Amnesty Hearings — Boksburg — UNKNOWN

JONAS HENDRIK DE WAAL: Yes, there were a number who were in a monitoring capacity.

UNKNOWN: What I find interesting is that you, as a captain, and not a captain of the detectives, but a captain from the Security Branch, you arrived there and you began questioning Mrs Derby-Lewis without any background regarding her previous questionings.   Is or was anything like that ever possible?

JONAS HENDRIK DE WAAL: Yes, it was.

UNKNOWN: Then I don't understand, I really don't know why Captain Deetliefs questioned Mrs Derby-Lewis, because then he was wasting the time and money of the State if he did not tell you or convey to you what he had found out from Mrs Derby-Lewis?

JONAS HENDRIK DE WAAL: Well I don't know why you're putting it to me.

UNKNOWN: I would like to put it further that when the advocate representing the family of Mr Hani, there were certain statements that were made and the police who were involved, that is Colonel Van Niekerk and Captain Deetliefs and Captain Beukes were notified that they would be called as witnesses, and in terms of section 4 they sat here during the evidence with an attorney present, are you aware of that?

JONAS HENDRIK DE WAAL: Yes, I was aware of that, I read it in the newspaper.

UNKNOWN: Whether or not they were legally represented, I do not know.   So they heard the testimony of Mrs Derby-Lewis and I would like to put it to you, according to the testimony that was given here by her, that she never accused you of assaulting her in any way or inappropriately influencing her by threatening her, that was her testimony.

JONAS HENDRIK DE WAAL: I am very glad to hear this.

UNKNOWN: But her testimony in fact, and this is the interesting aspect, was that she said that you told her that you would use her as a State witness.

JONAS HENDRIK DE WAAL: I did not say that.

UNKNOWN: And that is why you took an affidavit, you told her, you must just bear in mind here that Colonel Van Niekerk is sitting here, as well as Captain Deetliefs, with their legal teams, the complaint was that if she had made a statement, then you would have taken the statement to Colonel Van Niekerk, who expressed his dissatisfaction, and then it was changed?

JONAS HENDRIK DE WAAL: I delivered a long testimony regarding that issue, I said what the point was behind it, I said that we had to convey information to head office, it was quite an important case, and he, as my commanding officer, if he was not satisfied with certain aspects or clauses, would say to me, "You, as the interrogator, would have to return to her and clear up certain issues".   Could you repeat?

UNKNOWN: He did not testify.   Colonel Van Niekerk did not testify.   So he accepted that what she said did happen?

JONAS HENDRIK DE WAAL: I do not know the reasons why he didn't testify.

UNKNOWN: Now I would like to put it to you that something must have happened, because when Mrs Derby-Lewis was arrested, and that would have been on the 21st of April 1993, that is in R4, 395, she was questioned in depth, and you know Captain Deetliefs, he is the type of person who was used by the Security Branch for this express purpose, he had very good experience, and then, on various pages, in single line space typing, she claims that when she was questioned, her answer was, unfortunately there are no notes or a video available, it continues, she is again questioned on the 24th of April, and she says, or gives her version of what happened.    Now the two important aspects here are the list and the tape, and that is what Colonel Van Niekerk was not happy with, because the police wanted her to write what they wanted her to write?

JONAS HENDRIK DE WAAL: No.

UNKNOWN: Because here, where Captain Deetliefs is questioning her, it is clearly stated,
"Who is being questioned by Captain Deetliefs? - Gaye Derby-Lewis".

JONAS HENDRIK DE WAAL: That's news to me.

UNKNOWN: She says that she never saw a weapon, and she continues to give her version regarding the list, why it was compiled and so forth, and then on page 202, it is on the tape on 1172, that is tape number, well the number doesn't appear here, let us just look, okay it is tape 2, she says, that is after the arrest, if one reads this in context, after the arrest of Mr Walus
"Tell me where he got the gun from?"
And now suddenly, my question is, suddenly she makes a completely different statement to you.   How is that possible?

UNKNOWN: How can this lady be asking me regarding statements which a person made during another series of questioning?   I was not present, I don't know what she said at that stage.   I can only testify regarding what she said to me and what occurred between us, I cannot answer regarding questions which occurred between that captain and the lady.

UNKNOWN: Why did she change her mind so suddenly?

CHAIRPERSON: I think that please, what is the point in putting questions to this witness when he wasn't present?

UNKNOWN: Chairperson, I would like to know why she changed her story so suddenly.

CHAIRPERSON: How will he know why she changed?

UNKNOWN: That is the argument, exactly.   Chair-person, this is a very serious case, and I think that the opportunity should be granted to determine exactly what happened.

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: Mr Chairman, I would like ...(intervention).

INTERPRETER: The speaker's microphone is not on.

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: ...this is not a trial, your questions have to be relevant to what he did.   What she said to others would not be something to which he's answerable, isn't it?  How can you ask him to speculate on why she said this to somebody else?

UNKNOWN: I am not asking why she said it, I am asking why she changed from one day to another and therefore changed her statement, in his hands.

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: How would this witness know unless you put to him the reason?

UNKNOWN: I am saying that you received instructions from Colonel Van Niekerk and you acted accordingly, and she was told to change her testimony?

JONAS HENDRIK DE WAAL: She was not told to change her testimony and I have said that at various occasions on this very day.

UNKNOWN: No further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS VAN DER WALT

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mpshe, are there any questions you wish to put to the witness?

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: No questions, Mr Chairman, thank you.
NO RE-EXAMINATION BY MR MPSHE

GEORGE BIZOS: Sorry, could I just clear up one point?

GEORGE BIZOS: Is it correct, it seems that on the 26th, that's on the Monday, you took her, 26th of April, you took, or you were responsible for arranging for Mrs Derby-Lewis to go to the district surgeon, where she would be seen by her own doctor?

JONAS HENDRIK DE WAAL: Chairperson, the detainees at that stage were usually seen or examined by the district surgeon.   I cannot remember any other request, and whether it was therefore granted, it would have been done that way.   May I read the section please
"Detainee, Mrs Derby-Lewis, taken to district surgeon's consulting rooms by Sergeant Miller from the Information Department for a medical examination by her private physicians.   She had no complaints."
That was not policy, that was an exceptional situation.   It just shows the preferential treatment that she received.

GEORGE BIZOS: And she returned at half past three that afternoon, it's on the next page?

JONAS HENDRIK DE WAAL: That's correct.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR BIZOS

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much, you're excused from further attendance.
WITNESS EXCUSED

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Mr Chairperson and members of the committee, the next witness is Mr Visser, who is present.   Mr Chairman, Mr Visser has indicated that he is willing to testify, but he's made an application that he testifies in camera because of threats he received in the past, as well as last night.

CHAIRPERSON: What is the nature of these threats?