> d * a., J. ^fo rvna ~T/ & vi 6 3 TREATMENT OF INDIANS IN SOUTH AFRICA Recent Developments Government of India Information Services 2111 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W., Washington 8, D. C. Issued under the authority of the Government of India A Ml U.N. FAILS TO ADOPT RESOLUTION O N 8th December, 1946, the General Assembly of the United Nations passed the following resolutions: “THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY, HAVING taken note of the application made by the Government of India regarding the treatment of Indians in the Union of South Africa, and having considered the matter: 1. STATES that, because of that treatment, friendly re- lations between the two Member States have been impaired, and unless a satisfactory settlement is reached, these relations are likely to be further im- paired; 2. IS OF THE OPINION that the treatment of Indians in the Union should be in conformity ivith the Inter- national obligations under the agreements concluded betiveen the two Governments and the relevant pro- visions of the Charter; 3. THEREFORE REQUESTS the two Governments to report at the next session of the General Assembly the measures adopted to this effect This resolution was hailed as a landmark in the history of human rights and a vindication of the principle of equality of men consecrated in the United Nations Charter. It had raised high hopes among the oppressed peoples of South Africa who were looking to the United Nations for the restora- tion of the fundamental freedoms and human rights which had hitherto been denied to them. These hopes, however, remained unfulfilled. The United Nations failed to pass any 1 effective resolution on the subject in 1947 and to suggest any steps for the resolution of the deadlock between India and South Africa. A two-thirds majority could not be obtained for the Indian resolution, the operative part of which is as follows: “REAFFIRMS its resolution dated 8th December, 1946 ; REQUESTS the two Governments to enter into dis- cussions at a Round Table Conference on the basis of that Resolution without any further delay and to invite the Government of Pakistan to take part in such discussions .” REACTIONS TO FAILURE OF THE U.N. The failure of the U.N. to pass an effective resolution was interpreted by the Government of the Union of South Africa as cancellation of the U.N.’s resolution of the 8th December, 1946. It was regarded as the result of their “having gained the sympathy and understanding of a large number of the nations of the world who realised that South Africa had a good case and nothing to be ashamed of.” While rejoicing over what they regarded as implied endorsement of the South African Government’s policy, their spokesmen continued to make pious professions of willingness to bring about a rapproachement with India. Field Marshal Smuts, speaking at the United Party Congress on the 10th December, 1947, said that “the resolution passed by the United Nations last year has been wiped out and it will now be possible for talks to take place which may find a way out of the difficulties we had.” He affirmed that the Government was determined to maintain its position and to see that nothing was done to prejudice the attitude it had taken up. Further he stated: “We are for the leadership of the European race in South Africa, and no one will dispute it and no one will endanger it except ourselves if we do not do our duty.” In his statement to the deputation of the Natal Indian Organisation the Field Marshal said that the Government were considering the question of bringing about a Round Table 2 Conference with India. Nothing, however, was done and it became clear that the Government was too occupied with the forthcoming general elections to think seriously of any such move. The Government of India’s view of the implications of the situation arising from the failure of the General Assembly to adopt an effective resolution was expounded by the Prime Minister, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, in the statement made in the Indian Legislature on 12th December, 1947, in the follow- ing terms: “The majority in favour of this resolution, though substantial, fell short of the requisite tivo-thirds figure by three. According to the rule of the Assembly which requires a two-thirds majority for all resolutions on im- portant subjects, this year’s resolution is not binding. Its moral importance, however, is in no way diminished by the shortfall of three votes in the requisite two-thirds majority. In any case we are advised that last years reso- lution remains operative. ... The outcome of debate on issues such as that of the treatment of Indians in South Africa is to be measured not in terms of arithmetic but the intrinsic merit of the cause and the support of en- lightened world opinion for that cause. Judged by these tests, the stand taken by the Government of India at the last session of the Assembly has been fully vindicated. In supporting the cause of Indians in South Africa, we have worked not only for the rights of people of our own race but for the rights of oppressed people throughout the world. . . . That attitude we are determined to main- tain, in the firm faith that our cause is right and that ultimately right will prevail. “All that I can do notv is to give the House the assurance that we shall not falter either in our resolve to secure justice for Indians in South Africa or in our desire to achieve this object by methods which are con- sistent with the letter and the spirit of the Charter of the United Nations.” 