Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1999-09-03

MR WILLS: When after the - sorry, I retract that, you say here you went in and out to establish whether there was any information on the four cadres, that too, I put it to you supports exactly what I was saying earlier, about the purpose of the operation was to arrest Khubeka in order to question her in order to give information about these cadres, so you went there to find out whether that interrogation had been successful, is that not so?

ADRIAN DAVID BAKER: I put my head through the door to find out if there was any information on it, that is so.

MR WILLS: You went in and out, you said twice?

ADRIAN DAVID BAKER: That is correct Mr Chairman.

MR WILLS: Now, was the first time you went in before the questioning started or had the questioning already commenced?

ADRIAN DAVID BAKER: Mr Chairman, I assume the questioning had already commenced, the people were in the room with her.

MR WILLS: And then how long after the questioning had commenced, did you put your head in for the first time?

ADRIAN DAVID BAKER: Mr Chairman, I assume it was a couple of minutes, it wouldn't have been very long.

MR WILLS: Had she screamed yet or shouted?  Had you heard the whip, the water pipe or the shambok, whatever?

ADRIAN DAVID BAKER: Yes, I think I had before going in.

MR WILLS: Because it would seem to me that logic dictates that if you were wanting information to be coming out, if you were going to be relying on information that would come out of an interrogation, there would have to be some delay while those questions were asked and that information was sought before you went in to find out whether it had been gained, not so?

ADRIAN DAVID BAKER: That is correct Mr Chairman, it would have been a few minutes.

MR WILLS: Yes.  Now, then - you say within a few minutes, she had already cooperated to the extent that - sorry, I withdraw that, how long afterwards did you go in for the second occasion or did you peep your head in for the second occasion?

ADRIAN DAVID BAKER: Mr Chairman, it was also a matter of minutes, a few minutes.

CHAIRPERSON: You say you had your head in for a matter of minutes?

ADRIAN DAVID BAKER: No, I put my head in, asked if there was any positive information, they said no, and then I left.  Then it wasn't very long after that again, I would say five minutes that I put my head in again and said is there anything that we can work on and it was after the second time that I recall, Lt du Preez saying that he was leaving and I went with him.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Wills?

MR WILLS: The answer to your second enquiry, what was that?

ADRIAN DAVID BAKER: Also negative, Mr Chairman.

MR WILLS: So everyone else has been saying that the woman was cooperative, but the answers to your questions indicated otherwise?

MR VISSER: That is an entirely unfair question on the evidence, Mr Chairman.  Entirely unfair.  All the witnesses that were there, told you that they got no information from her about the terrorists.

MR WILLS: Sorry, may I enquire if Mr Visser is acting for this applicant?

MR VISSER: I am protecting my witnesses Mr Chairman, because their evidence is now being twisted.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Mr Wills is not incorrect in saying that the evidence was that she was not uncooperative, I think it was only in one respect that it came from the other witnesses that she didn't cooperate and that was in respect of her turning herself around to be an informer, she refused that, but we didn't get any evidence that they had actually, she had actually given any information concerning MK, the identity of MK operatives.

MR LAX: In fact Chair, if I could just add to that, the fact of the matter was that most people have conceded that she died before she could actually give them information, but there was a possibility on the various versions, that she was about to disclose that information, because the sticking point was that she wanted her identity to remain undisclosed.  That was the sticking point and apart from that, she was cooperating.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR WILLS: Let me rephrase then, Mr Baker, the evidence has been that when she was being asked questions, she answered the questions.  Did you get that impression?

ADRIAN DAVID BAKER: Mr Chairman, I cannot comment, I wasn't present while she was answering questions.

MR WILLS: Well, what question did you ask to Mr Botha, can you recall?

ADRIAN DAVID BAKER: As I recall it was if there was any information on the four members, that we could work on.

MR WILLS: And he said no?

ADRIAN DAVID BAKER: That is correct Mr Chairman.

MR WILLS: So why didn't you wait a bit longer, I mean it seems a bit strange that you went five minutes later to ask the same question, it seems as if you were in a hurry to get this information, is that so?

ADRIAN DAVID BAKER: Mr Chairman, no, I just wanted to know if there was anything coming up and then as I say, I left with Mr du Preez.

MR WILLS: So you went for this information twice in the matter of minutes?

ADRIAN DAVID BAKER: As I said, five minutes.

MR WILLS: You wouldn't say you were in a hurry?

ADRIAN DAVID BAKER: No.

MR WILLS: You weren't in a hurry for this information?  Why did you go in in the first place?  What I am trying to suggest is, it seems, your version seems quite strange to me, because if you go in there once or twice and then it seems that the information must have been very important to you to get quickly, because you went in the second time so soon after the first time, but then you decide to go and buy food and you are away from the place, and don't show much interest in what goes on?

ADRIAN DAVID BAKER: Mr Chairman, I cannot comment on what I did then and why I did it then, I went in to find out and then Mr du Preez was leaving, so I left with him.

MR WILLS: I stand to be corrected and my recollection is of Mr du Preez' evidence, that he wasn't aware of the assault taking place because he went to get food immediately.  You obviously differ with him in that regard?

ADRIAN DAVID BAKER: That is correct Mr Chairman.

UNKNOWN: Mr Chairman, with all due respect, I don't recall the evidence being that he went immediately to go and get food, his evidence was he left to carry on with his tasks.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, he said Mr du Preez' evidence was "I wasn't present in the room, I had other duties to perform and I also went to buy food", but as far as I can recall, you are correct in saying that he was unaware of any assault taking place in that room.

MR WILLS: Yes, I am sorry I used the word immediately, I realise it was challenged earlier and I will rephrase, but clearly the implication of du Preez' evidence was that he was not aware that the assault had taken place because he was away on other duties and possibly buying food.  It seems to me that that is quite strange because if you went with him, then he would also have been aware that this assault was taking place?

ADRIAN DAVID BAKER: Mr Chairman, I cannot speak for Mr du Preez.

MR WILLS: Where was he?

ADRIAN DAVID BAKER: I am saying what my version was.

MR WILLS: Where was he?

ADRIAN DAVID BAKER: As far as I can remember I met him at his car, I don't know where his car was parked.

MR WILLS: How can you remember where you met him at his car, if you cannot even remember where it was parked?

ADRIAN DAVID BAKER: We went in his car.  I don't remember where it was parked, that is a big area.

MR WILLS: You must concede that these cracks with the whip or the shambok must have been particularly brutal?  You heard them from outside a closed door, a generator was on, a portable generator was on and people were being questioned, you heard it above that?  You actually heard, in your evidence, you are the first person to tell us that you hear the cracks of the whip?

CHAIRPERSON: The blows, blows with what he presumes was that black pipe.