Sachs v Minister of Justice; Diamond v Mnister of Justice

• Jurisdiction: South Africa
• Judge: Stratford ACJ, Beyers JA, De Villiers JA and Gardiner AJA
• Judgment Date: 06 October 1933
• Citation: 1934 AD 11
• Hearing Date: 26 September 1933
• Court: Appellate Division

Stratford, A.C.J.:

This is an appeal from a decision of the Transvaal Provincial Division in an application made by the present appellant. The Court dismissed the application declaring the appellant entitled to costs to the date of the service of the respondent's answering affidavit of the 18th November, 1932, and declaring the respondent entitled to subsequent costs. A sufficiently full summary of the facts relating to the dispute appears in the judgment of the learned JUDGE-PRESIDENT and it is unnecessary to restate them in extenso. Sub-sec. (12) of sec. 1 of Act 27 of 1914 as amended by sec. 1 of Act 19 of 1930 provides that: "Whenever the Minister is satisfied that any person is in any area promoting feelings of hostility between the European inhabitants of the Union on the one hand and any other section of the inhabitants of the Union on the other hand, he may by notice under his hand, addressed and delivered or tendered to such person prohibit him, after a period stated in such notice being not less than seven days from the date of such delivery or tender, and during a period likewise stated therein, from being in any area defined in such notice"; and sub-sec. (13) reads: "If any person to whom a notice has been delivered or tendered under sub-sec.

Stratford, A.C.J.

(12) requests the Minister in writing to f tarnish him with the reasons for such notice, and with a statement of the information which induced the Minister to issue such notice, the Minister shall furnish such person with a statement in writing setting forth his reasons for such notice and so much of the information which induced the Minister to issue such notice as can, in his opinion, be disclosed without detriment to public policy." On the 5th November, 1932, the respondent caused the following notice to be served on the appellant: "In terms of the provisions of sub-sec. (12) of sec. 1 of Act 27 of 1914, as amended by sec. 1 of Act 19 of 1930, you are hereby notified that whereas I find that you are creating feelings of hostility between the European inhabitants of the Union on the one hand and the coloured and native inhabitants of the Union on the other hand, in the Magisterial districts of Benoni, Boksburg, Brakpan, Germiston, Johannesburg, Krugersdorp and Springs, in the Province of the Transvaal, I hereby prohibit you from being present within the aforementioned Magisterial districts of Benoni, Boksburg, Brakpan, Germiston, Johannesburg, Krugersdorp and Springs, in the Province of the Transvaal, for a period of twelve months as from the seventh day after the delivery or tender to you of this Notice." On receipt of this notice and on the same day the appellant's attorney wrote the following letter to respondent: "I have been consulted by Mr. E. S. Sachs with reference to the order of deportation served on him to-day, prohibiting him from being present within the magisterial districts of Benoni, Boksburg, Brakpan, Germiston, Johannesburg, Krugersdorp and Springs, in the Province of Transvaal, for a period of 12 months, as from the seventh day of service. In terms of sub-sec. (13) of sec. 1 of the Riotous Assemblies and Criminal Law Amendment Act 27 of 1914 as amended by sec. 1 of the Riotous Assemblies (Amendment) Act 19 of 1930, I have been instructed by my client to require you to furnish him with the reasons for such notice, and with a statement of the information which induced you to issue such notice." On the 10th November the respondent replied as follows: "The Minister of Justice desires me to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 5th inst., containing your request to be furnished with the reasons why the Minister caused your client to be served with a notice under sub-section (12) of sec. 1 of Act No. 27 of 1914, prohibiting him to be within the area comprising the Reef

Stratford, A.C.J.

districts, and to inform you, on behalf of your client, that the Minister caused the said notice to be served upon your client because he was satisfied that your client has been promoting feelings of hostility between the European inhabitants of the Union on the one hand and the native inhabitants of the Union on the other hand in that as an avowed and professed communist he prominently and actively associated himself, both in public and in private with propaganda: (a) vilifying the majority of the European inhabitants of the Union as robbers and oppressors of the Native inhabitants of the Union; (b) inciting the...