Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1998-11-12

MR VISSER: Let us deal with Mr Visagie.  It might be an appropriate time Mr Chairman to place on record, Mr Visagie is not in the country, he is in America.  He's not able to attend these hearings although he has made application for amnesty.  His application is on the basis that he was aware that the vehicle that he was asked to prepare, as it were, was for the kidnapping of Zandile, or at least a person, the unlawful kidnapping of a person.  I believe it's of Zandile itself.  I'm referring to page 86.  Yes, indeed it refers to her personally, Mr Chairman, I'm reminded.  It's page 86 of the same bundle, bundle 2.  You will see that the bottom of the page he says that he had knowledge that the security branch intended to abduct Zandile from Swaziland he describes his task in the following fashion, he says
"My task was to find out what her address was in Swaziland and to confirm it and then to pass on the information to the relevant security branch.  Furthermore I was responsible for the preparation of the vehicle with which she was to be abducted from Swaziland."
And he says, over the page at page 87:
"I was not involved in the execution of the operation and found out later that she indeed was abducted as it was planned and in the process I have probably made myself guilty to a conspiracy"
That is the extent of his application.
	Mr Botha, you heard what I have read now with regard to Mr Visagie, is there anything else that you want to add in terms of this evidence to which you concur or not?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: Chairperson I agree but I would like to add that he did not have to determine the address of Zandile but he had to monitor her movements.

MR VISSER: And for that purpose did he go to Swaziland?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: No Chairperson, we had the suspicion with the communication that she had locally to find out where she was.

MR VISSER: And it was his task to do that?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: That is correct Chairperson.

MR VISSER: And as far as you know, Mr Visagie, was he involved in any other activities?  Was he not present when she was abducted the day or at her murder?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: No Chairperson.

MR VISSER: Why was Mr Vorster called in, why was Mr Vorster involved because he was from Pietermaritzburg was he not?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: Chairperson at that stage we were one province with the police division in one and he handled the terrorist desk in Pietermaritzburg, his task was also to gather information with regard to terrorist activities in Swaziland and he had the ability to share intelligence with us which would supplement or would be successful in the implementation of this operation.

MR MALAN: Could I just follow up on this?  It seems strange to me that such a large contingent will go over to execute this operation?  If you were successful in abducting her and convincing her to become an informant then all this information would be available to Mr Vorster?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: That is correct, Chairperson.

MR MALAN: Then why did he come along to execute the information, why did he have to get the information there?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: No, he did not have to get the information there but beforehand, through informants, he could give assistance with his intelligence and if we were successful with her recruitment and it would not be strange then, he would be aware of all those people and they all worked in one group with intelligence gathering.

MR MALAN: But you had co-ordinating structures to exchange intelligence, why did you have to contact somebody else, it seems strange to me that everybody had liaised with Trevits or with their regions but everybody had to go to get the intelligence first hand.

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: No Chairperson, I don't know what information you are referring to.

MR MALAN: I refer to the intelligence you allege that you would have gotten from Zandile?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: But we first went and abducted her.

MR MALAN: To get information from her?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: Yes.

MR MALAN: But Mr Vorster's role was not to help with the abduction?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: Because he had information that could help us, his informers in the Republic and Swaziland who could help us to abduct somebody in a strange country is not as easy as we are talking about it here now, we had to keep things in mind, the locality of where we could launch it from, the activity of other activists who might spot us and so on, though much had to be done.

MR MALAN: Maybe then you have to continue so we can learn some more of this whole process.  Not that I have any plans to abduct anybody, I just want to understand.

CHAIRPERSON: You say you recruited her as an informer?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: That was the intention, Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: That would have been by threats of what would happen to her if she didn't agree to be an informer, would it not?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: It would be part of it yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, it wouldn't be a voluntary agreement by her?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: No Mr Chairperson.

MR VISSER: As you discussed the matter, did you know then that she would not comply to work with you as an informant?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: No, at that stage when we discussed the matter we did not know.

MR VISSER: You had suspicions?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: Yes we had regard for it.

MR MALAN: Excuse me, you say that they thought that she would not work with?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: Well if she didn't work with us she would be eliminated.

MR MALAN: But I think the question that Mr Visser put to you that your suspicions were that she would not co-operate with you?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: Yes we anticipated it.

MR MALAN: Anticipate is something else, anticipate says something about a possibility, you went to abduct her and in your mind the possibility that she was not going to work with you, you did have regard for it?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: That is correct.

MR MALAN: Well when you abducted her you thought that she might not work with you?  Could we not infer from this that the first purpose was to eliminate her except if she worked with you?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: That is correct, Chairperson.

MR MALAN: Now why do you say in your application that the purpose was an abduction and the whole application is structured on the basis that the cooperation was not found and other possibilities had to be considered.  You application says:  "We went and abducted her to recruit her as an informant", your application does not mention that you told Steyn beforehand that "we might have to eliminate her if we do not receive her cooperation" while your evidence tells us now that the possibility existed that you were going to kill her but if she was willing to work with you then you would save her life and keep her as an informant?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: That is correct.

MR MALAN: Is that what you say in your application?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: What I say in my application and what I now say, when I drew up this application two years ago, it was under other circumstances, I had to do it quickly, it was two days before the closing date.  If we did not do it then we would have been prosecuted, that was the basis of my application, I could not consult with the rest of the applicants so the wording is not as I give evidence here today but my evidence here today is far as the extent of what happened so here and there there might be some shortcomings in my written application which I would supplement by my verbal evidence here before you today.