Amnesty Hearings — Boksburg — 1998-03-18

UNKNOWN: ...[No English translation] apart from the fact 
that funds would be applied for the defence of Mr Derby-Lewis.  
When were the Freedom Front and the Volksfront established, 
when was the money stolen.  Look at the facts surrounding the 
issue.  
	There's nothing in his testimony which indicates facts which 
can be used in this relation and I am surprised that he was needed 
as a witness.  His testimony was anything but satisfactory and it 
contributed absolutely nothing to the case.  Just a moment please. 
	Honourable Chairperson, another aspect which should be 
studied closely is the time period when this deed was committed.  
I would like to argue that this deed was committed at a time when 
there was definite conflict and a struggle between various groups 
and parties and it cannot be argued that peace prevailed.  
	I would like argue with respect, that no possibility existed 
other than to accept as a fact that there would be a takeover by
the ANC/SACP Alliance at that point and that under those 
circumstances it would have been beneficial for the party to which 
Mr Derby-Lewis belonged.  And under the circumstances, Mr 
Derby-Lewis fulfilled all the requirements regarding this Act and 
if amnesty would be granted to Mr Derby-Lewis, reconciliation 
would be further promoted in this country.  
	I would argue with respect, there is nothing which Mr 
Derby-Lewis at this point, which indicates that he would not 
promote reconciliation, he is no longer involved in politics.  At 
this point in this country the CP is promoted to negotiations.  
And at this point with respect, no violence is being committed by 
members of the CP.
	And in that respect, with respect Mr Chairperson, especially 
where various people particularly white males in this country are 
feeling neglected yet they are well treated otherwise to take a 
place in society, that is the endeavour of Mr Derby-Lewis.  There 
is no violence on his behalf, no violence in mind.  
	And I argue with respect, that amnesty be granted to him 
and that this will help to promote and establish reconciliation 
within this country.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

JUDGE WILSON: Can I let you have the 1995 amendment to the 
Act, Section 9.  I don't know if there has been a subsequent 
amendment ...[no sound]

CHAIRPERSON: Yes Mrs van der Walt?  Yes Mrs van der Walt?

UNKNOWN: Thank you 
Chairperson.  I will attempt not to repeat what Mr Prinsloo has 
stated.  There are certain aspects which I wish to highlight in my 
argument.  Firstly it is the applicant who in terms of Section 
19(1) provided further details with regard to the question 9(a)1 
which is read together with question IV.   
	The applicant was honest towards the Committee by saying 
that he compiled his application with the assistance of Mr Clive 
Derby-Lewis and that also in paragraph 11(b) he did not state 
that he had received an order.  
	I would like to put it to the Honourable Committee that the 
Committee should accept his testimony in that regard, that he 
indeed did attempt to make the burden or the issue lighter for Mr 
Clive Derby-Lewis.

ADV POTGIETER: Was he not aware of the danger?

UNKNOWN: Yes, he was aware of the danger, but 
only after he had been consulted.

ADV POTGIETER: ...[inaudible]

INTERPRETER: The speaker's microphone is not on.

UNKNOWN: ...[inaudible]

ADV POTGIETER: Didn't he know that he should submit the 
entire truth to the Commission with his application?

UNKNOWN: Yes, he did know that he must make a 
full disclosure but as he has stated, in his testimony he attempted 
- he did make a full disclosure but when he had to speak of the 
order he didn't specifically mention it.

ADV POTGIETER: So, in other words he told a lie in his initial 
application?

UNKNOWN: Not, a lie as such but he did not 
express it as strongly I would like to argue.  But on the 30th of 
November 1996, he did indeed say that he received an order and 
they had planned it together but that he himself had acted alone in 
committing the deed.
	Then my heads proceed ...[intervention]

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: I beg your pardon Madam, did he do this in 
writing?

UNKNOWN: Yes.  The amendment?

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: Yes.

UNKNOWN: Yes.

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: Where does that appear?

UNKNOWN: I will just find it for you.

JUDGE WILSON: Page 10 of bundle A I think
		"I have been advised I did not provide sufficient 
particulars with regard to paragraph 9(a)1.  In 
addition to my application the following particulars 
are provided"
Is that what you're referring to?

UNKNOWN: Correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Carry on.