The High Court in Pietermaritzburg has reopened the inquest into the controversial death of Chief Albert Luthuli, an esteemed anti-apartheid activist and the former President of the African National Congress (ANC). His untimely demise in 1967 has long been shrouded in speculation, with official reports historically attributing it to an accident involving a train. However, the initial inquiries lacked a critical component—any photographs of the crime scene or the post-mortem examination, a shocking revelation that emerged during the court’s first session of the reopened inquest.
Captain Godisamang Kgamanyane, the first witness, detailed his investigation which began in 2019. He disclosed that the original inquest records did not contain any images that could provide clarity on the circumstances surrounding Luthuli’s death. “I also attempted to trace any photographs relating to the late Chief Albert Luthuli. As none were reflected, it has been part of the inquest record. I was looking specifically for the crime scene or post-mortem photographs without any success. It means there were no photographs. The post-mortem was attached to this,” Kgamanyane stated.
During the first session, held yesterday, the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) indicated its intention to reconstruct the events leading to Luthuli’s death and expose alleged collusion within the initial inquest. The NPA has committed to calling approximately 27 witnesses as they seek to unearth the buried truths surrounding this pivotal moment in South African history.
Among those present at the court sitting was Jeff Radebe, the ANC’s Convener of the Provincial Task Team. He expressed the long-held suspicions regarding Luthuli’s death, asserting that, “from the very beginning our leaders and the world at large never believed that this was an accident by goods train.” Radebe added, “We always suspected that this was an orchestrated brutal murder of the president.” His statements echoed the growing frustration over the initial findings, which many believe were tainted by the political context of apartheid.
Radebe further elaborated that the early proceedings not only involved graves misinformation but also collusion with the powers of the then apartheid regime—highlighting the complicity of the magistrate who presided over the initial inquest. “May I say Secretariat of the injustice of Apartheid to cover up this murder as if it is a goods train accident. The expert now is indicating as well that how does a goods train accident give rise to defensive wounds in the hands?” Radebe’s remarks resonate with the historical narrative and the demand for justice that continues to reverberate within South Africa.