CHAIRPERSON: Just for the purposes of continuity, the matter we heard yesterday involved a number of applicants. It involved Mr Labuschagne, who unfortunately was not here. I have been in communication with his attorney and I've told him that it is desirable that his client's application be heard by the Panel as it is presently constituted, because a great deal of the evidence relevant to the background in this matter has already been placed before us. The members of the family of the deceased were present throughout the hearing. One wants to avoid causing them inconvenience and the upshot of it is, I have now arranged for him, that's Mr Britz, to give him a special dispensation by interposing his application at half past nine on Wednesday morning. He is going to come down with his client and we will then be able to close this chapter of the hearing. So, we must work between now and then on the basis that on Wednesday morning we might have to suspend whatever we are doing to enable us to finish another matter. Thank you.

Are we ready to begin Mr Visser?

MR VISSER: Yes, Chairperson. Mr Chairman, ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: I'm sorry to tell you, you must realise that the delay in beginning this hearing is not due to any delay on the part of members of the Committee.

MR VISSER: The thought never crossed my mind, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: We're trying to organise our schedule in such a way that we can bring forward matters set down in the future so that we can save more time.

MR VISSER: Yes. Yes, while we're on that point, Mr Chairman, Ms Thabethe has an impossible task, it seems, to bring matters forward. Perhaps the problem here is in the whole attempt to place matters for certain dates. It would seem and the present hearings do seem to be the best example of that, that one must place the incidents without dates, to run as a running role, so that people must know that they must keep themselves available because we are under an accelerated situation and it just won't do for attorneys and advocates to say "I'm sorry, you said it was the 3rd and therefore I'm not available before then".

CHAIRPERSON: That is part of the problem.

MR VISSER: Yes, that is certainly a big part of the problem.

CHAIRPERSON: That is part of the problem, the other part of the problem is the unavailability of the dependants.

MR VISSER: Yes, of course.

CHAIRPERSON: And sometimes that has caused a great deal of delay, but I appreciate the ...(intervention)

MR VISSER: We attempt to assist as far as we are possible, but our hands are also tied. We can only be ready to go on with our clients, but we can't speak for others, as long as you understand that.

CHAIRPERSON: Alright, good, I do.

MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, may I briefly refer you back to the Cele matter, just one matter which I neglected to mention? You will recall that in the evidence of Lawrence Wasserman, he mentioned that he shot Cele with a firearm. Now we did not lead him fully on that, but if necessary when he comes back he can give the evidence. It was a Russian firearm, a Makarov, I don't know whether he said so.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR VISSER: But the fact is Mr Chairman, what I neglected to do, was to add to his request for amnesty, amnesty also for possession of an unlicensed firearm and ammunition, if you would be prepared to consider that as well?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, certainly.

MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, we are now proceeding to the matter of Mr Tekere, M K Tekere. In this matter we act for Mr Vorster, Mr du Preez and Mr Wasserman and we will first of all call Mr Vorster. You, I hope have before you the additional bundle which has been prepared by Ms Thabethe in the Tekere matter because that bundle includes the statements, which we have prepared of their evidence, at page 37 of the additional bundle.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, we have that.

MR VISSER: If you will then turn to page 37, Chairperson, you will find the evidence of Vorster. I beg leave to call him. He will give his evidence in Afrikaans and he has no objection to taking the oath.

J A VORSTER: (sworn states)

EXAMINATION BY MR VISSER: Mr Vorster, you have given evidence previously before this Committee, is that correct?

MR VORSTER: Yes, that is correct.

MR VISSER: And do you incorporate that evidence, in so far as it may be relevant, to this evidence that you are intending to give?

MR VORSTER: That is correct.

MR VISSER: What was your share in the Tekere incident? Will you go to page 38 of the additional bundle and please address the Committee.

MR VORSTER: Chairperson, during the end of 1988 or the beginning of 1989,...(intervention)

MR VISSER: Just a moment please. Is there a problem with the microphone?

CHAIRPERSON: You carry on, we're trying to get another one.

MR VISSER: Well, let's rather get you a proper one.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. You were saying that towards the end of 1988 or beginning of 1989?

MR VORSTER: That is correct Chairperson, I'm not certain of the date, Col A R C Taylor contacted me telephonically and requested for me to meet him at a safe-house in Pietermaritzburg. It was on a farm in the Elandskop vicinity, which was used by me as a safe-house.

MR VISSER: Is that the same farm that you referred to yesterday during your evidence regarding the Cele incident?

MR VORSTER: Yes, that is correct.

MR VISSER: Please proceed.

MR VORSTER: He requested me to meet Maj du Preez and W/O Wasserman in Pietermaritzburg and to bring them with to the farm. I met them in Pietermaritzburg and they followed me in their car to the farm. Upon our arrival there it was already dark.

I found Col Taylor, along with a black man, there. In this regard I was mistaken in my supplementary statement, on page 37 of the Tekere bundle.

MR VISSER: Please continue.

MR VORSTER: By saying that I found du Preez and Wasserman on the farm as well.

Col Taylor informed us that the black man's MK name was Tekere and that he was a trained terrorist as well as a member of the ANC's Special Operations Unit. That he had received specialist training in the manufacturing of explosive devices and that he had knowledge regarding the situation of DLBs and I would just like to specify that DLBs in this regard refers to weapon stockpiling locations. Col Taylor further informed us that he had attempted to recruit Tekere to co-operate with the Security Branch, but that this was unsuccessful. He also said that he believed the Tekere could not be released because he would continue with his terrorist activities. Furthermore, he could also not be released because he would then be capable of identifying members of the Security Branch as well as informers.

I noticed that Col Taylor in his amnesty application, that being Tekere bundle page 4.

MR VISSER: That's the original bundle Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR VORSTER: Said that Tekere had been captured whilst he was on his way to set an explosive device. I cannot recall whether Taylor told me this on that particular evening, but it is possible.

MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, perhaps I should just read that in page 4 the late Mr Taylor said:

CHAIRPERSON: I see that.

That is what the reference is about and this witness says he can't recall that that was told to him.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR VORSTER: According to Col Taylor, he did not possess sufficient evidence to prosecute Tekere, consequently he decided that Tekere had to be eliminated. Due to this information it became clear to us, or at least to me, that Tekere had been abducted and was being detained unlawfully. On the basis of our subsequent actions, I therefore associated myself with this. After this briefing ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: How did you come to the conclusion that Tekere had been abducted?

MR VORSTER: Chairperson, the fact that Col Taylor had informed me that he could not prosecute the man due to insufficient evidence, led me to the inference that this man was being unlawfully detained.

MR VISSER: And if he had been illegally arrested and registered as an arrestee and if after that he had been killed, would there have been any problems?

MR VORSTER: Yes, there would definitely have been very big problems.

MR VISSER: So in other words, if Taylor said to you that he had decided that the man had to be eliminated, was that an indication to you that he was illegally under arrest?

MR VORSTER: It was an indication to me that he was unlawfully under arrest.

MR VISSER: And that is what you have referred to?

MR VORSTER: Yes.

MR VISSER: Very well, proceed.

MR VORSTER: After this briefing I took du Preez and Wasserman to a pine plantation where I pointed out a place where they could dig a grave. It was already dark. This place was close to a driveway to the garages. I went back to the house where I discussed the matter further with Col Taylor. Tekere was inside the house and the two of us spoke to each other outside the house. We discussed Tekere further. I want to emphasise it that I am not capable of recalling such aspects of the information that I have referred to above, which were given to me by Taylor during the briefing, where du Preez and Wasserman were present, as well as the session that I discussed with Taylor.

