Amnesty Hearings — Cape Town — 2000-06-22

MR KAHANOVITZ: Do you have some sort of a medical condition that ...  I'm sorry, I'm not asking this as a joke, I'm asking you whether you have some sort of a medical condition that affects your memory.

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: My lawyer thinks so.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Your lawyer thinks so.

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: No, I'm trying to be honest today and I want to tell you the whole truth to the best of my ability, but I'm not aware of a medical condition, but it's possible and it happened many years ago and I challenge each one of you sitting and laughing to answer questions about what happened last week and to divulge the details, it's not that easy.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Thank you.  So is it pointless for me to put to you what Mr van Zyl had to say about what he recalls was discussed in that meeting?

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: You can put it to me.

MR KAHANOVITZ: But will you be able to remember?

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: If I can.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Well Mr van Zyl, for example, says there was information placed before the meeting as to the time, he'd received information from his informant as to the time that the meeting was scheduled and the time that the meeting was scheduled to end, can you remember that?

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: The meeting at the Early Learning Centre?

MR KAHANOVITZ: Yes.

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: Yes, it could be.

MR KAHANOVITZ: He takes it further.  He says that in the light of that information a decision was made as to the time at which the limpet would be exploded.

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: Then it's true.

MR KAHANOVITZ: But once again, I can see from the way you're answering the question, you're saying:  "I can't independently recall, but if that's what Mr van Zyl says, then it must be so", that's your answer?

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: I would have liked to have the pre-study and the project in front of me so I could show you and tell you what was discussed and what happened.  All of us rely on our memories today and this is why we seem so uncertain.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Mr Berger, that's a very strange answer to be given by somebody that was party to a plan to make sure that the Harms Commission didn't get hold of those files.

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: I think that's an allegation you make and I take exception that I'm involved in something like that.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Well when I say you, I say the CCB.

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: No, you spoke to me, you're busy with me.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, we're getting off the track now, we're wasting time now.  Can you remember the in-house meeting, Mr Burger?

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: No, I can't remember that specifically.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Now, the change that was made to the plan when van Zyl and Botha got to Cape Town, you will recall that the plan was that the "onbewustelike lid" would go off and explode the bomb.

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: Yes.

MR KAHANOVITZ: But what in fact happened was that Botha and van Zyl went along.

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: Yes.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Was there any consultation with you as to the change in the plan?  Did they phone you in Johannesburg as say:  "We know that it's a CCB rule that the "bewustelike lede" never go along, but we want to change the plan for various reasons?  Was any contact made with you?

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: No.

MR KAHANOVITZ: So in doing that, they violated your instruction?

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: Yes, the guidelines.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Now if Mr van Zyl says that the budget for the amount to be paid to Mr Hardien was R30 000, are you in a position to dispute that?

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: No.

MR KAHANOVITZ: You don't remember what it was, but you don't dispute that?

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: No.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Alright, well the facts are that the amount he requested in the budget for payment to Mr Hardien was
R30 000 but instead of paying him R30 000, he paid him only R18 000, do you recall that evidence?

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: Yes.

MR KAHANOVITZ: What explanation do you wish to give for why Mr Hardien was only paid R18 000?

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: I was not aware of it.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Well, you've heard me put it to Mr van Zyl that that is one of the facts which goes to show that what was planned was to kill the people in the hall and that the amount of R30 000 was agreed on as payment to Mr Hardien because the plan was to kill people.  You remember hearing that evidence?

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: I heard you put it to Mr van Zyl and he denied it.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Well, I want you as the Regional Manager to explain to us why you were going to pay R30 000 to Mr Hardien to merely explode a limpet mine in these circumstances, compared to paying at most R15 000 to the people who were tasked, to the group of three people who were tasked to assassinate Adv Omar, what explanation do you wish to give?

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: The amount of R30 000 was asked for for this project of the Early Learning Centre.  The other amount for Mr Omar, I cannot remember exactly why there was such a difference, if I must say now what it was, I think it was because Mr Omar was at that stage, he didn't have the profile at that time that he has today as Minister, but he was a prominent figure in the UDF, the ANC and the damage hypothetically speaking, the damage in the structure of the elimination of Mr Omar - well R15 000 sounded alright and it was the first time - this was the first time we had to do with a bomb and I think the informant or Mr Gakkie, whoever he is, he could have told Mr van Zyl:  "Listen, I'm going to work with an explosive and I'm not trained and I'm this and if they catch me with it I can be accused of sabotage".  There are different reasons, the impact that such an explosion could have in the organisation could be important and I think that's why the amount was R30 000.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Mr Burger, the price to be paid, you are suggesting in your evidence, you appear to agree with me, must bear a relation to the risk which the operative will take in carrying out the act, you agree with me?

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: Yes, it is a risk.

CHAIRPERSON: There'd be one factor because it also depends on the nature of the act to be carried out as well, I should imagine would be important.

MR KAHANOVITZ: That is - certainly a highly relevant factor would be if you get caught, what kind of punishment might you face.

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: That as well.

MR KAHANOVITZ: You're going to charge more to kill someone than to burn someone's car, you agree with me?

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: For the bomb you pay more.

CHAIRPERSON: But I mean if you're going to put a bomb in a car parked in a dark parking lot, or you're going to put a bomb which is going to be aimed to kill somebody, the price will be higher for the murder than the blowing up of a car.

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: Yes.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Well I'm going to just put this to you.  We're going to argue at the end of this case that you haven't given, neither you nor Mr van Zyl, have given any acceptable explanation for agreeing to pay Mr Hardien far more than was to be expected in relation to this bombing.  You also haven't given any explanation as to why you eventually paid him less than had been agreed on.

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: I didn't pay him.  He was supposed to get R30,000.

CHAIRPERSON: I think Mr Kahanovitz when you say agreed on, as far as I will recall, the agreement was between the CCB, it wasn't with Gakkie.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Yes, that was Mr van Zyl's evidence.

CHAIRPERSON: Ja, there wasn't an agreement with Gakkie to get R30 000.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Were you - are you saying you weren't aware that Mr van Zyl actually paid Mr Hardien less than the R30, 000 that had been mentioned in the meeting?

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: No.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Well, did he give you back the rest of the money?

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: No.

MR KAHANOVITZ: So what happened to the money?

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: You should ask him.