ARCHBISHOP DESMOND TUTU – THE RELIGIOUS LEADER THAT MOST OF THE PRIVILEGED WHO WANTED TO WRING HIS NECK IN THE 1980s FOR CAMPAIGNING FOR SANCTIONS AGAINST APARTHEID SOUTH AFRICA

 

 

 

One of the anti-apartheid leaders who stood up for values, principles and morality while dedicating his life to the attainment of justice, human dignity, peace, human rights and freedom, is the retired leader of the Anglican Church, Archbishop Desmond Tutu.
He will turn 89 on October 7 (2020).
While he called for a total onslaught against the apartheid regime, he had also come out strongly against the new post-apartheid regime, led by the ANC. He had spoken out against corruption, theft of state resources, lack of values and morality among some members and leaders of the ANC. He especially condemned the ANC Government for refusing to grant the exiled leader of Tibet, the Dalai Lama, a visa to visit South Africa in October 2011. Tutu extended an invitation to the Dalai Lama to attend his 80^th birthday celebration in Cape Town. He warned that the ANC Government must “watch out” because the people would mobilise against it as they had mobilised against the apartheid government.
Tutu, who was born in 1931, had travelled the length and breadth of South Africa and the world during his involvement for peace, justice and human rights since the 1960s.
In 1978 he was appointed secretary general of the South African Council of Churches (SACC) – a position he used effectively to intensify the struggles against apartheid.
He also held talks with the former UN Secretary General, Kurt Waldheim; addressed the United Nations Committee Against Apartheid; held talks with several governments; and addressed religious organisations in his call for sanctions against apartheid South Africa.
For his efforts to bring about peaceful change in South Africa, he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1984.
Between the 1980s and 1990s he held several talks with the ANC and the National Party Government to promote peaceful change. He vacated his position at the SACC after he was appointed the Anglican Bishop of Johannesburg early in 1985.
In the early 1990s, prior to the advent of the new democratic SA in April 1994, Tutu also promoted talks between the ANC and the leader of the Inkatha Freedom Party, Mangosuthu Buthelezi, to bring about a cessation of the violence between ANC and IFP supporters.
In 2010 when South Africa hosted the FIFA World Cup, Tutu was one of the leaders who came out with Nelson Mandela to welcome visitors to the country and to support the promotion of greater interaction between the different countries.
But a year later, when he was celebrating his 80^th birthday, he became increasingly disillusioned with the ANC Government after the Dalai Lama was refused a visa to attend his birthday celebrations. When celebrating his 89^th birthday, Tutu is now even more disappointed with the fresh disclosures of widespread corruption and theft of state resources by ANC leaders, officials, and members.

On his 89^th birthday, I want to publish an article the Press Trust of SA News Agency had written and circulated around the world about the developments when he was about to be enthroned as the first black Anglican Archbishop leader of South Africa in 1986.
The article, titled: “South Africa: Murder in the Cathedral”, was published on August 27 1986.

 

   
     SOUTH AFRICA: MURDER IN THE CATHEDRAL

 

The enthronement of Nobel Peace Prize Laureate, Bishop Desmond Tutu, as South Africa’s first black archbishop of the Anglican Church promises to be a dramatic affair.
Most whites would prefer him to be behind bars because of his call for sanctions against the “fatherland”.
Meanwhile, with anti-Tutu hysteria rapidly climaxing the issue of his martyrdom has become dangerously real.

 
“TU TERRIBLE, TU SPECTACULAR, TU TU MUCH”

 

