Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — 1998-06-10

MS VAN DER WALT: Thank you.  Mr Kloppers the question that was asked to you regarding EXHIBIT 6 was that you had the opportunity or the privilege that you and the other applicants had the same legal team and that Mr Van der Schyff made his application alone.  Is that correct, that was the question?

MR KLOPPERS: That was the question yes Mr Chairperson.

MS VAN DER WALT: Then when Mr Van der Schyff made his application in Johannesburg, were you in Leeukop then?

MR KLOPPERS: I think during that time I was in Pretoria Maximum, hospitals and Leeukop.  I cannot say with precision where I was.

MS VAN DER WALT: Did you have any contact with him when he made his first amnesty application that he amended today, did
you have any contact from them?

MR KLOPPERS: That is correct yes.  In the beginning we did have contact with each other.

MS VAN DER WALT: Now did you say to him what he had to write or did he fill in his own amnesty application?

MR KLOPPERS: All the applicants filled in his own application form and wanted to decide for themselves what they wanted to say.

MS VAN DER WALT: This warning, EXHIBIT 6, this is about negotiations.  Did this warning about the negotiations have anything to do with your amnesty application.  Did it have anything to do with that?

MR KLOPPERS: No nothing, except for the fact that it confirms that the Generals in Staff admitted him for what he was, as leader of the group and for what he stood and that is why the copies also went to headquarters.

MS VAN DER WALT: Do I understand you correctly that in this letter at that stage, there was negotiations by the AWB and other organisations regarding your amnesty?

MR KLOPPERS: It was said to us that there were negotiations, definitely not from the AWB side but from Constand Viljoen's side that is why the amnesty or the date for application was moved.

MS VAN DER WALT: Thank you Mr Chairperson no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MRS VAN DER WALT

MR PRINSLOO: Thank you Chairperson.  I would just like to ask a question about the negotiations with your permission Chairperson.  Mr Kloppers, what negotiations are you referring to in this letter.  Who undertook negotiations and what for?

MR KLOPPERS: These negotiations were aimed at moving the amnesty dates, the date was 5th of December 1993 and our attack took place on the 12th of December 1993 and that's why we fell outside the ambit of the cutoff date.  We were waiting for the negotiations which occurred and we asked that the amnesty date be shifted to May 1994 so that we could also be included.  We didn't want to upset the negotiations.  Various people led the negotiations such as a number of right wing organisations, Constand Viljoen as well as the Conservative Party.  All of these organisations put their positions to Minister Dullah Omar and President Mandela, I can't say exactly who was involved with these negotiations.

MR PRINSLOO: Thank you Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: But by amnesty is he referring to that other thing?  That thing that used to be there before amnesty, Indemnity, because I suppose he is talking about Indemnity because this letter was written in June 1995 before the whole question of amnesty came into existence, before the Act.

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Chairman with respect, at that stage there was already a amnesty date, a cutoff date and that date was not relevant to these applicants.  So he (indistinct).  Mr Chairman the initial cutoff date, these applicants were outside that date at that stage and what I understand the applicant to say at this stage, they were in negotiations in order to shift the date so that they would also fall inside the amnesty legislation which was subsequently done.  At that stage they didn't qualify for amnesty.  Thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: I don't think - well I thought in June 1995 nobody could have negotiated about shifting the date, the expiry date or the closing date for amnesty.  I thought they would only have been talking about the closing date for Indemnity.

MR PRINSLOO: As I understood it Mr Chairman initially there was a cutoff date for amnesty, there was indeed an amnesty legislation and subsequent to that the date was shifted to the 10th of May.

CHAIRPERSON: We are at cross (indistinct).  It doesn't matter.  But I thought when the witness speaks of making negotiations in here, it would have been because the letter was written in June 1995, I don't know, I may be wrong, it doesn't matter.

MR MALAN: Chair it may be important to the witness to consider his answer because the date that this letter was  written, the legislation was not yet adopted and at that stage there was no discussion about a specific extension and negotiations about an extension, to the best of my knowledge, relating to legislation on the table as Harry has just said.

MR PRINSLOO: Chairperson the cutoff date for amnesty was amended on the 6th of December 1996 and moved ahead to the 10th of May 1994 and that is why I'm referring to negotiations in that letter, but the point which I wanted to make to you was that at that stage in June, legislation did not exist about the process, let alone the extension of the cutoff date.  I would just like you to be very clear about that matter.

MR KNOETZE: I have a copy of the Act in front of me, that is Act 34 of 95, Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act.  That act is actually dated the 26th of July 1995, so that is when it went through Parliament which means there must have been some discussion prior to that.

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Chairman I may also place on record that at some stage we accompanied General Viljoen and we had discussion with President Nelson Mandela with regard to shifting the date to the 10th of May.  And it may be that date, I'm not sure when that visit took place.  We can ascertain that Mr Chairman.

MR DREYER: Mr Chairman may I just put the following on record.  This last letter EXHIBIT 6 was not made available to me earlier and it's clear from that there's reference in that letter to certain discussions having taken place apparently with General J.L. Oelofse.  I haven't had the opportunity to obtain instructions on that, whether that was in fact so and I do not want to delay the proceedings unnecessarily, I just want to place it on record that at this stage I'm not in a position to make any comment to this witness or to the committee in that respect and I just reserve the right when I have taken such instruction, to do so.  As the court pleases.

CHAIRPERSON: When next you feel that you need to be given the opportunity to put questions to this witness in relation to this letter, you'll make an application.

MR DREYER: As it pleases Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Because once more I'm not sure that your client is here.  It seems your client is not here?

MR DREYER: No Mr Chairman, he's not here today.

CHAIRPERSON: And if he had been here he would be in a position to give you instructions straight away and I'm not  so sure whether we should keep on putting things away because your client is not here to give you instructions, but that is by the way.  You'll make your application when next you feel that you want
questions to be put to the witness.

MR DREYER: I take note Mr Chairman.

MR MALAN: Chairman just before you move on, may I just ask Mr Kloppers.  A question was put to him about Mr Van der Schyff's application having been prepared independently of the others.  I heard your answer to that being that:  No, each of the applicants could by themselves or for themselves decide - I beg your pardon I guess I could speak Afrikaans - you said that every person could decide for himself what he wanted to say?

MR KLOPPERS: That's correct.

MR MALAN: But isn't it true that all the other applications are verbally true, apart from those who were speaking or not speaking.  You've studied each one of them?

MR KLOPPERS: That's correct.