Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1998-11-11

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: I beg your pardon sir?

MR NGUBANE: Where did Mr Mhieza reside?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: Why did Mr Mhieza reside?

MR NGUBANE: Where.

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: Where did Mr Mhieza reside?

MR NGUBANE: Yes.

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: In Umlazi.

MR NGUBANE: That's very close to Lamontville, is that correct?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: Close by yes.

MR NGUBANE: And Lembedi resided in Umbumbulu, is that correct?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: Umbumbulu I think was his tribal home, his rural home but I think he also had a residence in Umlazi.

MR NGUBANE: Well you say you think he had a residential home, you're not sure?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: No.

MR NGUBANE: But what you are sure about is that he resided in Umbumbulu?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: That was his tribal home.  That is what you said isn't it?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: Yes that's what I said, yes.

MR NGUBANE: Thank you.  Thank you for that.
	And as a person who worked closely with Mhieza, is it correct that he new Lamontville very well?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: It's correct, we all knew Lamontville quite well.

MR NGUBANE: And the people from Vlakplaas, like Ramatala, didn't know Lamontville is that correct?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: Mr Chairman I'm unable to comment on that, I don't know how many operational trips Ramatala did down here, he might have known the township, he might not have, I don't know the man.

MR NGUBANE: If Ramatala states that Mhieza pointed Bhila's house in Lamontville because he knew the place would you - what would be your comment?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: I can't comment on that, I have no comment on that one at all.

MR NGUBANE: Can you deny categorically that Mr Mhieza did assist Ramatala in arresting ...[indistinct] Mr Bhila in Lamontville?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: Mr Chairman I cannot deny that, I was not present.

MR NGUBANE: Yesterday I saw you when you gave evidence, you were reading from a certain document, is that correct?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: Yes I had notes in front of me, Mr Chairman.

MR NGUBANE: Do you still have those notes with you?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: Yes I do.

MR NGUBANE: Are you prepared to make those notes available?

MR VISSER: I would object to that Mr Chairman, they are consultation notes of ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: The witness referred to them when he gave evidence, Mr Visser, I don't think your objection is well founded.  These were not consultation notes, he has just said he referred to those notes while he gave evidence.

MR VISSER: With respect, Mr Chairman, they are notes made about instructions given and during consultation with counsel and ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: And he elected to make use of them when he gave evidence.  It was for you to make sure that he did not, Mr Visser, if you wished them to remain confidential.

MR VISSER: Well Mr Chairman, I have no objection to that Mr Chairman.

MR NGUBANE: Mr Chairman, with the leave of the Chairman and the Commissioners, may I have access to those notes?

CHAIRPERSON: The witness has just told you he has no objection to making them available to you, he's not being compelled to.

MR NGUBANE: Can I have a look at those notes please?

MR VISSER: I'm certain my learned friend is then going to make his consultation available to us as well, Mr Chairman?

CHAIRPERSON: Do you intend to look at all of them before you continue your cross-examination?

MR NGUBANE: Yes Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: I don't think we all need sit and wait while you do so, we will take a short adjournment.  If you will notify us when you are finished?

MR VISSER: There are 13 pages Mr Chairman.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: (s.u.o.)

MR NGUBANE: (Continued)  I thank the Members of the Committee for the indulgence.
	Now Mr Wasserman, do you agree with me that the security branch of which you were a member was a very secretive organisation?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: No necessarily Mr Chairman.

MR NGUBANE: Well, if you say not necessarily, do you mean that it was not or it was?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: It was not necessarily secret, some of it's operations were clandestine and classified but we operated in the open so it is incorrect to say it was a secret organisation, Mr Chairman.

MR NGUBANE: And let me put the question differently, is it correct that if you were involved in anything that was illegal, you were trained not to divulge any information at all?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: That is correct, Mr Chairman.

MR NGUBANE: And in fact it became a culture of the members of your branch to hide things that were illegal, is that correct?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: That is correct.

MR NGUBANE: Have you, as you sit there, overcome that culture?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: I have.

MR NGUBANE: Did you undergo any rehabilitative treatment to overcome that culture or did you just overcome it on your own?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: Can you outline what kind of treatment you are referring to?

MR NGUBANE: Pardon?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: Can you outline to me what treatment you are referring to?

MR NGUBANE: Well, to overcome that culture.  Were you trained in some form to get rid of the culture of being secretive of this ...[indistinct] thing?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: No, no Mr Chairman.  I would imagine time is one of the treatments.

MR NGUBANE: Okay.  At page 44 of the bundle, Bhila bundle, paragraph 9(a)iv, you were asked about the nature and particulars of the incident and you didn't disclose anything about this incident, is that correct?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: That is correct.

MR NGUBANE: And you said you'd do the necessary research?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: Correct.

MR NGUBANE: What research did you have in mind?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: Consultation with other parties at the time who had also applied for amnesty in terms of this Act.

MR NGUBANE: And subsequent to your completing this form did you submit anything written to the TRC on this incident?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: On that I'm unable to recall, however I did attend two investigative hearings and I'm not sure whether this matter did come up in those or not but there was - I was with them twice and I'm not sure if Mr Bhila came up in that matter.

MR NGUBANE: But do you agree with me that in all probability if you had submitted something in writing it would be available here?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: Oh, I didn't submit in writing but it was a verbal - two verbal sessions.

MR NGUBANE: Okay and did you think it necessary to submit something in writing to the TRC about this incident?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: Well I knew I would be formally sitting in front of the TRC having to account at some stage.

MR NGUBANE: So you thought it was unnecessary to submit something in writing?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: I was expecting as on the previous occasions either to be informed by legal counsel or to be notified by the TRC and then thirdly to formally appear as I am right now.

MR NGUBANE: You say in the paragraph I've quoted
"I will do the necessary research etc in an attempt to provide  a full and detailed statement which will be provided at a later stage."
Is that correct?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: That is correct yes, Mr Chairman.

MR NGUBANE: When you mentioned a statement at that time did you have in your mind a written statement or a verbal statement?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: It's much or a muchness, it would have been in all probability a written statement, Mr Chairman.

MR NGUBANE: Alright.  Now this document which I asked you to hand over - Mr Chairman I ask it to be handed in as  Exhibit G?  It doesn't have a date but it refers to November 1998.  Can you recall when you perhaps drafted it?

CHAIRPERSON: Well did you draft it or was it drafted by your lawyers?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: It was drafted by my counsel.

MR NGUBANE: Thank you very much, I'm indebted to the Chairperson.
	And when did it come into your possession, can you recall?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: At the time of this formally taking place, presumably - when did this start, Monday?  On Sunday evening prior to the Monday kick-off here, Mr Chairman.