Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 2000-07-26

CHAIRPERSON: Good morning everybody.  We continue with the hearing.  Mr Wills?

MR WILLS: Thank you Mr Chairperson.  Mr Chairperson, I just want to place on record the certain attempts that we have tried to trace Mr Visagie, and I just want to confirm that according to the information that we have done, he is in the country, he flew in on SAA flight 204 into Johannesburg International Airport on the 4th of January at I think it is 17H30.
	We have done a search of all the ports in the country and he hasn't left the country.  He has been sighted on two occasions in Sunnyside Pretoria and unfortunately we haven't been able to get an address where we can issue the subpoena, but I thought I would like to just place that on record.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you very much.  Ms Thabethe?

MS THABETHE: Thank you Mr Chair.  For the record, I have two witnesses left.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MS THABETHE: Mr Mohammed Sadik Ismail, his affidavit is Exhibit L and Dr Naidoo.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MS THABETHE: I will be calling Mr Ismail.

CHAIRPERSON: Calling Mr Ismail.  That is Exhibit L you say?

MS THABETHE: Exhibit L.

CHAIRPERSON: Just bear with me.  Yes, does everybody have a copy of Exhibit L in their possession, it is a two page affidavit, deposed to be Mr Mohammed Sadik Ismail.  You all got your copies, Exhibit L?
	Mr Ismail, would you take the oath or would you prefer to make an affirmation?

MOHAMMED SADIK ISMAIL: I will take the oath.

MOHAMMED SADIK ISMAIL: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.  Ms Thabethe?

MS THABETHE: Thank you Mr Chair.  Mr Ismail, you say in paragraph 1 of your statement that you are in the employ of the South African Police Services, is that correct?

MOHAMMED SADIK ISMAIL: That is correct.

MS THABETHE: Is this still the case?

MOHAMMED SADIK ISMAIL: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: What rank do you hold Mr Ismail?

MOHAMMED SADIK ISMAIL: Sergeant.

CHAIRPERSON: And whereabouts are you stationed?

MOHAMMED SADIK ISMAIL: At the Phoenix mortuary.

MS THABETHE: The case in this instance is a dispute on the body that was allegedly brought to Phoenix mortuary or to Verulam mortuary on the 15th of July 1987.  Were you employed as a Mortuary Attendant at Verulam at that time?

MOHAMMED SADIK ISMAIL: Yes.

MS THABETHE: Would you remember the specific body that was brought on this day?

MOHAMMED SADIK ISMAIL: No.

MS THABETHE: You wouldn't?  Right, on paragraph 3 of your statement you state that decomposed bodies were regularly brought into the mortuary and then if police report accompanying the body, did not indicate that the death was due to a murder, or a shooting, then the body was sent to Gale Street Mortuary for X-ray and if the report did not ...

MR LAX: Sorry, you said to him if the police report indicated that it wasn't a murder ...

MS THABETHE: If the report accompanying the body, indicated that the death was due to a murder or shooting.

MR LAX: Correct.

MS THABETHE: Then the body was sent to Gale Street Mortuary for X-ray.  I am indebted to Mr Lax.  Is that correct?

MOHAMMED SADIK ISMAIL: Yes, that is right.

MS THABETHE: Did this happen often or ...

MOHAMMED SADIK ISMAIL: Yes, quite often, yes.

MS THABETHE: Quite often?

MOHAMMED SADIK ISMAIL: Yes.

MS THABETHE: Are you certain of this fact?

MOHAMMED SADIK ISMAIL: Yes.

MS THABETHE: And then you go on to say if the report did not indicate the cause of death, and the body was not decomposed, then a post-mortem would be conducted by a District Surgeon?

MOHAMMED SADIK ISMAIL: Yes.

MS THABETHE: Is that correct?

MOHAMMED SADIK ISMAIL: Yes.

MS THABETHE: Now, we have a situation of a body that was brought to your mortuary in Verulam on the 15th of July 1987.  We have a report from Dr Chetty, I don't know whether you have seen the report, I will show it to you.  On page 67 of Bundle 2, which states that the body was completely decomposed.  What would have happened to such a body, would a post-mortem have been done on it or what would have happened?

MOHAMMED SADIK ISMAIL: The normal practice was on a body that was decomposed was brought to the mortuary and if the police report accompanying that particular body stated that it was a murder by shooting, etc, especially a shooting, we would then take the body to Gale Street Mortuary to have it X-rayed.
	Where it was decomposed and the police report did not state that it was a murder, where it was stated that it was just found in the veld, etc, then normally doctors never did a thorough post-mortem, the normal cause of death would have been undetermined or completely decomposed.

MS THABETHE: Right.  On page 68 of the Bundle, it is the report, it states that the height was 1.6 metre and the mass was 60 kg's.  Would you say there were measurements that were done on a decomposed body or what usually happened with regard to measure it and weighing it?

MOHAMMED SADIK ISMAIL: When it came to decomposed bodies, I don't think that was a correct measurement, the doctor just had a look at it and gave his average measurements.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry Mr Ismail, you say that during that period, July 1987, you were also a Mortuary Attendant at the Phoenix, what did your duties entail there, I mean ...

MOHAMMED SADIK ISMAIL: My duties entailed fetching bodies to the mortuary and assisting the doctors while they were doing post-mortems.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MS THABETHE: Thank you Mr Chair.  Mr Chair, at this stage I just want to draw the attention of the Committee to page 69 of Dr Chetty's report, Bundle 2.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, that is the ...(indistinct)

MS THABETHE: On scrutinising this form, Mr Chair, I realised that the serial number is 530/87 which is not the same serial number, so it appears that this is a wrong page.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, and also if one takes a look at page 68, it is written in hand, 69 is typed and then 70 although is written in hand again, although there is only the number written on page  70.

MS THABETHE: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Although the paragraphs fit in, you've suddenly got one typed page amongst a manuscript, so there does seem to be something odd about it, I must say.

MS THABETHE: Yes.  I would recommend that it be discarded, because it is a wrong reference number to start with, it is 530/87 instead of 580.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.  But I am just wondering how it gets there, because how can it happen?  It would seem to be a huge coincidence that a post-mortem report, 50 numbers earlier, one page, gets amongst 580 and it slots in exactly if you take a look at the paragraph numbers and the one page of 580 isn't there.  If we discard it, what do we replace it with, because then we are missing paragraphs 20 to whatever?

MS THABETHE: Yes, we will have to look for the right page.

CHAIRPERSON: So maybe that 530 might be a mistake, I don't know.  You see, this is why I say it is very odd, it is just strange.

MR LAX: Ms Thabethe, I specifically yesterday or the day before, asked that the original of this be brought to us, so that we could all scrutinise it, and that the original of 530 be brought, just to make absolutely sure.

MR VISSER: Chairperson, could I be of assistance.    The answer appears from the docket, the Police docket.  What happened here was a simple case of somebody not taking a clean page when the type written report was reproduced and in the Police docket it is quite clear that this page is turned around, and the actual correct page, is on the reverse side, so that we have the full report, and all that that page says is completely decomposed.

CHAIRPERSON: It doesn't talk about fractured ribs and ...