Amnesty Hearings — Port Elizabeth — 1997-09-22

MR PHOSA: I do think I should give you this opportunity to answer this again because there ...[inaudible] I'm right or wrong.  Surely, was it not the view of the others - these covert meetings, that you in the Eastern Cape had to do more than you've done so far?  In other words, you were not doing enough to contain this violence or the situation?

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: Mr Chairman, it is like that like I've said before, through the systems pressure was exerted to do more to act in a stronger way and to undertake further actions.

MR PHOSA: The point I'm trying to make now is that you were made to appear that you in your division were not as successful in containing the situation as the other areas were, isn't that so?

MR VISSER: He's already denied that Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that not so Mr Phosa?

MR PHOSA: What?

CHAIRPERSON: That he's already denied that.

MR PHOSA: I actually didn't understand that he denied it, and honesty I did not.

CHAIRPERSON: His answer was: "I did not get the impression that I was letting down the rest of the country, there was a flash-point here in Port Elizabeth".

MR PHOSA: No, no, I had said initially I'd understood him to say that and I came back and said: "Have a look at my notes, I want to give him a further opportunity on that", so I did understand that on that occasion he did deny but he might have done so but I didn't understand that.  Anyway I do not pursue that point, he's answered it.
	Now you said something yesterday about your not knowing anything about the poisoning of Mr Mthimkhulu.  Do you still say so?

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: What I'm saying is that I knew about that because it was printed, it was in all papers right through the world.  Regarding this, I personally do not have any knowledge of who was responsible for this poisoning.

MR PHOSA: Did you get to know that there was some medical opinion regarding that incident, in other words, some medical views to whatever but did you know of any medical opinion regarding that particular incident?

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: Mr Chairman, I did not read that but I know that there were certain medical points of view.

MR PHOSA: When you say you know that here were certain medical points of view, are you saying yes, you aware that certain medical experts commented about this incident, are you saying yes?

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: I have stated yes, it was also reflected in the local newspapers.

MR PHOSA: Without giving details - I just want to indicate to you what I am referring to and hear whether you also got to hear about that amongst other things.  For instance, did you hear a mention that it was thallium poison, some thallium poisoning?

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: That is correct Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Is it disputed gentlemen that it was - he did suffer from thallium poisoning at the time set up in the reports and that he was treated for it?

MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, we simply don't know because you will know that not a single medical report in the sense of a clinical chemical analysis has ever served before any court of law, nor before this Commission so we don't know but we've got no reason to deny that he suffered thallium poisoning.  All that we're saying is: "We don't know how it happened".

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, it seems that one of the reasons why is that something mysterious happened to the samples on the way to the laboratory.

MR VISSER: Well that's only part of the story ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: The other part is in the medical report which says what the report they received from an English laboratory ...[intervention]

MR VISSER: That's missing.  That we've never seem although we've asked for it for years Mr Chairman.  The Harmse Commission tried to get hold of it and as far as I can remember, they didn't even get hold of it.  We don't know what the doctor in England say, we know what Doctor Ames says the doctor in England says, but that's all we know.

ADV DE JAGER: For purposes of this application, could we accept that nobody is applying for poising the deceased?  If it can be proved that they've - there was an attempt to poison them, persons could be arrested, they could be brought before court unless they get amnesty.  So if the present applicants had a hand in it, they could be charged and brought before a court of law because they're not asking for amnesty as far as that is concerned.

MR VISSER: That is precisely correct Mr Chairman, and for that reason we will submit in argument - we didn't want to interfere now, for that reason we will submit that the evidence in bundle B is irrelevant to this present hearing.

MR PHOSA: Just before that is concluded, I didn't raise for the first time the issue of the poisoning, it came from the evidence in chief.

ADV DE JAGER: I'm not blaming you at all Mr PHOSA, I'm only stating a fact, that they can still be prosecuted.

MR PHOSA: I have no difficulty with all that if it's not stopping me from questioning.

CHAIRPERSON: But I am now.  I would like your comments gentlemen and if any members of the staff wish to make comments, at Bloemfontein where we had a similar hearing we found that three quarters of an hour was for sufficient for the long adjournment because everybody remained in the presence of the hall - I don't know what the position is here.

MR VISSER: We have no objection at all Mr Chairman, of course bearing in mind the convenience of the witness, it perhaps is a long time for two hours on end to sit but let's please continue from a quarter to two and the witnesses can signify if they're uncomfortable.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay.

MR PHOSA: I'm in this - in the previous position where I walked into this case very late - all my work has to be faxed to me for me to get back - between one and two, it's closed.  I may request perhaps that at some stage I be given an opportunity to speak to my secretary.  Either we stop at a quarter past one, sorry, we stop at a quarter to one so that I can just speak to her and then go on or we move in such a way that I can talk to her at 2 o'clock.  I really wasn't planning to be here and I'm going to be struck off in no time for not dealing with my work.   But now ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: We've sprung this on you today, let us rather say we will start at a quarter to two and we will take an adjournment at half past two, would that suit you?

MR PHOSA: Yes, that will suit me a lot, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Right, we'll adjourn now till a quarter to - sorry, I can't see behind you, can you move?  Does that suit the interpreters?  Very well we will now adjourn until a quarter to two.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
ON RESUMPTION

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: (s.u.o.)

CHAIRPERSON: We will proceed now with the hearing.  I should perhaps inform everyone that - thanks to the co-operation of the staff and particularly the interpreters and the other members of the staff, we propose to continue with the hearing tomorrow and will then go on up till the end of the week including Friday, to try to complete it.
	Right, Mr Phosa, do you have any further questions?