TRC Final Report

Volume 6

Section 5

Chapter 5

Subsection 5

FINDINGS

Police officers as ‘legitimate’ targets

48. The PAC makes the assertion that they considered all police officers to be legitimate targets because they were the agents of apartheid and thus criminals. Their involvement with the apartheid government made them a legitimate target of the liberation movement.

49. An anomalous factor is that the vast majority of attacks against police officers took place at times when they were technically off duty. In most of these instances, their houses were attacked and often their families were included in the attack.

50. In this regard, the PAC makes the point that one cannot draw a distinction between the period when police officers are at work and the period when they a re off duty. It asserts further that, even when they were off duty, they were reporting to the state.

51. The main thrust of the PAC’s argument is that police officers were considered by the vast majority of township residents to be agents of the state, and that in the eyes of the liberation movements they were regarded as collaborators and therefore constituted legitimate targets. The question of being on or off duty or in plain clothes or uniform was not at issue.

52. There is no doubt that police officers were perceived by ordinary people to be an extension of the state and thus legitimate targets of the liberation movements. In most of the townships, police were perceived to be the enemy and in many instances played the role of maintaining the apartheid government’s power. This is not true of all police officers, but it is certainly true of the vast majority who became police officers during the apartheid era. One of the most painful experiences for most members of the community was the fact that police officers were an extension of apartheid authority and were responsible for carrying out many brutal acts against members of the community. In a number of instances, they were responsible for the arrest and detention of loved ones. In a vast number of cases, black policemen were responsible for the torture of activists in the townships.

53. In its submission, the PAC makes the point in vivid language:

When is a criminal not a criminal? Is he a criminal only when he commits a crime and stops being such when he retires to his bedroom at night? Would we say that the police must stop pursuing him simply because his now with his family and enjoying a Sunday meal.

54. It goes on to make the point that the apartheid government did not make that distinctio n .

55. The PAC points out that, in terms of their own definitions, ‘all police were the enemies of oppressed people because under that system they were obliged to work even when they were off duty’.

56. However, even if one accepts the argument that police officers were an extension of the apartheid system and thus legitimate targets, this does not remove from the PAC responsibility for attacks on police officers when they were hors de combat or when, unacceptably, innocent family members were killed or injured in these attacks.

57. Furthermore, it is not correct to assume that all police officers collaborated with the former state. In many instances, they joined the force because there was little opportunity for them to do anything else. Are they to be considered anymore complicit in the apartheid system than magistrates or other persons who accepted jobs in the apartheid system?

58. If one accepts the argument that police officers were an extension of the apartheid apparatus, does this make a police station a legitimate target? In one case, applicants sought amnesty for an attack on a police vehicle in Diepkloof during which one policeman was killed and another injured.

59. In another incident, amnesty was sought for an attempted attack on the Yeoville police station. In this particular incident, the applicants were intercepted before they got to the police station. However, one SAP member was injured in the crossfire that ensued.

60. A question that must be considered is: Are all policemen who served in the apartheid force to be considered combatants and thus legitimate targets?

61. If one accepts the PAC’s argument with regard to police officers, then neither the PAC nor ANC can be held responsible for the commission of gross human rights violations for these attacks. However, if one applies a strict interpretation of the Conventions, they would nevertheless be held accountable.