It is against every concept of the rule of law and the principles of democracy and an act of sheer impudence for the Minister to call upon office bearers and leaders of democratic and lawful organisations to resign from office.
We have been elected in accordance with democratic procedure by the membership of our organisations and we are indeed proud and privileged to hold office in order to carry out the mandate of the people in a proper constitutional manner, very unlike the Government which is subverting the rule of law for the purpose of imposing an open dictatorship on the people.
It is extremely foolhardy for Mr. Swart to imagine that by removing some leaders from official posts in their organisations, he will manage to strangle the activities of these organisations. The Minister, with all the weapons of suppression at his command, cannot and will not suppress the activities of the masses of the people against injustice and oppression.
The warning is clear for the people to see - both white and non-white! Today, the whip of dictatorship is cracked down on the heads of the leaders of the Non-European people, tomorrow it will be the turn of the leaders of the trade union movement, and then all and sundry who do not see eye to eye with the policy of Dr. Malan's Government will find themselves the victims of the law of the jungle.
The first and fundamental task before the South African people, European and Non-European alike, is to stop the government before it is too late, and oust it from office. Firm and resolute action must be taken by the people now. Intra-Parliamentary struggle is played out, it is now for the masses of the people everywhere to act and express in tangible form their opposition to the anti-democratic actions of the government. It is not too late - it can and must be done. From the factories and workshops, from the homes and the farms the voice of the people must be raised. The Nationalist Government has made a farce of the rule of law and laws are no longer made for the maintenance of law and order and the good government of the country. Laws are now framed to impose the will of the fascist clique in power. Civil liberty, freedom of speech and movement and every principle of democracy are being ruthlessly crushed.
It is clearly the duty of every citizen to obey the laws of the State but when certain laws are made in defiance of the rule of law and contrary to the cherished principles of civil liberty, then these laws are bad, unjust and immoral and cannot be tolerated by the people. When all normal constitutional avenues for voicing the opposition of the people against unjust laws are brutally closed by the government, then the people have no alternative but to defy these laws.
It is in this context that the plan for the Defiance of Unjust Laws undertaken by the African National Congress and supported by the South African Indian Congress should be viewed and understood. If the United Party, !he Labour Party and the Torch Commando are in right earnest to save South Africa from fascism then there is only one way, that of building a firm alliance with the national organisations of the Non-European people on the basis of full democratic rights for all, in an all-out struggle to stop the Nationalist fascists. Any hesitation on their part to build this alliance will be a great and unforgivable betrayal of the future of South Africa.
The Non-European people are pledged through the decisions of the conferences of the African National Congress and the South African Indian Congress and the countrywide demonstrations of April 6th to implement the plan for the Defiance of Unjust Laws. The joint meeting of the executives of the African National Congress and the South African Indian Congress, which meets at Port Elizabeth on May 31, is called upon to meet the new situation fairly and squarely.
Stop Swart! Rid South Africa of Fascist Tyranny!
Act and Resist now! Black and white unite to oust the Nats!
Join the struggle for defiance of unjust laws!
To freedom-loving people in South Africa this day is of great significance. Twenty-three years ago, late in December, Johannes Nkosi, one of the most gallant sons of South Africa, lost his life in the thick of the struggle for the freedom of his people.
The huge mass demonstration that was then organised against the vicious pass laws was indeed a tribute to this great people's leader, who, by his courage, showed the down-trodden people of South Africa that liberation can only be achieved through courageous leadership and unity of the masses.
We, who are following in this hero's footsteps, call upon all freedom-loving people in our country to renew their hopes in our great struggle to make South Africa a happy country for all, and to continue in every possible way to help the march towards liberation.
The Conference of Asian and African countries which is scheduled to take place in Indonesia in the middle of April should mark a historical step forward in the fight for world peace and in the struggle to defeat imperialism and win freedom by the peoples of Africa and Asia.
The very fact that a conference of this nature could take place in 1955 is proof in itself of the growing political maturity and strength of those countries which not so long ago lay prostrate under the iron heel of imperialist colonial rule.
The ten million oppressed non-white people and the democratic forces in the Union of South Africa, and indeed the 150 million African people throughout the continent, will be watching with deep and abiding interest the deliberations at the conference.
The herrenvolk police State of Strijdom(4) assumes an important role in the war plans of United States imperialism and its satellites, the Western Powers.
