Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1999-10-11

MATTHEW LECORDIER: What I said was from the intelligence gathering I did and also talking with people who attended these meetings, that's how I was aware that it was Labour Party meetings.

JUDGE PILLAY: Okay, now let me follow.  Now these people who informed you that these were Labour Party meetings, did you ask them about whether Mr Klein participated in those meetings?

MATTHEW LECORDIER: No, Judge, I could not go into that because the people would get suspicious.

JUDGE PILLAY: Oh.

ADV SIGODI: Do you know who were the leaders of the Labour Party at that time?

MATTHEW LECORDIER: Sorry, Chairperson.

ADV SIGODI: Do you know who were the leaders of the Labour Party in Wentworth at that time?

MATTHEW LECORDIER: If I remember correctly, I think it was Pearce and July.  I'm not saying I'm right, I'm not sure if I remember correctly.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, could you just repeat that name, I didn't catch it, Mr Lecordier.

MATTHEW LECORDIER: Pearce and July.

CHAIRPERSON: Pearce and July?

MATTHEW LECORDIER: Mr Pearce and July.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MR RICHARD: May I proceed?
	Now ...(intervention)

MATTHEW LECORDIER: No, sorry, I'd just like to add, I also think it was Mr Abrahams as well.

MR RICHARD: Thank you.  Now am I correct in understanding that what went on at these meetings is not within your knowledge?

MATTHEW LECORDIER: That's right.

MR RICHARD: Am I also correct in my understanding that as to the fact that Mr Klein went to these meetings, is a product of discussions between you and somebody else who did go to the meetings?

MATTHEW LECORDIER: That and also my own following Mr Klein.

MR RICHARD: Now do you have any other information that would support your statement that he was an active member of the Labour Party?

MATTHEW LECORDIER: No, I don't.

MR RICHARD: Now we then get to the point of Mrs Klein.  My question there is, firstly, on what basis do you say she was a member of the Labour Party?

MATTHEW LECORDIER: I thought Mrs Klein was a member of the Labour Party.

MR RICHARD: My next question then is, what led you to think that Mrs Klein was a member of the Labour Party?

MATTHEW LECORDIER: At the time she used to attend some of these meetings, Labour Party meetings.  She used to accompany Mr Klein to them.

MR RICHARD: It may as well be put on record that Mrs Klein denies ever going to any Labour Party meetings.
	Now which meeting did you - alright, let me rephrase that.  You say she went to Labour Party meetings, on basis do you make that allegation?

MATTHEW LECORDIER: The times when I went to these venues, not every time I'm saying, but there were times when I saw Mrs Klein with Mr Klein there.  I don't know if she drove him there and was supposed to drive the car back or what, but her presence alone, her presence, she was there.

MR RICHARD: Now on your version, was that once, twice or more often?

MATTHEW LECORDIER: It was more than once.

MR RICHARD: More than three times?

MATTHEW LECORDIER: I can't say if it was more than three times, I said more than once.

MR RICHARD: Now, do you believe that in and during the mid-'80s it was inappropriate for an ordinary member of the public to go to a meeting for no other reason that to hear what was said there?

MATTHEW LECORDIER: Can you repeat that please.

MR RICHARD: Do you think it was permissible, in and during the period '85/'86 ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: I think your first wording was appropriate rather than permissible.

MR RICHARD: Do you think it was appropriate in and during the mid-'80s for an ordinary member of the public to go to a meeting for no other reason than to find out what is being said?

MATTHEW LECORDIER: Yes, I think it was appropriate.

MR RICHARD: You've also conceded that you had ...(intervention)

JUDGE PILLAY: Even a meeting that was run by a supporter of the apartheid parliament?

MATTHEW LECORDIER: It depends what reason he's going there for.  It could be to gather intelligence, to see who is the main speakers or who is really attending.  He could have his reasons for attending there.  I'm not saying he's attending for the support of that Party.

MR RICHARD: Thank you.  And if the reason for going there might have been nothing more than to go and hear what's being said, so as to be informed, would it be permissible for anyone at their will to go to that meeting?

CHAIRPERSON: You keep using this word "permissible", it wasn't an illegal Party, was it Mr Richard?

MR RICHARD: The Labour Party at the time was particularly, as then defined, legal.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, it wasn't a banned Party, so I mean it would be permissible to go.

MR RICHARD: Sorry, Chairperson, the use of the word "permissible" as opposed "appropriate" is incorrect.
	Do you think it was inappropriate for an ordinary member of the public to go to a Labour Party meeting, or any other meeting convened by a Party that might or might not support apartheid, to find out nothing besides what's being said at the meeting?

MATTHEW LECORDIER: I don't see anything wrong with that.

MR RICHARD: And your evidence earlier was that you had no knowledge of what Mr Klein did while in the meetings.

MATTHEW LECORDIER: Sir, to take you back on your own words, you said Mr Klein used to put up posters for the same party.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, Mr Richard, just to get to the bottom of this line of cross-examination.  You've put it on record that Mr Klein's - is it Kline or Klein, sorry?

MR RICHARD: Klein.

CHAIRPERSON: ... Mr Klein's only association with the Party was helping putting up posters in 1983.  Now is it denied that he ever went to meetings?

MR RICHARD: It's not specifically denied that he ever went to meetings, but it is denied that he was an active participator and supporter of the ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, thank you, I just wanted to get that clear, to understand why these questions were being put.

JUDGE PILLAY: Mr Richard, let's just get something straight, I don't want to get caught in the crossfire as it were.  Putting up posters, is that not an act of participation, whether as a member or supporter?

MR RICHARD: What might or might not have happened in 1983, doesn't necessarily mean that in 1986, three years later ...(intervention)

JUDGE PILLAY: I suppose he could have resigned, ja.

MR RICHARD: Thank you.  Now let's go to the next point.  The houses in Wentworth, many of them are almost identical to each other, is that not so?

MATTHEW LECORDIER: Yes.

MR RICHARD: So when you went and examined the outside of the Klein household, is it not correct that you knew precisely which was the bedroom?

MATTHEW LECORDIER: Yes, that's right.

MR RICHARD: Now, if I take it further, am I correct in assuming that you would have known which end of the room the head of the bed would be positioned in that room, by virtue of where the doors and windows were?

MATTHEW LECORDIER: The thing is it sounds like you're putting words into my mouth here.  I ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: The question, Mr Lecordier, is did you know how the bed was situated in the Klein's bedroom?  Where the bed would be for instance and ...

MATTHEW LECORDIER: No, I did not know.  No, but I knew it was the bedroom.

MR RICHARD: Now from what I can reconstruct the one handgrenade that did go through the window, went through in such a way that it landed, as it happened, at the foot of the bed.  The other handgrenade, if it had hit its target, would have gone into the room at the other end of the room.  Was that a deliberate plan between you and your colleague?

MATTHEW LECORDIER: We had planned and we agreed on throwing the handgrenades into the bedroom.

MR RICHARD: Did you agree to throw them through the window in such a way that they would each land in approximately the same place or might land in different places in the room?

MATTHEW LECORDIER: We just agreed to throw the handgrenades through the window into the bedroom.