Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1999-08-16

MS GABRIEL: And you agreed that blowing up his hands and face would make it seem as if, you would then be able to say that he had left to Swaziland?

LAWRENCE G WASSERMAN: No, that doesn't make any sense, your question.  Please say it again.

MS GABRIEL: Well you just said in your own mind...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: It occurred to him that maybe he had gone overseas, out of the border, beyond the border.

MS GABRIEL: I'm afraid that's not how I understood Mr Wasserman's evidence.  I understood him to say that if, and please correct me if I'm wrong, that if Mr Ninela was obliterated in ways that he wouldn't be able to be identified, that would help spread, or assist in having people believe that Ninela himself specifically had left the country.

LAWRENCE G WASSERMAN: It was as, that's much of ...(intervention)

MS GABRIEL: Now why did you form this belief?  Why did you need to form this belief?

LAWRENCE G WASSERMAN: Mr Chairman, may the learned lady please say it a little bit more concise?

MS GABRIEL: Okay.

CHAIRPERSON: You know a thought occurs to you and the question is being asked, why did this thought occur to you?  Whether this was a belief or a thought, we'll leave that out for the time being.  In your mind you thought that if this man's body would not be identified, people might assume that Ninela was out of the country.

LAWRENCE G WASSERMAN: Correct, Mr Chairman.  I presumed or assumed that the family wouldn't make inquiries about him and they might anticipate that he had left the country and the matter would be left at that.

MS GABRIEL: And so this was a belief that was particular to your own mind?

LAWRENCE G WASSERMAN: I had it.

MS GABRIEL: Please have a look at bundle 1 page 57.  This, I understand, was the statement of the 4th applicant in this case, Mwelase.  Have a look at the penultimate paragraph.
"We followed Taylor to this place.  The man was beaten by Taylor and Myeza.  We were taken back to Durban by Mr Brown.  I later asked Taylor what happened to him and he told me that they had recruited him and sent him to Swaziland."
It seems then that this was a shared belief?

LAWRENCE G WASSERMAN: No, I don't know anything about that.

MS GABRIEL: Is there anything else about this case that you're not disclosing, Mr Wasserman?

LAWRENCE G WASSERMAN: I've disclosed everything that I, of my portion in this case, I have disclosed.

MS GABRIEL: So you've disclosed everything that you know about the execution of Mr Ninela?

LAWRENCE G WASSERMAN: To my recollection, yes I have.

MS GABRIEL: And you would not be in a position to dispute any of the evidence then that the family presents?

LAWRENCE G WASSERMAN: I don't know what that evidence is.

MS GABRIEL: Okay.  Well you supposedly know nothing about the history of Mr Ninela, you were just following instructions.

LAWRENCE G WASSERMAN: Yes, Mr Ninela wasn't a subject that got my attention during the struggle days.

MS GABRIEL: Who's attention did he receive?

LAWRENCE G WASSERMAN: I have no idea.

MS GABRIEL: But not yours?

LAWRENCE G WASSERMAN: Definitely not mine.

MS GABRIEL: You mentioned earlier that in those days it was not possible to solve all of the problems that you encountered through legislative means, what did you mean by that?

LAWRENCE G WASSERMAN: The legal process and the arrest of Umkhonto personnel sometimes could not be cleared up via the court system and this is specially relevant when the war in Natal hotted up, sometimes it was deemed necessary that non-legal steps had to be taken by ourselves.

MS GABRIEL: And you noted that Mr Ninela was handed over to you with an explosive or is it a limpet mine was found in his possession?

LAWRENCE G WASSERMAN: I was informed so by Col Taylor, yes.

MS GABRIEL: And you received Mr Ninela and the limpet mine?

LAWRENCE G WASSERMAN: That is correct.

MS GABRIEL: And at that point couldn't you question the instruction to execute because there you had the evidence to take him through the legislative channels?  Did it occur to you to question?

LAWRENCE G WASSERMAN: I did not question, I presumed that this is, Mr Taylor had probably thought that the legislation process would not be efficient in this case, therefore he had made that decision.

MS GABRIEL: But it was something that didn't strike you. did it not strike you as odd?

LAWRENCE G WASSERMAN: No, it did not.

MS GABRIEL: Thank you, Mr Wasserman.  I have no further questions Mr chair.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS GABRIEL

MS THABETHE: Just one Mr Chair.

MS THABETHE: Mr Wasserman, what happened to the body of the deceased after he was executed?

LAWRENCE G WASSERMAN: Do you mean after I had shot him?

MS THABETHE: Yes.  Did you leave it there or what happened to it, do you know?

LAWRENCE G WASSERMAN: Exactly where he died instantly, is where Col du Preez set the limpet mine and he was place on top of that limpet mine, all at the same place.

MS THABETHE: No, I mean after he was blown up, what happened to his remains?

LAWRENCE G WASSERMAN: No, after leaving the scene, I never returned back to the scene.

MS THABETHE: So you don't know what happened?

LAWRENCE G WASSERMAN: No, I don't know.  I have no idea what happened thereafter at the scene, Mr Chairman.

MS THABETHE: No further questions Mr Chair.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS THABETHE

ADV BOSMAN: Thank you, Chairperson.  Mr Wasserman, where were your duties sort of, where did your duties lie?  Was it within the terrorism or the intelligence part of the work of the Security Branch?

LAWRENCE G WASSERMAN: I was in the MK Intelligence Unit, but it still formed, fell under the terrorist desk.

ADV BOSMAN: And perhaps it's not fair to ask you this, but why did Mr Taylor, in your mind, summon du Preez to this operation, which fell outside of his normal activities?

LAWRENCE G WASSERMAN: Mr Chairman, I can only conclude that had, with Taylor's involvement with Ninela, then perhaps there had been a transition from Ninela's other activities into MK activities somehow and that's how come Taylor got involved, because otherwise he normally would not have been involved with persons that weren't involved in MK activities in some form or another.

ADV BOSMAN: A question which arises in my mind is that in Taylor's application it is said that he suggested that the body be blown up and Mr du Preez happened to be an explosives expert, would it be unfair to draw the conclusion that he was summoned because of his expertise in explosives?

LAWRENCE G WASSERMAN: That might also be a valid conclusion.

ADV BOSMAN: Were there any indications, as far as you can remember, that du Preez was asked to assist on account of him expertise in explosives?

LAWRENCE G WASSERMAN: I cannot recall that specific aspect, but with the handing over of Mr Ninela's limpet mine, he must have been there because Mr Taylor would never have given me the limpet mine because I'm not a trained expert.

ADV BOSMAN: And then just one more question, it's also something that I'm rather puzzled about, is in the first application both you and Mr du Preez say that you are vague and you cannot recollect exactly what the details were and then you consult with him and he consults with you and then all of a sudden you know, so what jolted your memories?  How did it come about that you then remembered?

LAWRENCE G WASSERMAN: Mr Chairman, this man, Mr Ninela, never came to my knowledge via our infiltrations into the Natal machinery and MK structures which I personally had infiltrated, therefore he was never a key figure in my entire career, I couldn't recall where Mr Ninela came in in the whole onslaught of our amnesty applications all the names.  Once the facts were given to me, then I recalled that he had come from, he was never a known, a big fish, like other persons that I'd been dealing with.

ADV BOSMAN: Which facts are you referring to?  Which facts were given to you?

LAWRENCE G WASSERMAN: When we consulted.

ADV BOSMAN: Who?