Hani’s widow, SACP continue to oppose Walus’s parole bid
CHRIS Hani’s widow Limpho Hani and the SA Communist Party (SACP) believe that Janusz Walus’s crime was an attempt to subvert the regime through violence and had the potential of collapsing the country.
Limpho Hani and the SACP were responding to Walus’s latest attempt to be granted parole, which the Polish immigrant filed at the Constitutional Court.
In their written submissions, prepared by their counsel, advocates Muzi Sikhakhane SC and Nomonde Nyembe, they argue that even the court that sentenced Walus in October 1993 correctly observed that his crime was extraordinary, in both its execution and implications for South Africa at the time, and that this continued to be the case now.
“So weighty were the statements made, so serious was the crime and so volatile was the context within which the crime was committed that those statements outweigh any others in the consideration of parole,” read the submissions dated January 24.
Sikhakhane and Nyembe continue: “The sentence must serve to deter any other like-minded people who may contemplate assassinating political opponents with a view to creating chaos or ‘regime change’ through violence”.
According to the advocates, although Walus technically qualified for consideration to be released on parole (on the basis of the years spent in prison) this did not mean that he was entitled to it.
”It was so grave that it had the potential, and indeed the intent, of collapsing what would soon become a new, non-racial democracy,” Sikhakhane and Nyembe said.
In Walus’s heads of argument, written by advocates Roelof du Plessis SC and Leon Kellermann SC, Justice and Correctional Services Minister Ronald Lamola is accused of bowing to political pressure and fearing the political fallout that would result from his release on parole.
”The minister has been deployed by the ANC, which is a partner in the tripartite alliance, to which the SACP belongs, which is the second respondent in this application, and which is a party that is directly opposed to the applicant’s (Walus’) application,” stated the heads of argument.
Du Plessis and Kellermann further submitted that due to political pressure, the SACP’s opposition to the application and the possible political fallout that would take place as a result of Walus’s release on parole, Lamola created the reasonable perception of bias.
In his response, Lamola said Walus’ claim that his March 2020 decision denying him parole was taken arbitrarily or capriciously, was without substance.
”In respect of decisions which he is required to make in his capacity as the minister, he does so independently from interference by the national executive committee of the ANC, the Cabinet or any other entity or person,” read Lamola’s heads of argument written by advocates Marumo Moerane SC, Graham Bester SC and Noxolo Mteto.
Walus is turning to the apex court to overturn the April 2021 North Gauteng High Court ruling, dismissing his bid to challenge the high court’s earlier decision to refuse his attempt to be released on parole and another Supreme Court of Appeal judgment, dismissing his application for leave to appeal in June last year.
The matter will be heard on February 22.