Not only does South Africa supply uranium and other important materials for war purposes, but the oppressive State manoeuvres which impose colour bars, racial discrimination and police terror and which deny fundamental rights to its non-white citizens serve as a pattern for the rest of Africa in the dastardly war aims of United States imperialism to turn the African continent into an arsenal and a war base in its efforts to destroy the independence and freedom and arrest the progress of the democratic sector of the world, The master plan for Africa is the complete exploitation of the rich mineral and other resources and the ruthless suppression of the liberation movements and the total enslavement of the people.
It is for those historical reasons that the Afro-Asian conference evokes world-wide interest, We hope that it will take firm and decisive steps for the furtherance of mutual aid and cooperation in the noble task of defeating the war aims of the imperialists and in eliminating the fascist policies of the South African Government, also in wiping out colonial rule and oppression from the face of the earth. A free Africa and a free Asia are the handmaidens of world peace, progress and human happiness.
Address to meeting of Pakistan Institute of International Affairs, March 2, 1961
South Africa has a population of 15 million, of which 12 million are non-whites and 3 million are whites. The white people of South Africa are a settled community unlike those in the rest of Africa, with the exception of Algeria and to some extent Congo. While at the present moment many territories in Africa are becoming free, 9 million Algerian people are shedding their blood in the struggle for freedom against 15 million settled French population, and we in South Africa have to battle against three million white people. There is no reason why it should be so. Insofar as white people are concerned our policy is quite clear. We do not say that we want to push the white man into the sea or throw him out of the country. Our demand is that democratic rights should be enjoyed by all people. There should be equality between man and man. There should be no discrimination on grounds of race or colour. White and non-white can live peacefully and build a bright future for all the people of South Africa. Its natural resources are developing and we can all live together in prosperity. But the three million whites who have amassed all the power and wealth in their hands do not want to give them up. They do not want to give up their privileges. They want to maintain white supremacy in South Africa. That kind of policy cannot continue. There is bitter opposition to it and in the end a bitter struggle might ensue. They cannot for ever maintain their supremacy with the force of arms; their police and their military cannot subdue 12 million people.
Apartheid received its greatest condemnation on 21 March last year. That is the date of the Sharpeville massacre in which African men, women and children protesting against what is known as the pass law system were killed. They were demonstrating in a peaceful way. The police opened fire on them, 67 is the official number of persons killed in one place and there were killings in other places as well. This massacre shook the conscience of the world. The matter was raised in the Security Council. The apartheid policy and the massacre were condemned and the Secretary-General was instructed by the Security Council to communicate with the South African Government in order to see if changes could not be brought about in this whole system of apartheid and racial discrimination in the Union of South Africa. A year has passed but there has been so far no change on the part of the South African Government.
The question arises why do they persist in this policy, knowing fully well that they will have to abandon it sooner or later. They say that they want to make South Africa safe for the white people for a thousand years. The present rulers of South Africa have been very closely following Nazi Germany's policy. They were great supporters of Hitler during the war and they opposed the war effort of the South African Government. They are fascist-minded and want to hold on to their privileges, depending upon the power of the State, its police, military and Air Force to keep that power as long as it is possible for them to do so.
The word apartheid, when literally translated into English, means separateness. Different racial groups are to live separately, so that there should be no question of their coming together. That is the simple meaning of the word apartheid. But in the context of South African politics, it is something more than that. The system of apartheid was introduced in the year 1948 by the National Party, which is still the ruling party in South Africa. At that time Dr. Malan was the leader of the Party. Today Dr. Verwoerd is its leader. It is mainly a party of Afrikaans-speaking people, that is, people of Dutch origin. Out of three million whites, 60 per cent are people of Dutch origin. The remaining 40 per cent are English-speaking people. These are mainly of British origin but there are also amongst them people from other parts of the continent of Europe.
In the 1948 election, the first one after the war, the Nationalists came out with the policy of apartheid against the traditional policy of segregation which successive white Governments had followed. Under the policy of segregation, political rights were denied to the non-white people. There was segregation in every sphere, so that whites and non-whites could not come together. That policy has been followed since the time the white people came to South Africa in 1652. They had landed at the Cape of Good Hope, which is now Cape Town. They were looking for the spices of the East but by accident their ship got wrecked and they landed at the Cape. Since then Africans have had to face misery. As the white people moved up, they had to fight bitter wars against the settled African population. So far as courage and strategy were concerned, the African people were better than the white men but the latter possessed superior arms. Therefore, gradually the whole of the area of the Union of South Africa was swallowed up by the whites. The Africans were robbed of their land. There is a saying amongst Africans that when the white man first came to South Africa he had the Bible and we had the land; now we have the Bible and the white man has the land.
