Amnesty Hearings — Cape Town — UNKNOWN

MR VISSER: Yes, yes, yes, thank you for pointing that out, of course in logic you're absolutely correct.  Let me ask the question a different way.  Were you one of the people who took Kondile to his cell on occasion after you had interrogated him during the day?

GINOTRY DANSTER: Yes.

MR VISSER: Was he locked up with other people in the same cell?

GINOTRY DANSTER: No.

MR VISSER: There's a passage in front of the cells, isn't that correct?

GINOTRY DANSTER: Yes that is correct.

MR VISSER: And wherever you are in a cell if you raised your voice you could be heard by detainees in other cells, prisoners in other cells, if you shouted for example.  Do you agree with that?

GINOTRY DANSTER: That may happen.

MR VISSER: Yes.  So in other words would you agree with the statement that on your evidence Mr Kondile would have been able to communicate with other prisoners during the night when he was locked up in his cell?

GINOTRY DANSTER: I cannot dispute that.

MR VISSER: You told us about three officers or more that came from East London to interrogate Mr Kondile, do you remember that?

GINOTRY DANSTER: Yes I remember that.

MR VISSER: In relation to the pointing out, the date of the pointing out at Umtata, was that prior to that or on that day or later than that?

GINOTRY DANSTER: It happened before that.

MR VISSER: Right.  Did Mr Kondile complain to you about being ill-treated by those gentlemen?

GINOTRY DANSTER: No.

MR VISSER: Mr Chairman would you allow me a short moment to go through my notes to see whether I might not have left something out?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR VISSER: Yes, you signed your affidavit, I think on the 18th of July 1996, if I remember correctly.  Let me just check.  On the 18th of July 1996.  At the time you told whoever, or you were prepared to tell whoever that you participated in the severe torturing of Mr Kondile, we know that.  My question to you is, seeing that you didn't apply for amnesty or did you?  Did you apply for amnesty in regard to this severe assault on Mr Kondile?

GINOTRY DANSTER: No.

MR VISSER: What then did you hope to gain by making this affidavit, or did you just do it merely because you were asked?

GINOTRY DANSTER: Please repeat your question, I don't follow it.

MR VISSER: What did you hope to gain by making this affidavit and saying what you said in this affidavit?

GINOTRY DANSTER: I was not hoping to gain anything.

MR VISSER: Please tell me then did you go straight to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission to make this affidavit or did you first go, as you put it, to the ANC?

GINOTRY DANSTER: This was discussed and then I was told that people were going to come to me and take a statement.

MR VISSER: Please just answer the question.  Did you first speak to the TRC or to the ANC?

CHAIRPERSON: I think the answer is that he first discussed it and they told him that the TRC would come and take a statement from him.

MR VISSER: Well may I then establish who he discussed it with Mr Chairman?

CHAIRPERSON: I think he's mentioned the ANC.

MR VISSER: I just want to be fair to him Mr Chairman.  Did you first discuss it with the ANC?

GINOTRY DANSTER: Yes.

MR VISSER: Thank you.  Why didn't you go straight to the TRC?

GINOTRY DANSTER: I was approached by the ANC and they asked me about the events that happened.

MR VISSER: And were you made any promises or given any undertakings?

GINOTRY DANSTER: No.

MR VISSER: Well then can you please tell this Committee why you didn't consider making application for amnesty for the severe torturing in which you participated? ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Tell me is it relevant?  There are lots of other people who have committed crimes who haven't applied.

MR VISSER: Well Mr Chairman they are not in the witness box.

CHAIRPERSON: I think you should just confine yourself to the real issues, please.

MR VISSER: Yes.  Well I believe we are finished with the real issues Mr Chairman.  We have no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Well that's good, I am glad.  We know each other and we ought not to take up your time and my time.

MR VISSER: Ja Mr Chairman I won't ask unnecessary questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes thanks very much.  Mr Jansen are there any questions you want to put to this witness?

MR JANSEN: I have no questions Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Valus is there any re-examination you have of your witness?

MR ROUX: No re-examination Mr Chairman.

MR VISSER: Mr Danster I just want to put one question to you.  When General Coetzee, the later Commissioner and then the head of Security came down and saw Kondile, I understand he in fact saw him, according to your evidence, is that correct or did he only walk past and didn't pay attention to Kondile?

GINOTRY DANSTER: He saw him because he was tied up and sitting down.

UNKNOWN: Did he speak to him?

GINOTRY DANSTER: No he didn't speak to him.

UNKNOWN: He didn't ask him a question?

GINOTRY DANSTER: No he didn't speak to him.

UNKNOWN: Thank you.

ADV GCABASHE: Okay, and just for clarity.  So you would collect Sizwe Kondile from the cells whenever you wanted to, take him to the interrogation room, interrogate him and take him back, was that the basic process?

GINOTRY DANSTER: Yes that is correct.
	Before I sit down I would like to speak to the family if I am given permission to do so.

CHAIRPERSON: ...(indistinct)

GINOTRY DANSTER: Okay.

CHAIRPERSON: You are not calling any other witnesses?

MR ROUX: No Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.
WITNESS EXCUSED

CHAIRPERSON: The Committee has considered the matter of whether it is necessary for us to hear Mr Dirk Coetzee.  We have come to the conclusion that we do not propose to call him to give evidence before us.

MR BOOYENS: Thank you Mr Chairman.  So I take it we are all going home soon.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR MOOSA: Mr Chairman it's me speaking.  I have taken instructions in the event of the Committee making that ruling and you will realise that the family of Sizwe Kondile, the family, is opposing the amnesty application of Mr Dirk Coetzee.  The basis of that opposition lies in the political motive and the proportionality element.
	In the circumstances, however, in order to reach the truth, which is an element of full disclosure, we would like to call Mr Coetzee to give evidence before this Committee.

UNKNOWN: Speaking for myself there is really a conflict of interest then, you are calling him as your witness but you are opposing his application.

MR MOOSA: Mr Chairman I have considered that very carefully, that is why this was not an application made except in these rather unusual circumstances.  The overriding thing, however, is not really a court of law, and the overall rights which the TRC gives is to arrive at the truth, the right to know the truth and the duty of the State to let the victims know the truth, and we have before us different versions.  We are not vouchsafing the version of Mr Coetzee in any way, but we want to be able to plum into the truth, we want that version to be tested under cross-examination so that we can finally arrive at what is the truth in the matter.

UNKNOWN: Mr Vusa, Mr Coetzee gave evidence, you were present there, you cross-examined him.

MR MOOSA: Absolutely Mr Chairman.

UNKNOWN: Is that true?

MR MOOSA: Absolutely.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes I think that for the purpose of our decision in that matter we do not want to call Mr Coetzee.

MR MOOSA: I am talking about the decision in this matter Mr Chairman.  What I am really proposing is that everything needs to be put into the pot in order to arrive at the truth to satisfy the element of full disclosure and then the decision in both matters need to be made.  We cannot artificially separate the two matters.

CHAIRPERSON: You are talking about full disclosure being made by the applicants?

MR MOOSA: Full disclosure by the applicants, yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Well now, so what is the purpose of calling Mr Coetzee?