Special Hearings — State Security Council Hearings — UNKNOWN

MR LAX: Chairperson I want to just deal with the practicality for example 
and this relates to a point in time before your time Mr Meyer on the SSC.  We 
know that the SSC authorised at times raids into neighbouring states for 
example and that people were killed in those raids.  Not only were those 
people foreign citizens but there were South Africans and innocent foreign 
citizens killed in some of those raids.  We can take one instance the Maseru 
raid in December 1985 for example.  That raid was authorised almost 
implicitly if you like by the SSC so we are led to understand, now does that 
make them collectively responsible say in line with your first bullet?  And if 
not does that make them responsible in line with your second bullet?  
 It doesn't include you personally because you weren't there at that 
time, but at the same time you are in a position to have been there at a 
different time and pass judgement and give us your view of the matter.

MR MEYER: I guess it's quite difficult.  One will have to go into what 
exactly that decision I guess, that resolution if there was one, amounts to, if 
one looks at the wording what it amounts to and so forth, one might be able to 
come to a conclusion.  I find myself a little bit in difficulty there because I 
can't speak of first-hand information or knowledge.

MR LAX: You can take it from me that there was a resolution on December 
the 20th, 1985, that those sorts of raids, that particular raid should be 
conducted and it was so conducted.  We heard last week of other raids and Pik 
yesterday spoke about a raid that he didn't even know about that interfered 
with his own working.  This is a specific instance where we know that the 
decision was authorised.  You can take it from me, I am not misleading you, 
it's gospel.  (Laughter)  In a vernacular sort of sense.

MR MEYER: But I guess there would be an argument and I am testing now 
because I am not quite sure, but there might be an argument about cross-
border raids and authorising that.  If I remember correctly General Malan also 
addressed that in his submission to you, and there is a different position in 
regard to cross-border raids than to what happened internally.  I am sort of 
asking.

MR LAX: Well you see we haven't focused much on cross-border raids 
because individuals that have come before us last week for example were all 
in one way or another involved in some of the cross-border raids, and because 
of the whole extradition issue not being resolved they didn't deal with it and 
so we didn't talk a great deal about it at that point but you are not involved 
and therefore there's an ample opportunity to deal with it.

MR MEYER: It would be unfair to make me either the advocate or the judge 
in a case like this.

CHAIRPERSON: Wynand Malan wants to say something.

MR MALAN: I want to, I am thinking back of the time, '85 when it was 
quoted, one of the concepts that was often discussed is the concept of 
collective responsibility, Cabinet responsibility.  On that basis I want to 
rephrase the question in a frame that I think will be sitting more comfortable 
in your mind because it's a frame that has been addressed, within which it has 
been addressed before.  
 If at the level of Cabinet or then for that matter State Security Council, 
whatever body, a decision is taken and implementation of that decision 
follows don't you accept total responsibility for that decision and its 
consequences?  Isn't that really the question?  Whether it is political or moral 
or criminal that's something else, the test is on the outside, it's not your test 
and frankly this is a bit of a problem that I experience with the line of 
questioning because I find that a construction is asked from the witness which 
is more one of a legal, technical or philosophical one whereas what I think is 
important is whether responsibility is accepted.  
 Now if that responsibility so is accepted in the plain proposition that I 
put would it not also be true that if, whether that is by negligence or omission 
or whatever reason, that whatever you did or was done in such a meeting or 
body, that those who were part of it is by definition saddled with the 
responsibility?  Again whatever kind of responsibility that is, political, moral, 
criminal, whatever, but the test is not for you to decide, the test is on the 
outside.
 My question to you is, are you trying to duck some of the things that 
you did or are you saying whatever I did I accept responsibility, the 
construction that follows is something that is on the outside of me?  Would 
you be prepared to go with such a proposition?

MR MEYER: I think that is what I tried to put here in a framework, exactly 
that, but I have the impression that some of the questions indicate that I must 
interpret what individuals might have had in mind in terms of consequences 
and so forth and that I can't make a deduction on.  So I would go along with 
an interpretation that you have constructed because I think that is essentially 
what I am trying to say in bullet two.

MR MALAN: And if - sorry Chairperson just for the - and if any 
construction would be put to whatever was done which would be construed as 
criminal liability and prosecutions following in a court of law then you will be 
quite comfortable with accepting the process as the process again?

MR MEYER: Indeed.

LEON WESSELS: Mr Chairman may I just establish something?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, you have a right to speak.  (Laughter)

LEON WESSELS: Thank you.  I'd just like to establish, if we play rugby the 
reserve bench cannot come into play unless he is authorised.  If this is a 
wrestling contest I mean you come in regardless of what the referee says and 
then he calls you to order.  Now Mr Goosen indicated that I am on the reserve 
bench right now ...(intervention)

MR GOOSEN: We are playing rugby....

LEON WESSELS: Right, then I remain silent.

CHAIRPERSON: It seems to me that you are likely to ask much the same sort 
of questions, this particular question, and if you feel I mean that there is a 
contribution you can make why not make it now.  The only thing is that you 
see I mean you keep giving him a chance to work out, if you are going to ask 
him the same questions so he's working out no, they don't like this answer 
maybe I am going to try that answer.  Alright, do you think you should......