The run-in to the investiture of Archbishop Desmond Tutu on September 7 (1985) in St George’s Cathedral, Cape Town, has been marked by incredible virulence. He has been labelled “fat-cat, vain, impudent and transparent” and lampooned “Tu terrible, Tu spectacular, Tu Tu much”. The pro-government Citizen newspaper of Johannesburg, which runs an almost daily campaign against the archbishop-elect, said:
“There is no greater thorn in South Africa’s flesh than this man of cloth who strides through the world like a religious pop star”, and denounced the enthronement as a quest for “ecclesiastical super-stardom”.
More decisively, the right-wing Afrikaner political parties have called for his arrest, prosecution and the confiscation of his passport.
In Government circles there have been murmurs of treason.
It is an unusual situation for white South Africans to be frustrated by a black Christian whose neck they would dearly love to wring.
The up-market Business Day newspaper in Johannesburg neatly summed up the problem. Bishop Tutu, it said, “was taunting a blundering Government, calling for sanctions, pronouncing his hatred for capitalism and making of his investiture an international showbiz event”.
But the newspaper warned that if the Government took the bait and tried to play the Bishop at his own game, it would lose.
“The Bishop is a master of theatrical politics who has raised the consciousness of half of mankind about apartheid…. He has no need to fear Government. He has won the affection of his people, the honour of his church, the Nobel Peace Prize, and the acclaim of mankind; the only achievement that eludes him as a man of the cloth is martyrdom.
“To be tried for treason and (if the past trials are any guide) to be acquitted would create an international circus sufficiently sensational to satisfy the lust of cameras for a year or two.”

 
“ANY ACTION AGAINST THE BISHOP WILL LEAD TO BAD INTERNATIONAL PRESS”

 

The only point on which the newspaper may be wrong is that the Bishop will necessarily be acquitted. The law is specific and provides for lengthy incarceration for South Africans who call for sanctions against their country. There is little doubt that the Bishop’s action verges delicately on the treasonable.
From the view point of most whites the real issue is relatively simple. Will the satisfaction of jailing the Bishop outweigh the disadvantage of a bad international press? It is a judgement on which Bishop Tutu’s head depends.
 

 

“CONSIDERABLE LOT IN NATIONAL PARTY GOVERNMENT FAVOUR ACTION AGAINST BISHOP TUTU”

 

The Citizen newspaper offers some insight into the possible plans that are being made for the Bishop. It says action will not be taken against the Bishop before his installation because it would precipitate an international diplomatic incident given the high-powered guest list.
“The spectacular guest list …. is a ploy to ensure maximum publicity and martyrdom should any steps be taken against him.”
But it adds “because of the hostile public opinion generated during Bishop Tutu’s latest trip abroad and the mounting pressure for action in political circles, there is now a considerable body of senior opinion in the Government that favours some form of action at an appropriate time”.
This sounds ominous considering that warnings have also been issued recently by both the Minister of Manpower, Mr Pietie Du Plessis, and the Deputy Minister of Trade and Industries, Mr Kent Durr.
To boot, State President Mr P W Botha suggested in a jibe at his party’s Federal Congress that the country could soon see the back of the Bishop.

IN SOUTH AFRICA RACE COLOURS MOST PERSPECTIVES

 

It is difficult to say whether the Bishop would have been reviled so bitterly had he been white. In South Africa, however, there is little reason to doubt that race colours most perspectives.
In the Bishop’s case racism has been conveniently submerged in the great debate on sanctions and the national interest.
Most whites, if they are to be believed, are outraged by the Bishop because he has called for sanctions. The stock argument is that this will put Black people out of work, erode their living standards and increase their misery – “effects that the Bishop is unlikely to suffer because of his clerical wealth”.
As the Citizen put it: “Far be it for us to suggest there should be any actions against the Bishop. But at least we can question why a man who lives so well and travels so far is so unconcerned about the lot of so many blacks who are going to suffer because of sanctions.”
Seldom is there ever mention that sanctions will affect whites when these arguments are trotted out.
It is a remarkable testimony to white altruism which probably explains why social security for blacks in South Africa is virtually non-existent.
The fact that some four-million blacks in the country – 25 percent of the working population – are unemployed; that nearly two-million people in the bantustans without incomes, let alone jobs, never enters the reckoning.
Moreover, in attacking the Bishop, most whites gloss over the fact that he is not the only black person who supports economic pressure on white South Africa.
The largest labour federation in the country, the Congress of South African Trade Unions (COSATU), favours economic measures as does the black business lobby, the National African Federated Chambers of Commerce.
The United Democratic Front (UDF) people’s organisation, commanding the support of millions of black South Africans, shares similar sentiments as do all of the extra-parliamentary black groups.
In short, the conundrum is that whites are against sanctions for the sake of blacks who favour economic measures that will pressurise the government into vital political concessions. Those blacks who are the exception to what is very much a rule are linked to the bantustans, which are essentially and increasingly dependent on South Africa for survival. They understandably reserve a special ire for the Bishop.

