Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1998-11-11

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: Chairperson, I have just told you of the circumstances and how acts of terror took place.  To understand this question correctly and to understand the answer of it, we had to make some adaptations and I'm talking here specifically about the security branch and the adaptation in terms of your own ability to gather information or intelligence and then the usage of such intelligence and by means of a pro-active or reactive action, the elimination of individuals.  And during the same time in 1986 where the investigative unit was divided into two components ...[intervention]

MR VISSER: I don't want you to divert too far from the point and I see there's only a few minutes left but can we just end this issue?  The gathering of information, was this important to you?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: This was the primary leg of the security branch.

MR VISSER: Yes, it is that leg that told you or hopefully would have told you what was going to happen?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: That is correct, Chairperson.

MR VISSER: Where you did not have any intelligence it was difficult if not impossible to act preventively?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: That is correct, Chairperson.

MR VISSER: Just in the remaining time - Mr Chairman, if you will allow me to interrupt the examination but we believe that we have to say something from a point of view of explanation to the members who are appearing, who are sitting with you today who have not been exposed to us, as it were, before.  Mr Chairman, you will recall that on occasion in the past, certain cross-examination was directed to certain of the applicants for whom we appear in regard to precisely the point that Commissioner Malan raised this morning, that being that the applications are all basically the same.  Mr Chairman, you will be reminded that there was one occasion, I can't remember which it was, but I believe it was in the Umzimkulu matter, where we explained to you and the panel then sitting with you, how precisely this came about and it concerns a long history of reticence on the part of policemen to apply for amnesty and how it eventually came about through the efforts of persons such as particularly General van der Merwe and also others that literally on number 99 decision was made to apply to support the process of the TRC and to apply for amnesty.  When that happened Mr Chairman, my poor attorney was suddenly swamped.

CHAIRPERSON: I'm sure "poor" is the wrong word, my "overworked".

MR VISSER: But he was swamped Mr Chairman and the best that they could do in order to get the applications in was to tell the word processor certain things and have it duplicated and basically it was intended that the words that are here would cover basically every conceivable situation.  You would find for example - and that was the very point in Umzimkulu, but there's no cross border raised in things that we're talking about "what are you talking about when you mention that?" well that's exactly the problem which we encountered.  But, Mr Chairman, tomorrow morning at 9 o'clock Mr Botha will tell you about the structures that Mr Malan was asking about today.

MR MALAN: I just want to make sure that I heard you properly Mr Botha and I look forward to tomorrow because I think this is of great importance to the greater intelligence and information surrounding the Commissions activities as to where the Commission has arrived in it's investigation and the amnesty process will give us much more information that we did not have. 	Before I ask you the question, let me tell you that from the Amnesty Committee we are well aware that the whole process of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission starts with the amnesty process, that we can only get information from applicants.
	The investigative capacity is severely limited and please do not think that there is the notion with the Amnesty Committee and all it's panels to lean more over when things come to a knife point as to the condition of amnesty, but this can only be done at a full disclosure and according to my experience, this is the thing that bothers the panel mostly and we feel sometimes that people are trying to avoid making full disclosure.  
	Did I hear you properly now, you said that your own capacity was limited, you intelligence gathering and usage thereof, it was decided on a proactive and reactive stage to eliminate some of the opposition?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: That is correct.

MR MALAN: I'll leave it at that and Mr Visser can lead your evidence tomorrow, but this is one of the central points around which the amnesty application revolves so can you please speak as openly of this as possible?

MR VISSER: I hope I'm not misunderstanding you Commissioner Malan, that he does not say that there is the impression that the notion exists that they would rather give amnesty then refuse it?

MR MALAN: I am not speaking of impressions, if we have to take a decision then we would rather grant amnesty instead of refusing it and I want you to be aware of this, we are not here to oppose or refuse amnesty in principle.  We hear it and we have to decide on it within the greater framework and in the interpretative, if that is the word, to have it play a role there.  Thank you very much.

CHAIRPERSON: We'll adjourn till 9 o'clock tomorrow morning.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS