Amnesty Hearings — Cape Town — 2000-03-13

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you Gentlemen.  We had a brief discussion here.  The statement that's been read into the record by Ms Omar of her father Mr Dullah Omar, in no way touches upon the merits of any of the applications, it expresses the views of the writer of the statement, or the maker of the statement.  It has been read into the record.  I think receiving a photocopy of what already is on record, is going to make very little difference indeed.  I can assure everyone present that the Panel is fully aware of the fact that this is nothing more than a statement expressing the views of a victim which, as mentioned by Mr Bizos, victims are entitled to make in terms of the Act.  I can also assure everyone present that no evidential weight regarding the merits of the matter will be attached to this statement at all and I can further assure everybody present that the Panel will give a completely and utterly fair hearing in this matter.  We have no preconceptions, or stands in this matter.  We are here to listen to the evidence, to receive it, to listen to the learned submissions made by the representatives and at the end of the day to apply what - the knowledge that we gain from this hearing to the criteria set out in the Act and come at an object decision as to whether or not each and every one of those criteria have been accepted.  I just want to stress that that is the position here.  So by receiving this typed version of what is already on record as Exhibit C, I can assure you, will not in any way influence the proceedings in this matter, it's already on record, so this statement will be received as Exhibit C and by making it an exhibit, I'm not attaching any weight to it as an exhibit in a court case and normally has weight attached to it, it's merely what we'll call it.  We'll call it C.
	I've just received an important note informing me that it's time for tea now.  I think this would be a convenient time to take the short adjournment, 20 minutes, and then we can hopefully after the adjournment resume with evidence relating to the merits of the matter.  Thank you.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
ON RESUMPTION

CHAIRPERSON: Before we proceed, it's probably going to get a lot warmer than it is now.  Please feel free to remove jackets, jerseys, if you wish.  We now commence with the leading of an applicant.  Mr Wessels, is it agreed that your applicant's going to testify first?

MR WESSELS: Yes Mr Chairman, Mr Verster will testify first.

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Wessels.

MR WESSELS: Chairperson the amnesty application appears on page 153 of bundle A and it runs up to page 194.  I am not going to run through the whole application.  I do not think that all of it is relevant.  I shall however ask the applicant to supply certain information with regard to what the CCB was and then we shall go over to the specific incidents for which he applies for amnesty.

MR WESSELS: Mr Verster is it correct that you were the Managing Director of the organisation known as CCB?

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: That is correct Chairperson.

MR WESSELS: Will you please briefly tell us how the CCB was founded?

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: Chairperson, the Civil Corporation Bureau was a branching of Special Forces of the South African Defence Force who operated under civilian circumstances and worked in plain clothes.  It was established in 1986, it was used in operations against the then enemy, the ANC SACP Alliance and to disrupt the enemy to the maximum.

MR WESSELS: Will you please explain to us how exactly the structure functioned when there was an instruction and how these would be executed?

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: Chairperson, there were several methods which would regulate it, but the structure was founded where members dealt with the management of the foundation and they had operatives on ground level who executed operations by receiving information from the higher echelons, so that it could be executed by the uniformed side of the South African Defence and specifically the Special Forces of the South African Defence Force, which would move to the CCB and from there the instructions would be given to ground level and on the other side it could also happen that information would be made available from ground level to Management of the CCB and then it was verified and information was gleaned from this and plans were formulated within the structures and then it was given to me on my level as the Managing Director and then I devolved it down to the uniform side, namely the Commanding Officer of Special Forces and thereby the operation was approved.
	The equipment, financing and logistical support was supplied from the formal side of Special Forces to the CCB in order to execute the operation.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, Mr Verster, would that be in respect of all operations that that procedure would be followed?

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: That is correct, Chairperson.  This was applicable to all operations.  There might have been minor variations depending on the time and speed needed to execute an operation but that is the modus operandi that we used.

MR WESSELS: Mr Verster, will you please explain to us what the principle covert operations would entail and if the CCB was such a body?

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: In our culture we distinguished between clandestine and covert operations, Chairperson.  Clandestine operations were seen as those operations which at that stage could be recognised by the government of the day and on the other side we had covert operations.  We were a covert structure and the intention was and per definition, as we dealt with it, was that the government of the day would not accept responsibility for those types of operations.  I would also say that the entire structure was built around this and our financial planning, existing procedures, were written depending on this and this was submitted inter-departmentally.  For example our plan within the CCB was given to the Treasurer and it was approved by the Auditor General's people who were also present and we functioned according to those lines.

MR WESSELS: Will you please explain how the regions functioned?

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: Chairperson, there were several regions.  I shall not go through all of them, it is part of the evidence, but the specific region under discussion is Region 6.  It was an internal region and this entailed the entire Republic of South Africa.  With regard to Region 6, it was the region that was founded later as opposed to the other regions which were responsible for example for Zimbabwe or Botswana or Mozambique and that was purely based on information, observations which were made according to the conduct of the enemy.  In other words the ANC at that stage had training bases from Tanzania to Zambia as well as in Zimbabwe and then there were access routes which were used by the then enemy into South Africa and later this ran into the heart of South Africa, Johannesburg, Cape Town.  It is general knowledge.  If we look back at what had happened back then, Region 6 was then founded to disrupt that enemy who was threatening the sovereignty of the State.

MR WESSELS: Is it correct that Staal Burger was the Regional Manager of Region 6?

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: That is correct, Staal Burger and the other members who are here today, were members of region 6, Chairperson.

MR WESSELS: And then I would like to arrive specifically at the incidents for which you apply for amnesty.  These appear on page 190 of bundle A, paragraph 1.1.  Will you please read that?
MR VERSTER
During 1989 members of the CCB were given instruction to watch one Gavin Evans in Johannesburg.  The persons who were involved were Staal Burger, Slang van Zyl, Wouter Basson.  These instructions were executed on my instructions.  No onslaught was made on the life of the person and he was not injured in any manner.