Amnesty Hearings — Cape Town — 1998-02-13

DIRK COETZEE: Well, I was forced in a way to make up my mind when Almond Nofomele spoke from death row in October 1989 Mr Chairman.

MR VISSER: Yes, and how you went about this was to contact the "Vrye Weekblad", either Mr Max du Preez or Jacques Pauw, is that correct?

DIRK COETZEE: Jacques Pauw was a friend of mine I met in 1986 and I contacted him.

MR VISSER: Yes.  And you were then whisked off to the Island paradise of Mauritius, is that correct?

DIRK COETZEE: Eventually yes, Mr Chairman.

MR VISSER: Where - as you explained to this Committee under great stress, you told you story to Jacques Pauw, it was recorded and transcribed.

DIRK COETZEE: That's correct Mr Chairman.  The transcription I believe was done afterwards.

MR VISSER: Yes.  That transcription was confirmed by you under oath in the Harms Commission as being true and correct?

DIRK COETZEE: Well, I have to accept that that's correct Mr Chairman.

MR VISSER: And that became known as the Mauritius statement?

DIRK COETZEE: That's correct Mr Chairman.

MR VISSER: Exhibit 31 I think it was but that's not relevant, in the Harms Commission.  After your Mauritius statement you gave evidence to Mr Justice Harms in London on commission?

DIRK COETZEE: That's correct Mr Chairman.

MR VISSER: Before the Commission I'm sorry, I should have said.

DIRK COETZEE: That's correct Mr Chairman.

MR VISSER: And thereafter, am I correct in saying that you also gave evidence regarding your revelations in the Neethling trial?

DIRK COETZEE: That's correct Mr Chairman.

MR VISSER: And in your own Ngenge trial where you were an accused?

DIRK COETZEE: I did not give evidence at all in the Ngenge trial.

MR VISSER: Oh I see, all right I stand corrected.  You commenced writing a manuscript in 1990 which wasn't completed at the Harms Commission's time, but which you have handed in to this Committee I am told copyright reserved, is that correct?

DIRK COETZEE: That's correct Mr Chairman.

MR VISSER: And apart from that you made an affidavit to which I will refer you within a short time, written out in your own handwriting or is it in someone else's handwriting?

DIRK COETZEE: If Mr Visser can ...[intervention]

MR VISSER: 102 of Volume 2 Mr Coetzee - 101.

DIRK COETZEE: No, it's not my handwriting Mr Chairman.

MR BOOYENS: But that's an affidavit attested to by you?

DIRK COETZEE: That's correct Mr Chairman.

MR VISSER: On the 8th of October 1996?  You've already confirmed it yesterday.

DIRK COETZEE: Ja, it's the same one - ja, that's correct Mr Chairman.

MR VISSER: You also had an opportunity to tell your story in your application to the Amnesty Committee, did you not?

DIRK COETZEE: That's correct Mr Chairman.

MR VISSER: And lastly, as far as I know you gave evidence to the
the Amnesty Committee, is that correct?

DIRK COETZEE: That's correct Mr Chairman.

MR VISSER: Now I want to ask you this, from 1989 to where you're sitting today, if it should appear that there may be contradictions in the various stages where you gave evidence on paper of verbally, which would you choose - which of these instances would you choose as your evidence that comes closest to the truth.

DIRK COETZEE: Well, are of them are relevant Mr Chairman, you can easily - if read in context - all the evidence, you can clearly see I slipped like for instance with the two Ermelo guys instead of referring to the two Komatiepoort guys, so there's a line of consistency right through all that evidence and as I say, with slip-ups on smaller non-irrelevant points.

MR VISSER: Yes, slips of the mind?  Mr Coetzee, the question is merely this, you're not saying today that: "In 1989 when matters were fresh in my memory that's really the document you should look at, the Mauritius statement".
	And neither are you saying: "Today as I'm giving evidence before you Mr Commissioners, I have had the opportunity of talking to people, of finding out for example that the Datsun Stanza belonged to Chris Hani and it was stole by Kondile and today you can look at this evidence and this is really what you should look at to discover what is the closest version to the truth". You're not saying that, you're saying we've got to look at all of it?

DIRK COETZEE: You've got to look at all of it in context, that's correct Mr Chairman.

MR VISSER: All right.  Now just by way of introduction very briefly and lastly by way of introduction.  You say your purpose of your quest for the truth was a full disclosure, you wanted to get it off your chest - I think were the words you used in London?

DIRK COETZEE: That's correct Mr Chairman.

MR VISSER: Yes.  But you see that's not entirely correct, is it?  Because let's tell each other this, that there were other influences for example the "Vrye Weekblad" considered you to be the scoop of the year did it not?

DIRK COETZEE: I won't be able to say.

MR VISSER: Oh come on Mr Coetzee ...[intervention]

DIRK COETZEE: Well, I wasn't working for them and I wasn't in South Africa at the time when all the stories broke, I only came back four years later Mr Chairman.

MR VISSER: Mr Coetzee, let's not play around, yesterday you told this Committee that Jacques Pauw was interrupting you all the time because he was looking for sensation or words to that effect, while you were trying to tell your story, isn't that true?

DIRK COETZEE: I said he was interrupting because he as a journalist took a different viewpoint or a different approach than a legal would have had.

MR VISSER: Yes, well forget about Jacques Pauw, let's come to you.  You were expecting to make money out of this weren't you?

DIRK COETZEE: I haven't made one cent and I did expect to make any money Mr Chairman and I clearly refused any money from anyone because I said all the way - at that time, that I can't stand on the grave and the bodies of people that I've killed and make money out of it.

MR VISSER: Yes.  And is that also with the same purpose that you wrote your manuscript, not to make money out of it but just to tell the truth?

DIRK COETZEE: The manuscript was written, I was trying to delay the Harms Commission to publish the facts in a book, have a few copies printed, dish it out to Mr Justice Harms and the world press and tell them: "That's my story, you can now cross-examine me on it".
	Unfortunately the legal representatives didn't want to listen and I had to go to London because I knew I was going to be up against a wall of denials.

MR VISSER: Yes, they pushed you into it as you put it?

DIRK COETZEE: I was pushed in.

MR VISSER: Yes.  The point is, that's not my question you see, I'm asking you if you did it for financial gain, yes or no?

DIRK COETZEE: Not at all.  At that stage it was for factual - the facts to come out without being bogged down and tied down by legal niceties in judicial commission.

MR VISSER: Forget about that time, what is your purpose now with your manuscript?

DIRK COETZEE: It is ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: ...[inaudible]

INTERPRETER: The speaker's mike is not on.

DIRK COETZEE: It is eight years later ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: When you said that it was - at that time it was for financial gain and he says: "it wasn't at that time".

DIRK COETZEE: It is eight years down the line Mr Chairman and that document stands as it is, not touched ever again or worked on except being polished as far as spelling mistakes are concerned but not submitted to anyone for printing purposes or updated at all with the knowledge I have now.

MR VISSER: Then just answer this one question would you please Mr Coetzee, why do you write: "Copyright Reserved" on that document?

DIRK COETZEE: I was helped with the document by my brother, he printed it for me and translated my Afrikaans into a fairly good English and he printed it at the top, I don't know what it means at all.

MR VISSER: Let's forget about that.  I'm going to suggest to you, you had your own private agenda did you not?