Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1999-10-09

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: Chairperson, in my opinion the blows had to do with the answers that she gave.

MR WILLS: So it wasn't just to impress upon her the seriousness of her predicament?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: Chairperson, once again I think that Mr Lax has asked me this earlier.  I did not know what the state of mind of Mr Taylor was, so I think it is difficult for me to explain exactly which of the blows were dealt in order to make an impression on her or which of the blows had to do with the fact that she may have given a negative answer.

MR WILLS: How did it feel to you to be party to an assault on a defenceless woman?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: Chairperson, given her activities, given the circumstances which reigned at that stage in Durban, terrorism was the order of the day here, they had killed a number of people in bomb explosions.  Dave Baker stood next to a colleague who was killed in an explosion, she provided accommodation to externally trained terrorists who were here with the purpose to murder and maim people, to me it was as natural as tomorrow.

MR WILLS: Did you enjoy it?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: No Chairperson, one would never enjoy it or relish it, but sometimes it was necessary and then I speak in general.

MR WILLS: Are you absolutely certain you cannot remember what she was wearing?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: I am absolutely certain.  I have tried to think about it.

MR WILLS: So she urinated at some stage?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: That is correct.

MR WILLS: What did you do then?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: I had water fetched and poured it on her face.  Her pulse was taken.  That is what was done.

MR WILLS: At any stage was she undressed?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: No, Chairperson.

MR WILLS: Now, you say that whilst this was going on, prior to her becoming unconscious, whilst this was going on, she was in a seated position, is that correct?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: That is correct.

MR WILLS: Sorry, Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: She was in a seated position on the floor, not on a chair.

MR WILLS: Yes, thank you.   Hello, can you pick me up?

CHAIRPERSON: The light's not coming on.

MR LAX: Just speak Mr Wills, the light's not on but we can hear you.

MR WILLS: Thank you.  Sorry, Mr Chairperson.

MR LAX: Just carry on, it's all there.

MR WILLS: I've just lost my train of thought.

CHAIRPERSON: Your question was during the interrogation and the assault, she was in a seated position.

MR WILLS: Now, sorry is it reading, it doesn't appear to be coming through my mike.  But anyway, can you hear me?  It seems to me that it would be more convenient for you if your members and you, I'm referring to you in the plural sense, are beating somebody with a sjambok, to have her hands tied up.  I mean surely this would keep her hands out of the way so that you could put the blows to the places that were required, rather than have her hands going around all over the place.

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: Chairperson, I will reiterate.  The purpose was not to arrest Nthombi.

MR WILLS: I wonder if I could ask you to repeat that.

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: The purpose was not to arrest Nthombi, consequently she was also not bound.

CHAIRPERSON: No but the question was, wouldn't it have been more convenient during the interrogation, especially in view of the fact that she was being assaulted, had she been bound, instead of having her arms available to ward off blows or whatever?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: She was not bound.

MR WILLS: How can you be so sure of that memory?  Why are you so sure of that?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: Because she wasn't bound.

MR WILLS: You see, because certain things you can remember so specifically and others like her clothing you don't have any idea on whatsoever.

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: What I do know is that she was clothed.

MR WILLS: But you don't know anything about her clothes?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: Whether it was blue or green, I cannot recall.

MR WILLS: Was it a dress?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: The clothing was not relevant to me at any stage, therefore I didn't really take any notice.

CHAIRPERSON: I may have just missed it, Col Botha, but about what time of the day was it that this interrogation took place?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: Chairperson, I recall that it was late afternoon.

CHAIRPERSON: We know that end of April, beginning May, was it still light at that time?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: Yes, it would have been dusk.

MR WILLS: Thank you, Mr Chairperson.  You say that you weren't expecting to arrest her at all or even see her that day, you were expecting to get the so-called terrorists.

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: That is correct.

MR WILLS: You had no plan whatsoever to meet with her and Jimmy?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: No, that was not the plan.

MR WILLS: Can I refer to my translation of your first application, and unfortunately the paragraphs aren't numbered, but Mr Chairperson I'm referring to the answers, the rather detailed section of the affidavit which commences at 9(A)(4) and it's about ...

CHAIRPERSON: Page 16 of the bundle, page 4 of the application of that document.

MR WILLS: And if my interpreter's done a good job, it's about the 13th paragraph from the beginning of that question, where it says, and you say this
"Jimmy was detailed to make contact with the terrorists through her.  He and ..."(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, before you proceed, that's page 18, the third paragraph on page 18.

MR WILLS: Thank you, Mr Chairperson.  I'll start again
"Jimmy was detailed to make contact with the terrorists through her.  He arranged an appointment for a certain day, I think it was a Sunday, at the Durban beach front, Battery Beach, to meet her and the Commander of the unit"
and then you go on to say that you and your group were involved in the surveillance of this meeting.  So that seems to imply that you were expecting to meet her on that day together with the terrorists.

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: No, Chairperson, what I wrote there in the statement does not imply that the intention was for us to meet her.  Jimmy's task, Mr Mbane's task was to make contact through her and the arrangement was to meet her and the Commander of the unit, it wasn't only to meet her specifically.  The particular objective was the terrorist, that was the objective.

MR WILLS: You see, my understanding of your answer to the last question was clear that you were just wanting to meet the terrorist, there was never an arrangement for her to be along, but in this statement it indicates that the arrangement was for her to come along with the terrorists.

MR VISSER: Well with respect Mr Chairman, perhaps I can help.  It's quite clear that this paragraph refers to what Jimmy was tasked to do
"Jimmy was tasked to make contact through her with the terrorists.  He arranged an appointment for a particular day.  I suspect it was a Sunday at the Durban beach front to meet her and the Commander of the unit."
If my learned friend will just distinguish and put to the witness that being at the "strandfront", that what must be inferred from this is that he in fact suspected her of being there as well.  But this ...language refers to Jimmy, not to him.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, if you read it carefully Mr Wills, the first sentence is "Jimmy was tasked to make contact with her" to, through her, make contact with the terrorists and then full stop.  Then it goes on
"He made an appointment one day etc, etc."
to meet her and the leader or the Commander of the unit to meet them at the beach front. That was the arrangement made by Jimmy.

MR WILLS: You must have been aware of this arrangement?

HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: Yes, Chairperson.