Amnesty Hearings — Cape Town — 2000-10-04

ISGAK HARDIEN: Mr van Zyl is a private investigator, he's up there in Johannesburg but he has a lot of work in Cape Town, for which I have to obtain information for him.

MR KAHANOVITZ: For example?  Tell us an example of two or three jobs you've done for him.

MR RHEEDE: Chairperson, I'm going to object, I don't know if this is relevant to the matter.

CHAIRPERSON: I don't think we need to know names or involve private people who have been investigated, I don't think that would be in order, but if you could describe the sort of work that you've done, in general terms.

MR RHEEDE: Chairperson, may I just consult?

GEORGE BIZOS: ...(indistinct - no microphone) consultations with a person under oath during cross-examination are unusual to say the least, I know that they take place in the United States, judging by some of the television programmes, but they are quite foreign to our procedure, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Rheede indicated that he was there to assist in case there were questions that might implicate him in crimes, etcetera.
	But all you've got to do here, Mr Hardien, all you're being asked is, what sort of work are you doing?  How often are you working?  Do you earn your R1 500 a month salary?

ISGAK HARDIEN: Yes, I earn my money.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you work on a daily basis or is it sometimes once a month, sometimes no times a month?

ISGAK HARDIEN: Sometimes once a week, sometimes two jobs in a month, it all depends on how the work comes my way.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Kahanovitz.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Just give us one example.  I don't want to know who the people are, I don't want to know who the client is, just give me an example of a single job that you've done for Mr van Zyl.

ISGAK HARDIEN: Matters that he is investigating pertaining to people in the Cape.  He'll phone me up and say: "Gakkie, go and check if such and such a person lives there", I'll go in and make enquiries and then I'll call him back and say: "Yes, the man lives there", and he'll follow it up.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Would you get a photograph of this person?  Would you get a photograph?

ISGAK HARDIEN: No, Mr van Zyl doesn't know that Cape in the way that I do, so it's difficult for him to come and look for someone in the Cape here.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Yes but you told us he tells you to go and find out if somebody's living at a particular place.

ISGAK HARDIEN: If he tells me: "Find out if Mr Williams (even though I might not know a Mr Williams, I'm just using the name for the example), Mr Williams who lives at 20 Klapperbos Street, this is his telephone number."  Perhaps I would phone first and ask to speak to Mr Williams and if they say no, he's coming home this evening, then I'll ask what time and then they'll say 7 o'clock for example, then I'll go at 7 o'clock and determine if the information is correct.

MR KAHANOVITZ: But you don't even know what he looks like.

ISGAK HARDIEN: He just tells me: "Gakkie, go and find out, just confirm if that is the correct address."  Instead of me running around with an album full of photos.

MR KAHANOVITZ: It seems also it's the kind of job that gives you a lot of time to sit at the Truth Commission.  Does your boss give you time off to come and sit here every day?

MR MARTINI: Chairperson, that's an unfair question, Mr Kahanovitz knows that Mr Hardien has been subpoenaed by the Commission, and I don't know if the Truth Commission ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: I don't think we can - 'cause there's been many people sitting here Mr Kahanovitz, who I'm sure are employed.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Mr Hardien, what we're going to argue at the end of the case, and you can comment, is that Mr van Zyl has clearly offered you work and a salary in order to buy your loyalty.

ISGAK HARDIEN: It's not true.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Why didn't he offer you work many years ago?  He's been running this detective agency for quite a while, why does he suddenly need your services now?  Why have  you become so important to his Western Cape operations?

ISGAK HARDIEN: Because he's got work here in the Cape.  ...(transcriber's interpretation)

MR KAHANOVITZ: Oh I see.  Now I want to read to you certain portions of a statement that Oesman Alexander made on the 30th of October 1990, this is part of the police docket into the blast at the Early Learning Centre.  The typed version of this statement appears in bundle D, pages 8 to 10.  In this statement he tells the police what happened that evening.  In the first place he says that the bomb went off at approximately 20H35, are you in a position to dispute that?

ISGAK HARDIEN: I cannot tell you when it was, I cannot say it's right or wrong, I do not know what the time was.

MR KAHANOVITZ: The answer is yes.  He says states that
"The meeting of the Kewtown Youth Movement was adjourned early because there were not a lot of people who came for the meeting.  If more members did arrive, the meeting would have taken longer and the bomb would have exploded in their midst."
You comment on that?

ISGAK HARDIEN: As I've stated before Sir, I do not know what time that meeting started and what time it finished.  I just ensured that there was no-one in the hall, and there's nothing else that I can say.  Whatever Mr Oesman stated there, I do not know.

MR KAHANOVITZ: He continues to say the following
"During the explosion there were a lot of vehicles in the road and also in the parking lot of the Early Learning Centre.  My vehicle is an Isuzu bakkie, it was parked in front of the building in the street."
Now you've just said anything he says you're not in a position to dispute, is that correct?

ISGAK HARDIEN: What I said is Sir, what Oesman's stating there I do not know of, because I was not there when he said these things.  I do not know what time the meeting started, I did not have the time.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Mr Alexander said this in his statement and he's going to come and give evidence here, that at the time the bomb exploded there were cars in the back parking lot, the parking lot that you say was empty at the time the bomb exploded.

ISGAK HARDIEN: There were no cars when the bomb exploded.

MR KAHANOVITZ: Can you give any reason why Mr Alexander would want to make up a version that there were cars in the parking lot at the time the bomb exploded?

ISGAK HARDIEN: I cannot tell you why he's saying that, I know there were no cars.  Even if you keep on asking me, I cannot say why he's saying that.

MR KAHANOVITZ: When you came back from the airport to the scene of the crime, were there cars in the parking lot?

ISGAK HARDIEN: Sir, I did not look at cars, there were too many people, there were no cars where the cars pulled out.

MR KAHANOVITZ: You didn't go and look at the back parking lot?

ISGAK HARDIEN: Sir, all the people were standing in front where the hole in the wall was, everybody was there and I stood there.

CHAIRPERSON: But the question was very simple, Mr Kahanovitz asked you whether you went and looked to see whether there were cars in the parking lot.

ISGAK HARDIEN: Was this now when I returned from the airport?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

ISGAK HARDIEN: I did not drive around that way, I took Vanguard.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you walk that way when you were there, when you were milling around?

ISGAK HARDIEN: No, Mr Chairperson, if I took Jan Smuts Drive I would have seen it, but I took Vanguard and I parked on the other side of the block and I walked across.

MR KAHANOVITZ: I thought your earlier evidence was that you actually went and you saw what the force of the explosion had been.

ISGAK HARDIEN: Sir, I drove from the airport, I could not get through with my car, the place was closed, I ...(intervention)

MR KAHANOVITZ: I'm not asking you if you drove there, you could have walked there.  Your earlier evidence was that you went and you saw the force of the explosion and you were surprised by the force of the explosion.  Remember your evidence?