358 / 494
357
complaints centred around a lack of food and the physical conditions of the
facility.
10.257.
Dr. Salmon said that there was no clear provision for water and
“sanitary conveniences were inadequate”. He could not understand how so
many persons could have been accommodated there. He saw processing of the
detainees such as the confiscation of mobile telephones and attempts at
identifying the owners. “The young men were angry.”
10.258.
Bishop Blair was told that there were 285 persons detained and
being processed at Seprod. He saw four persons in need of medical attention.
There were “men and children held at the facility”. He said -
“We asked SSP Graham to remove the children,
approximately 25. He did so and the children were sent to
the National Arena. I oversaw the procedure where the
children were processed and sent back home on 26 May.”
Complaints of Residents – Degrading Treatment
10.259.
In earlier Chapters, we reported that some residents who testified
alleged that they were roughly treated by the security forces and made to suffer
indignities. Maj. Williams acknowledged that “it could have been that my men
made persons sit in water”. Section 17(1) of the Constitution is engaged on this
evidence – see Chapter 10.13.
FINDINGS
10.260.
The law is clear that, during the State of Emergency, the
security forces were entitled to detain persons only where their
behaviour was of such a nature as to give reasonable grounds for
suspecting that they were acting or had acted in a manner prejudicial
to public safety or were committing or had committed an offence