Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1999-08-24

LAWRENCE GERALD WASSERMAN: Mr Chairman, this was Col Taylor's headquarters.   It was Col Taylor's askari farm.

MR VISSER: It was a farm was it not?

LAWRENCE GERALD WASSERMAN: Yes, Mr Chairman it was a farm with two houses on it and a workshop.

MR VISSER: And who were accommodated there?

LAWRENCE GERALD WASSERMAN: The askaris were accommodated there.

MR VISSER: And you say there was a workshop on the farm?

LAWRENCE GERALD WASSERMAN: Correct, Mr Chairman.

MR VISSER: And did you ever visit that workshop?

LAWRENCE GERALD WASSERMAN: I did, Mr Chairman.

MR VISSER: And did du Preez also visit that workshop?

LAWRENCE GERALD WASSERMAN: He did, Mr Chairman.

MR VISSER: And what did you go and do there?

LAWRENCE GERALD WASSERMAN: Mr Chairman, there we worked on many motor vehicles.  We resprayed them, we fixed them up.  We would fix them.

MR VISSER: What was that in aid of?

LAWRENCE GERALD WASSERMAN: In the course of our duties and infiltration methods we would change the appearance of vehicles and the colours of vehicle on numerous occasions, Mr Chairman.

MR VISSER: Yes.  And were some of these vehicles also used by the askaris?

LAWRENCE GERALD WASSERMAN: They were Mr Chairman.

MR VISSER: Will you then just continue at paragraph 31?

LAWRENCE GERALD WASSERMAN: Mr Chairman, I have no recollection of a blue Toyota being chopped up at the farm, but I cannot place it in dispute.  What I can say, however, is that if that happened, it was not Mr Shabalala's vehicle because I am absolutely certain that that vehicle was destroyed by fire.

MR VISSER: What do you say about the allegation that you were present when certain parts of a chopped up vehicle was loaded onto a white Isuzu bakkie?  Can you recall that to mind?

LAWRENCE GERALD WASSERMAN: No, Mr Chairman, that's incorrect.

MR VISSER: You say it didn't happen.

LAWRENCE GERALD WASSERMAN: That didn't happen, Mr Chairman,

MR VISSER: Did you have anything to do with the loading of an engine at any point in time?  Is that possible?

LAWRENCE GERALD WASSERMAN: Mr Chairman, yes I would, well, vehicle parts, tyres, jacks, that kind of thing.

MR VISSER: Engines?

LAWRENCE GERALD WASSERMAN: Parts of engines, yes.

MR VISSER: Not whole engines?

LAWRENCE GERALD WASSERMAN: Never a whole engine.

MR VISSER: Alright.  Can you explain to the Committee why you were motivated to participate in these events?

LAWRENCE GERALD WASSERMAN: Mr Chairman, my actions to participate in the events to this incident and to associate myself therewith, were prompted by my complete belief that what I did, I did while executing my duties as a policeman, the way that I saw it, as my obligation during the time of conflict and political violence at the time.  We were not engaged in a conventional war where the sides could be identified and attacks were limited against visible enemies.  It was an unconventional war situation as was explained by Gen Steyn in his evidence.  During this conflict, we as Security policemen were conditioned by speeches of politicians and directions by our senior officers, to do everything that was in our power to confront the revolutionary onslaught at all costs.  There were times when in terms of the prevailing legislation of the time, it was not possible to solve all the problems that came one's way.  The present case is perhaps an example of such an instance.  in view of the above, I was of the bona fide belief that what I did in the present instance in order to combat or derail the revolutionary onslaught and to protect the government and National Party from political embarrassment, fell within my express or implied authority.  I did not participate in the events for any personal gain, or driven by personal spite or malice and I received no reward.

MR VISSER: Mr Wasserman, can I just briefly refer you to Exhibit J which was handed in by the previous witness, Mr Maharaj?  Mr Chairman, if it would meet with your satisfaction, I do not intend to go through each of those items with Mr Wasserman, I'm simply going to ask him whether he agrees with what I put to the witness, yea or nay, but if you feel that I should, then I'll go through the exercise, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, has he gone through them?

MR VISSER: Mr Wasserman, were  you here during the cross-examination of Mr Maharaj?

LAWRENCE GERALD WASSERMAN: I was, Sir.

MR VISSER: Were you present when I put to him certain explanations of what certain letters of the alphabet that precede numbers and other letters in Exhibit J mean?

LAWRENCE GERALD WASSERMAN: That's correct, Mr Chairman.

MR VISSER: Did you agree with the evidence which I put to him about the meaning of those letters?

LAWRENCE GERALD WASSERMAN: Yes, Mr Chairman, as best as I heard.

MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, I can go through them all again if you require that.  Not much turns on it, Mr Chairman, with respect.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, there's one I would like to ask him about.  We haven't been told about.

MR VISSER: Yes, certainly.

CHAIRPERSON: What is PNV for?

LAWRENCE GERALD WASSERMAN: Mr Chairman, PN is the division of Port Natal, V for Veiligheidstak, Security Branch, V.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry?

LAWRENCE GERALD WASSERMAN: V is for Veiligheid.  So that identifies, that prefix shows that its Port Natal Security Branch.

CHAIRPERSON: And the 4?

LAWRENCE GERALD WASSERMAN: The 4 means Black, the subject that you are about to, that reference is going to be the reference number of a black man.

MR VISSER: And PNV 1 would have been a reference to what?

LAWRENCE GERALD WASSERMAN: A Port Natal subject, Security subject, white.

MR VISSER: And 2?

LAWRENCE GERALD WASSERMAN: Would be the same, but a coloured subject.

MR VISSER: And three?

LAWRENCE GERALD WASSERMAN: Port Natal, Security Branch, coloured subject, Indian, 3 would be Indian.

MR VISSER: Did that always remain the position, or did that change at some point?

LAWRENCE GERALD WASSERMAN: No, Mr Chairman that was countrywide but the prefix in front would change for the relevant division.

MR VISSER: Yes, but the 1, 2, 3 and 4, the racial classification if I may call it that, did that remain the same or did that change?

LAWRENCE GERALD WASSERMAN: It was a national referencing system, it stayed the same.

MR LAX: Just while we're on the subject,  so the V therefore refers to a Security subject, Veiligheids onderwerp?  Would that be correct?

LAWRENCE GERALD WASSERMAN: Yes, Mr Chairman.

MR LAX: In other words somebody who was

LAWRENCE GERALD WASSERMAN: Enjoying the attention of the branch.

MR LAX: Under  the attention of the branch?

LAWRENCE GERALD WASSERMAN: That's correct.

MR LAX: Yes.  And if one looks at page 11 of that annexure.

LAWRENCE GERALD WASSERMAN: Yes, Mr Chair?

MR LAX: If you look next to the name Ndaba, in the second line of that entry after the photograph reference, under "Afdelings verwysing" PNV4 what's the stroke V for?

LAWRENCE GERALD WASSERMAN: Mr Chairman, that indicates that that V before the number, that that was an interim file, so PNV4, Port Natal Security Branch, 4 - black, the V is an interim file and as that file grows the V would drop away and get the next figures after that 4 stroke, would then be what the new file would be.

MR LAX: So this implied that that person was newly brought to your attention?

LAWRENCE GERALD WASSERMAN: Not necessarily, Mr Chairman, sometimes the V would remain for a considerable period of time, it was merely an administration thing.

MR KNIGHT: And  why, I'm just interested, the next entry in respect of Zandile, has the same reference.  Both at a regional level and at an H Q level.  The only difference is that at an HQ level, there's no PN in brackets behind it.