Amnesty Hearings — Cape Town — 1997-07-14

UNKNOWN: Mr Chairman, I refer you to the application, page 2, paragraph 9(a), there the applicant distinguishes between two periods, namely (a), his period at Murder and Robbery at Bishop Lavis from 1986 and (b), his period at the Terrorist Tracing Unit, from the middle of 1986 to 1990.
	If you turn to page 3, under A, period at Murder and Robbery at Bishop Lavis.  When the application was drafted, my client made it very clear in his application and I am sure you would have gone through it, mentioned that due to a lack of recollection and the fact that he received no information from the Truth Commission, he was not able to give the Committee enough information and that he could not apply for amnesty for any incidents which include any delicts.
	Mr Brink, who is to the right of me here, gave me a transcript last week, this is a transcript of the Sithlahya incident and you will see the nature and particulars on page 3 and following pages, once again, that incident my client cannot remember and therefore he cannot apply for that.
	After studying the transcript of the Sithlahya matter, there is only one sentence on page 2 where Mr Knipe is mentioned as having been involved in the assault on Mr Sithlahya.  My client is not implicated in any way in that transcript of Mr Sithlahya.
	This information came to the fore during the questioning by the Investigating Unit of the Truth Commission and there it was mentioned to my client that he was implicated.
	You will see in the application, second last page, I applied for a copy of any statement which implicates  my client, which the Investigating Unit might have in its possession.  I don't know why, but they never provided me with any particulars, until Mr Brink read the application and saw that we had problems with information and he then gave us the transcript.  
	I accordingly want to bring it to your attention that this whole period during which my client was at Murder and Robbery, had nothing to do with politics.  So there is no question of my client applying for amnesty for any delict committed with a political objective in this period.
	He denies categorically that he assaulted Mr Sithlahya in any way, he categorically denies that in this period at Murder and Robbery, he assaulted anybody, whether with a political motive or a common criminal.
	So I would like to ask you to ignore this period so pages 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7, we can actually delete.

JUDGE WILSON: Page 3, 4, 5, 6 of what?

UNKNOWN: And 7 of the application, we can scrap that.  We will continue with the application on page 7, under B - Period at Terrorist Tracing Unit Security Branch.

SISI KHAMPEPE: Should we therefore disregard the whole of A and only concentrate on the period B?

UNKNOWN: Indeed, yes.  If we all have the correct place, I will continue.  On page 7, under B, 9(a)(1).  Mr Benzien, during your period at the Terrorist Tracing Unit, for which deed or deeds are you applying for amnesty.

JEFFERY T BENZIEN: Chairperson, assaults, tortures, perjury committed during this period mentioned below, vis-a-vis suspects who were arrested and questioned as well as the death of Ashley Kriel.
	I also now apply for the cases which due to lack of recollection, I can't remember.  If I am given sufficient information by the Commission, I would like to help the Commission.  The period relevant here is the middle of 1986 until 1990, when the ANC was unbanned.
	The places, the whole of the Peninsula.

UNKNOWN: If we turn to page 8, subparagraph (4), Nature and Particulars.

JEFFERY T BENZIEN: I start there with Ashley Kriel.  I stand by my statement which I made in the inquest, 23/87 and dated the 15th of July, 1987.
	The reason why I am now applying is as follows:  This is an open and democratic forum in the new Republic of South Africa and I hope that I will be able to convince the families that I am speaking the truth.
	Hopefully this forum will convince the family that I am speaking the truth.

UNKNOWN: Chairperson, I am told that we first have to deal with the assaults and the torture, namely number 2 and then we can deal with the incident of Ashley Kriel at a later stage.  I don't know what the reason for that is, but if it pleases you, then we can continue like that.

CHAIRPERSON: I think you should do it the way it is most convenient to you and your client.

UNKNOWN: They didn't give me a reason why we should do it the other way around.  Perhaps if she can tell you, I would like us to continue based on this format, otherwise we are going to be jumping around, but if she can tell us the reason why, then I will abide by that.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Inthanga, is there is any reason why you think you should proceed on that basis?

MS INTHANGA: The victims Mr Chairman, asked that the torture incidents be heard before the Ashley Kriel incident, but if it is going to be convenient for Adv Cook to go ahead in that manner, then he can proceed.

CHAIRPERSON: Let us proceed.

UNKNOWN: I don't have a problem with that, we can continue along those lines.  As far as point 2 is concerned, dealing with the assaults and the torture, you can then start reading that.