Amnesty Hearings — Pretoria — UNKNOWN

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I have already testified to that, Mr Chairman.

UNKNOWN: Is that the correct summary of your testimony, yes or no?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I have already testified as to what extent this is correct.  It, with the exception ...

UNKNOWN: Mr Derby-Lewis, ...

MR DERBY-LEWIS: ... of those paragraphs, ...

UNKNOWN: Mr Derby-Lewis, ...

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman, it is correct.

UNKNOWN: ... I will have, with the permission of the Chairman of the Committee, an answer to my question.  Did you purport to tell the truth with certain exceptions and did you lie to the police despite the pressure that there was put on you?  What is the answer to that question?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes, I did in this instance, Mr Chairman, ...

UNKNOWN: Right.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: ... yes.

UNKNOWN: If you managed to lie and held out with your untruths, how great was the pressure that, you say, was imposed on you?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman, I want to also recall that this was not under oath that this was done.  That is the first point I want to make and I want to say, secondly, that at that stage the pressure was off.  At that stage the pressure was off, because we had already reached agreement on the contents of the statement. They had then said to me, here is the paper, go and sit down, ...

UNKNOWN: So, ...

MR DERBY-LEWIS: ... Deetliefs testified to that effect, and go and sit down and write it out and we will get it before a magistrate and we will accept this statement as is.

UNKNOWN: So that, and you said yes and you said yes, because at that stage there was no pressure anymore on you?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: At that stage, yes.

UNKNOWN: Yes.  So, you accepted to sign a statement at a time when there was no longer any pressure?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes, yes, that is correct, the pressure had been removed because of my acceptance.

UNKNOWN: Yes.  Thank you Mr Derby-Lewis.  I do not think that I have to take that point any further.  Now, in relation to your detention, did you see your attorneys?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: In relation to my detention?

UNKNOWN: Yes.  As soon as your detention, well, first of all, you saw your attorneys in order to oppose the application for the extension of the period of detention.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Correct.  Excuse me.

UNKNOWN: Did you tell your attorneys, at that time, that you had been coerced to make any statements?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes, Mr Chairman.  That is why my advocate, at the end of my detention period, got me to produce the statement which is part of the evidence.  I do not know what ...

UNKNOWN: For how long did you see your attorney when you gave instructions to oppose the application to extend the period of detention?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I am not sure, Mr Chairman.  I am not sure.

UNKNOWN: You knew that unlike the unfortunate detainees under Section 6 and under Section 29 in the pre-90 days, that your affidavit would go before a judge and that you would be represented by counsel and that you would be given a hearing as to whether your detention should be extended or not?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: You mean when we tried to oppose the application?

UNKNOWN: Yes.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes, Mr Chairman.

UNKNOWN: In the representations that you made to the court not to extend your Section 29 detention, did you say that you had been ill-treated whilst in the, whilst you were in detention?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I cannot recall, Mr Chairman.

UNKNOWN: Do you recall whether you complained to your attorneys, at that time, and say, look, here is an opportunity for you to put in the affidavit so that it may become publicly known that I have been ill-treated and, also, that I fear that if my detention is extended, I will suffer more from these, to use your wife's words outside these proceedings, by these torturers?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman, at that stage, the pressure had been stopped.  So, there was no reason to complain about that.  The intention was to oppose the extension, because there was no reason for the extension.

UNKNOWN: Mr Derby-Lewis, ...

CHAIRPERSON: The answer is no.  In that application before the court he did not mention there was pressure on him.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That is correct, no, I said that, Mr Chairman.

UNKNOWN: Yes.  Bear with me for just a short while.

JUDGE WILSON: When did you make this statement, the 20th?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Which one, Mr Chairman?

JUDGE WILSON: The one we are talking about.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: The hand written one?

JUDGE WILSON: The hand written one.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No, Mr Chairman, apparently it was finalised on the 27th ...

JUDGE WILSON: 27th.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: ... of April.  It started, the pressure started on the 20th in terms of Section 29, the real pressure.  Until then I was even allowed to see my family that weekend and the impression was created that I was being taken care of and nobody had to worry about me and then on Monday morning, early, when nobody could do anything about it, that is when they sprung the Section 29 on me.

UNKNOWN: Do you agree that no complaint was voiced by your attorneys or counsel?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: As far as I know, there was no complaint at that stage.

UNKNOWN: Even though the pressure started as soon as you were converted from a criminal procedure detainee to a Section 29 detainee?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman, I do not know whether there was any relevance in terms of the further application, because at that stage the pressure was off.

UNKNOWN: When did the pressure start?  Let us just get that clear.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: The pressure started on the 17th of April when I was arrested.

UNKNOWN: Yes and, obviously, that was before you made, you saw your attorneys in order to oppose the extension?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I beg your pardon.  Yes.

UNKNOWN: Yes.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That was my initial arrest.

UNKNOWN: Yes, yes.  Now, I want to read to you a newspaper cutting which may or may not have come to your attention, published on the 2nd of May 1993.  This may have been whilst you and your wife, when was your wife arrested?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: On the 21st I think, Mr Chairman.

UNKNOWN: 21st, Yes.  So probably, ...

MR DERBY-LEWIS: The 23rd, no ...

MR DERBY-LEWIS: ... you were probably in detention at, on the 2nd of May 1993.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I was, Mr Chairman.

UNKNOWN: Yes.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes.

UNKNOWN: I want you to comment on a statement made.  I will, we will hand in a copy, Mr Chairman.  It is headed,
"Was the overbearing Gaye Derby-Lewis playing Lady Macbeth to her ambitious husband.",
and I merely do that for the purposes of identification, but what I am concerned about is this,
"Her husband became a MP in 1987 forging a reputation in Parliament where even his CP colleagues strove to keep up with him to keep up civil appearances as an inveterate racist. Andries Beyers, a senior CP official at the time said,
"I think sometimes he became an embarrassment to us.  He was a complex, difficult character, very, very hard line.  He had a calling to bring English speakers to the CP, but his personal style actually put them off."
		He lost his Parliamentary  seat in 1989, Whites only election, at which point he decided, without abandoning his role as a self-appointed leader of the English speaking South African ultra-right to consolidate friendships elsewhere.  One of these friends was David Irving, the controversial British historian, famous for his Hitler sympathies.".
Now, I do not want, I do not expect you to admit this, but who was Mr Beyers?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman, Mr Beyers was a man who had been, who left the party at that stage.  He was a man who had an axe to grind with me, because I saw through him long before anyone else in the CP in terms of what he was using the Conservative Party for his own personal affairs.

UNKNOWN: Yes.