Todd family applauds Mr Marshall’s action

Press, Volume CXII, Issue 32870, 20 March 1972, Page 18

Todd family applauds Mr Marshall’s action

The Todd family in Rhodesia firmly believes that the action of the Prime Minister (Mr Marshall) was significant in bringing about the release of Mr Garfield Todd and his daughter, Judith Todd, from solitary confinement in prison.

This information is contained in a letter from Mr Todd’s sister, Mrs J. V. Salisbury, of Oamaru, at present in Rhodesia, to the Prime Minister, and which Mr Marshall has agreed to make public. “We are all so grateful that the two can live at home, but they are still prisoners and are innocent of any crime,” writes Mrs Salisbury. “No charge has been laid, and their request to be brought to open court has been ignored. The ‘Sunday Telegraph’ at the time of their arrests described the Special Branch search of their papers as "disappointing.’ ” POLICE PATROLS But Mrs Salisbury expresses the fear that the detentions may continue for a long time, and says some men have now been detained in prisons and camps, without trial, for eight years. She adds she had no difficulty in obtaining a permit to go to Hokonui Ranch at Dadaya, and to stay there. Permits have been granted to a few other whites for special reasons and for periods of one or two hours, she adds.

“At first, police mounted patrols with four men at the 800-metre perimeter of the ‘protected area’, but now the regular patrols appear to have been withdrawn and spot checks substituted,” Mrs Salisbury says. She describes conditions at the ranch as very pleasant, “if only there was freedom.” Already the health of her brother, Garfield Todd, 1 was being restored. “Mrs Grace Todd has received many hundreds of letters and cables from people all over the world,” Mrs Salisbury says. “Their concern is heart-warming, but the atmosphere in Rhodesia is chilling.” In her leter to Mr Marshall, Mrs Salisbury mentions the sitting of the Review Tribunal headed by a High Court judge, which secretly met to consider the imprisonment of Mr Todd and his daughter and their solitary confinement. “Garfield and Judith declined to appear before the tribunal because of the unsatisfactory aspects of this type of hearing,” she says. NEWSPAPER REPORTS Mrs Salisbury says that in Rhodesia it is a crime to publish the names of detained persons, and no direct information has been sent to the detainees themselves. According to one newspaper report enclosed, consideration of Judith Todd’s case is referred to in these terms: “A Review Tribunal will sit to hear evidence in camera in a case concerning a detainee.” Criticism by Mrs Grace Todd that the defence is denied the opportunity of having the grounds of detention aired before the court of public opinion and facilities to repudiate allegations, is defined as “a statement issued by a relative of the detainee.” Another newspaper account which reports the tribunal’s decision to recommend continued detention of four persons — again no names are mentioned — says that the Minister of Law and Order (Mr D. W. LardnerBurke) has received reports and recommendations.

“Because they contain security information, the reports will not be published,” the report says. One newspaper editorial says that the Government announcement of the continued detention of four persons “in the interests of public safety” suggests they are of more than ordinary interest. "Like

everyone else in Rhodesia, we have no official knowledge of who the people are. We can only make an inspired guess,” the editorial says. Mrs Salisbury writes: “It appears the conclusions of the tribunal go a long way towards convicing the whites here that the detainees were guilty of criminal action, .though the leading articles do show some doubt.” OUTSIDE RHODESIA Outside the country, the Rhodesian Government has freely announced that the detainees Mr and Mrs J. Chinamano appeared before the tribunal and that Mr Todd and his daughter declined to do so.

The Rhodesian Information Centre in Australia apparently does not consider itself bound by the same restrictions as apply in Rhodesia itself.

The newspaper goes on to ask whether the detainees will be tried, and will the British Government be put in the picture sufficiently to convince it that the detentions do not contravene the “normal political activity,” requirement?

Sensitivity to world opinion is also expressed in another newspaper’s editorial which asks: “If the evidence put before the judge is conclusive, when will the detainees be tried in court? In the countries whose opinions matter to us, nothing less will suffice.”

Mrs Salisbury, in her letter to Mr Marshall, adds: “I know you will be watching the situation very closely and will not forget the Todds and many others imprisoned to keep them out of the way in the endeavour to achieve a settlement and to maintain white supremacy in this country.

“We thank you from our hearts for what you have already done, and we are confident that you will find ways to maintain pressure on the authorities here.”