Amnesty Hearings — Bloemfontein — 1998-01-22

SEGOPOLO PETRUS KOPI: No, he did not phone at 11 o'clock because we were in the process.  I don't know as whether I interrogated one or two people.  As I say 12 o'clock, I'm just making an example of saying, if he say at 12 o'clock.  He didn't phone at 12 o'clock as I said, I don't remember what time.

ADV MEMANI: Now for approximately how long were you in the office, after you arrived at the office at about 11?

SEGOPOLO PETRUS KOPI: I took about 30 to 35 minutes in the office but I'm not sure, I'm just approximating.

ADV MEMANI: Then you left at about 12 to meet an informer and you met the informer after 12, past 12.

SEGOPOLO PETRUS KOPI: I say I was just making an estimation.  For example, he's say: "Let us meet at 12/half past 12", I did not say he said we should meet at 12 o'clock.

MR BRINK: Mr Chairman, I really do hesitate to interrupt but I am not entirely sure where all this detailed cross-examination on matters which appear to me, with great respect, have nothing to do with the assaults which are alleged to have taken place over that three day period in relation to Mr Ngo or Mr Motsamai, who himself is applying for amnesty in respect of those assaults.

CHAIRPERSON: I have equal difficulty in understanding what this - whether he was 30 or 35 minutes.  What is the point of all this Mr Memani?

ADV MEMANI: Mr Chairman, can you give me the latitude because if I explain to you, the witness ...[indistinct] me.

CHAIRPERSON: Well I will tell you that at the end of it you will have to explain to me, if I do not then see the reason.

ADV MEMANI: As the Chair pleases.

MR BRINK: May I suggest Mr Chairman, the witness be excused and Mr Memani tell you what this - be asked to leave the hall ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: ...[inaudible]

ADV MEMANI: Mr Kopi, you left the office on that day at about 12 to meet the informer, that's what you told us isn't it?

CHAIRPERSON: He didn't.

ADV MEMANI: He did say so M'Lord, he said it was after 12.

CHAIRPERSON: He said he was in the office for about 30 to 35 minutes after he returned at about 11 o'clock.  Do you remember that?

ADV MEMANI: But much earlier on M'Lord, he also said that he must have left the office just after 12.

CHAIRPERSON: He was given you an estimate, he's explained time and again that the informer phones up and says: "Let's meet at 12 or let's meet at 12H30" and that this person would have done something like that.

ADV MEMANI: Mr Kopi, let's clarify this.  At about what time did you leave the office after the informer called you?

SEGOPOLO PETRUS KOPI: I don't remember I left the office or what time he phoned because those things happened a long time ago.  That's why I made an example of saying, if he would see me at 12 o'clock or half past 12, I don't remember the time correctly.  That is why I made an approximation of saying I stayed in the office 30 to 35 minutes, then that's why I suppose to leave to see the informer.

ADV MEMANI: It's obvious then Mr Kopi, that at least by half past 12 you'd have left the office isn't it?

SEGOPOLO PETRUS KOPI: I said I don't remember the time of saying what time we should meet.  That is why I made - I told you an approximation because I'm not sure.

ADV MEMANI: But Mr Kopi, if you arrive at the office at about 11, then if you stay at the office for about 30 minutes then you must leave the office at around half past, quarter to 12.  Doesn't that follow?

SEGOPOLO PETRUS KOPI: Let us take it this way.  I said I interrogated either two or three people.  At that time I was sitting down and nobody phoned, whilst I was interrogating a phone arrived and somebody told me that I should go and respond to the call.  Then I returned and told the person whom I was working with and say: "There is an informer who wants to see me".  Then I would take these papers to du Plooy: "I'm leaving to see an informer, I will come and give you a response".

ADV MEMANI: You went to see the informer and you know that you came back at 3H30.

SEGOPOLO PETRUS KOPI: Yes, I remember I came back at half past three because I had an appointment at a quarter past four because I supposed to report back at half past four.

ADV MEMANI: At what time did you meet the informer?

SEGOPOLO PETRUS KOPI: I'm making an estimation, it might approximately half past twelve to one.  I'm making an estimation, it's not an exact time, it's an estimation.

ADV MEMANI: And then you tell us that you came back at half past three.

SEGOPOLO PETRUS KOPI: Then he would tell me and say: "You would take care of this and that", then I'll do that.  And then again, the distance from that point to that point, to a certain point, I should try to calculate the distance again.

ADV MEMANI: What information did this person give you?

SEGOPOLO PETRUS KOPI: I'm not able to say that.

UNKNOWN: Is it really relevant to your client's application?  Have you any idea that it might be relevant?  Have you any grounds to think it's relevant, then you're entitled to ask the question.

ADV MEMANI: I believe so.

UNKNOWN: If you've got no reason to think that that person gave information that relevant to your client's application, I really think you're not entitled to ask those questions.  Then we're wasting time and keep in mind we're dealing with a period 11 years ago.  I can't even remember whether I left my house on the 24th of October, on what time or whatever it may be, a year ago.  Let's be fair to the witnesses all over.

ADV MEMANI: Mr Chairman, this witness knows that he was not at the office until half past three and there is a reason why I'm asking him what information did he get from the informer.

CHAIRPERSON: Isn't that information confidential?  Are we entitled to get him to publicise it if it's got nothing to do with this case?

ADV MEMANI: He hasn't said so M'Lord.  I'm not forcing him to say so, he hasn't said so.  You mustn't say so for him.

MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, I'm saying so, with respect.  This witness isn't entitled to divulge that kind of evidence, he's sworn an other of secrecy in that regard.

CHAIRPERSON: It appears to me that unless you have any reason to suggest that it's relevant to the present application, then that is a valid objection Mr Memani.

ADV MEMANI: Mr Chair, I will leave the matter there but I will proceed on the point I'm making on a different basis.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, if you're making any point at all.  None of us have managed to see what that point it yet.

ADV MEMANI: As the Chair pleases.

CHAIRPERSON: And I think we're going to take the adjournment now.  We will adjourn - I want everybody to take note of this, we are going to propose to adjourn till 08H30 tomorrow morning and we will then adjourn for the day at 13H30.  I understand various people have travel arrangements.
	I also understand that certain people may want to get away before and if it's possible for one person to carry on, we understand that too.  Does that suit you?  Has anybody got any urgent reasons that 13H30 is too late?

MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, we do appreciate that.  Of course on the basis that if we find a reasonable reason - a reasonable gap before hand, we will take it.

CHAIRPERSON: I think you have all got appointments, travel arrangements made for tomorrow afternoon.

MR VISSER: We would like to get away as early as possible but we'll stay till 13H30 if that is called for.

CHAIRPERSON: Right.  We will now adjourn till 08H30 tomorrow morning.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS