bitter-aloe/trc-testimonies huggingface dataset:
Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1999-06-23

MR MOLOHLANYE: No, I would say because it was put here in terms of the evidence that was led that the applicant and his co-accused or the other applicants, they went into the IFP area with the sole purpose of attacking and killing members of the IFP and in them doing so they went further and took their possessions that they can buy ammunition ...(intervention)

MR MALAN: It's clear you're not hearing my question.  My question is if the panel should believe that the taking of the wristwatches and cash was a criminal act was mere theft because that if we decide in our understanding that was not the objective, would that objective not flow over as a criminal, an indication of a criminal intention in the killings?  That's the question of Mr de Jager.

CHAIRPERSON: May I try and clarify the issue further?  Will you say that if we should find that there was no political motive for the robbery, that it was criminal, would that dilute your argument and your submission that the two killings were politically motivated and that the act of killing both Mr Cele and Mr Mavundla was aimed at achieving a political objective as evidenced, as evinced by your client?  Would you say that you would still find, you would still argue and submit that they still have a political motive for the killing and that the evidence led before us should satisfy us that the killing was politically motivated and that whatever finding we have in respect of the robbery should not effect the motive that your client has testified to with regard to the killing?

MR MOLOHLANYE: Thank you Madame Chair, that is clear and I'm indebted to you.
	I think or I'd like to say that the robbery will not effect the purpose and the objective of the attack or the killing of these deceased.  Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much to the two legal representatives, presenting both Mr Ncishane, Ms Loonat, Mr Ngcobo represented by Mr Molohlanye and Ms Thabethe.  We'll reserve judgement in respect of this application and we'll pronounce our decision in due course.

MS THABETHE: As the Committee pleases.

MR MOLOHLANYE: As the Committee pleases.

MS LOONAT: As the Committee pleases, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Loonat you are excused.

MS LOONAT: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Thabethe what is the next matter to be heard?

MS THABETHE: The next matter Madame Chair is the matter of Madlala and Mngomezulu.

ADV DE JAGER: In the previous application were the victims notified and did you hear anything from them?

MS THABETHE: In the previous incident?

ADV DE JAGER: Yes.

MS THABETHE: I just want to confirm my answer before I give it.

CHAIRPERSON: There was an indication that the publication was by means of radio broadcast.  What may assist us in ascertaining would be the date because the date was not inserted, the date on which the radio broadcast was made with Radio Zulu.  Will you get that information and give it to us in due course?

MS THABETHE: I'll do that Madame Chair.
Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1999-07-26

FREDERIK JOHANNES PIENAAR: I did show the clothes, Chairperson.  The parents were with a legal representative, I cannot recall his surname now, but he was also at the inquest.  At the police station I showed them the clothes.

CHAIRPERSON: When you're talking about parents, are you talking about all the parents of all four of the deceased persons, four sets of parents?

FREDERIK JOHANNES PIENAAR: Chairperson, what I can recall specifically, Mr Naidoo's parents were there, there were some people with him.  I showed them the clothing and asked them if they wanted the clothing in the presence of their legal representative whereupon they answered that they did not want the clothes, they were just looking for a little chain which belonged to Mr Naidoo and I did not see or have the chain.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Moerane, when it's convenient...(indistinct - microphone not on) until tomorrow but when you get to a convenient time.

MR MOERANE: Mr Chairman after the clothing issue it will be a suitable stage.  Mr Pienaar you seem to have forgotten what you said at the inquest about this clothing.  Are you now telling this Honourable Committee that the parents of this Nyoka, this Mthembu and this Kotosa told you that they were not interested in the clothing?

FREDERIK JOHANNES PIENAAR: No, I refer to Mr Naidoo's parents, Chairperson.  I say that there were other persons with him.  I don't know who they were but I spoke specifically to Mr Naidoo's parents.

MR MOERANE: Let's hear what you're trying to say.  Did the parents of the three deceased that I've mentioned tell you they were not interested in the clothing?

FREDERIK JOHANNES PIENAAR: No, Chairperson, I did not speak to them.  Not at all.

MR MOERANE: I put it to you that none of the clothing was shown, physically shown to Mr Naidoo or the parents of the other deceased.

FREDERIK JOHANNES PIENAAR: The clothes were shown to them Chairperson, as I've said, in the presence of their legal representative who was there with them in the mortuary at Piet Retief.

MR MOERANE: Whereabouts?

FREDERIK JOHANNES PIENAAR: There was a little hall within the mortuary.  If the inquest is held, clothes are placed in a drum there, in the mortuary itself.

MR MOERANE: Mr Chairman, this might be a convenient stage.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you.  We'll now adjourn until tomorrow morning when we continue with these proceedings.  I discussed it with the legal representatives this morning and just subject to whether or not Mr de Kock could be brought in time, we would like to start at 9 o'clock tomorrow.  Is that possible for the Department of Correctional Services?  I'm addressing the person next to you, Mr de Kock.  Is it possible to be here at 9 tomorrow, please because we'd like to start at 9 o'clock.  Thank you.
We'll then adjourn.  At this same venue tomorrow to start at 9 o'clock in the morning.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1999-07-27

CHRISTO PETRO DEETLEFS: Yes, Chairperson, I suppose one could put it that way, but we went from the supposition that they would be armed and all the planning was undertaken within that context.

MR LAMEY: Thank you.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR LAMEY

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Deetlefs, that concludes your testimony.  You may stand down.  I see that it's now 1 o'clock so we'll take the lunch adjournment.  I just remind the legal representatives that we'll be finishing at 3 o'clock this afternoon, so if we can have lunch as quickly as possible to make up a bit of time and let's see if we can start, if it's convenient, as close as possible to half past 1, thank you.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
ON RESUMPTION

CHAIRPERSON: Before we commence, we'd just like to mention something relating to the question that was raised just before the tea adjournment and immediately after the tea adjournment, relating to the identity of the source.  We have now had opportunity to discuss the matter and what we've decided is that we will ask Mr Prinsloo for that piece of paper with the name on, that we will not reveal the name until such time as we have received and considered representation made on behalf of the person mentioned therein, that the person mentioned therein will be given notification in terms of Section 30 of the Act and will be requested in terms of that section to exercise his/her option to make representations within a specified period.  We though that perhaps 14 days would be reasonable time for such representation to be made and then if representations are being made, we'll again have an opportunity to hear argument, we might have to reconvene for that, and then only after hearing the representations will a decision be made as to whether or not the name should be revealed.  I think in that way we will be acting properly in giving the person concerned the right of representation, or the right to make representations.

MR PRINSLOO: Allocate an Exhibit number to this Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: It will be B and then also, I would also advise that the name contained on that piece of paper will not be revealed save through, if it is at all, through the Committee.  Thank you.

MS LOCKHAT: Chairperson, the next amnesty applicant is Mr van Zweel.
Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1999-07-27

MR MOERANE: Now was Col de Kock at that reconstruction?

JAMES EMIEL WILHELM VAN ZWEEL: I don't know Chairperson, it was a long time ago.  Is it not in the report?  I cannot recall.

MR MOERANE: All you say is that on the 24th May 1989,
"I was present at the scene when the scene was reconstructed and I indicated the place from where I fired shots."

JAMES EMIEL WILHELM VAN ZWEEL: Yes, that is correct.

MR MOERANE: So you do not recall whether Col de Kock was there or not?

JAMES EMIEL WILHELM VAN ZWEEL: I cannot recall who were all there.

MR MOERANE: In all probability he wasn't there because at that stage he was being kept out of this matter, not so?

JAMES EMIEL WILHELM VAN ZWEEL: That is possible, yes, Chairperson, because he was kept out of the matter.

MR MOERANE: You say even on that occasion, or on that occasion you saw a mark on the tar which you believed was caused by a bullet from the firearm that was fired by this person who came out of the kombi?

JAMES EMIEL WILHELM VAN ZWEEL: Yes, that's what I said, Chairperson, but I also said that it could have been one of the other - the advocate asked me and I said it could have been a bullet that might have ricocheted from somewhere or somebody else's bullet, I did not deny it.

MR MOERANE: I see.  So you are actually saying that you are not positive that that mark was caused by that bullet?

JAMES EMIEL WILHELM VAN ZWEEL: I am positive that the mark was caused by a bullet but I am not positive that it was caused by the bullet of an ANC member.

MR MOERANE: I suggest to you that this question of the person from the kombi firing, is something that you people fabricated for purposes of the inquest.

JAMES EMIEL WILHELM VAN ZWEEL: No, Chairperson.

MR MOERANE: You didn't see him fire.

JAMES EMIEL WILHELM VAN ZWEEL: Chairperson, I say I suspected that the person who had jumped out the left front of the vehicle fired in our direction and you asked that it could have been another bullet and I said, "yes it is possible."

MR MOERANE: Yes, but what I'm putting to you is that you did not see this person fire.

JAMES EMIEL WILHELM VAN ZWEEL: No, Chairperson, I suspected that he fired.

MR MOERANE: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Any other questions arising?  Thank you Mr van Zweel, that concludes your evidence.  You may stand down now.

JAMES EMIEL WILHELM VAN ZWEEL: Thank you, Chairperson.
WITNESS EXCUSED
Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1999-07-28

MARTINHUS DAVID RAS: That is correct Chairperson, I received recommendations for deeds in Botswana where we eliminated people, from the Commissioner of Police.

MR CORNELIUS: And the purpose of these questions ...

CHAIRPERSON: Is this, it is not really arising Mr Cornelius?

MR CORNELIUS: If it pleases you, I just wanted to claim his subjective line of thought, thank you.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR CORNELIUS

CHAIRPERSON: But you didn't receive any recommendation for committing perjury, did you?

MARTINHUS DAVID RAS: No Chairperson, but it was part of what we were doing, if we look at the Cosatu House incidents, it was directly approved from the highest authority.

MR MALAN: Mr Ras, I personally have a problem with this general type questions which Mr Cornelius led you, it is true that the Commissioner of Police and Min Vlok had applied for amnesty for the London bomb, but did you receive any commendations from the Commissioner about the elimination of these people from Swaziland?

MARTINHUS DAVID RAS: No Chairperson.

MR MALAN: Or of any politician?

MARTINHUS DAVID RAS: No Chairperson.

MR MALAN: And you withheld it from them, as far as you know, no knowledge was given to them, that it was reported to them?

MARTINHUS DAVID RAS: Chairperson, I would just like to say that the only, we speak of nine people who were killed.

MR MALAN: Yes, that is correct.

MARTINHUS DAVID RAS: And Min Vlok had a press  release about nine people, so somebody should have told him about the ninth person, or somebody wrote a press release for him and the person who wrote the press release, was wrongly informed about the ninth person, but somebody knew about the ninth person and Mr Vlok said there were nine persons.

MR MALAN: On the basis of a contact, not on the basis of shooting unarmed people?

MARTINHUS DAVID RAS: No Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, any questions arising?  Thank you Mr Ras, that concludes your evidence, you may stand down.
WITNESS EXCUSED
Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1999-07-28

MR MOERANE: Chairperson, if I can come to the rescue of the witness, I think this witness was concerned with the second incident, not the first one.  Ras was concerned, and I think the both means actually that both the group that were going to come in and the people that were going to escort them in, had to be eliminated.  I don't think he means two.

MR MALAN: No, it is just the use of the word both as a reference to the number of people that you were going to eliminate.  My next question is that you knew that the persons would return to the car, or did you only know about the one who you shot?  Your evidence isn't very clear regarding that?

JOHAN HENDRIK TAIT: It would have been two persons.

MR MALAN: Did you see both of them return?

JOHAN HENDRIK TAIT: Chairperson, it was dark, but the persons were speaking to each other, so I assumed that there had to have been more than one person who was returning to the vehicle.

MR MALAN: But you only knew of the one who you shot dead, the one who returned?

JOHAN HENDRIK TAIT: Yes, I knew about the one that had been shot.

MR MALAN: So you knew that there was another one somewhere in the vicinity?

JOHAN HENDRIK TAIT: Yes, that is correct.

MR MALAN: Despite the fact that you heard them running away with firearms, you walked to the vehicle and took the Makarov pistol, shot a hole in the petrol tank and set the vehicle alight while the second one was somewhere in the vicinity and most probably armed?

JOHAN HENDRIK TAIT: Chairperson, as far as I can recall, I heard him moving away from the scene, because you could clearly hear the sound of stones and gravel.   The question of approaching the vehicle and taking the firearm and setting the vehicle alight, that was a matter of seconds.  We didn't waste any time and we left the scene virtually immediately.

MR MALAN: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Are there any questions arising?  Thank you Mr Tait, that then concludes your testimony, you may stand down.

MR BOOYENS: Mr Chairman, may I request that the witness be excused from further attendance, he is running an operation as a milk farmer somewhere down in the Eastern Cape and he's got certain problems on his farming operation?  If there is a crisis, we can let him come back?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, unless there is any serious objection to that from anybody?   Yes, Mr Tait, you may be excused from further attendance, you of course know that it is your statutory right to be here.

JOHAN HENDRIK TAIT: Thank you Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: You of course are entitled to attend if you want to come back, you are very welcome to, but you may be excused from further attendance.

JOHAN HENDRIK TAIT: Thank you Chairperson.
WITNESS EXCUSED
Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1999-07-28

PAUL JACOBUS VAN DYK: Chairperson, that is correct.  There was a very important reason for it.  I don't however wish to present this as an excuse, I just want to put it clearly that this is what happened at that moment.  One of the persons who lay with me in the line, his safety catch of his firearm was not off and as the person approached the vehicle in front of us, I cannot say who the person was, I am not certain, he pulled his safety catch back and this made a rather loud noise and it appeared to me as if the person on the other side of the vehicle stopped and listened in our direction, as if he wasn't certain of what he had heard.  That is why I decided to open fire at that point.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.  Any questions arising from questions put by the panel?  Thank you Mr Van Dyk, that then concludes your evidence, you may stand down and I now see it is just passed eleven o'clock and this would then be an appropriate time to take the short tea adjournment.

MS LOCKHAT: All rise.
WITNESS EXCUSED
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1999-07-28

MR MOERANE: You see Mr Pienaar and Mr Theron had a very good source, a very well placed source, so they did not need that particular information, do you go along with that?

CORNELIUS JOHANNES BOTHA: I don't know, however good this source was, would not have had all the information, it would have been limited to her information.

MR MOERANE: You see, that is the normal function of a Security Branch office or any policeman concerned with collection of information or Intelligence.

CORNELIUS JOHANNES BOTHA: That is correct.  That is the primary function, yes.

MR MOERANE: But here you were involved in a different mission, it was not a question of collection of information, it was a specific mission of elimination?

CORNELIUS JOHANNES BOTHA: Yes Chairperson, sometimes there are instances where one has to act on information.

MR MOERANE: No further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MOERANE

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MS VAN DER WALT: Just a single issue Mr Botha.  You were here when Mr De Kock gave evidence about this incident, is that correct?

CORNELIUS JOHANNES BOTHA: That is correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: And if I recall the words of Mr De Kock as such, I want to know whether you understood it as such.  When he gave evidence about this incident, he said there was the idea of to catch these people, he used the word catch.  He testified that but the primary purpose was to eliminate them, did you hear that?

