Amnesty Hearings — Port Elizabeth — UNKNOWN

ADV NYOKA: You said that there will be no reason why you will omit the assault if you killed - if you murdered the three, there will be no reason for you to omit the assault, not so?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: That is correct.

ADV NYOKA: I put it to you that you are trying to make the entire scenario to be humane in that they were taken nicely, interrogated, supplied the ...[indistinct] and then killed ...[indistinct] because some of you are in employment currently.  We know that Mr van Zyl is busy with the humanitarian landmine sweeping, Mr Lotz is in a security company.  If you are asked what you did it would be very, very patriotic to say: "I did this killing in the interest of my country" but look at how humane I did it, I didn't have to hit or stamp on people - for future employment prospects.

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: No.

ADV NYOKA: I'm putting to you, that is the reason why the assault is being omitted.

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: No.

ADV NYOKA: In that "Bosberaad" about strategy to be adopted towards the TRC process, there was also a strategy about how to tackle this particular issue that you were going to omit - assault.

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: No, I didn't attend the "Bosberaad", I don't know which one you refer to.

ADV NYOKA: I'm referring to the one where you discussed your statements which are so similar and what you had to put in those statements.

CHAIRPERSON: I think Mr Nyoka, he says: "No", he has said: "No" - he's denying that that is the reason why he left the assault.

ADV NYOKA: On arriving at Post Chalmers, it was stated that the so-called Askaris were guarding the activists in the garage ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, since you have reached a point where we can conveniently adjourn until 11 o'clock.

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: Thank you Sir.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
ON RESUMPTION

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nieuwoudt, you are still under oath.

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEWOUDT: (s.u.o.)

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nyoka, you may continue.

ADV NYOKA: (cont)
	With regard to your written statement you said:
"Before the three Pebco leaders were eliminated you wanted to interrogate them about firstly, their regular visits to Lesotho and secondly, their implementation of the: "M-Plan" and that you started with Mr Godolozi and then the remaining two one by one"
Not so?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: Yes, that is the case.

ADV NYOKA: So when you said in your oral evidence you asked them about their activities, you are referring about these two particular instances or issues?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: Yes.

ADV NYOKA: Did you not ask Mr Hashe about the whereabouts of his children, one in Lesotho and the other one married to the then - to Mr Popu Molefi before he became Premier of North West?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: I had knowledge of that, I asked him about that and also that Gumba Pankidobo who had an affair with Dumisa.

ADV NYOKA: Is it correct that you began the interrogation in jest by suggesting that the activists love money and which had led to their arrest and you asked Mr Hashe where he got his money from and to which he replied he was a vegetable vendor and a business - shebeen owner?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: I didn't ask him that, I know Mr Hashe from 1975 and I know that he is a vegetable vendor.

ADV NYOKA: Is it not correct that in you written statement you said
"On the arrival of the three leaders they were taken to the garage and that you were in the house and they were taken one by one and the Askaris were guarding them at the garage whilst the other members - security branch, were moving in and out"

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: Yes, that is how I put it.

ADV NYOKA: So if that is the case then, the Askaris must have been stationed in the garage and the people who were doing the in and out must be the other security members, not so?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: Yes, but I didn't precisely observe what each one was doing because it wasn't of any importance to me.

ADV NYOKA: And in fact it was going to flow from their mandate to abduct, to continue guarding them where they were stationed and that is in the garage, not so? - the Askaris mandate.

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: Yes.

ADV NYOKA: If that is the case and the Askaris were in the garage, how could Mr Mamasela have known what was being said about the daughters of Mr Hashe - about his businesses, if he was in the garage because I would assume that he will not hear anything?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: As I've said, he could have heard it from other exiles whom they interrogated, he could have received it there.  They weren't permanently in the presence of the detainees, they moved in and out so there were many ways in which you could get the information.

ADV NYOKA: And Mr van Zyl stated that the mandate of the Askaris was just to abduct - when they participated in the interrogation, why did you not stop them and say or Mr van Zyl stop them and say: "Look this is where the line ends for you, just guard them, don't say anything"?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: I don't think that they were pursay involved with the interrogation as I've said in my testimony.

ADV NYOKA: And in your statement you also said that - you further said that, the Askaris role in the former Eastern Province was to quote
"The identification and collection of information around terrorism"
Unquote.
And Mr Venter has stated that it had been requested that his Askaris assisted the security branch in the Pebco 3 with regard to further interrogation and investigation, so they must have been present when you were interrogating them - consistent their mandate didn't come in P.E., not so?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: As I said that they moved in and out during the interview that I held with the Pebco members but the purpose wasn't to be that.

ADV NYOKA: If they were doing the in's and out's, it's strange for one person to recite exactly what happened up to the assault if he was moving and out - he was not stationed at the place where the interrogation was taking place.

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: I have said it several times, there was no assault.

ADV NYOKA: Mr Mamasela further said that you were quoting frequently from the Bible.

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: I know of two instances where I quoted from the Bible and I can just briefly refer to those two instances and it was not in this instance, the first one was with my case and I refer you to my application, page 98
"The State versus Sakkie Makuzoma"
He's the Director of Spoornet.  It was the Black Power theology, it was one the psalms being quoted and I referred them to Roman 13, that they had to obey the laws of the country and also the Government of the day as the present Government has also been put there by God.  
	And then the second instance where I dealt with the Bible and the second instance where I had a discussion with detainees with regard to the Bible was in the Young Christian Workers who were used by the Roman Catholic Church and the terminology that they usually used was:  "See, judge and act".  They see the opportunity or the problem and then they use the Bible to verify it and those are the only two instances where I refer to the Bible.  
	So, I'm at the assumption that Mamasela must have talked to some of the detainees or to the family - in that instance I never referred to the Bible, that is my explanation.

ADV NYOKA: Are you therefore saying that he was dramatising by saying that you were quoting from the Bible?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: Yes.

ADV NYOKA: I wonder why he would say that, it would not help his case?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: I don't know, I don't know what's going on in his mind but that's the only explanation I can give.  He must have talked to members of the organisation during his press conference and also on television.