Compiled by
Ernst Roets and Lorraine Claassen

For the attention of the
International Rehabilitation Council for Torture Victims

A report by AfriForum

26 June 2014

International Day in Support of Victims of Torture

On this International Day in Support of Victims of Torture, we express
our solidarity with, and support for, the hundreds of thousands of victims
of torture and their family members throughout the world who
endure such suffering. We also note the obligation of States not only
to prevent torture but to provide all torture victims with effective and
prompt redress, compensation and appropriate social, psychological,
medical and other forms of rehabilitation. Both the General Assembly
and the Human Rights Council have now strongly urged States to
establish and support rehabilitation centres or facilities.
—United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon 20121
1 Secretary-General’s Message for 2012, International Day in Support of Victims of Torture
“
”
1. Introduction
2. Defining Torture
3. Day in Support of Victoms of Torture
4. Farm Tortures in the South African context
5. The Extent of Farm Attacks in South Africa
6. Characteristics of Farm Attacks
7. The Deprioritisation of Farm Attacks in South Africa
8. Lasting Effects of Torture
9. Case studies
1 Christine Otto
2 Edward and Ina de Villiers
3 Lena-Maria Jackson
4 Andre van der Merwe
5 Barbara Wortmann and Etcel Wortmann
6 Mohammad and Razia Enger
7 John and Bina Cross
8 Attie, Wilna and Wilmien Potgieter
9 Koos and Tina van Wyk
10 Fanus Badenhorst and Marina Maritz
10. Conclusion
Content
1. Introduction
AfriForum is a civil rights organisation operating in South Africa with particular
focus on the promotion and protection of the rights of minority communities.
The organisation was founded in 2006 and has been blessed with growth at an
exponential rate. At the time this report was drafted, the organisation had more
than 95 000 individual members, the majority of whom represent families.
AfriForum is a multi-issue, non-governmental organisation and therefore the
organisation drives multiple campaigns simultaneously. However, one of AfriForum’s
core campaigns is the prioritising of farm murders.
South Africa has been plagued by farm murders, especially in the past 20 years.
The worst of the matter is not the fact that South African farmers are being
attacked and killed, but rather the disproportionate numbers that are involved,
the extreme levels of brutality that often accompany these crimes, and the fact
that the South African government has largely been in denial about the problem
since 2007.
On 17 June 2014, during the annual State of the Nation Address, state president
Jacob Zuma said that the government expected the agricultural community to
create one million jobs by the year 2030. Although AfriForum agrees that poverty
and job creation are one of South Africa’s major challenges, the organisation
expresses concern that the state president’s ambitions will not be realised as
long as job creators in the agricultural community are being murdered and even
tortured at an alarming rate. Fifteen years ago, South Africa had about 100 000
commercial farmers. This number has declined to about 36 000 today.2 If the
crisis of farm murders and tortures is not addressed, it will impact negatively not
only on the agricultural community, but on South Africa as a whole.
About a month before the finalisation of this report, a new South African government
was elected. Together with this, a new minister of police was appointed.
Most of the information in this report is based on interaction with previous
2 Loss of commercial farmers ‘worrisome’ News24, 24 March 2013.
ministries of police (who were of the same political party as the new minister)
and national police commissioners.
Only days after the inauguration of Nkosinathi Nhleko as the new Minister of
Police, Martin Coetzee (82) was attacked and tortured on his farm near Belfast
in the province of Mpumalanga. Upon discovering and confronting intruders on
his farm, Coetzee was tied up and repeatedly beaten with blunt objects, breaking
his arm. From this particular case it transpired that there was a relationship
between the attackers and the local police, as the attackers called the police
to the scene. The police arrived shortly after the summons, only to engage in
discussion with the attackers while ignoring Coetzee, who was still on the scene,
tied up and severely injured.
This report will be presented to the International Rehabilitation Council for Torture
Victims (IRCT), but also to the new South African Minister of Police, Nkosinathi
Nhleko.
After several calls for the prioritisation of farm murders had fallen on deaf ears,
AfriForum decided in 2013 to internationalise its campaign as a way of raising
awareness about the matter and obtaining support. With this report, AfriForum
intends strengthening communication with the IRCT in order to learn from best
practices how the phenomenon of farm murders can best be addressed, while
supporting the victims who have been tortured, or who have lost loved ones
during these attacks.
The case studies in this report were compiled using various resources and articles
published in the media. All resources are available on request. As is stated
elsewhere, limited resources were available regarding the more sensitive details
of some of the attacks mentioned in this report.
The most widely accepted definition of torture internationally is set out by Article
1 of the United Nations Convention Against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or
Degrading Treatment or Punishment (UNCAT).
