Amnesty Hearings — Cape Town — 2000-06-22

MR KAHANOVITZ: But his version is that you and him divided up the balance amongst yourselves.

UNKNOWN: Sorry Chair ...(indistinct - speaking simultaneously).  Mr van Zyl's version was that Mr Burger kept R5,000, R7,000 of it was applied to the Omar project to Barnard's expenses, it's not that - it's incorrect.

MR KAHANOVITZ: I didn't mean on a 50/50 basis.  You've heard his version.  Mr van Zyl's version would be that you would have a very clear understanding of what happened to the money because you were the person that arrived with the R30 000 in cash, you had a discussion, the basis of which was that not all of that money would be given to Mr Hardien.  Do you deny ever having such a discussion with Mr van Zyl?

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: It's correct, but apparently you forgot about it.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Sorry, I don't understand ...

MR LAX: Can I just clarify one thing, just quickly Mr Kahanovitz?  Sorry Mr Burger.  Just a thought that occurred to me and I want to be clear that I'm clear on what your evidence in this regard is.  You seem to be saying that you understood that the sum of R30,000 was being paid to him because he'd asked for that amount of money.

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: Yes.

MR LAX: Did I understand that correctly?

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: Yes.

MR LAX: And clearly that's not the case because he accepted R18 000.

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: Yes.

MR LAX: I just wanted to clarify that.

MR KAHANOVITZ: With respect Mr Lax that's not the - there's another possibility, that he agreed to accept the reduced amount because the job wasn't completed in the fashion contemplated.

MR LAX: Fair enough.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Mr Burger, your version then is the following:  You had a meeting with Mr van Zyl, you handed over the R30 000 to him.

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: Yes.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Your understanding was that you'd handed him R30,000 which he was going to pay to Gakkie.

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: Yes.

MR KAHANOVITZ: And that's all that happened at that meeting.

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: The whole discussion, the bomb, everything.

MR KAHANOVITZ: But as far as the money aspect is concerned, all this stuff about Mr van Zyl and you and Mr van Zyl agreeing that less was going to be paid to Mr Hardien and therefore certain things could be done with the balance, that never happened?

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: No, he had to pay the full amount to Gakkie.

MR KAHANOVITZ: That might be an appropriate time.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.  We'll take the lunch adjournment until 2 o'clock.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
ON RESUMPTION

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: (s.u.o.)

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Kahanovitz.

MR KAHANOVITZ: (Cont)
	If we could then look at your application starting at page 143, concerning the evidence matter.  Mr Burger, to save time, can I just suggest that - I don't know if you've had an opportunity to read through this again during the lunch break?  Instead of you reading the whole thing into the record, can't you just indicate to us what inaccuracies, if any, there are concerning Evans?

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: Paragraph 1 seems correct.  Paragraph 2 is correct.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Just let's pause there.  When you say one of the members.

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: Mr Maree.

MR KAHANOVITZ: That's Maree?  Alright.

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: Paragraph 3, that's also correct.  Mr van Zyl.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Okay.

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: That paragraph which follows:  "In the process of monitoring of Mr Evans ..." that was phrased incorrectly in that paragraph.  It's misleading in the sense that that information regarding Mr Evans and Mr Grosskopff came from the structure and not as a result of the monitoring of Mr Evans by Mr Maree.  And then the visit to Grosskopff, that also came out of the structure.  The bomb explosions in which Grosskopff was involved.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Mr Burger, do I assume the sentence once again:  "Since the source once again did not want to have his identity disclosed and was not prepared to testify in a Court ..." that sentence, you with me?  I assume a same comment applies to that which you made in relation to the Early Learning Centre?

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: Yes.

MR KAHANOVITZ: There was never an issue as to whether or not you were going to prosecute Mr Evans based on the information that you had, correct?

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: Yes, that's correct.

MR KAHANOVITZ: The pre-study was done by the aforementioned van Zyl and submitted.

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: That's incorrect.   The pre-study was done by myself and the co-ordinator Mr Basson to the Managing Director.  And then the finalisation of the project.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Well, the sentence on page 146 where you say:  "As a result of this, the decision was taken to abort the process or the project", in the light of your earlier evidence, you'll agree with me, that's not accurate?  All that happened was that you postponed ...(intervention)

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: It was suspended, ja.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Well it wasn't suspended, you postponed taking further steps until better information became available.

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: Yes.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Now you, I assume, have no independent information yourself as to what Mr Evans was involved in?  In other words, you're saying in so far as you say for instance in your application that Mr Evans was involved in bombings, if I have to ask you for details, all you're going to tell me is:  "Mr Verster told me that, I can't take it any further", is that what your answer will be?

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: That was the information from the structure.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Via either Mr Evans or  - sorry, Mr Verster or Mr Basson?

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: Correct.

MR KAHANOVITZ: So if I put it to you that Mr Evans denies that - well let me, before I even put it to you that Mr Evans denies being involved in bombing, Mr Evans, at the time that you say you formulated a plan to assassinate him, says that he'd never met Mr Grosskopff.  Are you in a position to dispute that?

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: He never met.

MR KAHANOVITZ: He never met Mr Grosskopff.

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: That was not the information which we had.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Well, I'm just putting it to you, the information that you had was wrong.  Secondly, you said yesterday that he was the Chairman of the ECC.

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: That was the information.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Well I put it to you that information was also wrong and you're not in a position to dispute it.

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: My information was that he was the Chairperson of the ECC.

CHAIRPERSON: What Mr Kahanovitz is saying to you is you yourself don't know whether he was, from your own personal knowledge?

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: No.

MR KAHANOVITZ: If I had to give you some other names of people who were involved in the ECC and ask you whether that person was the Chairman or wasn't, you're not in a position to deal with that?

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: Correct.

MR KAHANOVITZ: You see, you do recall though at the time the End Conscription Campaign was a very vocal and public organisation?

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: Yes.

MR KAHANOVITZ: They were holding meetings, rallies, so on and so forth.

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: Yes.  I never attended those things personally, but that was the information.

MR KAHANOVITZ: No but the point I'm trying to make is that it's incomprehensible how you would get that sort of information wrong.

CHAIRPERSON: It was an open campaign, it wasn't an underground organisation, people holding placards in the street, protesting, that sort of thing.

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: No, it was well-known.

MR KAHANOVITZ: And in fact their office bearers were well-known, this wasn't some underground structure that you needed to infiltrate.

DANIEL F DU TOIT BURGER: No, it was the front of the underground, of the ANC.

MR KAHANOVITZ: But what has that got to do with the question of whose the Chairman of the ECC?