For the first time in its seven-year history, Harvard Radcliffe Alumni Against Apartheid (HRAAA) did not nominate candidates for the Board of Overseers this year.

As rumors circulated that the group would soon disband, HRAAA representatives said this week that it will actually expand its activities. It is planning a newsletter and is currently considering setting up a fund to promote diversity within the University, the representatives said.

The Harvard Alumni Association usually nominates an official slate of candidates each year for the 30-members Board of Overseers, one of the University's two governing boards. Each year, five news members are elected to six-year terms on the board by ballots submitted by alumni from all Harvard schools.

Any individual or group the nominate candidates by petition. Since 1986, HRAAA has fielded an independent slate of candidates in an effort to force the University to divest of its stock in South Africa, valued at $240 million as of December.

In 1986, 1987 and 1989, HRAAA succeeded in having four of its candidates elected to board: Gay W. Seidman '78, Peter H. Wood '64, Consuela M. Washington and South African Archbishop Desmond M. Tutu.

Seidman's term expires this year, Wood's and Washington's next year, and Tutu's in 1995.

Several HRAAA associates speculated that HRAAA did not nominate any candidates for two reasons--recent po- litical changes in south Africa and the YoungReport which was accepted in the 1989 by both theCorporation and the Board of Overseers.

The report made several modifications to theelection process for over seers in addition toreducing the number of candidates on the HarvardAlumni Association slate, it specified thatpetition candidates should be the listedseparately below official candidates on alumniballots.

HRAAA officials have said they believe thechange brought about by the Young Report titledthe playing field" against petition candidates. NoHRAAA candidates were electaed in the 1990 and1991.

"once Harvard titled the playing field, itbecame impossible for us to elect candidates,"said Robert P. Wolff 54, former executive directorof HRAAA.

"They're got 300 years of experience in keepingoutsiders outside," Wolff said. "They've beenholding off democracy for a long time and theywill probably continue to do so far for 200 moreyears."

Acting Executive Director of HRAAA Jan L.Handke offered no explanation of why her groupchose not to nominate candidates this year, butshe said in a written statement yesterday thatHRAAA will "actively consider" nominatingcandidates in future elections.

"At this time when the majority of the citizensof South Africa still cannot vote in their owncountry, [HRAAA] continues to demand that theUniversity adopt a policy of divestment," Handkesaid in the statement.

"We look forward to the day when democracy is areality in south Africa, and Harvard can be urgedto pursue a course of socially responsibleinvestment to address the economic inequalitiescreated by apartheid," she wrote.

Handke's sentiments contrast sharply with thoseof Wolff, who said yesterday he thought theorganization may be "about to wrap it up."

Although Wolff said he was only speculating histhoughts were indicative of the effect the recentchanges in south Africa may have had no HRAAAmembers.

Donald M. Solomon, who also once headed HRAAA,said "It's was getting to be a little to late forHarvard to divest, because even if Harvard diddivest it couldn't claim any moral superiority forhaving done so."

And Wolff said," The world has changed in sucha way that divestment is not longer a centralelement in the struggle against apartheid."

Just as the issue of divestment has become moreclouded in recent years even for HRAAA associates,the University has simultaneously increased itsstake in South Africa.

In fact, from June to December of last year,Harvard's investments in companies with ties toSouth Africa soared by $90 million to $20 million,largely due to new purchases of the stock inpharmaceutical and healthrelated companies.

And the latest annual report from thecorporation Committee on ShareholderResponsibility suggests that the University policyof selective divestment may be the close toextinction.

Thought HRAAA maybe giving up its battle fordivestment the group has long stated it has otherissues on its agenda. Now the group may be theshifting its energies from South Africa to otherissues of social responsibility regarding theUniversity.

A possible outgrowth of this shif