Amnesty Hearings — Port Elizabeth — 1997-09-08

MR JACK DEMONSTRATES: It was Fanie Els. Fanie Els I think, what I suspect is still a warrant-officer or whatever, but the important thing, let me tell you about what Fanie Els said to me, and Patrick Hlongwane, if you want to listen to him, he will confirm this.  I was at that - was it still Sanlam? Yes, I think it was still Sanlam, and there was this wound in Hlongwane, who was supposed to have assaulted by me and this is the Hlongwane that on the 22nd of January 1984, Mr Nieuwoudt assaulted me for whatever, in the bus, an incident, I had seen him in the bus and he said - Mr Fanie Els said to me, I will tell you in Afrikaans what he said to me. He said "jou politiek is kak" (your politics is shit), but even "so, dit is gemors hierdie storie" (this entire story however remains nonsense).

MR VAN DER MERWE: May I then ask you ... (intervention).

MR JACK DEMONSTRATES: No, but I am trying to show you that Nieuwoudt used his informer to go and lay a charge against me, that I attempted to murder him. I have stayed in prison for that, amongst criminals and I was a criminal.

MR VAN DER MERWE: During the assaults you allege in 1980, it is also true that while you were giving evidence in chief, you never mentioned once that you were assaulted, was it right?

MR JACK DEMONSTRATES: What's that?

MR VAN DER MERWE: When you were giving evidence in chief now, you didn't mention that you were assaulted during 1980.

MR JACK DEMONSTRATES: Of course, that's possible that I didn't mention that, of course.

CHAIRPERSON: I don't think - I think all those questions would not have been asked in detail, because he was reading a large part of his evidence in chief, was merely a reading out by him from a prepared statement, from his affidavit.

MR VAN DER MERWE: That is correct, Commissioner.  This however, this notes that you and your attorney compiled, also speak about 1980 detained more than five times, before being sent to Modder Bee Prison.

MR JACK DEMONSTRATES: Yes, that is correct.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Now remember this is drawn up in response to Mr Nieuwoudt's application for amnesty, and in there you do not make mention of any assault by Mr Nieuwoudt either during 1980.

MR JACK DEMONSTRATES: Ja, look, those notes are my notes for my consultant.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, surely if he assaulted you, it would have been written in the notes, because that is of utmost importance.

MR JACK DEMONSTRATES: No, but look, let me tell you advocate ... (intervention).

MR VAN DER MERWE: Attorney.

MR JACK DEMONSTRATES: Attorney, whatever.  I am really in a difficult situation now, whereby I was hoping that I will sit down and listen.  My intention was never to come here and nail down Deon, Mr Nieuwoudt, okay?  And I think you are misunderstanding. Your questions now seem to be achieving what I think you are not intending to achieve.  I expected Mr Nieuwoudt to explain in detail, and I don't blame him for omitting, and I know that if you want to find faults with me, the first fault you will find is the fact that he doesn't even know when I was arrested in 1985, okay.  And I find it very funny that he has such a good recollection and actually I believe he got documents in his possession, which are not even available at Louis le Grange at this point in time.  They have been shredded and I thought he will use those documents he has, which he has shown he does have them, to come clean on this matter, especially with mentioning his co-partners in torture. But he failed to do that.  And I have no apologies for not having - my intentions even now, is not to pin him down, but what I want him to do, I hope he will do to this amnesty application, is to tell just things as they were. I mean nobody is standing here and saying that no, we want to punish you for that little bit, admit this little bit. That is not what I am for here. I don't take care about that.

UNKNOWN: Mr Jack, in a nut-shell, just very briefly in other words, what is your attitude to the application for amnesty by Mr Nieuwoudt, having heard what he has said?

MR JACK DEMONSTRATES: No, I mean, as I have said, Mr Commissioner, my - when I came here, I was flowing with the spirit of knowing that I am going to achieve the greatest thing in my life of standing here, knowing that Mr Nieuwoudt has really come clean and told what he has done, as he has tried as much as he could with some other more serious issues, like the National Party and all that.  On the smaller things like torturing, the rest of the other people that are here, here in this hall and outside there are thousands and thousands of people who we were leading at the time. And those people are looking at least in times like this, upon us for some direction. And I believe an opportunity was great here for Mr Nieuwoudt to say that he remembers that and that. I am shocked that his lawyer is attempting to disprove this matters instead of assisting him to say that he may have forgotten this, but go on and all that. And personally, from my personal point of view, and I speak solely for myself now, because I believe that the question of forgiveness or whatever is a personal matter, is not a general matter, I have no qualms, I understood clearly Mr Nieuwoudt when he set the rules of the game to me, that it was war, and I was ready to take the consequences from his side. And I am proud today that out of the product of the sacrifices of the people that has stood so definitely opposed to today, is coming to you, the institutions, and the structures those people have put up. I have no objection in him enjoying the fruits and benefits of that freedom that many people have died for. That is my point.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay. Is that all?

UNKNOWN: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Any further questions, Mr Van der Merwe?

MR VAN DER MERWE: I would just like to place on record, I am not trying to disprove anything.  But I also have instructions from my client, and his instructions is he will apply for whatever he did, he cannot apply for what he didn't do, and we have a factual difference at this stage. You allege he assaulted you more than once.  He says he assaulted you once.  That is the facts we are working with. All I was trying to ascertain, is why does your consultation notes with your legal representative not refer to an assault in 1979?   Why does it not refer to an assault in 1980, why does it not refer to an assault in 1981.  Which I think ... (intervention).

CHAIRPERSON: I think that we have covered that ground now.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Yes, I will then close off by saying - these are my instructions and ... (intervention).
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VAN DER MERWE

CHAIRPERSON: I understand your instructions, your job is to carry out your instructions and I can understand the purpose of the questions as well.  I would like you to tell me, Mr Jack, a little more about this trumped-up charge. You spoke so quickly that I wasn't able to take it down. In 1984 there was a trumped-up charge against  you.  What was that charge about?

MR JACK DEMONSTRATES: The charge was about attempted armed robbery and murder.

CHAIRPERSON: Of?

MR JACK DEMONSTRATES: Of a Mr Patrick Hlongwana.

CHAIRPERSON: What is the surname of this person?

MR JACK DEMONSTRATES: Blongwana. B-L-O-N-G-W-A-N-A, as he was known then.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, so this was a charge of attempted armed robbery?

MR JACK DEMONSTRATES: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: And attempted murder, was it?

MR JACK DEMONSTRATES: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Any other charge?

MR JACK DEMONSTRATES: There was again another one, in succession too of attempted murder, armed murder, which was supposed to have taken place at Njoli Square, later, but three months after the first one. So in that year I had three cases going on at the same time.

CHAIRPERSON: Attempted murder of who?

MR JACK DEMONSTRATES: Of the same individual.

CHAIRPERSON: Again the same person?

MR JACK DEMONSTRATES: Yes, Sir.