bitter-aloe/trc-testimonies huggingface dataset:
Amnesty Hearings — Pietersburg — 1997-07-03

CHAIRPERSON: What unrest situation, because I think these people were said to be terrorists or coming in, whether there was unrest in the country or not, it is neither here nor there, they are supposed to be trained, they are coming in, they are to be arrested.  And you know ...

ADV VISSER: Yes, of course except that the general background will of course have an influence on how people reacted at that time and ...

ADV DE JAGER: Mr Visser, you furnished us with yesterday you said 400 pages, and it transcribed to be 200, is there any further evidence about the background that you would like to represent?

ADV VISSER: Mr Chairman no, but may I remind you that we haven't had an indication from you that that would be sufficient.  We haven't addressed you on that at all.  We don't know whether you want us to do so at this stage or whether you believe it is necessary, because as the Chairman pointed out, this was an isolated incident.
	At this stage Mr Chairman, we are quite happy to discuss the issues with you tomorrow as far as the applications themselves are concerned and their merits, we would submit that it would be more convenient for us as well as for you, if we were to draw written argument and to hand it to you at a later stage.
	Unless of course you want us to argue tomorrow, verbally, which we are quite happy to do as well.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, I was still going to come to that.  For example I don't know whether Mr Black has witnesses to call.  I thought I should ask you first whether you had witnesses to call and it seems to me you don't?
	Mr Black, do you have any witnesses to call?

MR BLACK: Mr Chairman, I don't propose calling any witnesses, but I may indicate to the Committee that the families of the three identified deceased persons are present and they have indicated to me that they would like to address the Committee.
	I anticipate that they would be addressing the Committee tomorrow, but if the Committee wishes to proceed now immediately, I would need at least five to ten minutes simply to explain again what would be required of them.

CHAIRPERSON: No, I don't think - it is already almost four o'clock.  We will adjourn now and then you will sort that out with them and I am sure they will agree amongst themselves on a representative for each family?

MR BLACK: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: It is almost four o'clock now and I think we should adjourn until tomorrow morning, half past nine.

MR BLACK: Thank you Mr Chairman.
COMMISSION ADJOURNS
Amnesty Hearings — Pietersburg — 1997-07-03

MR BLACK: Can you remember, thinking back, because I am sure this is while you have been sitting here, have realised that the contents of that tape recording could be of some significance, what do you remember was recorded.  You heard the whistling, there was shooting, that is common cause.
	What part or section of the interview to the best of your recollection, can you remember was recorded?  The speaking section, what was recorded while the wounded man was being spoken to?  What came out on the tape?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: The whole questioning is on that tape.  Everything is there which was said to this person.  What exactly was asked and what was answered, I can't remember.

MR BLACK: Was there any recording - when did it stop, when did this tape recording stop?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: The tape recording stopped the moment when Mr Erwee picked the person up.

MR BLACK: Was anything recorded about a medical man there and anything to that effect?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: I can't remember whether the medical person was spoken to there and the person who injected the wounded person, didn't say a word as far as I can remember.

MR BLACK: And Erwee?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: I can't remember what he said.

MR BLACK: Okay.  This tape recording, this is a manually operated tape recording and you switch it on and off when so required is that so?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: That is correct, yes.

MR BLACK: I have no further questions, thank you.

MR BLACK: .

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Visser?

ADV VISSER: Thank you Mr Chairman.  I am not quite sure whether I have dealt with this issue with this particular witness.  You have confirmed the contents of your statement, have I asked you to do that, I can't remember.
	In case I have forgotten to do so, you have filled in a form in which you applied for amnesty and you've read it through and it contains the correct facts?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: Yes, that is correct.

ADV VISSER: And you confirm that, and you are also confirming the political objectives and motives with which you've acted as set out in your statement?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: Correct, yes.

ADV VISSER: Now, I have asked this of everybody so far, so I am going to ask you to.  You said that you did not do anything wrong at the scene.  You may later have done something wrong in the eyes of the law, by the attestation of Erwee's statement, but why - I am getting confused with the witnesses, I am sorry.  I think he has already testified to that.  I have no further questions.

ADV VISSER: .

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, you are excused.

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: Thank you Mr Chairman.

SISI KHAMPEPE: I think Mr Visser, you probably need a break.

ADV VISSER: I think so.
Amnesty Hearings — Pietersburg — 1997-07-01

ADV VISSER: Once again, and this is often what happens when you're testifying about something that was told to you, the issue of the language spoken by the people and what Matthew Sehlwana reported on, I perhaps would like to put it to you just to refresh your memory and if it's not the case just say so, the idea was not that the people spoke Afrikaans but a South African Black language. That is what the evidence will be.  I don't know if you are willing to accept that that is what was told to you?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN DER MERWE: Yes I'm with you, I actually think that's what I said, but the fact is that it was a Black South African language, yes.

ADV VISSER: Thank you Mr Chairman, I have no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY ADV VISSER

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr van der Merwe, you may stand down.
MR VAN DER MERWE EXCUSED
Amnesty Hearings — Pietersburg — 1997-07-02

CHAIRPERSON: Today is 2 July 1997 and we are proceeding with the same matter of 
Erwee et al.

