Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1999-08-30

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: Chairperson, once again I will say the entire process of his interrogation was about ten minutes long.  It was very clear that he was not going to cooperate.  When I asked him about the owl he denied any knowledge about it, he denied any knowledge of who the person was, he denied everything regarding the person.  Even though there were documents which indicated that he would know who the person was.

MR LAX: Now you made your decision to torture him very, very quickly, even on your own admission?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: That is correct.

MR LAX: Why bother to torture him at all when it was so clear to you that he wasn't going to cooperate?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: Because I wanted to know the identity of The Owl.

MR LAX: But it must have been clear to you, Mr Botha, that this man was not likely to cooperate with you at all.  His whole attitude his "houding" was such that he was aggressive, he was non-cooperative, he wasn't going to give you anything.

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: Chairperson, if one makes use of a technique of coercion, it often has the effect that even though his attitude may be non-cooperative, he would ultimately make the information known.

MR LAX: In terms of your documentation you haven't made any mention of swearing at him, of threatening his life, why was that?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: It was not important to me to insert that.

MR LAX: Well isn't it a component of the offences for which you apply for amnesty, which was subtly different from the physical assault itself?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: No, not in my opinion.

MR LAX: I see.  Thank you Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: I don't know if you'll be able to answer me but you drive all the way from Durban to Bethlehem to come and extract very important information, vital information according to what you say, there's somebody in your organisation undermining it etc. so it's very important organisation, you drive the whole way from Durban to Bethlehem, you then interrogate Mr Gordhan for obviously a very short while, less than ten minutes because the suffocation process must have taken a few minutes in itself and then you torture him for, on your version, also less than ten minutes and the whole procedure comes to an end after ten minutes.  It seems extremely quick, you know one would have imagined that first of all the interrogation as suggested by Mr Lax would have been much longer, more questions and then even the torture would have been more sustained, take a break, come back again, carry on, until the person is reduced to talking but it seems very strange that taking into account the importance of the information you were trying to get out of the victim, the fact that you had travelled so far, it's all over in ten minutes?  I mean I should imagine that most people who are interrogated and who are subjected to torture initially uncooperative, that's why there's torture and we've heard on a number of occasions matters concerning torture where the torture process has endured, often it's short but it's often endured until there's absolutely, the interrogator is absolutely sure that there's no chance of any cooperation but it seems very premature to have stopped in such a short while.

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: Chairperson, I can explain as follows.  I don't know for how long Carl Duhr and the other members ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: But I'm talking now about the moles, you said they didn't - their brief wasn't to get the information about the mole, they were getting the general information, Operation Vula etc., but you came specifically for this vital information on the mole?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: The identity of the mole.

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: And I think they will give evidence about that.

CHAIRPERSON: And yet it's all done and shot and finished and filed away in ten minutes?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: That is correct.

MR LAX: You see, if I could just add, Chairperson, the most important bit of information in terms of his interrogation was actually the mole?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: That is correct.

MR LAX: You guys knew everything else and you were beginning to get more and more information as time went by as you were able to decode the documents and the computer's information in your possession.  So the most important reason and really, the only reason for you to go there was the mole issue, they were handling all the rest which was already well known anyway?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: Chairperson, I think that Captain Duhr and Mr Bothma will themselves be able to explain or give evidence regarding what they questioned Mr Gordhan about and whether they questioned him about the mole.  I was specifically tasked to obtain that information because it was necessary.  Now their interrogation took place over a period of time and they will be able to give evidence regarding what his attitude was.  My observation was that he was non-cooperative, it was quick, I didn't have time to spend days undertaking interrogation and applying methods of coercion to him in order to obtain information.  I needed that information quickly.  The visit to Bethlehem was not directed only at him but also at Mr Lalla who possessed other information so it was dual in nature.

MR LAX: I understand that, I think the question remains and again, you haven't directly answered the question.  It's a very simple question.  The most crucial bit of information that you had gone there for was the mole.  The other stuff was ancillary, you'll concede that?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: That is correct.

MR LAX: And yet you tortured him for less than ten minutes around that issue.  Now in the stuff we've heard over the last two years, people far stronger than Mr Gordhan and others have given in over a period of time, using less harsh methods in suffocation but of a sustained nature and that's the point the Chairperson is putting to you?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: Chairperson, in this case I assaulted him within that period of time.  I may have taken even longer but you must accept that it was in ten minutes that I did this.

MR LAX: And you obviously deny his assertion that this assault went on for much longer?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: Chairperson, he describes a period of approximately 50 minutes but in my mind it was ten minutes.

MR LAX: Thank you Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, Ms Thabethe do you have any questions?

MS THABETHE: No Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Visser, do you have any questions arising out of questions that have been put by the Panel?

MR VISSER: No thank you, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nel?

MR NEL: No thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Gordhan?

MR GORDHAN: Chairperson, I don't know what my rights are in this matter but I just want to correct one statement which Mr Botha might have misinterpreted?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, certainly.

MR GORDHAN: When I spoke of my detention in 1981 when 25 detainees were kept at C.R. Swart Police Station, it wasn't in one cell.  There are 50 cells in that complex and there were some 25 of us there connected with different issues all in the same complex and that's fairly common practice.  Mr Lalla and I were kept in the Bethlehem cells for about two and a half weeks, there are only four cells there but there were two detainees there at that time.  That's the only point I was trying to make, Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you Mr Gordhan.  Mr Lalla, any questions arising?

MR LAX: Just a comment because I think the perception has been created here and I think we need to rule out this perception.  The comment is that, just following from what Mr Lax says that you can torture people while they cooperate, you can torture people while they don't cooperate, where does he draw the line then?