3 COLOUR — THE MAIN ISSUE IN THE SOUTH AFRICAN ELECTIONS Public controversy in South Africa over the deliberations of the United Nations on the South African Indian question left no doubt that the general elections would be fought on the colour question. The keynote of the Nationalist Party’s elec- tion campaign was struck on the 20th January, 1948. Dr. Malan, the leader of the Party, moved a resolution in the Union Parliament for the withdrawal of the representation given to Indians in the Parliament and to natives in the House of Assembly. The motion was lost; but during the debate the attitude of the Nationalist Party towards the U.N.O. and the colour question was made abundantly clear. The following typical quotations from the speeches of the Party’s members, who are now responsible Ministers in the new Cabinet, are revealing : MR. LOUW (now Minister of Economic Development and Mines): “7 am afraid that the Rt. Hon. the Prime Minister ( F . M. Smuts) has a somewhat exaggerated idea of the interest taken in our affairs by people in other countries and he certainly has, if I may say so, an exaggerated idea of world opinion, as represented by U.N.O. Are we to be dictated to by world opinion as to how we should run our own country? And may I ask, why this cringing attitude? Have we not recently annexed two Islands and played the part of a Great Pcnver? Why then this cring- ing attitude towards world opinion? Let us look to our own affairs, and not worry about world opinion .” MR. STRYDOM (now Minister of Lands): “ The Hon. Minister of Mines (Mr. J. 77. Hofmeyr ) rejects with contempt the principles of the white mans domination. He dismisses with scorn the HERRENVOI.K idea. ... Are we ruling South Africa as a result of his stupid leadership idea? No, we are ruling South Africa 4 today because the legislation placed the power in our hands and not in the hands of his friends. . . . But he does not want to rule the country by power. “ Our policy is that the Europeans must stand their ground and must remain BAAS in South Africa. I f we re- ject the herrenvolk idea and the principle that the white man cannot remain baas, if the franchise is to be extended to the non-Europeans , and if the non-Europeans are given representation and the vote and the non-Europeans are developed on the same basis as the Europeans, how can the Europeans remain BAAS with the leadership idea of the Minister of Mines? Our vie w is that in every sphere the European must retain the right to rule the country and to keep it a white mans country. That is our stand- point in the country — our standpoint.” DR. MALAN (now Prime Minister): “Give the non-Europeans numerical strength in such cases, let them be stronger numerically than the European element, give them education on top of it; also give them social security as we know social security here; give them the same social security which you give to the European; give them the right to organise in the field of labour, that is to say, give them trade union organisations which enable them as a working class to enforce their will in several respects by means of strikes; give them political equality such as the Deputy Prime Minister has clearly outlined and such as many members on the other side have also clearly outlined, give them political equality and give them arms, and then there is only one ultimate result and that is that the non-European will govern the country and the European will have to leave it. That happened in India and today you see the result 5 NATIONALIST PARTY’S ELECTION MANIFESTO T HE first important statement in the general election cam- paign was made by Dr. Malan on the 29th March, 1948, on the Nationalist Party’s policy of “apartheid”, which was later reiterated in the Nationalist Party’s election manifesto. The statement purported to be a summary of the report of a Commission appointed by the Nationalist Party to define its colour policy. The report itself has not been published. According to the statement, there were two schools of thought in South Africa in regard to the policy affecting the non-Europeans. On the one hand, there was the policy of equality, the statement went on, “which advocates equal rights within the same political structure for all civilised and edu- cated persons, irrespective of race or colour, and the gradual granting of the franchise to non-Europeans as they become qualified to make use of democratic rights.” The other school of thought advocated the policy of separation (apartheid) “which is based