Amnesty Hearings — Cape Town — UNKNOWN

CHAIRPERSON: Alright, just for my information.  You get some information as a result of which you take him to accompany you and you go to East London and you go to Umtata.  When he is brought back after the incident that took place in Umtata was Mr Kondile questioned further about other matters or was he being questioned again on the same matters on which he had given you information?

GINOTRY DANSTER: He was being questioned about the information he had given us and other information.

CHAIRPERSON: Other matters.

GINOTRY DANSTER: Yes other matters.

CHAIRPERSON: In other words matters not concerning the people in Umtata, but some other activity.

GINOTRY DANSTER: Yes that is correct.

UNKNOWN: Did he give any information about other activities?

GINOTRY DANSTER: He gave us a lot of details and a lot of information.

UNKNOWN: Right, now the other activities after Umtata which he gave you a lot of details and a lot of information, can you convey to us what the details and the information was?

GINOTRY DANSTER: They were written down in documents, everything, the names and the people they were written down in documents.

UNKNOWN: Now can you give me the names that were written or one of the names that were written down or any other information that's been written down?

GINOTRY DANSTER: Do you want me to give you names Mr Chairperson?

UNKNOWN: Well you said he wrote down names and he gave you information, now how many names can you remember did he give?  The names after Umtata when you said you further interrogated him and he gave you details and further names, I want to know the further names and the further details he's given you after Umtata.

GINOTRY DANSTER: He gave us details but I don't remember now, but he did give us some details.

UNKNOWN: And the names?

GINOTRY DANSTER: He also gave us names.

UNKNOWN: Well can you remember the names?

GINOTRY DANSTER: It is very difficult for me to remember these names after so many years.

UNKNOWN: Thank you.

ADV GCABASHE: As a result of the interrogation after the Umtata trip were there any other pointings out you might remember, this is really what the Committee and Counsel is trying to solicit from you, is there any one incident to give us an example that might come to mind?

GINOTRY DANSTER: We did not go with him after the Umtata incident.

MR VISSER: Yes.  Is it fair to say that you can't tell us today of any action taken by the Security Police based on any information received from Mr Kondile after he had been taken to Umtata?

GINOTRY DANSTER: Please repeat your question.

MR VISSER: No action by the Security police was taken, that you can remember today based upon information given by Mr Kondile after you had come back from Umtata.

GINOTRY DANSTER: I don't remember.

MR VISSER: And lastly on this point Mr Danster let me put it to you.  Isn't it true to say that the fact that Mr Kondile had taken the Security police to Umtata and pointed out the two gentlemen who worked in the bank is the living proof of the fact that he was cooperating.

GINOTRY DANSTER: I don't actually follow you.

MR VISSER: Mr Kondile was cooperating by the time you went to Umtata, there was no reason to torture him at all I am putting it to you.

GINOTRY DANSTER: It was the method of the day to get information.

CHAIRPERSON: You see it's being put by counsel the fact that he gave you details, went with you to Umtata, pointed out people, isn't that proof that he was cooperating with the police?

GINOTRY DANSTER: He did give us some information, that is proof.

CHAIRPERSON: No, no, he didn't only just give you information, he went there and he pointed out people as well, isn't that so?

GINOTRY DANSTER: He gave us information and he told us where these people were and he gave us names.

CHAIRPERSON: Alright.  Now that was proof that he was cooperating with the police.

GINOTRY DANSTER: If you put it that way because we forced information out of him.

MR VISSER: ...ask you.  You referred on more than one occasion in your affidavit to the torturing, or the alleged torturing of Mr Kondile as a severe torture, do you remember that?

GINOTRY DANSTER: Yes.

MR VISSER: Well you told us today that one of the things that was used was a torture machine.

GINOTRY DANSTER: That is so.

MR VISSER: And you described it to us, didn't you, it's a telephone apparatus with two wires.

GINOTRY DANSTER: Yes.

MR VISSER: And is that machine generally known in Security police circles as a "torture machine"?

GINOTRY DANSTER: That is correct.

MR VISSER: You don't know of any other way in which one refers to that machine, do you?

GINOTRY DANSTER: "Spook".

MR VISSER: Did this torturing leave any marks, any wounds on the body of Mr Kondile?

GINOTRY DANSTER: No.

MR VISSER: And to what would you ascribe that, one, the torture machine produced electric shocks if I understand you correctly, and you used a tube.  That wouldn't necessarily leave marks, is that what you are saying?

GINOTRY DANSTER: Yes I say that.

MR VISSER: Now apart from that you also alleged in your statement and eventually in your evidence-in-chief today that Mr Kondile was deprived of sleep.

GINOTRY DANSTER: Yes I did say that.

MR VISSER: Okay.  Apart from those methods was there any other method of torturing used on Mr Kondile that you observed or that you actually yourself applied?

GINOTRY DANSTER: It's only the one I have mentioned.

MR VISSER: I am sorry I don't follow you, which is the one you are referring to now?

GINOTRY DANSTER: The ones that you have just asked me about.

MR VISSER: Okay, that makes it clear.  Can we go to - well just before I do that.  Mr Kondile, according to your evidence if it is to be believed is basically tortured, severely, for something in the region of six weeks, is that correct?

GINOTRY DANSTER: Yes like I have said.

MR VISSER: And you say there was absolutely no sign that the torturing was affecting him adversely so that people who saw him would observe it?

CHAIRPERSON: Unless he was undressed perhaps.

MR VISSER: Well Mr Chairman may the witness answer this question with respect I think it's a fair question and you know what the background is to form the question.
	Are you saying that you ...(intervention)

GINOTRY DANSTER: We were not using stones, sticks so that there could be marks on his body.

MR VISSER: Yes.  He didn't start acting strangely, peculiarly because of this torturing, did he, that you could see?

GINOTRY DANSTER: He would feel pain and the body would be stiff because of that.

MR VISSER: Yes.  Let me ask you this again.  You didn't observe a behavioural pattern change in Mr Kondile during the six weeks that you speak about, did you?

GINOTRY DANSTER: A behaviour like what?

UNKNOWN: Was Mr Kondile an intelligent person?

GINOTRY DANSTER: Yes.

UNKNOWN: Did he remain an intelligent person?

GINOTRY DANSTER: Yes.

UNKNOWN: Up to the end when they took him away?

GINOTRY DANSTER: Yes.

MR VISSER: Thank you Mr Commissioner. Let's move on to something else.  You said as a security policeman you are obliged to follow orders?

GINOTRY DANSTER: That is correct.

MR VISSER: Mr du Plessis gave you an order, according to you, not to beat, kick or bang him against a wall.

GINOTRY DANSTER: Yes.

MR VISSER: Why would Mr du Plessis have found it necessary to be so specific when he gave you that instruction, do you think?

GINOTRY DANSTER: I don't know.

MR VISSER: Oh come on Mr Danster.  On this instruction you could have taken a lead pipe and hit him over the head couldn't you, because that wouldn't have been covered in this instruction?  Do you agree with me?

GINOTRY DANSTER: I was given instructions not to beat him.  I did not do that because I obeyed the instructions.

MR VISSER: You are a policeman Mr Danster, you know what is involved when you speak about assault.  Now Mr du Plessis gave evidence to say that he told you all not to assault the man, isn't that what he said?