The Mandela Brief: Sydney Kentridge and the Trials of Apartheid

Product Information

In 1949, after working briefly as a judge's clerk, Kentridge was admitted as an advocate of the High Court of South Africa. He was appointed a Senior Counsel in 1965. He became a leading defence lawyer in political trials in South Africa, with some of his major cases including the Treason Trial (1956–61), in which he defended Nelson Mandela, and the Prisons Trial (1968–69). A staunch opponent of apartheid, Kentridge represented three Nobel Peace Prize winners during his career – Mandela, Desmond Tutu and Albert Luthuli. [4] I well remember the arrival of Sydney Kent­ridge from South Africa into the arcane world of the English commercial bar, at which he began to practise in earnest in the early 1980s. He had not only a reputation for the quality of his advocacy, but also – less usual among commercial lawyers – a commanding moral stature, derived from his unwavering opposition to the apartheid regime in his home country. However, what will always dominate his legacy are his cases challenging the apartheid laws, policy and conduct by the apartheid government. Thomas Grant QC knows how ephemeral and incommunicable the art of advocacy is – how, if you were not there, it is impossible to understand the magic of a particular technique or the impact of a particular remark. Even the printed transcript of the proceedings is a dead thing by comparison with the event itself. Despite these challenges, this is Grant’s third book about what might be called notable cases. The first was The Trials of ­Jeremy Hutchison, who appeared in the evergreen Lady Chatterley’s Lover case; in another obscenity trial, the barrister achieved notoriety by simulating a penis with his thumb. Better still was Court Number 1, The Old Bailey, which built a richly variegated and ­perceptive portrait of 20th-century Britain around the framework of 11 trials held in that court.

Records the default button state of the corresponding category & the status of CCPA. It works only in coordination with the primary cookie. On occasion an apartheid judge would rule in favour of one of Kentridge’s clients. But, generally, his clients received scant justice from apartheid judges blind to justice and fairness. In 1965, Bram Fischer was disbarred by the Johannesburg Bar for skipping bail and absconding while being an accused in a case involving the Suppression of Communism Act of 1950, which made it an offence to be a communist in South Africa. At the disbarment hearings, Kentridge appeared for Fischer with Arthur Chaskalson (later to become Chief Justice) as his junior. Fischer was disbarred, although the decision was reversed posthumously in 2003. In 1949 Kentridge was admitted to the Johannesburg Bar and in 1965 he was appointed Senior Counsel. He served as Chairman of the Johannesburg Bar Council in 1972. In his early days at the Bar he appeared in several cases of historical and political significance, including cases for the Garment Workers' Union and its Secretary, E S "Solly" Sachs. He furthermore appeared as counsel at the inquiry into the shooting at Sharpeville, 1961, and for the family of Steve Biko at the inquest into his death. He also appeared for Stella Madzimabuto in both the then Rhodesia and the Privy Council in her challenge to the legality of the Smith regime.Kentridge refused to accept an appointment to the bench under the Apartheid government. He served as a judge of the Appeal Court in Botswana. In his 50s, Kentridge went to London where he launched a successful legal career, albeit one much more associated with the establishment than that of his time in South Africa. In 1984, he was appointed Queen’s Counsel and served as an Appeal Judge in Jersey and Guernsey. He was elected as Bencher of Lincoln’s Inn in 1986. In England, Kentridge has represented the English Bar in Court and has acted for the British Government (in the litigation on the Maastricht Treaty) and against it (in litigation citing the Home Secretary for contempt of Court). In an article in the Financial Times in January 2013 a friend of the Kentridge family, John Gapper, interviewed Sir Sydney and formed the view that Sir Sydney’s description of Nelson Mandela matched Mandela’s description of Kentridge. “You could see his quality of leadership from the beginning…He was very thoughtful. ...unlike some of the others he never went in for slogans.” It’s not always remembered that in the treason trial in which Sir Sydney represented him, Mandela was acquitted. His prolonged sentence was as a result of a later trial. Sydney Kentridge was born in Johannesburg in 1922. He matriculated in 1938 at the King Edward VII High School. In 1941, he obtained a BA degree at the University of the Witwatersrand.

Many have committed to paper their memories of the man in action. Here is the account of Jeremy Gauntlett SC KC, whom Kentridge led in a number of cases: “He has the natural gift of a deep baritone voice, and the acquired ones of a deliberate fluency and perfect timing in delivery. Thus, witnesses “splutter” or “whimper” under Kentridge’s ­“devastating” cross-examination and “patrician nonchalance”; ­Mandela’s bearing in the witness box is “princely”; prosecution ­counsel are “preposterous”, ­“sheepish” or exhibit “a lather of confected rage”. Subtle this isn’t; and when a modest joke of Kent­ridge’s is described as “an immortal retort”, the narrative tips into hagiography – justified in life maybe, but less welcome in a book. It is also an error of judgment for Grant to demote the murderous speeches and (probably) activities of the “sanctified” Winnie Mandela’s later life to the status of “controversies”. a b c Gapper, John (18 January 2013). "Lunch with the FT: Sydney Kentridge". Financial Times . Retrieved 7 April 2013. He initially took several cases representing the trade unions and trade unionists, on occasion chalking up big wins against the National Party government, such as the case where he successfully asserted to the Appellate Division in Bloemfontein that the government could not unilaterally suspend trade unionist Solly Sachs’s passport.

Music Played

All QC’s (Queens Counsel) became KCs (Kings Counsel) after Queen Elizabeth’s death and King Charles III ascension to the English throne.

Feinberg, Tali (10 November 2022). "Kentridge reflects on a lifetime of fascination with the law". Jewish Report . Retrieved 27 November 2022. The barrister's barrister . . . a moral stature that no amount of moral forensic technique can impersonateSydney Kentridge was born in Johannesburg in 1922 and matriculated in 1938 at the King Edward VII High School. He married Felicia Geffen in 1952. They have two daughters, two sons, two granddaughters and two grandsons. Education The Mandela Brief: Sydney Kentridge and the Trials of Apartheid by Thomas Grant (21 Jul 2022) is available at the Book Lounge and for loan from the Jacob Gitlin Library . It is impossible for the court to come to the conclusion that the ANC acquired or adopted a policy to overthrow the state by violence … While the prosecution has succeeded in showing that the Programme of Action contemplated the use of illegal methods (e.g. strikes, boycotts etc) … for the achievement of a fundamentally different state from the present, it has failed to show that the ANC as a matter of policy intended to achieve this new state by violent means. Sydney Kentridge is widely regarded as one of the great advocates of the 20 th century. He practised in South Africa for some 30 years, where he is most famous for having represented numerous high-profile anti-apartheid figures, although his practice in fact covered all areas of the law. He is perhaps best known for having (uniquely) represented three Nobel Peace Prize winners – Albert Luthuli, Nelson Mandela (at both the Treason Trial and the Prison Trial) and Desmond Tutu, and also for having represented the family of Steve Biko at the inquest into his death in police custody. In many ways, lawyers like Kentridge, who robustly represented Nelson Mandela and his banned ANC colleagues, were both hated and welcomed by the apartheid government. They were hated because they were competent and showed up the stupidity and evil of the apartheid laws. On the other hand, so the Nationalists believed, Kentridge’s work showed the world that there was a decent legal system in place and those who obeyed the law would be protected by the courts.