on the Christian principles of justice and reasonableness. ... Its aim is the maintenance and protection of the European population of the country as a pure white race, the maintenance and protection of the indigenous racial groups as separate communities with prospects of developing into self-supporting communities within their own areas, and the stimulation of national pride, self-respect and mutual respect among the various races of the country.” This, it was stated, was the policy of the Nationalist Party. The Party also proposed the abolition of the Cape coloured vote on the common roll and the substitution therefor of three European representatives in the House of Assembly elected by a Coloured Representative Council. In native affairs, the Party intended to abolish native representation in the Assembly and the Provincial Council, and on the economic side to develop the native reserves, establishing a greater variety of economic activities in these areas and taking vigorous steps to stop the drift to the towns. Native labourers in the urban areas 6 would be regarded as“visitors” to be sent back to their reserves when not wanted. Further, the principle of separation was to be carried out in factories, industries and workshops so far as it was practically possible and natives were to be prevented from organising trade unions. The Native Representative Council was to be abolished and in its place councils in urban localities were to be established which were not, however, to be allowed to develop into independent bodies. The Party’s Indian policy was specifically set out thus: “ The Party holds the view that Indians are a foreign and outlandish element which is unassimilable. They can never become part of the country and must therefore be treated as an immigrant community. The Party accepts as a basis of its policy the repatriation of as many Indians as possible and proposes a proper investigation into the practicability of such a policy on a large scale in co- operation with India and other countries .” Dr. Malan’s statement then went on to deal with the revi- sion of the Asiatic Land Tenure and Indian Representation Act on the lines that there would be no Parliamentary representa- tion for Indians; areas would be completely separated so that Europeans would be banned from Indian areas and Indians would be kept apart from indigenous races; compensation would be paid for expropriations to implement this policy; facilities for Indian trading outside Indian areas would be drastically curtailed and in native areas gradually abolished; and inter-provincial movement would be effectively prevented. Further, action would be taken to prevent Indian penetration in the Cape, and action would also be taken against Indians who incited non-European races against the Europeans. Shorn of verbiage, the Nationalist Party’s declaration of policy on colour reduces itself to a bare-faced expression of a desire to dominate, oppress and exploit the non-Europeans, to relegate them to ghettos and reserves — much in the fashion of wild game reserves, to clamp the lid of economic and social inferiority on them for ever and to subject them to perpetual servitude of the “superior race”. 7 And how were these objectives to be achieved? The technique was laid down thus in the Nationalist Party’s manifesto : “The State will exercise complete supervision over the moulding of the youth. The Party will not tolerate in- terference from without, and destructive propaganda to the outside world, in regard to the race problems of South Africa. ... The Party wishes all non-Europeans to be strongly encouraged to make the Christian religion the basis of their lives and will assist the Church in this task in every possible way. Churches and societies which un- dermine the policy of apartheid foreign to the nation ivill be checked.” BROEDERBOND The policy of the Nationalist Party, which is now the party in power in South Africans better understood by a reference to the secret organisation called Broederbond of which the Prime Minister of South Africa himself and several Ministers of his Cabinet are members. This organisation, the members of which were debarred from entry into the civil services by the Government of Field Marshal Smuts, has a Supreme Council who are called “The Twelve Apostles”. Sixty out of the ninety-three candidates of the Nationalist Party in the general election of 1948 were drawn from this secret organisation, which, indeed, provides the inspiration of the present Government of the Party led by Dr. Malan. The following from a secret circular of this organisation quoted in a report of the Cape Times of the 22nd May, 1948 is revealing: “ Let us bear in mind that the main point is for Afri- kanerdom to reach its ultimate goal of dominance in South Africa. Brothers, our solution for South Africa’s troubles is that the Afrikaner Broederbond must rule South Africa.” 