
Cradock Four: South Africa opens new inquiry into apartheid-era torture and killings
Sicelo Mhlauli was one of four Black men abducted, tortured and killed 40 years ago this month by apartheid-era security forces in South Africa. No one has been held accountable for their deaths.
But a new judge-led inquiry into the killings of the anti-apartheid activists who became known as the Cradock Four — and who became a rallying cry for those denied justice — opened this month.
It is part of a renewed push for the truth by relatives of some of the thousands of people killed by police and others during the years of white minority rule and enforced racial segregation.
Mhlauli described the state of her husband's body during testimony she gave at the start of the inquiry in the city of Gqeberha, near where the Cradock Four were abducted in June 1985. Relatives of some of the three other men also testified.
Thumani Calata never got to know her father, Fort Calata, who had been a teacher. She was born two weeks after the funerals of the Cradock Four, which drew huge crowds and galvanized resistance to apartheid.
'I don't know how it feels, and I will never know how it feels, to be hugged by my dad,' Thumani Calata, now 39, told the inquiry as she wept.
Two previous inquiries were held during apartheid. A two-year inquest that started in 1987 found the men were killed by unknown people. Another in 1993 said they were killed by unnamed policemen.
Relatives of the Cradock Four likely will never see justice. The six former police officers directly implicated in the abductions and killings have died, the last one in 2023. None was prosecuted despite the post-apartheid Truth and Reconciliation Commission identifying them and denying them amnesty in the late 1990s.
That commission, set up by then-President Nelson Mandela, attempted to confront the atrocities of apartheid in the years after the system officially ended in 1994. While some killers were granted amnesty, more than 5,000 applications were refused and recommended for criminal investigation.
Hardly any made it to court.
Oscar van Heerden, a political analyst at the University of Johannesburg, said the bitter emotion of relatives at the Cradock Four inquiry showed wounds have not healed.
'Where it was felt that truth was not spoken and there wasn't sufficient evidence to warrant forgiveness, those were cases that were supposed to be formally charged, prosecuted and justice should have prevailed," van Heerden said. "None of that happened.'
The failure by post-apartheid governments for 25 years to pursue cases is now being scrutinized. Frustrated, the families of the Cradock Four finally forced authorities to rule last year that there would be a new inquiry into the killings.
They also joined with a group of relatives of other apartheid-era victims to take the South African government to court this year over the failure to investigate so many crimes.
As part of the settlement in that case, South African President Cyril Ramaphosa ordered a national inquiry led by a retired judge into why apartheid-era killers were not brought to justice. The inquiry, which has not opened yet, threatens to expose further uncomfortable moments for South Africa.
While the majority of victims of political violence during apartheid were Black and other people of color, some were white, and families have come together across racial lines. A group of survivors and relatives from the 1993 Highgate Hotel massacre, where unknown men opened fire in a bar full of white customers, joined with the Cradock Four families and others in the case against the government.
They allege that post-apartheid authorities deliberately blocked investigations.
Other inquests have been reopened, including one into the 1967 death of Albert Luthuli, who was president of the banned anti-apartheid African National Congress movement when he was hit by a train. Luthuli's death has been viewed with suspicion for more than 50 years.
At the Cradock Four inquiry, which is expected to resume in October for more testimony, Howard Varney, a lawyer for the families, said this is their last chance to know the truth.
The new inquiry has attempted to retrace the killings, from the moment of the men's abduction at a nighttime police roadblock to the time their bodies were discovered, burned and with signs of torture. The families also want a former military commander and ex-police officers who may have knowledge of the killings to testify.
Lukhanyo Calata, the son of Fort Calata, said he accepted it was unlikely anyone would ever be prosecuted over the death of his father and his friends Mhlauli, Matthew Goniwe and Sparrow Mkonto. But he said he wants official records to finally show who killed them.
' Justice now can really only come in the form of truth,' Lukhanyo Calata told The Associated Press. 'They may not have been prosecuted, they may not have been convicted, but according to court records, this is the truth around the murders of the Cradock Four.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Daily Mail
34 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Kathleen Folbigg, 'we don't have $30million just lying around': Brutal response to innocent woman cleared of killing her four children after she complained about taxpayer payout
A strident state premier is not budging on a widely condemned $2 million compensation offer to a woman who was wrongfully imprisoned for two decades. Kathleen Folbigg has described NSW Premier Chris Minns' repeated calls for her to sue the state if she wants more money as 'a slap in the face' after she was offered the ex gratia payment. She was jailed in 2003 over the deaths of her four children, but her convictions were quashed and she was freed in 2023 after new scientific evidence cast reasonable doubt over her guilt. Unmoved, the premier stood by the offer to Ms Folbigg while agreeing she was innocent. The amount offered represents about 0.0015 per cent of the annual NSW budget of $128 billion. 'There was pro-bono legal work that law firms undertook on behalf of Kathleen Folbigg ... she might have a personal obligation to them she feels she has (but) the NSW taxpayers don't,' Mr Minns said. 'It's not my money, it's taxpayer money, we don't have $20 million, $30 million, $15 million just lying around, it necessarily has to come from other programs.' David Eastman successfully sued for $7 million under ACT human rights law after serving 19 years for a murder over which he was wrongfully convicted. But most Australians wrongly accused of murder have relied on governments' good grace to compensate them for lost years. Lindy Chamberlain, jailed for four years before authorities agreed a dingo had likely taken her baby from an Uluru campsite, was awarded $1.7 million including legal costs in 1992. That sum would be worth $4 million today, allowing for inflation. Ms Folbigg, who told News Corp the money she had been offered was 'not a fair figure', said the prospect of more legal action was 'traumatising'. 'For them to turn around and offer what they did ... for them to turn around and say you can sue the government like everybody else was quite a slap in the face,' she said. 'Plan A was hopefully to be offered enough that it could be invested and I could live reasonably comfortably, without having a fear that I won't have superannuation that's enough to support me or I won't be able to go to the dentist without having to sacrifice something else.' Others across the political spectrum, including Greens MP Sue Higginson, have queried how the $2million figure was arrived at. 'I know there's room in the budget right now to give Kathleen something more than $2 million, something more commensurate with the harm that the justice system has perpetrated,' she said. Ms Folbigg's solicitor Rhanee Rego has labelled the sum offered as 'a moral affront - woefully inadequate and ethically indefensible'.


Powys County Times
7 hours ago
- Powys County Times
‘Deport now, appeal later' scheme expanded in drive to remove foreign criminals
More foreign criminals will be deported before their appeals have been heard as the Government expands its 'deport now, appeal later' scheme. Offenders from another 15 countries including India, Bulgaria and Australia will now be included in the scheme, bringing the total to 23 countries. The scheme allows the UK to deport offenders who have had a human rights claim against their removal rejected, with any appeals heard from abroad over a video link. Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said foreign criminals had been 'exploiting' the immigration system by 'remaining in the UK for months or even years while their appeals drag on'. She said: 'That has to end. Those who commit crimes in our country cannot be allowed to manipulate the system, which is why we are restoring control and sending a clear message that our laws must be respected and will be enforced.' The other countries now in the scheme are Angola, Botswana, Brunei, Canada, Guyana, Indonesia, Kenya, Latvia, Lebanon, Malaysia, Uganda and Zambia. The Home Office said the expansion of 'deport now, appeal later' would help 'scale up' the country's ability to remove foreign criminals, alongside measures announced on Sunday to deport offenders as soon as they are sentenced. Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood said the move, which requires parliamentary approval, would save £54,000 a year per prison place. Since Labour came to power last year, almost 5,200 foreign offenders have been deported, representing a 14% increase on the previous 12 months. Officials have said increasing deportations will help ease pressure on overcrowded prisons. But figures from the Ministry of Justice from the end of June suggest there are currently just 772 prisoners from the 15 new countries covered by 'deport now, appeal later'. Of the new countries, only Indians are in the top nationalities among current prisoners, while there are no offenders from Botswana or Brunei currently behind bars. The 'deport now, appeal later' scheme for human rights claims was introduced in 2014 but was ruled unlawful by the Supreme Court three years later in cases where deportation would prevent the offender from giving live evidence in their appeal. But the court noted that giving evidence over a video link could be sufficient, provided it was financially and logistically possible, in effect limiting the policy to countries where video appeal facilities were realistically available. The UK currently has arrangements for video appeals with eight countries, including Tanzania, Belize, Finland and Estonia. Foreign Secretary David Lammy said: 'We are leading diplomatic efforts to increase the number of countries where foreign criminals can be swiftly returned, and if they want to appeal, they can do so safely from their home country. 'Under this scheme, we're investing in international partnerships that uphold our security and make our streets safer.' Shadow home secretary Chris Philp said: 'We welcome Keir Starmer's step in the right direction of Conservative Party deportations policy. But with record numbers of illegal arrivals, this is only a drop in the ocean. 'But even with this U-turn, only the Conservative Party is committed to deporting all foreign criminals.


Daily Mirror
9 hours ago
- Daily Mirror
15 more countries where criminals can be deported to before appeal
The Government's 'Deport Now Appeal Later' scheme will be extended to cover 15 more countries, ministers have announced Hundreds more foreign criminals will be kicked out of the UK before their appeals are heard, it has been announced. Ministers said the 'Deport Now Appeal Later' scheme will be extended from eight to 23 countries - meaning their cases will be heard from overseas. Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said the controversial measure will target lawbreakers who "manipulate the system". It comes after the Government vowed to remove criminals to their homelands after being convicted. Ms Cooper said: 'For far too long, foreign criminals have been exploiting our immigration system, remaining in the UK for months or even years while their appeals drag on. "That has to end. Those who commit crimes in our country cannot be allowed to manipulate the system, which is why we are restoring control and sending a clear message that our laws must be respected and will be enforced.' India, Bulgaria and Australia are among the countries to be included in the scheme. It will mean those who have had a human rights claim against their removal rejected will make their case via video link. Also added are Angola, Botswana, Brunei, Canada, Guyana, Indonesia, Kenya, Latvia, Lebanon, Malaysia, Uganda and Zambia. Foreign Secretary David Lammy, said: "We are leading diplomatic efforts to increase the number of countries where foreign criminals can be swiftly returned, and if they want to appeal, they can do so safely from their home country. Under this scheme, we're investing in international partnerships that uphold our security and make our streets safer." The Home Office said the measure will help "scale up" the UK's ability to remove foreign criminals, alongside measures announced yesterday(SUN) to deport offenders as soon as they are sentenced. Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood said the move, which requires parliamentary approval, would save £54,000 a year per prison place. Officials have said increasing deportations will help ease pressure on overcrowded prisons. But figures from the Ministry of Justice from the end of June suggest there are currently just 772 prisoners from the 15 new countries. The "deport now, appeal later" scheme for human rights claims was introduced in 2014. But it suffered a setback three years later when the Supreme Court ruled it was unlawful if it stopped an offender from giving live evidence in their appeal. However judges accepted that giving evidence over a video link could be sufficient. The UK currently has arrangements for video appeals with eight countries, including Tanzania, Belize, Finland and Estonia.