Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — 1998-04-15

MICHAEL BELLINGAN: (s.u.o.)
	Thank you, Mr Chairman.  Mr Chairman, then I'll just state as a fact that I did not commit the murder to save my own skin.  And then I'd also like to say that I used the word "political amnesty" in respect of New Zealand in my previous evidence, when I meant political asylum at that stage, with regard to New Zealand.  That is all about that.
	As far as the Evans document is concerned that was submitted by the LRC, it is so that Derek Broone is related to Olivia Forsyth, it is so that the Edwards brothers were involved in that circle, as Gavin Edwards sets out.  In fact Royd Edwards spent, lived in my house for a week once with Janine and myself.  The - he's quite wrong about the source Sylvia.  In fact I've subsequently asked Renata, who also knows Sylvia, to contact her and just see if she wouldn't want to make a statement or whatever and her response is contained in Renata's statement. - if anyone is wondering how it got there.
	Then Mr Chairman, at one stage I was asked about the bug on the telephone, I think by yourself, and what is correct is that I put the bug on my telephone prior to the holiday and not after the holiday.  After the holiday I got a better version of the bug from the Technical Division in Rebecca Street.  There - I was experiencing some problems with the bug, so I got a better one.
	Mr Chairman, the murder was not butchery, it was not excessive or needless, I merely previously left it at that because I accept that Advocate Trengrove is putting to me the anger and hostility of the family.  So butchery in the sense of, in an emotional sense yes, I accept the anger and hostility, in a technical sense it's not needless or excessive.  
	As far as the question of whether I'm predisposed to violence, I am assertive, I'm not aggressive and I'm not abusive, Mr Chairman.  
	The J88 that was submitted or completed on the 6th of June 1991, Mr Chairman, refers to torn ligaments.  Torn ligaments is something which takes quite a long time to, not torn ligaments, it's not torn ligaments - it seems to me, I can't read the writing too well, but it seems to be an injury which actually needs plaster casting and all that kind of thing, Mr Chairman, and Janine never had that.  I don't recall her every having anything like that.  Also, she wrote a letter to her attorney, which is in Mr Trengove's bundle, shortly thereafter and she never mentions it. 
	As far as my perception, Mr Chairman, of the general authorisation, I can just that no-one ever instructed me specifically to do this, but I do believe that, my perception to be correct in terms of what I've said about that.
	The notes that were copied during my previous testimony in February, Mr Chairman, I never read from those notes, but what I've neglected to say is that the, at the top of the page there's a reference to a spanner, which I've crossed.  The reason I crossed it out over there, Mr Chairman, is quite simply that that is what I was going to purchase, it's what I took at the shop, but I gave it back because it occurred to me while I was buying it in Pietermaritzburg that I wouldn't make it through the metal detector at the airport with such an object.  So if anyone's wondering about why that spanner is crossed out there ...  I understand that Mr Chaskalson was referring to it yesterday.
	At one stage I had referred to a quotation in page 2 of Annexure C, which read something to the effect of behind every government there's secret services which keep the government in power, and notwithstanding moral codes etc., etc., or keep the government of the day informed.  I just want to make it clear that that is a typical Security Branch euphemism.  When we say keep the government of the day informed, what I understood there is keep the government of the day in power.  The word "informed" there is completely out of context and it's just euphemistically stated.
	I can state, I think, as one of my last points, my second-last point I think, Mr Chairman, that I did know more in, concerning my application for amnesty than what is prescribed for Annexure H with respect to the fact that the first step prescribed there for Stratcom is persuasion.  I tried my level best to persuade Janine to desist.  I for example to her to a marriage councillor, I reconciled with her, we went on holiday.  The next step prescribed is force.  I argued with Janine, I threatened her regarding playing with fire, regarding the Official Secrets Act, regarding the fact that it's potentially treason, it's treason what she's doing.  And then when I knew that she was not going to change her mind, the third step over there in terms of intensity is elimination, Mr Chairman.
	As far as the various definitions of Stratcom are concerned, I can just point out that the war in South Africa was one of a very different nature, Mr Chairman, to any other war and perceptions were vitally important.  Stratcom was at the core of what was happening in the country, during all the phases of the struggle, right through the transition until the end.  Perception was central to that.  For every conceivable situation of conflict there is an application of Stratcom, Mr Chairman.
	Lastly, I would like to refer to Annexure G, Annexure G of my amnesty application concerns, it concerns the duties with which I was involved at the time, Annexure G, it's signed by Lieutenant-General Smit, on page 6 of the annexure, Annexure G.  And what I want to refer to, Mr Chairman, is on page 7 on the top, page 7.  I can just point out that I was the senior captain mentioned on that page.  And in terms of the heading:
"Werksaamhede"
I was directly responsible for the following task mentioned over there, and that is:
"The psychometric and polygraphic evaluation of potential agents, journalists ..."

INTERPRETER: Sorry, that should be
"... informants"
MR BELLINGAN
"... double agents, anti-espionage subjects and members of the MID."

MICHAEL BELLINGAN: That was a description of my direct responsibility then.  I also performed other tasks over here, for example training is mentioned.  And then there's another section over here that reads as follows.  It reads like this
"The detection, finding and neutralisation of enemies and their efforts aimed at infiltrating the SAP"
I think we all know what "neutralisation" means, Mr Chairman, what it can mean.  And that would also have been something that I would have to give attention to, although it was "teenspioenasie" directly, that that refers to.  But it certainly doesn't exclude me in any way, if one has a look at page 7.
	I think that's it, Mr Chairman, thank you.

MR HATTINGH: Mr Bellingan, is there anything else that you would like to add at this stage, being your last opportunity to say anything?

MICHAEL BELLINGAN: Mr Chairman, the actual deed itself, the actus reus has always been inferred previously, at previous hearings.  I've now given a detailed description of that because it's obviously relevant disclosure, full relevant disclosure.  The motive has been only suggested previously and I've now given full relevant disclosure about that, Mr Chairman.  I would just like to finish off by once again sincerely apologising to the family.  I know that they can never forgive me.  Perhaps they can just at best, understand the situation I was in, that is all.  I know that they can never forgive me and I apologise again to the family.

MR HATTINGH: Thank you, Mr Chairman, no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR HATTINGH

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much.  We'll adjourn for lunch.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
ON RESUMPTION

CHAIRPERSON: Is there any of the parties who wish to raise an issue which might be relevant, which they haven't had the opportunity to deal with properly and which has arisen from the re-examination of the applicant?