Amnesty Hearings — Boksburg — UNKNOWN

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

GEORGE BIZOS: The effect of it is, Mr Chairman ...(intervention).

INTERPRETER: The speaker's microphone is not on.

GEORGE BIZOS: ...if what the witness says on page 7, is amplified whilst in consultation, it tends to show that Mr Clark, who was held out to be nothing more than a person who was interested in Mrs Derby-Lewis's computer, was involved in unlawful activities, particularly stealing large sums of money and it was suggested by Mr Clark that a portion of that money that was stolen from the JCI should be used for Mr Derby-Lewis's defence.

CHAIRPERSON: Suggested by who?

GEORGE BIZOS: By Mr Clark.   Now, in further consultation with the witness, further information has been made known to us about the relationship between Mr and Mrs Derby-Lewis and Mr Clark.   We would contend that if the evidence is true, then Mr Clark is most likely to have known about the plans, Mr Chairman, and we may say that Mrs Derby-Lewis' statement, sorry diary, is punctuated with Mr Clark's name at or about the time that the murder took place, and this is the basis upon which we thought the evidence relevant and it might carry the matter further.

CHAIRPERSON: In that case, Mr Bizos, is the primary source of information not Mr Clark, assuming that we are going to have Mr Clark, I was told this morning, we were told this morning that we are likely to have Mr Clark as a witness?  Now looking at page 7, it would seem that the primary source of the information that you seek would be Mr Clark himself, and ...(intervention).

GEORGE BIZOS: Well, with one ...(intervention).

INTERPRETER: The speaker's microphone.

GEORGE BIZOS: With one difficulty, judge, and that is this, that we have reason to believe that the friendship between Mr Clark and Mr and Mrs Derby-Lewis continues, and we do have no reason to believe that we will get any information from Mr Clark.   What we would like to put to Mr Clark is what we have been told by Mr Visser.    If that evidence is not placed on record, then it's theoretically possible to put it to Mr Clark first.   If we are correct in our assessment that he's likely to deny the allegations, then we would have to, or ask the committee to call Mr Visser in order to confirm the things that we have to put to Mr Clark, and this is why we thought that the order would be then more appropriate to have Mr Visser's evidence and then put whatever he may have said to Mr Clark.

CHAIRPERSON: Ja, you see that's the point I was trying to grapple with, because, well one must bear in mind that Mr Visser is first, I mean he's also an applicant himself, he's applying for amnesty.   If we have to hear his evidence, we'll hear it, but normally we're not very keen to hear somebody who is himself an applicant in the case, if that can be avoided, but I'm not saying that that would be one of the reasons why he shouldn't, but what I'm saying is, you want to have Mr Visser now on the premise that, well...(tape ends)
	...to shelve Mr Visser, I'm just thinking aloud, if we were to shelve Mr Visser and then call Mr Clark, and then possibly Mr Clark does not deny these things, where perhaps you think he may, you may find no need to call Mr Visser.

GEORGE BIZOS: That is a possibility, but ...(intervention).

INTERPRETER: The speaker's microphone is not on.

GEORGE BIZOS: ...on the information that I have received, it seems to be a hypothetical and theoretical one, but if the committee feels that we should hear Mr Clark first, I have no strong objection to it.   I merely draw attention to the fact that it would only be postponing the problem rather than solving it.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I'm sure we'll bear that in mind as and when we deliberate over the application itself.   Thank you.  Is there anything you wish to say?

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Nothing.

MR PRINSLOO: Nothing, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Is there anything else you wish to say?

MR VISSER: No.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, may I ask, Mr Visser, it seems to me we had some difficulties in the past to get you here to the hearing.   Assuming that we are not to hear you today, maybe tomorrow morning, would you be available?

MR VISSER: Yes, yes.

CHAIRPERSON: You hear this request that is being made by this witness, or by this potential witness, and is there a view you wish to express on the matter?

UNKNOWN: Nothing.

CHAIRPERSON: (Indistinct) to hear this witness, we will make a, I have come to the conclusion, from the little bit I've heard, that Mrs Derby-Lewis should then be allowed to be present, as a result of what I have heard.   	The committee will now adjourn and make its decision known immediately after the lunch interval.
	Mr Visser, the committee will adjourn to consider your application.   We will resume at two o'clock and we will then notify you what our decision is.

MR VISSER: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: The committee will adjourn and when it resumes, it will still resume in camera.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
RULING

CHAIRPERSON: My committee has considered the application made by Mr Visser that he be allowed to give evidence in camera, and, on the information placed before us, we have come to the conclusion that we should allow him to do so.  
	However, he is an applicant in his own right for amnesty.   Bearing that in mind, we have come to the conclusion that his evidence here must be strictly limited to the extent that it has any direct bearing on the issues that we are seized with.   In other words, any evidence relating to other matters will be regarded as extraneous and there ought not to be any question, evidence or cross-examination of those matters.   Such questions as are put to him should be limited directly to the point for which, or the point on which he is going to give evidence.
	I had, before the adjournment, indicated my personal view that Mrs Derby-Lewis may be allowed in these proceedings in camera.   My committee has considered that matter and has come to the conclusion that nobody, except for Mrs Hani, should be allowed to be present here.

MR VISSER: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: Perhaps I should start, Mr Visser, just a few personal details.    What are you by occupation?

MR VISSER: Sir, currently I am a transport manager for a company here in Johannesburg.

CHAIRPERSON: You live in Johannesburg?

MR VISSER: I stay in Krugersdorp, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Krugersdorp.   And the questions that are going to be put to you will be confined to the issues that we are concerned with in this inquiry, do you understand?

MR VISSER: I understand, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: And you're expected to give us an honest and truthful and full account ...(intervention).

MR VISSER: Yes, I will.

CHAIRPERSON: ...of that.

MR VISSER: Yes, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mpshe?

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Thank you, Mr Chairman, I think my learned friend, Advocate Bizos, is leading the witness.

CHAIRPERSON: (indistinct) put to this witness?

GEORGE BIZOS: Yes, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Please do so.

GEORGE BIZOS: Mr Visser, we are concerned only with that portion of your affidavit and application for amnesty before the committee with item No 8 on page 7, have you got that document in front of you, Exhibit Q?

MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, yes I have the document in front of me.

CHAIRPERSON: Give me the page number again.

GEORGE BIZOS: Page 7, Mr Chairman, item 8, headed "diefstal".

MR VISSER: That's correct.

GEORGE BIZOS: Now I'd like you to read that out to members of the committee and tell us whether you confirm the contents of this?