Amnesty Hearings — Cape Town — 2000-03-17

ABRAM VAN ZYL: That is true, Mr Chairperson.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR P DU PLESSIS

CHAIRPERSON: Mr H du Plessis, do you have any questions you'd like to put to the applicant?

MR H DU PLESSIS: Thank you Chairperson, I have a few questions.  Mr van Zyl, when did you meet Gen Webb, the Chairperson for the first time?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: I met Gen Webb the same day or the day after I was released, in other words it could have been the 28th February or the 1st March 1990.

MR H DU PLESSIS: This was long after the CCB had been exposed?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: That is true.

MR H DU PLESSIS: During your time at the CCB did you make any submissions directly to the General, Gen Webb now?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: No.

MR H DU PLESSIS: So in your evidence yesterday and today when you referred to projects not being your own you did not make the submissions to the General yourself, that is mistaken?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: Please repeat that?

MR H DU PLESSIS: At several occasions you have said now amongst others when the attorney asked you with regard to the evidence to the Evans matter, you said that it was not your project and you did not make the submissions to the Chairperson personally?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: I beg your pardon, I meant the Managing Director, not the Chairperson because we as operatives did not do any submissions to the Chairperson.  The highest level with whom we communicated was the Managing Director.

MR H DU PLESSIS: Those are also my instructions, I just wish to clear that up with you.  Am I correct to say that with regard to you personally if there is an approval by the Chairperson it is always an inference you draw or hearsay because you were not personally there?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: That is correct.

MR H DU PLESSIS: I have no further questions at this stage, thank you Chairperson.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR DU PLESSIS

MR VAN ECK: Thank you Chairperson.
	Mr van Zyl, from your evidence yesterday it would appear that when it was discussed that Mr Botha was in your cell although it is my instruction you said that it maybe happened at times that a specific submission was made where the others were not involved and such a person would be requested to leave the building.  Do you have knowledge of such usage?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: That is indeed so, Chairperson, what I meant in my statement if I for example referred to a cell meeting where the following persons were present I mean everyone was present there but not necessarily that Chap Maree was present when I made a submission with regard to the Early Learning Centre project to the Co-ordinator or to the Regional Manager.  As it is stated there it could be somewhat misleading, I hear what Mr van Eck says.  With regard to the ape foetus it was a direct instruction that the Regional Manager, Burger, gave to me and I am not able to say whether Kalla heard this or whether he saw it, but I did not discuss the project with him up to the time after it was completed.

MR VAN ECK: But it will be Mr Botha's evidence that he had no knowledge or it and it was not discussed with him?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: I cannot dispute that.

MR VAN ECK: Very well then, when we refer to the bomb incident, at which stage was Mr Botha informed to become involved in the bomb incident?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: Botha, upon my request to the Regional Manager, Burger, was involved and this was at a stage if I recall correctly that when Botha was as we had tried to define yesterday while Botha was still on ice and this was upon instruction from the Regional Manager, Burger, that Botha should join with me and then he was present up to the time of the explosion, that was approximately a day later.

MR VAN ECK: Did he have anything to do with the preparation, the planning and the choice of premises?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: Not at all.

MR VAN ECK: Thank you Chairperson.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VAN ECK

CHAIRPERSON: Yes thank you.  Mr Bizos do you have any questions you'd like to put to the applicant?

GEORGE BIZOS: No, thank you, Chairperson.
NO QUESTIONS BY MR BIZOS

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Khanovitz, do you have any questions?

MR KHANOVITZ: Yes Mr Chairperson, for the record my surname is spelt K-H-A-N-O-V-I-T-Z.
	Mr van Zyl, you've mentioned that in the criminal prosecution against Ferdi Barnard you've received an indemnity in terms of Section 204 of the criminal procedure act.  How do you know that?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: Chairperson, the Prosecutor in that matter was Adv Anton Akkerman and Adv Akkerman confirmed to me that the judge would grant me that indemnity and I am in contact with their office because I was identified as a witness in the Dr Wouter Basson matter where the same Section 204 came up and I discussed it with Adv Pretorius who discussed this with Mr Bulalani Ncguka's office.  You can accept from me that I received 204 indemnity.  After my evidence in the Ferdi Barnard case, I don't have any documents but because one does not get any documents that confirms something like that.

MR KHANOVITZ: But you weren't called back to Court by the judge who informed you that you've been granted indemnity in terms of Section 204?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: No, not at all.

MR KHANOVITZ: On the assumption that you have been granted indemnity why are you applying for amnesty in respect of the Omar incident?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: Chairperson, I applied for indemnity to all these matters for the first time in 1990.  Thereafter I applied for indemnity with regard to all these incidents in 1994 so it was long before I gave any evidence in the Ferdi Barnard matter but I would also like to add that whether I received indemnity or not from the previous government, it is my personal opinion that the Truth Commission is the only forum that is recognised by the broader community and it is for that purpose and in order to participate in those proceedings that I came here to give my co-operation in order to get amnesty from this forum.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr van Zyl, when was the Barnard hearing?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: Chairperson, the Barnard trial was in 1998, if I recall correctly.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry Mr Khanovitz.

MR KHANOVITZ: Chairperson, you have been handed an extract of that judgment but I don't know if there's a date on the document, there doesn't appear to be one.
	Mr van Zyl, as regards the apologies that you've now made to various victims, you'll agree with me that where someone waits ten years to make an apology it tends to weaken it somewhat?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: Chairperson, I would like my circumstances to be considered.  I do realise that it is so but circumstances unfortunately did not allow me with regard to Mr Omar do it any sooner.  I was involved during the last few years and as far back as four years ago at a specific matter where a matter of Dr Omar Sabadia was investigated or of his wife and I understood because the father of the deceased in that matter was also an ANC representative in the then Northern Transvaal Region and I understood that there was contact between that Mr Omar and Adv Dullah Omar and even during that investigation we spoke of it and I tried to send through my apology to Mr Omar via that structure so it is not that I am sitting here today and try to pretend something which is false, that is not the case.

MR KHANOVITZ: You'll agree with me there was nothing to stop you sending a letter to Minister Omar nine years ago without any fanfare asking to meet with him privately?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: That is so.

MR KHANOVITZ: The Evans family that you say are sitting in this hearing, are those the people that you met?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: No, I met Gavin Evans personally not his parents, in March of 1990.

MR KHANOVITZ: What made you assume that the couple sitting over there are the parents of Gavin Evans.

ABRAM VAN ZYL: It's an inference that I drew.

MR KHANOVITZ: Well it's an incorrect assumption that you made.  Your business that you're operating at the moment, the one with 300 employees, are you doing work for the government?