6 plead not guilty to treason

2003-06-23 13:01

Pretoria - Six of the 22 alleged Boeremag members on trial for treason pleaded not guilty in Pretoria High Court on Monday.

Thirteen others entered a special plea contesting the jurisdiction of the court.

Legal argument got underway in the Palace of Justice amid strict security measures on Monday morning, after a month of wrangling over legal aid for the accused.

The State alleges the 22 men plotted as members of a rightwing organisation calling itself the Boeremag to overthrow the government.

Defence attorney Paul Kruger contended on behalf of 13 of them that white voters in the 1992 referendum on a new political order were never asked to approve the new constitution.

He argued this was in violation of a decision by the pre-1994 parliament not to approve any constitutional legislation before the results of pro-democracy negotiations were presented to white voters.

Kruger said this meant the foundation for the constitution, which in turn formed the basis of all legislation and executive judicial authority, was invalid.

He also cited an English common-law rule that any form of self-government, once granted, could never be taken away.

'94 elections were irregular'

This had, in effect, happened to his clients, who were able to exert real influence on governance prior to 1994, while their votes were of nothing more than academic importance now.

A third basis for the application was that the 1994 elections were irregular - rendering the new parliament and the constitution it adopted invalid.

Furthermore, Kruger argued that the Electoral Act was adopted in January 1994 by a parliament which effectively only came into being three months later.

Claims documents were confiscated

Two of the accused opted to plead at a later stage and one, Tom Vorster, refused to plead.

Rudie Lubbe, for Vorster, said his client felt his rights had been violated to the extent that there was no chance of his trial being fair.

He claimed prison authorities had confiscated documents prepared to explain his plea and defence. Vorster also contended he was denied access to means of communication.

The court entered a plea of not guilty on his behalf.

Argument continues.

- SAPA