Amnesty Hearings — Cape Town — 2000-09-28

FERDINAND BARNARD: That is correct.

MR WESSELS: According to your evidence here, the murder of Dr Webster, in as far as it affected your position, would have been the perfect example of a case for which you could have received amnesty?

FERDINAND BARNARD: That is correct.

MR WESSELS: Why didn't you apply for amnesty at that point, if this version of yours is the truth?

FERDINAND BARNARD: Chairperson, for a very simple reason.  The CCB handled me in a different fashion.  I was not in a structured system as it was presented to me by Calla Botha and Slang van Zyl, where presentations were made where other members could substantiate presentations, where there was an established structure or pro forma according to which things were conducted.  I was a lone figure and incriminated a such, along with Lafras Luitingh and Joe Verster, who had already during the post-mortem inquest incriminated me during the formal presentation of evidence.
	All they would have to do, if I had gone and said "okay, I am applying for amnesty, here are the facts" as I have done, all they would have to do is deny it.  They would substantiate each other and there would be a very good chance of my refusal of amnesty.  Then I would stand alone and Joe Verster would be laughing at me.  That is why I did not apply for amnesty.

MR WESSELS: You see, I find it problematic to accept that story because you enter a hearing regarding which you will most probably be found guilty and receive a life sentence, wouldn't it be more advisable to take the chance and to take on Luitingh and Verster in an amnesty hearing, rather than being completely unarmed in a criminal trial?

FERDINAND BARNARD: Chairperson, if I recall correctly the criminal trial began when the amnesty cut-off date had already passed.

MR WESSELS: Yes, that is correct regarding the criminal trial, but you were arrested and you submitted your amnesty statement while you were in custody?

FERDINAND BARNARD: That is correct.

MR WESSELS: At that stage you already knew?

GEORGE BIZOS: Mr Chairman, although we are not acting for Mr Barnard, I think that it is only fair to draw to the Committee's attention, and to our learned friend through you, that the amnesty applications could not be made after May 1987.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, that wasn't the final cut-off date, it was extended to the end of December 1997.

GEORGE BIZOS: The conviction, he was arrested at the end of ...

CHAIRPERSON: End of August.

GEORGE BIZOS: August?

CHAIRPERSON: The cut-off, the final cut-off, it kept on being extended various times, but the very last time was the end of September 1997, it was the last one.

GEORGE BIZOS: And we don't know the date of the witness' conviction, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you Mr Bizos.

GEORGE BIZOS: I am reasonably certain that it was after that.

FERDINAND BARNARD: I was sentenced on the 4th of June 1998.

GEORGE BIZOS: Thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Wessels?

MR WESSELS: Mr Barnard, so nonetheless you decided that you would enter this trial during which you would most probably be found guilty and sentenced to life, rather than apply for amnesty and take the chance of not being believed, and Joe Verster and Lafras Luitingh being believed before an Amnesty Committee, is that what you are saying?

FERDINAND BARNARD: Yes.  As I have just summarised it, that was my reasoning.

MR WESSELS: Very well.  You went through he trial and you were found guilty on what date?

FERDINAND BARNARD: On the 6th of June 1998.

MR WESSELS: You were found guilty of murder and you must have been advised, or you must have known yourself, that the sentence that you would receive for the murder of Dr Webster, would be one of life long imprisonment?

FERDINAND BARNARD: I didn't necessarily know that, Chairperson.  The Judge or Presiding Officer could exercise his discretion as to which I should receive 10, 20 years or life long imprisonment.  I could not foresee what the Judge's decision would be.

MR WESSELS: But you could have formulated a reasonably good idea of what would happen?

FERDINAND BARNARD: Yes, I did.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, particularly having a previous conviction for two murders?

FERDINAND BARNARD: Yes, that is correct, I definitely foresaw problems, there is no doubt about that.

MR WESSELS: What did you offer in mitigation of your circumstances?

FERDINAND BARNARD: I did not give any evidence in mitigation.

MR WESSELS: Why didn't you upon that occasion disclose that what you did, was indeed an instruction which was given to you by the former State, that this was not a private matter, or a frolic of your own that you had embarked upon, but that it was actually an instruction given by the former State for which others could receive amnesty, should they have applied for amnesty for this?

FERDINAND BARNARD: There was always the possibility of an appeal, which I considered, and I simply didn't do it, that is all.  The Presiding Judge, if I recall correctly, in his decision remarked that the CCB indeed would either have been involved, or if it wasn't a CCB instruction, they would at least have associated themselves after the deed.

MR WESSELS: But that would have served as mitigation for you and the Judge would have been able to exercise his discretion for a lighter sentence?

FERDINAND BARNARD: That is possible, I didn't do view it like that at that point.

MR WESSELS: Why not?

FERDINAND BARNARD: I don't know, I cannot explain it to you.

MR WESSELS: I will tell you why.  You didn't do it, because it wasn't the truth?  It was at a later stage that you decided that the time had come for you to implicate Luitingh and Verster in the Webster incident, after you sat mulling over it in your cell for 97 percent of your time, and your desire for vengeance began to grow against these persons whom you believed, were against you in the past?

FERDINAND BARNARD: What objective could I achieve, to satisfy my thirst for vengeance?  No.  It wouldn't have worked that way.  If I had wanted that, I would have given the Attorney-General an appropriate statement with all the appropriate facts and all these people would have been in the cells with me and every morning we would unlock the cells and all of us would have stood together in a row, to go and fetch our porridge.
	It does not work that way.  Of all the conscious operatives, Ferdi Barnard is the only one who went to prison, and it isn't only because of my own doing as the suggestion has been made.  Then there is also those from DCC, not one of the DCC members are in prison, only Ferdi Barnard.
	I have made it clear, I don't wish to bring 45 more persons into jail, because then I will have to look at Joe Verster's face every single day, and I really don't want that.

MR WESSELS: Mr Barnard, the reason why you did not apply for amnesty was because you do not qualify for amnesty, because when you shot Dr Webster, you did not do it as a member of a State organisation, you did it for your own interests?

FERDINAND BARNARD: That is not correct, honourable Chairperson.  I do not take that seriously.

MR WESSELS: That is why at that stage, you did not apply for amnesty?

FERDINAND BARNARD: What you are saying is not correct, no.

MR WESSELS: Why did you apply for amnesty for the Omar case, or incident?