Amnesty Hearings — Pretoria — UNKNOWN

FERDIE HARTZENBERG: I there could be various reasons for doing so, it could have brought his operation into - it could have placed a risk on the carrying out of his operation but as I've said the CP did not approve of this but if - through the deed of Mr Clive Derby-Lewis, we could maintain our liberty we wouldn't have said: "No thanks, we don't want to be free", we would have accepted it.

JUDGE WILSON: Mr Hartzenberg, what ...[inaudible]

INTERPRETER: Microphone?

JUDGE WILSON: ...[inaudible] look at Mr Walus's evidence, is that he says what they anticipated was chaos and civil war breaking out, an almost immediate intervention by the army and the police and thereafter right-wing Afrikaner elements seeking power.  Now, surely if he envisaged something of that nature, he would have discussed it with you so that you and other persons were ready to take action.

FERDIE HARTZENBERG: Well, that didn't happen.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr ...[intervention]

ADV POTGIETER: Sorry, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Derby-Lewis, you talked about the slogan - my apologies, Doctor Hartzenberg, you talked about the slogan of: "The Third Freedom Struggle" and you talked the mobilisation plan which had begun, now in that mobilisation plan was there specific reference to the fact that part of the plan was to murder the political opponents of the Conservative Party?

FERDIE HARTZENBERG: No, Sir.

ADV POTGIETER: Doctor Hartzenberg, just to take the point that Ms Khampepe made a bit further, if Mr Derby-Lewis had approached you before this incident, you or the leadership of the CP would have told him quite clearly that the CP doesn't approve of this kind of conduct and it certainly does not fall within the policy of the Party, would that be correct?

FERDIE HARTZENBERG: Sir, we would probably have acted in the way that Mr Tambo had acted and said: "No, don't do it".

ADV POTGIETER: So in other words I a not talking ex-post facto after having received the gift, I'm talking about beforehand.

FERDIE HARTZENBERG: Yes, I'm saying we would probably have maintained the same point of view, if he'd come to ask we would have taken the same point of view that Mr Tambo had taken with regard to Mr Zondo.

ADV POTGIETER: And under those circumstances - if he had done so, you wouldn't have received that gift which wouldn't been acceptable but which you had to accept?

FERDIE HARTZENBERG: Well, if he had to come and asked us and we had said: "No" and he had done that regardless - which I don't think he would have done, but for his own subjective reasons he preferred not to do it and we accepted - and this often happens in politics, that somebody does something in the heat of the battle, which is contrary to the policy of the Party but we accept that sometimes somebody there involved in what is happening still does this, then you do not reject this person, you accept that he still stands for the same cause and you continue on the road with that person.

ADV POTGIETER: I accept that, thank you.

SISI KHAMPEPE: Just to make a follow-up Doctor Hartzenberg, one can also accept that no member of the CP - particularly because Mr Derby-Lewis was a member of the CP caucus, could make a
decision on his own which impinges on issues of policy without the approval of the Executive Committee of the Party, can we accept that?

FERDIE HARTZENBERG: I would accept that but I would like to say that in a situation where tension runs high, where people are killed around you, where people say - like Mr Hani, that Whites should be killed, where it says parliamentarians should be - where there has been more than one assault on the life of Mr Clive Derby-Lewis, I can understand that he had said: "Now I have to go over to action" to steer this situation on a new course.

CHAIRPERSON: Doctor Hartzenberg, around April 1993 when this had happened, Mr Hani had long ceased engaging in the activities that he had, he was now openly propagating to solve the problems by peaceful means, is that not so?

FERDIE HARTZENBERG: No, Chair, I deny that very strongly, I dispute that strongly because Mr Hani at that stage was busy establishing this army which had to serve as a backdoor - that should negotiations not go according to plan, those 10.000 people would be deployed.
	And if Mr Hani had come to new insights, then it was in such a way that the world was not aware of this because Mr Tambo repudiated him shortly before regarding statements he had made which actually jeopardised the negotiation process and if one were to consider all these facts, then Mr Hani was still dedicated to a violent take-over.

CHAIRPERSON: Is there any re-examination?

MS VAN DER WALT: Mr Chair, I haven't had the opportunity - if I could just ask a question or two?
	Doctor Hartzenberg, you testified yesterday or gave evidence with regard to a motion of the Conservative Party which was accepted regarding the case of Mr Derby-Lewis, this motion which you referred to, was that accepted on 4 October 1997 or which was started then?

FERDIE HARTZENBERG: Yes, this motion was accepted by a CP Congress on that date, I have a copy of the motion here.

MS VAN DER WALT: I am showing a signed motion, is that it?

FERDIE HARTZENBERG: Yes, this is the signed version, that is the correct motion.

MS VAN DER WALT: Mr Chair, I would like permission to hand this up as A(f), it is signed by the Secretary of the CP as dated and this is the motion referred to by the witness.   Thank you Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Mr Prinsloo?

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Chair, I have a copy which I would like to discuss with the applicant - to which my attention had been drawn, could we ask for a short adjournment as it is time for tea, then I can take up this issue with him?

CHAIRPERSON: Well, it isn't actually time for tea but I want to know whether you can't proceed with whatever else you have to deal with in re-examination?

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Chair, I have to clarify this matter, there is no other matter.

CHAIRPERSON: Is this some matter that arose as a result of the questioning by Mr Bizos?

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Chairman, I haven't spoken to him, he just given me an indication that he wants to say something to me.

CHAIRPERSON: I beg your pardon.

MR PRINSLOO: Yes, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well, we'll take an adjournment at this stage and resume in 15 minutes.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
ON RESUMPTION

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Hartzenberg, you're still under oath.

FERDIE HARTZENBERG: (s.u.o.)

MR PRINSLOO: Thank you Honourable Chair, for you your patience and the adjournment.
	Doctor Hartzenberg, you testified under cross-examination by Mr Bizos, that the negotiations at Kempton Park - from the word go, 
was to doomed to failure as far as your Party saw it.

FERDIE HARTZENBERG: Yes, I said that for a careful observer, it would be clear that it was actually a farce but we gave negotiations a chance and we gave it the benefit of the doubt because a careful observer would - from the word go, have noticed that it wouldn't be successful for us.

MR PRINSLOO: Did any of the parties who were involved in the negotiations have a double agenda, one of negotiation and on the other hand violence?

FERDIE HARTZENBERG: Yes, we accepted that and we realised that if we looked at the violence that occurred and the people who were killed during that period, this is proof that parties who were involved in the negotiations also used other actions - mass actions and violence, to achieve their goals.
	And I think it is clear that after the ANC had failed in CODESSA, it said it would go over to violence - it would start with violence, and this actually led to the Record of Understanding and this is where the final negotiations were contained.

MR PRINSLOO: Could there have been people in the CP who might have thought that there were two options, one of violence and one of negotiation - in the light of the circumstances and the climate which prevailed at the time?