Amnesty Hearings — Cape Town — 2000-09-26

MR KAHANOVITZ: Alright.  So you personally would never contact either Gen Webb or a member of his staff, to set up a meeting between Webb and Verster?

WOUTER J BASSON: No.  I must just add that Mr Verster also had a person who was his personal assistant, so to speak, ...(end of side A of tape)

MR KAHANOVITZ: ...(inaudible)

WOUTER J BASSON: ... upon an occasion ...(intervention)

MR KAHANOVITZ: Is that a real name or an administrative name?

WOUTER J BASSON: It is his real name.

MR KAHANOVITZ: It's a real name.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, how do you spell Phaal?

WOUTER J BASSON: P-h-a-a-l.

MR LAX: Please repeat that.

WOUTER J BASSON: P-h-a-a-l.

MR LAX: Mr Kahanovitz, there was one thing you said earlier that I just wanted to follow up on quickly while it's still alive.  You said something to the effect that if Verster gave the go-ahead after he said he would go and get the go-ahead from Gen Webb, then you assume that he had got it.

WOUTER J BASSON: Yes, that is correct, there was always a lapse of time, it wasn't a question of us doing something at 11 and then at 12 o'clock the person would call and say go ahead, there was always at least a day or two before we were contacted and told that it had been cleared or that we could continue.

MR LAX: The questions is really, did you always know that Verster, did he always say to you "Look, I'll take this matter up to Webb and I'll find out what he thinks", and then come back and say "Yes, he said yes"?

WOUTER J BASSON: Chairperson, it was actually an unspoken rule, my Commander did not have to tell me "Listen, I'm going to my next Commander and then I will get back to you".  It may be that if he returned and he spoke to me or Mr Burger, that he would say "the Chairperson has approved it, continue, but these are the limitations", or "you may not continue, make another plan and make another presentation."

MR LAX: You see, the purpose of my question is to actually test that assumption, are you just assuming that when Verster considered a matter and then there was a lapse of time, are you just assuming that he went to Webb to get higher authority, because that's what he should have done, or do you know for a fact that he actually did it, or did he tell you that he would do it?  There are three distinct possibilities there.

WOUTER J BASSON: Chairperson, as I've stated, yes, I accept that he would clear it with the Chairperson, I cannot confirm that he did so, but I cannot recall specifically that he returned and said "listen, the Chairperson has approved it, continue", or if he said "listen, that presentation that you made two days ago, you may continue with it."  So it is very difficult for me to give you a specific answer to this question.  If you understand what I mean.

MR LAX: I do, it's just that you gave me the distinct impression that you had been told by Verster that he would get his permission and that was the sort of modus that you followed, and clearly I got the wrong impression from what you said.  You're not at all sure as to whether you did in fact, or were in fact told that Webb would approve it or not and that Verster would go to him.

WOUTER J BASSON: Well as I've stated, Chairperson, I was not present and today I cannot bring you a file and say "this is what the Chairperson signed", or whatever the case may be.  It is difficult for me to respond to this question, I cannot give you any better answer than this.

MR LAX: You see, the other thing is you've just said that, and you made this as a very positive ascertain, you said Webb was completely informed, as far as you were concerned he was completely informed.  They met on a weekly basis.  Again, are you making assumptions?  Do you know for a fact that they did actually meet?

WOUTER J BASSON: Chairperson, let me put it as follows.  There were weekly meetings with the Chairperson and it wasn't only during those meetings that Mr Verster communicated with him, and I assume, gave him thorough feedback regarding every region and the progress and the situation and so forth.
	It could also have been that with the exception of those meetings, he could also just have called him and arranged to meet him somewhere and then briefed him regarding a project that was going to take place.  So that could also have taken place, but I was never present during such meetings.

MR LAX: You see it's just that Webb gave us the impression that this was a tiny part of his duties and he certainly didn't meet as often as once a week, often he had other duties, he couldn't possibly do that, and you're saying as far as you're concerned that was a definite, once a week they met.

WOUTER J BASSON: To test my questions you would have to get hold of any other Co-ordinator, a person from the inside who would be able to confirm my statement, no-one else can confirm or deny it.

MR LAX: My point is a simple one, do you know for a fact they met, or are you just again making assumptions?

WOUTER J BASSON: I was aware of meetings which took place, because the Chairperson came to the facility physically, and we saw them meeting, because we were always there.

MR LAX: That's very helpful to know on what basis you made that conclusion, thank you.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Mr Basson, let me put a hypothetical proposition to you for your comment.  Let's assume that Gen Webb wasn't very keen on the idea of people being assassinated inside the borders of the Republic.  Let us further assume that Joe Verster thought it was a very good idea to assassinate people within the borders of the Republic.  If the power relationship between the two of them was such that Joe Verster wasn't particularly interested in what Webb's views were, wouldn't Verster then just go ahead and just do things?  He's not scared of the General.

WOUTER J BASSON: Mr Chairperson, it is a hypothetical statement, but it is against the work ethics of the organisation to act on your own.

MR KAHANOVITZ: We know it's against the rules of the organisation, but what we also know is that this organisation consistently broke the rules, because that's what we've heard in the evidence.  You've also heard Gen Webb's evidence here, Gen Webb says in terms
"It's quite clear to me now that I look at things in retrospect, that I wasn't fully informed."
You heard his evidence.

WOUTER J BASSON: Yes, that's correct.

MR KAHANOVITZ: He says it's quite clear to him that he was not fully in control of the CCB, that was his evidence.  Did you hear his evidence?

WOUTER J BASSON: I heard it, yes.

MR KAHANOVITZ: So if - Gen Webb also gave some very interesting evidence when he said it was never explained to him in terms, that internal assassinations could be authorised by him.  Did you hear his evidence?

WOUTER J BASSON: I cannot recall everything, but I do accept that it is so.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Now as regards the transition from the PW Botha regime to the FW de Klerk regime, what significance, if any, did that have for the CCB, according to you?

WOUTER J BASSON: Well what I can remember is that I did not attach a lot of value to the differences, I allowed myself to be led by my Commanders, but what I can remember was that there was, or we definitely looked at the consolidation or the reorganisation, I cannot specifically recall the correct word, of all projects, in co-operation with the Chairperson.  In other words, if I recall correctly there was a consolidation amongst all the projects and it was again presented to the Chairperson ...(intervention)

MR KAHANOVITZ: Let me put to you what the evidence has been, because it's highly contradictory and maybe you can help us.  We have the evidence of Mr van Zyl, Mr van Zyl says that when FW de Klerk assumed power, they as the operatives were told that all internal operations were being suspended.  Do you recall his evidence?

WOUTER J BASSON: Yes.