Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1998-11-10

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: The pressures came from the government, from - we were expected to get hold of the problem and normalise the situation.  We were placed under increasing pressure to get results and normalise the situation.

MR VISSER: Yes.  There were also security systems in place, were there pressures exerted from that direction as well?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: There were.

MR MALAN: Mr Visser, will you not allow us just to pursue these last two questions, three questions.
	The response of prejudice firstly was that you experienced on yourself, pressures from government.  In which way, who in government put pressure on you?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: Perhaps that is not the correct words, but from within my Branch.

MR MALAN: Well, exactly, could we really stick to your really, not jargon or rhetoric, but your personal experience.  Within the Branch there was pressure?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: There was.

MR MALAN: Your senior officers expected performance from you?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: That is correct Mr Chairman.

MR MALAN: Then secondly  you responded also to the call upon, you were called upon as Security Branch to uphold a political party's views and policies.  That was the question, and you confirmed it?  Will you explain to me what do you have in mind there, which political party or were you simply expected to implement the law as expected by the government of the time, and do that under a command structure?  Or is it really, are you referring to a political party?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: When was that question put forward?

MR MALAN: Just before the one that I raised first.  You were called upon as Security Branch to uphold a political party's views and policies, that was the question, and you confirmed it.
	I am putting that question again.  Was there ever expected of you to uphold a political party's views and policies?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: No.

MR MALAN: Okay, thank you, you may proceed Mr Visser.

MR VISSER: Thank you Mr Chairman.  Who was the government of the day in 1987 Mr Wasserman?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: The National Party, Mr Chairman.

MR VISSER: The National Party, was that a political party within this country?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: Indeed it was Mr Chairman.

MR VISSER: Did it have its own policies?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: Yes, it did.

MR VISSER: Including the policy of apartheid?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: It did.

MR VISSER: Were you - was it expected from you to uphold the laws as promulgated by that government?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: It was Mr Chairman.

MR VISSER: Let's go on to the assassination of Mr Bhila.  Can you just tell the Committee exactly what you remember about this incident?  Perhaps before I get there, perhaps before I get there, looking at your application form, at page 44 of the Bhila volume, bundle 1, no particulars had been given to you, by you in that application form, except that you referred to the incident under paragraph 9(a)(i) as being the elimination of ANC/MK member, Sipho Stanley Bika, which you rectified at page 45 as under the heading name of victim, Sipho Stanley Bhila.

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: That is correct.

MR VISSER: And what you said under (iv) was the nature and particulars of this incident are not immediately recalled to mind.  I would do the necessary research, etc, in an attempt to provide a full and detailed statement which will be provided at a later stage.
	What I want to ask you to tell the Committee is this, was there such an occasion where you had the occasion of making a full and detailed statement?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: At the time of completing this particular one that we are talking about here, there was no time at my Attorneys.

MR VISSER: All right, if you want to deal with that first, when you signed this affidavit, your application form, did you have a one on one consultation with your Attorney at the time, in December 1996?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: That is correct.

MR VISSER: And at that time, how long before the cut off date was it that you consulted with your Attorney?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: I believe it was two days.

MR VISSER: Two days?  And Mr Wasserman, it is no secret, you apply for some 15 incidents?  How many?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: I think it is 15.

MR VISSER: 15 incidents, and at the time when you couldn't remember this, the idea was to get in the application form at all costs.

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: That is correct Mr Chairman.

MR VISSER: And then later, to fill in?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: That is correct.

MR VISSER: Yes.   Now, what I am referring to now is were you later - did you later receive a notification from the Investigation, apparently my Attorney doesn't agree with me Mr Chairman, just bear with me.  Oh yes, no that is correct, it wasn't a subpoena, it was an informal request made to you and others of Durban, who served in the Security Branch at the time, to meet with the Investigation Unit of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, is that correct?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: That is correct yes.

MR VISSER: And you spent some two days dealing with all the issues which were raised by them and you allowed yourself to be questioned by them?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: That is correct Mr Chairman.

MR VISSER: Inter alia, did you also deal with the Bhila incident?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: Correct Mr Chairman.

MR VISSER: So, having said that Mr Wasserman, and you having now had opportunity of recalling the events of the 22nd of February 1987, will you please tell the Committee what you remember about the incident concerning Mr Bhila?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: Yes Mr Chairman.  On the day in question, I was instructed by Colonel Taylor, to follow him in my vehicle to the Railway Police range.

MR VISSER: How did this instruction reach you, can you remember?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: Via my radio.

MR VISSER: On your radio?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: On my police radio, yes Mr Chairman.

MR VISSER: I am sorry, but let's just take this step by step.  Colonel Taylor or the then Major Taylor then asked you to meet him where?

CHAIRPERSON: Follow?

MR VISSER: To follow him where?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: To the Railway shooting range at Winkelspruit.

MR VISSER: All right, and did anything happen along the road?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: We pulled off before the range and I, and we spoke together and he informed me that the Vlakplaas contingent had picked up Mr Bhila.
	He was at the range.

MR VISSER: The pistol shooting range?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: That is the pistol shooting range, that is correct Mr Chairman.  He further informed me that Mr Bhila was going to be eliminated.

MR VISSER: Did you say to him, well, why tell me?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: No, the reason for that was clear to me as I also regarded Mr Bhila as a very dangerous Umkhonto weSizwe trained person.

MR VISSER: On that point, Mr Wasserman, we have received from my learned friend Mr Prior, Exhibit D, I believe it is D Mr Chairman, may I just check, the extract from the charge sheet, D, an extract from the charge sheet.  In the Ramlakan case, which is just a cross-reference to Exhibit A and I am afraid Mr Chairman, I know you haven't received yours yet, we will really make serious attempts at making sure that you have yours tomorrow, at page 13 to an incident at the Port Natal Administration Board Offices at Lamontville relating to an SPM limpet mine, is that correct?
	I beg your pardon, my Exhibit D seems to have disappeared, I must have mislaid it here somewhere.   Be that as it may, it speaks for itself Mr Chairman.  Is that part of the reason that, yes, I have just found it Mr Chairman, did you - what did you know about Mr Bhila, his background?  Did you know that he had received training for example?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: That is correct Mr Chairman, I knew he had been trained, he had been military trained internally.

MR VISSER: Yes, and the charge sheet suggested in paragraph 4 of Exhibit D that he suggested the bomb to be planted at Lamontville township offices on the 16th of June 1985?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: That is correct Mr Chairman.