Special Hearings — State Security Council Hearings — UNKNOWN

CHAIRPERSON: The remarkable answer, I just wondered whether I could take 
it just a little further, I mean take your construction further, in a way it is a 
breathtaking response to say publicly and this is one of the incredible things 
about this country, you know, and sometimes we become blase and take it for 
granted, but I don't know that anywhere else in the world would you get 
someone who has been in government come before a Commission of this kind 
and say what you have said just now, you know both of you are saying, yes, 
well we got to a point where we were as we where and that gives the 
opportunity for all of us to say, now we are actually are human and we have 
got weaknesses, but your weakness paradoxically is a strength because it is 
ultimately really a strong person, a big person, who can say, you know, I am 
sorry but this is where I was and it almost seems like being, you know, like 
nit-picking but I wonder whether you would be willing to say that given all 
the things you say that happened in those years, I mean all the bombardment 
about the kind of facts and that you didn't want to ask questions and I agree 
with Yasmin that, well we have a kind of small judicial thing judging facts 
and so on, but in that setting it clearly seems possible and I think that is what 
happened, that people said in order to achieve this goal, I mean that we will 
resist this total onslaught, anything goes, I mean that no holes barred, and that 
is where we are now and we are trying now to say what happened how do you 
overcome it. I don't know.  Well I, you see you are nodding and it is not 
coming into the dingus, I see you shaking your head, maybe you have to say 
something. I mean it is almost superfluous because I think that that is the 
consequence of what you said, that I mean we were in that kind of a situation 
and no holes barred.

MR MEYER: I think you've said it, I think essentially, unfortunately that is to 
what a great extent happened. Maybe it was because it was not necessarily 
Security ...(inaudible - recording deteriorates) all of it, it was across the 
spectrum. And of course the misreading of the situation now is so clear, the 
whole idea of looking for an answer through counter-mobilisation or counter- 
strategy in itself was wrong, it missed the point. I can recall we ourselves at 
that stage, including myself, said yes the answer is political, we were almost 
taught to say the answer is 80% political and 20% security. But that in itself 
was a complete misreading of the situation, because the political answers that 
we sought were not the real answers and that in itself created even more 
misunderstanding, I think, because the frustration that misreading of the real 
answer must have caused on the other side, so to speak, on the side of those 
that wanted to achieve liberation must have caused more and more frustration 
because it was as if they could not break through with their messages.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much.

MR GOOSEN: I have no questions for Mr Meyer, for Mr Wessels, yes a few.

CHAIRPERSON: I am not sure, I mean, Roelf you don't have to go because 
the Chairperson sometimes says some things at the end.

MR MEYER: I will wait for my partner.

CHAIRPERSON: Alright, thank you.

MR GOOSEN: Thank you very much Mr Chairperson. Mr Wessels, one of 
the disadvantages of being a reserve in a rugby match is that you possibly 
only come on right at the very end.

LEON WESSELS: That doesn't matter, as long as you know how long the game 
is going to last, are we continuing tomorrow. (Laughter)

MR GOOSEN: No, we won't be long, I assure you.

LEON WESSELS: No, I am not difficult, are we staying until 4.00pm or 3.30, I 
just want to know how to place myself in answering the questions.

CHAIRPERSON: I had hoped for about 3.30 but what do you think?

MR GOOSEN: Mr Chairperson, I think we will be finished by 3.30. I don't 
have a great deal to ask Mr Wessels. Thank you.
 I think Mr Wessels perhaps it picks up on the point that Mr Meyer has 
just made, the issue that we have just been speaking about.  In reference to the 
portion in your statement on Page 2 where you state 
"That I further do not believe the political defence I did not know is 
available to me, because in many respects I believe I did not want to 
know".
and I really just want to ask if you can elaborate on that and if you can 
explain and what it is you wish to convey, in perhaps more detail.

LEON WESSELS: Well, I appreciate the remarks made by the Chair and by 
Roelf and I endorse those sentiments, each and every one of them. I cannot 
shy away from the fact that I am a National Party, that I was a National Party 
politician, I was elected on the National Party political ticket, I had endorsed 
each and every of those policies. The policy simply was since the days of Mr 
John Vorster that . . . (indistinct)  the highest law of the land would be the 
security of the land, that had to do with the first detentions of people 90 days, 
80 days. 16 years later, I was in Parliament, I was debating the Rabie 
Commission and the framework, the launching pad was still the highest law of 
the land, is the security of the land. Now amongst that framework, amongst 
that frame of mind we had put legislation on the statute book. Numbers of 
them. Security legislation, the Terrorism Act, within them were embodied, 
sections, clauses which allowed policemen to question, to hold indefinitely 
people in detention.  Subsequent to that we had in terms of Public Safety act 
we called for states of emergency, we on the basis of that you need to 
centralise authority in the hands of the executive, did exactly that, now 
because we did that, I simply cannot see how I can ...(inaudible) back and say 
sorry I did not know, it was foreseen that under those circumstances people 
would be detained, people would be tortured, everybody in this country knew 
people were tortured, they were tortured, you read it in the alternative Press, 
anybody who had access to the Townships, my sources of information was the 
Chairman of ...(recording deteriorates and disappears)

LEON WESSELS: Chairman of this Commission sitting next to him Wynand 
Malan, Alex Boraine, we did battle on many occasions in Parliament in the 
face of attacks by Helen Suzman, Boraine and others simply saying the 
Security forces were a law unto themselves and we argued, vehemently 
opposed that, we said you are misreading the situation, it is not true and yet it 
all happened right there under our noses, so I don't believe I can stand up and 
say, sorry, I didn't know.

MR GOOSEN: Does it flow from that then that you would accept that it is 
not directed at you personally, but at in those circumstances, the context that 
you sketch that senior government officials subject to exactly the same 
context that you were subject to in effect chose not to know and accordingly 
chose to create a climate of impunity for Security force members to act.

LEON WESSELS: I take it I am also permitted to ask a question for you to 
further particulars, are we saying when you refer to officials, government 
officials, could you just explain to me what are you talking of, are you talking 
of politicians or officials of state, non-elected officials?

MR GOOSEN: Let's stop at the politicians for the moment.