Amnesty Hearings — Cape Town — 2000-03-15

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: No, that was a specific military action, you call this a preventative attack, in other words before the enemy acts you do what he wanted to do.

MR WILLIAMS: You're acting against a building not against people?

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: We said yesterday that the message would be given in this way.

MR WILLIAMS: But wasn't it common knowledge that if the army acted against uMkhonto weSizwe that they will retaliate and that they will try to kill people in retaliation to the attack down of the army?

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: I will not speculate who had done what at that time.

MR WILLIAMS: But was that ever the case?

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: What do you mean by this?

MR WILLIAMS: People react in retaliation in what was done against them?

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: We did this, that was the war, that was the insurgence war and the counter-insurgence war, the revolutionary war and the counter-revolutionary war, that was the order of the day.

MR WILLIAMS: But you are now targeting a building that was used by terrorists?

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: I told you just now that one of the priorities had been enemy structures, enemy logistical lines and in this case enemy planning places.  It could have been a meeting place, it was known and I accept that it would not be acknowledged at this point, I understand the political reasons that you are asking this but at that point we saw it like this.

MR WILLIAMS: Sir, I put it to you that I was the leader of the Kewtown Youth Movement, myself and Osmond Alexander.  We were the leaders of that organisation.  I tell you, I was never involved in any act of terror, neither was I a gangster in any point in time.  In fact we opposed gangsterism, the gangsters know that.

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: Mr Chairperson, that might have been the reason why that information came to our avail, what the infighting between the groups were, we do not know.

MR WILLIAMS: But then wasn't it then possible for these terrorists to just use another venue as Advocate Bizos said yesterday and continue with their reign of terror?

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: That is just speculating, I do not have to answer that.

MR WILLIAMS: I put it to you that the act under these circumstances were completely illogical?

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: You would have to ask people on ground level.

MR WILLIAMS: Sir can I ask you whether there was an instruction from your side that after the bombing the Kewtown Youth should be monitored again to see whether the act achieved it's purpose?

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: No, I cannot remember anything of this nature.

MR WILLIAMS: So there was going to be no monitoring of the organisation or no follow up to see whether in fact you accomplished your objective?

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: The activity in itself was the aim.

MR WILLIAMS: Sir, I would like to believe that the organisation was a professional unit, I'd like to believe that but the evidence doesn't bear that out.  I don't dispute that you had the capacity or the organisation had the capacity to kill and cause destruction, I don't dispute that but I think the evidence tends to show that you were not or the organisation was not professional at all?

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: That is debatable, I think about a thousand times better than uMkhonto was, uMkhonto did not win one military operation or had any success.  Maybe they won the politics but that is completely debatable.

MR WILLIAMS: Now did it ever occur to you Sir that the creche that the venue was being used by little children, by toddlers?

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: That is why the operation was planned as it was planned.

MR WILLIAMS: Now you've stated also that you've specifically discussed the question of loss of lives and that the instruction was that this project did not cater for the loss of lives, is that correct?

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: That is correct, Chairperson.

MR WILLIAMS: Just give me one second, Sir?
	I want to refer you to bundle B, page 40.  The second last paragraph on the sixth line from the bottom, it says that and this is the statement of Mr van Zyl where he says:
"It was also said by Staal Burger that the project made provision for the loss of life insofar it had regard for members of the Kewtown Youth Movement."

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: Chairperson, this was a Section 29 statement and I think the time is appropriate now that I be granted an opportunity to discuss this or to address it.  There was a disclosure of the CCB within which the whole State structure including four or five Ministers, the general structure, the SAP, who turned against the CCB.  If you would cast your mind back to a very long time ago then these problems emanated after Dirk Coetzee became involved in a dispute with the then Police.  Dirk Coetzee started talking about Vlakplaas.  Vlakplaas was tabled and the Harms Commission flowed out from that in order up Vlakplaas and to present it as the CCB's activities.  So this statement was made under pressure, it cannot be accepted.  Many things were said but not one members of the CCB knew how we had to react in order to protect his own interests and if for one moment if I could go even further back, you must have seen everyone has seen that what I had said yesterday with regard to the Harms Commission was last night politic and I will take the blow now and hopefully in future I will get my blow in and that I had lied at the Harms Commission and this had been seen because political lines were given for it, that was my work and I know how to accept that.  What I do not accept is that now bits and pieces are taken and it was done yesterday.  Bits and pieces are chosen and nothing is presented in context.  The entire context within which my initial amnesty under the previous government where I said I opposed it, there was a cover up of the truth.  The truth is not being presented properly.  In my documentation here once again I covered the whole spectrum of activities and it is not seen in context.  I wish to present it to you in such a manner that every fact of what the CCB did, if we may go back, eleven years back, it was put before the government and then that government started tiptoeing in order to intimidate people and cover up things and some of us who are sitting here today were locked up for example.  During the Harms Commission I deposed to another statement and I said in that statement that I asked for the privilege for Omar and Evans and the Early Learning Centre and even for the monkey.  I answered specific questions with regard to Webster so it is an entire untruth to go and say for example on television that I had lied to the Harms Commission.  What bothers me is that it would appear as if there is a conspiracy of the current government with the previous government in order saying whatever you try to do with the CCB back then let's see if we can do the same today in order to catch them therefore these types of questions where one point is being lifted out and old Section 29 statements are being used and the blow has been delivered I have been rendered incredible and have been discredited and therefore I do not accept any of these things that are putting to me.

MR WILLIAMS: Mr Verster can we just focus on this statement?  Mr van Zyl makes a positive statement, he says that this project made provision for the loss of our lives.  He is specific with regard to who gave him that instruction.  He says it's Mr Staal Burger.  Do you say that this information that was provided by Mr van Zyl is a figment of his imagination?

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: I do not accept this statement I've already stated my case.

MR WILLIAMS: Is he lying about this?

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: That you would have to ask him.

MR WILLIAMS: Then Sir, I also want to ask you are you aware of the time when the bomb went off?