Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1998-11-13

MR BOTHA: Yes, I formulated it in that manner, yes Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Why didn't you try to prosecute him?

MR BOTHA: Chairperson, at that stage we had many problems in Durban with prosecutions.   To find somebody to testify against him, in the first instance, to find somebody to testify against him, the chance would be very slim.

CHAIRPERSON: You found a trunk full of ammunition and explosives and firearms?

MR BOTHA: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Were they tested for fingerprints?

MR BOTHA: No sir.

CHAIRPERSON: Why not?   It would have been the perfect evidence against him, wouldn't it, that he was in unlawful possession of automatic weapons, he would have got a heavy sentence?

MR BOTHA: I already took the decision to eliminate him at that stage.

CHAIRPERSON: So you were not interested in prosecuting him either, your sole intention was to eliminate him, is that what you are telling us?

MR BOTHA: That is what I am telling you, yes Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: There was no question of discussing the options, you had already decided you weren't interested in them?

MR BOTHA: With regard to the circumstances, prosecution was not an option.

CHAIRPERSON: Murder was better, is that the attitude of the police at that time, even where they could get a conviction, they would rather murder the person.  Is that what you are telling us?

MR BOTHA: Finding a person guilty, is something I cannot answer.  As I have said, we had much trouble and we were arresting people every day.  This was something heavy for us, we had more pressure on us every time.
	We had a very prejudiced bar in Durban, that is true.

MR MALAN: Prejudiced or ...

MR BOTHA: Depends on how you look at it.

ADV SIGODI: And you are saying that Major Taylor was senior to you?

MR BOTHA: That is correct.

ADV SIGODI: But you took the decision that you wanted to have him eliminated?

MR BOTHA: That is correct Mr Chairperson.

ADV SIGODI: Just to clarify this, was it the position at that time, that any policemen, even though junior, could actually take such a serious decision, a decision to kill and perhaps just discuss it with somebody senior without having had the order from somebody senior to kill the person?  Was that the situation, could it be done that way that somebody junior could decide to kill and then communicate that to somebody senior that we have decided to kill this person, and then decide and discuss the option with somebody senior, instead of waiting for an order from somebody senior to say to the juniors, look eliminate this person because he is problematic?

MR BOTHA: Chairperson, there were many questions in one here, but let me answer it as briefly as possible.
	In order of the incidents, I decided to eliminate Pumeso before Taylor arrived there, Taylor was out of town.  I think he was in Swaziland gathering intelligence, I did not expect him to come back, so when he did come back, I decided that the decision was all ready, and that is why we discussed the options.
	I already took the decision and at the end thereof, he agreed with me that this was the best option.

ADV SIGODI: How far high up could a person for a decision to kill, would an order come from?

MR BOTHA: We could not ask permission for an elimination.  I could just answer where I took the decision myself, there was no standing instruction as to go and ask for permission to eliminate somebody.

CHAIRPERSON: Who did you tell to eliminate him?

MR BOTHA: Chairperson, if I can continue, if I could just sketch the order of occurrences.
	Wasserman, Du Preez and myself went to the Allan Taylor residence, where we found the arms.  In our absence Taylor and Van der Westhuizen stayed at the safe house and when we got back to the safe house, Taylor said that Van der Westhuizen and I could leave, we were not needed any more, he already took the decision, and that was his attitude.
	If he arrived at the scene, then he would be in control, and consequently he took the responsibility for which I made the decision, on himself.

MR MALAN: Could you tell us please, where was Nxiweni from the time that you interrogated him, what was his movements, where did you keep him before you returned back to the house?

MR BOTHA: He was at the safe house at all times Chairperson, in Verulam.

MR MALAN: Is this the same house where you returned to?

MR BOTHA: That is correct Chairperson.

MR MALAN: And where Taylor told you that Van der Westhuizen and yourself could leave?

MR BOTHA: That is correct Chairperson.

MR MALAN: And the Chairperson's question was who received instruction to execute the elimination, who was that?

MR BOTHA: That would be Du Preez and Wasserman.

MR MALAN: So it was Du Preez and Wasserman?

MR BOTHA: That is correct.

MR MALAN: And you say Taylor, or this is where Taylor took over and that was his arrangements?

MR BOTHA: That is correct.

MR VISSER: Mr Botha, let us just return to something else which is causing confusion.  You apply for amnesty because you committed some acts.
	In the police, was there a system, an authorization for some or other officer of rank, to give authorization to others to commit offences?

MR BOTHA: No Chairperson.

MR VISSER: Did it ever exist according to your knowledge that an officer would give you an instruction to commit an offence?

MR BOTHA: No Chairperson.

MR VISSER: So it is not a matter of your rank, if you decide to commit an irregular act, it is still an illegal offence?

MR BOTHA: It did not matter what rank we had, no.

MR VISSER: Very well.  We have preempted the whole thing now, but if I could just take you back.  You informed Taylor and I am not going to repeat that evidence, which you also mentioned in your application, in the middle of page 9, the fourth paragraph, that he refused, this is Nxiweni to cooperate as an informer with the Security Branch.  What do you mean by that?

MR BOTHA: Chairperson, I already testified that my evaluation of Nxiweni is that he was not suitable as an informant.

MR VISSER: But you speak of refusal here, you said he refused?

MR BOTHA: He was obstinate all the time.

MR VISSER: Did you ask him if he wanted to cooperate with you?

MR BOTHA: No, I did not.

MR VISSER: Why do you say that he refused?

MR BOTHA: Mr Chairman, it is probably the wrong choice of words.

MR VISSER: Yes, you must have used the wrong words there.  Is the situation as you have explained it here, according to the best of your recollection, is that how it is?

MR BOTHA: That is how I remember it.

MR VISSER: As the Chairperson put it to you, when you went to arrest him in your mind, you have already considered all the options and you decided to eliminate him?

MR BOTHA: That is correct Chairperson.

MR VISSER: And then you say that that paragraph on page 9 is not correct, strictly speaking that he refused as if he was asked?

MR BOTHA: In the context of my evidence today, that paragraph should not be in there.

MR VISSER: Let us just get to the arms cache.  You say yourself, Wasserman and Du Preez went to Allan Taylor residence and then you use the words where you had access to a package room.  Tell us, did you break in?

MR BOTHA: Yes, we did.

MR VISSER: Why did you not go to the caretaker or whoever or get a warrant, a search warrant on the grounds that you had reasonable suspicion that there were goods that were used in offences on these premises?

MR BOTHA: Chairperson, Pumeso had to be eliminated, and I have already testified that if I had to get a search warrant, then his illegal arrest would have been complicated.

MR VISSER: So in other words, the incidents surrounding him, you would have been advertising it if you went in search of search warrants and asked for permission and you did not want to do that?

MR BOTHA: No.

MR VISSER: And you have already decided that you would have to cover up these things?

MR BOTHA: That is correct.

MR VISSER: What did you find there exactly, can you recall today?