Amnesty Hearings — Cape Town — 2000-10-05

MR P DU PLESSIS: Page 235, Mr Chairman of bundle B.  My learned friend can perhaps assist me if there is a typed written one.  It is not in the typed written one, it is page 235 at the bottom, virtually at the bottom.
	Let me just read it from a little bit higher up.
"... Terrence and I, it was our club (then there is a name mentioned) and delegates.   The meeting was said to begin at eight o'clock, but by 20H35 it was only the five of us.  With the exception of the black caretaker who was in the building, I am not aware of any other persons in the building.  I noted that the hall doors were closed, I don't know if anyone was inside."
	Then he goes on to say on page 236 in paragraph 4, inter alia that after the explosion, they went to the caretaker who was in his room, they found him there.
"... all five of us went through the door."
	Sorry he says -
"... they found the backdoor with his assistance."
	On this point, the following, you see according to your evidence, you and even the people of the Kewtown Youth Movement, were standing around in the foyer, and then at a certain stage, about 20H25 you went into the boardroom, correct?

OESMAN ALEXANDER: That is correct, just before then, yes.  Our meeting started at twenty five past eight.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes, you had to, do you go to the boardroom from the foyer, or do you go out of the building to do that?

OESMAN ALEXANDER: No, we came via the foyer.

MR P DU PLESSIS: You were in the foyer and from there you moved into the boardroom section?

OESMAN ALEXANDER: That is right.

MR P DU PLESSIS: So for anyone sitting around in the foyer, it must be clear that people are moving into the boardroom, correct?

OESMAN ALEXANDER: Yes, depending what time a person came there, that is right.

MR P DU PLESSIS: In fact it is very clear from this gentleman's statement that he was there from about eight o'clock and that he was there with five other people.  For some reason sir, he is totally unaware of your presence in the boardroom.  Can you explain that?

MR LAX: Sorry Mr du Plessis, just to be absolutely clear, put your question correctly, he was there from about quarter past eight, according to his statement.  That is Mr Blignaut?

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes, thank you.  20H15, and that would be before you moved into the boardroom, on your own evidence?

OESMAN ALEXANDER: 20H15, yes, that is correct.  It was, as I have said earlier, between ten past eight and the time I came there, and 25 past, just before 25 past, we were in the ...

MR P DU PLESSIS: Well, it is very clear from your evidence that just before the meeting convened at 25 past, you moved into the boardroom?

OESMAN ALEXANDER: That is correct.

MR P DU PLESSIS: So this gentleman as well as the others, must have seen you?  I will argue on the papers?

OESMAN ALEXANDER: I would assume that.

MR P DU PLESSIS: And for some reason, some mysterious reason, these people who have no reason to lie about the incident, never saw anyone moving into the boardroom, do you agree with me?

OESMAN ALEXANDER: That is a mysterious reason, I would ...

MR P DU PLESSIS: Sir, there is nothing mysterious I would submit to this Committee about their statements, but what I would be saying, what I am going to argue is that it cannot be accepted on your evidence, and on the evidence contained in these statements that you were at the hall at the time that the bomb went off.

OESMAN ALEXANDER: Sir ...

CHAIRPERSON: Please, let Mr Alexander answer the question.

OESMAN ALEXANDER: Sir, I was in the hall when the bomb exploded.  I promise you I was in there, I don't have any reason to lie about that.

MR P DU PLESSIS: You see, that explains why Mr van Zyl never saw the cars there, because you weren't there.

OESMAN ALEXANDER: The cars were definitely there.

MR P DU PLESSIS: You had left, if you were there before?

OESMAN ALEXANDER: The cars were definitely there, yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Let's move on.  I will return to this statement, because obviously the clients I represent, were not there.
	But they gave certain instructions to the subordinates or Mr Botha and Mr van Zyl ...

CHAIRPERSON: Please, all this talking is interrupting the proceeding, please.

MR P DU PLESSIS: That is to see to it that people were not hurt and that in fact sir, is what eventually happened, no one was seriously hurt or people did not have to be killed, and that is what happened eventually?

OESMAN ALEXANDER: Sir, the fact is by chance no one was seriously hurt.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes, let's just proceed for a moment.

OESMAN ALEXANDER: By chance.

MR P DU PLESSIS: You see, your statement, all right, let me just cover this point with you quickly.  You already described to us how you left the centre and you went to park your car at a certain place, you wanted to remove your car?

OESMAN ALEXANDER: The vehicle, the bakkie.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Was that so that the police couldn't or shouldn't see your car?  You didn't want your car to be seen at the scene?

OESMAN ALEXANDER: That is correct, because we would then be linked in terms of the police saying "it was definitely you guys."  It was a limpet mine of Russian origin and "you guys had the political motive."

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes, so your political sentiments were well know, correct?

OESMAN ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: At that time.  It was known that the Cape Youth Congress was affiliated to the UDF, correct?

OESMAN ALEXANDER: That is right.

MR P DU PLESSIS: The UDF's sentiments as far as the ANC is concerned, was already also well know, correct?

OESMAN ALEXANDER: Sorry?

MR P DU PLESSIS: The UDF's sentiments as far as supporting the ANC as a front organisation was well known?

OESMAN ALEXANDER: A front organisation in which regard sir?

MR P DU PLESSIS: Sorry?

OESMAN ALEXANDER: In which regard?  They had support for the ANC, but they were not involved in acts of terror or violence.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes well, I didn't say that, I don't know why you mention it.

OESMAN ALEXANDER: I am clarifying it, because you are leaving it open to interpretation.

MR P DU PLESSIS: The point is sir, that you were afraid that because of the knowledge that the police had of your personally and some of the other people, that you would be linked to the bomb, isn't it?  Why should they think that ...

OESMAN ALEXANDER: Out of fear.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Sorry?

OESMAN ALEXANDER: Out of fear I left, I took my car.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Why should the police think that you were responsible for exploding the bomb?

OESMAN ALEXANDER: Because I was an activist.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Sorry?

OESMAN ALEXANDER: Because I was an activist.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes, an activist on which the police had correctly or wrongly, had information that you were involved in for instance, disrupting the elections, isn't it?

OESMAN ALEXANDER: Disrupting the elections in which - by educating people, by telling people what is right and wrong, they make up their own minds?

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes, but the police for some reason, according to you and I will respect your evidence in that regard, for some reason the police were under the misapprehension that you were an activist involved in violence, isn't that so?

OESMAN ALEXANDER: No ways.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Not?

OESMAN ALEXANDER: No.

MR P DU PLESSIS: And I believe Mr Peter Williams who was closely associated with you, was locked up under the Internal Security Act, isn't it?

OESMAN ALEXANDER: Mr Chairperson, there is no evidence to that effect.

CHAIRPERSON: He is asking that.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Chairperson, he put it to the witness himself, to Mr van Zyl.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I think it is fair.

MR P DU PLESSIS: I will get the record, he put it to van Zyl himself.

CHAIRPERSON: You can continue with that if you want, Mr du Plessis.