Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1998-11-11

MR MALAN: You're not talking - if you continue with this paragraph - you're not talking only of - I don't know whether I have to read it to you or whether I shouldn't necessarily pursue it.  But let me read it to, I continuing
"These operations included the gathering of information as well as actions which were launched in order to obtain such information on both a pro-active and a reactive way."
But you refer to operations here, not to structures.
"These type of actions"
and it continues with the actions but you don't speak any more of structures.  If I put it to you that - and this was my first impression when I read all of this - it seems to me that there's some kind of disclosure here about an internal structure which would have done things which did not fall within the framework of the law but which was managed within the unit.  I say this is my impression and I'd like to have an explanation for this, an explanation that makes sense.

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: No Mr Chairman, there was no internal, no structure as such that was set up with positions and ranks and things like that, we were a unit, we were the MK counter-intelligence unit.

MR MALAN: Was there not some kind of arrangement that when people were to be taken out as in the case of Bhila that such a decision would be made on a need to know basis or a prior agreed circle of people privileged to information and participation in such decisions?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: Yes a decision as serious as that would not be a readily available decision to everybody on the security branch at all.

MR MALAN: But Mr Taylor did inform you?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: He did sir.

MR MALAN: Did he need your acquiesence in terms of the implementation according to the structures and procedures set up in the structures?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: No sir.  To my knowledge there was no such structure as you are outlining to me right now.

MR MALAN: So Taylor would have taken that decision on his own and he had the authority to take it on his own in your understanding?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: In my understanding, that's correct.

MR MALAN: So he could take decisions and you had to follow the orders?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: That's correct sir.

MR MALAN: If he decided that Bhila had to be taken out, he could have done so within the branch?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: I think that was correct to say that yes.

MR MALAN: That's how you understood it?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: I do sir.

MR MALAN: And he would not necessarily have to seek any clearance above then, is that not what the structures are referring to, that's my question?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: I don't know what went on above Major Taylor's ranks.

MR MALAN: Were you involved in any discussions with him earlier about taking out people and that he would have had the authority to make such decisions?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: No sir, we never discussed or he never discussed with his subordinates what his mandates were and what his authorities would be, that was never coming down to the Sergeant's level.

MR MALAN: So you have no other explanation for your having put this paragraph in the application?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: No the paragraph is, it's there, it exists, I see it.  I don't fully understand it the way I understood it.

MR MALAN: You see it leaves the impression especially because it comes from all the other applicants and the person who claims not to have been involved, claims knowledge of the existence of such structures, that's Mr Vorster.

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: Maybe he can outline what structures are being referred to here.

MR MALAN: Well I guess that goes for every applicant.  You see you need to make full disclosure and if you do make a statement, you need to be able to substantiate that to us.  Alright, let me just say to you that, I want to go back on my tracks to pursue the question that I put to you immediately before we took the tea break.  The one about your having been trained not to divulge information on the legal actions and I think your last response was that that statement was valid for all actions.  You were not to divulge information on any action.

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: No, in terms of the Official Secrets Act, what was ever classified, was classified and non-divulgible.

MR MALAN: Yes but certainly in terms the Official Secrets Act illegal activities are not classified?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: Well then I mean if we weren't going to talk about legal actions Mr Chair, we wouldn't have spoken about illegal ones.

MR MALAN: Now the question was put to you whether you were trained not to divulge any information on illegal actions and you answered that in the positive?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: Well it's the culture of any intelligence service.  I've never undergone any formal training, I wouldn't know how people are trained not to divulge things.

MR MALAN: I thought that you would be giving us more information linking this to this paragraph 7 on page 123 that I have read out to you and the question is really was there not a structure or were there no structures within your unit busying themselves indeed with illegal actions and that within the frame of those structures and those involved in the structures that you were trained not to divulge information on illegal actions, that's really the question.

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: No Mr Chairman, I was totally unaware of such a structure, totally unaware of such a structure.

MR MALAN: So you have no explanation really for why you refer to structures?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: No, in fact this is an English/Afrikaans mistake somehow, mix up here sir and I apologise to the Commission for that but there is nothing like that.

MR MALAN: It really cannot be an English/Afrikaans mistake, it cannot simply be a mistake of having, of your not having understood it but in all the others and most of the other applicants are Afrikaans speaking, clearly, in exactly the same words, making exactly the same statement but you had no knowledge of such structures that they refer to?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: Definitely to my working knowledge there was no such structure, sir.

MR MALAN: Because most of the others were your seniors in any event.  Is it possible that such structures did exist, that there was some kind of a conspiracy within the unit, did you have any such notion at any stage that decisions were made about illegal actions of which you were not part of?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: Decisions were certainly made but I would have said it was ....[intervention]

MR MALAN: Illegal activities?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: Correct but I would have said it was done by the rank structures.

MR MALAN: In other words Taylor and others?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: By the rank structure, correct sir.

MR MALAN: Within the unit?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: Yes sir.

MR MALAN: And then one last question, no I needn't ask this question of you at this stage, we can perhaps leave that for the second part of the application.  Thank you.

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: Thanks.

CHAIRPERSON: How many people were there in your unit?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: Mr Chairman I would imagine 12 or so, possibly more, we had two legs.

CHAIRPERSON: And the commanding officer of the unit was Major Taylor?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: Correct sir.

CHAIRPERSON: Who was under him?  By that I mean who was the next ranking?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: It would have been Colonel Botha.

CHAIRPERSON: Well he would surely have been above Major Taylor?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: No but this - I'm talking about the last of their ranks of course, I was referring to their last ranks.

CHAIRPERSON: The rank at the time?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: It would have been Major Botha.

CHAIRPERSON: Who?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: Major Botha.  There was Lieutenant du Preez, there were Warrant Officers Lembedi and Mhieza.

CHAIRPERSON: Well I don't think you know all the rest.

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: I was a sergeant.

CHAIRPERSON: You say you had three officers in the unit?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: Yes.