Amnesty Hearings — Bloemfontein — 1998-01-20

CHAIRPERSON: There is an entry which doesn't refer to being in uniform.  If you look at page 155,  entry number 92 there is a complaint there that Constable Ngo left his residence without permission and took himself off duty at two o'clock in the afternoon.  Have you got that entry?

ADV MEMANI: I've got that entry My Lord.

CHAIRPERSON: And then if you look at the next page, page 156, entry number 102, there is an entry that Constable Ngo left the single quarters for Unit 19 to explain to Lieutenant Haggard, to speak to Lieutenant Haggard in connection with his absence from duty on the two days of the 18th and 19th of July.

ADV MEMANI: I've seen that My Lord.

CHAIRPERSON: There you, when he was absent from duty, you didn't deal with him, he was dealt with by lieutenant Haggard of Unit 19, is that the position?

UNKNOWN: I put in the statement those who finalised the Haggard and them.

CHAIRPERSON: There are other entries aren't there that he had to go and report to Lieutenant Haggard on other occasions, hadn't he?

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, I am not sure that the witness, Mr Memani wanted to interrupt and I saw the witness looking at Mr Memani.  I am not sure that the witness understands that he has to answer the question.  Perhaps we can just clear that up.

CHAIRPERSON: Did Mr Ngo have to go and report to Lieutenant Haggard is it, on another occasion or other occasions?

UNKNOWN: That is not so.

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: You don't want to say I don't remember?

UNKNOWN: I would not remember, I think he went many times to Unit 19 when he was forced by reasons to go there, but I won't be in a position to tell whether he just went to Haggard.

ADV MEMANI: May I proceed My Lord?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

ADV MEMANI: Thank you My Lord.  Do you know a person who was then Warrant Officer Maritz, in 1988, of Unit 19?

UNKNOWN: I do not know him.

ADV MEMANI: Now, that person must have spoken to you.  If you have a look at page 135, entry number 47, dated 19 June.

UNKNOWN: Page what?

ADV MEMANI: It is page 135.

CHAIRPERSON: Of the second volume?

ADV MEMANI: Yes, My Lord.  This is the volume starting from page 118.
	That entry is signed by you and counter signed by Ngo and it says that Ngo must go and report at Unit 19 before twelve o'clock and he must report to Warrant Officer Maritz, and he must be in uniform.

UNKNOWN: I see that.  I have written that.

ADV MEMANI: Do you know why he had to report?

UNKNOWN: I don't remember now, though I wrote that entry and that he should wear uniform, I don't remember for what purpose.

ADV MEMANI: I put it to you that Mr Ngo was being probably paraded for his transfer on this day to Security Branch.  Do you have any comment?

CHAIRPERSON: Isn't it more likely to have been for his absence without leave, if you look at the previous page?  Page 134, entry 45, single quarters visited by this witness and he found that Constable Ngo wasn't in his room.  He was also supposed to be on duty at the same time.
	The next entry, 46, Constable Ngo reported back to his quarters and said that he had been to court in KwaNdabele.

ADV MEMANI: It is a matter for argument My Lord.

CHAIRPERSON: He couldn't say what is the relevant MR, the matter is going to be investigated.  And then on the next page they sent him off.

ADV MEMANI: My Lord, there is also an entry on the 20th of July 1988, at page 156, entry number 102.  There Mr Ngo is being summoned to explain his absence to Lieutenant Haggard, that is the parade I associate with the absence from duty.

CHAIRPERSON: That is the one I read to him.  This is in July.

ADV MEMANI: Yes, My Lord, and I am saying that he had been absent from duty and he said he was going to court.  I am saying he was being paraded now on the ...

CHAIRPERSON: If you looked at the day before, he was absent from duty on the Monday, he was paraded on the Wednesday.

ADV MEMANI: But My Lord, he was not absent from duty again from the day when he went, when he was absent until now, he goes to, he then goes to Haggard.

CHAIRPERSON: If you look at entry number 92 on Monday the 18th, this witness found that everything was in order except that Constable Ngo had left his place of residence without permission and taken himself off duty without leave.  That was on the Monday it was discovered and on the Wednesday he was sent to Haggard.
	And then we have on the previous occasion that he has discovered that he has been off duty, and he was sent to Maritz.

ADV MEMANI: Now, Mr Khoja, after the 20th of July 1988, you did not work with Mr Ngo?

UNKNOWN: I would not remember except just looking on the entry book.  I found that that is true.

CHAIRPERSON: We will take the adjournment when you come to a convenient stage.

ADV MEMANI: It is a convenient stage, My Lord.  It is a convenient stage.

CHAIRPERSON: We will take half an hour adjournment.
COMMISSION ADJOURNS

ADV MEMANI: As the Chair pleases.  Mr Khoja, there is an entry which unfortunately was not flagged and I will give the reference tomorrow.  That entry records that Mr Ngo left the barracks with members of the Security Branch and my instructions are that Mr Ngo was leaving with those members of the Security Branch because he was a member of the Security Branch.

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, I want to ask to see that entry.  I may say Mr Chairman, that previously when we led the evidence and maybe I can do this now, there were one or two entries which we missed, which we told Mr Memani about last time.
	I think the one entry was one of the visits to Captain Loots which I didn't lead evidence about, but which we told Mr Memani about, but this entry I am not sure about Mr Chairman.  I may have missed it, but I can't remember that I saw such an entry.

CHAIRPERSON: I am afraid, I don't remember such an entry either.  Can you say approximately when you say this happened?

ADV MEMANI: I think it is one of the later entries in the second occurrence book, My Lord.  But My Lord, it is not necessary to delay the proceedings  by looking for the entry, it is one of many entries in the line which tend to show that he worked with the Security Branch and I am saying that I will look for the entry overnight, and I will produce it.
	And if that entry is not there, I will also come back and say I am sorry, I was mistaken, that entry is not there.  I don't see the reason why we should delay these proceedings for that.

CHAIRPERSON: You can't put it to a witness and you confuse the witness, and then you come tomorrow and say oh, there wasn't such an entry.  That is what the objection is.
	If the entry is there, I think as I understand it, it will be accepted any entry in the occurrence book will be accepted as a genuine entry, so you can use it in argument.

ADV MEMANI: There is no risk of confusing the witness here, My Lord, nothing was going to be said about the fact that there is that entry, and that is all.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well.

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, I still persist in the objection.  My Lord, what the witness is requested to testify about now, is probably speculation about something that he doesn't know about, based on an entry in a book that he hasn't seen and that we are not sure exists.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, the book he has seen, it is his occurrence book.  He says he is familiar with it, but it is correct, there may not be such an entry or it may say something slightly different.  I don't think it is right Mr Memani if we are going to put it to the witness as there being such an entry if you cannot refer to the entry.

ADV MEMANI: Now, Mr Khoja, when a policeman is issued with a firearm, that firearm is recorded in the occurrence book, isn't it?

UNKNOWN: That is correct.

ADV MEMANI: And a supervising officer has got a duty to regularly inspect the firearm, if the officer doesn't hand it in at the end of the shift?

UNKNOWN: That is correct.

ADV MEMANI: And that procedure is also recorded in the occurrence book?