8 According to the Cape Times — a journal of repute and standing: “ The Broederbond is actively engaged in laying the nucleus of an Afrikanerised State. It has reached the stage where it can be classed as a shadow government of the legally constituted government of the Union the moment its political auxiliary — the Nationalist Party — wins a general election. “ More than sixty of the Nationalist Party’s ninety- three candidates in the general election are members of the Afrikaner Broederbond. At least six members of the Supreme Council of this secret society — the “ Twelve Apostles” — are among the candidates. “Dr. T. E. Donges is a vice-chairman of the Bond. The Nationalist Party leader, Dr. D. F. Malan, who is contesting Piketburg, is also a Broer, as is Mr. W. C. du Plessis, who is opposing General Smuts at Standerton. “Mr. du Plessis was a senior diplomat in the Union s Department of External Affairs before he was dismissed because he refused to resign from the Broederbond. “General Smuts in a speech at Bloemfontein in December, 1944, publicly denounced the Broederbond as a small secret minority or oligarchy which was working itself into a position of power. “It was then that the Government officially outlawed the Broers in the public service. “If the Broederbond can get into the House of Assem- bly in force, the democratic conception of government will be overshadowed by the very real threat of an Afrikaner republic for Afrikaners only.” The Broederbond in the shape of the Nationalist Party is now in power. It not only dominates the Nationalist Party in the Parliament and in the Cabinet but has, by a recent order, which was one of the first acts of the new Government, been given the right of entry into the public service. 9 The Nationalist Party was carried to victory in the general elections on the wave of hatred against the non- Europeans. It had roused the passions and emotions of the white people by statements like the following: DR. DONGES (now Minister of the Interior): “If South Africa accepted the United Party policy the white South Africans would eventually have to quit as the British had done in India, or else suffer the fate of the South American republics and become a country of mixed breeds ”. — Cape Times, dated 3rd May, 1948. DR. MALAN (Now Prime Minister): “In India, as the result of the policy adopted there, a policy such as that advocated by Smuts and Hofmeyr, the white man was now compelled to leave. In South America, the policy of * letting things develop * had brought about the creation of nothing less than nations of half-castes. Could that be allowed in South Africa? Never. The development of European and non-European, each in his own territory, the policy of apartheid, was the only solution.” — Cape Times, dated 5th May, 1948. WORDS AND DEEDS The change over of the Government in South Africa marked a further triumph of racialism and led to further de- terioration of the condition of the non-European peoples in South Africa. In his first broadcast to the nation, as Prime Minister, given on the 4th June, 1948, Dr. Malan, while stating his adherence to the membership of the U.N., gave the follow- ing exposition of his idea of “apartheid”: “Apartheid” is not the caricature it has so often been represented to be. On the contrary, for the non-Europeans it means a large measure of independence through the growth of their self-reliance and self-respect and at the same time, the creation of greater opportunities for free 10 development in conformity with their own character and capacity .” The decisions, however, announced by members of his Cabinet, soon after the broadcast, were clear pointers as to the real meaning of “apartheid” and the way the Government was going to implement its colour policies. Thus (1) On the 10th June, Dr. Donges, the Minister of the Interior, announced his intention to repeal Chapter II of the Asiatic Land Tenure and Indian Representation Act providing for extremely limited franchise and representation to Indians. A bill to amend the Act has since been introduced in the Union Parliament. (2) The same Minister announced on the 15th June that a commission would probably be appointed to investigate into Indian penetration into Cape Province, no doubt with the object of introducing segregation in that province, which had as yet been comparatively free from racial discrimination. (3) Mr. Schoeman, the Minister of Labour, announced his intention (i) to stop the training of natives as artisans and to discard the previous Government’s Bill for the recogni- tion of native trade unions and (ii) to amend the Unemploy- ment Insurance Act, which gives unemployment benefit to all races, with the intention of eliminating non-Europeans from its scope. The training of the natives initiated by the Smuts Government in the construction of houses required mainly for native housing was in fact discontinued with the result that a most important amenity for the natives will not be provided. Be it noted that there are not enough white workers for this kind of work in the Union. PROPOSAL FOR SEGREGATION IN CAPE PROVINCE The declared intentions of the present Government of the Union of South Africa