Amnesty Hearings — Cape Town — 2000-03-16

GEORGE BIZOS: No, you knew, you knew - please, never mind all the circumstances, you knew at the time that you gave evidence that some of your subordinate officers had told in statements - never mind the newspapers, in statements, and they had or were going to give evidence before the Commission that they attempted to murder these two gentlemen.  You knew that.  Did you?

MR VERSTER: That is correct.

GEORGE BIZOS: Right.  Now did you not feel that you owed it to your subordinate officers and as an officer and a gentlemen, to tell His Lordship Mr Justice Harms, the truth?  Didn't you feel that you were obliged to do that?

MR VERSTER: No, definitely not, Chairperson, because the Harms Commission, the way in which it was manipulated was not by Judge Harms, but in an attempt - and I was proved correct, everything that happened.  You can go back, I proved to have been correct, that was that that which was presented for the Police was all blamed on us and for the evidence that I am now asked about was Police activities, it was projected on us, so I tried as an individual to go against that.  I did not have it against the Judge or the system, but if the State and other elements of the State are busy trying to blame one structure, then that is the best way I could oppose it.  And it has nothing to do with an officer and a gentleman, I was out of the Defence Force at that time.

GEORGE BIZOS: Yes, well were you not out of the Army at the time of the Harms Commission?

MR VERSTER: I stopped long before that, I think in 1988.

GEORGE BIZOS: Oh I see, you didn't consider yourself as an officer anymore?

MR VERSTER: I was no longer an officer.

GEORGE BIZOS: Oh I see, that may explain some of your conduct.  But let us just proceed, on page 1569 ...(intervention)

MR VERSTER: ...(indistinct)

GEORGE BIZOS: I beg your pardon, Sir?

MR VERSTER: I understood the interjection.

GEORGE BIZOS: Let us go on to 1569, there is a sentence there that I want you to confirm please, in about line 13
"We did, and I am now talking about this era, about five years ago we did have an emergency plan at that stage which was part of the planning and this emergency plan was if there was any internal political changes, then as part of that we would like to have control of our documentation."
Is that a correct statement of fact?

MR VERSTER: That is correct, there was ...(intervention)

GEORGE BIZOS: Thank you, we must make progress.  Now as a result of that you were asked many questions about the documents, the protection of people and the destruction of documents.  I want to read to you a few passages and I just want you to confirm them.

CHAIRPERSON: Page number?

GEORGE BIZOS: Page 1574, the middle of the page about line 15
"Good.  I do not want to go to the detail, but at a stage - and this is now on the 29th of March, this would then have been a week later, do you know that the Auditor-General arrived as Speskop?"
		"That is correct, that is the incident that I can remember telling about."
What was Speskop?

MR VERSTER: That was Special Forces' Headquarters where I could not go to.

GEORGE BIZOS: Thank you.
"Let's just stand still with this incident.  And Braam then came to unlock the place.  I as a rule never went there but I know that I gave him instructions that he would have to be there as a representative."
Who was Braam?

MR VERSTER: That was the Administrative Manager, the person who would look at the files.

GEORGE BIZOS: What was his name?

MR VERSTER: I can't remember his correct name, I do not know.  We never used his correct name.

GEORGE BIZOS: Then we proceed
"Good.  Then on that day the file with which Mr Britz and the auditor was busy was gone."
		"So the Goldie file disappeared, in other words between the 22nd and the 29th of March?"
		"I do not know if this was so.  I couldn't get there."
		"Now you say that there are people who are protecting you, is this correct?"
		"This is correct."
		"Who are these people who are protecting you?"
		"We have, and it is any of the members within the structure.  I cannot mention a specific name because ..."
		"But who told you that they had the documents or took the documents?"
		"That is what I want to tell you, that one evening I received a call - we had a system according to which your tone of voice could be changed, and a person contacted me and I told him that you have a problem and you can get us in problems and we will take the files, we will be keeping it in terms of the emergency plan and we are not prepared to tell you anything further regarding this."
		"I accept that people who know about this emergency plan would have to be people within the command structure above you."
		"Above me?"
		"Yes."
	Now here already you are speaking about protecting persons, was that the same loyalty that you had and protection, for protection of your colleagues as to why you were not prepared to give us any details?  You remember the names that I referred to you in the Commission's Report, Exhibit D?

CHAIRPERSON: Is it the extract from the Final Report, is it not?

GEORGE BIZOS: ...(indistinct - no microphone)

MR LAX: Mr Bizos, your mike.

GEORGE BIZOS: Sorry.  This is why you were not prepared to give us the details of the persons who are named in the Commission's Report, in the paragraphs that we were dealing with.  I just want to find the paragraphs, yes 395, and because of your lack of co-operation I didn't put the names to you of 398.  Now did that intention to protect that you had in 1990, carry through when you gave evidence before the Commission under Section 29 here, not the 29 of 1990, the Section 29 of the TRC Act, and is that the same reason why you were not prepared to give details in relation to the persons' names in 395 and 398?  A yes or no will do.

MR VERSTER: Mr Chairperson, there is no relation between the two.  I did not say that, I said that I cannot recall what the particulars were.  And the names which you put to me, if I be reminded of it and I could see the statement, I will tell you.  I am here to try and obtain amnesty within the ambit of the law.