After a while du Preez and Wasserman returned. At that stage Taylor and I were inside the house with Tekere. I can recall that Col Taylor nodded his head and that du Preez and Wasserman took Tekere outside. Tekere was told that he would be transferred and he was blindfolded, his hands were bound behind his back. After a while du Preez and Wasserman returned and said that it was done.

The following day I returned to the safe-house to make sure that there were no signs of the events from the previous evening.

MR VISSER: If I could just interrupt you for a moment. We have seen this very same pattern in the evidence with regard to the murder of Mr Cele where it was about a person who was actively involved in political violence, is that correct?

MR VORSTER: Yes, that is correct.

MR VISSER: There was also another person with whom the pattern was precisely the same.

MR VORSTER: Yes.

MR VISSER: Who was that?

MR VORSTER: That was Portia Ndwandwe.

MR VISSER: Yes. It is a pity that these three cases could not be heard concurrently, but let us just leave it there. From your recollection, can you tell the Committee what the sequence was of Cele, Ndwandwe and Tekere, or are you not capable of recalling what the chronological sequence of events was with regard to these three cases?

MR VORSTER: As far as I can recall, it was first Ndwandwe, I beg your pardon, it was Cele first, then Ndwandwe and then Tekere.

MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, I'm favoured with an attorney who has the kind of mind that remembers dates. I see him writing down dates here. These dates are for Cele, it was July 1988, Ndwandwe was October 1988 and Tekere was towards the end of 1988, beginning of 1989, so it would seem that that would be the order.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MR VISSER: There is a reference, however, somewhere in the papers, I'm not sure where I saw it, that Tekere was in fact murdered on the 7th of August 1988, but we've not been able to verify that date, Chairperson, but it would appear that those were the three incidents which revolved basically around the same situation and the same set of facts and they were all buried on the farm and my information is that those graves were all pointed out by some of the applicants and exhumations took place. I see Commissioner Lax agrees with me.

Yes, perhaps the family, if, well how would they know? If the family does know a better date perhaps, they could clear the question.

CHAIRPERSON: You can carry on with your evidence.

MR VISSER: Thank you, Mr Chairman. Please proceed.

MR VORSTER: The acts and omissions which I committed, I did in the execution of my official duties, under the order of a higher officer, whose orders I was obliged to execute. I did this as part of the opposition to the struggle and my actions were aimed against the supporters of a liberation movement. What I did, I did in order to protect the interests of the Government and the National Party, as well as to combat the revolutionary onslaught. As such I believed bona fide that what I did fell within my express or implied authorisations.

MR VISSER: Very well, we will discuss that further in a moment. Mr Chairman, if you'll just allow me a moment. In the additional bundle you would have noticed that there is documentation pertaining to a medico legal post-mortem report and there is also a report. It is the TRC interview information, from page 3 onwards. Perhaps, Mr Chairman, page 4 might be of some relevance.

CHAIRPERSON: This is the additional bundle?

MR VISSER: The additional bundle, yes Mr Chairman. Page 4 may be of some relevance, where the person who makes the statement, Anna Sithole, describes Mr Tekere as a very politically active person since 1978, and that he was harassed by the police and he went into hiding and she identifies him by his code name as Tekere and she refers apparently, oh no, she says she was never arrested or tortured by the police, that's not relevant, but I just thought that we might point that out to you.

Mr Vorster you then request amnesty in so far as you have associated yourself with it for the unlawful detention or deprivation of freedom of Mr Tekere and for your share in his murder. Mr Chairman we did say at page 37, his abduction, but this witness wasn't involved in that, so that would fall away, it would be the unlawful detention and the murder and any such lesser offence which may emanate from the facts and circumstances of this case. Is that correct?

MR VORSTER: Yes, that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Had you known the man, Tekere, before you say him for the first time with Taylor?

MR VORSTER: No, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: And the information that you got about his political activity, if you had not been told by Taylor, you would not have known anything about him?

MR VORSTER: That is correct, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: You haven't been able to ascertain how it came about that Tekere found himself in the custody of Taylor?

MR VORSTER: No, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: And to your knowledge nobody has thrown any light to you on where Tekere was originally arrested, or apprehended?

MR VORSTER: No, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that all the evidence?

MR VISSER: That's the evidence from this witness, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Any questions?

MR NEL: Thank you, Mr Chairperson.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR NEL: I've got no questions save to say that I just want to refer to the late Col Taylor's affidavit on page 4 of the original bundle.

Mr Vorster in the final paragraph, the final sentence Col Taylor says that he cannot recall, it was either at Verulam or Elandskop, we confirm according to your statement, that it was Elandskop.

MR VORSTER: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you. Do you have any questions?

MS THABETHE: Thank you Mr Chair, just a few.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, please do.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS THABETHE: Mr Vorster, I'm trying to understand what your role was in this whole incident. Were you present when the deceased was interrogated?

MR VORSTER: No, Chairperson.

MS THABETHE: So what would you say your role was in the whole incident?

MR VORSTER: The farm or the safe-house was under my custody or my control and I believe that that is the reason why I was called. My other role was to bring Wasserman and du Preez to the farm because they were not familiar with the environment or the situation of the farm.

MS THABETHE: Thank you, Mr Chair, no questions.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS THABETHE

CHAIRPERSON: I trust from what you've just said that you had nothing to do with the interrogation at all of Tekere?

MR VORSTER: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: And would you know who interrogated him?

MR VORSTER: Chairperson, while Wasserman and du Preez dug the grave, Taylor and I were in the house with Tekere and Taylor consistently communicated with Tekere in Zulu and what emerged from that is something that I cannot comment on or even say anything about, because I don't understand the language.

CHAIRPERSON: Which means that as far as you are concerned, you did not converse or talk to Tekere?

MR VORSTER: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you have any questions to ask?

MR LAX: Mr Vorster, I just want to be clear on something. When you got to the farm at Elandskop, Taylor and Tekere were already there?

MR VORSTER: That is correct.

MR LAX: Were they waiting at the house? Were they inside the house?

MR VORSTER: They were inside the house.

MR LAX: How had Taylor got access to the house? You were in control of the property?

MR VORSTER: The key was left at a particular point and Taylor was aware of where that point was.

MR LAX: Was it normal that he would just make use of the house without informing you beforehand?

MR VORSTER: No, Chairperson. I believe that that was the reason why he called me to the farm, because he was already there and I had to know about it.

MR LAX: Do you have any idea how long he had been at the house before he phoned you?

MR VORSTER: I have no idea and I also cannot recall at what time he contacted me during the day, but there was a pre-appointed time for Wasserman and du Preez to wait for me in Pietermaritzburg, after which we would go to the farm. I cannot say at what time Taylor arrived on the farm.

MR LAX: But he was alone with Tekere on the farm until you brought Wasserman and du Preez there?

MR VORSTER: That is correct, as far as I can recall. I cannot recall anybody else there.

MR LAX: And how did Tekere look when you saw him? What condition was he in?

MR VORSTER: To me he appeared normal. I cannot say with certainty but if I think back, I think that he was cuffed, or that his hands were bound. He sat in an easy chair and Col Taylor sat opposite him on another item of furniture.

MR LAX: Thank you, Chairperson, I have no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you know where they had come from?

MR VORSTER: I have no idea.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes?

MR LAX: Just one last thing.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR LAX: And you didn't ask Taylor where this guy came from and what he was doing with him there?

MR VORSTER: Chairperson, as I have stated in my evidence in chief, I cannot recall what was said when, but I cannot recall that Taylor told me where he had come from or how he had been arrested. As I have stated, I may have read in his submission or his application, that this man was on his way to place an explosive device, but I cannot recall that he told me this specifically.

MR LAX: You see, all I'm just trying to understand is, you find Taylor there with a man, by all accounts you don't ask him anything, you just assume that this is okay. Didn't your inquisitiveness or your - I mean, after all you were a detective, you were a Security Branch policeman, you must have wondered what on earth he was doing with this man?

