Special Hearings — Mandela United Football Club Hearings — 1997-11-28

MR SEMENYA: Before the "in camera hearing" and in May of 1995, the request which this letter is making is that there is information that Mbatha and Dlamini are being assaulted with the view to implicate Mrs Mandela in this murder and we make two requests which would appear in paragraph 2 - I mean page 2, under paragraphs A & B
"If our instructions are to demand that
  (a) the police either charge our client for the alleged offences that she allegedly committed, failing which they must stop making any press statements or utterances to the media in connection with the alleged police investigation involving our client and:
  (b) you give us access to the above-mentioned people in order to determine whether the alleged unlawful conduct of the police is correct or not"
And according to my instruction there was no response to this letter of May Mr Commissioner.

JOHN GEORGE FIVAZ: Chairperson, if I look at the letter then I think I must inform the TRC about the arrangement in the management environment of the police service.  We have four Deputy National Commissioners and each one will be on duty for a specific week on a rotating basis.
 It seems that this letter was received at that time by Lieutenant General Morgan Chetty, he referred it to a Brigadier Britz and Schoeman - as I can see on the document, and he said in his remark: "Discuss it with the legal section of the police service and treat as urgent".
 So this was not in my hands at all, it was dealt with by the South African police service but I assume by the detective service.  So if we would like to give proper explanation about developments around this letter, I think those officials must be called to answer those questions.

MR SEMENYA: But according to me, the statements by Cyril Mbatha and Dlamini implicated Mrs Mandela with Doctor Asvat death after the date of this letter.

JOHN GEORGE FIVAZ: Chairperson, that's quite possible, that's quite possible but this specific letter - it's really the very first time I'm seeing the letter but what I can testify from my side, it has been received by National Commissioner's office head office and it was referred to the Detective Branch to deal with.

MR SEMENYA: I think what is of interest - at least to me if not important to the Commission is, have you discovered the information when did Richardson become a police informer?  Was it before the abduction of the children from the Manse or after?

JOHN GEORGE FIVAZ: In my case Chairperson, I can say most definitely about - the first time I was informed about the possible involvement of Richardson and other people was when my official was in London and after I had a meeting with Mr Tony Leon.  I was personally involved in anyone of these investigations at any stage.

MR SEMENYA: But you would agree with me, it would be important to know whether the removal of Stompie from the Manse was instigated by this police informer - we know that he's the one who removed them together with Falati.

JOHN GEORGE FIVAZ: Chairperson, I think I can only assume certain issues here because I was never involved.  We are going to have two of our investigating officers here today - three of them as a matter of fact, they worked on a first hand basis with the investigations and I think they will be in a position to answer exactly what is asked now.

MR SEMENYA: Let me ask as a matter of policy, my understanding is that the Government uses tax payers money to pay informers for among others, to use that information to stop the commission of an offence.  Is that a fair statement to make?

JOHN GEORGE FIVAZ: That is normal practice.

MR SEMENYA: Now, if this information we have in front of us is correct, Gerry Richardson would have known that Doctor Abu-Baker Asvat was going to be killed before it happened.  You would expect that as an informer he must take that information and give it to the police to stop the murder of Doctor Abu-Baker Asvat.  Is that fair to say?

JOHN GEORGE FIVAZ: That is also normal practice.

MR SEMENYA: And if indeed he did communicate that information as an informer for which he's paid R10.000-00 down the line, it means the police kept quiet knowing that Doctor Abu-Baker Asvat was going to be murdered?

JOHN GEORGE FIVAZ: Chairperson, that I can't answer because what we are talking about is offences committed in the late '80's.  The investigating officers - once again, are here today and I think when you are talking about a police informer it is not as straightforward as saying a police informer for the normal structures of the police, meaning the normal uniform police officer and the ordinary detective.
 Most probably an informer of the old security branch and that was of course not open for utilisation by the ordinary detective and the normal uniform person.  Those informers were the informers of the old security branch and they were not utilised by the normal structures of the police service.

MR SEMENYA: But they were still paid out of the tax payers money so that they can bring information that can stop certain offences being committed?

JOHN GEORGE FIVAZ: But you know Chairperson, I think we are also talking about two categories of informers, the one informer will be around crime investigation if you look into the past, the other informer was really managed within the framework of the Secret Services Fund.
 That was not an open fund for the use of the ordinary police officer, it was a fund for the purpose of the functions or performing the functions of the old security branch and all those informers were paid out of that specific fund.

MR SEMENYA: But what I'm trying to establish is whether the purpose of that old security branch to use informers, was it not also amongst others to stop the commission of offences?

JOHN GEORGE FIVAZ: Amongst others Chairperson but we all know that the old security branch was not only concerned about crime.

MR SEMENYA: Do you know if you are able to establish the exact date when Richardson was registered as an informer?

JOHN GEORGE FIVAZ: Chairperson, for that purpose you'll need the informer file and I have my doubts whether that's possible at this stage because we've have already indicated to the Commission that we don't have any of those files left and I think the date of registration will be in that specific file.
 We have already searched for those files and we haven't found anything, so I think it will be extremely impossible in my mind to find that date or to discover that date.

MR SEMENYA: Now Commissioner, three weeks ago you told us that you came to know about the payment of R10.000-00 to Gerry Richardson.  As you stand, did you form an opinion that that payment was proper payment to Richardson by the members of the South African Police?

JOHN GEORGE FIVAZ: What I did Chairperson, I relied on the bona fides of the investigators, I haven't checked it myself - that is totally impossible, I can't check all informer claims in the police service because we are dealing with literally thousands of them.  But I also explained that we - from my side, from the accounting officer of the department's side, I queried that specific claim when it was brought to my attention by my legal people in the police service and I thought I can't regard this as normal practice.
 What happened here is, I made my enquiries and I testified this morning about what was discovered by myself and what was explained by my people about the motivation on that claim.  I accepted their explanation that the payment was not really for services rendered but for services to be rendered.

MR SEMENYA: But we are not to anticipate disciplinary action for the payment of that R10.000-00, is that my understanding?