 

DR FAROUQ MEER – “BISHOP TUTU COMMANDS INTERNATIONAL AUDIENCE”

                          

                                  Dr Farouq Meer

 

Dr Farouq Meer, an official of the UDF and the Natal Indian Congress (NIC), believes that part of the hostility derives quite naturally from the Bishop’s status.
“He is an international figure, with an aura enhanced by the award of the Nobel Peace Prize. As such what he says commands an international audience.
“The fact that his views coincide with the opinion of the black majority in the country must hurt most whites. By articulating what black people really think he is breaking a conspiracy of silence imposed on the majority through their lack of political power and through white control of the media.
“Most whites are quite happy to ignore black feelings as long as it does not reach the outside world.  Bishop Tutu has broken the rules of the game and most whites are sore.”
Dr Meer adds that “deep down most whites realise that the real issue is not sanctions but apartheid”.
“They are using the sanctions threat to rally around a common fear. That fear has been raised by a black man, raised in their own backyard. They have allowed him to grow powerful and now he is a danger. It sticks in the craw of most in the white minority.”

                                    Zwelike Sisulu
 

ZWELIKE SISULU – “BISHOP TUTU AFFRONTS THE PSYCHE OF MOST WHITES BY CALLING FOR SANCTIONS”

 

Zwelike Sisulu, Editor of the New Nation black newspaper, propounds another dimension.
“South Africa,” he says, “prides itself on being a Christian nation”.
“The reality of that Christian commitment is now being questioned by a black man. He is challenging their comfortable Christianity, challenging them to come to grips with the real horror of the apartheid system on which they thrive. This is obviously disconcerting and enraging.”
Sisulu says there is also another aspect in which Tutu deeply affronts the psyche of most white people.
“Most whites are still basically paternalistic. They believe that they have allowed Bishop Tutu to ascend in the church. Therefore, he ought to act with reticence and circumspection, indeed respect they finally believe all blacks must show towards whites.”

 
DURBAN DAILY NEWS – “MANY SOUTH AFRICANS HAVE INTIMATIONS OF PARANOIA”

The white conservative Daily News afternoon newspaper in the city of Durban suggests yet another reason for the backlash against Tutu.In an editorial this week, it says: “With sanctions barriers going up all around us, it is quite natural for many South Africans to have intimations of paranoia. This may manifest itself in a desire to lash back at those who promote the campaign.”Whatever the psychological motivations there is little doubt that Bishop Tutu has incensed most whites as few churchmen have done in this country.The fact that he has invited international dignitaries to his enthronement has only fuelled white jealousies, inflaming the wrath of a besieged and isolated tribe.They are calling the enthronement in St George’s Cathedral “a showbiz event”. It gives most whites the opportunity for sincerely wishing the Bishop breaks a leg. Ends – Press Trust of SA News Agency August 27 1986    

 

MOLLY BLACKBURN – AN ANTI-APARTHEID ACTIVIST WHO STOOD UP FOR THE CIVIL AND HUMAN RIGHTS OF ALL SOUTH AFRICANS

 

                               

 

On January 1 1986, more than 30 000 South Africans, mainly black Africans, turned up for the funeral of an anti-apartheid activist in Port Elizabeth who they identified as one of their own. They were paying their last respects and tributes to Molly Blackburn, who died tragically in a road accident near Port Elizabeth a few days earlier on December 28 1985. She and some of her fellow activists were on their way to take up the cause of those fellow South Africans who were being harassed, intimidated and targeted by the apartheid security forces.
Born into a progressive family in Port Elizabeth in 1930, Molly Blackburn became an active opponent of the apartheid system after she returned to South Africa in 1954 following several years in the United Kingdom and Belgium.
She joined the Black Sash movement, which was made up mainly of progressive white women who tackled human rights issues all over the country. She also became a member of the Progressive Party. Because of her activism against the oppressive actions and policies of the apartheid regime, she was considered to be “trouble maker” along with other members of the Black Sash. Black South Africans easily identified her as one of their own and when she died tragically in the road accident in December 1985, they came in their thousands to say farewell to a “true comrade”.
At this time, the Press Trust of SA News Agency wrote an article about the amazing turn out of black South Africans at her funeral and her life in trying to help people overcome the inequities of the apartheid system.
This was the article that was published and circulated to news outlets around the world in January 1986.

