and that he can be kept handcuffed and in irons, chained to a grille for more than 48 hours. We know that he can be allowed to lie in urine-soaked trousers on urine-soaked mats...and that doctors can miss classic symptoms of brain damage...we know that...there is no word of sorrow or anger by the authorities, not even a suggestion that detainees in the future won't suffer the same treatment.

Unfortunately, Biko was not the last to die at the hands of the

security police, and indeed, as Mr. Osmond noted, subsequent detainees suffered much the same fate as Biko. However, it did not happen immediately. During the two year period of 1976 - 1977, detainees had died in detention at the rate of more than one a month.

However, following the uprecedented world attention focused on the Biko inquest, deaths in detention came to an almost abrupt halt for nearly three years. Then, gradually the familiar pattern began to reemerge. In 1980 there were two deaths in detention. In 1981 two more detainees were found dead.. In 1982, the number had increased to three, among whom was Dr. Neil Aggett, the first white detainee to die. Last year there were two more deaths including 23-year old Paris Malatje who was shot in the head at point blank range less than 24 hours after he was detained.

The South African government has consistently denied that it condones or tolerates torture. It has either offered some justification or has attributed the various deaths to having occurred either naturally, as a result of an accident, or, more commonly, suicide. In only three cases have the security police been charged or implicated in a detainee's death. The first occurred in 1977 when the Minister of Justice agreed to an out of court

settlement in a civil suit brought by the detainee's family for wrongful death. Police headquarters subsequently issued a statement denying state responsibility for the detainee's death. In 1983, two security policemen were acquitted of murder in the Supreme Court of Venda, however, the Venda government settled a civil suit for damages without acknowledging any culpability.

Last month, Jan van As was found guilty of culpaable homicide in the death of Paris Malatji, thus becoming the first security policemen to ever be convicted of a crime in connection with the death of a detainee. An interesting development in the case was that the State sought leave to appeal the court's decision seeking instead, a conviction for murder. The appeal was denied and van As was sentenced to 10 years in prison.

Following Biko's death, the South African government established a Commission of Inquiry to examine the country's security legislation and to recommend changes. Many of the Commission's findings were enacted as part of the Internal Security Act of 1982 which purported to eliminate the more onerous aspects of South Africa's security legislation. Section 29 of the Act deals with the detention of persons held for interrogation. According to the Act, a person can be held until the Commissioner of Police is satisfied that the individual has satisfactorily replied to all questions or that no useful purpose would be served by his further detention.

37-536 0-84--15

Once a month, the Commissioner of Police must furnish the Minister of Justice with reasons why the person should not be released, and the Minister must provide written authority for further detention. After six months, and

at intervals of not less than three months, the reasons for the detention must be placed before a review board. There is no time limitation as to when the review board must hand down its decision. There are no visitation rights for a person in detention except with the consent and subject to the conditions set forth by the Minister or the Commissioner. No person is entitled to any official information relating to the detained individual and finally, no court of law has jurisdiction to pronounce upon the validity of any action taken under the Act or order the release of a detainee.

The government also issued a Code of Conduct Regarding Detentions under the Act, however, the practical effect of the Code together with the Act is tą permit unlimited, solitary confinement, to which the general public is expressely prohibited by law from obtaining any information regarding the identity or the number of persons detained. As such, the potential for abuse is enormous and the possibilities for legalized torture numerous. Since the passage of the Act in June, 1982, four individuals have died in detention, and to the extent that information has been made possible, most of them have been tortured in some fashion. The principal shortcoming of the Act is that like its predecessor, Section 6 of the Terrorism Act, the new law provides for the deprivation of personal liberty without benefit of a judicial proceeding. It is an improvement in form; hardly of substance.

The establishment of a Commission of Inquiry following Biko's death; the enactment of new, but not necessarily better security legislation and the conviction of a security policeman for the death of a detainee, are begrudging responses by the South African government to at least appear to be reacting to the enormous and extraordinary allegations of torture and misconduct on the part of its law enforcement officials.

To some degree the actions of the government are the culmination of a growing concern within white South Africa itself to the devestating recital of insensitivity, callousness and brutality that have come to characterize the methodology of the security police. As South Africa was forced to confront the realties that were suppose to guarantee its exístance, individuals and organizations began to grope for alternatives.

In 1979, an international human rights conference was convened in Cape Town and two legal institutions were established, the Center for Applied Legal Studies and the Legal Resources Center. Both institutions focused on the legal plight of black South Africans. Shortly thereafter, the Black Lawyers' Association and the Democratic Lawyers Association were formed, both designed to address the needs of black lawyers. Another recently formed group of lawyers is the Lawyers for Human Rights.

While all of these organizations are concerned with detention, they do not specifically address the question of torture. However, the Detainees' Parents Support Committee does. The committee was established to safeguard the interest of detainees and their families and to work toward the

eradication of laws which made torture possible.

In April of 1982, a delegation from the Committee met with the Minister of Law and Order and the Minister of Justice and presented them with a

memorandum which set fourth in graphic detail, the widespread and systematic use of assault and torture by the security police during the interrogation of The Committee's memorandum included 70 statements from former

detainees.
detainees alleging:

28 cases of enforced standing for long periods, and
enforced physical exercise and exertion;

25 cases of being kept naked during interrogation;
25 cases of suffocation by hooding;

22 cases of electric-shock torture;

20 cases of sleep deprivation;

14 cases of attacks on the genitals;

The Detainee Parents Support Committee was not the only organization to study the issue of detention and torture. At virtually the same time that the Committee presented the government with its memorandum, the MedicalAssociation of South Africa released the report of its ad hoc committee which had conducted an inquiry into the medical care of prisoners and detainees. The report cited serious maltreatment of detainees and noted that despite the government's Code of Conduct there are "insufficient safeguards in the existing legislation to ensure that maltreatment of detainees does not occur without those responsible having to account for their actions before a court of law." The report recommended that no detainee be held for longer than seven days in isolation and that detainees should not be tortured during interrogation. Other recommendations included that district surgeons be given unlimited free access by law to all detainees without prior police

authorization, and that the obstruction of a district surgeon in the

performance of his duty would constitute a criminal offense.