Mr Newnham all day in witness-box

Press, 6 July 1977, Page 3

Mr Newnham all day in witness-box

PA Auckland Thomas Oliver Newnham was under crossexamination all day in the Supreme Court at Auckland yesterday, where a jury is hearing an action for defamation against the Prime Minister (Mr Muldoon).

Mr Newnham is first plaintiff in the action, and seeks damages of $20,000 from the Prime Minister. The Citizens Association for Racial Equality (C.A.R.E.) is second plaintiff, and seeks damages of $2500. Both plaintiffs allege that on July 19 last year, Mr Muldoon "falsely and maliciously spoke and published” words concerning them. Mr Muldoon denies the allegations. The hearing, before Mr Justice Speight and a jury, is expected to last until the end of next week.

Mr F. H. Haigh and Mr R. A. Adams-Smith appear for Mr Newnham and C.A.R.E. Mr Muldoon is represented by Mr J. D. Dalgety and Mr J. Dunn.

During his, cross-exam-ination, Mr Newnham was referred by Mr Dalgety to the National Party’s 1975 election manifesto. Mr Newnham said that he had never spelled out the precise words of the National policy in his communications overseas. He accepted that the National Party policy said the party did not support apartheid. Mr Dalgety read part of the manifesto, which said that the party believed every New Zealander should be free to have contact or play sport with, or not have contact or play sport with, anyone in the world.

Mr Dalgety: Do you agree with the National Party that individuals should have the right to make up their own minds whether they have sports contacts with South Africa? Mr Newnham said that it was desirable, but ' there might be higher moral reasons, or it might be in the national interest to require the Government to impose prohibitions. He said that he had sent material overseas. There had been a steady flow of material over the last eight years in support of a worldwide boycott of South Africa.

He had been reasonably content with the policy of the Labour Government, because it did not allow visas for sports contacts with South Africa. He wanted to have the National Party policy reversed. He said that the issue was whether he had lied in pursuit of that aim.

Mr Newnham said that he had tried to prevent sports tours between New Zealand and South Africa, including the 1976 tour by the All Blacks. He denied that he had tried to cause New Zealand athletes to be expelled from the Olympic Games, or to isolate New Zealand sportsmen in international sport. Mr Newnham said that C.A.R.E. had seen isolation as inevitable, but denied that the organisation was marshalling overseas opinion.

“We were issuing a warning,” he said, “that if you don’t change, this is what will happen.”

Mr Newnham said that it would be quite wrong to categorise all people who supported continuing sports contacts with South Africa as pro-apartheid. Some people were indulging in selfdeception on -the issue, he said, and others were genuine.

Mr Newnham said that there might be a number of people in New Zealand who were in favour of playing sport with South Africa for a variety of reasons. Mr Dalgety said that in a lot of documentation, Mr Newnham had maintained that 90 per cent of New Zealand sports bodies were proapartheid in sport.

Mr Newnham said that the figure went back to the Labour Government, and moves made by the New Zealand Federation of Sport to have sports ties with South Africa reinstated.

Mt Buckingham, of the federation, war reported as saying that the federation, which controlled 90 per cent of New Zealand sports bodies, held the unanimous view that the ties should be reestablished.

Mr Dalgety: Because Mr Buckingham wants to return freedom to the hands of sportsmen, j’ou say it automatically follows that 90 per cent of those sports bodies are pro-apartheid in sport? Mr Newnham: It has that effect.

Mr Dalgety raised the issue of Ugandan athletes attending the Commonwealth Games in New Zealand. Mr Newnham replied: “That is no analogy.” Mr Dalgety said that genocide had been practised in Uganda, but, in spite of these atrocities, New Zealand entertained the Ugandan team at the games. Witness: But they were not selected on the basis of genocide.

Mr Dalgety: The team would not have included 250,000 Asians who had been excluded from that country. Mr Newnham said that apartheid was a crime against humanity, but agreed that atrocities in other countries could also be similar crimes against humanity. Witness said that he would not say the New Zealand Government was proapartheid, because that would mean the Government wanted apartheid to flourish. H e contended that C.A.R.E. had always intended the meaning of support to be taken as encouraging.

It was not his intention that the overseas people to whom he sent material should understand that the New Zealand Government was in favour of apartheid in South African sport. Mr Newnham said that he had said the New Zealand Government had defied a resolution of the United Nations General Assembly calling for a boycott of apartheid sport. He denied saying that the All Black team to South Africa last year was being paid by the Government.

He had written a letter to the International Olympic Committee in June, 1976, which alleged that New Zealand stood out as the world’s chief supporter of apartheid in sport. He stood by that assertion. j Mr Newnham said that Mr I Lance Cross had been a champion for the white raclist South African sports bodies.

Mr Dalgety: Is he proapartheid? — No.

Mr Newnham said that he had discussed the issue with Mr Cross, and had never doubted his sincerity “as to his beliefs that he was not advocating apartheid.”

He said that the aim of a letter he had written to Mr Abraham Ordia, of the Supreme Council for Sport in Africa, was to “clear the air so that New Zealand would be able to take part in the Olympics without shame." Mr Newnham said that he wrote to Mr Ordia and sent him newspaper clippings on April 10, 1976. He was concerned that the truth was not getting to the world, but

the New Zealand Government’s versions were, and he wanted to counterbalance that

He knew a distorted onesided ve r sion of New Zealand policy on sport was being placed before other countries.

The Secretary-General of the United Nations, he said, came to New Zealand to warn against flying in the face of a United Nations resolution.

Mr Newnham said that he knew that Dr Kurt Waldheim, the Secretary-Gen-eral, had impressed on the New Zealand Government the need for implementation by all countries of the unanimous United Nations resolution. He used press releases for that information. He said that he indicated to Mr Ordia in his letter that the Government had turned a deaf ear to the pleas of Dr Waldheim.

He believed it was true that the Government had instructed the Head of State, the Governor-General, to open a world softball tournament in 1976. There was, he said, widespread publicity about this.

He and C.A.R.E. had appealed to the Government for it not to happen.

The Governor-General he said, acted or did not act in accordance with the wishes of the Government.

The Queen would never open an apartheid sports tournament in Britain, Mr Newnham said. When the Governor-General took an official stand it could be said that he was instructed or there was a direct link between him and the Government.

When it was a matter of great national issue, he would do it with Government instructions. Mr Newnhan said that he did not know if the Gover-nor-General had been instructed by any Minister of the Government to open the tournament. He said that he had stated it was a bad thing for this to happen, as it gave Government support to apartheid sport in New Zealand. Mr Newnham said that he his letter to Mr Ordia he had said the United Nations Committee on Elimination of Racial Discrimination had met in Geneva, and had called on New Zealand to reconsider its. sports contacts with South Africa. He got his information from a press report. He had not read the full official report, and had not checked the press report to see if it was accurate.

He said that what was in Mr Ordia’s speech at the United Nations seminar at Havana was almost identical to what had been in Witness's letter to him. Mr Ordia had taken it as being truthful and accurate: witness believed it to be so.

Mr Dalgety produced 10 pages of a record of the United Nations committee meeting at Geneva of events of April 8, at the meeting when New Zealand had appeared before it.

Mr Newnham said there was a coincidence that New Zealand was chosen by the committee for similar reasons as he had provided to Mr Ordia in the letter. Mr Ordia, he said, had a wide variety of sources available.

He said that he • was one of the principal architects of the decision that the committee had taken by the Havana seminar. Mr Newnham was referred to a transcript of a press interview on July 19, 1976, by the chairman of the United Nations Special Committee on Apartheid (Mr Harriman) in Geneva on events connected with sports contacts with South Africa, with particular reference to New Zealand, soon after the Olympic Games.

Mr Dalgety said that Mr Harriman indicated one of the major reasons for the actions takne by the committee was on request by anti-apartheid groups. Mr Newnham said that he was shocked to hear the initiative had come from New Zealand. He said that what Mr Harriman said was untrue, if it referred to C.A.R.E. He said that he had no knowledge of the New Zealand anti-apartheid committee’s wanting that action by the United Nations committee.

. Groups, he said, wanted action not against their own country but the Government and sports organisations which persisted in sports contacts with South Africa. Mr Newnham said that there was some doubt as to what action Mr Harriman was speaking of. The purpose was to bring New Zealand back in line with the rest of the world. He said that he was shocked to hear that the anti-apartheid movement in New Zealand had taken a strong initiative in wanting the boycott (at the Olympic Games), as it was not true. Mr Ordia had come to New Zealand, he said, to appear on television. Witness had believed that he had asked the representative of the New Zealand Government at the Havana meeting if he could meet a Government representative on his trip.

As well as appearing on television, Mr Ordia had wanted to clarify the issue when in New Zealand. He had said that he was not a politican, and had come to talk to sportsmen. Mr Newnham was again referred to his letter to Mr Ordia of April 10, 1976. He said he said that he had the impression of a police State over the events at Papakura when a softball tournament was held there. He had made such statements in press statements. Road blocks, dogs, and reserve corps of police gave him that impression.

Mr Dalgety said that there had been a bomb blast at the ground in Lower Hutt, and after that the Leader of the Opposition had spoken out, saying there could be no excuse for violence and vandalism. Mr Newnham said that in a society such as New Zealand’s the end did not justify the means. He said that he and C.A.R.E. were planning non-violent disruption, and had training camps for that end.

The hearing will continue today.