Amnesty Hearings — Pietermaritzburg — 1997-02-10

ANSWER: That is correct Mr Brink, but in the time we mentioned and the riot squad where I worked, to me it was normal procedure to detain ANC people and not charge them, and interrogate them and take their weapons without prosecuting them.   Hence it was a waste of time for me to prosecute mainly  because we operated on the information of the Kwashange incident and we were looking for attackers and we were looking for the firearms which had been used to assault the people in the bus.

JUDGE WILSON: (Inaudible)...to sell them?

ANSWER: It was with a view to give it to the IFP or Inkatha, either give it to them or sell it to them.
MR BRINK (contd)

<UNKNOWN>: In any event, I think you will agree with me that that pocketbook was of very, very great importance for you?

ANSWER: Yes it was important to me.

<UNKNOWN>: What happened to it?

ANSWER: When we drove off after having encountered the
1.1	pocketbook /...
MR BRINK	24	W B HARRINGTON
pocketbook and having read it and having questioned Mr Jama about the content and about the attacks in the Richmond area, Mr Madlala and I, my accomplice in the matter, threw the pocketbook out of the window of the vehicle onto the tarred road.

CHAIRPERSON: (Inaudible)...out of the window?

ANSWER: Which one of us in the back of the vehicle?

CHAIRPERSON: ...the pocketbook in his hand to be thrown out of the window?

ANSWER: I did.
MR BRINK (contd)

<UNKNOWN>: Mr Harrington, it is my duty here not to prosecute you but to endeavour to bring out the truth as best I can, to enable this Committee to arrive at a fair and just decision you understand?   After you were convicted the Attorney-General, we know, took the matter on appeal insofar as sentences were concerned.

ANSWER: That is correct.

<UNKNOWN>: I refer the Committee now to page 109 of the Bundle, that is the decision of the Appellate Division and you will find it under sub-paragraph 1D.

CHAIRPERSON: We don't have page 109.

MR BRINK: I beg your pardon Mr Chairman?

CHAIRPERSON: No page is numbered.

MR BRINK: Is your page not numbered 109?

CHAIRPERSON: We have what looks like a photographic reproduction of a report that ends at page 107.

MR BRINK: Yes if it's not numbered, oh it's in fact 248 of the Law Report if that will assist, it's page 248 at the top left-hand corner of the report in question.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.
1.1	MR /...
MR BRINK	25	W B HARRINGTON

MR BRINK: Have you got that passage to which I am about to refer, which is marked 1?

CHAIRPERSON: It's not marked, but you will tell us where it is.

MR BRINK: Yes, it's about a third of the way down.

CHAIRPERSON: Of page 248?

MR BRINK: On page 248 against, virtually against letter "D" on that page.

CHAIRPERSON: Right.
MR BRINK (contd)

<UNKNOWN>: What the appeal court judge said there was
"The appeal has been decided on the basis of the following findings;
1.	when Jama was searched, nothing was found and nothing more happened to justify his detention..."

ANSWER: Mr Brink that is the same situation in which you are today, the judge of appeal and also the Supreme Court judge were not there at the time of the incident, they were not at the scene.   That is why I am grabbing this opportunity with both hands to tell the truth.   If I say that the pocketbook was there, it was there.

<UNKNOWN>: Did you mention the pocketbook at your trial, whether or not you were believed about it, I just want to know whether you mentioned it at your trial or not, and if not, why not?

ANSWER: As far as I can remember yes.

<UNKNOWN>: Why, having regard to the fact that murder is such a serious offence, why didn't you merely take Jama to the police station, detain him and have him charged by a more senior policeman, you had a lot of information.
1.1

ANSWER: /...
MR BRINK	26	W B HARRINGTON

ANSWER: That is correct.   On previous occasions I experienced the same thing with regard to the same kind of incidents where detained ANC supporters, with more information than Mr Jama had, and we assaulted the person and if we got the correct answers, satisfactory answers, we proceeded with the case and if we did not obtain any satisfactory answers we would take the ANC supporter and drop them in an Inkatha area which on 19 November, 1996, I explained to the TRC.

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: I am sorry Mr Brink, going back to the judgment which was read back to you, your answer is that as far as you can remember you did tell the Court that the pocketbook was found on the deceased?

ANSWER: That's correct.

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: Did you tell the Trial Court what the contents of the pocketbook was, namely that there was a list of some terror deeds which had been carried out by the deceased? (end tape 1b)

ANSWER: ...and what was in there I'm not sure about, it's been a while since...

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: I don't understand what your answer is, I wanted to know from you whether if you did mention the pocketbook to the Court whether, to the best of your recollection, you also told the judge what the contents thereof was?

ANSWER: As far as I can remember I'd say yes.

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: You would agree won't you Mr Harrington that if you did in fact tell the trial judge that the pocketbook was found, as also what the contents were, it is highly unlikely that the Court would have made the type of finding that Mr Brink has read to you?
1.2

ANSWER: /...
MR BRINK	27	W B HARRINGTON

ANSWER: That the Court would have found that there wasn't any evidence against him in his pocketbook?

UNKNOWN: No that nothing was found in his possession.

ANSWER: Sir it is probably the evidence which was considered, lots of factors were mentioned there that are changed today, but I maintain that the pocketbook was found in Mr Jama's possession and this led to what happened.   Does that answer your question?

JUDGE WILSON: Could I perhaps interrupt and point out to my brother that in the Trial Court's judgment they do refer to the pocketbook which had been found on him.

MR BANADE: Mr Chairman if I may also just interject, coincidentally I do have a transcript of the judge and his assessors' judgment.   It is not the reported version, it is not reported but on page 841 the judge says with accused 6 in this matter, and that was the applicant
"...question the deceased.   The most likely reason why accused 6 would have wanted to question the deceased would have been in connection with a notebook or diary found in the deceased's possession.   Accused No 6 was in authority over the special constables, he was in charge of the questioning of the deceased."
So obviously the Trial Court definitely heard about a diary.

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: Can I just ask you, was the, for clarification, was the evidence led by the Trial Court that the notebook was found on the corpse of the deceased or whether it had been found earlier on by the police?

JUDGE WILSON: At page 814 of the judgment it says
"Obviously the deceased was, during this part of
1.2	the /...
MR BRINK	28	W B HARRINGTON
the journey, being questioned about the entries in a certain notebook or diary which had been found on him."

ANSWER: Mr Chairman I do not know if, which had been found on him means that it had been found on his, on his corpse or whether it had been found on him at the time when he was still alive.   I will not be able to assist you in that regard.

MR DE JAGER: Mr Harrington the evidence which you have presented to us tells us that you found deadly evidence against the accused that he was involved in attacks upon the Inkatha supporters or that he was involved in the incident where the 18 people were killed, is that correct?

ANSWER: Yes that is correct.

MR DE JAGER: Why would you destroy such evidence?