The International Rehabilitation Council for Torture Victims further explains that
torture is often used to punish, to obtain information or a confession, to take
revenge on a person or persons or to create terror and fear within a population.
Some of the most common methods of physical torture across the globe include
beating, electric shocks, stretching, submersion, suffocation, burns, rape
and sexual assault.
‘… “torture” means any act by which severe pain or suffering,
whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted
on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a
third person information or a confession, punishing him for
an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected
of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a
third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of
any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at
the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a
public official or other person acting in an official capacity.
It does not include pain or suffering arising only from,
inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.’
2. Defining torture
3. Day in support of victims of torture
26 June is a day of particular importance when it comes to the issue of torture.
The day is dedicated to support of victims of torture on the United
Nations’ calendar. On the 26’th of June 1987, the United Nations Convention
Against Torture came into effect. Furthermore, the Charter of the United Nations,
which is the foundational treaty of the United Nations, was signed on
the 26’th of June 1945. The Charter states in article one that the United Nations
intends to take effective collective measures to the suppression of acts
of aggression (among other).
The General Assembly of the UN officially decided to dedicate the day to
support of victims of torture at the proposal of Denmark, which houses the
International Rehabilitation Council for Torture Victims (IRCT). Since then,
nearly 100 organisations across the globe organise events, celebrations or
campaigns on the said day.
The purpose of this day is to speak out against violent crime, to raise awareness
about incidents of torture worldwide and to support victims of torture.
Victims are limited to those who have been tortured and who were fortunate
enough to survive, but also those whose loved ones were tortured and killed.
4. Farm tortures in the South African context
Although torture may occur during a variety of violent crimes, with different
purposes and in various circumstances, it is particularly evident during farm
attacks (the focus of this report). The true extent to which torture may occur in
these cases is difficult to determine, as information on this subject is limited for
a variety of reasons, including:
The victims succumbed to the injuries inflicted during the attack and
the exact details of the ordeal are not known and cannot be relayed in
witness testimonies
Because of the ongoing investigations, only limited details and facts
are often released to the press and the public
The extent of the violence used on victims is often just too horrendous
to be released
The families of the victims need to be respected and should be
spared any additional pain and sadness that facts about the attack
may cause
The South African Police Service (SAPS) does not release any information
on the topic and has refused to engage with civil society on
the topic in recent years
It is clear that attacks in which torture occurs are loaded with emotion and
intent. In numerous cases the attackers may have had ample opportunity to
target the homestead when the inhabitants were not at home or were elsewhere
on the property, thereby reducing their chances of being caught. The crime
changes from theft to robbery, and from robbery to torture. What makes an
assailant then choose to use extremely violent and unnecessary means to inflict
pain and torture if the sole motive was monetary gain?
During the attack, the attackers are in complete control of the situation and
have the power or authority over the victim’s lives. In stark contrast to the torturer,
the victim (or tortured) has absolutely no control due to being physically
restrained and frightened about the uncertainty of the situation and whether
they will come out of it alive. It is disturbing that a group of assailants chooses
as a collective to disregard the morality and moral fibre that are part of every
human being (another subject entirely) and to inflict such extreme, brutal and
cruel suffering on another human being. One cannot deny the complexities
of group dynamics and the authority of the leader of the group, leaving other
members afraid to confront him in such a loaded situation. However, this subject
will not be dealt with here.
Nevertheless, these extreme measures are used for the purpose of gaining information
regarding the whereabouts of the keys to the safe, the safe itself or
the location of other valuables. The contents or the value of the possible loot
is at this stage still unclear in the majority of cases, and torture may have been
unnecessarily inflicted for a meagre R40.3
It is apparent in some cases that monetary gain was not the motive for the
attack. Attackers may have tortured their victims in order to instil fear, not only
in the victims but also in the general farming community. Torturing to such
an extent may also have been used to send a message and to let the victims
know that they were and still are being watched, instilling extreme fear.
Michael Davis4 writes that torture can be undertaken or used for any of at least
six reasons (of which the UC Convention identifies four):
To obtain a confession – ‘judicial torture’
To obtain information – ‘interrogational torture’
To punish – ‘penal torture’, and
To intimidate or coerce the sufferer or others to act in certain ways
– ‘terroristic’ or ‘deterrent torture’
To destroy opponents without killing them – ‘disabling torture’ and
To please the torturer or others –‘recreational torture’.
Any of these reasons still seem unconceivable to the rational mind. Even
though the victims are physically helpless and restrained, the torture is as
much on an emotional as a mental level. Regardless of the possible motive for
gaining information from the victim, the victim is left to face severe pain and
possibly death.
3 40 South African rands are roughly the equivalent of 3,74 US dollars or 20,54 Danish krone.
4 Davis, M. 2005. The Moral Justifiability of Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading
Treatment, International Journal of Applied Philosophy, 19(2): 161-178.
What does a victim think about when being tortured for hours on end? Obviously
the safety of their spouse or family, and inevitably the tortured person’s
own life. Weighing up possible scenarios, negotiating with the torturer, pleading
for the torture to end are but a few possibilities of what a victim may have to
face during hours of torture.
Davis5 also discusses the duration of such an event. The torture may not necessarily
end when the information is given and the victim’s life may be taken
regardless of their having provided the correct information. The natural limit of
torture or stopping point of the suffering is ultimately death, when the victim
is physically not ably to endure or withstand the suffering and dies as a direct
result of wounds inflicted.
In the case studies included in this report, the variety of the methods of torture
is clear. One method that stands out and is often used is burning the victim
with a hot clothes iron. This not only shows malicious intent but the torturers
expect this method to provide them with the desired results. The use of an
iron or warming up of an object to use to burn a victim also indicates the time
the assailants have to complete an attack. They are comfortable in taking their
time, often helping themselves to food and drinks, trying on clothes and looking
for valuables throughout the house while torturing the restrained victim in the
meantime. There is no fear of being caught on the scene due to the isolation of
the property.
In the context of farm tortures in South Africa, the focus appears to be more on
the creation of terror and fear within the population than on obtaining information,
as will be evident from this report.
It should be noted that, historically, there has been political tension between
South African farmers and South Africa’s ruling African National Congress
(ANC). Portions of minority communities believe that farm tortures carry with
them an element of revenge on the white population as a result of South Af-
5 Davis, M. 2005. The Moral Justifiability of Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading
Treatment, International Journal of Applied Philosophy, 19(2): 161-178.
rica’s history of racial segregation. Many believe that there is also a political
element, as the military wing of the African National Congress6 historically
defined farms as ‘legitimate ware zones’ in which soft targets could also be
attacked and killed.7 Farmers are still frequently the targets of verbal political
attacks by senior members of the ruling party. Furthermore, AfriForum recently
filed a complaint of hate speech against the ANC for its continued use of the
so-called struggle song, entitled Shoot the Boer.8 Another popular struggle
song entitled Kill the Boer, kill the farmer was declared to be hate speech by
the South African Human Rights Commission in 2003.9
6 Currently the ruling party in South Africa.
7 At the ANC General Conference in Kabwe, Zambia in 1985, a resolution was adopted that
soft targets could be killed during actions of armed struggle.
8 See AfriForum v Malema (2011).
9 See Freedom Front v South African Human Rights Commission (2003).
10 Johan Burger ‘From Rural Protection to Rural Safety: How government changed its priorities’
in Report by the Solidarity Research Institute An overview of farm attacks in South
Africa and the potential impact thereof on society November 2012, page 62.
11 Boere het meer risiko’s as polisie Beeld, 24 October 2013.
5. The extent of farm attacks in South Africa
When the South African government made a decision to deprioritise farm murders
in 2007 (see The deprioritisation of farm attacks in South Africa later in this
report), its own commission of enquiry found that at least 6 122 farm attacks
and 1 254 farm murders had taken place between 1991 and 2001. The rate at
which farm murders were committed more than doubled from 1991 to 1998.
Since 2007 no official statistics on farm murders have been made available and
it is left to civil society to compile statistics. In the same year that the government
decided to deprioritise farm murders, murders on commercial farmers
(excluding their families and employees) were calculated at 98,8/100 000. That
was more than three times higher than the general South African murder rate
and fourteen times higher than the world average.10
During 2011 the murder rate on police officers was calculated at 51/100 000,
half the murder rate on farmers four years previously. In contrast to the situation
with farmers, the government’s reaction to this issue was to organise a national
conference and formulate a counter-strategy.
During 2013 the murder rate on farms was recalculated by the South African
Institute for Security Studies (ISS). Using newer data, the rate at which South
African farmers were murdered annually was estimated at 120/100 000.11
6. The characteristics of farm attacks
Some attacks are more organised and planned than others, like with
any other crime. Firearms, tools to break into a house, wire or cables
used to restrain victims or a getaway car brought with the perpetrators
to the targeted property indicate the offender’s intent in premeditating
and planning the attack in advance.
Perpetrators who have already selected their target often stake out
the property weeks in advance, sometimes trying to gather information
from farm labourers about the comings and goings at the homestead
and the general layout of the farm and the house.
