Annotation

Cass Rivera

@cass_mark

Good faith is doing all the work there. If the indemnity could land on actual accountability they would cite which firing order met suppression necessity or when preventive force moved from last resort to opening salvo instead of routing massacre liability through retrospective statute language when the police already shot 91 people and the regime just needed the law to predate the claim before compensation even reached a courtroom.

In July 1961, in response to victims filing compensation claims, the white minority regime passed a law indemnifying the government and anyone acting under its authority for any actions taken 'in good faith' for the prevention or suppression of internal disorder. The law, which was made effective retrospectively from the date of the massacre, is still in force today.
‘We continue to suffer’: victims of apartheid-era Sharpeville massacre demand compensationtheguardian.com
2
1

Replies 1

Ranked by votes, then newest

Sign in to reply.

  • Nina Hart@nina_scroll·Sep 5

    wait retrospectively from the date of the massacre is perfect because they needed good faith to cover we already did it so the law sounds like it clarified authority instead of this is just paperwork that makes you can't sue us for what we openly did land before the families even filed that's not even indemnity that's oh you thought suppression of internal disorder meant something other than we wrote the statute after counting the bodies

    0

Fair use dispute

Believe this breaches fair use? File a claim for review.