When at the turn of the century there was a war between the English people and the Boers, the Boers were defeated but eventually self-government was given and in 1910 the Union was formed. The Act of Union prescribed that there should be no rights for the non-white people. That was a betrayal on the part of the British Government who in spite of the representations made by the organisations of the non-white people, sacrificed all their rights and gave a constitution in which the non-white people did not get any franchise or any say in the affairs of the State.
Then came the Land Act of 1913, which deprived the African people of their land. The result today is that 80 percent of the South African population, consisting of non-white people, mostly African, have only 13 percent of the land and 20 percent of the population that is, the whites today own 87 percent of land. One can imagine the land hunger and poverty of the African people. Then there were the pass laws which control and regulate the freedom of movement of the African people. The aim of these measures was to ensure cheap labour for the gold mines, which were then thriving, and for the white man's farms. Later, with industrial development, there was need for providing cheap labour for industries. Cheap labour being thus ensured, the white people benefitted from it and enjoyed all the prosperity at the expense of the blood, sweat and lives of the non-whites.
When the Second World War came there were those who opposed it. But in spite of them there was war effort and industrial development took place in South Africa. One of the natural consequences of industrial development is that there is influx of people from rural areas into industrial areas. Precisely the same thing happened in South Africa. This influx of non-white people took place in spite of the restrictive laws and it could not be stopped. With this contact came the question of apartheid. The Nationalist Party, in the interest of the white farmers, sponsored the policy of apartheid. In industry there was a policy of laissez faire supported by General Smuts who was Prime Minister during the war.In 1942 when the Japanese submarines were around the African ports, Smuts said 'segregation` is gone. He said that in order to mobilise the non-white people in the fight against the fascists, people were allowed to come into towns and some form of integration was taking place. With industrial development, black people came into the towns and naturally mixed with the whites. The Nationalist Party demanded that there must be a conscious, calculated effort on the part of Government to bring to a halt this form of insiduous integration. When after the war we had the elections, the majority voted the Nationalists into power.
Since then we have had this policy of apartheid. Every movement of a non-white person is controlled or regulated or governed by the laws of the country. We thus have in South Africa a system of racial discrimination sanctioned by law, which is the worst in the history of mankind. Of course, there has been discrimination in many parts of the world. People in Asian countries and in other parts of Africa have suffered from discrimination of one kind or another. But here is discrimination sanctioned by law and enforced by the authority of the State against a section of the population on the ground that it is not white. Merit does not count. I may be a doctor, but when I walk in the street, I am a 'coolie`. People of mixed breed or Coloured people are no better treated. That happens in education and in social welfare. This kind of system makes life absolutely intolerable.
Is it surprising that people in South Africa should rise against this tyranny? We have been conducting a struggle for 50 years or more. Non-white people have had to suffer for it, many have been killed, sent to prison or sent out of the country and so on. In this decade, when territory after territory in Africa is becoming independent, there is a great upsurge on the part of the African people which no one can prevent. Freedom is coming to other territories in Africa. That has its impact on the non-white people of South Africa, who are determined to carry on the struggle to the bitter end. Until they have won their freedom, basic human rights and their self-respect, this struggle will go on.
A world-wide struggle
What about the other countries of the world? Can they do anything to help? The struggle against racial discrimination has been a world-wide struggle. A bond of solidarity has existed between all those who are engaged in this struggle. The struggle against racial discrimination is a part of that against colonialism. South Africa constitutes a base against all people striving for freedom and equal rights. You have seen what has happened in the Congo. What the colonialists gave with one hand, they tried to take back with the other. But they will not succeed in their desire in the Congo. The Portuguese too will have to forego their African possessions. The struggle in Africa is part of a common struggle of the African people. The independent African States recognise that fact, and nobody in Africa is prepared to tolerate the policy of apartheid followed by Dr. Verwoerd.
