Amnesty Hearings — Cape Town — 2000-10-02

FERDINAND BARNARD: I just think so, because I never heard from him again.  At a time I saw, a few years ago, that he was still making statements in the media and in the press, that he even spoke to the foreign media at one point.  I recall seeing an interview that he had with Dirk Coetzee, during which it was said that he was also tasked to kill Dirk Coetzee and then he just became quiet, I never heard anything else of him.

GEORGE BIZOS: He wasn't a person to keep quiet about things.

FERDINAND BARNARD: No, after his release, on the contrary he set press interviews, he was the sort of man who would do anything for money.  If the press paid him, he would tell them a lie.

GEORGE BIZOS: And how did Peaches come to be killed?

FERDINAND BARNARD: I don't know, I followed the story in the papers and I saw that he had been killed.  I must just say that the CCB was very unhappy with him, due to the revelations that he made, and in particular, Mr Slang van Zyl, because Slang van Zyl and I discussed it at one point.  Peaches Gordon came to point me out while I was in Section 29 detention, he slapped me on the shoulder and pointed me out and identified me in Brixton, so I wasn't very happy with him either.  There was a lot of sensitivity surrounding the fact that he led Slang van Zyl around by the nose with regard to work that he didn't do and money that he took from him.  I'm not saying that Mr van Zyl has something to do with it, what I am trying to say is that he, Mr van Zyl, was very unhappy with Peaches Gordon.

GEORGE BIZOS: Mr Chairman, I have no more questions at this stage, but we would like to reserve any further cross-examination that, or examination as a result of anything that may emerge when our learned friend Mr Wessels has another opportunity.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR BIZOS

CHAIRPERSON: Yes thank you, Mr Bizos.  Mr Hockey, do you have any questions you'd like to put to the applicant?

MR HOCKEY: I don't have any questions in addition to that asked by Mr Bizos, so thank you Mr Chairman.
NO QUESTIONS BY MR HOCKEY

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Rheede, do you have any questions that you would like to put?

MR RHEEDE: None, Mr Chairman.
NO QUESTIONS BY MR RHEEDE

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Martini, you indicated earlier that you would be reserving any rights to put questions, do you wish to put questions at all?

MR MARTINI: Thank you, Chairperson, just one question.
	Mr Barnard, just flowing from what Mr Bizos asked you, I just want to understand your evidence, if it's correct.  In your Section 29 statement, the '89 statement, November '89, you created this fictitious person, Dirk, is that correct?

FERDINAND BARNARD: That is correct, Sir.

MR MARTINI: And I take it that was designed to protect Mr Slang van Zyl?

FERDINAND BARNARD: That is correct, and also to create as much confusion as possible, to give the police without really giving them anything at all.

MR MARTINI: Yes, yes, but on the issue of the "vyf punt plan", you original said it was Dirk.

FERDINAND BARNARD: That is correct.

MR MARTINI: Because you said in your evidence that Mr van Zyl told you this was part of a five point plan, correct?

FERDINAND BARNARD: That is correct, Dirk does not exist.  He never existed.

MR MARTINI: Correct.  So at that point in time you created this surely to protect Mr van Zyl on the issue of the Apie.

FERDINAND BARNARD: That is correct.

MR MARTINI: Then are we to assume you then made another statement, December '89, correct?

FERDINAND BARNARD: I assume so.

MR MARTINI: And there you said you wanted to correct certain falsehoods that you'd made previously, correct?

FERDINAND BARNARD: That is correct.

MR MARTINI: Well you say you "neem so aan", if you just check bundle B, I thought Mr Bizos dealt with that with you, if you can look at page 99 of bundle B, Mr Barnard.  Do you have it?

FERDINAND BARNARD: Yes I do, thank you.

MR MARTINI: You see that statement's dated the 6th of December 89, correct?  Page 99, bundle B.

MR LAX: In fact the later statement comes before the first statement, the earlier statement.

MR MARTINI: Sir, I don't want you to assume, I want you just to tell us if it's correct.

FERDINAND BARNARD: Could you please put the question again.

MR MARTINI: Do you agree with me that at page 99, bundle B, that statement is dated 6th of December '89?

FERDINAND BARNARD: That is correct.

MR MARTINI: Now the first statement where you dealt with Dirk, where you created the fictitious person, where you said Dirk told you about this five point plan, was done in November '89, correct?

FERDINAND BARNARD: That is correct.

MR MARTINI: Now in December '89, I take it then you no longer wanted to protect Mr van Zyl.

FERDINAND BARNARD: I exposed him, if I recall correctly.

MR MARTINI: Correct, that's my point.  Well that's what you say, you say well he even identified ...(indistinct).  In your statement, if you look at 93
"I did it once again to protect Slang"

FERDINAND BARNARD: Yes, I can see that.

MR MARTINI: So can we accept that in your second statement, December '89, you then wanted to expose Mr van Zyl?

FERDINAND BARNARD: Yes I did expose him, but my second statement also contained lies, but this is the truth.

MR MARTINI: Ja, but what I'm putting to you is, you've now corrected it, you said: "Look, there was no such a person as Van Zyl, it was Dirk", now comes a month later you now want to expose him, because you now identify him, correct?

FERDINAND BARNARD: That's correct.

MR MARTINI: Because you wanted to expose him.  You went as far as now identifying Mr van Zyl.

FERDINAND BARNARD: That's correct.

MR MARTINI: Thank you, no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MARTINI

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.  At this stage, unless anybody's got any further questions, that concludes your testimony.

MS COLERIDGE: Chairperson?

CHAIRPERSON: Oh sorry, there was no intention Ms Coleridge.  Please go ahead and ask questions.

MS COLERIDGE: Thank you, Chairperson, just a few questions I'd like to ask Mr Barnard in relation to the Webster incident.
	Mr Barnard, did you contact Mr Verster after the Webster incident?  Did you make a report to him?

FERDINAND BARNARD: No, I only reported to Lafras Luitingh when I contacted him and he didn't get back to me directly.  I finally managed to get hold of him two to three days later and upon our meeting I reported to him and also wanted to know if damage control was necessary.  I was worried about the press and media coverage of the incident.

MS COLERIDGE: And then in relation to Calla Botha, at which stage did Mr Verster know of Calla Botha's involvement in the Webster incident?

FERDINAND BARNARD: I cannot say specifically when it became known or when it was reported, but possibly on the morning of my meeting with Lafras Luitingh, I could have disclosed Calla Botha's involvement in the incident to him.  I cannot remember precisely.  I've spent much time thinking about it, unfortunately I cannot answer you precisely.

MS COLERIDGE: And did Mr Calla Botha at any stage inform you that he had told Joe Verster of his involvement in the Webster incident?

FERDINAND BARNARD: I don't know if he reported to Joe Verster, but at a certain stage he disclosed the facts to his Co-ordinator and his regional management.

MS COLERIDGE: Is that Wouter ...(intervention)

FERDINAND BARNARD: That is Wouter Basson and Staal Burger.  Although I cannot say whether it was both of them or only one of them, but he did report it to his cell.  There was a stage where he would have had to report it.

MS COLERIDGE: Was this immediately after the incident, or was it a long while after the incident?  Do you have any recollection?

FERDINAND BARNARD: I have no idea when it was.

MS COLERIDGE: And then just after your Section 29, after your detention, you said you made calculations that your needs were about R6 000, but instead you received R12 000, did you actually request the R12 000 or the R6 000?