Amnesty Hearings — Cape Town — 2000-03-14

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: That is where the ANC crawled around, with the gangsters, that is why the people had connections there and that had nothing to do with me.

GEORGE BIZOS: Has it occurred to you that perhaps the reason why your CCB did not succeed, is because you had a completely wrong perception about the ANC, which you refer to as the enemy, that it crept around amongst gangsters?   It was your men apparently in this instance that were creeping around gangsters.

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: It was the same structure.  The ANC was the enemy at that stage and it was the same structure who stole cars and smuggled narcotics and in Lusaka, weapons were taken ...

GEORGE BIZOS: Let's deal with the facts here.  The facts of this case were that it was your men that were co-operating with a gangster who even took them for a ride of a large sum of the State's money and not the ANC, but let us return to the question.  Did you - Why would you, who had to make such an important decision, not ask:  "Where is the origin of this information?"

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: Well I have tried to explain to you.  Information does not come from one point only.  It comes from sources and thereafter the information is disseminated and becomes intelligence and then it is given to me as intelligence.  My training background is that from an operational viewpoint with the information to my availability, I shall make a plan.  The information will say whether it's an A1, A2 or A4 source, so it is only an element from grass roots level which you know Sir, is to be doubted, which comes from a gang member.  It comes from the police as well.  It comes from Military Intelligence.  It comes from National Intelligence and the fact that Mr Omar was appointed Minister of Justice is what his - proves his background, so I was correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, Mr Bizos, if I could just ask one quick question.  Mr Verster, when the name Mr Dullah Omar was submitted to you by, I presume, Mr Wouter Basson as a proposal for an operation, as a target, was that name a strange name to you, the first time you hear it?

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: At that stage it was a strange name to me.

CHAIRPERSON: So you hadn't heard of Mr Omar before a submission came to you?

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: Up to the moment when it was given to me, he was unknown to me.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Bizos.

GEORGE BIZOS: Did you know whether or not he had been banned in terms of the Security legislation?

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: No, Chairperson I did not have that background knowledge.

GEORGE BIZOS: Did you know whether or not he had been detained?

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: No, I did not know him at all, Chairperson.

GEORGE BIZOS: Did you know whether he was an office bearer in the United Democratic Front?

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: I knew that he was that, but that was the police's function and they were ...(indistinct)

GEORGE BIZOS: Did you know that he was a member of the United Democratic Front?

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: Yes.

GEORGE BIZOS: Now we have evidence that the decision as to how a person was to be dealt with depended upon you.  It was put, whether the window pane was going to be broken or the person was going to be killed, was your decision.  I know that you're going to tell us that there was a Court of Appeal and Gen Webb, but do you agree that you made the decision on the information placed before you, that this person is to be killed?

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: I did not decide on it.  There were projects where I made a plan and where I proposed a plan and then it goes according to the channels in the hierarchy.

GEORGE BIZOS: The plan was how a person - first of all that a person should be killed and how he or she was to be killed, that was your decision?  To make a plan and send it up for approval.

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: I did not decide how, the plan is made by the Region, I approve or disapprove.

GEORGE BIZOS: But you can cut it off, if you, or you can alter the plan that was made by the district?

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: Correct, I may disapprove of it or I may say that I support it and it is approved.

CHAIRPERSON: We know that Gen Webb made the final decision, that's what you've been saying, that Gen Webb made the final decision.  I'm not sure whether that will be disputed by Gen Webb, but would you make a recommendation?  When you approached Gen Webb with the information that you'd received from the ground level and confirmation through Christo Nel etc., when you went to Gen Webb with the proposal, would you just say:  "Well, here's the information" and then just wait for Gen Webb to make the decision, or would you say:  "Well, our recommendation is that this person should be eliminated, or we should go and slash his motor car tyres," or whatever the proposal was?

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: Chairperson that plan is formulated at ground roots, at ground level and two or three scenarios would be proposed to me and then I would support it and I would choose one of the options and then usually we would meet, the Chairperson and I and someone from the Region, for example the Co-ordinator or maybe just the two of us, but there were instances where speed or circumstances were of such a nature where we, for example, could speak telephonically and say that:  "Listen, we cannot meet now, but this instance is like another instance" and something might have been discussed beforehand and on that basis we would continue.  So sometimes it was formal and sometimes it was not so formal.

CHAIRPERSON: What I want to know is, when Gen Webb was approached for final approval or disapproval of a project, was a recommendation put to him?  It is recommended that the person who is the subject-matter of this proposal, be eliminated, or whatever, would that proposal - and then he would authorise it or not authorise it, or would he himself make the decision as to what action should be taken against the subject-matter of - the person who was the subject-matter of the proposal?

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: Chairperson, the Chairperson should only say yes or no, and I generalise now, but the Chairperson listens to the plan and it is proposed to him with the information, that is a formal - it could be the exact procedure that is followed for the planning and for the submission of a plan.
]

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.  Mr Bizos.

GEORGE BIZOS: Thank you, Mr Chairman.  You told us that the fact that Minister Dullah Omar was appointed Minister of Justice was confirmation of the correctness of your information.  Do you recall that?

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: Correct.  Yes that is the impression that I had.

GEORGE BIZOS: And it was also confirmation for you that your decision to kill him was correct.

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: It was not only my decision.

GEORGE BIZOS: The decision to kill him was correct?

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: It was not my decision, Chairperson, and I wish to reiterate that Mr Omar and all the radically left persons from that time, were on lists within the Intelligence structure.  I was only an executive arm of the Intelligence structure, it was not in my hands.  I did not make him a target.

GEORGE BIZOS: I'm dealing with your statement this morning that the fact that Mr Mandela's government - President Mandela appointed him as Minister of Justice was confirmation of the correctness of the decision that he should be killed?

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: It confirms, in my opinion, that Mr Omar was indeed  - in previous times had opposed the government of the day and that he had acted against the law and that he had tried to usurp the previous government and through that a measure of trust existed between him and his colleagues and that is why he was given a senior appointment after the election.

GEORGE BIZOS: Who was the Minster of Finance appointed by Mr Mandela when he became President?

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: I just can't get his name.

GEORGE BIZOS: I'll remind you, Mr Keyes.