Amnesty Hearings — Boksburg — 1998-03-18

GEORGE BIZOS: Well I can venture a number of reasonable 
possibilities as to why they would do that.  
	First of all, either at the time that they were doing the list 
or before that they had hoped that more people would come into 
the conspiracy and it may be that they wanted to show them, 
these are the enemies of the Afrikaner Volk, these are the people 
that we must eliminate.  They wanted an order and in answer to 
Judge Wilson as to why Walus marked it 1 to 9, is a ridiculous 
answer, with respect.  You'll recall that it was in order to speak 
on the telephone by number, and I think it was the chairperson 
that asked well if there was only going to be one, why talk in 
numbers anyway? So that a list is some evidence that this was or 
was intended to be a wider conspiracy than we have heard of 
here.
	The other of course is, criminal investigators in the 
administration of justice thrive on it.  Many of the people that 
plan similar crimes are just stupid.  In the Goniwe matter they 
dropped a name plate, otherwise the Goniwe people would just 
have disappeared for ever.  It is the sort of thing, the sort of 
oversight or the sort of conduct which makes investigation 
possible.  But certainly what it is not, is a list for journalistic 
purposes because we have the evidence of  Mrs Derby-Lewis in 
the criminal trial.  
	We will refer you to the passage Mr Chairman where His 
Lordship Mr Justice Eloff holds the evidence to be highly 
improbable.  However in that criminal trial there was an onus 
which had to be discharged and probabilities were not enough.  
The Committee here, and this is why she could not be convicted 
on the second count of conspiring to kill the people on the list, 
but here we had the additional evidence, their own statements, we 
have the evidence here of what Mr Derby-Lewis admits to doing 
which was not before His Lordship Mr Justice Eloff and I would 
submit that although the Committee will accept the learned 
Judge's view that it was highly improbable, what has come forth 
since, that Mr Derby-Lewis indeed had this list, that he did get it 
from his wife, that he did give it to Walus, that he and Walus, on 
their own version had planned the assassination, so that claiming 
that this was an innocent list on the probabilities was unlikely for 
Judge Eloff correctly, for this Committee it is beyond reasonable 
doubt.  
	That is the submission that we make in relation to the list 
and Mr Derby-Lewis lied about it, Mr Walus lied about the 
purpose of the list, Mrs Derby-Lewis lied in relation to the 
purposes of the list.  Therefore in relation to lack of full 
disclosure, if our submission is well-founded that all three of 
them knew that there were to be more than one victim and at least 
another appears in the list of nine, then each one of them has 
failed to disclose the truth.
	Let us take it on the probabilities.  After all we only have 
the wrong-doers testimony to work on and it may well be that 
none of them was expressly prepared to say or Walus was not 
prepared to say that I knew that this was drawn up by Mrs Derby-
Lewis and I knew that it was a hit list for the nine, if the 
inference can be drawn, and we submit clearly that it can, that all 
three of them knew what they were doing and what they were 
saying about the nine people on the list, there has not been full 
disclosure, that neither of them is entitled to amnesty and it is a 
pity that the safeguards of double jeopardy, Mrs Derby-Lewis 
does not have to answer any more to Mr Hani's death in a court 
of law.

CHAIRPERSON: Another possibility could well be is that 
initially the list was sought for the purpose that we are told it 
was sought for and then later however, certain names were 
identified from it for purposes of elimination, which does not 
destroy the original purpose for which the list was sought.