There is usually more than one attacker committing the crimes. Having
someone to work with, restrain victims, collect the loot or keep
watch allows the attack to be completed in a shorter time period.
There are cases where at least one of the attackers was known to the
victim, in other cases the attackers were complete strangers.
The initial contact with the victim can occur in various ways. Some
attackers ambush their victims by either waiting or hiding inside their
homes or at the farm gates to overpower the unsuspecting victims
arriving home. Others surprise the victims inside their homes by gaining
access to the home through windows, or confront them somewhere
else on the property. Attackers may also lure the victims outside
the house on the pretence of buying cattle or products, looking
for a job or even by setting the grass outside the home alight. This
allows the attacker to overpower the victims, leaving them powerless
and with phones or firearms out of reach.
In November 2012 the Solidarity Research Institute compiled a report entitled
An overview of farm attacks in South Africa and the potential impact thereof on
society .12 The report included the characteristics of a farm attack, which provided
an overview of the nature of an attack and what it may include. The following
factors and characteristics were identified as predominant in farm attacks 13:
12 The full report was published in the second edition of Treurgrond, published by Kraal
Publishers.
13 Claasen, L. 2012. The significance of the level of brutality and overkill in An Overview of
Farm Attacks in South Africa and the potential impact thereof on society.
The victims of the attacks are not limited to the farmer and their
spouse or family but also include domestic workers and farm labourers.
Most victims are overpowered, assaulted and restrained upon
initial contact with the attackers. There are cases where the victims
fought back in self-defence, often shooting the perpetrators and
causing them to flee.
Victims are mostly restrained with shoe laces, telephone wires or
electric cables tied around their hands and legs.
Victims may be harmed with various objects during attacks. Attackers
assault victims with steel pipes, pangas14 , axes, knobkerries15 ,
shovels, pitchforks, broomsticks and knives, or by kicking, beating,
slapping and hitting the victims.
Victims are often threatened in order to gather information about
the whereabouts of the safe, the keys to the safe and the location of
money, firearms and other valuables. Threatening to kill them or their
spouses or cause them serious physical harm, or pouring methylated
spirits over the victims may force the victims to give the information
that the attackers demand.
Various victims are horrifically tortured by pulling out their nails, pouring
boiling water over their bodies, burning them with electric irons,
breaking their fingers, pulling them behind a moving vehicle, or repeatedly
hitting them with objects before they are ultimately murdered.
The attackers ransack the house, looking for valuables and loot.
Female victims are sometimes raped during the attack.
Victims are shot, sometimes fatally, when they try to resist the attack,
try to defend their families, shoot at the attackers and much too often
for no apparent reason at all.
The attacker’s loot may, if anything, include firearms, money, vehicles,
jewellery, electronic devices, clothes, shoes or farming equipment.
Attackers either flee the scene on foot, in a getaway car ready for the
escape or in the farmer’s own vehicles. It is concerning that in numerous
cases the vehicle stolen is left abandoned a short distance from
the farm or property where the attack occurred.
14 Panga is a South African term used for a machete-like tool.
15 A knobkerrie is typically a traditional weapon used for hunting or for clubbing an enemy’s
head. It typically consists of a wooden stick with a large knob on the one end.
7. The deprioritisation of farm murders
A significant problem in determining the extent of farm murders is the fact that the South
African government, and the department of police in particular, is refusing to release any
statistics on this crime.
The government says it seems as if farmers are being targeted in
a unique manner in violent and murderous attacks. Statistics on
farm murders are released annually and the government appoints
a task team to draft a plan against farm attacks.
President Thabo Mbeki announces that the commando system
(which focuses primarily on protecting farmers) is being abolished.
Mbeki undertakes to replace the commando system by a structure
that is controlled by the police. However, this never happens.
Farm attacks increase by almost 25%. The government announces
that no further statistics on farm attacks or murders will be released.
Despite this increase and the government’s earlier undertakings farm
murders are no longer a priority.
A victim whose father and brother were murdered on their farm in the
past month submits a volume to the office of the minister. The volume
contains letters from 100 victims of farm attacks and requests the prioritisation
of farm murders. The minister responds to this by calling the
victims’ attempt to communicate with him a publicity stunt that should
not be taken seriously.17
AfriForum releases a report indicating that farm murders are not investigated
by the police with the necessary seriousness.18 The minister’s
spokesperson calls the report racist and indicates that the minister will
not read it.
Where the government admitted in the past that farmer murders are particularly
savage and that it is a crisis that should be addressed, the magnitude of the crisis is
to a great extent denied today. The irony is that the government’s reaction to farm
murders has declined as rapidly as the magnitude of the problem has increased.
The Joint Operational and Intelligence Structure
Priority Committee is appointed to handle rural
safety as a national priority.
A committee of enquiry on farm murders
is appointed by the government.
The department of police prohibits victims whose relatives were murdered
on farms from holding a protest march to its offices. AfriForum
representatives are blackmailed by a representative of the minister. A
complaint is submitted to the Public Protector (PP).16
The high court gives permission for the march to continue. The
march takes place on 1 December, but the minister refuses to accept
the memorandum and the police fail to delegate officers to regulate
traffic and ensure the safety of the marchers.
16 More information is available from AfriForum on request.
17 The full statement by the office of the minster of police is available from AfriForum
on request.
18 The full report, highlighting police negligence with respect to the investigation of
farm murders, is available from AfriForum on request.
8. The lasting effects of torture
Torture undoubtedly leaves severe physical and emotional scars if the victim
survives. This also applies to the family of the victim. Witnessing the scene of
the crime or the injuries inflicted on a loved one may leave a person severely
traumatised, racked with guilt about not being able to help or save the victim,
and overwhelmed by the aftermath of the crimes committed. Dealing with or
handling farm activities and duties for which the victim may have been responsible
puts enormous pressure on the family and friends left behind.
Victims and their families may be subjected to severe emotional stress and
trauma by having to recount events to the police or for insurance purposes.
The inability to cope with the aftermath may lead to depression, anxiety, substance
abuse and thoughts of suicide. Withdrawing from friends and family,
from daily farm duties and responsibilities and constantly living in fear of
re-victimisation may leave victims and their families in desperate need of the
necessary assistance and guidance to adapt to their changed lives.
Even though we cannot bring loved ones back or remove physical and emotional
scars and pain, AfriForum aims to help the victims and their families left
behind. By providing assistance and attending to basic needs and by providing
support wherever we can, we can use that same moral fibre mentioned earlier
to do good, to help and to support those left behind.
Ultimately the effects of experiencing such a violent event and being tortured
are far-reaching and incomprehensible. In an attempt to explain further, Bennoune
wrote the following in an article entitled Terror/Torture19 :
‘The similarities between the practices of terror and torture are
significant and defining. These include the visitation of severe pain
on victims, the intentionality of doing so, and the tremendous
fear deliberately provoked in victims, survivors and those around
them. Terrorism and torture both share some characteristics with
19 Bennoune, K. 2008. Terror/Torture. Berkeley Journal of International Law, 26:1-61.
hate crimes. Both torture and terror involve the infliction of extreme
suffering, often on a victim chosen on a basis which may include
discriminatory motives, often with a message intended for a broad
audience and meant to impact the lives of many…
‘… Ultimately, the concrete results of what is called torture and what
is called terrorism are often experienced as much the same: the devastation
of the bodies and minds of those targeted by these practices;
grave physical and psychological injury to many with profound
and lasting sequelae for survivors, some of which may be invisible to
the eye; and the spread of fear among many others of falling victim
to the same fate.’

20Roughly the equivalent of 23,68 US dollars or 129,57 Danish krone.

Steps that the International Rehabilitation Council for Torture Victims can take:
1. Acknowledge of the crisis
2. Further engage with AfriForum and other role players about
the crisis
3. Initiate a fact-finding mission to South Africa
4. Communicate with the South African government about the
problem
5. Assist AfriForum regarding the support of torture victims in
South Africa
10. Conclusion
The horror experienced during farm tortures is almost incomprehensible. The
well-known ‘blood sisters’ from the South African company Crimescene-cleanup
have rightly indicated that, in their experience, farm tortures are by far the most
horrific acts of violence in South Africa. They are of the opinion that the term
‘farm murders’ is misleading and that the terms ‘farm terror’ and ‘farm tortures’
are more suitable.
Although there are many aspects to the farm attacks, a matter of particular
concern is the romanticising of violence towards white farmers in particular by
high-profile politicians, combined with a large degree of denial about the true
extent of the problem.
The fact that the South African government has effectively deprioritised farm
attacks, despite the increase in this phenomenon, is probably the greatest cause
for concern.
Given the complexity of the matter, the reality is that there is no silver bullet and
that this phenomenon cannot be solved with one single action. A multifaceted
approach should be followed.
Steps that AfriForum will take:
1. Conduct further research on the topic with experts in the field
2. Communicate further with the IRCT
3. Engage further with the South African Police Service
4. Launch a national awareness campaign regarding the safety of farmers
5. With the assistance of the IRCT, establish a network to support victims
of farm tortures more efficiently