| Suppression of Communism Act, 1950 | |
|---|---|
.svg) | |
| Parliament of South Africa | |
| |
| Citation | Act No. 44 of 1950 |
| Territorial extent | South Africa,South West Africa |
| Enacted by | Parliament of South Africa |
| Assented to | 26 June 1950 |
| Commenced | 17 July 1950 |
| Repealed | 2 July 1982 |
| Administered by | Minister of Justice |
| Repealed by | |
| Internal Security Act, 1982 | |
| Keywords | |
| Anti-communism,political repression,exile,censorship | |
| Status:Repealed | |
TheSuppression of Communism Act, 1950 (Act No. 44 of 1950), renamed theInternal Security Act in 1976, was legislation of the national government inapartheid South Africa which formally banned theCommunist Party of South Africa and proscribed any party or group subscribing tocommunism, according to a uniquely broad definition of the term. It was also used as the basis to placeindividuals under banning orders, and its practical effect was to isolate and silence voices of dissent.
The Act, which came into effect on 17 July 1950,[1] definedcommunism as any scheme aimed at achieving change—whether economic, social, political, or industrial—"by the promotion of disturbance or disorder" or any act encouraging "feelings of hostility between the European and the non-European races [...] calculated to further [disorder]". TheMinister of Justice could deem any person to be a communist if he found that person's aims to be aligned with these aims, and could issue an order severely restricting the freedoms of anyone deemed to be a communist. After a nominal two-week appeal period, the person's status as a communist became an unreviewable matter of fact, and subjected the person to being barred from public participation, restricted in movement, or imprisoned.[2][3]
The government justified passage of the Act by noting the involvement of members of theSouth African Communist Party in theinternal resistance to apartheid, the subversive tactics of communist parties more widely, as well as the perceived threat of theSoviet Union in theemerging Cold War and decolonisation.[4]
The opposition in theHouse of Assembly protested certain functions of the act, such as the possibility to ban individuals purposedly advocating communist goals, circumventing the normalrule of law guarantees in theSouth African legal system. The government responded by watering down the act, explicitly outlining the right to due process before penalties (i.e. fines or imprisonment) were executed, requiring theMinister of Justice to submit requests to ban to a three-member committee, affording the right to redress by those issued a banning order, as well as exempting labour unions from the sanctions included in the act.[5] These guarantees, however, were not followed reliably, and banning ordersemerged as one of the most effective tools of the South African government throughout the apartheid era.
The Act was worded in such a way that anyone who opposed government policy could be deemed a communist. Since the Act explicitly declared that communism sought to encourage racial disharmony, it was frequently used to legally gag critics ofracial segregation andapartheid. The Act defined communism so sweepingly that defendants were frequently convicted of "statutory communism". JusticeFrans Rumpff, presiding in the 1952 trial ofAfrican National Congress (ANC) leaders, observed that such an offence might have "nothing to do with communism as it is commonly known."[6]
The Act facilitated the government suppression of organisations such as the ANC and others which advocated for equal rights for blacks, coloureds and Indians.[4] The Act forced these groups to go underground with their activism. Because of this Act, groups such asuMkhonto we Sizwe, led byNelson Mandela as a branch of the ANC, did seek financial support from the Communist Party.
Most of the Act was replaced in 1982 by theInternal Security Act, 1982.[7]
...from the bookA Crime Against Humanity - Analysing the Repression of the Apartheid State edited by Max Coleman, (Cape Town)