to introduce restrictions on acquisition and occupation of property by Indians in Cape Province also show to what length racialism can go to suppress a voiceless minority. Cape Province, having about 16,000 Indians, is the only Province in the Union of South Africa where Indians are not subjected to disabilities in regard to occupation and 11 acquisition of land. In 1946, the Nationalist Party, then in opposition, had moved an amendment providing for the exten- sion of the applicability of the Asiatic Land Tenure Act to Cape Province, but this amendment was rejected. In April 1947, again, the Nationalist Party introduced a motion in the Union House of Assembly asking the Government to stop the alleged Indian penetration into predominantly European areas in Cape Province through acquisition of land. Field Marshal Smuts, the then Prime Minister, in replying to the motion, had said that no case had been made out to show that Indian pene- tration had actually taken place to such an extent as to call for any legislative action. The motion was then lost. But judging by the utterances of its spokesmen, the Nationalist Government seems determined to carry out its intention of segregating Indians in the Cape Province. REPATRIATION OF INDIANS The present Government regards Indians, who first went to South Africa about a century ago and who are South African nationals, as an outlandish element that should be repatriated to India or other countries. In order to carry out this proposal individual members of Parliament suggest means which must shock civilised conscience. The following extract from a report published in the Natal Mercury dated the 19th July, 1948 will speak for itself: At a recent meeting at Brits, Mr. J. E. Potgieter, the local Nationalist M.P., and other speakers said that the European and native must be taught to boycott Indians “ until they are bled white.'' If the Indians were reduced to “ abject poverty by this means, they woidd be glad to emigrate to India with the Government's assistance." It is reported in the press that the South African Govern- ment is working on a plan under which the United Nations would be asked to co-operate in a scheme to repatriate all Indians from South Africa. The only fitting reply to this can be the one given by Dr. Y. M. Dadoo, the President of the Transvaal Indian Congress: 12 “We are born and bred here and we are sons of the soil as much as Malans, Afrikaners or the African people. South Africa is our home. No one dare put us out. We South Africans will stay here to play our part in making South Africa a democratic State.” PASSIVE RESISTANCE MOVEMENT VINDICTIVE SENTENCES Subsequent to the United Nations’ failure to take any ef- fective action, the Passive Resistance Council decided in Janu- ary 1948 to launch the “second phase” of the Passive Resistance Movement. This time, the movement took the form of peaceful violation of those provisions of the Immigrants Regulations Act, 1913, which unjustly forbid inter-provincial movement of Indians, by crossing into the Transvaal from Natal. The Indians were arrested and sentenced to imprisonment. The sentences generally varied from three months to one month’s imprisonment with hard labour. Dr. Y. M. Dadoo, the Presi- dent of the Transvaal Indian Congress, and Dr. G. M. Naicker, the President of the Natal Indian Congress, were each sen- tenced to six months hard labour for aiding Asiatic persons to enter the Transvaal in contravention of the Immigration Regu- lations and thus abetting the breach of the law, although punishment for abetment was not imposed previously. In April, a Volkrust Magistrate sentenced a resister to three months hard labour, with spare diet and solitary confinement for two days in each week during the first month. This aroused indignation among progressive people, including Europeans. A number of Europeans, in a letter to the Ministry of Justice protesting against and asking for the repeal of such an oppressive sentence, stated: ‘'We the signatories of this letter are perturbed over the spirit of racial intolerance and racial disharmony prevalent in South Africa today and we fear that if, in meting out justice, discrimination on the grounds of politics or race is allowed to go unchecked a very grave position will develop.” 13 The Natal Indian Congress, in a cable to the Minister of Justice, said: “We understand sentences of this nature are only imposed on hardened and habitual criminals; to place non-violent passive resisters on a par ivith habitual criminals is certainly the crudest form of intimidation. Such cruel and inhuman treatment of non-violent political prisoners will not raise the status of South Africa in the eyes of the world and will most certainly not help in paving the way for a Round Table conference between India, Pakistan and the Union Government which you claim to desire .” Three young Indians who were passive resisters were charged with illegally entering Natal on 9th May, and were each sentenced by a Magistrate to receive whipping of six strokes with a light