Amnesty Hearings — Cape Town — 2000-06-23

MR P DU PLESSIS: I'm also not going to go through that with you, Mr Burger was questioned about that.  Basically your statement and his statement are the same.  It appears very clearly that the one was copied from the other and there was quite a lot of collaboration in the taking down of the statements.

WOUTER J BASSON: Yes.  I just want to say a person is unfortunately sort of ignorant as far as the legal processes are concerned and my advice, my legal advice was we should do it in that way and the same untruths which were pointed out in Mr Burger's application is also relevant to my application and statement.  I however bona fide accepted that it was correct at the time and that is the case currently.

MR P DU PLESSIS: In other words you confirm that there are inaccuracies in that statement?

WOUTER J BASSON: Yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: And then lastly, these acts which were committed, and we're talking about crimes and offences, and they are crimes because if it hadn't been a crime it wouldn't have been necessary for you to apply for amnesty in terms of the legislation, what was your specific objective in carrying out these acts?

WOUTER J BASSON: Chairperson, we are all aware of the climate which reigned in that period and it worsened dramatically in '89, the revolutionary climate reached a boiling point.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Revolutionary from your point of view?

WOUTER J BASSON: Yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: What was your point of view, what was your political outlook at the time?

WOUTER J BASSON: It may sound like a cliche to some people but once again, I was brought up as an Afrikaner boy, there was only Party, the National Party, and we fought to bolster the sovereignty of the State and for the preservation of whites, that was important, self-determination was on the table ...(intervention)

MR P DU PLESSIS: Self-determination of?

WOUTER J BASSON: Of white Afrikaners.  There was an absolute fear of black domination.  It may seem funny to some people, but it was the situation at that stage and it was on that basis that I did what I did and I believed it was right at that stage.

MR P DU PLESSIS: The other aspect which joins up with this one are the methods used to achieve your objectives.  It is so that specific individuals were the targets of some of these actions and that it took the form of assassinations, you would agree with that?

WOUTER J BASSON: Yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Assassinations of citizens of the country?

WOUTER J BASSON: Yes, well I just want to say that it was a result of those people's involvement, along with other radical elements and organisations.  They had these front organisations and companies ...(intervention)

MR P DU PLESSIS: Front organisations.

WOUTER J BASSON: Front organisations, yes, who wanted to undermine the State.  It wasn't aimed at a specific individual, it was done purely as a result of a person's activities within a structure whose objective it ultimately was to subvert the State.

MR P DU PLESSIS: You would readily concede that the strategies which were followed, well one can use all kinds of names, dirty tricks or ... but ultimately what it amounts to is reprehensible and even cowardly strategies by means of which people were killed by means of assassination attacks when they weren't even aware that there was such a plan against them?

WOUTER J BASSON: Chairperson, I suppose you could refer to it in those terms today, but it is also known that similar methods were employed by the enemy.  So the two opposing parties or enemies were equally reprehensible and cowardly in their methods which they used.

CHAIRPERSON: In any event, today you know that two wrongs don't make a right.

WOUTER J BASSON: Yes, you grow up and you become wiser with the years and that is definitely the case, yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: And without being sentimental or anything, today you're still a citizen of the Republic of South Africa and you have no problems with the new dispensation.

WOUTER J BASSON: No, I have no problems with - well the stories which were used to frighten us and the ghosts never materialised.  I have no problems to live in this country and I have no reason to consider immigration, I'm here to effect reconciliation and to reconcile.  I'm not here to cross swords with people who were enemies in the past.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Thank you, Mr Chairman.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR P DU PLESSIS

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr du Plessis.  Mr Wessels.

MR WESSELS: I have no questions, thank you.
NO QUESTIONS BY MR WESSELS

CHAIRPERSON: Mr du Plessis.

MR H DU PLESSIS: Thank you, Chairperson, just a couple of aspects.
	Mr Basson, you were never present except, if I understand the evidence, in one case and that's the bomb incident.  If one assumes that Col Verster made a submission to the Chairperson, you were never present?

WOUTER J BASSON: That's correct, it was only when the Athlone/Early Learning Centre event that I was physically involved where the General gave authorisation.

MR H DU PLESSIS: So to get back to the Omar case, where the General testified that Col Verster never gave authorisation or that he never asked for authorisation, you can't dispute that?

WOUTER J BASSON: I can't dispute that, there are no grounds on which I can say he had such authorisation.

MR H DU PLESSIS: Let us move to the Evans case.  If I understand your evidence correctly it actually falls in two parts, the first part relates to March, according to Mr van Zyl, when authorisation was given for Project Evans, is that correct?

WOUTER J BASSON: Yes.

MR H DU PLESSIS: The second part it seems to me according to your diary, relates to the 22nd of August 1989 when there was another reference to Evans, is that correct?

WOUTER J BASSON: Yes.

MR H DU PLESSIS: You were not present, if one once again assumes that Col Verster made a submission to the Chairperson in the first Evans case, is that correct?

WOUTER J BASSON: No, not in the first case.

MR H DU PLESSIS: And am I correct in saying that you can't dispute it when Gen Webb says that Col Verster never asked him for authorisation for the first Evans matter?

WOUTER J BASSON: No, I can't dispute it and also as far as the second case is concerned I can recall that I reminded Verster as to what I had to remind him of, the conversation on the following day.  I did it, but I can't say whether he did it or I can't what was discussed.

MR H DU PLESSIS: "Dis bloot die punt.  Die tweede geval is nog Col Verster het hier getuig dat hy in Augustus met Gen Webb 'n gesprek sou voer oor Evans en nog Gen Webb het oor so iets getuig, so u kan nie se so iets plaasgevind het nie?"

WOUTER J BASSON: No, I cannot, Chairperson.

MR H DU PLESSIS: The last aspect.  You heard what Gen Webb testified before the Commission relating to the bomb and the briefing which Verster made to him, is that correct?

WOUTER J BASSON: Yes, that's correct.

MR H DU PLESSIS: Is there anything relating to Gen Webb's evidence regarding the submission made to him, with which you do not agree?

WOUTER J BASSON: No, I accept his evidence.

MR H DU PLESSIS: I have no further questions, thank you Chairperson.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR H DU PLESSIS

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr du Plessis.  Mr Martini, do you have any questions?

MR MARTINI: Mr Basson, as regards the Early Learning Centre, you had to obtain the bomb, is that correct, from Hekkies?

WOUTER J BASSON: Yes, that's correct, Chairperson.

MR MARTINI: Were you given any particular instruction that the bomb had to be doctored with nails?

WOUTER J BASSON: No, not at all, Chairperson, it was regular limpet mine without any modifications.

MR MARTINI: Now Mr Basson, you heard most people testifying here, saying that they all testified at Harms.  You've said attempts - and most people's evidence seems to be that at Harms, most of the applicants, except for possibly van Zyl and Botha, attempted to cover up the truth at Harms, is that correct?