 

SOUTH AFRICA: MOURNING TOGETHER AT THE TRAGIC DEATH OF MOLLY BLACKBURN

 

White South Africans have had it pounded into their heads by the ruling National Party that the biggest threat to their security is black majority rule.
Assurances by black leaders that they are seeking a non-racial democracy have made little difference. The government continues to prey on the imaginary fears of the white minority, claiming that all blacks want in the final resort, is total power.
However, when 30 000 black mourners flocked to the funeral earlier this month of white civil rights activist, Mrs Molly Blackburn, they clearly demonstrated that race is not the issue.
The funeral of the 55-year-old white anti-apartheid leader, Mrs Molly Blackburn, in the city of Port Elizabeth on January 2 1986 embarrassed the all-white South African Government.
Not only did the more than 30 000 black mourners, who descended on the St Johns Church in the city centre add a dimension of township protest to the proceedings, they also made it clear that “Miss Molly” – as she was affectionately known – had a special place in their hearts.
For many of the black mourners it was no easy matter to attend the funeral. They travelled long distances – on foot, by taxi, in buses – from far flung townships to be at the service.
For the regime it was an uncomfortable and dangerous demonstration of mutual trust that threatened its black power myth. To avoid a repeat peformance it banned a memorial service for Mrs Blackburn two days later.
It was a gross, insensitive and provocative gesture that did nothing to reduce Mrs Blacburn’s reputation among blacks. She had already proved that it only took a sense of justice to break out of racist white society.
Outside observers might find it difficult to understand how blacks can be profoundly sceptical of white society and yet offer a white politician their utmost respect.

 

MRS BLACKBURN POSSESSED A COMMON TOUCH

 

In a tribute, Mrs Ann Colvin, a colleague of Mrs Blackburn in the Black Sash civil rights group, offers an insight that helps understand the situation:
“Molly Blackburn possessed a common touch very rarely found among South Africa’s ruling white classes.”
In short it is a sense of justice and not race that divides South Africans – despite what the National Party says and privileged whites like to believe.
More importantly “Miss Molly’s” notions of justice were not academic.
She fought tenaciously to protect defenceless township dwellers from the brutality of apartheid, especially that meted out by the police and army in the smouldering townships. She stood up.
When she died in a car crash in which a friend, Mr Brian Bishop of the Civil Rights League in Cape Town, also died, they were returning from the small Cape town of Oudtshoorn.
They had been visiting a black township in the ostrich farming district to collect affidavits alleging horrific police brutality following the arrest of 250 youths. It was the kind of assignment they had found themselves undertaking with increasing frequency since the police and army moved into the black townships more than a year ago.
Mrs Blackburn, a mother of seven children, was elected to the Provincial Council for the Walmer seat in 1981. As the situation in the Eastern Cape took on the profile of a low scale civil war she became immersed in the problems of the townships.
Hours after the Langa massacre in March last year (1985) when police opened fire on a funeral procession, killing 20 people, Mrs Blackburn set up a relief station; when four leading members of the United Democratic Front (UDF) in the Cradock community were murdered by alleged police agents she was there to share the sorrow of their families; when police in Uitenhage savagely beat a youth while he was manacled to a table, it was “Miss Molly” who rushed to his aid.
She attended numerous funerals of victims who had died at the hands of the police in the townships and openly and sincerely shared the sorrow of the residents.

 

 
MRS BLACKBURN’S FUNERAL BECAME A RALLY     AGAINST APARTHEID

Inevitably, her funeral, like those she had attended in the townships, became a political event – a rally against apartheid. It may have taken place in a white suburb in Port Elizabeth, but it was very much a township send-off.
Although it was monitored by a large contingent of security police,  the black, green and gold colours of the African National Congress (ANC) were prominent and clenched fists and freedom songs were an integral part of the service.
The black township youth organisation, the Port Elizabeth Youth Congress, formed a guard of honour at the church and acted as pall bearers.
The speakers at the inter-denominational service were black and white and came from both the parliamentary and extra-parliamentary groupings. It was eloquent testimony that despite differences in race, religious affiliation and political persuasion, South Africans could relate to a common sense of decency.
Mrs Blackburn’s funeral is not the first instance in which black South Africans have shown their respect for white people who have given their lives for a more just society.
When white trade unionist, Dr Neil Agett, died in police custody four years ago his funeral in Johannesburg was also attended by thousands of blacks. Across the country, close on a million black workers who could not be at the funeral downed tools to hold individual services in thousands of work places.
Despite the profound demonstration against racism, which is what the funeral came down to, Pretoria is unlikely to stop using the immense resources at its disposal to keep racism alive and blacks out of the political processes.
Thus far, however, it has clearly not succeeded in turning blacks into racists. Ends – Press Trust of SA News Agency January 14 1986  
 

