Amnesty Hearings — Ermelo — 1998-07-23

MR HATTINGH: Thank you.   One of the sections of the Act that I would like to refer you to is Section 4(c), no, sorry, 4(b), functions of the Commission.   Now, although I've been shown that the Commission is not the Committee, the whole of chapter 6 and 7, I believe, where applicable, also applies to a Committee, where it makes reference to a Commission.   However, if we can just go back to what is applicable to a Committee, that is Section 19.5(a), it tells us that
"The Committee shall, for the purpose of considering and deciding upon an application referred to in sub-Section 1, have the same powers as those conferred upon the Commission in Section 5(l) and (m) and chapters 6 and 7."
	Now, at this moment, we're looking at Section 4, and perhaps I should skip that, because that is not part of the powers which is also conferred on the Committee.   However, in Section 5(m), 5(m) is specifically one of those powers which the Commission has which is also conferred on the Committee, and Section 5(m) tells us:-
"The Committee on its own initiative, or at the request of any interested party, inquire or investigate into any manner in terms of this Act."
Which I would submit tells us that this Committee can take cognisance of whatever information could provide a fuller picture.
	Then I would also like to refer to Section 19.2, where it is stated that:-
"The Committee shall investigate the application and make such inquiries as may be necessary."
What I would submit in this regard is that this power of the Committee, as it is stated in Section 19.2, is in sequence at the stage where prior to a public hearing, but this power of the Committee does not stop, it does not cease.   So this power to investigate and make inquiries continues and this Committee, to enable it to get your fuller picture, still need to take that action.
	And then again in Section 28, that's in chapter 6, investigations and hearings by the Commission, now this is the chapter which also, the powers in which the Committee present is also entitled to use is Section 28.4(a):-
"To investigate any matter falling within the scope of the powers, functions and duties of that Committee."
And I believe that this problem that we're dealing with at the moment is also such.
	And then sub-Section 5 of 28:-
"Subject to Section 33, no article or information obtained by the investigating unit shall be made public..."
And it then continues:-
"...until the commencement of any hearings in terms of this Act which is not held behind closed doors."
	Again article as described in Section 1, meaning of the word:-
"All the information obtained by the investigating unit shall be made public the moment this hearing commences."
	Then Section 29.1(b), it is stated that:-
"By notice in writing, the Committee can call on any person who is in possession of or has the custody of or control over any article or other thing which, in the opinion of the Commission, is relevant to the subject matter."
I believe that we have something which is relevant to the subject matter.
	And then in 29.5, the third line:-
"The Commission may, having due regard to the principles of openness and transparency, declare that any article produced or information submitted at such investigation shall not be made public until the article is produced at the hearing in terms of this Act."
Once again, it would indicate that anything obtained for the purpose of the principle of openness and transparency, should become public and should be investigated, should be scrutinised.
	Then we may just again refer to Section 31 again, we discussed it, or I made certain submissions with that in regard to Section 31.   In fact it would appear that Section 31 is applicable to this Committee, as already indicated in Section 19.5(a), which incorporates chapters 6 and 7, where it is clear that a witness or a person can be compelled to produce any article, once again as set out in Section 1, meaning evidence, documents, whatsoever, and they can be compelled to answer any question put to them.
	And sub-Section 5:-
"Any person appearing before the Commission by virtue of the provisions shall be entitled to peruse any article referred to in that sub-Section."
	And then, one last thing is that the Act also makes provision in Section 32 for the Commission, and that would include the Amnesty Committee, to enter upon premises and to search for and seize and to remove articles, and once again article as described in Section 1, and the basis on which that can be done is that:-
"upon reasonable grounds suspected to be concerned with any matter which is the subject of any investigation."
Or in sub-Section (b):-
"on reasonable grounds suspected to contain information with regard to any such matter."
	Now I believe that had this document been in the custody of someone and we didn't know what the contents were and we wanted to, but we know that it was in existence, then this section could very well have been used to obtain this document, because, on the face of it, reasonable grounds exist to suspect that this document could assist us.
	Mr Chairman, I'm not going to take it any further.  There were other issues raised by your Committee yesterday and perhaps if you ask me or indicate to me which of those questions you still would like me to respond to?

CHAIRPERSON: Francis, do you need anything?   I've heard what you have got to say, Mr Hattingh.

ADV SANDI: I think there's still the hurdle of having to inform entrusted parties.   I gather that that document you're referring to also refers to some other incidents which are not part of this hearing.   Now how does one deal with that, without having notified such parties?

MR HATTINGH: I think the suggestion, or the ruling already made, that we're not allowed to cross-examine or deal with any other incidents which do not form part of this hearing and all the applications would still be in force, and we're not allowed to carry on and deal with any other incidents.  So it would be restricted to the incidents, the specific incidents for which amnesty applications are being made.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that all, Mr Hattingh?

MR HATTINGH: That's all, thank you, Mr Chairman.   Mr Chairman, may I just, I need to pop out myself actually, but I won't, it will be short?
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
ON RESUMPTION

MR BLACK: At the outset, I'm also pleased to note that Mr Hattingh has conceded that this isn't a court of law, and in fact it is almost (indistinct) generous and created by statute, in terms of the Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act, and as such, my submission is that one of the principle duties is to promote the principles and objectives set out in the preamble to the Act.

CHAIRPERSON: The primary is reconciliation, isn't it?