Special Hearings — Prison Hearings — 1997-07-22

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.  Dumisa?

MR NTSEBEZA: Just a few follow up questions.  To what extent to your knowledge are prison authorities involved either in the promotion of or in the perpetration of so-called prison gangs and to what extent are these still prevalent and how much are they being used in the perpetration of gross violations of human rights?

GOLDEN MILES BHUDU: Comrade Chairperson, as an ex-prisoner myself, I just totally refused to become part and parcel of the gangster structure.  And in fact at the end of the day I was used by gangsters as a mediator and that is when we as progressive inmates decided to form the South African Prisoners' Organisation for Human Rights.
 Of course prison gangsterism comes a very, very long time.  Researchers and specialists will tell you where it comes from.  They will tell you that Ngoloza was the one that came with prison gangsterism and Ngoloza was coming from the homelands.
 He spent some time in the mine and in single hostels and he ended up in prison.  And the idea of prison gangsterism started when prisoners had no structure, no voice to represent them about their complaints and about their plights.  They then decided to form these gangsters.
 That is why you get different kinds of gangsters.  You get a 28, the 26, the Airforce 2 and 3, and the Big 5's.  And different gangsters started to operate for the benefit of their members.
 And according to my experience in the Gauteng province, it is the Big 5's that is very active, because they get assistance from prison authorities because the language in which they communicate it is a language which is understood by Afrikaner prison warders.
 And yes, what I have learnt from other countries is that particularly in the United States, that when you become a prisoner which is an organiser, you are going to get killed and what is happening here, we see a situation where prisoner gangsters are continuously used to fight amongst one another.
 And by doing that, prisoners, they never have an opportunity to sit down, to strategize and organise how they could fight for their rights because now the times has changed.   There is a Bill of Rights, there is a constitution and until such time, prisoners are allowed to form what we called prisoner representative structures.
 Prisoner gangsterism will remain a problem and prison warders who don't want to come to terms with the changes of the time, will keep on using the structures to cause a total destruction and demobilisation of prisoners amongst themselves.

MR NTSEBEZA: Just another question.  A few years ago, I am not so sure now what year it was, a report came of considerable amount of prisoners who died in a fire that was supposed to have been started by themselves in Queenstown.
 There were allegations of course from the prisoners that that fire had been in fact engineered and perpetrated by authorities.  Now I would like to know whether there had been any inquiries and if there were any inquiries, to what extent any action was taken?  And the role of prison authorities in trying to resolve that position?

GOLDEN MILES BHUDU: Comrade Chair, thank you very much for that question.  I can recall very well, it was in 1994 when we as an organisation demanded the right for prisoners to vote for organisations of their choices, because it was the first time in the history of this country that people were going to vote for organisations of their choices.
 What happened in Queenstown of course, was an unfortunate situation.  If I can recall well, the local ANC structure ... (tape ends) ... and the civics intervened and I then happened one day to meet with the Attorney who was given instructions by some people in very high places to start a commission of inquiry.
 And if I can recall very well, that particular Attorney, I cannot recall his name, but I have got it in our files, was a pro-ANC lawyer that was given instructions to do some inquiries and he is in Parliament now.
 But unfortunately when we were following up with him, particularly what really happened there, because we could not get accurate information, we then learnt later on that he was told to distance himself from us.
 And we learnt that he ended up in Parliament and when we wrote a letter for him to send us a copy of the inquest, he sent us one simple letter saying that the authorities of Queenstown could not be found liable of the fire that broke out and the prisoners that died in that process unfortunately and that is where the story ended up.

CHAIRPERSON: Tom?

THOMAS MANTHATA: If I understand you well, Mr Bhudu SAPOHR is an organisation of common law prisoners?

GOLDEN MILES BHUDU: Of course political prisoners as well if they are interested.

THOMAS MANTHATA: And the Act under which we operate is specifically for those who are political prisoners, not even by choice.  So I for one am a little confused, you know by that.

GOLDEN MILES BHUDU: Can I respond Comrade Tom?

THOMAS MANTHATA: Yes.

GOLDEN MILES BHUDU: Of course I am also confused Comrade Tom, that you are confused because this submission was submitted to your  Commission and if it was not appropriate, I don't think from the wiseness of the TRC that they were going to invite me to come and make this input, but nevertheless, what brought me here of course it is not only about the deaths and disappearance and torture of those who died in custody, but it is or it was about the gross human rights violations of the people we are talking about here.
 Whether they were political prisoners or common law prisoners, because we felt that we must make this submission.  It should have been a sad day in the history of this country as far as reconciliation is concerned, that the process came and the process went and still there are relatives out there who don't know what happened with their kids, with their husbands, who were killed and who disappeared merely on suspicion of having committed an offence.
 You know, one is talking of a situation here sir, where the Investigating Officer, the police, the Magistrate, Prosecutor and the Judges were the executor and it was here about the gross violation of human rights, unless I have misunderstood the entire Act that give guidelines to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.

THOMAS MANTHATA: Yes, if I have to answer you.  I want to ensure you that the Truth and Reconciliation Commission is so democratic that it doesn't follow that there could have been unanimity in accepting your submission and even giving SAPOHR a hearing, but nonetheless as it is meant to be broadly democratic, it allowed SAPOHR to make a submission, but still one wants to just put the legal structure in its true perspective, that the Act is this and the submission is this.

CHAIRPERSON: Dumisa, would you like to follow up that?