Amnesty Hearings — Pietersburg — 1997-07-01

ADV VISSER: I have no further questions at this stage Chairperson, thank you.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY ADV VISSER

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Rossouw.

MR ROSSOUW: Thank you Mr Chairman.

ADV DE JAGER: Mr Rossouw, just to get clarity on your position, are you opposing the application?   What precisely is your position, what role are you playing with regard to these applicants?  What is your status here?

MR ROSSOUW: Chairperson thank you for this opportunity, I've found myself in the unfortunate position that I feel I am involuntarily put in the position of a prosecutor. I am not opposing the applications.
	I think as far as the facts put forward by Mr Sehlwana is concerned and in the manner that it differs from what is said here or the deductions that were made, I should point it out, but whether there was as full disclosure or a political objective to the various applicants now testifying before this Commission is really, with all due respect, none of my concern and I do not intend to put that before the Commission. 
	If the committee would allow me, I think it would be proper that I think Mr Black should proceed to first start with cross-examining the witness and if there are further aspects which I feel might specifically deal with the issues raised by Mr Sehlwana I would then request the Committee  to afford me that opportunity.

ADV DE JAGER: I think it is correct that you should point out any differences between your client's testimony and his.  I think it is correct that you should proceed to do so now.  I've got no trouble, I only wanted to have clarity about your position, whether you oppose it or not.

MR ROSSOUW: As the Committee pleases.

MR ROSSOUW: Mr Coetsee the vehicle that was provided to Mr Sehlwana, initially to collect the people, you mentioned that it was a Toyota vehicle?

NICHOLAS STEPHANUS COETSEE: That is correct.

MR ROSSOUW: You heard that Mr Sehlwana denied that he had any knowledge of this biscuit coloured vehicle and during cross-examination there was referred to a beige vehicle.

NICHOLAS STEPHANUS COETSEE: Just being fair to Mr Sehlwana, he didn't say that he wasn't aware of this vehicle, he said that he was driving a 4 X 4. I don't know whether one can take it as far as saying that he didn't have knowledge or wasn't aware of this vehicle.

CHAIRPERSON: Of course I mean you have defined your own limits of cross-examination, nobody envisages that you would be a prosecutor.  The only reason why we give you the opportunity is whether you have questions to ask. If you don't have questions to ask you don't have to ask any questions.  But the correct procedure would be to be that you should put questions first before Mr Black as far as we are concerned and not the other way around, for very obvious reasons.  Therefore as I say you're very correct, you've defined your own limits of cross-examination.  If you have no questions to ask, say so and we will proceed to Mr Black.

MR ROSSOUW: Thank you Mr Chairman.
	Mr Coetsee in relation to that vehicle in your argument in-chief, it was the first time that we heard that this vehicle broke down. Is that correct?

NICHOLAS STEPHANUS COETSEE: Yes it broke down.

MR ROSSOUW: And it wasn't put to Mr Sehlwana that this vehicle broke down and that was also one of the reasons why this vehicle couldn't be used?

ADV VISSER: Mr Chairperson with great respect, that wasn't the reason.

CHAIRPERSON: Why is this question important?

MR ROSSOUW: Mr Chairman I'm just pointing out that this is the first time that - that it was not put in cross-examination to Mr Sehlwana.

CHAIRPERSON: How does it affect the client's position?

MR ROSSOUW: The fact is that it might have, to some extent, he said as far as that vehicle is concerned, I'm not going to say he didn't have recollection but he didn't use it, now surely if a vehicle breaks down, you must surely, somehow remember it, that would just be a further point which might prompt his recollection.

CHAIRPERSON: Well I'm not sure I understand you but any way, did I interrupt you Mr Visser?

ADV VISSER: No Mr Chairman I think I'm not going to make any objection.

CHAIRPERSON: Let's hear you, I mean proceed with your questioning.

MR ROSSOUW: You also said that just after the vehicle broke down you said that the 6th of July you received information from Mr van der Berg that it wasn't going to be three people anymore but six.

NICHOLAS STEPHANUS COETSEE: Yes that is correct.

MR ROSSOUW: Did he give you an indication of where he got the information from?

NICHOLAS STEPHANUS COETSEE: I can't remember whether he gave me an indication.  The deduction that I made was that he got it from Sehlwana.

MR ROSSOUW: After the operation you say that later in the same day you received a telephone call, you cannot remember if you got it yourself or Colonel van der Merwe?

NICHOLAS STEPHANUS COETSEE: That is correct.

MR ROSSOUW: And you say that the information from that telephone call was that five people were killed and one was wounded of the occupants?

NICHOLAS STEPHANUS COETSEE: Yes that's correct.

MR ROSSOUW: You heard that Mr van der Merwe said that the information to him was that six people were dead?

NICHOLAS STEPHANUS COETSEE: Yes I heard that.

MR ROSSOUW: You said that that's not how you received it, that's not correct?

NICHOLAS STEPHANUS COETSEE: That's how I can remember it, five people were killed and one was wounded.

MR ROSSOUW: Mr Chairman I have no further questions at this point.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR ROSSOUW

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Black.

MR BLACK: Thank you Mr Chairman. Perhaps if we just start off where Mr Rossouw left off. Your information was that five were killed at the scene and the wounded cadre was taken to Alldays. Now what does it mean by taken to Alldays, was he taken to hospital there, was he treated there, was he taken there for hospital treatment?

NICHOLAS STEPHANUS COETSEE: The deduction that I made was that he was taken to the Alldays Hospital.

MR BLACK: Did you follow that up at all?

NICHOLAS STEPHANUS COETSEE: Later I heard that the person died on the way.

MR BLACK: Who told you that the person died on the way while being transported?

NICHOLAS STEPHANUS COETSEE: I can't remember precisely who told me that.

MR BLACK: Do you know who took him to Alldays, who was in charge of the vehicle in which he was taken to Alldays?

NICHOLAS STEPHANUS COETSEE: No I don't know.

MR BLACK: Do you know in what type of vehicle was he taken there?

NICHOLAS STEPHANUS COETSEE: No I don't .

MR BLACK: Surely according to your evidence one of the main objects was to extract evidence from these six parties and here was the one who had survived this operation and incident, you make no enquiries as to the details of how he died on the way to Alldays, or who was in charge of him at the time, or in charge of his welfare, let's put it that way.  Is that how I understand your evidence?

NICHOLAS STEPHANUS COETSEE: Chairperson, I don't know who the person is who transported him.

MR BLACK: In fairness to you, did I understand that you did not make enquiries and investigate that issue?

NICHOLAS STEPHANUS COETSEE: I don't understand your question.

MR BLACK: You say that a survivor of the six was transported to Alldays, you've told the Committee that you don't know how he was transported, who transported him, who was in charge of his welfare and who made the report to you that he had died on the way.

ADV DE JAGER: Well if he died on the way to the hospital, surely he can't be interrogated later on, so..

MR BLACK: Mr Commissioner what I'm getting at is I want to enquire as to whether or not the Brigadier made enquiries about these issues after he had received a report that this wounded person had died on the way to Alldays. Did you enquire about these issues which I've raised?   When you say that you don't know in reply to each of those questions, did you make any investigation or enquiry after receiving the report?