 

BEYERS NAUDE - AFRIKANER RELIGIOUS AND CIVIL RIGHTS LEADER WHO TURNED HIS BACK ON THE RACIAL POLICIES OF HIS FELLOW BROEDERBONDERS

 

BY SUBRY GOVENDER

INTRODUCTION:

During the funeral of black consciousness leader, Steven Bantu Biko, at King Williamstown in the Eastern Cape region of South Africa on September 25 1977, one prominent progressive leader caught the attention of many among the 20 000 mourners. 
He was Dr Beyers Naude, a former minister of the Dutch Reformed Church (DRC), who ditched the conservative background of the DRC in the early 1960s to join the anti-apartheid struggles. He rose to become secretary general of the South African Council of Churches (SACC) in 1985. 
Veteran journalist, Subry Govender, recalls that for his bravery, Dr Naude was banned, house-arrested, harassed and intimidated by the security police, and denied several opportunities to travel overseas prior to 1994.

 

                "A TRUE PATRIOT AND SON OF AFRICA"

 

On September 25 1977 at the funeral of black consciousness leader, Steven Bantu Biko, a prominent Afrikaner, who turned his back on his people’s bigotry and racial prejudices, joined the more than 20 000 mourners in giving the power salute and shouting: “Amandhla Awethu – Power to the People”.
A black colleague watching this historic event whispered to this correspondent:
“He is a true patriot and son of Africa.”

But 24 days later the black journalist, Mono Badela, who was serving a banning order at that time, and the people as a whole heard with shock and disbelief that the “true patriot”, Dr Beyers Naude, had been served with a five-year banning and house arrest order.
At the time of his banning, Dr Naude was Director of the Christian Institute – a peace organisation he had joined after resigning as a member of the Afrikaner secret body, the Broederbond, and as a dominee of the Afrikaner church, the Nederuitse Gereformede Kerk (NGK).
Dr Naude was silenced when the Pretoria regime in one major crackdown on October 19 1977 banned the Christian Institute, 17 other anti-apartheid  organisations and their leaders.
In 1985 when his banning order was lifted, he accepted his nomination as the next general secretary of the South African Council of Churches (SACC).  He succeeded Bishop Desmond Tutu who vacated the hot seat to take up the position of Anglican Bishop of Johannesburg.
His acceptance of the SACC post marked a milestone in his political and Christian involvement in the country – an involvement which saw him fall-out with Afrikaners in the corridors of power to being one of the most respected persons among the progressive forces in the country and anti-apartheid supporters in Europe.

BECAME ACTIVE AT THE UNIVERSITY OF STELLENBOSCH

Born in May 1915 in Roodeport, near Johannesburg, as Christiaan Frederick Beyers Naude to parents who were involved in the DRC, he started his schooling at the age of seven in the country town of Graaf-Reinet in the Cape Province.
After finishing his schooling, he went to the former Afrikaner University of Stellenbosch where he graduated with a Bachelor of Arts degree with majors in Afrikaans, Dutch and German.
In 1936 he completed a masters degree. While at university it was clear to all that he was destined for greater things.
He was head of the university’s SRC – a position at that time generally meant that one would eventually enter the white parliament.
However, no one realised his destiny would be with the forces opposed to the racial establishment.
After he completed his masters, he studied at a theological school at the ultra-conservative Nederduitse Gereformede Kerk (NGK) in Stellenbosch and obtained a diploma in theology.

