Amnesty Hearings — Cape Town — 2000-10-02

CARL CASTELING BOTHA: Mr Lax I hear what you are saying, I wouldn't say it was most of the work.  I was tasked with activating the mine and at a later stage Mr van Zyl tasked me to detonate the mine.  The placement of the bomb was the more important aspect to me, which we didn't do, so we did not place the organisation at a disadvantage with regard to that.  The order was carried out and maintained.

MR LAX: Except in this sense that you weren't meant to be at the scene at all and you people were at the scene.

CARL CASTELING BOTHA: Once again it wasn't my project.  Mr van Zyl should have taken certain precautionary measures which I supported and that is how we executed the project.

MR LAX: You see the thrust of all these questions is, you guys had rules but you broke them all the time, you didn't stick to them.  That's how it seems to me.  The only person who appears to have stuck quite carefully to the rules was Mr Maree.

CARL CASTELING BOTHA: I hear what you are saying but simultaneously I must say that the rules perhaps were not that narrowly observed.  The execution of projects was a priority for us at that stage given the internal situation of the country and during training it was also stated that we had to ensure that we took calculated risks.  Either the project would not be executed or you would do it yourself.  That was our reasoning, right or wrong, but I accept what you have said.

MR LAX: Yes.  Sorry, we are running quite far ahead, I didn't mean to do that, it was just this principle that I was dealing with.

MR VAN ECK: Thank you Mr Lax.   Mr Botha, in the many cell meetings that you attended were your members ever asked why there wasn't any movement, what was going on, why the lack of progress?

CARL CASTELING BOTHA: Yes.

MR VAN ECK: Who put these questions?

CARL CASTELING BOTHA: The regional manager and the co-ordinator, Wouter Basson.

MR VAN ECK: And at that stage had you made any progress with regard to the organisation's objectives?

CARL CASTELING BOTHA: Not to the scope that I would have preferred but we did try.

MR VAN ECK: The sentiment of, among others, Mr Burger who threatened to discharge you when it became known that you were working with Mr Barnard, did you ever feel afterwards that you could say that you and Mr Barnard had shot Dr Webster dead?

CARL CASTELING BOTHA: Not at all.  I must just add on that point, the contact with regard to Mr Verster was exclusive via the co-ordinator.  So it wasn't as if I could call him up and say let's go and have a coffee I want to tell you something.  There was a clear cut-off point with regard to any meeting with Mr Joe Verster.

MR VAN ECK: What do you think the reaction would have been if you had said subsequently that you and Mr Barnard had shot Dr Webster dead if it was Staal Burger's reaction where you and Mr Barnard were viewed together observing Mr White?

CARL CASTELING BOTHA: Given the cut-off points which were maintained and the management of the project I could not exclude that they would sacrifice me and Mr Barnard as happened by implication during our Section 29 detention.  Rumours were spread that we had been involved in the murder and I believe that it was one of the motivations as to why we were detained in terms of Section 29.  So it was my fear that Joe Verster would exonerate himself and Luitingh and apply a so-called cover-up operation and sell Barnard and I out, and I wasn't prepared to take that chance.

MR VAN ECK: It could have led to the death sentence.

CARL CASTELING BOTHA: That is correct.

MR VAN ECK: While you were on ice from June until you received the call to assist the organisation again in August, what were you doing?

CARL CASTELING BOTHA: I continued with my blue plan which was Cabot and I continued to try to collect information in my own way, I tried to stay busy.  No particular directions were given to me, I simply wasn't allowed to be involved.

MR VAN ECK: Were you still part of the cell meetings?

CARL CASTELING BOTHA: No I wasn't.

MR VAN ECK: Was any feedback given by any person to you regarding what the CCB and Region 6 was occupied with at that stage?

CARL CASTELING BOTHA: No, there were many stories and rumours but there was no official feedback as such.

MR VAN ECK: And at the end of August you received a call to report to a hotel, can you recall this?

CARL CASTELING BOTHA: Yes.

MR VAN ECK: What was your immediate reaction?

CARL CASTELING BOTHA: Once again my eagerness played a significant role.  I was anxious to return to the structure, yet simultaneously I felt that I was being drawn in again and that I might be tossed out at a later stage, nonetheless I was eager to assist Van Zyl.

MR VAN ECK: Who phoned you, can you recall?

CARL CASTELING BOTHA: Staal Burger personally.

MR VAN ECK: And who told you there, where you met them there at the hotel, what was going to happen?

CARL CASTELING BOTHA: Generally it was explained to me what was going to occur.  It was not my place to make enquiries regarding the project as such.  I received an order from my regional manager in co-operation with the co-ordinator and I accepted that Mr van Zyl would inform me more comprehensively on the way to Cape Town.  They explained the device to me, but as a demolitions expert it was fairly elementary to understand, and that was the information that I received.

MR VAN ECK: Despite the name of the organisation, the Civil Co-operation Bureau, was there any disciplinary structure within the CCB?  One could almost say some kind of rank structure.

CARL CASTELING BOTHA: There was seniority, there was definitely seniority, and the seniors clearly made the subordinates feel subordinate.

MR VAN ECK: If you were told about an instruction could you refuse to execute it?

CARL CASTELING BOTHA: No I could not.

MR VAN ECK: If you were to refuse to execute it what would the consequences have been?

CARL CASTELING BOTHA: I was not prepared to take the risk.  It is speculative but I have explained the capacities of the organisation and in the light of this I was not prepared to take the risk of refusal.

MR VAN ECK: You said that you were almost happy to be involved again?

CARL CASTELING BOTHA: That is correct.

MR VAN ECK: The planning prior to the bomb incident at the Early Learning Centre, was this ever shared with you, the prior in-house planning, the decisions regarding what was going to be done and so forth?

CARL CASTELING BOTHA: In general terms it was explained to me.  We travelled from Johannesburg to Cape Town via car and Mr van Zyl did explain aspects of the operation to me but I was not involved in the planning of it, in the approval of it or anything like that.

MR VAN ECK: Were you involved in the observation and the persons who would have been involved with that?

CARL CASTELING BOTHA: Yes I was.

MR VAN ECK: In what capacity?

CARL CASTELING BOTHA: I had to ensure that the bomb would be detonated.  I also had to ensure that execution would be given to the project.

MR VAN ECK: Did you see the bomb in Johannesburg?

CARL CASTELING BOTHA: Yes I did.

MR VAN ECK: What sort of bomb was it?

CARL CASTELING BOTHA: It was an SPM limpet mine.

MR VAN ECK: The small one or the big one?

CARL CASTELING BOTHA: The big one, grey in colour, one kilogram in mass.

MR VAN ECK: Was it the one with the 950 grams explosives?

CARL CASTELING BOTHA: That is correct.

MR VAN ECK: The detonator, was this shown to you?

CARL CASTELING BOTHA: Yes.

MR VAN ECK: Was it a standard detonator for this sort of mine?

CARL CASTELING BOTHA: No it wasn't.

MR VAN ECK: What would the standard detonator involve?