MR VORSTER: Chairperson, as I have stated, I cannot recall everything that was said. I may have asked him, it is possible, and he may have told me, but I simply can't remember it.

MR LAX: Thank you, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Any re-examination?

MR VISSER: If you'll just allow me one moment, Chairperson.

RE-EXAMINATION BY MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, perhaps not by way of re-examination, perhaps not re-examination, but perhaps it might be helpful just to place on record that very soon before Col Taylor died, my attorney had made an appointment with him together with his attorney in order to obtain fuller information from him to place before the Amnesty Committee, but before that could come to pass, he had passed away, so we are stuck with the situation where we have ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: We can't take the matter any further.

MR VISSER: We can't take the matter any further at all, Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: I understand.

MR VISSER: And I may add that perhaps Mr Nel will draw your attention to that, that on the record in the previous hearing it was made quite clear that towards the end of his life he was very confused and you will also see it in one of the amnesty applications which is to come before you, that he was very confused about facts of incidents and details, Chairperson. I refer you to the Ndwandwe record at page 731 where Mr Nel actually brought this out, the bad memory of Mr Taylor and you can read that for yourself, Mr Chairman, I'm not going to read it into the record, but there were problems discovering from Mr Taylor towards the end of his life, what he knew and the problem was that in certain incidents he just gave an order and the applicants now find themselves that they have to rely on what they were told by him and they can't take the matter any further.

CHAIRPERSON: Just to clear in my own mind, what was the relationship in terms of seniority between Mr Taylor and the applicant?

MR VORSTER: Chairperson, at that stage I was a Major and Col Taylor was already a Colonel. He was the senior officer.

MR VISSER: Would it have occurred to you to doubt or question or to insubordinate his orders?

MR VORSTER: No.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you very much.

MR VISSER: May this witness then be excused?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MS THABETHE: Mr Chair, may I interpose, with your permission please, before the witness is excused?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, certainly.

FURTHER CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS THABETHE: My learned friend referred to an arrest that took place in 1978, I don't know whether I'm mistaken. I just want to clarify that point before we proceed.

MS THABETHE: 1978. He referred to something in 1978.

MR VISSER: No, Mr Chairman, we referred to the additional bundle at page 4, where a lady by the name of Anna Sithole told the investigation unit that he was politically active since 1978. That was one statement. The question of the arrest should not even have been mentioned by myself, because it refers to her which is irrelevant.

MS THABETHE: Thank you, Mr Chair, I just wanted clarification on that.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, you're excused.

MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, the next witness is Maj du Preez. His statement of his evidence also appears in the additional bundle and I would refer you to page 41 of that additional bundle, Mr Chairman. Du Preez is present and he will give his evidence in Afrikaans. He has no objection to taking the prescribed oath.

S G DU PREEZ: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: Did you say page 41 of bundle B?

MR VISSER: Of the original bundle, and page, I'm sorry, of the additional bundle and page 10 of the original bundle, Mr Chairperson. In the original bundle his amnesty application, he deals with the Tekere matter.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I've got that, thank you very much.

MR VISSER: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

EXAMINATION BY MR VISSER: At page 12, I think it is. Mr du Preez, you are also an applicant in the amnesty application with regard to the death of Mr Tekere?

MR DU PREEZ: That's correct, Chairperson.

MR VISSER: Do you have - have you studied Exhibit A and read through it?

MR DU PREEZ: That's correct, Chairperson.

MR VISSER: Are there any parts of Exhibit A which are not applicable to you?

MR DU PREEZ: The parts with regard to Lesotho and Botswana.

MR VISSER: And with regard to the remaining parts of Exhibit A, was this on the grounds of your own knowledge and on the grounds of reports that were sent to you and your general knowledge? Can you confirm those parts?

MR DU PREEZ: Yes, that's correct, Chairperson.

MR VISSER: And you ask that these be considered in the consideration of your application?

MR DU PREEZ: That's correct, Chairperson.

MR VISSER: You have previously given evidence in the Ndwandwe matter and the so-called kwaMashu 3 which was Ntjale Villakase and Sibusiso?

MR DU PREEZ: That's correct, Chairperson.

MR VISSER: As well as Mr Pumezo Mcubini?

MR DU PREEZ: That's correct, Chairperson.

MR VISSER: Mr du Preez on page 42 of the additional bundle, you have said that your memory is quite vague and in the introduction you said that these events took place over a long period and you were involved with several instances and there are no documents which you can refresh your memory by and base your memory on, is that correct?

MR DU PREEZ: That's correct, Chairperson.

MR VISSER: And in your original application indeed you have said that the incident as to which you will give evidence, excuse me we will repeat that, but with regard to your application you said that you could not recall anything at that stage with regard to this incident.

MR DU PREEZ: It is more that I was confused with all the events.

MR VISSER: Yes, that is what I wanted to ask you. At that stage you were not certain as to which facts fitted in with which events?

MR DU PREEZ: That's correct.

MR VISSER: And you require that your evidence be elaborated by means of a document which was handed in. Can you please proceed with paragraph 3 on page 42, the additional bundle. Oh excuse me, maybe I should just ask you beforehand, during this incident you were stationed at Durban, is that correct?

MR DU PREEZ: That's correct, Chairperson.

MR VISSER: Who was your Commanding Officer?

MR DU PREEZ: If I recall correctly, it was Botha.

MR VISSER: And that is what you said the previous time when you gave evidence?

MR DU PREEZ: That's correct.

MR VISSER: And which Commander was above him?

MR DU PREEZ: It was Col Taylor.

MR VISSER: What was your rank, Sir?

MR DU PREEZ: I think I was a Lieutenant or a Captain at that stage.

MR VISSER: And you are currently a Major?

MR DU PREEZ: That's correct.

MR VISSER: With which you retired from the Force?

MR DU PREEZ: That's correct, Chairperson.

MR VISSER: Please continue from paragraph 2.

MR DU PREEZ: I think I will start at paragraph 3, we've already dealt with paragraph 2. It was arranged that Wasserman and I, ...(intervention)

MR VISSER: Please excuse me, will you please start at paragraph 2?

MR DU PREEZ: I am only able to recall certain matters in this incident and I recall that Col Taylor called me on one day and requested me to go to a farm in the Elandskop area with W/O Wasserman. This farm, according to my knowledge, was used as a safe-house by Col Vorster.

It was arranged that Wasserman and I would meet Vorster in Pietermaritzburg and we followed him in our vehicle to the farm, where we arrived at dusk. On the farm we met Col Taylor and a black man. While the black man was left behind in the house, Col Taylor told Vorster, Wasserman and myself certain information outside the house. As far as I can recall, the information was to the effect that the man, Tekere was a trained terrorist and that he was a member of the ANC's Special Operations Unit. He was arrested while he was on his way to place an explosive device in the Durban area.

Col Taylor also informed us that he tried to recruit Tekere, but that he was not successful. Taylor was of the opinion that he could not release Tekere because he would disclose the identity of askaris to the ANC and that he would continue with his terrorist activities. He also did not have any evidence which he could use to have Tekere prosecuted. Col Taylor informed us that he consequently decided that Tekere had to be eliminated and he ordered Wasserman and I to carry out this order. From this information it became clear that Tekere was abducted and was detained unlawfully.

On the grounds of the following actions I associated myself with this. Vorster indicated a place to us in a plantation of pine trees close to the road which led to the garage. Wasserman and I dug a grave there with the spades which Vorster supplied to us. When we were done, we returned to the house where Tekere was informed that he would be moved to another place and he was blindfolded. I think Tekere was cuffed all the time, with his hands behind his back.

Wasserman and I walked Tekere down the road and at some point close to the grave, Wasserman hit Tekere over the head with a baton and he fell unconscious. After he fell on the ground, Wasserman shot him in the head and chest with a silenced Makarov pistol. We removed Tekere's clothing, placed him in the grave and closed the grave. Afterwards we went back to the house.

The clothing of Tekere was burned right there on the farm, if I recall correctly, a fire was made outside the house. Afterwards we returned back to Durban.

MR VISSER: And you say that the actions and omissions which were committed by you, were done in the execution of your official duty and you acted here in the instruction of a senior officer, whose instructions you were obliged to execute and this was in the opposition of the struggle to protect the government and the National Party's interest and to combat the revolutionary onslaught and you bona fide believed that you acted within your implicit or expressive authority?

CHAIRPERSON: You know there's a limit to way questions are put. You know, you don't make a statement to him, you put a question him. We've reached so far in this matter that at this stage that it can't prejudice anybody.

MR VISSER: Yes, I thought so Mr Chairman, but if you feel that I should lead it to the witness to say it out of his own each time, then I will gladly do so.

CHAIRPERSON: No, but I think that as far as crucial aspects of the evidence are concerned, let that come out of his own mouth.

MR VISSER: Yes, of course.

CHAIRPERSON: Rather than him saying yes or no, if you don't mind.

MR VISSER: Yes. Chairperson, do I understand you correctly to say that I can go a bit quicker over the issues pertaining to the past as I've just done?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, quite right, there's nothing wrong with that. We can understand because there has been a great deal of evidence that's already been led.

MR VISSER: Yes, I thought so, Chairperson, with respect, but as far as his evidence on the facts is concerned, I'd rather let him tell you that out of his own.

CHAIRPERSON: Quite right, for example the precise extent of his participation.

MR VISSER: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Must come from him.

MR VISSER: Yes, certainly, Chairperson. Thank you, Chairperson. If I may turn to page 41 Chairperson, we again refer to the question of the abduction. In our minds we're not entirely certain what the legal position is of a man who finds somebody and he comes to the conclusion in his own mind that the man must have been abducted and he associates himself with that.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, I don't know whether one can go to that extent.

MR VISSER: Well technically it might be argued by the Attorney-General that he therefore became associo criminus in the abduction itself. We're not entirely certain what the legal position might be but perhaps ex abundanti cautela, Chairperson, we should ask you to consider A on page 41 in the case of Vorster as well as this witness and Mr Wasserman, for what it might be worth, but clearly they realised that he was not in legal detention and therefore B would be relevant, C would also be relevant, as well as any other delict or offence committed and as shown by the facts. Mr Chairman, we notice it is now 5 past 11, we're not certain whether you want to take the tea adjournment now or continue with the next witness.

CHAIRPERSON: We'd like to dispose of this witness's evidence.

MR VISSER: Certainly, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nel, any questions you wish to put?

MR NEL: I've got no questions, thank you Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Thabethe, any cross-examination of this witness?

MS THABETHE: Thank you, Mr Chair, I do.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS THABETHE: In your evidence Mr du Preez, you have indicated that Col Taylor informed you, Vorster and Wasserman outside about the deceased, M K Tekere, is that correct?

MR DU PREEZ: That's correct.

MS THABETHE: And you've also indicated that he informed you that he was called whilst on his way to place a bomb, is that correct?

MR DU PREEZ: That's correct.

MS THABETHE: Did he inform you whether he did find anything with him? Was he in possession of those bombs, or not?

MR DU PREEZ: No, I cannot recall. I understood it that he was active in Durban with the execution of operations of placing bombs.

MS THABETHE: No, what I'm trying to understand is, was he caught whilst he was on his way to place bombs? Was that what you were told or, I'm just trying to understand that feature of the evidence.

MR DU PREEZ: That's correct, but I cannot recall whether he was specifically on his way with explosives in his possession. I cannot recall if Taylor told me that he had explosives in his possession at the time of his arrest.

MS THABETHE: And were you involved in any way in the interrogation of Mr Tekere?

MR DU PREEZ: No, not at all. I met Taylor at the farm there with him. I never interrogated Tekere.

MS THABETHE: Thank you Mr Chair, no further questions.

MR LAX: Mr du Preez, do you have any idea when Taylor had arrested Tekere, or whether in fact Taylor himself even arrested Tekere?

MR DU PREEZ: I have no idea.

MR LAX: And your recollection is that it was the three of you that were told by Taylor about this man together, you were all present together.

MR DU PREEZ: That's correct.

MR LAX: Now and your recollection of what you were told is as it's contained here and as you've testified? That this man was arrested on his way to place certain bombs, that's how you've put it in these - is that your recollection?

MR DU PREEZ: That's correct, Chairperson.

MR LAX: You see, what concerns me is that if a man was arrested on his way to place bombs, he'd presumably have the bombs with him that he was intending to place, there would presumably consequently therefore be some evidence upon which you could then charge him.

MR DU PREEZ: That's correct. At that stage I cannot recall whether Taylor told me that he found explosives in his possession, or I never saw any of those explosives, or I've never heard of the circumstances surrounding these explosives.

MR LAX: You see, I'm just trying to put myself in your position on that day, being told that information and what would not have made sense would have then been the statement, well there was no evidence to charge him. You don't recall having questioned that or being uncomfortable with that in any way?

MR DU PREEZ: No, Chairperson.

MR LAX: Thank you, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: In other words what it really boils down to here is that you were told by Taylor that this man was about to place bombs in Durban. That ought to have conveyed to you that this man was - had either committed an offence for being in possession of explosives, or was planning to commit an offence. He could be arrested and he could be charged. Now, if that were so, then your evidence that you couldn't release this man because there was no case against him, you couldn't make a case against him, presents me with some difficult, because there would be a case against him if he was found in possession of explosives, or he was caught while he was about to place a bomb somewhere in Durban. Now I understand your position. As far as you are concerned, your recollection is that this is what you were told and you didn't question it.

MR DU PREEZ: Correct, Chairperson, maybe I should answer in the following. I had the fullest confidence in Col Taylor and if he said that the man had to be eliminated, I had the fullest confidence that there was no other way and if there were alternatives to charge the man, he would have done so or he would have used that option.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you. Have you any questions?

ADV BOSMAN: Mr du Preez, the same point which was raised by my colleagues is my problem as well. On page 43 you say there he was arrested while he was on his way to place an explosive device in Durban. You do not qualify it as saying that he was unlawfully arrested and then later you say, because of the information that he was, you know that he was abducted and unlawfully detained. Are you not uncomfortable with this where you say he was arrested and then later you said that he was abducted, which contradicts arrest, are you not uncomfortable with this now?

MR DU PREEZ: With regard to the arrest, at the time of his arrest I don't know whether it was an arrest or an abduction. When I found the man at the farm and Taylor gave us the instruction to eliminate him, it was clear that it was an abduction.

ADV BOSMAN: But now ex post facto you say that he was arrested, why don't you say that he was abducted while he was on his way to place the explosive device? This is what bothers me because in this written statement you contradict yourself. Shall I put it to you, did you initially think that he was arrested?

MR DU PREEZ: I assumed that Taylor must have arrested the man and later this arrest turned into an abduction.

ADV BOSMAN: Why did you not say in your statement that he was abducted? Why did you say he was arrested?

MR DU PREEZ: It might just be a choice of words. When a policeman says that when a person is taken, he is arrested.

ADV BOSMAN: But you were a senior policeman and you retired with a senior rank from the police force, for a policeman there must be a great difference between arrest and abduction? Thank you. Thank you Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Any re-examination?

MR VISSER: Yes, please, Mr Chairman.

RE-EXAMINATION BY MR VISSER: For you as a policeman, was there a difference between a lawful and an unlawful arrest?

