Amnesty Hearings — Cape Town — 2000-03-13

GEORGE BIZOS: I want to illustrate in view of Mr Martini's intervention, opposition, by a statement in 5(a) page 86.  The context, it is on the briefing of what the policy of the CCB was and it continues on top of page 86, Mr Chairman
"We are informed that the disruption of the enemy for example the existence of breaking of a window, the killing of a person and this depends on the priority class.  The organisation identified targets by means of information upon which we received instructions.  Several non de plumes were used."
Elsewhere Mr van Zyl says more graphically, whether we kill somebody or we break a window, depended on the decision of Mr Verster, he was the Managing Director and presumably it will be confirmed by Gen Webb who is sitting here.
	Now this is very important on the proportionality issue.  How was this policy applied and how can we decide whether the witness has made full disclosure or not if we are prohibited from or restrained from asking questions, well what other decisions did you make?  Illustrate to us when somebody had the penalty of death or the breaking of a window pane, so that the Committee decide what your policy was and how you applied it.  It's very clear that we cannot do justice to the case that we have undertaken on behalf of the victims if we are restrained.  My learned friend Mr Wessels, Mr Chairman, says for the last 20 years you can't go and do things.  Now we're not interested in 20 years.  We are interested in the period and that the question was, how many people were there in the CCB during your stewardship, during your leadership of this organisation?  And then my learned friend says that we have misread the papers because he did apply for amnesty in other matters.  Yes, we have not overlooked the pages 192 to 193 of the application in relation to Ribeiro and one other, the Community House, which was clearly outside the period when he was a CCB General Manager.  It was at a time when he was a staff officer in the Special Forces, so we haven't forgotten about that and we want to give you and our learned friends an assurance that we will confine ourselves to the nature and extent of the CCB and its activities and the participation of each one of the gentlemen before you, of what they did so that you may properly decide whether they comply with the requirements of the Act.  My learned friend Mr Wessels, correctly stated that there was a Section 29 hearing.  It was a painful experience to read it, Mr Chairman, because the witness and the others spent most of their time making lengthy speeches and not answering questions about the importance of their work and refusing to ask questions on specific matters which they avoided completely and the Chairman of the Commission did not direct them to answer them.  The victims are not obliged to accept those as the final word, they have a right to claim the information before the Amnesty Committee, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.  Thank you.  We'd just like to take a short adjournment to deliberate amongst ourselves so that we won't be overheard by everybody.

MR LAX: It's quarter to one.

CHAIRPERSON: I see it's quarter to one.  This might be an opportunity to, instead of going out and coming back for five minutes, to take the lunch adjournment and if we could start again at half-past one, if that would be convenient.  So we'll take the lunch adjournment now and then we will, if possible, proceed at half-past one.  Thank you.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
ON RESUMPTION

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: (s.u.o.)

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.  We've discussed the arguments that were submitted prior to the lunch adjournment and it's not possible for us at this stage to make a definitive ruling as to which questions may be put in the future, will be relevant or not relevant, we cannot anticipate what questions will be put.  However we and certainly speaking for myself, know very little about the CCB and its operations and we would not find it irrelevant as to how such an organisation was established, how it worked, how it arrived at decisions, how it obtained information, how information was confirmed and matters of that nature.  We are also of the view that we would not find it relevant, which has already been mentioned, as to the minutia or details of other operations in order for us to arrive at a decision in this matter.  We are however, fully aware of the concerns of both the, of all the applicants and the victims in this regard.  We also are aware of the fact that time is a factor as well.  We would like these proceedings to proceed expeditiously.
	So, all we can say at this stage is that if there is an objection from one side or the other side to a question in the future regarding relevancy, we'll consider it without the need of making the same submissions every time.  We're fully aware of that.  With regard to the question that the objection was taken to now, namely what was the size of the, or the number of operatives of the CCB during Verster's tenure there, we are of the view that there's no reason why such question should be excluded.  I've personally got no idea as to the size of the CCB, whether it was small, whether it was large and it's the sort of information that certainly I can't see any prejudice to anybody, that information being revealed, so I will allow that question.  Thank you.  Mr Bizos.

GEORGE BIZOS: (cont)
	During your stewardship of the CCB, how many members did it have?

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: Chairperson, the exact number is in previous documentation and at previous occasions has been given.  If I recall correctly, it was in the vicinity of 160 members and reason why it is difficult to say exactly, because certain members were directly or as we called it, members who knew and then there were members who did not know, so there is a connection in that regard that makes it difficult to quantify.  Approximately 160.

GEORGE BIZOS: How many formal members of the CCB and how many might have been unwitting members of the CCB?

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: Chairperson, I have just answered that now.  I said I don't know exactly.  I judged that the exact number would be approximately 160 fifteen years ago.  I cannot recall right now.

CHAIRPERSON: That would be formal members?  Actual members who were receiving ...

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: No, Chairperson.  Certain were knowing and others were unknowing and the numbers, it's not possible to give it to you without any research.

GEORGE BIZOS: ...(indistinct - no microphone)

MR LAX: Sorry Mr Bizos.  You need to appoint another agent to press your button.

GEORGE BIZOS: You made an estimate in previous proceedings that there were about 100 that were members and some 150 unaware members.

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: That may be so.  I recall that there were previous instances that we discussed it.

GEORGE BIZOS: Now was there a Board of Directors, with Directors in inverted commas?

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: No, Chairperson, I was appointed as the Managing Director.  The General was the Chairperson and then we only had Regional Managers.

GEORGE BIZOS: Well, whether we call them Regional Managers or Directors, please give us the names of the Regional Managers with the region for which each one of them was responsible.

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: I cannot recall all those names Chairperson.

GEORGE BIZOS: Give us the ones that you can remember.

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: Staal Burger was Region 6, that's the only name, the others had administrative names, I cannot recall any of their names.

GEORGE BIZOS: Give us their administrative names, because there is ...(intervention)

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: I don't know what that is, Chairperson.