Amnesty Hearings — Bloemfontein — 1997-05-12

ADV DE JAGER: Just one thing.  Doctor, you had mentioned that you had negotiations with senior police Officers but that it was never clearly said to you, you had the impression that they had not fully informed you with regard to circumstances.  Before I ask this question, I want to make the statement that we have had testimony for instance from General Van deer Mere which indicated that at certain points the situation was of such a nature that it was of a critical nature, people were not informed about the situation because it might have caused people to become panicky about the situation.  Do you want to make comment in this regard?

PIETER JAKOBUS GOUWS: Chairman, that is precisely the idea that I personally got and I think the idea I conveyed to my Executive and I think this is the idea most of the farming, the enlightened part of the farming community had, it is that the boat shouldn't be rocked, the facts should be kept as simple as possible, it is just a criminal attack and it shouldn't be this or that, because what could have happened and perhaps one could understand the reasoning, it might have been that certain farmers' group took the law in their own hands at that specific stage and it might have led to a blood bath in certain cases.  But I had discussions, numerous ones, we had open discussions with Ministers during the Ficksburg meeting specifically, can give you dates of that, we had Minister Kriel, Minister Kobie Coetzee and other Ministers there and when they came with this story, that it was not a political motive and most of these murderers, criminals, the farming community rose as one and shouted them down and actually put a motion of no confidence in them and asked them to leave the meeting, so extreme it was.

JUDGE WILSON: Thank you very much for having agreed to come and give evidence here, I am sure everyone is obliged to you for your assistance and thank you also for your offer to appear at any further hearings that we require your assistance.

PIETER JAKOBUS GOUWS: Thank you Chairman, I hope I was of some assistance, I appreciate it.

CHAIRPERSON: Does that conclude the evidence now?

ADV MADASA: Yes, it does Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: I don't think we want to hear final addresses till we have heard the other application, if however, you would like to prepare written arguments on the factual aspects of this application, it would be of great assistance to us and I am sure to you to deal with the facts now while they are fresh in your memory.  Do you want to address us on any particular aspect at this stage?

ADV MADASA: Mr Chairman, without encroaching on Mr Chairman's discretion and powers, I was of the view that we rather conclude even the submissions on this today, on this particular case and then if then the hearing is postponed, pending the other one, that that be decided by the Committee, but on my part I would like that we conclude all submissions today.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well.

ADV MADASA: But Mr Chairman, having said that I would request that we have an adjournment so as to put together everything in view of this evidence, until two o'clock.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well, we will adjourn until two o'clock which will give us chance to consider the position.

MS THABET: Thank you Mr Chairman.

ADV DE JAGER: Sorry before we adjourn, would there be any other case going on today, is there anything ready to go on?

MS THABET: Yes ...

ADV DE JAGER: Are the applicants present, are the witnesses present, are the representatives here?

MS THABET: I did arrange prior to this hearings that all the matters, or all the applicants and all the parties involved, come to the hearing the day before so that if we finish with a matter early, we can proceed, so the applicants are on their way, the lawyer for the applicants are here.  The lawyer for the victims was notified of everything, he hasn't gotten back to me, I have been leaving messages for him to get back to me, but he never got back to me.

CHAIRPERSON: As we might be able to do something else, then I think we take a slightly shorter adjournment and we adjourn until a quarter to two, does that suit you.
COMMISSION ADJOURNS - ON RESUMPTION

CHAIRPERSON: Right, what is the position now?

MS THABET: The position Mr Chair is that Adv Madasa will not make any further submissions, he prefers to make them at the end of the second matter if and when it is heard.  I have consulted with the Investigators that they will give me submissions and as soon as they are there, I will make a copy to Adv Madasa and I will make a copy to the Committee Members.

JUDGE WILSON: So the matter can now merely be adjourned to a date to be arranged, this date to coincide with the date of the hearing of the fresh application which has been made by the applicant and I further direct that a copy of today's proceedings be transcribed and that we be furnished with a copy of both the original, the transcription of the original proceedings and of today's proceedings when this is available.

MS THABET: That will be done, Mr Chairman.

ADV MADASA: May I be excused Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: And I think it perhaps unnecessary to say that a date for the resumed hearing should be arranged with the applicant's counsel.

MS THABET: I will do that Mr Chairman.

ADV MADASA: May I be excused Mr Chairman?  Thank you.

MS THABET: Our next matter on the role is the matter of Nkgwedi, Magoda, May and Leeuw.  Their lawyer was here just now, I don't know where he is, oh, he is still here and I was told that the applicants would be here as well.  I can't see Mr Uys, but as far as I know, they should be here.
	Members of the Committee, I am told that the applicants still are not here.  I don't know why they are not here.

JUDGE WILSON: Where are they coming from?

ADV MTHEMBU: From (indistinct) prison, locally Mr Chairman, but I have spoken to the warder in charge, he said to me that they should be here any minute from now.

JUDGE WILSON: ... further enquiries to be made as to whether in fact they are on their way or what has happened, and some explanation as to why they were not here on time?  Carry on.

MS THABET: Mr Chairman, we are proceeding now with the matter of Nkgwedi, Magoda, May, Leeuw which was part-heard and I will hand over to my colleague, Mr Mthembu.

ADV DE JAGER: Don't you perhaps have a transcription of the evidence in this case too?

MS THABET: There should be a copy in Cape Town, I can ask them to fax it.

ADV MTHEMBU: Thank you Mr Chairman.  Mr Chairman, you will recall on the last occasion the Committee as in view of the fact that the loot or the items regarding this incident was found in the possession of various of the applicants, that the Committee would like an explanation as to why they were found at various places, am I correct Mr Chairman?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, in a sense, you are referring to a statement or a document which was handed in which told us that these item, such and such items were found in the possession of such and such an applicant, etc, etc.

ADV MTHEMBU: That is correct sir.

CHAIRPERSON: And then we invited the applicants if they so wished to comment on those allegations.

ADV MTHEMBU: That is correct sir.

CHAIRPERSON: You didn't think it would be sufficient for the applicants to respond by way of affidavits?  I am not saying you should have done so but, I am just trying to think aloud.

ADV MTHEMBU: I think it would have been expedient perhaps if they would have given oral evidence, perhaps maybe the Committee maybe would have questions to put to them, so in that regard I thought perhaps it wouldn't have been expedient to do so by way of affidavits.

CHAIRPERSON: I am trying to locate my own copy of that document, do you have an extra copy perhaps or ...

ADV MTHEMBU: I do sir.  Thank you Mr Chairman.  Mr Chairman I will call Mr Leeuw to the witness stand.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Leeuw, you are Mr Leeuw aren't you?

HENDRIK LEEUW: Yes.