At the Commonwealth Prime Minister's conference to be held in London a week hence, Dr. Nkrumah, President of Ghana and Alhaji (Tafewa) Balewa of Nigeria are bound to make that clear. At the time of the last year's Conference, a state of emergency was declared in South Africa, about 2,000 leaders were arrested and the two main political organisations of the African people were declared illegal. These organisations are now functioning underground. Most of the leaders were arrested but some of us who managed to escape the net were asked by our organisations to go out of South Africa to work abroad for the cause. Of course we could not have got permission and passports to leave South Africa from the Government.
The South African United Front comprises five organisations of South Africa and South West Africa. South West Africa is a mandated territory, which was given as a trust territory to Britain after the First World War. Britain in turn gave it to South Africa to manage it as a trust territory. The Government of Dr. Verwoerd has incorporated South West Africa into the Union of South Africa, unconstitutionally and illegally. The question is before the United Nations as to what should be done about it. The matter has been referred to the International Court at the Hague. The Government of South Africa is trying to find a loophole for maintaining that since no provision was made when the United Nations was formed that this territory would go to the United Nations, it belongs to South Africa. The United Nations itself has not accepted the South African position.
Boycott South Africa
It is our duty to thank the Government and people of Pakistan for their constant support in our struggle daring all these years. We want to thank also the people of other countries that have supported us. At the same time we ask them now to do something positive and resolute to help us. We demand that there should be a boycott of South Africa and it should be isolated in the international field in every possible way, diplomatically, culturally, economically. So far as this is concerned we are very glad that the independent States of Africa at a conference last June resolved not to have diplomatic relations with South Africa and that is now being implemented by them. They are also considering the question of not allowing South African planes to fly over or land in their territories. The African States are determined also not to allow South African ships or South African goods to come into their territories. The movement is not confined to Africa. Malaya has just imposed a trade boycott against South Africa. That has also been done by the Carribean States like Trinidad and Jamaica.
Then there are voluntary movements for the boycott of South African goods. There has been tremendous support for our stand from people in Britain, where it is now being officially supported by the Labour Party and the Trade Union Congress and unofficially by other organisations. A similar movement is afoot in the Scandinavian countries and it has been just as successful as that in Britain. To a lesser extent movements of this kind are winning support in other European countries and in the United States of America.
For our part we shall not be satisfied with the boycott of South African goods. We want economic sanctions against South Africa to be imposed by the United Nations. Every year the policy of apartheid has been condemned by an overwhelming majority in the United Nations. We appeal to the member States of the United Nations to wholeheartedly supports the proposal in the General Assembly for imposing economic sanctions against South Africa.
Membership of Commonwealth
Then there is the question of South Africa's membership of Commonwealth, a conference of whose Prime Ministers is to begin on 8 March in London. We appeal to member States to take steps to exclude South Africa from the Commonwealth. South Africa has decided to become a republic through a referendum, a referendum which was confined to the white people. Eighty percent of the South African population was excluded from it. Perhaps we want a republic; but we were not consulted about it. When the constitutional form of a member country is changed, it has to re-apply for the membership of the Commonwealth. South Africa has now to seek admission as a republic. We ask the Prime Ministers of all the Commonwealth countries to refuse it admission.
There are some people who say that if South Africa is thrown out of the Commonwealth, there will be no restraining influence on its policies. Dr. Verwoerd will impose further restrictive and oppressive measures on the people. Would it not be better to have South Africa in the Commonwealth so that we might exercise some check on its policies?
South Africa has been a member of the Commonwealth for many a long year but that has not had any restraining effect on its Government. On the other hand South Africa has been using its prestige as a member of the Commonwealth to further oppress non-white people. The factor of economic relations within the Commonwealth has been used by the South African Government against the non-white people. You know what will happen if South Africa is retained as a member? Dr. Verwoerd will go back from the Conference and proclaim to the whites that South Africa is still a member of the Commonwealth and he will be acclaimed as a hero by them. At the time of the referendum there were some among the whites who opposed the creation of a republic on the ground that if they did that they would be thrown out of the Commonwealth and isolated in the international world. Dr. Verwoerd and his colleagues went round the country and assured the white people that nothing of that sort would happen and that South Africa would remain a member of the Commonwealth. If Dr. Verwoerd goes back successful then he will have strengthened his position amongst the white electors, and have a freer hand to carry out his detested policies. On the contrary if South Africa is excluded from the Commonwealth, that will disillusion the whites. They will then know that these policies will not receive even the tacit support of people of the Commonwealth. That will have a salutary effect on the whites.
I must say one thing clearly, namely, that when I speak of white people I mean the majority of them. There are brave and courageous whites who abhor racial discrimination and apartheid. We respect and love them for the sacrifices they have made in common with us for our cause. Some of the Church leaders have also supported us. Men like Bishop Reeves and Alan Paton, a great writer and author, have had to go out of Africa. They had the courage of their convictions to condemn and speak against apartheid. There are others like them. There are also white industrialists who are perturbed because of the unfavourable reaction of the world to South Africa`s racial policies. Its economic position is affected and people outside no longer look upon South Africa as a stable field for investment. By excluding South Africa from the Commonwealth you will further isolate it and weaken the position of those among the whites who advocate apartheid.
Tragedy can be averted
We do not believe that our battle will be won by outside pressure alone. We know that the struggle will have to be carried on, as it is being carried on, by our people, legally or illegally, openly or underground. As time goes on, that struggle will become more bitter and hard. There is still time when external pressure can help to shorten the duration of the struggle, to minimise bloodshed and violence on the part of the Government and reduce the suffering of the people. If timely action is not taken, we may see in South Africa, whether we like it or not, a situation similar to that in Algeria, perhaps on a bigger scale. That tragedy can be averted only through the active intervention of all justice-loving people of the world.
We have seen several Prime Ministers and we shall be seeing your Foreign Minister. Then we shall go to London. There Dr. Verwoerd will face a severe attack from the Prime Minister of the Malayan Federation and from other Prime Ministers. The Malayan Prime Minister has made it quite clear that the question of apartheid will be raised in the Commonwealth Conference in spite of the fact that Mr. Macmillan,(6) who having spoken of "the wind of change sweeping the Continent of Africa" has been trying his best that there should be no controversy about it. Mr. Diefenbaker(7) too has made his position clear to Mr. Macmillan and so has Dr. Nkrumah.(8) So far as others are concerned, they have not yet spoken their minds but we know what they think about it. In any case Dr. Verwoerd(9) is not going to have an easy time. A policy such as his cannot be tolerated in the year 1961 and it cannot last.
Message from London to the South African people, March 1961
The enforced withdrawal of South Africa from the Commonwealth is a resounding victory for our people, and marks an historic step forward in our struggle against apartheid and for democratic rights.
This is a stunning defeat for Verwoerd and a dismal failure for Macmillan in his frantic attempt to retain Dr. Verwoerd's Government within the Commonwealth by means of tricky manoeuvres both prior to and during the Commonwealth conference.
The Prime Ministers' determined stand is a tribute to their steadfast opposition to racial discrimination, as well as a tribute to the solidarity of the peoples in all their countries with the struggle of the South African masses against apartheid and for freedom.
The world is solidly against Verwoerd's racial policies.
We are now engaged in a campaign
This new development opens up vast possibilities for us to make further inroads into the bastion of racialism and white supremacy built by the herrenvolk supporters of Dr. Verwoerd and his Nationalist Party. The people at home must redouble their efforts and work with renewed energy in opposing every facet of Dr. Verwoerd's Government. The Pietermaritzburg All-African Conference deserves every success in its demand for a national convention backed up by mass action for its speedy realisation.
Verwoerd's end is near. The warm rays of Africa's dawn of freedom will soon be felt in our beloved land.
"The South Africa United Front has been dissolved," said the statement issued by the representatives of the African National Congress (ANC), Pan Africanist Congress (PAC), South West Africa National Union (SWANU) and South African Indian Congress (SAIC) - Messrs Oliver Tambo, Nana Mahomo, J. Kozonguizi and Dr. Y. M. Dadoo respectively - after a meeting of the South Africa United Front held in London on 13 March 1962.
Behind this bland statement lies the history of the Front's achievements and also of the causes which led to its tragic downfall.
The South Africa United Front was formed abroad soon after the Sharpeville massacre, when the Verwoerd Government had unleashed a regime of terror, murder and violence. Our leading organisations were suppressed and many of our leaders and other democrats were detained without trial.
We then felt that despite the deep differences that marked the policies of the ANC and with it the SAIC on the one hand and the PAC on the other, this crisis was so overwhelming in character as to demand of those of us abroad the joining of our forces in a united front with a view to seeking the sympathy and support of the peoples and governments of the world for our struggle, to bring international economic and political pressure on the South African Government and in general to secure its expulsion from the world community of nations.
