Amnesty Hearings — Cape Town — UNKNOWN

MR COOK: Chairperson I got hold of her, she will be here tomorrow morning at ten o'clock and she will give her testimony then.  She's in the middle of a consultation at this stage and it is in any event after three in the afternoon so I will ask that she come and testify tomorrow morning.

CHAIRPERSON: Is it possible to proceed with the Liebenberg application?

MR BRINK: I believe it is.  I gather that the legal representatives are present and they are willing to proceed.

CHAIRPERSON: Well Mr Cook thank you very much for your assistance and we will resume......

MR COOK: Thank you.  May I just obtain clarity on one point.  How does this application of Liebenberg work?  Are they interwoven or what is the position?  If they are interwoven does my client's, success of his application depend on the success of Liebenberg's application or if the psychologist after testifying tomorrow are we then excused from further attendance until such time it reaches argument stage, or what is the position?  In other words does the success of the one depend on the success of the other?

CHAIRPERSON: I think nobody can tell you just now.  We have no idea as to what is in store as far as the Liebenberg application is concerned, do you understand?  It might impinge on your case, or your case may impinge on the Liebenberg case, but at this stage beyond that we are no wiser than I am telling you.  It is our wish that, if it is possible, to deal with each application as an application on its own merits and I was hoping that as soon as we have finished with your case I would ask you to address us so that we can dispose of your matter and then proceed with the next one.  These matters were not set down to be heard together, but it's just because of the unavailability of your witness and in order to save time we are interposing the Liebenberg matter and we will do the best we can tomorrow.

MR COOK: If I understand you correctly, after the testimony of the psychologist tomorrow then we may be excused from attending until argument stage?

ADV DE JAGER: Mr Cook I think you will recall that at your application notice was given to Mr Liebenberg that he was an implicated person.

MR COOK: Yes.

ADV DE JAGER: He was entitled to come and cross-examine your client, and the converse is also true.  He may implicate your client even in cases which your client hasn't mentioned at all and you and your client therefore have an interest in his application but it's for you to decide whether you want to attend his application and the hearings in that regard.  Maybe that he will give evidence which is directly in conflict with your client's evidence.  So your client has an interest in his case but you must decide whether you will come and protect that interest.

MR COOK: Yes but it is important for my argument because it seems as if we don't have two watertight compartments here, it seems as if they are interwoven.

CHAIRPERSON: I understand, I understand, I think I've re-thought the matter out, it would seem that we will call upon you to address us after we have heard the Liebenberg matter so that we will have addresses from both sides after the evidence of the Liebenberg case.

MR COOK: Thank you.
HEARING ADJOURNS
ON RESUMPTION ON 21.10.97

MR COOK: I apologise for the fact that we are a bit late.  We got stuck in the traffic, there was an accident on the N1.  I would like to call the psychologist Ria Kotze.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

SARAH MARIA KOTZE: (sworn states)

MR COOK: Thank you Chairperson.  Mrs Kotze could you please state your qualifications for the Committee.

MS KOTZE: I have a BA, BA(Hons) and an MA in Psychology.

MR COOK: When did you obtain the MA?

MS KOTZE: It was in 1990 at the University of Stellenbosch.

MR COOK: Any other qualifications?

INTERPRETER: The Interpreter is struggling to hear the witness.

CHAIRPERSON: Could you please just speak into the mike because there is some difficulty getting you onto the record.

MS KOTZE: I obtained this qualification at the Carl Bremmer Hospital.

MR COOK: Are you a qualified Clinical Psychologist?

MS KOTZE: I am qualified in Occupational Psychology.

MR COOK: When did you qualify?

MS KOTZE: In 1990.

MR COOK: And your experience?

MS KOTZE: From 1990, after doing my internship I worked in private practice and since then I have been in private practice and I deal with clinical cases as well as relationship problems, depression etc.

MR COOK: You prepared a report in terms of Mr Benzien, is that correct?

MS KOTZE: Yes.

MR COOK: I don't think it's necessary, Chairperson, to read out the entire report.  I read out a portion of it yesterday and to save time perhaps we can just confirm those portions and proceed.  If you look at the last page is that your signature?

MS KOTZE: Correct.

MR COOK: And do you confirm the contents of the report as true and correct?

MS KOTZE: Yes I do.

MR COOK: If you look at page 5, paragraph 7, your recommendations and conclusion if you could read that into the record.

MS KOTZE: It's
"Conclusions and recommendations
		Mr Benzien suffered from severe post-traumatic disorder and major depressive episode caused by the events he experienced in the course of his duties.  This caused a stress reaction marked by hallucinations and severe personal, social and work impairment.  
		He was treated with medication including a high dosage of an antidepressant, sedatives and sleeping tablets; psychological therapy that extended to his family and extended sick leave.  He is presently still taking medication".
and that is still the fact presently.
"In my professional opinion Mr Benzien does not suffer from a personality disorder which includes anti-social personality disorder also known as psychopathy, he has no history of juvenile misbehaviour before the age of 15, such as serious rule violation, property destruction, lying and theft or continual aggression towards people or animals.  In fact his personal and marital life was severely impaired by his dedication to his work but not marred by severe aggression or brutality.  He has a close-knit family life and enjoys the emotional support of his wife and two children.  His personal life therefore, does not evidence the aggression shown in the execution of his duties.
		Both PTSD and major depression impairs a persons or patients memory and it became evident during therapy that Mr Benzien has blocked out large areas of experience.  When exposed to unpleasant circumstances of severe trauma patients block out negative experiences.  Sometimes people will even block out positive experiences together with negative events in an unconscious effort to forget unpleasant detail.  It is in this light that Mr Benzien's recall abilities should be seen.  
		In my opinion he is not untruthful in his efforts because I was witness to the painful process he underwent to make the decision to apply for amnesty.  He is a person who has always considered himself loyal to the South African Police and his colleagues and the decision to appear before the TRC has been traumatic.  This has been a painful process which started long before the act of applying for amnesty  and after seeing his suffering during the last six months I do not doubt or I do not believe that he will make a mockery of the process that he is presently participating in.  The toll his work has taken from him and his family has been far too great.  He was a good detective who had an excellent record in breaking crime and because of this success he was recruited to a position that has broken him mentally and physically".

MR COOK: Is Mr Benzien still a patient of yours at this stage?

MS KOTZE: Yes he is, and he has another appointment next week.

MR COOK: What are his symptoms at this stage, does he still have certain symptoms which you have listed in your report?