Amnesty Hearings — Port Elizabeth — 1997-09-22

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: The arrest and detention of Mr Madaka was discussed and I asked the two gentlemen talking to me, why they couldn't detain him and I received the following answer: "That as a result of a very delicately placed informer very close to him, it was actually not possible to detain him because arising from the questions which would have to be put to him, that would make it very clear where this information came from.

MR VISSER: And that source would be the informer?

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: Yes.

MR VISSER: So, the idea was that should you arrest Madaka and possibly prosecute him, it would have become abundantly clear who the informer was?

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: That is correct.

MR VISSER: And according to your insights at the time, what would then have happened in all probability to this informer?

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: In all probability there would not have been sufficient evidence to arraign Mr Madaka in a criminal court and this would lead to his later release and that informer would definitely then be killed.

MR VISSER: Mr Erasmus, was this a discussion which took place on one occasion, this discussion regarding Mr Madaka and Mr Mthimkhulu, or  was it something that was discussed on more than one occasion?

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: There were several discussions on more than one occasion because I asked questions which needed elucidation and these two - these men then had to go back and look at other alternatives.

MR VISSER: And what was the ultimate conclusion which the three of you reached?

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: Our final conclusion was that there was no other way - detention or any other thing, other than to eliminate these people.

MR VISSER: When you talking about elimination, you're mean to kill them?

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: That is correct.

MR VISSER: Now, how did you feel about that personally - about this decision?

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: Mr Chairperson, this decision was a very, very difficult one, it's not something which you decide to do lightly.  Gerrit Erasmus is obviously not a murderer - the way he was brought up, and in all these years I still remember it.  I tried to get this decision right out of my system but it constantly came back to me.

MR VISSER: And Mr Erasmus, I think you said that today you are relieved for the process which was created and established whereby you can reveal all these facts so that the families of the victims can know what happened and that you can at least get it off your conscience to a certain extent, is that not so?

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: Yes, that is so.  The opportunity given me, I've grabbed with both hands to come and say what the situation is or was so that the families will be able to know what exactly happened to their loved ones.

MR VISSER: Mr Erasmus, we know that Mr Mthimkhulu, after he was released from detention, went to see an attorney in order to lodge a civil claim against the police or to be more specific the Minister of Law and Order, based on alleged assaults which he said he had suffered whilst he was in detention.  Are you  aware of that?

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: I am aware of a civil claim, yes.

MR VISSER: There is documentation before this Committee which includes a statement made by Mr Mthimkhulu which indicates that, or which alleges that he had been tortured and assaulted in various ways.  I want to ask you the following:  "You Gerrit Erasmus, do you have any personal knowledge of any assault committed on Mr Mthimkhulu during his period of detention, as he alleges?

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: I personally have no such knowledge.

MR VISSER: Yes, I'm going to ask you this even though you weren't implicated by him - did you personally assault Mr Mthimkhulu at any time?

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: No, not at all, I also did not interrogate him.

MR VISSER: And you are aware that is you did do so or if you had poisoned him, you would have been able to apply for amnesty for that?

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: I would most certainly apply for amnesty, yes.

MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, may I be allowed a moment?
	Mr Erasmus, it is the evidence so far - and the probability exists that your former colleagues will confirm this in their testimony, that to a certain extent we can call it a joint decision between the three of you, you du Plessis and van Rensburg about what should happen to Madaka and Mthimkhulu?

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: That is correct Sir.

MR VISSER: But it is also like that Mr Erasmus that you, the commanding officer is telling this Commission that you take the responsibility, that you gave that instruction.

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: That is correct Mr Chairman.

MR VISSER: You did not receive any instructions from senior level to do that, that was your own decision and you accept full responsibility for that?

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: That is correct, I did not receive any direct instructions.

MR VISSER: You, yourself were not present or was part of the execution of this instruction, is that correct?

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: Yes, that is correct.

MR VISSER: Later, they reported back to you that the instruction was completed?

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: That is correct.

MR VISSER: I just want to ask you this, did you give the instruction in the name of Gerrit Erasmus in your personal capacity, or did you give this instruction for another reason, or for which other reason?

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: I did not give this instruction for any personal gain, I did not do it for Gerrit Erasmus.  As I saw it at that stage, I gave this instruction in the execution of my duties.  I firmly believed that that which I had done was correct.

MR VISSER: And what purpose did you try to achieve with that?

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: What I tried to achieve was to break this power basis which was developing around these people.

MR VISSER: And in the end, was it the present political dispensation - was that to maintain that dispensation?

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: That was at all costs the fact.

MR VISSER: And then do you confirm the contents pages 28 - that is paragraph 10 of your application, in which you describe the circumstances and the objectives of your actions?

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: That is correct Mr Chairman.

MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, I've noticed that it is ten to four.  I believe that this is the evidence that we wish to present from this witness.  There may one or two aspects which I might have overlooked in the evidence and I'm wondering Mr Chairman, whether it will be a great hardship if we took an adjournment now so that I could perhaps go through my notes and finish off tomorrow morning first thing.  I don't believe that there is anything else but it would perhaps make sense to allow the cross-examiners some time to digest what they've heard and perhaps start tomorrow morning first thing.

CHAIRPERSON: Does anybody wish to say anything in that regard?

MR BRINK: No thank you, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well we'll grant your application Mr Visser, and take the adjournment now.  We will adjourn till 9 o'clock tomorrow morning.

MR VISSER: Thank you Mr Chairman.
WITNESS EXCUSED
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
ON RESUMPTION - 23rd SEPTEMBER 1997

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: (s.u.o.)

CHAIRPERSON: We are proceeding with the application of Erasmus, van Rensburg, du Plessis and Niewoudt.  It is today the 23rd of September.
	Mr Phosa, I received a message that you would be a few minutes late, that you were interviewing a potential witness - it's slightly more than a few minutes, isn't it?

MR PHOSA: I said I hoped to be a few minutes late.  In fact I said I hoped to not be late at all but I had no control over the situation, it's a witness I had to have.  I must thank the court and everybody else for giving me that opportunity.

CHAIRPERSON: We must make every effort in the future to start on time.  Are you now ready Mr Visser, to proceed?