We believed that by uniting with this purpose we would help and inspire our peoples and bring nearer the victory of their struggles.
Much was achieved in the early stages of the United Front's existence. By concentrating on what was common to all our policies and aims, we succeeded in winning wide international support for our cause. The trade boycott became one of the most important and, politically at least, the most effective instrument of world solidarity against apartheid.
We won effective support from virtually every independent African State. Largely through our efforts South Africa had to withdraw from the Commonwealth.
However, these successes by themselves had not proved strong enough to consolidate or develop the unity of the United Front. Instead, the United Front became increasingly ineffective. It soon reached the point where it was doing little if anything to further the aims and tasks we had originally set ourselves. As a result the Front quickly fell into disrepute.
United Fronts in general demand a high level of discipline and integrity from their participants. They call for absolute honesty and frankness, for a regular discussion of outstanding problems and difficulties and above all for unity in action. They forbid public attacks of one partner by another. They prohibit conspiracies, underhand schemes designed to undermine one or other partner of the front.
This discipline has been shown to be of no less importance by the SAUF. We knew that existence as a united front depended heavily on the absence of recrimination and attack on each other and on our organisations in South Africa.
The ANC and the SAIC representatives tried hard to maintain the integrity of the United Front on these bases. They conscientiously held back from expounding their own policies abroad in their desire to maintain faithfully the unity of the Front. They refused, in spite of repeated provocations, to engage in attacks on their principal partner, the PAC. They always confronted their partners with common problems and had even compromised aspects of their policies - all with a view to maintaining the unity and cohesion of the Front.
On the other hand, the PAC had acted differently. The PAC and its overseas representatives and members - despite their presence in the Front - had already at an earlier stage embarked on a campaign of willful slander and attack on the African National Congress and its leaders.
They directed their energy mainly towards establishing for the PAC the image that it alone was the leading organisation of the African people, commanding overwhelming support - a wholly fraudulent image in terms of the actual balance of strength of our organisations in South Africa.
Through malicious distortion and lies, the ANC was presented as being both conservative and the instrument of Communists, whites and Indian merchants.
Behind the back of the United Front, the PAC representatives worked for privileged contacts with governments and public organisations abroad.
Within the Front itself, the PAC representatives proved to be particularly difficult allies; they tried to foist their organisation`s chauvinistic policies on the Front itself. They persistently refused to permit the Front to invite the support of other well-known anti-apartheid forces in South Africa.
These unprincipled methods of the PAC abroad were matched by a particularly treasonable PAC act towards the struggle of our people in South Africa itself. After having been invited and given positions of importance in the campaign for a National Convention and a three-day national strike in May last, members of the PAC withdrew at a vital stage of the campaign`s preparations. Not stopping at this attempt to sow confusion, the PAC then treacherously tried to scab the strike by distributing anti-strike leaflets. Any basis for unity in South Africa was thus removed.
Furthermore, we understand that the PAC organisation abroad is now split into two sections each claiming to speak in the name of the organisation, one having expelled the other and both engaging in mutual recrimination of a most embarrassing kind. This has created abroad considerable doubt about the authority and political substance of the PAC representatives.
These then are the factors which have led to the dissolution of the United Front. This regrettable course may cause some disquiet among many of our supporters and friends. We are, however, confident that they will understand the reasons for the dissolution and will continue to support the cause we have stood for: the winning of a free and democratic South Africa, of full and equal opportunities for all our people based on a common non-racial citizenship, of one man one vote and the liberation of our people from the poverty and ignorance so assiduously fostered by the regime of apartheid.
1. 1 From: The Guardian, Cape Town, May 22, 1952
2. 2 From: South African Communists Speak
3. 3 From: New Age, Cape Town, April 7, 1955
4. 4 Prime Minister of the Union of South Africa
5. 5 From: Pakistan Horizon, Karachi, first quarter 1961
6. 6 Harold Macmillan, Prime Minsiter of the United Kingdom
7. 7 Mr. Diefenbaker, Prime Minister of Canada
8. 8 Dr. Kwame Nkrumah, President of Ghana
9. 9 Dr. Hendrik Verwoerd, Prime Minister of the Union of South Africa
10. 10 From: New Age, Cape Town, March 23, 1961
11. 11 Article published in New Age, Cape Town, March 29, 1962