MR DU PREEZ: Yes, Chairperson.

MR VISSER: An unlawful arrest and an abduction, what is the difference between the two?

MR DU PREEZ: I would say unlawful arrest would be abduction.

CHAIRPERSON: Any questions you wish to put arising out of all of this?

MS THABETHE: No, Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Thank you very much.

We'll take the short adjournment at this stage and resume in 15 minutes.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes Mr Visser?

MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, in the adjournment Mr Nel indicated to us that he would ask you to allow him to ask some questions which he hadn't put to the witness, du Preez. Du Preez is still present and he's still under his former oath.

S G DU PREEZ: (s.u.o)

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, please do proceed.

MR NEL: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR NEL: Mr du Preez, what I would like to do is to put to you Col Taylor's role with regard to his work and also with regard to the persons under his command, just to clear it up for the Committee's sake. To begin with, when did you arrive at the Security Branch?

MR DU PREEZ: 1979, that is when I began at the Security Branch in Durban.

MR NEL: And when you arrived there was Col Taylor already at the branch?

MR DU PREEZ: Yes, for quite some time. I suspect that it may have been from approximately 1973 or 1975.

MR NEL: Am I correct in saying that initially you did not serve under him, but from your arrival he was already in control of the terrorism unit?

MR DU PREEZ: Yes, that is correct.

MR NEL: And for how long did you serve under his command in the same section?

MR DU PREEZ: Since 1980 or 81, I began working under his command.

MR NEL: And Col Taylor was, up to his discharge as medically unfit, in control of the terrorism unit?

MR DU PREEZ: In approximately 1990 or 1991, we went to Head Office in Durban and that is where we resided. Taylor was still involved with the askaris, but in 1990 or 1991 we went to Durban.

CHAIRPERSON: I didn't, it seemed a bit disjointed to me. What happened in 1990, 1991?

MR DU PREEZ: That is when I went to the Regional Office in Durban, I was transferred there.

CHAIRPERSON: I see. In other words you met Taylor for the first time once you came to Durban in 1990, 1991?

MR DU PREEZ: No, 1979.

CHAIRPERSON: 1979?

MR DU PREEZ: That is correct.

MR NEL: Now, during this period before you went to Head Office and worked directly under his command, who was the bearer of dossiers and the Chief Investigator of that section?

MR DU PREEZ: It was Col Taylor.

MR NEL: And what was the role of the other members under his command? Did you also carry files, or what was your task?

MR DU PREEZ: We were field workers and we also assisted with investigations or rumours.

CHAIRPERSON: May I just interrupt at this stage? May I ask you, what is the purpose of all this questioning?

MR NEL: Mr Chairman, I just wanted to enlighten the Committee as to what sort of a person Mr Taylor was.

CHAIRPERSON: I don't think I'm going to allow that. We are concerned with the amnesty application by people who have applied before us. We are not going to pass judgment on Mr Taylor, we're not going to make an assessment on Mr Taylor's achievements or demerits. Do you understand?

MR NEL: I understand, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: We've got to confine ourselves to the applicants for amnesty and what they did. We have accepted the information placed before us, that they all accepted orders from Col Taylor.

MR NEL: Thank you, Mr Chairman, I was merely trying to try and enlighten the acceptance of an order from for instance Mr du Preez from Col Taylor.

CHAIRPERSON: We accept that, you see. We haven't questioned anybody when they said that they'd accepted instructions from Col Taylor because of his seniority and we have accepted that.

MR NEL: Very well then, thank you Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Your questioning of this witness doesn't go beyond just trying to establish?

MR NEL: No, it does not, Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Alright, thank you. Well then you're excused.

MR DU PREEZ: Thank you Chairperson.

NAME: LAWRENCE G WASSERMAN

APPLICATION NO: 4508/96

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, the next witness is Mr Wasserman. You will find his statement of his evidence at page 45 of the additional bundle.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, we have that.

LAWRENCE G WASSERMAN: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR VISSER: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

EXAMINATION BY MR VISSER: Mr Wasserman, you gave evidence earlier in this week before this Committee, is that correct?

MR WASSERMAN: That's correct, Mr Chairman.

MR VISSER: And you wish to incorporate the evidence you gave previously in your present application?

MR WASSERMAN: Correct, Sir.

MR VISSER: Mr Wasserman, at page 93 of the original Tekere bundle where you dealt with the Tekere application, you stated that the nature and particulars of this incident are not immediately recalled to mind and you said that you would do the necessary research etc in an attempt to provide a full and detailed statement which would be provided at a later stage. What did you mean by that?

MR WASSERMAN: Mr Chairman, I needed to consult and recall the particulars with other parties that might have been involved in the same incident.

CHAIRPERSON: Just a bit louder, I can't hear. You needed to recall?

MR WASSERMAN: I needed to recall some facts, some salient points, from other parties which would have been involved, in order to make a decent, full statement.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you.

MR VISSER: You were involved in more than one incident, we already know, is that so?

MR WASSERMAN: That's so.

MR VISSER: Was your problem the same as that of Maj du Preez, that he could not recall at that stage which incidents referred to which personalities?

MR WASSERMAN: That's correct, Mr Chairperson.

MR VISSER: Will you please take the Committee through your statement at page 46, that is page 2 before you? You referred to the evidence of Mr du Preez and you find yourself in agreement with his testimony, you stated there.

MR WASSERMAN: That's correct, Mr Chairman.

MR VISSER: We will see that there are some slight differences which you will point out in a moment. Will you continue from paragraph 2?

MR WASSERMAN: Yes, Mr Chairman. My memory is rather poor relating to this incident. I do recall that I did proceed with du Preez one evening to a farm in Pietermaritzburg, although I am uncertain when the instruction first came. I know that the farm was in the Elandskop area, which Col Vorster used as a safe-house.

MR VISSER: According to your recollection, is it a fact that you were in fact on that farm once before the Tekere matter took place, not so?

MR WASSERMAN: That is so, Sir.

MR VISSER: Were you able to find your own way to the farm?

MR WASSERMAN: No, Mr Chairman.

MR VISSER: Yes, alright.

MR WASSERMAN: Consequently du Preez and I met Mr Vorster in Pietermaritzburg and we followed him to that farm. On arrival at the farm, we found Col Andy Taylor with a black gentleman present. Col Taylor then briefed us in regard to this man. He informed us that it was MK Tekere and that he was an S O U, he was a Special Operations member and that he was totally non-co-operative. He also said that Tekere had been arrested by askaris and that he would be able to convey to the ANC the identity of those askaris. He further told us that Tekere had been arrested and that he was on his way to plant bombs in the Durban area.

What made Tekere particularly dangerous was underscored by the fact that he was a member of the elite Special Operations unit of the ANC and some of the biggest and most spectacular attacks during the conflict of the past, were attributed to Special Ops, such as the explosions in Durban on the Victoria embankment and the Mobil Oil Refinery. I am also informed that this list includes the Church Street bomb, Krugersdorp Magistrates Court bomb and the attacks on Sasol 1 and 2.

CHAIRPERSON: These are the activities of the Special Operations Unit?

MR WASSERMAN: Of S O U, yes, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: Not necessarily Tekere?

MR WASSERMAN: Yes, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: Carry on.

MR WASSERMAN: I was further informed that attempts made to solicit his services as an informer were unsuccessful, so briefly we were told that Tekere could neither be prosecuted or released. He couldn't be prosecuted due to the lack of evidence against him and he couldn't be released as he would continue with his terrorist activities and consequently Taylor decided that he should be eliminated.

MR VISSER: What was your experience of Col Taylor at the time? How did you regard his judgment in matters dealing with your work?

