×

We've got news for you.

Register on SowetanLIVE at no cost to receive newsletters, read exclusive articles & more.
Register now

'Lamola's decision to deny Walus parole will never change'

Siviwe Feketha Political reporter
Janusz Walus' lawyer Roelof du Plessis accused justice and correctional services minister Ronald Lamola of coming up with new reasons for not releasing him.
Janusz Walus' lawyer Roelof du Plessis accused justice and correctional services minister Ronald Lamola of coming up with new reasons for not releasing him.
Image: Gallo Images/Oryx Media Archive

Justice and correctional services minister Ronald Lamola will never allow Chris Hani’s killer Janusz Walus to be released from prison on parole if the Constitutional Court does not intervene and aid his last bid for freedom.

This was the argument put forward by Walus’ lawyer, Adv Roelof du Plessis, during an appeal application before the Apex court on Tuesday against Lamola’s decision to deny him parole.

Walus was sentenced to death in 1993 for gunning down Hani, then the general secretary of the SACP and a prominent leader of the ANC, who served as the chief of staff of its military wing, Umkhonto weSizwe.

The sentence was later commuted to life imprisonment after the abolishment of the death penalty in SA, but his application for parole has been rejected by the government for at least four times despite the claim by his legal representatives that he was fully rehabilitated and was remorseful.

Du Plessis told the ConCourt that there was no hope that Lamola would ever take a decision to allow for Walus to be released at any time in the future as he accused him of coming with new reasons for not releasing the Polish immigrant from incarceration.

“The court would have seen the ping pong game that went on between the minister and ourselves all the time in these matters and we submit that the minister, simply because of the political fallout, is never going to make a decision here. He is never going to make a decision to put the applicant on parole and the only entity that will come to the assistance of the applicant in this matter will be this court,” he said.

Lamola had pointed out that the 1993 sentencing remarks that described Walus’ actions led to him securing a death sentence, as well as the fact that he would only be on parole for three years if released before getting full freedom in terms of the law that applied when he was imprisoned, releasing him “would negate the severity that the court sought when sentencing him”.

Du Plessis, however, stressed that Walus had satisfied all the requirements for parole and that there was nothing that counted against him beside the death sentence and the sentencing remarks highlighted by Lamola, which he said Walus could not do anything about.

“These aspects will not change in future. So, when we have the decision of the minister on this basis, with only these two aspects counting against the applicant, the situation will not change in two or three or five years,” he said.

He said Lamola could still be taken on review if he had later decided to release Walus “on some arbitrary or capricious reason” as facts would now have changed.

He accused Lamola of violating Walus’ constitutional right to a parole.

Justice Nonkosi Mhlantla questioned Du Plessis if Walus had fully satisfied the restorative justice process which required him to engage with Hani's wife, Limpho, and the SACP, who are currently opposing his release.

Du Plessis said Walus had apologised but both the Hani family and the SACP had refused to accept the apology and that there was nothing more he could do.

Would you like to comment on this article?
Register (it's quick and free) or sign in now.

Speech Bubbles

Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.