Amnesty Hearings — Cape Town — 2000-09-26

MR KAHANOVITZ: So in other words you're saying Mr van Zyl, cause it could only have been Mr van Zyl, came to tell you that he believed that Peaches had become sympathetic towards Mr Omar.

WOUTER J BASSON: That's correct, yes.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Now you seem to be - read the last sentence there, you say
"Insofar as my participation goes concerning this project and it can be interpreted as a conspiracy to kill Mr Omar, I therefore ask for indemnity on such charges."
You seem to be in some doubt as to whether your conduct amounts to participation in a conspiracy to assassinate Mr Omar, I'm just wondering what the source of your doubt was.

WOUTER J BASSON: It was not my specific words, although I did approve this statement and signed it.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Is it true that you handed over R15 000 to Van Zyl, that Van Zyl could use to pay the killers?

WOUTER J BASSON: Mr Chairperson, in various instances I handed over money to Van Zyl, but I cannot recall this specific instance.

MR KAHANOVITZ: He might be telling the truth but you're not sure.

WOUTER J BASSON: I do not know, it is possible, I cannot deny it or admit it.

MR KAHANOVITZ: But if he says that is so, you have no reason to dispute it.

WOUTER J BASSON: That's correct, yes.

MR KAHANOVITZ: And I assume that's something that you might very well have remembered at the time that you drew up this application.  I mean you're lawyer's asking you "Now what's your role in the conspiracy Mr Basson?"  I imagine you would say "Well I actually gave the man R15 000 to pay to the killers."

WOUTER J BASSON: Mr Chairperson, such a question was not put to me and I've got no illusions concerning the facts that I am responsible for or guilty of conspiracy to murder in this case.

MR LAX: Do I understand you correctly - while Mr Kahanovitz is looking for something, that you have no recollection of paying Van Zyl money in relation to this matter?

WOUTER J BASSON: Mr Chairperson, I cannot specifically recall it, no.

MR LAX: And you have no recollection of him bringing money back to you?

WOUTER J BASSON: I do not know if there's some confusion now concerning the Nick person who received money, I cannot specifically recall it.

MR LAX: Because he goes into elaborate detail about how he put the different bits of money together and how it had to come back at the point at which things were being suspended and ...(intervention)

WOUTER J BASSON: That money was paid back to Nick, if I'm not mistaken.

MR LAX: I'm just trying to jog your memory, so you don't recall this at all?

WOUTER J BASSON: Mr Chairperson, it is possible that I did give the money initially, but if I received money back, I cannot specifically recall, no.  I actually want to say that it wasn't me.

MR LAX: But the most important thing for me is whether you - 'cause you would have had to draw the money and take it to him in some way or other.

WOUTER J BASSON: Yes, it was myself or Nick.

MR LAX: And it was in cash?

WOUTER J BASSON: That's correct, yes.

MR LAX: It's quite a lot of cash, bearing in mind the denominations of the time.

WOUTER J BASSON: Oh well, it's so.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Now I just want to read you some of the evidence that you gave while you were testifying in-chief.  I want you to just confirm that you're sure that this evidence is one hundred percent true.
	At page 2154 of the record you'll see towards the bottom of the page you're being led by Mr du Plessis and you'll see he says to you:
"You confirm your involvement in the procurement of a weapon."
Are you with me?

WOUTER J BASSON: That's correct.

MR KAHANOVITZ: You answer
"Yes, I confirm that was the initial plan that I form part of that planning.  I just want to add that with the change of plan to the toxic substance plan, I was not present when those proposals were made and the planning in that regard, I was busy disconnecting from Region 6 to some extent because a void had been left by Mr Botha's departure and my responsibilities then once again included looking after Region 2, so those two other people were brought in."
I assume that's Botes, it should be B-o-t-e-s.

WOUTER J BASSON: That's right, yes.

MR KAHANOVITZ: I just want to confirm, are you sure that you were not present when the proposals were made regarding the change of plan to what you've called the toxic substance plan?

WOUTER J BASSON: I was not present.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Excuse me?

WOUTER J BASSON: That's correct, I was not present at the presentation.

MR KAHANOVITZ: You're sure?

WOUTER J BASSON: Yes.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Then you deal with Nick and Theo having been brought in to fulfil certain functions, then Mr du Plessis asks you a direct question
"But you didn't deal with or procure the toxic substances or tablets."
And your answer is:
"No."
Are you're a hundred percent sure that that answer was correct?

WOUTER J BASSON: That is correct that I was not aware of it, but if I look at the question
"But you didn't deal with or procure the toxic substances or tablets?"
then I had to answer "yes".  What I'm trying to say is that the question is a bit ambiguous and if I can translate it very quickly.  I was not present with the handling or the handing over of these substances.

MR KAHANOVITZ: No, I don't think the question that was put to you was at all vague or ambiguous, you see what your lawyer thought you were telling the Committee was, if you look at the context you were telling us in essence that although you knew about the change of plan you were not in any way involved in its implementation because you were disassociating yourself from Region 6.

WOUTER J BASSON: That's correct.

MR KAHANOVITZ: And then he just wanted to make sure that he understood your evidence properly, he asked you
"So what you're saying is you didn't with, neither did you deal with and nor did you procure the toxic substances or tablets?"

WOUTER J BASSON: That's correct.

MR KAHANOVITZ: And your answer is
"No."
but you're telling us now the answer should be "yes"?

WOUTER J BASSON: What I am trying to say is, it doesn't matter if we have to ask the question again or not, the fact is that I said that I was not involved in the dealing with this substance or the handing over of it.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Sorry.  So your evidence is you did not deal with the tablets, let's just leave it at that, you didn't deal with these tablets?

WOUTER J BASSON: That's correct, that's what I meant.

MR KAHANOVITZ: And you didn't procure these tablets?

WOUTER J BASSON: Did not.  That is correct.  Where the question should have been "Yes, I did not", you can say "No, I did not."

MR KAHANOVITZ: Alright.  Okay, I understand.

MR MARTINI: Chairperson, just to correct an earlier version put to this witness, in fairness to this witness because I did see that it affected Mr Lax's thinking slightly on the amount of money.  In fairness to this witness, according to Mr van Zyl at page 116, the R10 000 was given back to Nick, not to Mr Basson, because Mr Lax seems to have the impression that 'surely it was a lot of money, you can remember'.  So I think the version that was put was incorrect, that Mr van Zyl gave it back to Mr Basson, which is not correct, Mr van Zyl's evidence was it went back to Nick and this witness suggested 'well, aren't we getting confused between Nick and Van Zyl here'.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Martini.

MR LAX: Thanks Mr Martini.  But the issue remained receiving the money, that was the ...

MR MARTINI: I'm just dealing with the returning of the money, not the handing over of the money.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Kahanovitz.

MR KAHANOVITZ: I want to read to you part of Mr van Zyl's amnesty application because he at page, this is page 105 of bundle A, he's talking about this change of plan - have you got the page?  You'll see at the top of the page he says
"I received an instruction from the Regional Manager..."
...(intervention)