Amnesty Hearings — Cape Town — 2000-06-15

MR LAX: I am not saying that is the decision to go ahead with the project?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: That is correct.

MR LAX: That is the decision  that the target is approved, correct?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: Correct.

MR MARTINI: But the project might not carry on?

MR LAX: Obviously.

MR MARTINI: Now, Mr van Zyl, when the "second in-house" is held, you have no knowledge of what takes place in that "second in-house"?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: No, I do not.

GEORGE BIZOS: (Microphone not on), in question form rather than an assertion.

MR MARTINI: Sorry, I apologise.

CHAIRPERSON: In stead of leading it.

MR MARTINI: Would you have knowledge of the decisions taken in the "second in-house"?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: No, I have no knowledge of what is discussed there.

MR MARTINI: Let me give you this example, assuming Mr Verster, the Managing Director, does not meet with the Chairman for the "second in-house", would you know whether that meeting did or did not take place?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: No, I would not know.

MR MARTINI: You take, you as far as I understand your evidence, the instruction to carry out a project, would come from either Mr Basson or Mr Burger, is that correct?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: That is so.  It is difficult to say, I think in all my cases, I received my instructions from the Regional Manager, but it is so that the Co-ordinator is aware of those instructions.

MR MARTINI: Who would relay to you what would be the final decision, to go ahead with the project?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: The Regional Manager.

MR MARTINI: Mr Burger?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: That is correct.

MR MARTINI: And if he gave you the go ahead, would you then assume that authority for the execution of the project has been obtained from the upper level?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: That is indeed so.

MR MARTINI: Sorry Chairperson, I am just checking.   I want to ask you this hypothesis - if assuming Gen Webb for example or whoever the Chairperson was, did not in fact have a meeting according the structures, with Col Verster, I think it is, and hence did not authorise at that point, the project, but you nevertheless get given the instruction by Mr Burger to execute your project for which you prepared the plan, for example Omar, would you as far as you are concerned, think that you had lawful authority to execute the plan, according to the structures of the CCB?

GEORGE BIZOS: (Microphone not on) nobody could give anybody authority to go and murder anybody and I am really surprised that the legal practitioner can put such a proposition?

MR MARTINI: Well, Mr Commissioner, whether that is a lawful act, is another issue.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.  I think if we can ...

MR MARTINI: I am talking, that is why I qualified, within their structure of the CCB, the authority within their structures, whether it is a lawful deed or not, is another issue.  I am talking about the authority so to speak within the CCB.

CHAIRPERSON: I think you have already got to that Mr Martini, because you have asked Mr van Zyl, whether he knew what went on in the "second in-house", he wouldn't know whether it was just Col Verster making the decision, or whether Gen Webb was present or who else ever was present, he had nothing to do with the "second in-house".
	The decision after the "second in-house" came via Mr Burger, through to him.  You have already got that, he would accept that ...

MR MARTINI: As long as that is clear, that in his mind the instruction ...

CHAIRPERSON: He was given the instruction to work?

MR MARTINI: To carry it out.     Mr Chairperson, I have no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MARTINI

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.  Mr Sibanyoni, do you have any questions that you would like to ask?

MR SIBANYONI: Thank you Chairperson.   Mr van Zyl, were there any attempts made to recover the money from Peaches after he didn't blow up the microbus?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: Chairperson, no, I would like to make it clear that the money was handed over to Ismail with regard to the microbus, not to Peaches, but no attempt was made to get the money back from him.

MR SIBANYONI: Why not?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: I just did not do it, I did not deem it necessary.

MR SIBANYONI: And then concerning your participation in the Matthysen bus, what cover story was he given, did he know why he was requested to take you into his company?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: As I have already explained, he was aware of the fact that we were involved with the Defence Force and that negotiations took place between him and Staal Burger.  I think he may be able to give you more information about that.
	But he was aware of the fact that we were not in his employ as proper employees.

MR SIBANYONI: Yes, I remember you said he was not aware of your projects?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: Correct.

MR SIBANYONI: But did he understand why were you people deployed in his company?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: No, I do not know whether I understand the question correctly.   I shall try to answer it.  Mr Matthysen knew that he offered us an opportunity to serve as a cover by working for his business, and that we were attached to the Defence Force, so basically we used his structure as a cover story for us, but he was not aware of our projects.

MR SIBANYONI: Coming to Mr Barnard, Ferdi Barnard, did he have confidence in you in general?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: I believe so.

MR SIBANYONI: The Court found him guilty of an attempt to murder Dullah Omar, did you expect that Ferdi Barnard was supposed to murder Dullah Omar?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: No.  I did not expect that.  That was also not my instruction to him.

MR SIBANYONI: Did it surprise you?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: No.  Let me tell you as follows, Ferdi did the monitoring and he was aware that there was a project registered to eliminate Dullah Omar, therefore his assistance that he offered with regard to the monitoring, probably makes him an accomplice in this attempt to murder.  From that perspective, it did not surprise me.

MR SIBANYONI: You also said he didn't tell you that he was involved in the murder of David Webster?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: Correct.

MR SIBANYONI: Is that no strange, he would be the person whose got confidence in you, but he never mentions to you such facts?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: No, I do not find it surprising Chairperson, I can tell you today in all honesty, up to today, he has never made any admission to me that he did it.
	Therefore I did not find it strange.

MR SIBANYONI: In re-examination by Mr Martini, you say that R30 000-00 was budgeted for the Early Learning Centre project, but in some of your statements you say Gakkie was supposed to receive the money, what is the correct position, was it budgeted for the whole  project or was it the amount which was supposed to be received by Gakkie?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: As I understood it, the amount that Gakkie had to receive, was R30 000-00, the project would have cost more because of the aeroplane tickets and hotel accommodation and costs incurred through the course of time, in order to execute the project.

MR SIBANYONI: Right.  You say that you drove around a block, a block of what?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: Chairperson, we drove around a lot, the blocks what I referred to when I asked Gakkie to drive around the block, is the block that I pointed out yesterday to the Chairperson and yourself as well, where we eventually came to stop.  That is the block which I referred to.

MR SIBANYONI: Wouldn't you explain it as just a circle, instead of being a block, the area that you showed us?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: No, with all respect, a circle I would define as something different.

MR SIBANYONI: You said yesterday that Peaches was murdered, was it ever established who was responsible?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: No, I do not know who was responsible for his murder.  I did hear some rumours that it was in regard to gangster activity, but I am not certain.

MR SIBANYONI: Thank you Mr Chairperson, no further
questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Sibanyoni.  Mr Lax, do you have any questions.