Sharpeville ‘clarified’

Press, Volume CXIII, Issue 33189, 31 March 1973, Page 16

Sharpeville ‘clarified’

Criticism of his statement on the events at Sharpeville on March 21, 1960, were trivial, ; irrelevant, and ridicut lous, the South African 1 Consul-General (Mr P. ’ H. Philip) said yester- ’ dayHe was commenting on a ■ report in “The Press” on J March 22, in which a South . African citizen (Mr D. Novitz), a lecturer in philosophy . at the University of Canter- . bury, and Mr N. Roberts, a ■ political science lecturer who t lived in South Africa for 14 . years, challenged Mr Philip’s i account of Sharpeville which had been published the day . before. Mr Philip said he had careI fully studied the six points ■ made by Messrs Novitz and i : and these did not! . show distortion and false j statements in the original ac-i count. The allegation that this I {account did not specify the 1 {reasons for the demonstration was correct, he said. “Shot in back, true” “The purpose of our state-I iment was to describe what {happened at Sharpeville {(which is what we are criti-; icised for), not why the de-1 {monstration took place.; {which raises an entirely dif{ferent issue,” said Mr Philip. I “Messrs Novitz and Roberts say’ that the events at ■ {Sharpeville 'haven’t had an {effect on the pass laws.' I did {not say that they had had {such an effect. I said that the II tragedy 'was a terrible trau[matic experience which had I penetrated to the very roots {of the national life' — which {is not disputed by any’one. “I said that ‘69 Bantu were {killed and a number wounded { — some of them in the back {as they turned to flee.’! {Messrs Novitz and Roberts! {go to a great deal of trouble! Ito prove that some of themi {were shot in the back —■ [which is precisely what l! I said. 1 “Messrs Novitz and Rob-: ■erts claim that nine police-1 men were killed at Catoi

51 Manor, and not seven as I J had stated. I have since ’ i checked this figure and I find 1 1 that we were both wrong — ,; eight were killed and one J survived. But does the preicise number really alter any‘lthing?” said Mr Philip. • I “Messrs Novitz and Rob•jerts state that Cato Manor I took place two months before Sharpeville and not two a; weeks as we had stated. Cort ; rect. This was an error on Hour part; the date of the . I Cato Manor murders was ; I January 24, 1960. “Trivial corrections” J “The points which I was .‘making were that a number J of policemen were murdered , at Cato Manor because they , I did not use their revolvers to ' defend themselves; that at ! Sharpeville there were shouts J of ‘Cato Manor’ from the Ji mob, indicating that the *lsame fate was intended foi , the police on that occasion; ’land that the police them-1 '(selves were well aware ofj (this. M “These points are in no; : 'wav affected by these rather;

trivial corrections,” said Mr: Philip. "Messrs Noyitz and Rob-1 erts state that the Cato] Manor affair ‘certainly) wasn’t a race riot.’ But who! said it was? Certainly I did! not say so. “If the points raised by I’ Messrs Novitz and Roberts! are intended to show that) our article contained distor-; tion and false statements, I; submit that they have totally! failed to achieve their pur-1 pose. "I must say I find their I; criticisms trivial, irrelevant. !■ and ridiculous.” said Mr;, Philip. I;