MR WASSERMAN: I regarded his judgment and opinions and conclusions as pretty professional.

MR VISSER: According to your own knowledge, was Taylor instrumental in the arrest of other so-called terrorists during the time that you knew him?

MR WASSERMAN: That's correct, Mr Chair.

MR VISSER: Can you give any indication of numbers with which Taylor would have been involved? Arrests.

MR WASSERMAN: It would be numerous, I can't recall how many.

MR VISSER: Yes. Would you say tens, or hundreds or what?

MR WASSERMAN: Scores.

MR VISSER: Scores. Alright. And according to your knowledge, were all those persons that Taylor had arrested before or had taken into custody, been killed, or what was the position?

MR WASSERMAN: Not at all, Mr Chairman, many were processed through the legal channels that were in existence.

MR VISSER: Tried in court and found guilty or not guilty, etc?

MR WASSERMAN: Yes, Sir.

MR VISSER: Alright. Will you continue at page 3 please, page 47 in your bundle, Mr Chairman.

MR WASSERMAN: Mr Chairman, as a result of the information passed on to me by Mr Taylor, it was clear to me that Tekere had been unlawfully abducted and detained.

MR VISSER: That's an inference you drew?

MR WASSERMAN: That's the inference I drew, yes.

MR VISSER: Alright.

MR WASSERMAN: And by my subsequent actions and conduct, I associated myself therewith.

Col Vorster took us to a spot in a plantation, which he identified as a good spot to bury Tekere. Mr du Preez and I then proceeded to dig a grave and when finished, we went back to the house. Tekere was informed that he was to be taken to another location and he was blindfolded.

MR VISSER: Can you recall whether his hands were cuffed?

MR WASSERMAN: He was cuffed behind his back, Mr Chairman.

MR VISSER: Right.

MR WASSERMAN: We led him down the garage driveway and just before reaching the plantation where the grave had been dug, I hit him with a police baton, which rendered him unconscious and caused him to fall to the ground. He was on his back and I shot him in the head with a silenced Makarov pistol, which was given to me by Col Taylor, for that purpose. I thereafter shot him a second time in the chest. The second shot was to make absolutely certain of death. We then took off all his clothes and buried Tekere. The clothes were then taken up to the farmhouse and were burned there. We then all left the scene.

MR VISSER: How do you view your position in what you did? Can you explain that to the Committee?

MR WASSERMAN: Yes, Mr Chairman, in doing what I did, I was executing my duties as a policeman, the way I saw it, as my obligation during the time of the conflict and the political violence. We were conditioned by speeches of politicians and directions by senior officers to do everything in our power to confront the revolutionary onslaught at all costs. There were times when in terms of the prevailing legislation of the time, it wasn't possible to solve all problems that came one's way and this present case is an example of such an instance.

In view of the above, I was of the bona fide belief that what I did was in the present instance in order to combat or derail the revolutionary onslaught and to protect the government and it's National Party from political embarrassment. It fell within my express and implied authority.

Mr Chairman I did not participate in these events for any personal gain, or driven by any personal spite or malice and I received no reward.

MR VISSER: Referring then to page 41, Mr Chairman, at the bottom of the page, again on the basis that he associated himself with the reality, which his inference was, that Mr Tekere had been abducted. He then applies for amnesty for his part of that abduction, albeit after the event, his part in the unlawful detention or the deprivation of liberty, the murder of Mr Tekere, the unlawful possession of an unlicensed firearm and ammunition and any lesser offence and/or delict supported by the facts, Mr Chairman.

ADV BOSMAN: For the record it's 45, Mr Visser, not 41.

MR VISSER: I'm sorry?

ADV BOSMAN: I said just for the record, the reference is to page 45, not 41.

MR VISSER: Sorry, did I give the wrong page reference?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Anyway.

MR VISSER: I do beg your pardon, Mr Chairman. It is 45, yes. Did I say something different? I'm sorry Chairperson.

Yes, Mr Chairman, we did not present you with evidence, this is not part of the evidence from this witness, I just want to point this out. We did not present you with evidence about Special Ops itself, but suffice to say, for purposes of the present hearing, Special Ops because a special operations as the name would indicate, which was launched by Pres Oliver Tambo himself through Mr Joe Slovo and the operative in charge was a gentlemen by the name of Aboobaker Ismail, whose MK name was Rashid and he applied for amnesty, Mr Chairman, before the Amnesty Committee, as you might be aware, and he assumed responsibility for the incidents which were mentioned in the evidence of Mr Wasserman. When Mr Wasserman said he was informed, he was in fact informed by us because we just wanted to place that information before you.

We would submit with respect that it's not necessary for you to concern yourself more than that with the whole issue and the concept and the activities of the Special Ops. In the statement to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission by the ANC, the one of August 1996, so it's the August 1996 ANC statement at page 49, at the foot of that page on the right-hand side, Mr Chairman, there is a reference and it's a very brief reference to Special Ops, about what they were about and then in different other places when the structures were set out, particularly in Mozambique, you will find references to Special Ops and that would be after the TRC had asked for further elucidation and the ANC supplied their further submissions, 12th May 1997 and that you will find for example, Mr Chairman, at page 53 and also at other places, but that's just to place it in perspective.

I have no further questions to this witness, Mr Chairman. If you need any further information about Special Ops for whatever reason, we can give you a lot of information about them, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Well some of it has already been included in some of the papers I have been reading, some of the documents.

MR VISSER: It might well be, yes Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Very well. Mr Nel, have you any questions to put to this witness?

MR NEL: I have no questions, thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Any questions that you wish to put to him?

MS THABETHE: Yes, Mr Chair, thank you.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS THABETHE: Mr Wasserman, you've indicated that it's askaris that arrested Mr Tekere. I want to find out the background. Were askaris authorised to do such arrests?

MR WASSERMAN: Yes, yes Mr Chairman, it would have fallen within their role of duty.

MS THABETHE: Was Mr Tekere assaulted at any stage before he was killed?

MR WASSERMAN: Mr Chairman, I wasn't part of the arrest. I knew nothing. The first time I saw him was on the farm that evening.

MS THABETHE: No, I mean on the farm, before he was killed?

MR WASSERMAN: No, no Mr Chairman, he wasn't assaulted at all.

CHAIRPERSON: In other words, you saw no signs of assault, is that what you are saying?

MR WASSERMAN: No signs of assault at all.

MS THABETHE: Besides having shot at him, is there anything else that you did to him?

MR WASSERMAN: No, there was nothing.

MS THABETHE: Do you know why they chose you specifically to conduct the shooting?

MR WASSERMAN: There is no specific reason that comes to mind why I was specifically chosen.

CHAIRPERSON: When did you know that you were going to be required to do that?

MR WASSERMAN: Mr Chairman, shortly after Mr Taylor had outlined the fact that he was to be eliminated, he informed me, took me aside and handed me the firearm, that's when I knew.

MS THABETHE: Can I proceed Mr Chair?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, please do.

MS THABETHE: Thank you. On going back to the issue of askaris, do you know who the askaris were who actually conducted the arrest?

MR WASSERMAN: No.

MS THABETHE: Thank you, Mr Chair, no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: You've said in response to a question put by the Leader of Evidence whether the askaris were authorised to make arrests, by whom were askaris authorised to make arrests?

MR WASSERMAN: Mr Chairman, Col Taylor would have authorised that.

CHAIRPERSON: Are you personally aware and were you present at any time, not only in this case but in any other matter, where askaris were given such authority by Taylor?

MR WASSERMAN: Mr Chairman, I know of other occasions where askaris arrested people or perhaps the more correct way would be a snatch of persons, I'm not sure about the legalities thereof, but I do know that they did arrest other MK persons that they did come across during the conflict period.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. The question is, who would they be authorised by?

MR WASSERMAN: It would have been under the direct command of Col Taylor.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Any questions, Ilan?

MR LAX: Do you know how long before that day Mr Tekere had actually been arrested, abducted or call it what you will?

MR WASSERMAN: Mr Chairman, no I don't, possibly a day in advance, it wasn't a long time. It wasn't a long period, of that I'm certain, but if it was the day before or during the course of the day of the evening that I was called to the farm, I am unable to state specifically.

MR LAX: But it wouldn't have been weeks before that?

MR WASSERMAN: Definitely not.

MR LAX: And where would these askaris have been stationed or based or whatever?

MR WASSERMAN: If it was under Col Taylor's command, it would have been the Natal based unit and they were based at Camperdown.

MR LAX: That's the farm that was hired at Camperdown?

MR WASSERMAN: Yes, correct, Mr Chairman.

MR LAX: Thank you, Chairperson.

ADV BOSMAN: Thank you, Chairperson. Mr Wasserman, when did you establish that Tekere was a member of this elite Special Operations unit?

MR WASSERMAN: I asked Mr Taylor a little of his background and he informed me himself.

ADV BOSMAN: Was that at the time when Mr du Preez and Vorster were also present?

MR WASSERMAN: Col Taylor spoke to us all in Afrikaans and occasionally I would miss the contents of certain things and I would talk to him on the side, so I was told then by him that he was a member of S O U, by Col Taylor. It would have been round about exactly the same time that he spoke to all the other members.

ADV BOSMAN: So it would appear you were fairly extensively briefed, were you?

MR WASSERMAN: I was reasonably briefed from Mr Taylor, yes Ma'am.

ADV BOSMAN: Thank you. Thank you Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Any re-examination?

MR VISSER: Just two aspects, Mr Chairman, with your leave.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

RE-EXAMINATION BY MR VISSER: You say you didn't understand the Afrikaans so well. Where are you originally from Mr Wasserman?

MR WASSERMAN: I'm originally from Zimbabwe.

MR VISSER: How long had you been in the country at the time?

MR WASSERMAN: At this particular time, are we talking 89 now?

MR VISSER: Yes.

MR WASSERMAN: It would have been from 1980 I was here.

MR VISSER: About 9 years. There's a popular misconception, is there not, that the askaris that operated during the conflict of the past, were all stationed at Vlakplaas, near Pretoria. That perception is incorrect, is that right?

MR WASSERMAN: That's an incorrect perception.

MR VISSER: There were permanent askaris, were there not, in Durban?

MR WASSERMAN: Correct, Mr Chairman.

MR VISSER: Are those the ones that you refer to who were based at Camperdown and who fell under the command of Mr Taylor as their handler?

MR WASSERMAN: That's correct, Mr Chairman.

MR VISSER: Thank you, Mr Chairman. Perhaps you could just tell us, how many askaris were there in the Durban area?

MR WASSERMAN: Mr Chairman, to the best of my knowledge, it's 8 or 9.

MR VISSER: 8 or 9?

MR WASSERMAN: Correct.

MR VISSER: Yes. And if I may, a last questions, Mr Chairman. Did they, were they supposed to do the same work as the askaris from Vlakplaas, to identify ANC supporters that they might have met in camps and so on and identify people from photographs and assist in their arrests?

MR WASSERMAN: That's a correct description, Mr Chairman.

MR VISSER: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Were askaris there to identify MK operatives, in other words people who were operating outside of South Africa, or were they also involved in local political activists?

MR WASSERMAN: Mr Chairman, the unit of askaris here were to identify Umkhonto weSizwe operatives, whom they had dealings with in the camps outside and identify them on their return to South Africa.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you. Thanks very much.

MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, that is the evidence which we wish to place before you by way of viva voce evidence.

CHAIRPERSON: Are you proposing to lead any evidence?

MS THABETHE: No, Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Which of the dependants or members of the family of Tekere are at the hearing?

MS THABETHE: There is the mother, Mr Chair, the mother of the deceased, Nombuso Sithole. Here's the sister, next to me, Jabu Mkhwanazi and the aunt, Octavia Mkhwanazi.

CHAIRPERSON: Was the deceased not married and had a wife and children?

MS THABETHE: No, Mr Chair, he didn't, he wasn't married.

CHAIRPERSON: He what?

MS THABETHE: He wasn't married and he did not have any children?

CHAIRPERSON: What sort of education did he have?

MS THABETHE: He apparently, according to the sister, he went up until Standard 10 and then skipped the country.

CHAIRPERSON: Does she know roughly what year it was that he left the country?

MS THABETHE: It was in 1984, Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: When last did she see him?

MS THABETHE: January 1984.

CHAIRPERSON: 1994?

MS THABETHE: 1984.

CHAIRPERSON: That is when he left the country?

MS THABETHE: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: She'd not seen him after that?

MS THABETHE: No.

CHAIRPERSON: And the other members of your family? You mother and your sister and your aunt?

MS THABETHE: No.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Any questions to put to her?

MR LAX: No.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much. That brings to an end oral evidence in this matter. Mr Visser do you propose to address us?

MR VISSER: Very briefly, with your permission, Mr Chairman.

MR VISSER IN ARGUMENT: Just first of all, on the point which you posed about the time when Tekere left, you will find a reference by the mother who made a statement in your additional bundle at page 4, 7 lines from the top, there's a reference to

1984, Mr Chairman. It says he decided to cross the border to Tanzania.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, we refer you again to the general argument, which we presented to you and we would ask you to bear that in mind in the present instance as well.

Mr Chairman, the facts of the present incident bear a close resemblance to the Cele matter. We submit, with respect, that the facts are basically for purposes of your deliberations on whether to grant amnesty or not on all four in the two matters and therefore the arguments which we presented in the Cele matter, would find application, in our respectful submission, also in the Tekere matter.

The one difference here Mr Chairman, is the fact that this is the one instance where the operatives who gave evidence before you really only acted on orders from Col Taylor. We are in a sense fortunate that he did divulge some information to the three witnesses who appeared before you and that it was not one of the cases which we have come across where the operative simply obtained an order without any explanation at all. They were therefore in a position to give you some background on Mr Tekere. As far as they are concerned, Chairperson, we submit that they have made full disclosure of their knowledge, although it may not be full disclosure of all the facts, but of course they can only tell you what they know.

Mr Chairman, with respect, we have dealt at length with the question of the giving or orders in previous addresses to you and we related that to the general war situation of the conflict of the past and we believe, with respect, that it has been accepted, that in certain circumstances, as long as a person, an operative believed that he acted or should act on orders, that he would fall at least under the provisions of Section 20 sub-section 2 sub-section little (f).

Mr Chairman, of course many questions will arise on the facts and one would have wanted, one would have preferred to have known a lot more about Mr Tekere and what Mr Taylor knew about his activities, one would certainly have liked to have known the answers to some of the questions put by members of your Committee. When was he arrested? How long had he been detained? Who arrested him? What were the circumstances? Was he arrested and found in possession of weapons or explosives? We don't know the answers to all of that Chairperson and sadly, as we indicated before to you, before consultation could come about, he had passed away.