        RELIGION AND POLITICS - A NATURAL CALLING

Religion and politics were a natural calling for the boy whose father was a dominee in the all-white NGK church, a pioneer of the Afrikaans language and a founder member of the secretive Afrikaner Broederbond.
Before he began to critically analyse what apartheid was doing to the black people, he served a number of congregations of the NGK around the country.
He was chaplin of the arch-conservative University of Pretoria, served on the executive of the synod of the Transvaal branch of the church and was moderator of the Southern Transvaal synod.
In 1940 he joined the Broederbond, an organisation which was sympathetic to Adolf Hitler’s Nazi Party.
The change in Naude’s life began after the Second World War when he began to question the biblical justifications for the policy of apartheid. In 1954 he began a study on the NGK church’s support of apartheid. In 1957, he claimed that he found that he, nor the “holy scriptures” could defend apartheid.
But a catalyst was needed for the young man to eject himself from the racial oligarchy.
Visits to black churches in the townships that surrounded the white cities were shattering experiences for him. They showed him at first-hand what apartheid was doing to more than 80 percent of the country’s population.

                            1960 SHARPEVILLE MASSACRE

The March 1960 Sharpeville massacre – in which more than 57 people were killed and hundreds others wounded by unprovoked police action – was a turning point in his personal history.
“I was no longer willing to be party to the injustices of apartheid,” he reflected when interacting with this correspondent in the 1980s.
In the same year in 1960 he and 80 other South African clergymen attended a gathering of churches to discuss the racial conflict in South Africa at Cottesloe in Canada.
The conference declared, among other things, that racially mixed marriages, that were still illegal at that time, could not be defended on biblical grounds and that everybody, irrespective of race, had the right to buy land where they wished.
The conference then drew up a document condemning the whole apartheid system. However, even though a number of ultra-conservative NGK delegates at the conference approved the document, their synod rejected it. Eventually Beyers Naude remained the only NGK delegate to endorse it.
In 1962 he started the ecumenical newspaper, Pro Veritate, to promote inter-racial dialogue in the country, particularly between the Afrikaner and the black people.
And when in 1963 he was offered the position of Director of the Christian Institute, he broke all links with Afrikanerdom by resigning as a dominee of the NGK church in the former Transvaal. He also resigned from the Broederbond “as a matter of conscience”.
The Institute tried to convince whites of the injustices of apartheid. This action invoked the wrath of the NGK church leaders who removed him from his position as minister.
The long, hard road of internal exile was to begin for him.

                               CHRISTIAN INSTITUTE

In the late 1960s the Christian Institute began to take a keener interest in the democratic political alternatives that faced the country.
Dr Naude’s Christian Institute sponsored an investigation into alternative ways of governing the country. Called the Sprocas Investigation, it was found that South Africa could in no way be classified as a democratic country and that the only way it could be democratic was when the government abolished all racial discrimination, released all political prisoners, allowed all exiles to return and to hold a national convention.
By then Beyers Naude and the Christian Institute, which had become more vocal in its opposition to apartheid, had become a festering sore for the apartheid regime.
In 1972 the apartheid regime appointed the Schlebusch Commission to “investigate” a number of organisations, including the Christian Institute.
During the sessions Dr Naude was called to give evidence, but he refused as he believed the Commission was too secretive and that it should have been a judicial body rather than a government one.
He was charged under the Commissions Act for refusing to testify and found guilty. He was given the option of paying a R50 fine or going to prison. Dr Naude refused to pay the fine and presented himself for imprisonment. However, an anonymous person paid his fine.
In 1975 the regime declared the Christian Institute an “affected organisation” which meant it could no longer receive any financial support from overseas. But the organisation, despite this setback, doggedly carried on with its work.

CHRISTIAN INSTITUTE AND DR NAUDE BANNED IN OCTOBER 1978

In October 1977 the government outlawed the Christian Institute and 17 other progressive organisations. At the same time Dr Naude was banned for five years. His passport was seized and he was prevented from travelling abroad.
During his years of banning he had been refused permission to travel to Stockholm to collect a R4 450 prize for his promotion of racial peace; refused permission to attend the funeral of a close friend; his car had been wrecked by a mysterious explosion; and in September 1982 refused permission to travel to West Germany to attend a book fair.
After his banning order was lifted on 26 September 1984, he joined the South African Council of Churches (SACC) as its general secretary. He succeeded Archbishop Desmond Tutu in this position and served in the Council from February 1985 until July 1988.
As chief of the SACC he played a vital role in helping progressive community-based and other organisations around the country.
After 1994, when the new South Africa was born following the election of Nelson Mandela as the new president, Dr Naude, in addition to receiving recognition for his promotion of justice and peace, was welcomed back into the Dutch Reformed Church. He was lauded as a prophet during a general synod of the DRC in 1994.
He was also awarded recognition by a number of universities in Europe and by the University of Natal in 1991 and the University of Durban-Westville in 1993.
One of the best-known landmarks in his honour is the Dr Beyers Naude motor way in Johannesburg.

When Dr Naude passed on in September 2004 at the age of 89, he was really “a true patriot and gallant son of Africa”. Ends – subrygovender@gmail.com  August 28 2020

BILLY NAIR – THE LIFE OF ONE OF THE DOYENS OF THE LIBERATION STRUGGLES RECALLED IN AN ARTICLE BY THE PRESS TRUST OF SA NEWS AGENCY WHEN HE WAS RELEASED FROM ROBBEN ISLAND AFTER 20 YEARS IN 1984

 

(BILLY NAIR BEING WELCOMED BACK HOME BY THE FOOD AND CANNING WORKERS UNION AT A FUNCTION NEAR THE KING EDWARD V111 HOSPITAL AFTER BEING RELEASED ON FEBRUARY 27 1984)

 

On 23 October next month it will be 12 years since one of our most militant freedom fighters, Billy Nair, passed away at the age of 79. He served 20 years on Robben Island with Nelson Mandela, Walter Sisulu, Govan Mbeki, Ahmed Kathrada and other stalwarts after being convicted of High Treason in 1964. When he was released on February 27 1984, many of our journalist colleagues and activists were there at the Central Prison in the city of Durban in South Africa to witness his release and welcome him home. I wrote the following article for the Press Trust of SA News Agency at that time and distributed it to India and other parts of the world.

 

The article was titled “Billy Nair Released” and dated February 28 1984.

 

                 

    (Journalist colleagues - Omar Badsha, M S Roy, Juggie Naran and Natal Indian Congress secretary, Mr R Ramesar, waiting outside the Durban Central Prison for the release of Billy Nair on February 27 1984) 

 

 

                   BILLY NAIR RELREASED

 

One of the top military leaders of the African National Congress (ANC) in the 1960s has just been released from prison after serving a 20-year sentence.
Mr Billy Nair, (52), who was the leader of the Natal Regional Command of the ANC’s military wing, Umkhonto we Sizwe, was released from the Durban Central Prison in the South African province of Natal on February 27.
He was convicted with 17 others in the Pietermaritzburg Supreme Court on February 27 1964 after being found guilty of high treason. He was alleged to have participated in a number of guerrilla activities between June 1962 and July 1963.
The 18 accused at the marathon sabotage trial, which lasted 51 days, were sentenced to a total of 206 years after being found guilty on a total of 28 counts of politically-motivated acts.
Mr Nair pleaded guilty to 13 counts, but was found guilty on 15 of the counts.
Mr Justice Milne, the judge president of Natal at the time, in dealing with Nair, said that there was no doubt in his mind that Nair was involved in the events. He also claimed that Nair was a party to authorising the sabotage.
During the trial more than 130 witnesses were called and over 3 000 pages of evidence was taken. Two of the witnesses were ex-members of the Natal Regional Command of Umkhonto.

(UDF leader, Archie Gumede, welcoming Billy Nair (right) and Curnik Ndlovu, who was released a few months earlier in 1983)

One of Mr Nair’s co-accused, Mr Curnik Ndlovu, also a member of the Natal Regional Command, was released in October 1983 after serving over 19 years of his 20-year sentence.
Nair and Ndlovu were refused permission to appeal against both sentences and their convictions.
Mr J Gurwitz, senior defence counsel at the trial, claimed that all the men had no motive for personal gain. He said that they became involved because “no other weapon was available to them”.
“Their right to use legal weapons of politics, debate, argument, discussion, meetings and appeals was denied to them when the ANC, a body politic formed to give expression to the aspirations of the African people was banned and declared an illegal organisation.”

