Amnesty Hearings — Port Elizabeth — UNKNOWN

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: ... busy with the interrogation.

ADV DU PLESSIS: And you also say that the evening when you arrived there the Askaris were there?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: Yes.

ADV DU PLESSIS: Is it correct to say the Askaris were used inter alias to guard these three deceased in the bus on the way there?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: Yes.

ADV DU PLESSIS: And the Askaris purpose had already expired when they arrived at Post Chalmers?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: Yes, that is correct.

ADV DU PLESSIS: And the next morning you also saw the Askaris there?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: Yes.

ADV DU PLESSIS: Isn't it possible Mr Nieuwoudt, that Captain Venter and Warrant Officer Beeslaar arrived at Post Chalmers later that afternoon, is there possibility?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: No.

ADV DU PLESSIS: That perhaps your memory's failing you with regard to their presence at Post Chalmers?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: No, my recollection of the day is that they departed on the morning of the 9th.  Captain Roelf Venter and Beeslaar were together with the Askaris there and after we ate, they departed.

ADV DU PLESSIS: Did you see them leave?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: What I can recollect is that they greeted me, that is how I can remember it.  I didn't know Venter personally, he was introduced to me that morning of the 8th and he greeted me.

ADV DU PLESSIS: You see Mr Nieuwoudt, we have already determined when you were busy with the interrogation and it seems to me besides for the time that you were busy eating, you were permanently busy with the interrogation up to 3 o'clock the afternoon.

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: No, I also had to leave the room, I didn't sit there permanently.

ADV DU PLESSIS: But aren't you perhaps willing to ceded that you might perhaps be wrong with regard to your memory in this particular instance?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: My recollection of that particular day is that Mr Roelf Venter and Beeslaar as well as the Askaris were present the evening and the next morning between 10 and 11 - perhaps I could make an error with the time that they left, but they were there and then after we ate they departed.

ADV DU PLESSIS: Could you conceive that you could have made a mistake with regard to the time that they departed?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: Whether it's 10 o'clock or whatever - that might be the case, I said approximately 10 o'clock, it could have been later but before Mr du Plessis arrived they had already left.

ADV DU PLESSIS: What I find strange Mr Nieuwoudt, under these circumstances with regard to the evidence is two things, first of all that you are so sure about the whole case with regard to their presence there whilst you were busy with the interrogation for most of the time, that's the first point that I find a bit strange.  And then secondly, some of the previous witnesses were prepared to concede that is a possibility that their recollection with regard to Venter and Beeslaar might not have been totally correct.  Can you explain that?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: Although I'm involved, I wasn't there the whole time, I left the room.  What I can recall is that we ate and then they departed before Mr du Plessis arrived, that is how I remember.

ADV DU PLESSIS: Are you prepared to concede - if we talk about the consumption of drinks with regard to Venter and Beeslaar, it could have been possible that they could have had a few drinks?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: Yes, I could do that but I want to emphasise it - I cannot see that alcohol was consumed, it was not a festive occasion and I don't believe Captain van Zyl would have permitted it.  If they had it in their bus, that could have been possible, if they had it on the way, that could have been possible - they could have consumed it, I didn't see it and I don't think Captain van Zyl would have allowed it, that is how I see it.

ADV DU PLESSIS: Mr Nieuwoudt, let me put it to you - a different aspect, I'm coming back to this one later on.  With regard to the assaults, Captain Venter testified that as far as he could see the three activists were not assaulted although their heads were covered.   Warrant Beeslaar will also testify in the same way for the period that they arrived there up to the point that they departed - that would have been the next afternoon up to the evening up to about 9 o'clock, they saw the activists with their heads covered and their evidence will be with regard to assault that as far as Beeslaar could see, it did not seem to him that they had been assaulted.  Would you like to comment on that?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: They had not been assaulted, their heads were not covered.

ADV DU PLESSIS: I hear what you say that their heads weren't covered, I just find it strange that Captain Venter and Warrant Officer Beeslaar testified in this regard.  Isn't it possible that their heads could have been covered at some stage?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: If I have to speculate on this, it could have been where I did not see it, when they were transported from the airport to Cradock by the Askaris.  When I saw them at Cradock at Post Chalmers, their heads were not covered.  And with regard to the assaults - while I was busy with one with the interrogation someone could have assaulted them , not that I have any knowledge of that.  I saw no marks of assault for me to gain that impression and that is how I can recall it.

ADV DU PLESSIS: And in general terms besides covering of the heads, your testimony is not contested by Beeslaar.  Mr Nieuwoudt.  The only question that I have a problem with - and I think the Committee's also struggling with, is the question why there is a difference between your version with regard to when Captain Venter and Beeslaar arrived there and when they departed.
	 I don't know why there is such a difference and the only logical reason that I can use in argument is that Warrant Officer Beeslaar and Captain Venter played a very small role in this operation and that you the Port Elizabeth branch security members, didn't really pay any attention to them.  And that it is a possibility that the security force members of Port Elizabeth really can't remember their involvement and presence there - your comment on that?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: No, I'm quite sure that they were there the evening, they stayed over and the next morning they departed and that is how I observed it on that day.  Before du Plessis arrived they had already left and that evening the three activists were eliminated, that's the evening of the 9th.

ADV DU PLESSIS: In the end it will be my argument that it is really not so essential in the whole case here - the question whether they were present or not, I just want to get an answer to this strange occurrence.  And I put it to you, it does seem to me that there could have been a possibility - and I ask you to consider this, if there wasn't perhaps a possibility even it it's 5%, that you could be wrong?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: No, I'm sure that they were there and as I have explained it might perhaps be that the fact that they played a minimal role, that they can't remember - that's the only comment I can give.

ADV DU PLESSIS: Let me put it to  you in this way ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Mr du Plessis, I think you have dealt with that point.

ADV DU PLESSIS: I have Mr Chairman, I'm finished with the point.

CHAIRPERSON: I think we should get onto another point.

ADV DU PLESSIS: I'm finished with that point Mr Chairman.
	Let me put it to you that Warrant Officer Beeslaar, his evidence will be - and I'm not going to repeat it again, that he does make allowance for a small possibility that he might be wrong with regard to his recollection of events, I put it to you.

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: Yes.

ADV DU PLESSIS: Thank you Mr Chairman, I've no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY ADV DU PLESSIS

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lamey?