Lawsuit Appeal Date set for November 21 in New York –

An appeal against the judgement of the Southern District Court in New York in theKhulumani et. al. v. Barclays et. al lawsuit (?the Khulumani International Lawsuit?) is to be heardon the 21st of November 2005,in the Second Circuit Court of Appeal in New York.

An appeal against the judgement of the Southern District Court in New York in theKhulumani et. al. v. Barclays et. al lawsuit (?the Khulumani International Lawsuit?) is to be heardon the 21st of November 2005,in the Second Circuit Court of Appeal in New York.

The South African Government has filed an amicus curiae brief recommending that the appeal be dismissed. The Government?s amicus brief opposesthe amicus curiae briefs signed by the majority of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) Commissioners. The Court will presumablytake great stock in the opinion of the South African Government as did the lower level District Court when dismissing what were referred to as the ?South African apartheid lawsuits?at this level.

The amicus curiae brief nowsubmitted by government simplyreiteratesand endorses the stanceoutlined in the ?Maduna affidavit? that actions such as the Khulumani International Lawsuit undermine the sovereignty of the South African government. Khulumani Support Group however is of the opinion that Dr Maduna?s affidavit was not, and the subsequent affidavit submitted by the Honourable Minister Mabandla is not, applicable to the Khulumani lawsuit. In particular the assertions that the lawsuits undermine the sovereignty of the South African government are not applicable to Khulumani Support Group.

Khulumani Support Group is a proud South African civil society organisation, comprising victims of gross human rights violations that took place in South Africa under apartheid. The agenda of Khulumani Support Group is determined by the organisation?s membership which is directed by the advisory role of the organisation?s National Steering Committee. The agenda of Khulumani Support Group is not determined by outsiders or international organisations. Khulumani Support Group regrets and distances itself from statements that possibly made by other organisations, have not been agreed and approved by its own decision-making processes.

The ?Maduna affidavit? has hadvery unfortunateand regrettable consequences for victims of human rights violations globally. One such example has been the use of the ?Maduna affidavit? in the June 2005, dismissal by the US Court of Appeals for the District of Colombia of the claims of the ?comfort women?.*

About the lawsuit

The Khulumani et al v. Barclays Bank et al lawsuit was brought to the New York court in terms ofthe Alien Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. ?1350, which allows injured parties to bring their complaints to theU.S. courts regardless of where the alleged damages occurred. This statute is increasingly being used to attempt to bring to justice those who havecommitted human rights abusesat an international level and in particular to advance the regulation and accountability of multinational corporations.

The Khulumani International Lawsuitthus seeks to hold accountable those internationally-basedbusinesses that aided and abetted the apartheid regime for enabling the perpetration of gross human rights abuses and violations carried out mainly by the security forces in South Africa through their financial and other support to that government. While this was accomplished with the direct and indirect assistance of these companies, they at the same time profited from their involvement with the apartheid regime.

Car manufacturers such as Daimler Chrysler, profited from manufacturingthe armoured vehicles used to patrol the townships, knowing that they would be used in repressive activities in the townships. Arms manufacturers profited by violating embargoes on armssales to South Africa. Oil companies, includingTotal, BP, Engen and Shell amongst others, profited by violating the oil embargoes. Bankssuch as Barclays, Citibank, Deutsche Bank amongst others profited from makingthe finance availablethat enabled South Africa to expand its apartheidpolice and security apparatus.

The lawsuit names the defendants (the businesses) and their alleged specific involvements with the apartheid regime, and names the plaintiffs (Khulumani Support Group alongside individual members who are victims of apartheidgross human rights violations and also Professor Dennis Brutus) and specifiesthe abuses they experienced. (See for more details)The Khulumani Lawsuit covers a time period during which the General Assembly of theUnited Nations had declaredapartheid to bea crime against humanity.

The specified businesses did not use the opportunity offered them to appear before the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC). It is inexcusable for them now claim the ?protection? of the TRC process in order not to be held responsible for their role in the gross human rights abuses and violations that were perpetrated under apartheid.

Khulumani Support Group respectfully urges the South African Minister of Justice, the Honourable Brigitte Mabandla, and the South African Cabinet to reconsider their amicus curiae brief, not only for the sake of victims and survivors of apartheid gross human rights abuses and violations, but also in the light of the adverse legacy that this action potentially leaves towards an undermining of the international human rights agenda and the undermining of a rule of law that applies to all persons and to juristic bodies such a corporations.

Issued by Khulumani Support Group

For comment, please contact Mr Tshepo Madlingozi on +27 82 496 9914, Khulumani?s Advocacy Coordinator.

*On September 18, 2000, 15 former ?comfort women? from Korea, China, the Philippines and Taiwan filed an historic, class-action lawsuit in U.S. federal court against the Government of Japan. (Geum Joo Hwang, et al, Appellants v. Japan). The lawsuit was based on ?Alien Tort Claims Act,? (the same Act which the Khulumani case is using). The plaintiffs in this case are victims of the notorious jugun ianfu scheme who were murdered, deported, enslaved, imprisoned, tortured, raped subjected to inhumane treatment by the Japanese military during the World War II.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email