Amnesty Hearings — Cape Town — 2000-03-15

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: That was a way to fuse the situation and what we asked in terms of our contract that it would not be given to us and that I would cooperate with what they were busy with.  For instance we went to the higher court twice where Gen Malan refused to do payments of contracts etc and that documentation never became public.  It is just part of the fight.

MR LAX: One last thing on that, you said there were 23 of you?  That group of 23 you said who didn't accept the offer to go back into the Defence Force in other words to be paid out?

CHAIRPERSON: It's the other way around.

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: No that group of 23 would be people who continued to be adamant in terms of the CCB's plan, I don't know if some of them went back later because I was alienated from the system, I don't know.

MR LAX: I'm not sure I understand you correctly because I'm now confused by the Chairperson.  Those 23 people are the people who at the end of the day were part of the court case with you or not?

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: That is correct.

MR LAX: Okay, now I'm clear.

MS COLERIDGE: Did you ever meet with the State Security Council in relation to CCB activities or programs or just in general?

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: No never.

MS COLERIDGE: Was there any other member of Special Forces that met with them, the State Security Council?

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: I do not know that, we did not have contact with the rest of the Special Forces but no one within my structure was allowed to do that.

MS COLERIDGE: Then just one last point, I want to refer you to bundle A, page 170 Chairperson.  I'd just like to ask Mr Verster one question and I just want to see if he still feels the same way after the processes and his experience with the Commission and his experience in life with the changes and reconciliation that has taken place in this country.  It's just the fourth line from the bottom on page 170.

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: Which one?  I can't hear?  It is paragraph 92?

MS COLERIDGE: That is correct, yes.

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: Bundle A?

MS COLERIDGE: Page 170.

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: Paragraph 32?

MS COLERIDGE: 32, correct.  The second line there, it says -can you just read that second line for me starting from "us".

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: "Commanders are sorry for the family and friends of any soldiers or co-workers that have lost their lives for a political ideal that was mismanaged."
Is that the sentence?
"But if we were to be in the same situation
			again and we'd received orders to act against 
the RSA especially those people close to us we would do it again, that was our job and we believed in what we did."

MS COLERIDGE: Do you still feel that way that if you were put in the same situation, with hindsight, looking back now for instance, would you have continued in the same way as you did, would you continue with your military action in covert operations?

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: Yes I definitely would have done that, I just would have managed it better, I was very proud of my work.

MS COLERIDGE: Thank you Chairperson, I have no further questions for this witness.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS COLERIDGE

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Ms Coleridge.  Mr Wessels, do you have any?

MR WESSELS: Mr Chairperson, at some point I reserve my right.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

GEORGE BIZOS: I'd like to place something on record.  Very early this morning the witness said among other things that we did not deal with his indemnity.  Now what I want to place on record is this, that we did read in the papers that a person claimed some form of indemnity.  At the pre-trial conference we asked for a copy of it or documentation so that we could be informed and deal with it.  It was a general question including counsel and attorney of the witness and they said well, they didn't have any documents readily available to show us but we appealed to them in the meantime to let us have whatever documents there were in order that we may deal with it but I did ask whether this indemnity was in terms of the Indemnity Act given on a .(indistinct) basis by the temporary acting State President and then Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr Pik Botha and I was told yes.  I asked whether they would favour us with a copy of the motivation of that application, I had some knowledge of it and it was in fact a letter written by Mr Wagenaar if I remember correctly in which mass - if that is what they were referring to, can we please have a copy because I don't want to argue now but at the very least the validity of that in indemnity is at the very least debatable.  I raise it at this stage because I understood the witness' remarks to be a statement that we did not deal fully with matters which were in his favour and this is why I deal with the matter now, Mr Chairperson.  If anything is to be done on it I would appeal to legal representatives of the applicants if they are going to claim anything like that they should make us - they claim the indemnity, let us make available such documentation as there may be.  That's all I wish to say, Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Bizos.  Mr Wessels do you have any comment on that, is there a copy of such application available?

MR WESSELS: I don't have such documents available, Mr Chairperson, and I don't really see the relevance of that at all during these proceedings.  Whether that was competent amnesty or not ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: I think you've basically got two types of indemnity, you've got in terms of that old Act, you've got the indemnity where applications appeared before the two judges concerned and they considered it on particular merits relating to a particular incident and then you got these - I don't know what you call them, blanket or group type amnesty so there is a bit of a difference in the one that the mind's been applied to a particular actions and incidents whereas the other it hasn't.  I can't see there being any prejudice at all in getting this just to confirm that.

MR WESSELS: I've no problem with that except that I don't have it here.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes perhaps if I could ask Ms Coleridge to through our investigation unit if they could perhaps get documentation of that nature, I know it's fairly common in many of these applications, we've got those sort of forms before us.

MS COLERIDGE: I'll attempt to get it, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, if it's not available ...(intervention)

GEORGE BIZOS: Chairperson, I merely raised it because I understood the statement made by the witness as a complaint that the matter was not being dealt with. I have a very clear recollection, Chairperson, about those indemnities that the President or for that matter the Acting President had authority in terms of the Act to grant group ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: No that's definitely so.

GEORGE BIZOS: What may be called the parking offences such as leaving the country without a permit and without - or not a valid passport and such other matters but did not apply to this sort of thing that we are dealing with here.  But anyway, we don't have to argue about that, I merely raised it at this stage because of what I understood to be a complaint that part of the case favouring the witness was not dealt with by us.

CHAIRPERSON: We will follow that up through the TRC.

GEORGE BIZOS: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr du Plessis reserved - I don't know if he wishes to say anything now?

UNKNOWN: Sorry Mr Chairperson, just the other Du Plessis first?

CHAIRPERSON: This is Mr P du Plessis talking now, for the record.