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN DER MERWE: (Still under oath).

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Van der Merwe is being recalled at the request of Mr Visser.  Mr 
Visser?

ADV VISSER: Thank you, Mr Chairman. Mr Van 
der Merwe, there is something which I forgot when you were testifying.   You told us 
that after the events there was a Press conference or a Press statement was released, 
regarding these events, and in this Press statement it was said that seven terrorists had 
entered the country in the mini-bus and that one of them or that six had been killed and 
that one had escaped.

MR VAN DER MERWE: That is so, Chairperson.

ADV VISSER: Could you say who was responsible for that Press statement?

MR VAN DER MERWE: I made the statement to the then SABC.

ADV VISSER: Yes, the facts are not entirely correct, because the seventh person 
who escaped was not a so-called terrorist but a policeman namely Matthews 
Sehlwana.

MR VAN DER MERWE: That is entirely true, it was done in order to conceal the 
true facts, namely that a policeman had been present.

ADV VISSER: And why would you have wanted to conceal that fact?

MR VAN DER MERWE: To protect Sehlwana and to conceal his involvement in the 
matter.

ADV VISSER: That is all the evidence in this regard.  It is fact that happened and I 
thought you should be aware of it.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Van der Merwe.

ADV VISSER: 61

W J VAN DER MERWE: PIETERSBURG HEARING	AMNESTY/
Amnesty Hearings — Pinetown — 1998-10-15

CHAIRPERSON: We were sitting today to hear the applications of Tulani Percival Keli, Bongani Richard Khumalo, Boy Bongomusa Keli.  Unfortunately due to a misunderstanding with the Correctional Services Department the Two Kelis are not here, we only have the applicant Khumalo.  The Committee consists of myself Andrew Wilson, Judge Khampepe, and Mr Wynand Malan.  Could the representatives announce themselves?

MR SAMUEL: I am Raymond Samuel on behalf of the applicant Khumalo, B R Khumalo in this matter.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: ...(indistinct)Mr Chairman myself of the Committee ...(indistinct) Mpshe for the Amnesty Committee.

CHAIRPERSON: What is the position then?

MR SAMUEL: In respect of applicant number 3, V R Khumalo, Your Honour, my instructions are that the applicant ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Applicant 2.

MR SAMUEL: 2, my apologies, the applicant wishes to withdraw his application for amnesty, however he would like to take this opportunity and be given an opportunity to formally apologise to the victim's family and the affected community, thank you.

MR KHUMALO: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Khumalo, I understand that you are completely fluent in English, is that so?  And you understand what your attorney has just said, that you are going to withdraw your amnesty application, do you confirm that?

MR KHUMALO: Yes I withdraw the application.

CHAIRPERSON: But you wish to make certain remarks and we invite you to do so.

MR KHUMALO: I withdraw the application and I want to apologise to the community.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you want to say anything further?

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Mr Chair I just wanted to give him this for him to understand if the Chair could with respect repeat what was said for them to interpret for him please.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you confirm what your attorney has said that you wish to withdraw your application for amnesty but you wish to make certain remarks to the victims and other interested parties.

MR KHUMALO: That's correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Carry on.

MR KHUMALO: I apologise to the people who lost their lives because of the political situation because what happened and what we did was because of the system of apartheid, not because we were there for personal gain.  This happened to them because they were members of the IFP, an organisation that we were fighting against.  I am sorry for what happened to them although I was not directly involved in the death of the deceased.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you wish to say anything further?

MR KHUMALO: I don't have anything to say.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well so this application has now been withdrawn, it will be noted and the application of the first and third applicants will be adjourned to a date to be arranged.  We will now adjourn until 9H30 tomorrow morning.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
Amnesty Hearings — Pinetown — 1998-10-16

CHAIRPERSON: ... by Advocate M J Lassink and Mr P Falconer.  The Evidence Leader is Mr Mpshe.
	I understand that as in the previous matters, the applicant was in fact in prison at Waterval, Utrecht and was therefore not available for consultation till he was brought down here today, is that the position?

MR FALCONER: That is correct, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: And that it is as a result of the consultation you have managed with him this morning, it has become necessary for you to consult with other possible witnesses, I don't put them higher than possible or certainly other sources of information and perhaps to prepare an amended or amplified affidavit.

MR FALCONER: That is correct, Mr Chairman, it would be more of a supplementary affidavit, if necessary.

CHAIRPERSON: And you have requested us that the matter should be adjourned.  There is a Committee sitting in Durban and we have what appear to be two short matters set down for Wednesday of next week.  I propose to adjourn this matter until Wednesday.  I will warn you here though that if it's not heard on Wednesday it may have to stand over to Thursday or till Friday.  We will certainly endeavour to dispose of it next week but I don't propose to adjourn it till the Monday because I think you should be given the time to prepare, rather than have to rush through it again.  Would that suit you?

MR FALCONER: That would suite me, Mr Chairman, I appreciate it.  Mr Mpshe, do you have any problems with that?

