Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1999-08-20

MS POSWA: You don't know of any particular incident.  Well, my instructions are that from 1982 when Mr Ndaba left and he went to exile, members of the Security Branch repeatedly went to his home, even after 1988 when you claim he was your informer and the visits heightened after you had arrested him and murdered him in July of 1990 and that now that is highly, highly inconsistent with the treatment of members of a family of an informer.  I would have thought that they would have been mollycoddled.  Why the continued badgering, because these were not just visits, these were raids.  They would come in, search the house, turn it upside down and ask information and even after he had been arrested in July.  Was that conduct consistent with the treatment of the family of an informer?

H J P BOTHA: What happened after his arrest, I'm assuming now is that the investigating teams, that would have been the investigating team's activities and in their opinion Charles Ndaba was a member of Operation Vula who had to be arrested.  They would have done everything in their power to track him down.  The fact that the family's home was visited after he started giving information as an informer in 1988 is also not strange.  The family would not get preferential treatment simply because a person was an informer.  On the contrary, it would remain as it was beforehand.

MS POSWA: So you are telling me that your policy was to harass everyone, whether the person is working for you, whether the person is working against you, yours was just to continue harassing?

H J P BOTHA: I can't describe it as harassment of the family, those were routine investigations conducted at the homes in connection with all people who'd left the country and we had information that they were being militarily trained.

MS POSWA: You do not believe that this was harassment?

CHAIRPERSON: Anyway, let's not argue about that.  The procedure is followed, they went around even after they knew that the man was arrested and even while he was under interrogation.

MS POSWA: With respect, My Lord, I'd like to highlight the fact that they didn't just come in to do investigations, they came in, turned the house upside down, asked questions and often not in a polite manner and I'm asking if that was the way in which they would continue to treat the family of a person who was their own,...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Informer.

MS POSWA: Yes, was their own informant and part of their group.  It just is highly inconsistent.

MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, but this witness has said that he never, either before or after, visited that house, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: What about those who were under him?  What about the investigative unit, whether they did it?

MR VISSER: Yes, but then obviously this witness wouldn't know about it, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, I mean, let's just clear that up.  I understand that he personally did not do that, but the family are concerned that this is what they had to put up with and they want some answer as to now why did they have to be put up with?

H J P BOTHA: I said that after Charles had become an informer in 1988, the visits from the Security Branch to his family home would not have decreased, the routine investigations would have remained the same.  I personally am not aware of who did these visits and how many visits there were.  The investigating team from the Security Branch, or there was an existing team and they would, as a matter of routine, have conducted these visits, whenever there was information that the person was present in the vicinity. and I want to testify that it was almost a matter of impossibility to, in respect of people who were registered as people who had illegally left the country and who were trained terrorists, to visit all their homes.  We simply did not have the manpower to do that.

CHAIRPERSON: I think that the question that is really directed is around the word harassment.  The family had to put up with having the house turned upside down, people being interrogated rudely and general rough treatment of the family.  I think that is the gist of the question and that despite the fact that here is a man, he's under your control, he's your informer you say, and despite that you still do that to his family.  Now you may not have done it personally, but are you aware of the fact that that is what was done?

H J P BOTHA: It would have been a routine part of it.

CHAIRPERSON: In other words cruel ill-treatment was routine?

H J P BOTHA: No, I wasn't personally aware of what happened at the homes.  If the homes were turned upside down as is being alleged, it is possible that that was being done as part of a search, but I actually can't comment on that, whether that was in fact the case of not.

ADV BOSMAN: Mr Botha, could I put it to you like this, the spirit in which these investigations took place, could you comment on that?  Was it done in a friendly, courteous way?

H J P BOTHA: Once again Chairperson, I wouldn't know because I wasn't present.  There was no specific instruction, "go and harass the people" there simply wasn't the time for that.  There were more important priorities than simply to visit the homes of all the people who had left the country.  When there was specific information that the person was in the area, then the families were visited.

ADV BOSMAN: Thank you.

MR LAX: I think the point that's being tried to put across is the family are claiming they were harassed in this way.  That's their claim and they're putting that to you.  Now either that accords with your general impression of such visits and searches, even where they were called for, as you've indicated they were from time to time, or it's not.  Can you just give us a straight answer one way or the other?

H J P BOTHA: Chairperson, once again, the interpretation of the family as to what they would regard as harassment and what we would regard as a routine visit to obtain information, I would not be able to say how these members executed these things.

MR LAX: It was suggested to you that where such searches took place, it wouldn't have necessarily been done in a very friendly atmosphere, isn't that self-evident to you?

H J P BOTHA: In certain instances that was the case, but ...(intervention)

MR LAX: Were you never involved in searches?

H J P BOTHA: I say yes, it may have been in instances where I was personally involved with searches and the spirit in which it was conducted depended on circumstances.  One would have people who would co-operate and there were others who would have a negative attitude.

MR LAX: Precisely.  So I mean it's not giving a great deal away to concede that it's highly likely that that was the case.

H J P BOTHA: It's possible.

CHAIRPERSON: Please proceed.

MS POSWA: I would just like to inform you that that is the family's cry.  You have come here to ask for amnesty, you have come here to ask for forgiveness from them, I would presume, or am I wrong?  Would you like the family to forgive you for the actions you committed?

H J P BOTHA: Chairperson by nature of the situation, firstly one requests amnesty ...(intervention)

MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, with respect ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Just allow him to finish.  Just allow him to finish.  Please carry on.

H J P BOTHA: Of course one would want forgiveness from the family, Chairperson.

MS POSWA: Your response to all this is so flippant.  you don't care.  Well if it happened, it did and it's too bad, I wasn't involved.  If it didn't happen, you don't know.  I mean, I would think that a person who has come before this Committee asking for amnesty, seeking amnesty, saying, Mr Chairman, I've committed a, b, c and I would like - I would expect more concern on your part, but you just, it's just one of those things.

CHAIRPERSON: Any further questions?