Amnesty Hearings — Pretoria — UNKNOWN

EMILY FOURIE: And things were a bit quiet after that, although there were continuous rumours and complaints that members were being manhandled.  But in 1987 it was round about March, April, a family came to see me of one of our members, Joseph Mokhojoe, and they said that he had disappeared and that he could not be found.  We made enquiries and in fact Mr Gerber admitted that he had questioned this person, money had disappeared, but that he had taken the man on the 4th of March of that year, 1987, to the Noord Street taxi rank, that he had dropped him there at midnight.  This person to date has never been found.

HASSAN MALL: What is the name of the family?

EMILY FOURIE: Joseph Mokhojoe.

UNKNOWN: Spell it.

EMILY FOURIE: Let me just quickly - it is M-O-K-H-O-J-O-E.

HASSAN MALL: Thank you.

EMILY FOURIE: We have subsequently had enquiries from legal representatives that was acting on behalf of the family, also a report appeared in 1989 in the City Press, where they asked and the heading said "no sign of the man, and where is Joseph Mokhojoe".
	During that time I see in our correspondence in 1988, we wrote again to the company, requesting that the security investigations department, when employees are requested to make a statement, a representative to be present; the investigation should be done during working hours.  
	There was a follow-up.  The company said that the person may be accompanied by a shop steward.  We responded by saying we insist that he must be accompanied by a shop steward.  But things really came to a head in September of 1989.  When one of our Coloured members, a man by the - his surname was Jantjies.  That was in September of 1989.

UNKNOWN: What about Jantjies?

EMILY FOURIE: He, Mr Chairman, he came to complain that he had been tortured and assaulted by - and he named four persons.  It was Mr Hennie Gerber, Johan van Eyck, a Mr Spies and a Mr Piet Niemand.  And in fact, he had been discharged from hospital and he came with a doctor's note to say that this man was assaulted by having an electric wire inserted in his left ear.  When first seen the drum was obscured by a lot of dry blood.  This was first removed under general anaesthetic, from the 5th of September 1989. His drum was then seen to have had a subtotal perforation. There is a 17% loss of hearing in that ear. He is to undergo - and then there is a very technical name, medical name here, operation on the 22nd. Now he went - he underwent the operation and everything and then he came to our office.  Needless to say we then contacted the head office and we asked for an immediate inquiry and an investigation into this allegation.
	At the initial inquest inquiry, it was then  decided that Mr Gerber, Mr Van Eyck, Mr Spies and Mr Niemand would be suspended pending a disciplinary inquiry.  That was towards the end of 1989.  I then whilst they were on suspension and we were now awaiting this hearing to proceed, which the company told us was going to be an internal investigation, that their human resources department would handle it.  And in fact we had one meeting where I was only allowed observer status.  Mr Van Eyck's brother, Adv Van Eyck then represented them at that hearing, and due to a lack of documentation having exchanged hands, it was then postponed.  
	I, subsequent to that, received a telephone call from Mr Fourie, and there then - Mr Thomas, who was part of their labour relations department, and asked if I could come and see them. When I got there they explained to me that the fact that Mr Gerber, Van Eyck, Spies and Niemand were suspended, it left them very short-staffed in this department and they could not proceed with investigations.  And, in fact, Mr Gerber was in the middle of some important investigation and they were basically pleading with me to allow them to lift the suspension, that they would continue with the disciplinary inquiry, but in fact, that these members would be confined.
	I then said I would only agree to that if I had an undertaking not from any other person in the company, but Mr McFarlane who held the highest position in the company .

UNKNOWN: Then that led to Exhibit A.

EMILY FOURIE: Yes. Now I was in their offices when they drafted this letter. I told them what I required in the letter, you know, what was our requirements. They went along, they typed this letter.  They got Mr McFarlane to sign it. They brought it to me in the office of Mr Thomas, and I was not satisfied with the contents of this letter, because I specifically asked that Mr Gerber and Mr Van Eyck not have any contact whatsoever with our members.  Whereas this letter just said that they could have a shop steward present during the investigation.
	They then back, redrafted a letter and in fact asked me to agree to the wording, went and retyped a further letter, which was then signed by Mr McFarlane.

UNKNOWN: This then led to the letter which is in front of you right now, dated 7 November 1989?

EMILY FOURIE: No. No, I don't have that letter with me. I think - oh, yes. Yes, I do have that, yes.  Now that, the  ... (intervention).

UNKNOWN: Yes. I see ...

EMILY FOURIE: ... first one was A, was just ...

UNKNOWN: I see that letter is addressed also to you?

EMILY FOURIE: Yes.

UNKNOWN: I would like you to read into the record the contents of that letter.

EMILY FOURIE: Fine.
"Dear Mrs Fourie
		re Security Department
		I refer you to your letter dated the 6th of November 1989 addressed to Mr A Thomas and also to your discussion with Messrs Marais and Fourie on Monday, 6th of November.  I hereby confirm the terms of agreement reached at the meeting in respect of the Fidelity Guards security department.  
1.	That all future investigations which involve the questioning of employees will be confined to a preliminary investigation stage, whereafter the matter will be referred to the South African Police for further action.
		2.	That the questioning of employees during the preliminary investigation stage will be conducted in the presence of either a shop steward or a co-employee.
		3.	That all such preliminary investigations which will be conducted in a question format, and at no stage will any form of illegal violence be used or permitted.
		4.	That as far as it is reasonably possible such preliminary investigations will be held within normal working hours.
		5.	That the suspension on Messrs Niemand and Spies be lifted immediately.
		6.	That the suspension on Messrs Gerber and Van Eyck be lifted immediately, subject to the following pre-condition, and pending the outcome of the disciplinary hearing; that their activities be restricted to administrative duties, and more specifically that they will not be party to any activity which involves the questioning of or direct contact with employees in the cash in transit division.
		7.	That Mrs Fourie will liaise with yourself in due course in respect of the appointment of a suitable chairman for the pending disciplinary inquiry as well as the determination of a suitable date. 
		I would also like to record my personal appreciation for your understanding and conciliatory matter in this sensitive matter. 
		Yours faithfully
		Mr McFarlane."

UNKNOWN: Mr Chairman, members of the Committee, I beg to hand this document in as EXHIBIT I.

HASSAN MALL: Very well.
EXHIBIT I HANDED IN

UNKNOWN: Mrs Fourie, the disciplinary inquiry referred to on page 2 of Exhibit I, was it ever held?

EMILY FOURIE: No.

UNKNOWN: It was never held?