Amnesty Hearings — Pretoria — UNKNOWN

CHARLES ALFRED ZEELIE: It's your words, it's not necessarily so, it would depend on the person's willingness to talk about certain things or not.

MR RAUTENBACH: Can we just once again have a look at page 379?   Sorry, this is not the page I was looking for, just a moment, the first two aspects which I'd like to refer you to, when I give you a page we're still going to get to, but first page 371 and then later 381, but first 371, at the bottom of the page, where it says, Mr Zeelie, you say
"I learnt the electrocuting methods from my very first years in the police force, and that is why I want to say that it's a general and widespread practice for obtaining information from unwilling suspects, it was general practice."
That's how I understood your testimony.    That is still your testimony?

CHARLES ALFRED ZEELIE: Yes, during my first years in the police, I did learn about this method.

MR RAUTENBACH: And then on page 381, there you say, with regards to this method, on the top of the page
"From my first year in the police, I had this entrusted, I knew this method, I saw it applied, and I never saw anyone having any long-term damage from this."

CHARLES ALFRED ZEELIE: That's correct, Your Honour.

MR RAUTENBACH: Mr Zeelie, can I understand from this that you started at the police in 1969 and that this method, or these methods of shocking people has been in use since 1969, is that correct?

CHARLES ALFRED ZEELIE: That's correct.

MR RAUTENBACH: As far as that same aspect is concerned, with regards to other methods, could you explain to us which other methods were used, except for the electrical shocks?

CHARLES ALFRED ZEELIE: Your Honour, I think I've mentioned earlier where a person was hung to a broomstick ...(intervention)

MR RAUTENBACH: I'm not trying to ask you something that's there to confront you, I'd just like you to look at page 390, page 390, in the middle of the page, you are asked by the chairman of the section 29 committee, you're asked the following, she refers to the use of the inner tubes, dan se jy
"I have knowledge of this, where the so-called tube method was used."
This tube method, what exactly was that, could you tell us?

CHARLES ALFRED ZEELIE: It's when a tyre, a tube, is pulled over somebody's face in order to suffocate that person.

MR RAUTENBACH: This is also to receive admissions or information from someone, and these types of methods were used since you arrived at the police in 1969?

CHARLES ALFRED ZEELIE: No, I referred specifically to the shock methods.

MR RAUTENBACH: But then these are other methods then which you also know of?

CHARLES ALFRED ZEELIE: That's correct.

MR RAUTENBACH: En dan se u
"I know of instances where the so-called broomstick method was used."
That's your next sentence.   Could you tell us, what did the broomstick method entail?

CHARLES ALFRED ZEELIE: His hands were cuffed and his feet, and the broom was put through his arms and legs and he was swung between two tables.

MR RAUTENBACH: To do what?

CHARLES ALFRED ZEELIE: It's just a type of way to make him talk, he is hanging on his arms and legs and he was being swung and it causes pain.   I never applied it, but I have seen it once.

MR RAUTENBACH: Dan se u
"I know of instances where a person's toe was pinched with pliers."
Kan u net dit verduidelik?

CHARLES ALFRED ZEELIE: I'd just like to, for you to, something, as I've said before, there must have been mistakes, "instances" might well be "instance" and not "instances".

MR RAUTENBACH: Can you just tell us what happened there?

CHARLES ALFRED ZEELIE: It's a specific case I saw where, and this came about in a court case, it came to light in a court case, I didn't see it myself, it was in a court case, where a person was charged and he was interrogated and in the court he gave testimony that somebody bit his toe, but it might not have been what happened, he was blindfolded, his toe was pinched with pliers, that's what actually happened.

MR RAUTENBACH: You pointed out that you were aware of all these methods, for example the tube and the broomstick method, and also the pliers story, you've made use of methods of coercion in the past, let's just get that on record.

CHARLES ALFRED ZEELIE: Yes, I mostly made use of the shock method.

MR RAUTENBACH: Why did you make use of the shock method?

CHARLES ALFRED ZEELIE: Because since my first years in the force, I was a young man, I saw this being used, I got to know it well.

MR RAUTENBACH: And you considered this the most effective method?

CHARLES ALFRED ZEELIE: Yes, it was very effective.

MR RAUTENBACH: Are you aware of cases where a person might have used different methods, maybe first try to suffocate the person, then it doesn't help, and then later you'd apply electric shocks, maybe as the last measure?

CHARLES ALFRED ZEELIE: No, Your Honour, I can't see why electric shocks would be used as the last measure, but there's no reason why a person should first use one method and then later another method, it's not necessary.

MR RAUTENBACH: Do you think, you are saying the shock is effective enough?

CHARLES ALFRED ZEELIE: With all respect, Your Honour, I'd like to know where these questions are leading us, because most of them are hypothetical, it's concerning methods that might be used, but it's not relevant in this case, and we're not getting anywhere?

MR RAUTENBACH: That's completely correct, Mr Chairperson, several witnesses have been asked about this, but each one is an individual applicant for amnesty and with regards to each one, the family's feeling is still that the way that Mr Bopape died, the fact that he was questioned or interrogated and after light shocks as described by the witnesses was applied to him, he suddenly died, that in the light of those versions, the fact is that these versions are not acceptable to the family and that's why I have to ask each witness the questions to investigate the issue and to understand that there might be room for other types of assault, other types of methods used, whichever, which might have led, in the end, to the death of Mr Bopape, whether it has been because of suffocation, shock, assault or whatever.  Those are the reasons I'm asking these questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I can understand the reasons.   I think this is also a matter that can be adequately dealt with in argument, but I think you can ask him whether he used any other particular methods.   If we have to go through every possible method ...(intervention)

MR RAUTENBACH: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: ...of torture, we could be here for a long time, because there's innumerable types of methods.

MR RAUTENBACH: As it pleases you.   I may just point out that for purposes of these aspects, the methods, I have asked the questions that I would have liked to ask, I have actually come to the end of it, but for maybe asking this last question.   Mr Zeelie, did you ever make use of any other method, other than the shock method?

CHARLES ALFRED ZEELIE: No, Your Honour.

MR RAUTENBACH: Mr Zeelie, it seems from the documents, and perhaps you could give us some clarity, that you are referred to in the documents as a so-called State witness.  What is this all about?

CHARLES ALFRED ZEELIE: I would be very glad if you could give me information on that.

MR RAUTENBACH: Did you at no stage contact the attorney-general?

CHARLES ALFRED ZEELIE: No, I didn't contact the attorney-general, they contacted me.

MR RAUTENBACH: And did the attorney-general, when they contacted you, what was it all about, can you tell us?

CHARLES ALFRED ZEELIE: It had to do with information that the attorney-general had, and I was questioned about it.

MR RAUTENBACH: Was this about Stanza Bopape?

CHARLES ALFRED ZEELIE: Yes.   At that stage I had no information, I didn't give it to the attorney-general.

MR RAUTENBACH: Did you at any stage give it to the attorney-general?