. Aware of these
efforts, the government felt pressured not merely to isolate
dissidents, but to destroy the ANC and PAC organizations,
preventing future armed resistance. Lobban focuses on the trial
of the Pretoria twelve accused of conspiring to recruit, train,
and arm people for the ANC. The state sought to expose and
eliminate the Johannesburg structure, and to further link these
structures with the Soweto students. Moreover, the government
asserted that the ANC was merely a "front organization"
for the South African Communist Party that sought to replace
apartheid with a Marxist government structure. The state
successfully prosecuted a number of individuals on the first
charge, but was unsuccessful in connecting the ANC to the Soweto
students. Lobban also examines the trial of some 18 accused held
in the small town of Bethel, to avoid disruption. The evidence in
the trial was heard in camera, to protect state witnesses. All
but one of the 18 were convicted.
The last major trial that Lobban examines focuses on the Soweto
students charged with sedition. Unlike the previous terrorism
trials, the students were charged not with seeking to overthrow
the government, but with "disturbing the state." Eleven
members of the Soweto Students' Representative Council were
charged with intentionally impairing the majesty of the state,
thus defying governmental authority. The allegations ranged from
minor protests and demonstrations to various acts of sabotage,
intimidation, and even murder. The state initially sought to
prove that the June 16, 1976 Soweto demonstration was in fact
seditious. The defense submitted evidence of the peaceful intent
of the demonstrators. It was only after the police fired teargas
and bullets that the violence erupted. Despite this, the court
ruled that objecting to the policies of the Department of Bantu
Education was an attack on the state. As Lobban notes, "This
interpretation seemed to deny absolutely the right to protest and
assemble, to make any black protest against government policy
potentially seditious" (p. 232). The state then had to prove
the connection between the demonstration and the student
organization. It succeeded in this, though none of the accused
was given more than a four-year sentence. But more importantly
the state was able to use the students as scapegoats for the
Soweto unrest, absolving the government and its policies.
Ultimately, the state succeeded in the majority of its cases
because of several interconnected aspects of the apartheid legal
system. First, the statutes used to convict oppositionists were
intentionally broad and vague. Interpretation was key. Second,
the evidence used at the trial was often equally imprecise. Cases
frequently rested on a government witness whose testimony was
often vague and contradictory, except for the key elements
necessary for conviction. "Confessions" were the
easiest route to conviction, but were often the end product of
torturous interrogation sessions. Because of the vagueness of
both the law and the evidence, the judge became the critical
factor in the decision-making process, even more than in the
United States, because South Africa, during the period examined
by Lobban, had no jury system. The South African bench was
entirely white, and predominately Afrikaans. These judges were
white South Africans sympathetic to the apartheid system. While
they could protest they were merely doing their job interpreting
the law, these judges repeatedly ignored evidence of police
brutality, even murder, during detention, of police intimidation
of witnesses, and of fabrication of evidence. Time and again, the
state's version of events was accepted as fact, and the
allegations of police misconduct considered absurd. As Lobban
notes, "These judges, for all their rhetoric of the
legitimacy of law, had their hands dirtied by the Machiavellian
task of legitimation" (p. 188).
Lobban creates an exceptional documentation of the legal aspects
of these trials. He focuses extensively on the strategies,
evidence, and various rulings that affected the outcomes. Despite
their convictions, many of these "criminals" are now
serving in the administration of the New Republic of South
Africa. They may have lost the legal battles explored by Lobban,
but they won the war for the democratic soul of South Africa. But
succeeding where apartheid failed is no easy task. The new South
African constitution has an impressive array of protections for
those accused of crimes. South Africans are learning that these
protections come at a cost. In a recent interview with a Cape
Town prosecutor, I asked about the use of coerced confessions in
the past and the difficulty of entrenching the concept of
constitutional protections. The prosecutor agreed that training
sessions were in progress, particularly with the police. She
admitted that in the past the job of the prosecutor was much
easier when the police could obtain confessions through less than
civilized means. Now, if the police resort to torture, the
confession is very likely to be ruled inadmissible, making the
conviction extremely difficult. Now, as in the Black
Consciousness era explored by Lobban, much depends on the
individual behavior and biases of the judge. But now, unlike
then, the bench is composed of whites, blacks, and Asians, men
and women, English and Afrikaans, Zulu and Xhosa.