(Billy Nair (third from left) with fellow veterans, Sonny Singh, Thumba Pillay and another comrade) 

Mr Nair’s political life began in his twenties when he became involved in the now exiled South African Congress of Trade Unions (SACTU).
Born on November 27 1929, he was forced to forego his high school education in order to take up employment to supplement the income of his former indentured parents.
He attended night classes and attained his matriculation and a diploma in accounting.
Billy Nair began his trade union work in 1951 by organising workers for the Natal Dairy Workers Union. He became the full-time secretary of the union after he lost his job. He also became leader of the Natal Indian Congress Youth League. In 1954 he served on the executive committee of the Natal Indian Congress.
He was one of the 156 leaders who were arrested and charged with high treason in 1956. He was detained for three months in 1960 when the ANC and the Pan Africanist Congress (PAC) were outlawed by the South African Government. He was served with a two-year banning order in 1961.

Mr Nair’s wife, Elsie, who was waiting for her husband when he was released, said that she hoped the Government would not harass her husband.
She said that she sincerely hoped the authorities would not slap a banning order on him, or restrict him any further.
“Twenty years on Robben Island has been long enough and my Billy has paid the highest price for his beliefs.
“The long incarceration has not changed him. I pray that we are left alone to pick up the threads of our marriage.”
Billy and Elsie were married for just three years when Mr Nair was imprisoned.
She and Billy met when he was signing up members for his trade union movement, SACTU, at the clothing company where she worked.
During his imprisonment, Elsie Nair has had to take a number of jobs, often working more than 15 hours a day, in order to keep the flat the couple shared before Billy Nair was jailed.
During his imprisonment, the only contact the couple have had was during a once a year visit on Robben Island and the letters which they wrote to each other.
On his release it was clear to Mr Nair that things have not changed in the country.
In addition to the many friends and family members who greeted him, a large contingent of security police and members of the riot police were also present.
The security police video-taped the joyous proceedings. The riot police marred the happy reunion by warning the people to disperse immediately.
A new dawn broke for Mr Nair when he stepped to freedom armed with B.Com and B.A. degrees from the University of SA (UNISA).
He will complete his law degree next year.
“I hope to use my qualifications earned to get back into trade unions,” said Mr Nair.
But first he has 20 years to catch up. – ends Press Trust of SA News Agency February 28 1984

 

 

BILLY NAIR CONTINUES WITH HIS STRUGGLE WORK

 

Despite sacrificing 20 years of his life on Robben Island for freedom, Billy Nair swung straight back into the struggles when he was released on February 27 1984.
He became involved with the newly-established United Democratic Front (UDF) and addressed rallies at the former University of Durban-Westville, Natal University, and at protest meetings in all the residential areas in and around Durban and other parts of the country. He served on the national executive committee of the UDF and became deputy chairperson of the Natal branch of the UDF.
He once again came under the scrutiny of the security police and was detained when the apartheid regime embarked on a massive oppressive campaign against UDF and NIC leaders.

(Billy Nair being carried shoulder high after walking out of the British Consulate in late 1984. Activists also in the photo include Yunus Mahomed and Terror LekotA)

Sometime at the end of 1984 he joined Mewa Ramgobin, M J Naidoo, Archie Gumede, George Sewpersadh and Paul David when they entered the British Consulate in Durban to highlight the plight of the detainees at the hands of the apartheid regime.
When he walked out of the British Consulate after a month, he was given a heroes welcome by more than 10 000 people. He was carried shoulder high in the former Field Street in Durban.
 

          

 

(Billy Nair (third from top right) with George Sewpersadh, Archie Gumede, Paul David, Mewa Ramgobin and M J Naidoo)

But his freedom did not last long. He went underground when the apartheid regime introduced a state of emergency in 1986.
The ANC in the late 1980s entered into talks with the apartheid regime and most activists were of the view that they would at last enjoy some freedom. But even after the release of Nelson Mandela and the unbanning of the ANC and other organisations in February 1990, the security police of the apartheid regime continued to harass Billy Nair and other leaders.
He was arrested once more on July 29 1990 and charged with nine others in the famous “Vula” trial. But this was dropped when the regime found that its negotiations with the ANC may not lead to compromises.
Billy became active with the South African Communist Party and the ANC once again and served on the national executive committee of the ANC and the SACP.
After the first democratic elections in April 1994, Billy Nair was elected as a member of parliament and served in this capacity for two terms.   

When he passed on, on October 23 2008, this correspondent a three-part radio documentary to pay tribute to Mr Nair for his enormous contributions to the liberation of South Africa.

Here are the three-part radio documentary series: