Amnesty Hearings — Cape Town — 2000-09-26

WOUTER J BASSON: Mr Chairperson, if another region gets the opportunity of the appointed region, for example, that refers back to what happens within the borders of South Africa, then with the necessary presentations they can continue with it, it's not necessary, or they cannot hand it over to the person who is responsible for that region, it doesn't work like that.

CHAIRPERSON: But it wouldn't be carried out without the knowledge of Region 6?

WOUTER J BASSON: Yes it would, without the knowledge of Region 6.

CHAIRPERSON: They don't even have to refer to Region 6, they can just come across from another region and assassinate somebody in Gauteng or Natal or something, without reference to ...(intervention)

WOUTER J BASSON: Mr Verster and the Chairperson will know about it and it's their prerogative to then tell Mr Burger about it, but not necessarily, no.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes thank you.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Two more questions.  Did Mr Staal Burger come to ask you shortly after David Webster was assassinated, if you had any knowledge as to who had assassinated David Webster?

WOUTER J BASSON: No, Mr Chairperson, I went to him and asked him if he knew.  I cannot recall that he specifically asked me.

MR KAHANOVITZ: And what answer did he give you?

WOUTER J BASSON: No, he doesn't know.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Did Mr Verster ask you to carry out the investigation as far as Region 6 was concerned?

WOUTER J BASSON: He told me that yes, I must find out if Region 6 was involved or not, but at a later stage Mr Verster took over the whole investigation.

MR KAHANOVITZ: When Mr Verster asked you to carry out an investigation did he tell you what information he, Joe Verster, had received?

WOUTER J BASSON: No, he didn't tell me anything.

MR KAHANOVITZ: So you had absolutely no idea why he was asking you to carry out enquiries within Region 6?

WOUTER J BASSON: No, I just executed his instruction.  I wanted to find out if they were involved and his answer was no.

MR KAHANOVITZ: You see what strikes me as very strange is that Mr Luitingh's evidence was that what was communicated to Mr Verster was the details and particularly Mr Barnard's name, and I'm open to correction here, but I believe Mr Botha's name as well.  Now one would have thought that Mr Verster would have said find out specifically about this person and that person.

WOUTER J BASSON: He didn't.

MR KAHANOVITZ: So you were just asking questions in the dark?

WOUTER J BASSON: Find out generally what's going on, if they know and if they were involved.

MR KAHANOVITZ: And he didn't in any way indicate to you why he thought such an enquiry might be necessary?

WOUTER J BASSON: At that stage I was not aware of Mr Barnard's dealing with Mr Luitingh, it was never mentioned to me.

MR KAHANOVITZ: And you had no idea that Mr Botha might have been driving the car?

WOUTER J BASSON: No, not at all.

MR KAHANOVITZ: It wasn't suggested to you that you investigate in that direction?

WOUTER J BASSON: No, not at all.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Now just on Mr Botha.  The evidence has been that Mr Botha was suspended but he was brought back as a matter of necessity on the Early Learning Centre project, remember?

WOUTER J BASSON: Yes.

MR KAHANOVITZ: And the evidence has been that that needed to be done because he had special skills in relation to bombs.

WOUTER J BASSON: Yes, the purpose of Mr Botha's move was because he knew about explosives and mechanisms from his previous career and he had to make contact with Gakkie to explain the workings of this to him as a person who had the background.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Yes, that's what I'm trying to understand.  As I understand it, what was going to happen was that someone would need to press a button to activate the limpet.

WOUTER J BASSON: That's correct.

MR KAHANOVITZ: And I'm just trying to work out what special skills were required to convey this information to Mr Hardien.

WOUTER J BASSON: Well firstly, the handling of explosives can make anybody nervous, then there was also a specific procedure that had to be taken concerning the arming of the limpet mine and the activation of the mechanism, the specific placing of it.  I cannot recall everything, but it is not just a Russian time mechanism, it was a very complicated mechanism that had to be explained.

MR KAHANOVITZ: I have no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR KAHANOVITZ

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Kahanovitz.  Mr Hockey, do you have any questions you'd like to put to Mr Basson?

MR HOCKEY: My questions were all asked, so not to repeat and in the interest of progress I would forego.
NO QUESTIONS BY MR HOCKEY

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.  Do you wish to put any questions?

MS COLERIDGE: No questions, thank you Chairperson.
NO QUESTIONS BY MS COLERIDGE

CHAIRPERSON: I think everybody's been given the opportunity before.  Mr Lax?  Mr Sibanyoni?
	Re-examination, Mr du Plessis?

MR P DU PLESSIS: No thank you, Mr Chairman, nothing in re-examination.
NO RE-EXAMINATION BY MR P DU PLESSIS

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.  Mr Basson, that then concludes your testimony, you may stand down.

WOUTER J BASSON: Thank you, Mr Chairperson.
WITNESS EXCUSED

CHAIRPERSON: Who is going to be the next applicant to testify?  Mr Maree, is it?

MR P DU PLESSIS: That is indeed so, Mr Chairman.  Mr Maree is present, I however see that we're virtually at 4 o'clock,
could I ask that we start his evidence tomorrow, we've only got five minutes.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.  Would it be convenient to start at 9 o'clock tomorrow morning?

GEORGE BIZOS: ... the availability and non-availability of a number of persons.  Perhaps we should get together as soon as we have adjourned and then subject to your concurrence, we would try and reach agreement and arrange for the next person to be ...  There's some suggestion that Mr Barnard may be called tomorrow.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Bizos, I speak for myself and I'm sure also probably for my colleagues, that as a Committee as long as there's an agreement, we won't have any objection as to the order of calling any persons, but I suggest then if we could adjourn now and you can between the legal representatives, arrange who is called next and the order of subsequent witnesses, we will abide by your agreement.  Okay, would 9 o'clock be convenient tomorrow morning.
	Yes thank you, we'll now adjourn and reconvene ...(intervention)

MR WESSELS: Sorry, we have some difficulty with 9 o'clock tomorrow morning, unfortunately we're far from our bases and we need some time in the mornings to keep our practices running and if we start at 9 o'clock here, then we have to leave before we can even make a telephone call to Johannesburg.  We do find that inconvenient to start that early.

CHAIRPERSON: I thought it was convenient, because I'd asked it to be enquired before from the legal representatives because I had a request from, well not a request but a query from the Department of Correctional Services about the time and it was suggested nine, but then I said well only subject to the people agreeing and nobody came back to me.

MR WESSELS: I certainly wasn't approached, Mr Chairman.

MS COLERIDGE: Would nine-thirty be convenient, Chairperson?

CHAIRPERSON: Nine-thirty.

MR WESSELS: That would be in order.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes we'll then adjourn until nine-thirty tomorrow morning at the same venue.

MS COLERIDGE: All rise.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS