Amnesty Hearings — Bloemfontein — 1998-01-20

CHAIRPERSON: 28th of January 1988, Thursday.

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, thank you My Lord.

UNKNOWN: I have it here.

MR STANDER: Whose handwriting is that, where it is written and Ngo on top of the line every time, where it had been inserted?

UNKNOWN: This is my handwriting.

MR DU PLESSIS: And did you write the words Ngo there at any time after you had found the occurrence books last year or did you write it in during this time in 1988, when did you make those inscriptions?

UNKNOWN: It was written on that same day in 1988, when I discovered that I skipped his name.

MR DU PLESSIS: All right.  Now, My Lord, there is one other issue that I want to ask a question, one or two questions about, that my learned friend, Mr Visser, drew my attention to.

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: Before you go to something else, let me just ask this witness about these entries.  Captain, there are other pages other than the pages to which Judge Wilson had drawn your attention to, like page 78, page 90. It seems that very often you would forget putting in Mr Ngo.
	Now, I want to ask you how reliable are your records relating to Mr Ngo?

UNKNOWN: My records are reliable because when I discovered that I made a mistake, at that same time, I rectified that mistake.  You would not find an old record with straight information, some information had been rectified.

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: And where you did not discover your mistakes, then heaven help us?

CHAIRPERSON: Will you look at page 90, entries 176, whose handwriting is that?

UNKNOWN: This is my handwriting.

CHAIRPERSON: But it is not the same as the handwriting at page 74?

UNKNOWN: Yes, but this is my handwriting.

CHAIRPERSON: Are you saying these are both your handwritings?

UNKNOWN: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: I find it very hard to accept that someone would write an "s" so completely differently, but I see 177 you have an "s" in the same way as you had before, and 181, 180 you change completely?  You say this is your handwriting, you are sure about that?

UNKNOWN: If that is 176, I think I printed at some stages.  At 176 I printed, these are my handwritings.  I have 176 here, which number is that that you refer to.

CHAIRPERSON: If you look at the duty at 176, duty on, the "d" appears to be written very differently from duty on on page 74, entry 133.  It is a different formation?

UNKNOWN: Do you want to see my handwriting, can I write on a piece of paper so that you can see my handwriting?

CHAIRPERSON: If you say it is your handwriting, I am not going to argue with you, but I - if you look at page 90 for example, 184 the duty has the circle at the top, we go on to the  next one, the next line, line 1, the duty has the circle at the bottom.  If we go to line 3, entry 3 has the circle at the top again.  So it appears that you change your handwriting frequently.
	I am not arguing with you, if you say it is your handwriting, I accept it.  Carry on.

MR DU PLESSIS: My Lord, I want to know if Your Lordship accepts it or not.

CHAIRPERSON: You will see that he makes these changes.

MR DU PLESSIS: I have been comparing it My Lord, and it looks different sometimes and sometimes it accords.  The "s" for instance accords, and then it differs again.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR DU PLESSIS: My Lord, I don't know, perhaps maybe one is written not under pressure and the other one is ...

CHAIRPERSON: But he says ...

MR BRINK: Mr Chairman, he might be ambidextrous.

CHAIRPERSON: Could be, there is no evidence to the contrary, there is no evidence that anyone else filled these papers in, except some that I think was probably Mr Ngo himself.

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, I think there was evidence relating to that.

CHAIRPERSON: Anyway, leave that now.  Have you got any more questions?

MR DU PLESSIS: Please My Lord, just pertaining to one issue.  Capt Khoja, you testified that for a specific period until Mr Ngo was arrested, he wasn't physically at the single quarters working, is that right, he wasn't physically doing work, he wasn't there?

UNKNOWN: This person disappeared at a certain stage, but he worked at the barracks.  I do not know whether I understood your question well.

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: Mr Du Plessis, which version are you referring to?  Are you referring to the version he gave us last year, or are you referring to the version which was elicited by Adv de Jager's question?

MR DU PLESSIS: My Lord, I thought that was cleared up but if Your Lordship perceives that there are two different versions, then I will have to deal with it properly.
	Capt Khoja, you testified last year, I am reading from the record, page 1123, you said I knew Mr Ngo, you said I knew him because he was under my supervision at that time.
	He worked under my supervision from 1987 when he arrived at the barracks, up to the time when he was arrested, that is what you testified.  What did you mean by saying that he worked under your supervision up to the time when he was arrested?
	The Committee wants to know what did you mean, did you mean that he worked physically there, until the day he was arrested, or did you mean that he was under your command or your supervision until the date he was arrested?  Which one did you mean?

UNKNOWN: He was under my supervision until the time of his arrest, but he was not physically there.  He worked under my supervision and then he disappeared and Unit 19 did not know his whereabouts, they ended up knowing that he was working under me.

MR DU PLESSIS: And when you testified last year, did you want or did you mean to testify what you have explained now?

UNKNOWN: That is correct.

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: Then why didn't you say so?  Why didn't you say what you meant?  Because apparently what you are saying is that you did not supervise him until he was arrested, you never supervised him until he was arrested?

MR DU PLESSIS: My Lord, with respect may I just make one point, that is why I am dealing with this now.  I thought it was cleared up in his evidence, there was clearly and I will argue that My Lord, there was clearly a misunderstanding when the questions were put to the witness, about this issue, and it has developed now into a situation where the witness is faced with allegations that he has made, has told under evidence, certain different versions, whereas I could clearly before my eyes see the development of the misunderstanding.

CHAIRPERSON: But you see, he goes on on the next page and says he worked under my supervision until he was arrested.  Now, Captain, did you see Mr Ngo every day, Mr Britz's question, the answer that is true.
	And where did he report to every day, he was reporting to me on a daily basis in the morning, and when he knocked off, he reported to me.
	Why didn't he then say I didn't see him for seven months?

MR DU PLESSIS: May I just get the right place Mr Chairman, just bear with me.

MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, it is an indulgence which I am asking Mr Chairman, I see that we are going on until half past, after twenty past three, I was wondering Mr Chairman, would it be asking too much to ask you whether we could possibly excuse the witnesses which I've got here until tomorrow morning Mr Chairman, we still have two witnesses to cross-examine.
	There are some difficulties unfortunately.

CHAIRPERSON: (Indistinct)