Human Rights Violation Hearings — Pietermaritzburg — 1996-11-20

WITNESS:   There could be many reasons for that.  On that specific day we were so busy - I am now talking about the Tuesday.  I just had to run from one scene to the other to attend incidents of shooting.

DANIEL JOHANNES MEYER:  You were so busy that you could not disarm the people who were going to kill other people and burn their houses?  You were busy doing what?  You were running up doing what, if you could not disarm the people who were going to take lives of the people?

WITNESS:   I hear you. Chairperson, once again from my side I am quite sure that the circumstances, even on the Tuesday, would have been far worse.  Unfortunately what you might have prevented can't be measured.  One can never measure anything which you prevented, and nobody can afterwards criticise you or say that you did good work.  But to say we did nothing is simply not true.

DANIEL JOHANNES MEYER:  Last question.  So are you surprised that the UDF people hated you as you have just said?  Are you surprised that the UDF people hated you as you have just said yourself?

WITNESS:   No, I am not surprised.  I am not surprised, especially not after all the evidence that I have listened to.

DANIEL JOHANNES MEYER: Thank you.

DANIEL JOHANNES MEYER:  Director Meyer, I am not going to be very specific in my questions.  I will just ask questions related to conduct.  Firstly you have just said there two sides of the - to a story.  What I would like to say is that there is one truth, one and only truth.  In your presentation you are almost discordant or inconsistent with the presentations that have been made by many other people yesterday, on Monday and Tuesday.  You are almost at odds with them.  I am beginning to wonder what is your conception of truth.  We are a Truth Commission here.  So the big question in your conception of truth.  Number two, with regard to the specials, you clearly and loudly say most of them were on their own missions.  I completely disagree with you.  The specials were recruited, were brainwashed, were trained to kill, by somebody.  Probably you know who that person was.  Who was behind that?  They were not trained to be guards, they were trained to kill.  Can we hear from you who was responsible for that training?

WITNESS:   As far as the first question is concerned, during this hearing, where the truth has to emerge, we are trying to find out the entire truth, but as it relates to a period of about six, seven or eight years of our lives.  Now we want to use bits and pieces and try and present that as the truth.  Perhaps I should just ask, the second part of question one, if it could perhaps be repeated.

DANIEL JOHANNES MEYER:  Question one or question two?

WITNESS:   Question one.

DANIEL JOHANNES MEYER:  I said I am beginning to be confused about the conception of truth and your own conception of truth.

WITNESS:   Further as regards question one, for this specific hearing of the Truth Commission we are searching for absolute truth, and it is expected of the police to answer to allegations which were never put to the police.  Two weeks ago we were told that a hearing was to take place, and that we should start preparing something for the Commission to give answers as to what we did during those times.  I think that in any democratic system, where certain allegations are made against a person, a person must surely be in possession of the allegations to be able to prepare a defence or a submission.  So to say to me - comment on answers given by previous witnesses, it's not very easy at all.  As far as training and indoctrination is concerned, and everything surrounding the special constables, these issues were not my decisions, and I don't think that those decisions and training - those decisions weren't made on our level, and I think that those answers must be sought with the government of the day.  Our policing today is such that we work for society, we work for the communities, but in those days we worked for the Government.

DANIEL JOHANNES MEYER:  The last question related to this is that if you look at lines of authority and accountability you are accountable for the atrocities - for all the atrocities and gross violations that were committed by the specials.  You agree with me there?

WITNESS:   I agree, as long as it happens in a just way, and if my personal involvement in it was such that I committed any offence then I agree with you.

DANIEL JOHANNES MEYER:  If you are accountable for those commissions I do think it's unfair for the specials to take the flak, to be considered responsible for all the atrocities, because if we look at what has been happening people sitting in high positions have got away with murder, while the people who were in lower positions, who have taken directions from them, have been treated as scapegoats.  This is my analysis of the situation.  That is why I think you are accountable in a way for these atrocities.

WITNESS:   Very probably I was, because I was part of the Government and the structures of the day.

DANIEL JOHANNES MEYER:  And my last question.  Having said all this do you feel comfortable occupying the position you are occupying today, having been partly accountable for all the atrocities that killed hundreds of blacks, thousand hundreds of blacks?  And also sitting in a position where you are not trusted by the majority of blacks in this country.  Thank you.

WITNESS:   Firstly I am happy with the position in which I am at the moment.  I know what I did, and I can tell you that I did not commit murder.  I didn't.  And I think there are many ANC people today who will testify on my behalf to say that I wasn't involved in murder.  But once again there were certain people who went off on their own missions, and those specific people must come and explain.

DANIEL JOHANNES MEYER: Thank you.

DANIEL JOHANNES MEYER:  Director, I just want first to make a comment on the alleged impartiality.  It's just a note, you may not respond to it, but I just want to say that I would argue against your claim that ... (incomplete - end of Side B, Tape 1) ... your submission makes it clear that the attackers were only local people.  People in the bus only disembarked to chase away the attackers.  At no stage are they referred to as aggressors, they were always defending themselves, and I am finding it difficult to believe that, because some witnesses have referred to instances where the buses would stop, and the passengers will do some unpleasant things like urinating at other people's fences, which to me is provocative.  That's observation number one in relation to impartiality.  And also you have admitted meetings between yourself and Mr Ntombela, which was good, but what I am trying to say here is that I am not hearing you telling us of similar meetings between yourself and with leaders of UDF or ANC to demonstrate impartiality.  And also the manner in which Mr Ntombela seems to have been handled by yourselves.  I am not going to go into details because Mr Lax has thrashed this point thoroughly with yourself, but the fact that he ignored your advice about the road, and he was not confronted, he was not reprimanded.  That reminds me of what some witnesses said about how Inkatha leadership was treated softly by police force.  And the question now.  Those were just notes.  On page six you made reference to arrests, that people who were looting were arrested.  Were they convicted?