Amnesty Hearings — Port Elizabeth — 1997-09-22

MR BOOYENS: So I come back to what I've asked you originally.  When this decision was made to kill these people, was it perceived that eliminating people was a possibility to manage the security situation as already been planted, is that correct?

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: Yes, Mr Chairman.

MR BOOYENS: Shortly, referring to your political purpose you wish to achieve, from the documentation it appears - also from the other applicants, that regarding the liberation movements and specifically COSAS being part of that liberation movement, what would you say was the ultimate purpose, not the short-term purpose, the ultimate purpose?

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: The long-term purpose of these revolutionary organisations was amongst others, to throw over the Government, to get rid of the National Apartheid Government.

MR BOOYENS: And I think you can just refer to the political statements of that time, to realise that the politicians of that time also saw that as the purpose. Was that also your impression?

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: Yes, it was very clear what the purpose of these people were because everything which happened on the ground was taken back to them through all these systems.

MR BOOYENS: The fact, was this channelled through your own police channels?  Did you receive it from your direct line?

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: First of all it was conveyed through our own channels and secondly, it was reported at the JIC, it was discussed there and it was taken further from there.

MR BOOYENS: Taking into account the pressure, or taking into account the channelling of these political perspectives and the fact that we've already heard that it was mentioned that people should be eliminated, where you satisfied when you gave that order that these people should be killed, that this was - and I'm referring to the people in this application, that it was within that framework?

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: Yes, that was what I believed.

MR BOOYENS: You've already told the Chairman that the information provided to you was that they were active in COSAS, one of the organisations trying to overthrow the previous Government?

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: That is correct.

MR BOOYENS: At that time, there was a lot of pressure and also a lot of critisism regarding the security police.  Many allegations were also made and we use a modern term or a term which is more relevant regarding human rights violations by the security police, can you remember that?

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: Yes.

MR BOOYENS: Specifically allegations were made regarding the Port Elizabeth security police, is that correct?

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: Yes.

MR BOOYENS: These allegations were made in the media, in the press and questions were posed in Parliament so people paid a lot of attention to that.

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: That is correct.

MR BOOYENS: Taking into consideration what I've just asked you Mr Erasmus, and taking into account that human rights violations did take place - it is a question of public record today, what was your impression - and I know you can give an impression only, what was the reaction when enquiries were made regarding these violations?  What I want to now from you actually - what was the feeling, did the politicians know or thought that they knew about these violations?  Can you answer that please?

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: Mr Chairman, and today I'm still under the impression that the politicians had to know, they were aware of what was going on.

MR BOOYENS: Why are you saying that?

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: I base this on the fact that although investigations were undertaken into these circumstances, the difference between the pressure exerted on us to solve this situation and the questions which were posed after this information was published in the press, it was not of that high level which we would expect to have been asked.  That is on what I based my viewpoint.

MR BOOYENS: Do I understand you correctly, your impression is it should - if they really wanted to investigate that, it should have been an in-depth investigation?

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: That is correct Mr Chairman.

MR BOOYENS: Thank you Mr Chairman.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR BOOYENS

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Phosa?

MR PHOSA: Thank you Mr Chairman.
	Mr Erasmus, I just want to get clarity on the issues that arise right now towards the end of your evidence.  Firstly, are you saying that by politicians you include the State President of the day?

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: Not the State President, if you refer to the present State President, no.

MR PHOSA: No, I'm referring to the President of the day at the time of the incidents, when these were happening - the President of the Nationalist Party,  whoever he was at the time.

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: Mr  Chairman, I can answer this in this way.  I've said the politicians who - and I can't refer to specific persons because I did not communicate on that level.

ADV SANDI: Sorry, Mr Phosa, can I try and help here?  Mr Erasmus the question as I understand it from Mr Phosa, he says when you use - when you make reference to politicians, are you doing so including whoever is a State President at that time in question?  Is that inclusive of a State President?

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: Yes, this is a better question.  Yes, it also includes that.

MR PHOSA: Have you Mr Erasmus, always been of this impression, that the State President was aware of the need to eliminate troublesome revolutionaries?

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: I think that was the case.

MR PHOSA: No, that was the answer.  I'm not talking about beliefs, you are here now, you give evidence, you tell the court - the Commission, towards the end what your attitude is ...[intervention]

MR VISSER: With respect Mr Chairman, let's be fair to the witness, he was asked for his impression, he's given his belief or impression, with great respect - and may I at this point enquire Mr Chairman, whether Mr Phosa is opposing the application of Mr Erasmus, and if so, on what grounds or whether he's here for some other purposes not opposing the application.  I believe the Committee is entitled to that information Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: I don't think you have officially put on record what your position in that regard is Mr Phosa, or rather not your position naturally, that of your clients.

MR PHOSA: I made the error of assuming that it was too obvious, I apologise.  This application is undoubtedly being opposed and I'm not sure whether the - I have to now give reasons unless there is an order for me to say so.  It is simple as I understand it, to tell you this application is opposed.

CHAIRPERSON: I think you can indicate - not in any detail, on what grounds.  You are not here merely to oppose because you don't think they ought to get it, you don't like them.  It must be one of the grounds in the Act.

MR PHOSA: Because to put it as they would say nowadays, the bottom line.  The bottom line is that these were not acts of political decision, they were acts of thugs who were simply intending to defend themselves and their pride, I can say much more than that.

CHAIRPERSON: I would ask members of the public to remember that we are not at a theatre, that we must preserve due decorum and if they do not do so, steps will have to be taken to ensure that the meeting is conducted peacefully.

MR PHOSA: Thank you Mr Chairman.   I want to go back to the question I asked you before the interruption - of course I understand why I was asked, the question is, is it a sudden thought of yours, a thought in your mind now, or were you always of this impression that - let's say to mention one, Mr de Klerk the President, was aware that it was necessary to eliminate people like Mr Mthimkhulu?  Were you honest about that?

MR VISSER: With due respect Mr Chairman, Mr de Klerk wasn't even on the scene in 1981/82.

MR PHOSA: Then just give us the relevant President ...[intervention]