Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — UNKNOWN

COLSON TEBOGO BEEA: I wish that incident had not happened.  I grew up like my colleagues have said, in the ANC and one of the fundamental issues and/or things that the ANC taught us is to respect life.  It's regrettable that the 28th of March ended the way it did, people lost life, life was lost and I do regret that, that it happened.  I regret and I feel bad, extremely bad not only for the people who died at the corner of King George and Shell House, there are other people who were killed on that morning.  I do believe that there are widows and widowers and their children without fathers and mothers today because of the happenings of the morning preceding the incident at Shell House and it pains me that - and I'm not pointing a finger at anybody but I'm just trying to say that it pains me that nobody but nobody has ever mentioned that.
	It appears therefore to me that those that have lost their lives in the morning before the actual incident are insignificant, but I believe they are not.  It is in that context that I say it, loss of life is regrettable and it will always be regrettable because it was not supposed to have happened.  So this is how I felt, this is how I fell, this is unfortunately how I'm going to feel until the day that I die, I wish it did not happen.

MR TIPP: Thank you Mr Beea.  Chairperson I have no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR TIPP

MR VAN WYK: Thank you Mr Chairman I will start with this witness, thank you.  Mr Beea you have testified that you confirm your application and the statements attached thereto.  Do you also confirm the contents of the evidence you have given at the inquest proceedings?

COLSON TEBOGO BEEA: Yes.

MR VAN WYK: And is that evidence correct?

COLSON TEBOGO BEEA: The evidence that I gave before Judge Nugent is correct.

MR VAN WYK: I see in your evidence you started here giving some of your background ... (inaudible- new tape) your present application?

COLSON TEBOGO BEEA: No it does not.

MR VAN WYK: You also mentioned that you were a trained soldier.  Can the Committee accept that you know how to handle a firearm?

COLSON TEBOGO BEEA: I know how to handle a firearm.

MR VAN WYK: Being a soldier you were trained to kill.  Is that correct?

COLSON TEBOGO BEEA: I was not a mercenary, I'm a political soldier.

MR VAN WYK: Were you trained that if necessary you have to kill?

COLSON TEBOGO BEEA: May you repeat your question please?

MR VAN WYK: Were you trained, being a soldier that if necessary you have to kill?

COLSON TEBOGO BEEA: Yes, if and when necessary.

MR VAN WYK: You have given some evidence in respect of information you have received.  Do you confirm that in your statement you have mentioned that this information was not very clear.  Is that still the position that you hold today?

COLSON TEBOGO BEEA: Yes.

MR VAN WYK: Was any of this information that you received, preceding 1994, ever documented?

COLSON TEBOGO BEEA: I would not know that.  Can I just try and explain why I would say that?  I am employed by an intelligence organisation.  I was then, before I became a member of NIA, a member of DIS which operated in the same level and we know that organs such as those are targets of other services and of organs who operate in a singular manner.  Which simply means that you can - the possibility that other people within you could be moles exists.  We therefore elected at Shell House then that everything but everything that was sensitive would be relayed to my immediate superior orally.  As to how he converted that oral evidence I would not know.

MR VAN WYK: Can I as you this Mr Beea, from your side you did not document any of this information that you presented to the Committee.  Is that correct?

COLSON TEBOGO BEEA: If you're asking me if I have copies, I don't.

MR VAN WYK: No I'm not asking whether you've got copies, my question is did you document any of this information.  Did you ever write it down for any purpose?

COLSON TEBOGO BEEA: No I did not.

MR VAN WYK: Now we've heard about this information that you received.  Are you prepared to disclose to us who is this informer of yours, giving this information?

COLSON TEBOGO BEEA: During the inquest Judge Nugent (?) asked me that question.  My answer was I could not.  I can now disclose that specific source, I handled a lot of sources, but that one I said no to then I can now.

MR VAN WYK: You've mentioned that in respect of the information you received, certain people were addressed in the Alexandra hostel.  Is that correct?

COLSON TEBOGO BEEA: Yes that is correct.

MR VAN WYK: Was that the only hostel in relation to which you received information?  Because that's the only one you've mentioned that's why I'm asking you.

COLSON TEBOGO BEEA: No it's not the only hostel.  I handled sources in different hostels, but Alexandra specifically in this issue, yes.

MR VAN WYK: You've mentioned that you were in a meeting, if I understand you correctly, on the 18th floor, that's now on the 28th of March and this meeting was held in the boardroom.  Is that correct?

COLSON TEBOGO BEEA: The meeting had not started.  I was in the boardroom with people who were just about to start a meeting.

MR VAN WYK: This boardroom, is that on the 18th floor of Shell House?

COLSON TEBOGO BEEA: That is correct.

MR VAN WYK: On which floor is Mr Ntlhantlha's office?

COLSON TEBOGO BEEA: It was on the 18th floor.

MR VAN WYK: On the same side of the building, on the opposite side of the building.  Could you assist us and tell us where on the floor were these two offices in relation to each other?

COLSON TEBOGO BEEA: They were on the same floor but from Ntlhantlha's office you could not have the view that you have if and when you were in the boardroom.  I hope I understand your question clearly.

MR VAN WYK: Do you then accept that from Mr Ntlhantlha's office you would not be able to see the marchers in the street.  Is that what you're saying?

COLSON TEBOGO BEEA: Yes, that's what I'm saying.

MR VAN WYK: I want to refer you to your statement which you've confirmed today and I'm going to put it to you that the evidence you're giving is in direct conflict of your statement and I want to afford you an opportunity to clarify that.  I refer you to page 90 of the bundle, that will be bundle C1 Mr Klusner.  When you made this statement I - can I accept that what happened was still fresh in your memory Mr Beea?

COLSON TEBOGO BEEA: I missed your question.

MR VAN WYK: Can I accept that when you made this statement what happened was still fresh in your memory.  Would you agree to that?

COLSON TEBOGO BEEA: Yes it was.

MR VAN WYK: Can you see that paragraph 10 of your statement reads as follows
"Some time later I was in the office of Joe Ntlhantlha.  There was a meeting underway with some senior police officers.  I was not formally part of that meeting and was in the office only very briefly".
Is that correct?

COLSON TEBOGO BEEA: Yes I see that line.

MR VAN WYK: Is the contents of that affidavit correct?

COLSON TEBOGO BEEA: I might have made a mistake.

MR VAN WYK: Well what is your answer today.  Is it correct or is it wrong?

COLSON TEBOGO BEEA: This line, I might have made a mistake because I've clarified that the meeting was actually in the boardroom.

MR VAN WYK: Because we've got two conflicting versions, both under oath, that we now know that the possibility that you mentioned in your statement could objectively not be true because you couldn't see the marchers from Mr Ntlhantlha's office.  Is that correct?

COLSON TEBOGO BEEA: From the boardroom you could.

MR VAN WYK: I'm sorry, can you then explain to the Committee how could you make an error like this saying that you saw this from Mr Ntlhantlha 's office whilst we know it could not be true.  Have you got an explanation?