CORNELIUS JOHANNES BOTHA: My Lord, it could be, I cannot recall his evidence to that extent, but that is how I understood his evidence.

MS VAN DER WALT: Thank you, no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS VAN DER WALT

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, that concludes your evidence Mr Botha, you may now stand down.

CORNELIUS JOHANNES BOTHA: Thank you Chairperson.
WITNESS EXCUSED
Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1999-07-28

GERRIE JOHAN BARNARD: Yes, I am now in a position where I am second in command in the Detective Branch in Knysna and I have members who serve under me and there I cannot pursue the methods that we used at the Security Branch, I have to educate them so that they can become better police officers.  I think of it as the start of my police career.

ADV GCABASHE: Okay, fair enough, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Any questions arising?  Thank you Mr Barnard, that then concludes your testimony, you may stand down.
WITNESS EXCUSED

CHAIRPERSON: I see that it is now past four o'clock, this would then be a convenient time to adjourn and will nine o'clock be convenient again?  Thank you, we have come to the end of today's hearing and we will adjourn until tomorrow, the same venue, at nine o'clock in the morning, thank you.

MS LOCKHAT: All rise.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1999-07-29

MR MALAN: You see, during cross-examination by Mr Moerane, I heard you say that Vlakplaas was a hero, or a group of heroes to you.

JURIE BERNARDUS HAYES: Yes.

MR MALAN: You and the rest of the Security Branch in general, and the fact that they were participating indicated to you that it was acceptable to the entire, or for the entire country.

JURIE BERNARDUS HAYES: Yes, that is correct.

MR MALAN: But you were involved by Pienaar before you knew that Vlakplaas would be participating.

JURIE BERNARDUS HAYES: I think you may have misunderstood me.  We were often called and told that there would be an infiltration and then I would rush from where I was, get my firearm and see to it that I had enough clothing and such and arrived at the offices and when I arrived at the offices we would usually be briefed regarding what we were going to do, and what sort of infiltration it would be, where it would be and what we would do.  When I arrived there, Mr de Kock was already there and that is when I was informed for the first time.
	When I was called out, I was called out for a possible infiltration, I didn't know where it was going to be or what the circumstances surrounding it would be.  When I arrived at the offices the people were already there.

MR MALAN: From where were you called out, where were you when you were called?

JURIE BERNARDUS HAYES: I think with the second incident I was somewhere in Ermelo for some or other operation, that I was following up information about, but I cannot recall specifically where I was with the first incident.  But with both incidents I know that I had to rush to get there.

MR MALAN: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Any questions arising?  Thank you, Mr Hayes, that concludes your testimony, you may stand down now.
WITNESS EXCUSED

MS VAN DER WALT: And that completes all my applications.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Ms van der Walt.
Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1999-07-29

MS LOCKHAT: Thank you, Chairperson.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1999-08-11

MS THABETHE: You've also indicated that from there you took him to Amsterdam where he was questioned.

H J P BOTHA: That is correct.

MS THABETHE: And where he furnished you with some information.

H J P BOTHA: That is correct.

MS THABETHE: What kind of information was this?

H J P BOTHA: It was information with regard to the structure in Swaziland, information which was known to us or which was not known to us, which I could verify.

MS THABETHE: And then you said also that it became clear that he did not want to co-operate with you.  On what basis did you reach this decision?  Like I want to understand because there was information that he gave to you.  Now what made you, or what led you to believe that he's not willing to co-operate with you?

H J P BOTHA: The moment one would ask the person "Are you prepared to go back and receive information as to when terrorists would infiltrate?  Would you get that information for us with regard to weapons being smuggled in?"  And that is what we would want from an informer which is placed back in Swaziland.  And when these leading questions are asked with regard to that, there was a refusal and his body language indicated that he was unwilling to concede.

MS THABETHE: You've also indicated that you were not present when Mr Cele was killed, is that correct?

H J P BOTHA: That's correct.

MS THABETHE: So you wouldn't know how he was killed would you?

H J P BOTHA: No, I don't know.

MS THABETHE: At this stage Mr Chair, thank you, I have no further questions for this witness.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS THABETHE

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

ADV BOSMAN: Thank you, Chairperson.
	Mr Botha, I am not hundred percent clear with regard to the reconnaissance that you undertook.  You did not mention that in your application or in Exhibit D which is before us.  Would you not regard it as very relevant to your application?

H J P BOTHA: Yes.  During consultation it was not regarded as relevant and in my evidence today I mentioned that the area was not strange and we knew what Cele looked like because he was identified do us.  And the point was Skosana was introduced to me for the first time by Vorster in Swaziland - oh, excuse me, Sikhakane.  I knew of his existence as an informer, but what he looked like and so forth was not known to me and he was only introduced to me in Swaziland.

ADV BOSMAN: Was it discussed beforehand that you would go back and report back and then you would do the final planning?

H J P BOTHA: Yes, I think Col Vorster would be able to give more evidence in detail, but I can just explain it as such.  There was no finality with regard to a precise day and date on which he would come out, that is why there was an excursion, there was an arrangement with Vorster and the informer.  He confirmed it and a final arrangement was made for the following evening, and the following evening we carried it out.  ...(transcriber's own interpretation)

ADV BOSMAN: Thank you, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thanks very much, you are excused for the time being.
WITNESS EXCUSED
Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1999-08-17

MR VISSER: Well, Mr Chairman, that is part of the conflict of the past.  Many people on both sides were killed for less reasons than we today would do far less to persons.  That is the reality of the situation, Mr Chairman.  Yes, when one thinks about it on the basis of normal society, the killing of one person, as I said before, is unjustifiable, but what we're talking about here, Mr Chairman and you'll remember the case of Steyn who received amnesty as the ultimate example, where he was given instructions to take a man to hospital.  He then decided that he's been looking for this man for so long, he's not going to go through that terrible ordeal again.  He takes him behind a bush and he shoots him.  Now those were the terrible facts of our past Mr Chairman, which the Interim Constitution charges us to reconcile with each other through the process of amnesty and it is sometimes difficult, of course it is, but those are the realities, Mr Chairman.
	Mr Chairman, just to put one matter straight.  My learned friend seems to assume that Mr Taylor, because he's amnesty application went in the same time as du Preez and Wasserman, did that in cahoots or together with Wasserman.  It's not true.  Wasserman and du Preez did their amnesty applications through attorneys Wagener and Muller in Pretoria, while Mr Taylor did his through Mr Nel.  Mr Nel can confirm that, Mr Chairman.
	Now my learned friend says that du Preez was forced to deny that he assaulted Ninela.  Well that is not his evidence.  He says that he can't remember and he can take it no further than that.  For a man who can't remember, he can't say, Mr Chairman.
	Now we find it very strange that my learned friend says that after they heard what the applicant said, they went to do research and they found the documents which they placed before you.  Now referring to those documents, Mr Chairman, you heard my learned friend say this morning that the brother of Mr Ninela wishes to come and give evidence to say that the applications for the release of Mr Ninela was within his custody, so that would suppose, with Mr Chairman, that he had it all along.  It wouldn't have been something which he had gone to look for now because of anything that the applicant said, with great respect. 
	Yes, so to round up, Mr Chairman, it is not for the applicant to show that Mr Ninela was anything more than what my learned friend refers to as a sympathiser.  We prefer to refer to as a supporter of a political organisation and with that Mr Chairman, I again repeat my request that you consider the applications favourably.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.  Mr Rorich, in the light of the confession made by counsel for the victims and so on, there's not need for your to reply.  No argument has been made against your client, unless there is something very important that you wish to say?

MR RORICH: I have nothing to add Mr Chairman, thank you.
NO ARGUMENT BY MR RORICH

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
The Committee will consider it's decision and in due course make it known to the interested parties.  We will now adjourn for 45 minutes.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1999-08-18

MS THABETHE: Okay, when Dion Cele was abducted there was evidence that there was a kombi driven by Mr Sikhakane when he was abducted.  Now you have given something to the contrary that Mr Sikhakane did not drive the car.  I'm saying why do you say that?

CELESTE MORRISON: Well he told me that it was a White man driving the kombi.

MS THABETHE: So would I be correct if I say that with all the evidence that you've given, Mr Goodwill Sikhakane told that himself?

CELESTE MORRISON: Yes.

MS THABETHE: No further questions, Mr Chair.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS THABETHE

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Visser?

MR VISSER: Thank you Chairperson.
	Just to take it one step further, apart from the date which you gave as April 1988, you have no personal knowledge of any of the matters which you testified about?

CELESTE MORRISON: No.

MR VISSER: How do you remember so clearly that the date was the 27th April 1988 when Cele was abducted?

CELESTE MORRISON: Because we left Swaziland on the 29th April and that was my father's birthday, I wouldn't forget it.

MR VISSER: That was the day after?

CELESTE MORRISON: Yes.

MR VISSER: Well thank you very much for giving us that date because we didn't have the date and we're quite happy to accept your date.  Thank you Ms Morrison.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VISSER

CHAIRPERSON: Is that all?
	What do you do Ms Morrison?

CELESTE MORRISON: I beg your pardon?

CHAIRPERSON: What do you do?

CELESTE MORRISON: I'm a security officer.

CHAIRPERSON: Where?

CELESTE MORRISON: At Checkers, Scottsville and I work for Asset Security.

CHAIRPERSON: And although there might not be direct evidence about this but somewhere along the line the information has come to us that Goodwill Sikhakane has passed away?

CELESTE MORRISON: Yes Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: When was that?

CELESTE MORRISON: In 1991.

CHAIRPERSON: Where?

CELESTE MORRISON: He was killed in Greytown.

CHAIRPERSON: Did his death result in some criminal prosecution or a trial of anybody?

CELESTE MORRISON: No, not that I know about.

CHAIRPERSON: Were you present at the time when he was killed?

CELESTE MORRISON: No.

CHAIRPERSON: Any questions to ask?

MS THABETHE: Sorry Mr Chair?  She's just indicated to me that she made a mistake, there was a criminal proceeding following the death.

CHAIRPERSON: The death?

MS THABETHE: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Oh I see.

MR VISSER: Chairperson, if you would allow me two bits of information?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes?

MR VISSER: One is Eugene De Kock is a person who was found guilty in this trial, I'm not sure what he was found guilty of but he was charged and found guilty in regard to the murder of Mr Sikhakane.

CHAIRPERSON: I see.

MR VISSER: And the other bit of information is that there is of course an amnesty application in regard to Mr Sikhakane, not before you at present but some time in future it will come up.

CHAIRPERSON: I trust it won't come before me?

MR VISSER: You mean you hope it won't come before you.

CHAIRPERSON: Alright, thank you very much.

MS THABETHE: Thank you Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much, you are excused.

CELESTE MORRISON: Thank you.
WITNESS EXCUSED
Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1999-08-18

CHAIRPERSON: Well I regret that I can't comply with your request here, it seems as if we'll make up time in some other way.  Mr Visser your suggestion is granted.  We will now adjourn and resume at 9.30 tomorrow morning.

MR VISSER: As it pleases the Committee.

MS THABETHE: As it pleases the Committee.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes Mr Webster, we'll be here at 9.30 tomorrow morning and there are people who are coming specifically for the matter that is set down tomorrow.  Mr Pravine Gordon and Mr Lala?

MS THABETHE: Mr Chair, I had indicated to Mr Gordon's secretary that anything might happen this week, we might hear his matter, we might not hear his matter, it will depend on how fast we're moving.  I spoke to Mr Gordon this afternoon and I indicated to him that we had set down the Ndaba and Shabalala matter for today which hasn't kick-started as yet so I was under the impression that as soon as we finished this one we're going to do the Ndaba and Shabalala matter more especially because the applicants had indicated to me that it would be better to do the Ndaba and Shabalala first for the background than do the Lala and Gordon matter later on so I wasn't aware that we were going to do the Lala and Gordon matter before we had disposed of the Ndaba and Shabalala incident.

CHAIRPERSON: Well no, I thought because of the brevity of the matter, looking at the papers, we thought that because it is a short matter maybe we could dispose of that but we are in your hands and you must do the best you can.

MS THABETHE: Yes Mr Chair.

MR VISSER: Yes Chairperson, if I may be allowed to say so, you will recall right at the outset as Ms Thabethe has just told you, we indicated to you that the logical sequence would be to do Ndaba and Shabalala before Gordon and Lala for the reasons which we advanced to you.  The problem which we're now going to have if we want to interpose the Gordon and Lala matter earlier is that there are some witnesses, some applicants from Pretoria who are now waiting for the Ndaba and Shabalala matter to be concluded before they are going to be here, they certainly aren't here now Mr Chairman and I believe it's Mr Britz who appears for them, I'm sorry, Mr Nel who appears for them and he indicated that it would suit his clients certainly also if Gordon and Lala matter be heard after Ndaba and Shabalala so there will be a practical problem if we want to juggle them around at this stage, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.  Well I think that you will have to do the best you can, what you think is the most convenient which will cause the least convenience to everybody concerned.  That will be guided by you.

MS THABETHE: Thank you Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: We will adjourn until 9.30 tomorrow morning.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1999-08-19

MR WEBSTER: That is my intention, Mr Chairman but please don't hold it to me, there are other considerations of a more persuasive nature but in so far as my intention Mr Chairman is, we proceed on Tuesday because it's also in my interests to finalise the matter.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Webster, as things stand at present.  The committee is about to start a matter just now which is not likely to finish during the course of today and tomorrow and we will be meeting on Monday in the hope that we'll finish it by then.  I want to know whether it's possible for you to give us an indication on Monday whether your witness will be coming on Tuesday or whether you are not going to lead any evidence on Tuesday?

MR WEBSTER: Thank you Mr Chairman, I will be in contact with the Leader of the Evidence.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, please make every endeavour so that we know how to arrange the time of people who are involved, counsel who are involved as to whether they have to be here on Tuesday or not.

MR WEBSTER: And also if there are people to be called, to supply them with the necessary copies of statements.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, by Monday if you can tell us, it will facilitate everybody's work.

MR WEBSTER: Absolutely.  I agree.  Thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well, thank you very much.  Your application , this application is then postponed until Tuesday morning at 9.30 and on the understanding that you will let us know on Monday whether you are proceeding with any further evidence.

MR WEBSTER: Thank you Mr Chairman.

MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, do allow me just to place two matters on the role.  You did not ask me what my position is.  Mr Chairman, the owner of the car if he comes here and tells you that there were bullet holes through the roof, does not of necessity mean that there was a helicopter.  So really that evidence...(intervention).

CHAIRPERSON: Just, just don't worry about all that.

MR VISSER: And Mr Chairman we gave evidence ...(intervention).

CHAIRPERSON: The Committee is sufficiently experienced to know how to deal with matters of that kind.  You don't have to worry about that at this stage.  I don't know whether there's going to be the owner of a vehicle or not, whether we are to be confined to hear Mr Breytenbach, so we'll just leave it at that, Mr Visser.

MR VISSER: I just wanted to remind you that Gen Steyn did give evidence that he spoke to him and what he told him, Mr Chairman, so there's no chance of my learned friend calling Mr Breytenbach at all, in our submission.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, he's making every endeavour in the hope of persuading him.  This matter is adjourned, at your request.

MR WEBSTER: As the Commission pleases.

CHAIRPERSON: Until tuesday morning.  We will take the short adjournment now and we will resume at 11.15 when we will proceed with the next application.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1999-08-20

CHAIRPERSON: This is not a trial, this is an inquiry.  If you are going to call Mr Maharaj, I'm wondering whether we ought not to hear Mr Maharaj and that you know now that we might call him on Monday.

MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, I'm certain that there will be no problem, as I'm sitting here I can't believe that there can be a problem.

CHAIRPERSON: I'll tell you why because otherwise, he'd been hanging around the whole of yesterday and one doesn't want to find out that we are landed with this evidence, the rest of the evidence and take up the whole of Monday and find out that Mr Maharaj is delayed again.  So will you convey to Mr Maharaj that we will be prepared to interpose Mr Maharaj's evidence on Monday morning.

MR WILLS: Mr Chairperson, what I could request, I've sort of briefly discussed this with Mr Maharaj, is if we could, I don't think in view of our cross-examination of the last witness, there's a lot of ground that we have already covered.  We'll obviously be putting certain of that to this witness where it's pertinent.  What I'd like to suggest Mr Chairperson, if we could finish the cross-examination of this witness and then interpose Mr Maharaj, I very much doubt that we'll go beyond lunch.

CHAIRPERSON: No I meant that.  I want us to get done with this witness's evidence.

MR WILLS: Yes thank you Mr Chairperson.

MR VISSER: Mr Chairperson, there's just one matter that I have forgotten about.  van der Westhuizen has now become a contractor after having been a policeman and he is now making roads and he works for apparently when he's away from work he loses money and he's working at Newcastle at the moment.  When we seek to interpose Mr Maharaj, can we at that stage just consider what the position if in view of the time remaining etc because I'd like to try and get Mr van der Westhuizen away as, on Monday also, if we could possibly manage it.

CHAIRPERSON: We'll certainly consider that.  This Committee will now adjourn and resume at 10 o'clock on Monday morning.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1999-08-23

CHAIRPERSON: Before we start today's hearing, I think I should explain why I am now presiding over the hearing.  Unfortunately Judge Mall was taken ill yesterday and is in hospital at the present time.  We are uncertain as to how long he will be there, but obviously it will be for some time and in the circumstances I was requested to take over the hearing.  I have discussed the matter with the legal representatives of the applicants and the victims and we have agreed that we can continue with the hearing, with the hearing of evidence but that arrangements will be made to obtain a transcript of the evidence that has been led up to now and of course a recording will be made of the evidence and a transcript obtained from now onwards.  If Judge Mall recovers rapidly, which I trust he will, and is able to rejoin us, we will then have a Committee of four with a complete record of all the proceedings available to us.  If he is unable to join us we will then proceed with the present Committee of three and the reason for the transcript and the delay in addresses is that you will all be able to refer me and the other members of the Committee to any points you wish to make in regard to the evidence that has already been led. As I say, I have discussed this matter with the legal advisers concerned and as I understand it they are all in agreement with this procedure.

MR VISSER: Mr Chairperson, Visser on record, what you have stated so far is in fact correct, as far as we understand it.  Thank you.

MR WILLS: Thank you, Mr Chairperson, John Wills acting for the families of Shabalala.  I also agree that that's an accurate reflection of what was agreed in chambers.

MS POSWA: Adv Poswa on behalf of the Ndaba family.  That is the correct position.

MS THABETHE: Thabile Thabethe the Evidence Leader.  I'm always at the service of everybody else.  Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Perhaps one thing that I should have done at the beginning, I will do now and that is place myself on record.  I am Judge Wilson.
Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1999-08-25

CHAIRPERSON: So if you can please get together.  Stage one, contact the dentist and he undoubtedly should be able to tell you over the telephone as to whether he's got any records relating to such a patient or not.  If he has no records well that's an end to the matter.  If he has records well then he will have to make arrangements and make what is available, available to him, to ask him if he can express an opinion or if he needs further examination and if so ask one of the forensic team in Durban, if it is Durban, to go and conduct an immediate examination and have a report available for the dentist by tomorrow morning or if the dentist will participate.

MR LAX: Can I just ask, are there other ...(inaudible)

MR VISSER: There will certainly be yes.  I don't act for all the applicants.

MR LAX: Should they not be kept informed of these developments?

MR VISSER: Yes, that's another matter.  Chairperson, your suggestions to Mr Wills is a good suggestion.  Perhaps once we get feedback tomorrow the other counsel are in Pretoria are I'm not sure how many there will be but we can then contact them there and put them in the picture but we'll have to wait to see whether there's some reaction, whether this is going to go anywhere but what we'll certainly tell them in the meantime which they'll know no doubt themselves is there is another bundle and we're now looking at a long hearing here but maybe then nothing comes from it.

MR WILLS: Chairperson, I just want to place on record at this stage that I have not yet consulted with the family in any manner so I will do my best to contact them but at this stage I haven't done so.

CHAIRPERSON: I fear that I have arranged a substitute, he was probably told that it's a matter that we should finish next week and I think he should also be told of what is happening.

MR WILLS: Yes, somebody has flown in from Copenhagen, Chairperson, on I think he arrives in Durban on Sunday.

CHAIRPERSON: ....(inaudible) Botha, Du Preez, Wasserman, Steyn and Van der Westhuizen to a date to be arranged with instructions that a full investigation can be made into the recent suggestion that other evidence is available and that if anything results from such investigations that all the parties concerned be notified of it and arrangements be made with them as to a suitable date for hearing as with the Members of the Committee and the second one, that is the matter set down for hearing next week, that attempts be made to contact the dentist concerned to supply him with all the information available and to ascertain whether he can express an opinion which should shorten proceedings, that is the identity of the deceased.  Well not the identity of the deceased, the identity of the body alleged to be that of the deceased.

MR VISSER: Before you arise Chairperson, I interrupted you while you were beginning to thank people.

CHAIRPERSON: I'd like to thank all of you this week sitting odd hours and doing all you could to help us get through our work and to those appearing.  Thank you.
HEARING ADJOURNS SINE DIE
Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1999-09-01

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I don't know how we're going to handle it logistically.  I've got no idea which roads to take etc and whether we're going to go in different - how we're going to go, but perhaps it might be an idea to, before we start the next witness, to do it.  We'll then take an adjournment and the go and do this inspection.  I don't know if - we'll see how long it takes and we might have time to come back here and you say we won't - yes the trouble is it's in two different directions.  Yes, perhaps then if we can adjourn and then just make arrangements on who's going and how.  Yes, we had a brief meeting now.  You will recall that I said we are now going off on an inspection in loco.  We have, however been informed by the Commission, one of the Commission's logistics officers that it wouldn't be possible to have a proper inspection in loco at this time.  They need a bit of time to prepare for it, you need batteries fro the cameras, transportation etc and after discussing the matter, it's been agreed that what we will do is we will meet here at half past 8 tomorrow morning and then we will proceed in the first instance to the shooting range in the Winkelspruit area and from there we'll then proceed to that Inanda road area that's been referred to.  And also I've been informed that there will be a kombi available as well for any person who, member of the family, who wishes to come along.  So we can then at this stage proceed with the evidence of the next witness.

MR VISSER: That will be Mr Lawrence Gerald Wasserman, Mr Chairman.
Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1999-09-01

MR NEL: Mr Chairman, Mr Taylor died approximately two years ago of brain cancer and at the time of drawing his application he was at that stage already very ill.  I recall drawing his application with Senior Counsel, Adv Booyens in Pietermaritzburg and we had to stop because of him being tired and we had great difficulties in getting him to recollect certain incidents at certain times.

MR VISSER: But the date I think was October/November 1997, Mr Chairman.  I thought Mr Nel might have a more accurate date.

MR NEL: I'm sorry, I don't have it at hand, but I can get that from the file and will have it for you in the morning Sir.

MR VISSER: Thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Wasserman, that concludes your evidence.  You may stand down.
WITNESS EXCUSED

CHAIRPERSON: We've now come to the end of today's hearing, I see it's quarter past four.  As mentioned earlier, tomorrow morning we will be meeting here at half past eight in the morning in order to proceed for an inspection in loco, or inspections in loco.  I do not know how long those inspections will take, but I would guestimate that we would probably be starting back here with the leading of evidence at approximately half past eleven or somewhere around there, I don't know, but as mentioned earlier, we will be meeting here at half past eight and I have been informed that there will be some arrangement for a kombi for members of the family who may be interested in going.  I don't know if they'll be able to provide public transport for other persons beyond the family to go.

MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, before you rise, I don't know whether you want reading matter for tonight, because we have the statements of van der Westhuizen and our last witness available.  It has been handed to our colleagues.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Visser, if we could get that now and then this will be received as Exhibit F, is it?
	Yes, thank you.  So we'll then adjourn until half past eight tomorrow morning.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1999-09-01

MR RAMAWELE: Now the question about - you know you've heard the suggestion that Mr de Kock could have been protecting you about not going into Chesterville, do you remember that?

BUTANA ALMOND NOFOMELA: Yes, Sir, I remember that.

MR RAMAWELE: Now is it true that before this incident you were an experienced operator in these kinds of activities?

BUTANA ALMOND NOFOMELA: Yes, that is correct, Sir.

MR RAMAWELE: As far as you are concerned, have you ever noticed a preference by Mr de Kock at Vlakplaas wherein he would rather prefer that other black members not get hurt and others should get hurt?

BUTANA ALMOND NOFOMELA: No, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: In other words, did Mr de Kock have a soft spot for you?

BUTANA ALMOND NOFOMELA: No, that is not so.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Mr Ramawele?

MR RAMAWELE: That is all.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR RAMAWELE

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much.  Yes, Mr Nofomela, thank you, you are excused.
WITNESS EXCUSED

MR RAMAWELE: Mr Chairman, that is our application.  Mr Nofomela is going to call no further witnesses.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well, that's the case for Mr Nofomela.

MR RAMAWELE: Yes, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Ramawele.