Comments on: Clive Derby-Lewis on the wrong side of history

By: Truth & reconciliation left me dazed & confused

Truth & reconciliation left me dazed & confused — Thu, 24 Dec 2009 17:40:08 +0000

[...] that others would be encouraged to apply. And their was the ignoring of the law in the case of Clive Derby Lewis and Janus Walluz, they was the text book case for amnesty. But they never got it, because they had [...]

By: Adrian Caoimh

Adrian Caoimh — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 07:13:56 +0000

Race continues to dog South Africa as justice is perverted by Hani’s mob and the lawyer who parades in sheep’s clothing …er what’s his name…Bikos … Bigot… who cares! The fact is the law is the law and Clive Derby-Lewis should be released.

By: Anonymouse

Anonymouse — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 16:03:59 +0000

Michael Graaf – Indeed, I agree. His hands is full of goo from that McGoos incident. That is why I say he should have been imprisoned and not granted any form of amnesty. The recent spate of burglaries at the Joh’burg High Court and Pretoria Regional Court both have pointers towards him. I hope he gets slammed for drunken driving – But, as a Metro Police Chief? He should never be allowed in a position of power again. God forbid that he tries to aim filling Jackie Selebi’s post.

By: Michael Graaf

Michael Graaf — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 10:39:29 +0000

McBride didn’t only blow up a bar – he did it when it was full of people; he chose it because the patrons were white, as he admitted, in claiming that he hoped to kill/injure police/army members.

By: Anonymouse

Anonymouse — Fri, 28 Nov 2008 19:46:07 +0000

Kameraad: Thanks for the “copyright” acknowledgement, but I think it is (or at least, should be) common knowledge. I have only now had the time to peruse this post – good one, and very objective. As far as Strydom is concerned, have you read the comment by Louis Harms DJP (the trial judge) in the Star of 14 Nov 2008? He said, as far as he was concerned, Strydom should’ve been hanged, not pardoned in terms of either the death penalty amnesty or the amnesty in terms of an agreement between De Klerk and Mandela. Funny that the neo-racists (e.g., lindelani maseko and his ilk on the constitutionallyspeaking blog) currently, as always, have a thing or to bad to say about Louis Harms. Yes, he has handed down bad decisions in the past, but so has many judges, black and white.

And, yes, Strydom was not granted amnesty by the TRC, his was a particular bargain that was part of the political horse-trading exercise in the transitional period preceding true democracy. I also agree that McBride (the one with all the goo of the McGoos incident on his hands, should never have qualified for amnesty (in terms of whatever process). In fact, he should nevr have been allowed to smuggle arms (or infiltrate an arms smuggling network) into Mocambique; and, he should never have been allowed to become a Metro Police chief. His case is totally different from that of honest cadres during the struggle. Well, at least, the “Skierlik skieter” got his dues, and so did the Jeppestown slaughterers. Win some – loose some.

By: Kameraad Mhambi

Kameraad Mhambi — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 10:36:55 +0000

Strydom was pardoned by De Klerk in 1992 as one of 150 political prisoners, including Robert McBride from the opposite end of the political spectrum. I’m sure De Klerk released him because of the release of McBride.

I don’t think you can equate the crimes of Strydom and McBride (the one targeted people because of their race the other planted a bomb in a bar) but neither of them should have gotten amnesty if the Norgaard principles were applied.

As far as I know the TRC never pronounced on Strydom.

By: boerinballingskap

boerinballingskap — Sun, 16 Nov 2008 15:11:40 +0000

I appreciate your objectivity on this matter. But how come that the notorious Barend Strydom managed to be on the “right” side of history?