South Africa: Apartheid reparations case begins
On the 24th of January 2006, oral arguments in the matter of Khulumani et. al. v. Barclays et. al. began in the USA. In Khulumani v. Barclays, 87 South Africans (victims of gross human rights abuses during Apartheid) charge 23 foreign corporations with aiding and abetting the Apartheid Regime. This is a very serious charge, as aiding and abetting is equivalent to actual perpetration under international law. The case will be heard in the Court of Appeals, second District of New York.
Press Release: Khulumani v. Barclays Trial Starts on 24th of January 2006
Jubilee South Africa
19th of January 2006
On the 24th of January 2006, oral arguments in the matter of Khulumani et. al. v. Barclays et. al. begin in the USA. In Khulumani v. Barclays, 87 South Africans (victims of gross human rights abuses during Apartheid) charge 23 foreign corporations with aiding and abetting the Apartheid Regime. This is a very serious charge, as aiding and abetting is equivalent to actual perpetration under international law. The case will be heard in the Court of Appeals, second District of New York. For more on the case, see summary at the end of this release.
The TRC Commissioners, South African civil society and South African labour organisations have all filed amicus curaie briefs (friends of the court submissions) on behalf of the plaintiffs. In what has become a grievous turn of events, the South African Government has decided to file a new amicus curaie brief on behalf of the corporations. This may have grave concerns for international law and human rights if the Court decides in favour of the corporations.
When the South African Government previously opposed this case, ex-Minister for Justice Maduna filed an affidavit in 2003, comfort women were denied the justice they had been seeking for 50 years: In 2000, 15 “comfort women” from Korea, China, the Philippines and Taiwan brought a case against the Japanese Government in the US Courts, under the Alien Tort Claims Act (the same act which the Khulumani v. Barclays lawsuit is under). These women were seeking compensation for being bonded into sexual slavery (including rape and torture) at the hands of the Japanese military during World War II as part of the notorious jugun ianfu scheme. In June 2005, the US Court of Appeals for the District of Colombia rejected the claims of these “comfort women”, citing the 2003 affidavit by Minister Maduna.
Jubilee South Africa calls on Minister Mabandla to repeal the new affidavit, and allow human rights law to flourish. Over a hundred activists from Jubilee South Africa and other organisations will be demonstrating outside of the Ministry of Justice in Pretoria, South Africa on the 24th of January (11:30am) in a last-ditch effort to change the Minister's mind.
The Khulumani Support Group (Western Cape Branch) will be holding an all night vigil at Community House, Salt River, Cape Town from 7pm on Tuesday 24th of Jan. to 7am on the Wednesday 25th of January. Over thirty plaintiffs, many of them disabled, will be at this vigil.
About Khulumani v. Barclays
The Khulumani v. Barclays lawsuit is based on common law principles of liability and on the Alien Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. §1350, which grants U.S. courts jurisdiction over certain violations of international law, regardless of where they occur. This statute is increasingly being used to bring to justice those who commit human rights abuses. This complaint seeks to hold those businesses that aided and abetted the apartheid regime responsible for the wrongs they made possible. For example: IBM and ICL provided the computers that enabled South Africa to create the hated pass book system and to control the black South African population. Car manufacturers provided the armoured vehicles that were used to patrol the townships. Arms manufacturers violated the embargoes on sales to South Africa as did the oil companies. The banks provided the funding that enabled South Africa to expand its police and security apparatus.
Recent historical evidence demonstrates that the involvement of companies in the key industries of mining, transportation, armaments, technology, oil, and financing were not only instrumental to the implementation of the furtherance of the abuses, but were so integrally connected to the abuses themselves that apartheid would probably not have occurred in the same way without their participation.
These companies' conduct satisfies the standard, common law principles of liability, including aiding and abetting liability which was first imposed on corporate participants in crimes against humanity by the Nuremburg Tribunal. At Nuremburg, the bankers that financed the Third Reich were held liable for crimes against humanity.
The defendants are: Barclays National Bank, British Petroleum P.L.C., ChevronTexaco Corporation, Cheveron Texaco Global Energy Inc., Citigroup Inc., Commerzbank, Credit Suisee Group, DaimlerChrysler AG, AEG Daimler-Benz Industrie, Deutsche Bank AG, Dresdner Bank AG, ExxonMobil Corporation, Flour Corporation, Ford Motor Company, Fujitsu Ltd., General Motors Corporation, International Business Machines Corporation, J.P. Morgan Chase, Rheinmetall Group AG, Shell Oil Company, Totalfina-Elf, and UBS AG.
For more information, please contact:
Jubilee South Africa
Tristen Taylor
Apartheid Debt and Reparations Coordinator
Jubilee South Africa
Tel: +27 11 403-7622/24
Cell: +27 84 250-2434
[email protected]
www.jubileesa.org.za
Khulumani Western Cape
Zukiswa Khalipha
Khulumani Western Cape
Tel: +27 21 477-6105
Cell: +27 84 836-7075