Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1999-10-08

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Prior?

ADV PRIOR: Mr Chairman, I don't at this stage have any specific witness in mind.  There are a few loose ends dealing with statistics and other information that if there's no agreement thereto, I might have to lead some evidence.  In principle I have no objection to the proposal of Mr Dehal, save to possible say while Mr Lecordier is here, he could properly use the ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Use the time here rather than battling with, as you said you have in the past, the prison authorities in prison.

MR DEHAL: I'm indebted to you.  In fact we managed to get five minutes yesterday afternoon and then the prison authorities vehicle arrived and they were husked away.  I presume if we adjourn at about this time or shortly hereafter, I'd be able to get the time.  Remember it's  a Friday and ...(intervention)

JUDGE PILLAY: Well perhaps you can have longer because 4 o'clock seems to be significant to prisons.

MR DEHAL: I agree.  Except today is Friday and I think the prisons have something about Friday and closing early as well.

CHAIRPERSON: In any event, I'm sure an arrangement can be made because we are in the middle of the hearing and we don't need their red tape or bureaucracy or whatever to interrupt it, there must be a little bit of flexibility.

ADV PRIOR: Then I'd propose that if the Panel made a ruling in a sense, that Mr Lecordier be available for the rest of today until whatever time to consult.

CHAIRPERSON: Certainly, I'd go along with that, I think that would be the most convenient.  Because I presume Mr Dehal, you've reserved the day for this matter.  Mr Lecordier is here, it's probably a better situation, better circumstances to consult in in this environment rather than in prison.  I would therefore direct that you be given an opportunity to consult with Mr Lecordier at least up until 4 o'clock in the afternoon.

MR DEHAL: I'm indebted, Mr Chairperson.

ADV PRIOR: Mr Chairman, sorry, there's one other matter.  Whilst in the past we've allowed statements to be read out, it's also proper I think that copies of those statements be circulated, particularly through the Evidence Leader, that we can assess the information in that statement before it's actually just read out onto the record without any particular warning.

CHAIRPERSON: What do you mean "to assess"?

ADV PRIOR: ...(inaudible) to know whether that information is going to assist the hearing or contribute to the applications serving before you.

CHAIRPERSON: What do you mean, statements from applicants?

ADV PRIOR: It was indicated that Mr Derek McBride's statement was going to be read out, we don't know what it says ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Oh sorry, I thought you meant like Exhibits P, Q and R, which is basically the evidence that they're leading.

ADV PRIOR: No, I'm referring to persons not appearing before the Committee and wish to have statements read out to them.  I'm simply asking Mr Dehal that we have sight of those before that stage, or ample sight so that we can also consider what information they seek to place before the Committee.

MR DEHAL: I have no difficulty with that, Mr Chairperson.  My only difficulty is, I'm waiting for it to be finalised and properly signed etc.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Dehal.  What I'd suggest now is perhaps we can take an adjournment, I see it's nearly tea time.  Mr Richard, you can speak with your clients, find out if anyone wishes to give any evidence now or make a statement, they may do so.  If they prefer to do so later, after the evidence has been led by all the applicants, then that is quite acceptable.  You can also indicate to them that the victims have a choice, they can either decide to give evidence, take the oath, in which event the other legal representatives will be given an opportunity to put questions if they want, or else to just come and make a statement as such, in which event they'll just make their statement without being subjected to questioning.

MR RICHARD: I will convey they have the options of giving evidence under oath and being questioned, or making an ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: A statement or whatever.

MR RICHARD: What I was going to add on, and it's for the benefit of the victims as well, there is a process going on and I would like the opportunity right now to discuss with them the further continuation of what is afoot.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you very much, Mr Richard.  So at this stage we'll take the an adjournment and then if you can just let us know what's going to happen, then we'll come in very briefly.  If nothing further is going to happen, if there's not going to be any statements or evidence, then I will formally postpone the matter to Monday, but we'll come in and do that here or else we'll come back to hear evidence or a statement, whatever the situation.  Thank you.  We'll now take the tea adjournment.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
ON RESUMPTION

ADV PRIOR: Mr Richard has asked to be excused.  He's with the victims at the moment.  What's been decided is simply we're going to adjourn now, just the adjournment, and he's asked to be excused.  I said I would convey anything that arose here.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you, Mr Prior.  So then is it agreed we'll adjourn until Monday when we expect the evidence of Mr Lecordier to be proceeded with.

MR DEHAL: Correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MR VAN DEN BERG: Mr Chairperson, before you proceed.  Mr Berger and I had raised with you in chambers yesterday whether we might be excused.  The arrangement I have with Mr Prior is that this matter will be argued on Wednesday and we ask that we might be excused until then.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR VAN DEN BERG: ...(inaudible - no microphone)

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I don't know how long it's going to take, but if it's going to be Wednesday, that would be fine.

JUDGE PILLAY: Perhaps you'd better prepare for Tuesday also.  I don't see Mr Lecordier being longer than the day.

CHAIRPERSON: But we don't know whether or not there's going to be any witnesses or victims.  What happens if Mr Lecordier's finished, let's say by lunchtime or whatever, you know if evidence is finished early?

ADV PRIOR: Mr Chairman, my sense of it is that Mr Lecordier plus whoever might give evidence after, will take a day, which leaves us basically a day, Tuesday, to consider all the evidence, prepare Heads of Argument and argue the matter.  Obviously I'm open, if the Committee says we do it on - I'm just thinking of the preparation time, that one's not rushed.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Prior, there's no other witness besides any victims that might be giving a statement or evidence?

ADV PRIOR: I'm not anticipating it at this stage.  Well, as I indicated we're still getting the list and that information, but I'm sure we can, between the parties, come to some arrangement as to background information.  No, so from the Commission's side I don't intend calling anybody, it's just the victims who are presently engaged with ... I understand from Mr Richard, and I was with them at the adjournment, that several of them wanted to address the Committee and give evidence.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.  Mr van den Berg, would it be possible that if there was some sort of communication with you on Monday, that you could be here Tuesday afternoon sort of thing?

MR VAN DEN BERG: Yes certainly, Mr Chairperson, we would be ready to argue as soon as whatever statements and evidence has been adduced on behalf of the victims, be that Monday afternoon or Tuesday morning. We're in your hands.