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: No problems, Mr Chairman, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: I would request the authorities, the Correctional Supervision authorities, to make arrangements that the applicant remains at Westville Prison until the hearing is concluded next week so that he will be available for consultations with his legal advisors.  Sorry, I've just realised that the applicant has not had earphones on, does he speak English?

MR FALCONER: Mr Chairman, he does understand English fairly well.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you understand that your matter is adjourned until next Wednesday?

APPLICANT: ...[inaudible]

CHAIRPERSON: Very well.  Well that concludes the hearings set down for this week, precisely nil.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
Amnesty Hearings — Pinetown — 1998-10-21

CHAIRPERSON: So then the next of kin of Mrs Mkhize, Mrs Grace Mkhize will be regarded in terms of the Act as being victims of this incident.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: That is correct, Mr Chairman.  Mr Chairman may I for purposes of the names of the victims without addresses, may I apply that the contents of page 14 of the papers, this I've checked and confirmed, Mr Chairman, be incorporated in the record as people or victims who were injured in the bus?  I will further make a commitment that when the addresses are made available, this will be conveyed to the relevant authorities, but for purposes of the record, contents of page 14 contains names of all victims, Mr Chairman.  May that be incorporated?

CHAIRPERSON: That's eight of them.

MR LAX: There's a couple more at the bottom as well.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, there's some down at the bottom.  But then I doubt whether this will, when I say doubt it may be that this doesn't - you see this includes Grace Mkhize who is obviously a victim but not for purposes of reparation, it should be her next of kin.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: That is so Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Her daughter and of course if her daughter's got brothers and sisters, them as well.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Yes Mr Chairman, she will be included and we will get more information as to whether there's an elder sister or brother and this will be conveyed.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Mpshe and then I'd appreciate that if that could be forwarded to me as soon as possible.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: That will be done Mr Chairman.  Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.  I'd then like to thank the legal representatives, Mr Mpshe, for their assistance in this matter and we will now adjourn.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
Amnesty Hearings — Pinetown — 1998-10-23

MR MCHUNU: Definitely yes, naturally I would agree.  The submissions with regards to the questions posed by my learned friend, Mr Nel, I think I am in full agreement with that.
	Other than that, I do not have any further response, unless the Committee members want me to address it on some other point.

MR LAX: Did I hear you say that you are in full agreement with what Mr Nel said?

MR MCHUNU: Not exactly.  Mr Mukadam.

MR LAX: Mukadam, I beg your pardon.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Mchunu, Mr Falconer, Mr Nel, Mr Mukadam.  We will reserve judgement and we hope that the decision will come out in the very near future. 	Thank you very much.
Amnesty Hearings — Pinetown — 1999-03-08

SISI KHAMPEPE: You make a reference to the matter of our decision in the Botha application.  I don't understand how you can think it akin to your matter.  From the totality of evidence and from objective facts, the ANC has always been fighting the IFP, and vice versa, the IFP fighting the ANC.  And in this particular incident the perpetrators concerned, the applicants, sought to implement an instruction, which allegedly had been given to them, to revenge against people who were perceived to be black whenever a white person had been killed.  Is your analogy an appropriate one?

MR STEWART: As I've indicated, that case is one which is, in my submission, particularly extreme, and it's only the analogy is a very limited one, and it's only a valid analogy insofar as it is civilians or ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: It's unknown victims.  Random killing.

MR STEWART: Indeed, thank you Mr Chairperson, that's really that's the limit of the analogy.  That it's, there are so many other differences, but it is unknown victims, unidentified, not necessarily having a clear political persuasion, or in fact not having any clear political persuasion, but in that instance targets were because they were black.  In these instances, in this application before the Committee today there are cases where the actual political persuasion of an individual who became a victim may not have been known as a matter of fact.  But there was an association, they were in an ANC supporting area, an area which was regarded in a particular way, or they were emerging from a school where there was a meeting where there was an ANC aligned meeting happening, that kind of, that kind of thing.  So really, in my submission is that I'm on far more solid ground today in relation to these sort incidents. ...(intervention)

SISI KHAMPEPE: Because in that particular case, it was the evidence of the applicants that they had good relations with organisation like the IFP.  And it was not their intention to attack the IFP, but they had to attack a particular grouping of a particular organisation, which was the PAC.  The fact that you are black does not make you be a PAC, you could also be an IFP.

MR STEWART: Thank you, Ms Committee Member.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Stewart would this be a convenient time for a tea adjournment?  We'll take a 20 minute tea adjournment then.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
ON RESUMPTION
Amnesty Hearings — Pinetown — 1999-12-13

CHAIRPERSON: We would also like to express our sympathy to you, the families of the two victims, for what must have been a horrifying loss and tragedy to all of you.  We hope that the time will rapidly be reached in this lovely land of ours, that things like
this can be put behind us and become memories of the past but not something that will happen again.
	Thank you all for having come here and being so patient with us in the delays that took place before we had this hearing.  Thank you.
	Does that conclude this hearing?

MS PATEL: It appears that it does, Honourable Chairperson.  We've had problems with the other matters that were set down and ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Come and see me in my chambers now and we'll finalise what we're going to do.

MS PATEL: Certainly.  Thank you, Honourable Chairperson.  Would everyone please rise.
HEARING ADJOURNS
Amnesty Hearings — Pinetown — 2000-02-15

MR WILLS: Thank you.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
Amnesty Hearings — Pinetown — 2000-02-15

MR DEHAL: May I just raise this Chair because the applicant Tom Madlala is a client of mine, I'm very indebted to you being as perceptive, they have not had lunch, all the prisoners approached me to say that they believe the TRC generally provides lunch and I said that's history so I wonder whether ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Perhaps we can make arrangements if history repeats itself tomorrow.

MR DEHAL: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: We'll adjourn till 9 o'clock tomorrow morning.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
Amnesty Hearings — Pinetown — 2000-02-16

TOM JABULANI MADLALA: No.  I do have a problem because we experienced problems in Westville, we as members of ANC whenever we were putting our applications and if you check in the bundle, you'll see where I wrote and I was complaining and what I realise is that IFP members who lodged their applications, they were attended to, those applications, quicker than ANC members and I realised that and I wasn't happy.  I called Cape Town on the 10th of January.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much.
WITNESS EXCUSED

ME DEHAL: Mr Chairperson, that concludes the evidence for this applicant.  May I just mention that, as can be seen from the crowd at the back, contained in that crowd are a number of persons who are potential witnesses who would support this applicant's testimony but lest the contrary deduction be drawn, given the nature of the cross-examination and the discussion I've had with my learned colleague who represents the victims, there seems little point in me calling those witnesses.  For the reasons of expediency, I'd rather not.  Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well.  You're calling the second applicant?

ME DEHAL: I am.  Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Please do.
Amnesty Hearings — Port Elizabeth — 1997-09-22

ADV SANDI: Just to get to the end, when you took the decision that the two gentlemen should be killed - when you started yesterday you told us a lot about your faith, you as a member of the NG Kerk, in terms of which principle of your faith were you taking such a decision?

MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, I object to this really because ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: I'm afraid I don't see the relevance of that question, we're not here to ...[intervention]

MR VISSER: But to put it in context, what he said was simply this, he said he was a church-goer and he never heard that his church ever expressed themselves against the principles of apartheid.  That was the long and the short of all of that evidence Mr Chairman.

ADV SANDI: Okay, maybe one can deal with that during the argument stage.  My last question to you Mr Erasmus, if a group of people identify a problem and one of them solves that problem of a part of the problem, is it not natural that such a person would go and report somewhere and say: "Look, you don't have to bother yourselves about this problem, I've solved it"?

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: That is the normal procedure, yes.  If the situation warrants it - if it was a normal situation, that would have been the case.

ADV SANDI: You stated repeatedly yesterday and today: "This was never reported to anyone".

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: That is correct.

ADV SANDI: Thank you, that is all I've got to ask you.

CHAIRPERSON: One last thing which I think arises out of that - just to clear my own mind.  As I understand, the reason why you couldn't detain him was you felt you could not afford the publicity of another death in detention?  That he already ...[inaudible] martyr status and if he were to die in detention, it would create innumerable problems for you, so it would be better to kill him.

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: That is correct Mr Chairman.

MR VISSER: I have only have one re-exam - point in re-examination.
	Mr Erasmus, it is fair to say that your evidence indicates that you have tried to support the Government of the day, that was what you tried to do?

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: That is correct Mr Chairman.

MR VISSER: Would you have assisted them by reporting back to them that you committed a murder?

GERRIT NICHOLAS ERASMUS: No, Mr Chairman.

MR VISSER: I have no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VISSER

CHAIRPERSON: We have reached the time for closing for today.  It has been suggested to me that we should not start at 9 tomorrow but rather start at half past nine, to allow everybody the time they may need to make telephone calls and to do other things, so once we start we can get going at 9H30.  I think that that is probably a wise suggestion so I'm now adjourning till 9H30 but we'll be starting then.
WITNESS EXCUSED
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
Amnesty Hearings — Port Elizabeth — UNKNOWN

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Booyens are we ready?
Amnesty Hearings — Port Elizabeth — UNKNOWN

CHAIRPERSON: We will take the adjournment now, but will it be convenient for Counsel for us to resume at two o'clock?

UNKNOWN: Yes, we certainly will make the arrangements.

CHAIRPERSON: Adjourn now and resume at two o'clock.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
ON RESUMPTION

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Bizos?
Amnesty Hearings — Port Elizabeth — UNKNOWN

CHAIRPERSON: Mr  Mpshe?

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Mr Chairman we are making no submissions, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Booyens, do you wish to reply?   Do you wish to say anything at all ?

ADV BOOYENS: Only very briefly Mr Chairman, I did promise not to detain the Committee for more than two minutes, and the only
aspect on which I wish to reply is my learned friend says on their own evidence they committed no offences, that of course is not entirely correct, with respect. A Court may hold that for four people to detain a single man in a rather forcible fashion may exceed the bounds of reasonableness, and would then, should he suffer an injury in the process, could lead to a prosecution on a charge of culpable homicide.   
	My learned friend says Siebert does not admit an assault, Siebert in fact says it was either him or Snyman or both of them said that the man was left on the grille for a substantial period of time in order to, the order was to breakdown his resistance.   Now, Mr Chairman to have left the man in a crucified position chained to a grille, I don't know if my learned friend is not going to complain to the police if they do that to him, I am certainly going to complain, there's no doubt about that.

CHAIRPERSON: Even if it didn't amount to a crime, surely that would be a delict, wouldn't it?

ADV BOOYENS: I think it's a crime in any case Mr Chairman.   I'll be mildly surprised if somebody leaves me on - and I can't get a conviction if I'm a prosecutor.
      And then of course there is the other question as far as culpable homicide is concerned.   Your Lordship would recall the judgment of your erstwhile brother Hugo in the Natal Provincial division as to the duty of the policemen, that he's got, once a crime has been committed, now that obviously also would go further, and its not only good enough to the Commander, the Commanding Officer, will - has a duty to get medical treatment.   If I'm in charge of a person, then I've got a duty to get him medical treatment if he can't get it himself. If I don't do it I'm negligent, if he dies, I'm culpable.
      So, my Lord, I think those really are the only law points.   Those are the submissions I wish to make in this regard.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Erasmus, do you wish to say anything?

UNKNOWN: Nothing more.   I concur with my learned friend and I've got no further submissions.

CHAIRPERSON: This brings to an end the somewhat lengthy application, it took some time.   A great deal of evidence has been led.   A number of documents have been handed in as exhibits or referred to, and it is quite clear that the Committee will have to take time to consider its decision, and it will in due course take that decision and notify the parties accordingly.
	Thank you very much for having made our task easier than it could have been otherwise.
	That brings to an end ladies and gentlemen, the hearing of this application.   The Committee now adjourns. 
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
Amnesty Hearings — Port Elizabeth — 1997-09-24

MR BOOYENS: The matter of the poisoning of Mr Mthimkhulu, I know it is difficult to be accurate, but if you were to say even with the Section 6 interrogation, how many people would you say, had access to him?  Just more or less?

HERMANUS BAREND DU PLESSIS: If I have to give an estimate of Security Forces, between 10 and 20 people.  There were also other policemen who had access to him.  It wasn't an isolated case in terms of Security Forces.

MR BOOYENS: Thank you Mr Chairman.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR BOOYENS

ADV SANDI: Do you know if anyone of those policemen who also had access to him, ever gave him food or anything to eat?

HERMANUS BAREND DU PLESSIS: Well, I accept where he was kept in the cells in detention, he was fed by a member of the Police Force or a number of policemen, in other words to give him food.

CHAIRPERSON: I gather he was also, if he was being interrogated, he would be fed there?

HERMANUS BAREND DU PLESSIS: That is correct, Your Honour.

ADV DE JAGER: And he was in detention for five months?

HERMANUS BAREND DU PLESSIS: That is correct.

ADV SANDI: You have said you would not just accept information from informers, you would go out to verify and check if that is true, is that correct?

HERMANUS BAREND DU PLESSIS: Yes, we try as far as possible to confirm this Your Honour.

ADV SANDI: Were you able to verify the information about the existence of weapons which were accessible to him?

HERMANUS BAREND DU PLESSIS: There we had a single informer, but there were various other pieces of information, not definitely concerning him, but that arms were accessible in the area.  We couldn't verify this specific informer's information.

ADV SANDI: So you were not able to verify as a matter of fact, if the weapons did in fact exist?

HERMANUS BAREND DU PLESSIS: That is correct, Your Honour.

ADV SANDI: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MR BOOYENS: Does that conclude the questioning of this witness?
WITNESS EXCUSED
Amnesty Hearings — Port Elizabeth — 1997-09-25

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Brink, I take it you don't want to say anything at this stage?

MR BRINK: No thank you.

ADV DE JAGER: Could you kindly assist me with one problem that has arisen during the discussions, what would you say does the word: "eliminate" - referring to a particular person, mean?

MR NYOKA: "Referring to a particular person"

ADV DE JAGER: Yes.  If I would say: "Eliminate Mr X" or "Eliminate a person", what would I convey?

MR NYOKA: Not being an Afrikaner but understanding English, I would say that it means: "Kill that person".

ADV DE JAGER: Yes, I thought it was disputed whether it would mean: "Kill that person" or whether it could mean "Take him away and put him somewhere else" or whatever it may be.  I've said already yesterday that I agree with your interpretation.

CHAIRPERSON: I take it you agree that it has an obvious different meaning when it is applied to an impersonal object such as a political party, you can't kill political parties when you say: "Eliminate the ANC", it means: "Take steps to make sure that they cannot carry on their operations"?

ADV SANDI: Do you agree Mr Nyoka with that?

MR NYOKA: I agree.

ADV SANDI: Do you also agree that in the evidence we have received for the past four or five days, there is no order to eliminate a specific person, isn't it?

MR NYOKA: Yes, there - that is so, but what I said was that those speeches were isolated deliberately, they were - they must be viewed in the totality.  Where the Government will say that: "We are going to defend our nation, we are against Black domination", we believe in civilised - in a civilised western way.  Mr Nieuwoudt read books on politics, he should have known that the Government meant that the opposition must be crushed.  Nowhere in their speeches did they say: "Eliminate individuals", otherwise they would have been taken to task.

CHAIRPERSON: I think we have now come to an end of this hearing.  We can discuss afterwards the question of the documentation getting - how I can arrange to get hold of the document and when written argument will be submitted.  Thank you all for the patience you have shown during the course of this hearing, we have tried to be as punctual as possible but we haven't always succeeded.
	Thank you and we will now call an end to this hearing.  There will be a separate - a different Committee sitting here on Monday to commence the next hearing.  They will not start before 10 o'clock on Monday morning.
WITNESS EXCUSED
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
Amnesty Hearings — Port Elizabeth — UNKNOWN

ADV LAMEY: I can place it on record that the people have to testify about this but my impression from the instruction is that the assaults took a turn the next morning, it became more serious - initially it wasn't that serious but it became more serious and Warrant Officer Koole - that was also my instructions, it seemed as if Beeslaar started to show pity for these people and I think at that stage it was when the people were in the garage when they heard that someone was screaming inside and at that stage they were outside.  The next morning things took a serious turn when Mr Hashe was kicked against the head and became unconscious.

UNKNOWN: I just want to put it to you - I don't want you not to have any knowledge of this or be unaware of this, that I have knowledge of other testimony that was given and that is that the Vlakplaas contingent - their assaults, were the worst that one has ever heard of.

ADV LAMEY: Mr de Jager, that is my instructions and that will be their testimony.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Booyens?

MR BOOYENS: Mr Chairman, and without hereby expressing any desire whatsoever to prolong proceedings but up to a stage both my learned friends on the other side have been punting a theory that these people were not killed and they haven't asked Mr Nieuwoudt a single question about that.
	Now, I don't want to be - we are in alert at this stage, perhaps they can just give an indication to us whether they are abandoning that point or what they are doing about it but that's subject to you Mr Chairman, I don't know.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, I suppose Mr Nyoka ...[indistinct] the point.

ADV NYOKA: We are not abandoning the point Mr Chairperson, there's been a constant denial of that.  We thought it was not necessary to put it to Mr Nieuwoudt because the answer was obvious: "It did not happen".

MR BOOYENS: I'm indebted to my learned friend Mr Chairman, I've got no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR BOOYENS

ADV LAMEY: Mr Chairman, there was just - before Mr Nyoka started with his examination, you asked me about the - my instructions about the parking of the bus before the garage door, my instructions are that the minibus was not parked directly in front of the garage, it was parked at a point more or less between the old farmhouse and the garage.
	If I may say it in Afrikaans, it was to the side - almost in a corner at an angle from the garage door but not in such a way that they would have had to guard the three Pebco leaders and they also had no instructions to guard them.

MR BOOYENS: Thank you Mr Chairman, I've got no re-examination.
NO RE-EXAMINATION BY MR BOOYENS

CHAIRPERSON: Have you finished with your clients?

MR BOOYENS: Yes, I hope so Mr Chairman.
WITNESS EXCUSED
Amnesty Hearings — Port Elizabeth — 1997-09-11

MR BOOYENS: M'Lord, I intend now dealing with the false statements and the false evidence and so.  I do not think it is conceivable, because I have still got to deal with his, with the political aim that they were looking for.  I do not think it is conceivable that I will be able to finish this before about, subject to your Lordship, I would suggest, approval, I would suggest that we adjourn now, because I am at a point where it will be convenient to do so.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well.  This may be a convenient time to bring these proceedings to an end for the day.  The resumed date or rather the date for the resumed hearing, as I understand, been agreed by counsel on both sides, to be the eighth of December?

MR BOOYENS: That is correct, M'Lord, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Can we arrange it in such a way that once we commence on the eighth of December, we will carry on until it is finalised?  Mr Booyens.

MR BOOYENS: Just a moment, M'Lord.  M'Lord, Monday the eighth, yes.  Yes, M'Lord, Monday the eighth, that date suits us and I understand the arrangement that we will proceed until the conclusion of evidence and, I presume, argument as well.  Mr Erasmus.

MR ERASMUS: I confirm this was arranged with me in this manner.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

GEORGE BIZOS: I confirm as well, your Honour, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry.  The date.

MR BOOYENS: Yes, it suits us, thank you, and I confirm.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, thank you very much.  These proceedings have now come to an end and the Committee will now adjourn and rise.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
Amnesty Hearings — Potchefstroom — UNKNOWN

DLANJWA GCINISIZWE: Firstly let me say Nzimeni's issue is quite confusing.  Firstly we knew him as a member of the organisation and then on the 23rd of August 1990, ...(intervention)

<UNKNOWN>: I am sorry to interrupt there, when you say at first you knew him as a member of the organisation, which organisation, can you be specific?
Amnesty Hearings — Pretoria — 1988-07-30

MR VISSER: Ja, it's stating the obvious, I suppose, this thunder flash, did you allow it to simulate an explosion in the sand?

C S HEYNEKE: That's correct.   I simply did that by means of electrical control.

MR VISSER: Thank you, Mr Chairman.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VISSER

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: I'm sorry, Mr Chairman, no questions.
NO CROSS-EXAMINATION BY ADV MPSHE
Amnesty Hearings — Pretoria — UNKNOWN

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Chairman, we've reached the stage now - up to the last witness, there's only one problem we have and that is with Mr Arthur Kemp.  We are informed - and that's always been the position, that he's in England and we can't get him here, so if the Committee wishes to call him at some stage but it's not an indication that we don't want to call him and we're not - but if it's necessary to call him, we'll call him but his evidence is on record as far as the trial is concerned, so we have the difficulty that he's in England Mr Chairman and we havn't got the funds to bring him here, that's another problem.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I'm going to switch my machine off, don't ...[inaudible]

MR PRINSLOO: That's an excellent suggestion Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Apart from that, is the position that you're calling no further witnesses?

MR PRINSLOO: Apart from that, we're not calling any further witnesses but certain witnesses are on the list of the Committee in any event Mr Chairman, so we're not calling them.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
WITNESS EXCUSED
Amnesty Hearings — Pretoria — UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN: Mr Zeelie, with regard to the interrogation, who did the interrogation of Bopape?

CHARLES ALFRED ZEELIE: Constable Engelbrecht and Warrant Officer Mostert handled the interrogation.

UNKNOWN: Was that in a separate office, where was it?

CHARLES ALFRED ZEELIE: It was in a separate office, in Engelbrecht's office.

UNKNOWN: And you were aware of the interrogation?

CHARLES ALFRED ZEELIE: I was aware of the interrogation, because I was in an office two offices from that one.

UNKNOWN: Could you hear during the interrogation whether there was any assault?

CHARLES ALFRED ZEELIE: If there had been any assaults, I would definitely have been able to hear it.

UNKNOWN: Could you tell the committee what then happened during the interrogation, where you were involved?

CHARLES ALFRED ZEELIE: At two occasions, I went into the office where the interrogation was taking place.   At some stage Colonel Van Niekerk and myself were informed that Mr Bopape was not giving his co-operation, and it was decided by myself, Van Niekerk, Engelbrecht and Mostert to frighten Bopape by using a shock method to let him talk.   We agreed that it should be done.  At a later stage, Sergeant Du Preez arrived with a shock device at the office.

UNKNOWN: Do you know who made the request that, who contacted Du Preez?

CHARLES ALFRED ZEELIE: I can't say at this point precisely who contacted Du Preez.

UNKNOWN: Was the shock device brought there?

CHARLES ALFRED ZEELIE: As I've said, a shock device was brought by Du Preez to John Vorster Square.

UNKNOWN: When the shock device arrived, what happened then?
Amnesty Hearings — Pretoria — UNKNOWN

CHARLES ALFRED ZEELIE: I don't think this is really telling, I don't think one could wait for four days and then make something public, the complications would even have been bigger.

MR RAUTENBACH: Now you say the complications would have been bigger?

CHARLES ALFRED ZEELIE: I don't want to debate this with you, because you know it would have been.

MR RAUTENBACH: No, that's not what I'm saying, let's have a look at the aspect that I was busy with.   If someone comes to you, a junior officer, and tells you, and you told me that in all the years, this shock method that you prefer, that no-one has ever died, and a junior officer comes to you and he says to you, this junior policeman comes to you, "Lieutenant, we turned this thing two or three times and the person is dead", would you have questioned it?

CHARLES ALFRED ZEELIE: I would not have questioned it.

MR RAUTENBACH: It wouldn't have occurred to you that perhaps this person is lying to you, isn't that one of the possibilities that you would consider?

CHARLES ALFRED ZEELIE: If I knew the person and he came to me and he told me, "I turned this thing once or twice and the man
died", then I would not really doubt him directly, because he comes to me with a problem.   If he came to me and told me, "I tortured this person until he died and now I have a problem", then it is a different case.   I cannot think that at that stage that I would really doubt him, because he comes to me with a problem and he states it.

MR RAUTENBACH: Mr Zeelie, you would have been surprised, because it had never happened before, isn't that so?

CHARLES ALFRED ZEELIE: I didn't say that I would not be surprised, I said I would not have doubted him.   I would have asked him, "Are you sure the man didn't die because of a heart attack?", that is what I said.

MR RAUTENBACH: And if he came to you and he said, "We turned this machine for five minutes and he then died", that would not have surprised you?

CHARLES ALFRED ZEELIE: Then I would have told him, "I think you went too far", because then he would have given me the reason.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Rautenbach, when you come to a convenient stage, we can adjourn at any time, tell me if it's convenient for you at a point where you're not ...(intervention).

MR RAUTENBACH: Yes, okay, I think this is a convenient stage, it is (indistinct), I see.   Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: We'll then adjourn the matter until tomorrow morning.   Will half past nine, as before, half past nine tomorrow morning, and I wonder if we could please just ask the legal representatives quickly to see us in the office (indistinct).
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
Amnesty Hearings — Pretoria — UNKNOWN

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I have answered the question, Mr Chairman.

GEORGE BIZOS: Do you say that the acts enumerated in the annexure that you referred to, were committed on behalf of the Conservative Party, yes or no?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes.

GEORGE BIZOS: We will examine them.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Bizos, maybe at an appropriate time.

GEORGE BIZOS: That will be so.

CHAIRPERSON: It will be convenient at this stage, for reasons explained ...

GEORGE BIZOS: We accept that.

CHAIRPERSON: The Committee will now adjourn until ten o'clock on Monday morning.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
Amnesty Hearings — Pretoria — UNKNOWN

MR STEENKAMP: Yes sir.  She was officially notified also on the 30th January 1998.  I spoke to her recently, 10 days ago, she's still ill and she indicated to me and I also spoke to her attorney last Friday, that she's not willing to attend this hearing at all because of her medical condition but she doesn't want to have any interest in this hearing at all.  So except maybe for the CP sir, which we didn't know of, all other relevant parties were notified.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, well I think with regard to the CP the evidence implicating them was clearly hearsay evidence.

MR STEENKAMP: Yes sir.

CHAIRPERSON: I don't know if we will really rely on that.

MR STEENKAMP: Yes sir.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Steenkamp is there going to any other evidence?

MR STEENKAMP: No sir, I'm not calling any witnesses at this stage from my side.  Thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mostert, are you in a position to address the panel now or would you need some time to prepare yourself?

MR MOSTERT: I would like to request that I be given some time to prepare myself in writing and I would also request a copy of the record.  Is that possible?

CHAIRPERSON: Would it be possible Mr Mostert to submit your heads or your submissions by Friday this week?  Why I say that is that this panel is here, scheduled to be here until Friday, we are commencing with another application tomorrow which unfortunately we were not in a position or it's not possible to bring it forward to today but you will expected to be here until Friday.

MR MOSTERT: I can do that, I'll burn a few candles, no problem.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much and if you have any difficulty if you can just keep in touch with Mr Steenkamp.  Would you be wanting to - if it's on Friday - backup your written submissions with oral submissions or not?

MR MOSTERT: No I don't think that it will be necessary, thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, well as I have mentioned earlier we were not in a position to bring forward tomorrow's application to today for various reasons beyond our control and because there's no further evidence in this application and because Mr Mostert has asked for time to submit his written argument or submissions which will be submitted by Friday, we have to adjourn and we accordingly adjourn until tomorrow.  What time, Mr Steenkamp, would you be ready to start tomorrow morning?

MR STEENKAMP: Sir, if I'm not mistaken the notices is indicating 9 o'clock sir, I think the official time is 9 o'clock, sir.  That's the normal time to start sir, if there's any other difficulties, but I've arranged with the attorneys to be here a bit earlier, but the normal time is arranged for 9 o'clock sir.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I think then from the public's point of view it will be probably - we'd probably start the hearing at about half past nine because we normally have a discussion with the legal representatives prior to a hearing just to see if there's any difficulties or to try to expedite the matter.  But I think we will then adjourn let's say until 9 o'clock although we might well only start at half past nine.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
Amnesty Hearings — Pretoria — UNKNOWN

CHAIRPERSON: Okay.   Thank you, Mr De Bruin.
WITNESS EXCUSED

MR DE KONING: Chairperson, before we adjourn, might I request, for the sake that the second applicant will appear regarding testimony, that you request the prison authorities to bring him here earlier?

CHAIRPERSON: I was just about to do that, because I realised this morning that there was a bit of a problem, I don't know what the nature of it was, but they did come late, despite arrangements having been made by the legal representatives to get them here early.

MR DE KONING: I'd be indebted to you.   Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: What will be a convenient time to start?

MR PRINSLOO: I'm sure nine o'clock, for consultation purposes, would be sufficient, or if we could have roughly an hour, I don't know what time you would wish to start.   Do you want to start ...(intervention).

CHAIRPERSON: Could we try to start at half past nine?

MR DE KONING: Well if we could have him at half past eight, we would be more than happy.   Thank you, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.   Mr Steenkamp, is anybody from the Gevangennisdiens hier?

MR STEENKAMP: Yes, Mr Chairman, there is people from Correctional Service here, I think the people who actually transported him are, all of them are present here.

CHAIRPERSON: Are they here, present here?

MR STEENKAMP: He is sitting down there, sir.

CHAIRPERSON: Is it possible to bring the applicants here before 8:30 tomorrow morning?
INAUDIBLE REPLY IN BACKGROUND

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much.   We'll then adjourn for the hearing to resume at 9:30, or depending on Mr De Koning's consultations, as soon thereafter as is possible, and also Mr Wheeler should also be brought timeously as well please, please if Mr Wheeler could be here by that time as well, at half past eight, thank you, and that the two applicants be brought by the Department of Correctional Services to the venue here by 8:30 tomorrow morning.   Thank you.    We'll then adjourn.

MR DE KONING: Thank you, Mr Chairman.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS