Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1998-11-13

MR NGUBANE: Well, we know that this man was a dangerous man according to you.  I suggest to you that the probabilities are that this man would not have given you information easily.  What do you say to that?

MR BOTHA: That is correct Chairperson.

MR NGUBANE: And I suggest to you, because you had made up your mind to eliminate this man, there would be no reason for you not to assault him and interrogate him severely.

MR BOTHA: But I have already given evidence that he was hit and he was slapped Chairperson.

MR NGUBANE: At this safe house, had you previously assaulted people seriously, causing them injuries other than mere slapping them and giving them a few fists?  You take long to answer?

MR BOTHA: The question around the safe house doesn't make sense to me, when we look at Nxiweni.

MR NGUBANE: I am just asking in general.  In order to extract information more specifically from MK people, did you have to assault people so that they could bleed because apparently you do not mean what it means to assault a man severely, so that they could bleed, so that they could be injured, in order to extract information from them?

MR BOTHA: Those people are usually detained under Section 29 at C.R. Swart or any other police station, where they had the facilities.

MR NGUBANE: Facilities to do what?

MR BOTHA: Detention for Section 29 as it is prescribed by the law, a soft bed, a Bible and those kinds of things.  Those were the prescriptions under which they were detained.

MR NGUBANE: And in the safe house, did you have the instrument to torture people?

MR BOTHA: Mr Ngubane, the safe house was a place where we worked clandestinely from.

MR NGUBANE: Yes, I know you worked clandestinely from.  What I am asking is, did you have the instruments of torture in that house?

MR BOTHA: I do not know what you are referring to Mr Ngubane.

CHAIRPERSON: We have heard repeatedly in courts, about people being given electric shocks, people being given tyre treatment, have you never heard of these?

MR BOTHA: I have heard of that Chairperson and that is why I asked Mr Ngubane.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, and isn't that the sort of torture that you are being asked about and you sit there, saying, tell me, I don't know.  You know perfectly well the sort of torture that the police are regularly involved in, don't you?

MR BOTHA: We did not have it there Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, then answer the question and tell him that.  You say you did not have devices like that at the safe house?

MR BOTHA: That is correct, yes.

MR NGUBANE: Now, if the people then were arrested by you and taken to the safe house and you desperately needed information from them, and they could not be detained in terms of Section 29, how did you extract this information then from them?  How did you go about extracting the information from them if you didn't have these instruments of torture as described by the Chairman?

MR BOTHA: There were other methods by enforcing pressure onto them.

MR MALAN: Mr Botha, please, the question refers specifically to Mr Nxiweni.  Please do not answer in general about other methods, the question was what did you do in order to extract information from him?

MR VISSER: With all due respect, the question was very specific in the general.

MR MALAN: Then I apologise, then I have heard incorrectly.

MR VISSER: You will see it in the record Chairperson.

MR NGUBANE: Yes, I concede it was general.  Can I have an answer to that?

MR BOTHA: Could you repeat the question please?

MR NGUBANE: The safe house, if you took someone from whom you desperately needed information, who could not be detained in terms of Section 29, and you wanted to extract information from him, what did you use to extract that information if you didn't have these instruments of torture in that safe house?

MR BOTHA: Specifically the instruments to which you are referring for example and also Mr Chairperson mentioned them, the shock device, etc, there were other methods.

MR NGUBANE: Yes, methods of torture, is that correct?

MR BOTHA: Yes.  To pressurise him, you envelope him in a blanket and you try to suffocate him.  That was one of the methods.

MR NGUBANE: Nxiweni, did you suffocate him at any stage?

MR BOTHA: No, if it was the case, I would have said so.

MR NGUBANE: Now the - well Mr Chairperson, I am a bit hampered here in my cross-examination because the questions which I intend asking flow from the ruling which is to be made on Tuesday.
	I wonder whether I can ...

CHAIRPERSON: What are you going to, why does the identity effect the questions?  I fail to understand that, can you explain?

MR NGUBANE: Yes, it does.  It does effect that.

CHAIRPERSON: What are the questions?

MR NGUBANE: The questions that directly flow from the identity of the informers which may directly flow from the identity of the informers Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, those questions can be asked later then.  Have you finished your other questions?

MR NGUBANE: I will deal with the kwaMashu 3 now.

CHAIRPERSON: How long will you be?

MR NGUBANE: About ten minutes.

CHAIRPERSON: I indicated yesterday that we are adjourning at two o'clock today and I am not aware of what arrangements people may have made for their travel plans.
	If you can go on, you say ten minutes, does that suit you?

MR NGUBANE: Maybe less than that Chairperson.

MR VISSER: Perhaps something that might facilitate the cross-examination Mr Chairman, by this stage in our submission, Mr Ngubane has had the opportunity of listening to the evidence, of discussing it with his clients and have decided whether he is going to oppose the applications or not, and if so, on what grounds.
	We know what the grounds are that are stated in the Act Mr Chairman, and it would be most helpful if Mr Ngubane could now give you an indication as to whether he is proceeding with objecting to the applications and if so, on what grounds.

CHAIRPERSON: (Microphone not on)

MR VISSER: I was hoping, you are probably right Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Carry on Mr Ngubane.

MR NGUBANE: Thank you.  Now the kwaMashu 3, you say that when you confronted them about the weapons they were carrying, they told you the story which you knew was a lie, is that correct?

MR BOTHA: That is correct.

MR NGUBANE: Did they at any stage cooperate with you and give you some information which was true?

MR BOTHA: It is once again a question of it was a question/answer method that we used Mr Chairperson.  Their cooperation was not voluntarily.

MR NGUBANE: ... (tape ends) ... somewhere on the railway line?

MR BOTHA: That information was already known to us Chairperson, that is also why that evening they were arrested, whilst they were on their way there.

MR NGUBANE: But you didn't know the exact spot where they were going to place those mines?

MR BOTHA: No.  I knew the railway line was the target.

MR NGUBANE: But not a specific spot?

MR BOTHA: No, not the specific spot.

MR NGUBANE: Well, I understood your evidence as saying that your intention was to take them to the place to be identified by them, and then you would blow them up at that spot, is that correct?

MR BOTHA: That is correct.

MR NGUBANE: But now you are saying that they didn't point out a spot to you, is that right?

MR BOTHA: When we arrived at Phoenix railway line, and that is how I said it in my evidence, it was close to the Phoenix railway station, they would show a place, seemingly the place that they are to point out.
	Taylor would have requested to do that and we already decided to eliminate them there at the precise place, whether it was ten metres this way, ten metres that way, was irrelevant.

MR NGUBANE: Yes, but the fact of the matter is that they didn't point the spot to you, where they were going to blow up the railway line?

MR BOTHA: The Phoenix railway station and the railway line was the target Mr Ngubane.