Amnesty Hearings — Cape Town — 2000-06-12

ABRAM VAN ZYL: I discussed the matter with the Regional Manager, Staal, he came back to me and said that the matter had been discussed with the Managing Director and that because there was already an approved project, I could continue with the obtaining of these tablets.

MR SIBANYONI: Did you have any amount of discretion in initiating some ways or some method of implementing the projects?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: In terms of the pre-study, I did have a discretion, yes.

MR SIBANYONI: And  if you come up with an initiative, you obviously have to report it so that it must be discussed at an "in-house"?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: That is indeed the case.

MR SIBANYONI: Thank you.

MR LAX: Sorry, just to clarify, what do you mean you had discretion with regard to the "voor-studie", in what sense did you have a discretion?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: I would say Chairperson, in terms of an instruction is given to me to go and do a pre-study, as in this case, with regard to Omar, and then the discretion is with me, after negotiation with the agents whom I would use in that specific instance, to submit a plan as to how best a project could be brought to execution to eliminate Mr Omar, in other words it is not said to me that at that stage of the pre-study, "go out, he has to be killed in this manner, go and look at the possibilities and come back", therefore I had a discretion at that stage to exercise, and I placed this in writing, and then later it is discussed at an "in-house".

MR LAX: Just one further aspect that I meant to ask much earlier this morning, and this is an appropriate time to do it, did you list a range of alternatives that you may have considered in your "voor-studie" so that when the management came to look at your "voor-studie", they could evaluate the alternatives and choose, in spite of what your recommendation might have been, whichever alternative they thought was appropriate?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: Chairperson, yes, as I have said, I think alternatives have been discussed at some stage, but I cannot recall, it is possible that it was the case, yes.

MR LAX: It is not the question of them being discussed, did you list them in your feasibility study?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: No, not that I can recall.

MR LAX: So invariably you would put one particular method of operational execution in such a feasibility?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: Correct.

MR LAX: Thank you Mr Kahanovitz, sorry.

MR COETZEE: Mr Commissioner, at this stage, as you would have noticed, Mr Barnard, due to security reasons, had left.  In the normal sense, I would not request this of the Court, but as this is an aspect where we are in now, which is directly implicating Mr Barnard, I would suggest that we do not continue  at this stage in his absence with this examination, I just feel that this prejudice him.
	I can take instructions, but I feel he needs to hear the evidence in this regard, because it is so pertinent to his application.

CHAIRPERSON: I believe Mr Barnard has left early because they did not want to get, they want to beat the rush hour, they don't want to get caught in traffic?

MR COETZEE: Yes, it is in accordance with his security.

CHAIRPERSON: That is what happened at the last hearing.

MR COETZEE: Yes, that is due to his security situation.

CHAIRPERSON: I think what is being put it not unreasonable Mr  Kahanovitz.  I don't know if you are in a position to proceed with other aspects, not dealing with Mr Barnard, or should we just take the adjournment now?  I think the last time we met, when Mr Barnard had to leave, he wasn't directly involved?

MR COETZEE: Yes, Mr Commissioner, I would not normally make this objection, this is just a very specific situation.

CHAIRPERSON: I can understand that something might be said which you need to instantly refer to your client, as to whether what is being said is correct or not.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Mr Chairman, maybe at the same time we can talk about maybe starting a bit earlier tomorrow, so that Mr Barnard's security officials know about that before he leaves.

CHAIRPERSON: I believe it is pretty much the same problem.  I think last time it was half past nine was decided on?

MR KAHANOVITZ: Shall we make it half past nine?

CHAIRPERSON: Half past nine, yes.

MR COETZEE: Mr Commissioner, Mr Barnard this morning was here just shortly after nine, he was here about, I think at the latest quarter past nine.  I think if we can start at half past nine, I think that will be appropriate, as last time?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I think so, half past nine, if we can start at half past nine, and then Mr Kahanovitz, you wouldn't prefer to switch on to some other aspects, I see it is only 20 minutes left?

MR KAHANOVITZ: Let's call it a day.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, we will then adjourn until tomorrow at half past nine in the morning, Mr van Zyl will continue to be questioned by Mr Kahanovitz.  Thank you very much.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS