Amnesty Hearings — Cape Town — 2000-06-22

MR WILLIAMS: Where you see the name Hockey for the third time.

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: Hockey?

MR WILLIAMS: Ja, "Was that according to Calla Botha...".

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: Yes.

MR WILLIAMS: Ja, can you just read that now?
MR BURGER
"Was that according to Calla Botha for the information that was provided to him?  Calla Botha says that according to the information that Anton Roskam was the Chairperson of the Wits SRC and was also a member of Jodac at the time.  Sorry, what was that last organisation?
		Jodac, Mr Chairperson. 
		Is that the Johannesburg Democratic Action Committee?
		Something to that effect.  A community based organisation.  This doesn't ring any bells.
		As far as I saw it in the documentation, yes and I think this is something that would have to be asked from the Regional Manager, if there was a project to burn out the car of this Jeffrey."

MR WILLIAMS: Ja, it should have read Anton, it's a mistake.
MR BURGER
"Would it have been a requirement for you to give authority for such a project?
		That is correct, it should have been like that.
		So are you saying that you have no knowledge of this project?
		No, if I remember correctly, I read it in the documentation and I imagine years ago I read about it in the newspapers, but it is not a project that was officially authorised by me, there could be an interpretation on Regional Level, but the Regional Manager can answer that question."

MR WILLIAMS: Can you just stop there?  Would you agree with me that according to this record, the testimony of Mr Verster was that he did not authorise this project?

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: It seems to me that he's not sure, but I will testify that he did and if you read the last paragraph, he said:  "If I remember correctly ...", so here he's relying on his memory, "Ask the Regional Manager", on the other hand.

MR WILLIAMS: No, he's referring to the documents.   "I read it in the documents, if he remembers correctly", that refers to that.

MR LAX: He then says, Mr Burger, he says:  "But it was not a project that was officially authorised by me".  He then says:  "It could have been interpreted at Regional level but the Regional Manager", that's yourself, "can answer that."

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: No, Mr Verster authorised it.

MR WESSELS: Mr Chairman, may I draw your attention to page 590?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.  590.  519 or ...?

MR WESSELS: 590.

CHAIRPERSON: 590.  Yes.  Is this talking about the Roskam thing?

MR WESSELS: Can I read it to you?

CHAIRPERSON: Is this,  "I cannot remember that Mr Chairperson", is that what you want, is that the section?

MR WESSELS: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: "I cannot remember that Mr Chairperson, but it is in any case not a gross human rights violation, that whole incident as I understood it, but I cannot remember that incident at all, there were many projects."  But does that relate to the Roskam?  I'm trying to find ...

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: Mr Chairperson,

CHAIRPERSON: Yes?

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: Paragraph 2.

MR WESSELS: Yes, on page 589, the last paragraph, it seems as if ...(indistinct)

CHAIRPERSON: Oh yes.

MR LAX: I think the other relevant portion, just so we're clear on the record in presenting a fair picture is this one here where he says:  "I cannot remember it Chairperson, I think that I also stated it like that and I accept that it could possibly have happened, but I don't remember such a presentation or submission.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, so then we've got the evidence of Mr Verster where he says he doesn't remember and the evidence now of Mr Burger who says it was an authorised project.

MR WILLIAMS: Thank you Mr Chairperson.  Mr Burger, who normally accounted for expenditure after a particular project?  For example, if the project of Mr Evans would have been successful and Peaches was paid R15 000, who would have done the accounting for that project?

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: The Budget gets was drawn up before the project was approved and then there was a financial file and a project file and there would be cross-references in those two and as soon as the operation was successfully completed, those funds would be channelled.

MR WILLIAMS: But who does the, what do you call "verrekening"?

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: That would be done by the member and it's submitted to the co-ordinator and myself and then to the financial.

MR WILLIAMS: Was that always the case?

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: Yes.

MR WILLIAMS: Now you've heard Mr van Zyl's testimony and it was also in some of the statement here that as far as the ELC is concerned, Early Learning Centre, that you were asked to do the accounting in that instance, now was that correct?

MR BERGER: That I was asked?

MR WILLIAMS: Ja to do the accounting?

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: No, I didn't do the accounting.

MR WILLIAMS: In fact that statement was that you would do this accounting to Nick.

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: Nick was at that stage the co-ordinator.  The co-ordinator and the member would then do this accounting or clearing and then it would go to Verster.

MR WILLIAMS: So are you saying that Mr van Zyl did the accounting of the particular incident?

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: Yes.  He would deal with the clearing of this amount and the accounting and the co-ordinator who was at that stage Nick.

MR WILLIAMS: But you had insight.

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: No, it was Mr Basson, I'm confused.

MR WILLIAMS: But you would have had insight into the statement because it had to go through you, not so?

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: Yes.

MR WILLIAMS: Now in terms of the ELC project, what were your observations?  What is the amount that was expended for this project?

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: I think we've already heard that, but I know it was R30 000 plus then the expenditure, the expenses relating to the travel and accommodation and so on.

MR WILLIAMS: Is this what you ...(indistinct)

CHAIRPERSON: Disbursements, R30 000 plus cost of disbursements?

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: That's correct.

MR WILLIAMS: Now is this what you in fact saw on the accounting statement?

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: I can't remember today but it should have been or would have been submitted as such.

MR WILLIAM: so then the allegation that you took R5 000 for yourself would then be incorrect, not so?

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: Yes.

MR WILLIAMS: Someone must be lying?

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you hand money over to Mr van Zyl?

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: Yes, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: R30 000?

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: Yes, Sir.

MR WILLIAMS: And did he give any money back to you?

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: No.

MR WILLIAMS: So he kept all the money, whatever you handed to him, he kept all the money, is that your testimony?

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: Yes.

MR WILLIAMS: We're pressed for time and I'm ...

CHAIRPERSON: You can carry on, I think if we could try to perhaps finish Mr Burger this afternoon would be better.

MR WILLIAMS: Now Mr Burger, I'm not going to go into detail but there are innuendoes in statements that you may have misappropriated funds and I just want you to briefly comment on it.  In the statement of Mr Botha in Bundle B on page 3 he says that an amount of R70 000 was supposed to be used for an import and export business, but according to him, that money was never used for that purpose and the suspicion arose in the cell that you might have misappropriated those funds, do you want to comment on that?

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: R70 000, that was for what?  For an import/export business?  It's the first time I've heard of that.

MR WILLIAMS: Should we quickly look at the statement?

CHAIRPERSON: Bundle B, page 3, right in the middle.  In the middle of the page, statement by Carl Botha, dated 12th of December 89.