Amnesty Hearings — Cape Town — 2000-03-14

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Bizos, it's my experience and I'm sure it's the experience of my colleagues, that we very often deal in hearings, particularly where they're combined hearings, where there are a number of incidents and side issues that are strictly speaking matters for chambers, but we deal with them as a matter of convenience to keep them together.  For instance if somebody applies for the murder of somebody and being in unlawful possession of firearms, we're not going to separate it and then have another Committee work in chambers on the firearms issues, it's just dealt with as a matter of convenience, that while you're dealing with three or four incidents, you may as well deal with five and the only real decision is whether a matter requires a hearing, not the other way round.  Because if we deal with a matter that requires hearing in chambers, then we're acting improperly, but not the other way round, so Mr Wessels says it was agreed, it wasn't ...(indistinct), but we're quite prepared to hear these matters.

GEORGE BIZOS: I don't know what agreement he is referring to.  It was certainly not agreed at the pre-trial conference where we raised an objection and we said that we would address you on it, but on the merits of relevance, Mr Chairman, on the merits of relevance, Gen Webb has applied for amnesty and a number of the other applicants have applied for amnesty ...

CHAIRPERSON: In respect of that particular issue.

GEORGE BIZOS: Gen Webb has asked and other applicants.  The witness has knowledge about those facts.  He cannot in an amnesty hearing, claim that he may incriminate himself.  He has applied for amnesty in relation to other matters and we submit he is obliged to answer questions in relation to it.
Yes and of course there is the other that although it was - others say that it was a Region 6 project, he denies that he authorised it, so he can't  ...

MR WESSELS: Sorry, Mr Bizos is not correct, ...(indistinct - no microphone) statement, Mr Verster didn't deny that he authorised it.

CHAIRPERSON: No, I think there was some reference that it was considered a joke or something.

MR WESSELS: But it wasn't denied at any stage that it was not authorised by Mr Verster.

GEORGE BIZOS: Well a joke is not an offence, Mr Chairman, so he doesn't have to ...(indistinct) to fear.

MR WESSELS: ;   Mr Chairman, that is not the point.  Mr Bizos knows that is not the point.  Whether it is an offence is not for Mr Verster to decide, that is a matter of law.

CHAIRPERSON: Sometimes a joke can be an offence, depending on how sick one's sense of humour is.

GEORGE BIZOS: I do submit with the greatest respect that this is so closely interwoven with the other facts that the witness is obliged to answer the questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Martini, you wanted to say something.

MR MARTINI: Mr Chairperson, maybe I can assist the Committee.  It seems as if the Committee had taken a decision already on the 28th of January 2000 in a letter addressed to my office by the Amnesty Committee.  It's stated clearly
"The Amnesty Committee has decided that the following instances will be heard in chambers.  The intimidation of
		(a) Archbishop Tutu, Baboon foetus,
		(b) the bombing of the Community Centre in Salt River, Cape Town."
So it seems to assist the Committee that a decision was taken that this issue would be dealt with in chambers and I refer to a letter dated 28th of January 2000.   Thank you, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Martini.  Then it would seem that we're not dealing with that here.  I mean, that it's not part of these hearings as is the other ...

MS COLERIDGE: ;   That is what we informed all the legal - and this is what's been set down on the roll Chairperson, those matters.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you.

MS COLERIDGE: And there's also another issue, just a legal issue that we have to bear in mind.  Obviously the people involved in the Desmond Tutu incident were not notified in terms of Section 19(iv)

CHAIRPERSON: Oh you mean the other notices to the Bishop himself?

MS COLERIDGE: That is correct, Chairperson.  We know the Bishop is very co-operative and understanding about proceedings, but just, that's the other legal implication.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.  Sorry.
MICROPHONE TURNED OFF
ON RESUMPTION

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: (s.u.o.)

GEORGE BIZOS: (cont.)

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.  The incident relating to the placement of that baboon or monkey foetus on the premises of Bishop Tutu, we've agreed, will not be a subject of these hearings.  We will not include a decision on that incident in our decision emanating from here.  We are however of the view that in so far as anything relating to that incident is relevant to these incidents, with regard to whether or not procedures were followed etc., questions may be asked, but without going into, as was the case with the Dulcie September and other incidents that were mentioned earlier, we're not interested in the minutia of those details, but in so far as the question may relate to consistency of practise, consistency of methods adopted, procedures, we will allow questions, so if you can listen carefully Mr Wessels to the questions put and if it comes into that category, object or not.

MR WESSELS: ;   Yes, Mr Chairman, I'll just reserve my right, because we haven't prepared on this issue at all.  I don't know what may come out.

CHAIRPERSON: No, certainly.

MR WESSELS: Other people may be involved, which may be incriminated but all sorts of repercussions that I don't know of, so ...

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, certainly, we understand that.  Mr Bizos.

GEORGE BIZOS: ...(indistinct - no microphone) and ask him a few questions in relation to it, just what he did about it.

CHAIRPERSON: If anything, yes.

GEORGE BIZOS: If we may say that my attorney cannot find the letter that was written to the Commission, objecting to it being dealt with in chambers, but be that as it may, let me - no the letter that my attorney wrote.

CHAIRPERSON: Oh.  Okay, sorry.

GEORGE BIZOS: According to the statement of Mr Barnard at page B132, the following is stated
"He then informed me that Desmond Tutu was a sensitive matter and that they would disrupt him in another manner.   He said that it was a 5 point plan and that the foetus was the third step.  The foetus had to be hung on the verandah on the Tutu premises, the nails had to be knocked in on both sides of the little path.  Research was done with regard to the witch doctor rituals of the tribe which Tutu belonged to and Dirk said that the fourth step would be a hyena which would be hung up at Tutu's house and the fifth step was some or other Witch doctor poison with which Trevor Tutu would be poisoned.  Dirk also said that CCB had duplicate keys of the vehicles of Tutu and Boesak."
Was this proposal made to you?

MR WESSELS: Mr Chairman, the witness wants to ask my legal advice on this issue.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I think we'll allow that Mr Bizos.

PIETER JOHANN VERSTER: Chairperson, that is not true.  I did not know of it.

GEORGE BIZOS: ;   Was any proposal of a similar nature, made to you?

MR WESSELS: Mr Chairman, the problem is, the witness decided to answer this because he says this is false.  Now there's a question of a similar nature.  Now we're getting to the minutiae of the Tutu incident and I submit that is not what we're supposed to be answering here.

CHAIRPERSON: I think, you see we know that, or we suspect that the Tutu - call it that - the Tutu operation was an operation carried out by Region 6.  We suspect that from the fact that certain applicants have applied and they say that they did it in their capacity as members of CCB.  It's not unfair to ask whether it was approved at the higher level, or whether it was just regional level.  What's being asked is was any proposal relating to the operation brought up to his level or higher level, doesn't he know?  I think I'll allow the question.