Amnesty Hearings — Cape Town — 2000-06-12

CHAIRPERSON: Good morning everybody.  Today we will be resuming the hearing.  When we adjourned last time, Mr van Zyl was in the process of being questioned by Mr Kahanovitz.
	Mr Bizos?  Mr Williams?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: (s.u.o.)

UNKNOWN: You carry on.

MR WILLIAMS: Thank you Mr Chairman, before Mr Kahanovitz proceeds, would you just allow me to address one issue, Mr Chairman?

CHAIRPERSON: Certainly, Mr Williams.

MR WILLIAMS: Thank you Mr Chairman.  I must say that I am very displeased with the choice of this venue, Mr Chairperson.  This venue is really inaccessible to the victims and to the community of Kewtown itself.
	Mr Chairperson, I just want to say that the bombing incident in Kewtown had wider implications in the community, or for the Kewtown community.  The community became divided as a result of that incident because local gangsters or local community members were used to destabilise the community and as a result of that, people who associated with these people, were treated with suspicion by the victims or other members of the community.
	This is the one chance to address those deep-rooted divisions which arose as a result of, directly as a result of this incident.  I would have expected the TRC to choose a venue that is more accessible, it need not necessarily be the Early Learning Centre itself, but there are other suitable venues.  I understand from Ms Coleridge that most of the legal representatives of the applicants had no, in principle, objection to the Hewitt Training College, except Mr Slang van Zyl or his legal representative.
	Mr Chairperson, I get the impression that any venue is okay, as long as it is in a so-called white area, irrespective of the fact that more bombs had been detonated in this area and surrounding areas than had been the case in Kewtown or surrounding areas, Mr Chairperson.
	I will ask the Committee to seriously reconsider this venue and to see whether it is at all possible to get the Hewitt Training College, to enable victims and the community to participate in these proceedings.  Thank you Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Williams.  Mr Bizos?

UNKNOWN: Yes, Mr Chairman, I don't know whether the letter written to us, dated the 30th of May is available to you?

CHAIRPERSON: I don't ...

UNKNOWN: It indicates, I accept that its contents is true, nobody has - but indicates a very strange state of affairs.  It says that the original venue was not available, which we accept, but I want to read the rest of the letter, and I think that the Committee and we and our clients are entitled to an explanation as to whether these decisions are made as a prerogative of Mr van Zyl and his legal representative.
"... We are aware of the strong opposition raised at the amnesty hearing by Mr Martini the legal representative of Mr van Zyl, to the change of venue, ie 7th floor, 106 Adderley Street, Cape Town.  On 29th May 2000, the writer attempted to conduct a telephonic conversation with the said Attorney, informing him of the developments in the matter.  From the outset of the conversation, he refused to communicate to the writer to the extent of him refusing any future telephonic conversation.  Mr du Plessis, representing Mr Burger, Mr Maree, Mr Basson, Mr Barnard and Mr Alex Bosman representing Gen Verster have indicated to the writer that they are not opposed to the change of the venue.  We wish to point out that the order, by consent in the High Court application in the case of Slang van Zyl  v Truth and Reconciliation Commission states that the TRC "is interdicted from proceeding or continuing with the amnesty hearing in so far as the applicant is concerned, from the 13th of March to the 17th of March, pending the relocation of the venue."  The venue referred to in the said order is the Athlone Learning Centre.  Find annexed here to a copy of the order, by consent marked Annexure B.
The letter continues -
"... In the spirit of reconciliation, we reiterate the words of the Honourable Justice Miller in response to Mr Martini.  'We are aware that there has been a decision made, but I am also fully aware of the anxiety of the victims, and a change of venue I can assure you would be done in consultation with yourselves.  It is just done in honest endeavour to get something that is more convenient and more acceptable, for all the people.'  Find annexed hereto a copy of pages 763 to 764 of the transcript, marked Annexure C.  We await your urgent response, confirmation to the issue of the said venue by not later than 14H00, Thursday, 1st of June 2000."
	Now Mr Chairman, what is this power that Mr Martini and Mr van Zyl Slabbert purport to have?

MR LAX: I don't think that is fair on Van Zyl Slabbert.
MACHINE SWITCHED OFF
ON RESUMPTION

MR LAX: Your microphone, Mr Bizos.

UNKNOWN: I apologise, Mr Chairman, to the very important figure in public life.  It would indeed be a compliment to the applicant, which was not intended.
	Mr Chairman, what is it that Mr van Zyl and his Attorney have, that we haven't got that the wishes of the other legal representatives and our clients' strongly felt wishes, are ignored and theirs, are accepted?  Thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Bizos.  Does anybody else wish to address us?  Ms Coleridge?

MS COLERIDGE: Thank you Chairperson.  Just from the Commission's side, Chairperson, we have attempted as the letter of the 30th stated.  Initially we had the Hewitt College, Chairperson, and your last instructions were that we reach consensus on the issue of the venue.
	I, the only person to date Chairperson, that raised the opposition, was Mr Slang van Zyl and his legal representative, Mr Martini, acting on his behalf.  The Commission attempted to liaise with Mr Martini, he refused to speak to me, Chairperson, as the Evidence Leader on that particular date, and therefore he said, you know, just to get all correspondence, etc, in writing, which I therefore had done, I did that, that was the letter of the 30th.  I then circulated the letter to all the legal representatives.
	At the outset, Chairperson, I attempted to speak to Mr Martini, just to get consensus whether he agreed to the venue or not and then we were forced in a sense, Chairperson, to communicate to everybody that we have this venue, which we rightfully were to do, which we did, and still Chairperson, Mr Slang van Zyl and Mr Martini raised the opposition.
	The TRC, we were involved in the application, the High Court application and we just want to inform the victims Chairperson, that we did vehemently oppose that application and that we are aware of the rights of the victims, but in every attempt that the TRC had made in liaising and communicating with Mr Slag van Zyl's Attorneys, we got strong opposition, and in all instances Chairperson, he threatened legal action once again.
	On the basis, the only basis, was that his client feared for his life.  The position of the Commission is, Chairperson, that we do have a limited lifespan and we have to take  note of that.  We are attempting to complete all matters by July/August Chairperson, and it is unfortunate that we have this limited lifespan, that we cannot entertain and oppose this as the Commission would have wanted to.
	Due to that factor, we thought that to speed up and expedite this matter, we would have it here, just to get Mr Slang van Zyl here and to hear his evidence, Chairperson, which the victims are entitled to hear.
	That is the position of the Commission.  We have attempted to do everything in our powers.  Thank you Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Ms Coleridge.  Does anybody wish to ...