cane. The sentence, however, was carried out in two cases; in one it was dropped on medical grounds. UNION GOVERNMENT REFUSES TO MEET INDIANS The Natal and the Transvaal Indian Congresses, however, showed exemplary patience and, when the new Government came into power, suspended the Passive Resistance movement in order to create a suitable atmosphere in which the new Government could define its policy towards the Indian ques- tion in a precise manner. They accordingly approached the Prime Minister, Dr. Malan, for an interview but he declined to meet them on the plea of other preoccupations and referred them to the Minister of the Interior. The latter too refused to grant an interview to the representatives of the Natal and Transvaal Indian Congresses on the specious grounds that these organisations had associated themselves with “organised flouting of the laws of the country” and that these organisa- tions are “communistic in their orientation or leadership.” In their letter dated the 2nd August, 1948 to the Prime Minister, the Secretaries of the Natal and Transvaal Indian Congresses deplored this decision of the Minister of the Interior in the following words: 14 “He has raised objections which are to be greatly deplored, for they run counter to all constitutional and democratic practice. We view such an attitude with grave apprehension, more particularly when it is taken against the accredited national representatives of a community who, deprived of the Parliamentary franchise, has no other channel of placing its views before the Govern- ment.'' “ Indians in South Africa have always maintained their unfettered right to seek the goodwill of India and the support of world opinion in their struggle for full democratic rights in this their land of birth and adoption. The solution here lies with the Government of South Africa. So long as the Indian is the victim of unjust racial discrimination, so long as franchise, the basic pillar of fundamental human rights, is denied to him, for so long will this position remain. The Honourable Minister refers to organised flouting of the law. We assume that this reference is to the Passive Resistance movement. There is no question that the Asiatic Act of 1946 is directed against the interests of the Indian community of the Transvaal and Natal and seeks their ultimate economic destruction, social degradation and national humiliation. In such circumstances, Indians have traditionally chosen to defy such an unjust law and accept the penalties imposed. Here, too, the solution lies with the Government WILL THE U.N. ACT? The treatment of Indians in South Africa thus continues to be a serious violation of the purposes and principles of the Charter on which the United Nations is founded. The con- tinuation by the South African Government of the policy of racial discrimination against Asians and other non-whites is clearly the result of an assumption by that Government that the failure of the General Assembly of the United Nations to adopt an effective resolution on this subject last year con- stitutes a tacit approval by the United Nations of that policy. 15 The Government of the Union of South Africa has made no change whatever either in its discriminatory laws or in the practice of racial discrimination against its nationals of Indian origin. The Asiatic Land Tenure and Indian Representation Act, 1946, which introduced a most severe measure of resi- dential and economic segregation against Asians, still remains on the statute book. The present Government in South Africa stands committed to the policy of “apartheid” or racial segre- gation and the domination of all non-white peoples by the Europeans. It has proclaimed its intention of taking away whatever restricted political rights are at present enjoyed by Indians and other Asians, and of extending the policy of residential and commercial segregation to the Cape Province, the only part of the Union of South Africa which has been comparatively free from racial segregation and political discrimination. QUESTIONS THAT DEMAND ANSWERS Will the United Nations continue to acquiesce in the refusal of South Africa to act on the General Assem- bly resolution of the 8th December, 1946? Will the United Nations ignore the systematic and deliberate denial of human rights and fundamental freedoms of South African nationals of Asiatic origin which will inevitably undermine its moral foundations? Can the United Nations allow a Member State so wantonly to violate its Charter obligations with impunity? Is it con- sistent with the principles of the Charter and the obli- gations undertaken by Member States for the United Nations to a passive and non possurnus attitude on this question? These are the questions to which world opinion expects an answer. “ The world is facing imminent peril on account of mounting racial antagonisms. It looks to the United Nations for leadership based on a recognition of the maintenance of standards and values. W e are on trial today. Let us not fail ourselves.” — Vijayalakslimi Pandit. 16 (