Amnesty Hearings — Cape Town — 2000-06-15

ABRAM VAN ZYL: Correct.  There he did specific co-ordinating functions, and I also gave evidence that I saw him on two other occasions, that he was present at cell meetings before September.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Maybe just to round up, regarding the project of Omar, then the same would also be applicable to Maree, that he was not aware of the project, or had any part in it?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: That is correct.

MR P DU PLESSIS: And then regarding Basson, I assume that your evidence was that he was present when the pills were handed over along with Nick, my instructions here are that at a previous presentation there was spoken about the new plan, in other words, to replace the pills and he was present there and he was aware of the project, but not at the specific meeting when the pills were physically handed over, is that possible?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: Are you now talking about the occasion when I gave the pills to the person from the Medical Regiment, that is correct, that he was not present there, that is probably possible.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Very well.   Regarding the Evans project, due to the same principle that you were not informed of other people's projects, you were if I understand you correctly, not present at previous meetings regarding Evans, that is before you were involved, and you were informed that you would have to get Peaches and another person up from Cape Town in order to execute the project on Evans, is that correct?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: That is correct.

MR P DU PLESSIS: So where you said that the preliminary study would have been done by Maree, it is just an assumption that you are making, you can naturally not specifically say because you were not present, is that correct?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: That is correct.

MR P DU PLESSIS: And if Maree's evidence would be that he did not do such a preliminary study, but the evidence of Basson and Burger is indeed that he did not do such a preliminary study and that he suggested the procedures how it should have been done by you and the persons from the Cape, Peaches and the other person and that it came from their side, then you would not be able to dispute that?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: I don't understand your question.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Let me put it to you in the following way.  You cannot say what Maree did regarding Evans?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: No, I cannot.

MR P DU PLESSIS: It is possible that he did not do a preliminary study at all and that the proposal of this project eventually would be executed from the Co-ordinator, Basson, and Basson, that the instructions would come from them?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: That is correct.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Just on this aspect, Maree's instructions to me are that he was not present when you were informed by the Regional Manager, that will be Mr Burger, to execute this project eventually, he was not present at that meeting, is this possible?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: It is probably possible, I gave evidence as I can remember it.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Mr Chairman, I don't understand what version is in fact being put by ...

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, can I ask myself, are you saying that the instructions are that Mr Maree was not present when Mr Burger asked you to execute the Evans project?

MR P DU PLESSIS: That is in fact correct Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: And you say it is possible, but what does that mean, were you present or weren't you present, was he present or wasn't he present?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: My instructions to execute the project, I received from Staal.  I did however obtain certain information from Chap regarding this project.  I accept that this was during the same meeting.  I might be wrong.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Mr Chairman the problem is there is no, my learned friend, I think is representing ...

MR P DU PLESSIS: Maree, Burger and Basson.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Yes, there is no version to Mr van Zyl that it is said Maree says he didn't do the pre-study.  We are not hearing a version being put as to what his clients are saying in relation to Evans, that it was such and such a person's project, such and such a person says he did the pre-study and so on and so forth.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, I think I clearly put it to the witness that in fact the evidence will be that Basson and Burger was responsible.

CHAIRPERSON: He said that Maree wasn't involved in the preliminary study and now he is saying that, his instructions are that Maree was not present when Mr Burger asked him to take, what else do you want?

MR KAHANOVITZ: The general nature of the evidence has been projects were allocated to particular people and that Mr Basson is the Co-ordinator.  Am I correct in understanding that he is saying that the project was Staal Burger's project, is that what it boils down to?

CHAIRPERSON: Perhaps you can be clear on that?

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes, Mr Chairman, I am not going to put all the detail forward at this stage, I don't think it is necessary.
	What I am saying is that, and full evidence will be led by both Basson and Burger, that the instruction of how practically this project was going to be done, came from them and not from Maree, that is what I am saying.

MR LAX: But I think the problem, sorry, I think the problem is who did the pre-study?  That is really, if we are taking it piece by piece?

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes, well, I don't want to give evidence, that is why I am not putting forward all the evidence, but the evidence will in fact be that there was no practical pre-study in the true sense of the word, and that evidence will be given by Basson and Burger.
	I don't want to give their evidence in detail, then it will be said that I am putting words in their mouths.

MR LAX: No, no, it is quite clear that you are putting a version here, that is pretty obvious to all of us.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Fine.  As long as it is clear that my instructions from Maree is that he did not do such a pre-study.
	Very well, your opinion was, and I assume it was only an opinion, that you were involved because you had the people at your disposal in order to execute the project on Evans.  The other statement that I want to make to you is that the evidence will be that Maree indeed at that stage, would have been used outside the country and that he would in any case, not have been available to continue with the project, is that correct?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: It is possible.

MR P DU PLESSIS: A further aspect that I just want to mention to you, it is that both Maree and Burger deny that in the period that you are placing it, that a discussion had taken place between the two of them, that you would have heard, circling around Lubowski?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: I gave evidence in this regard, and this is what I heard.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes, it is clear to me that you do not pretend to have heard the details of the conversation, is that correct?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: That is correct.

MR P DU PLESSIS: And naturally you would admit that you could possibly have made a mistake in this regard?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: I have given evidence in this regard and I must say that it was a discussion between Maree and Basson.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Maree and Basson?  The same is applicable, the same denials will also be applicable to Basson.
	One further denial from Burger's side, regarding the 
R5 000-00 that you mentioned, he denies that he would have told you that he was taking R5 000-00 or stealing and you can do the same thing?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: I understood him to have said that.

MR P DU PLESSIS: And then just a last aspect, there was at a stage mention made of legal representation at certain stage, in different stages, and I would say that you probably don't remember it correctly.  If we can just take the chronological order.
	During the period, the beginning of 1990 and also in the period when your first application for indemnity, in terms of Act 151 of 1992,  then it was only you and Mr Botha who were clients of my firm.  If you can just think of that?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: That is correct, yes.