Mr Chairman, we really have very little to add except for the issue on the question of whether Tekere was found in possession of a bomb. We're talking about events which took place 10 years ago and the witnesses whom you heard, Mr Chairman, did deviate to some extent, albeit it slightly, from each other in what they recalled from what Mr Taylor told them. Now, may I immediately submit to you that that is the kind of differences which one would expect from honest witnesses to make. They could quite easily, if they wanted to be dishonest about their recollection, have colluded and all told you exactly the same story, but they chose not to do so, they told you what they remember of what they were told and the expression of what their recollection was, differs. But Mr Chairman, when the witnesses tell you that Taylor told them that Tekere was arrested while on his way to plant bombs, that's how they remember it. Mr Taylor, and again we immediately place the qualification that when he completed his application forms according to evidence which we have heard before, he was forgetful, he was a very ill man but he puts it somewhat differently at page 4 of the original bundle, in his amnesty application and I would read that to you, Mr Chairman, he says that,

Now that's a slightly different expression, and it's page 4 Mr Chairman and it's under incident 17, the death of Tekere and it is line 5 of that paragraph, so we were well aware that Mr Taylor expressed it slightly differently, but what you heard here, Mr Chairman, was the way in which these witnesses remembered it and they stick to that evidence, even after this had been put to them in consultation. They told you what they remembered.

We submit, Mr Chairman, that in the light of the events of Mr Taylor having, being now deceased, in the light of the time that has passed since the incident, that you will not hold any deviation in the evidence among these three witnesses, against them. There are also explanations, one is that Vorster spoke to Taylor on two occasions and he says he can't remember what was said at which occasion and particularly what was said when Wasserman and du Preez were present. Wasserman told you something which Vorster and du Preez didn't tell you and that was the question of the askaris, which they didn't know about. His explanation for that is that his understanding of Afrikaans was poor and that he asked for elucidation and as he recalls, that took place not in the presence of Vorster and du Preez, so Mr Chairman, we're talking about matters which transpired a long time ago and these are possible solutions to the answers, to the questions as to why they remember matters differently, but at the end of the day, Mr Chairman, our submission is that these conflicts or contradictions, if you wish to call them that, are not material and that they do not detract from the fact that in fact they support the fact, support the submission that these people wanted and in fact did come to this Committee to make a full disclosure of all the relevant facts.

They acted, Mr Chairman, on the instructions of Mr Taylor, who was a very senior officer, who had been involved in terrorist investigations and activities for a long time, who had arrested many, many people, certainly did not kill all of them, many, many more were put through the legal process, through the courts etc and therefore we would ask you to accept that when Mr du Preez said that he had faith in Mr Taylor's decision when he had decided that a certain avenue had to be followed, that he would have considered all possible possibilities and options.

Mr Chairman, unless there is something you specifically wish to hear me on, we have no further submissions to make, other than to ask you that, to deal with this matter on basically the same basis as the Cele matter and to favourably consider the amnesty applications. As far as the abduction or unlawful arrest is concerned, Mr Chairman, with respect we have thought about it and we are going to submit to you that you should in your wisdom, also consider granting them amnesty for as far as they become socio crimini after the event of the abduction, because they all told you that it was pretty clear to them that the man wasn't under a normal arrest and logic would prescribe that it couldn't have been Mr Chairman, because in a normal arrest, the person would be taken to the police station, he would be registered as an arrestee, his name would be entered in cell registers, he would be put in a cell until bail could be arranged and he would be arraigned within 48 hours. It is hardly likely that Tekere would have been taken out of a cell by Mr Taylor and then, on his orders be eliminated, because one wonders how one would be able to explain the non-return of the body of Mr Tekere to the cell after having taken him out. So we submit, Mr Chairman, it would be in order for you to consider granting them amnesty also for the abduction or perhaps unlawful arrest, we're not certain what happened there because we have no knowledge, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MR VISSER: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nel, is there anything you wish to say?

MR NEL ADDRESSES: Mr Chairman, yes briefly.

You did indicate to me yesterday in Chambers and which is not on record and perhaps, if I may, you indicated to me that there is no need to hear argument on the matter of the late Col Taylor. As I've indicated to you, Sir, in Chambers that I am currently taking instructions from the advocate, Adv Sonnekus who represents the office of the Commissioner of the Police. I have not been instructed to take that matter any further as to now and it's for that reason, Sir, that I beg your indulgence for, seeing that the Cele matter is going to be heard on Wednesday and

finalised, if I may, if those instructions come and if I'm asked to argue the point any further, to allow me a brief moment after the Cele matter perhaps to do so.

CHAIRPERSON: You will certainly be allowed.

MR NEL: Thank you, Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Is there anything you wish to say?

MS THABETHE: No, Mr Chair, except to say that with regard to the requirements of the Act, there is no opposition. However, Ms Mkhwanazi has indicated that she would like to address you on something and I would request that she be allowed that privilege.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MS MKHWANAZI: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Please give us your full names and spell it, so that we can record it.

MS MKHWANAZI: J-A-B--U M-K-H-W-A-N-A-Z-I

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MS MKHWANAZI: Thank you, Mr Chairman, what I would like to say is, I've just heard the evidence and I've got nothing against it because I've got no evidence to rebut it, all the questions which I had were for Col Taylor and unfortunately he's late. What I would like to tell the people around here is that I was very, very angry and sad and hurting, but my anger has subsided now. The reason is who made this to me and I'm very grateful to him, that is Mr Wasserman. I spoke to him yesterday in the afternoon after these hearings and I said to myself "at least I've spoken to him, I've faced him, I've told what I felt about this and he told me that he is sad". That is the reconciliation I was looking for, not this hearing, that he have to reconcile with the family. I'm very happy that he said he's sad. Of course this is war, that is what he said to me yesterday. Of course it was, but unfortunately my brother did not get the chance to defend himself. He was blindfolded, gagged, so he had no arms, so he was defenceless, he was killed like sheep going to an abattoir, but what I'm grateful about to these men, I don't know who is it, but one of them pointed out the grave. I'm very grateful to that one otherwise we wouldn't know about this till today because we were looking high and low for this man since 1984, who left us when he was still young. I'm grateful to you. At least you did one good thing, that is Ubuntu, that is to show us the grave so we could bury the grave and we know where he is resting.

So I forgive you Mr Wasserman. You showed remorse to me. You don't know how I felt yesterday. At least my anger has subsided, I'm sad. I know now that you are the one suffering, those who are dead are in peace now. All the answers, all the questions I have were for Andy Taylor. At least you owned up, you said "I killed him", you did not say that it was Col Taylor, because we knew that I wouldn't ask those questions to him, but you owned up. Thank you. I forgive you Wasserman. That's all. Thank you, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

Do you wish to say anything?

This brings to an end these hearings and the Committee will consider the application in due course and make known it's decision.

Before we adjourn, I think we should finalise precisely what we are going to do next. Could you tell us which matter we are going to be dealing with next?

MS THABETHE: Yes, Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, please tell us.

MS THABETHE: With the assistance of my colleague, Mr Visser and Mr Wagener, next week we will be doing the matters of Mamela, I'm not sure about the order, Ninela.

CHAIRPERSON: How do you spell that?

MS THABETHE: N-I-N-E-L-A

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MS THABETHE: The Quarry Road incident.

CHAIRPERSON: Pardon.

MS THABETHE: The Quarry Road incident. Can I hand over this?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, please.

CHAIRPERSON: We are going to start of with the Ninela matter that involves two of the present applicants, Mr du Preez and Mr Wasserman and a Mr Mwelase.

MS THABETHE: Yes, Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nel, you appear in those matters as well, do you? Mr du Preez, you appear for Mr du Preez?

MR NEL: No, Mr Chairman, I once again will either be representing the Estate or the Office of the Commissioner of police in the matter of the deceased, Mr Taylor.

CHAIRPERSON: I see. So will you be appearing?

MR VISSER: Yes, Mr Chairman. As presently advised, he hasn't fired me yet, so I'll act for du Preez again.

CHAIRPERSON: What about Wasserman? What about Mwelase?

MR VISSER: We don't act for him, Mr Chairman and frankly we're not certain who is going to appear for him, but it is not us.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MS THABETHE: Can I respond to that Mr Chair?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MS THABETHE: I understand that Mr Mwelase has been served with Section 19 (4) notice, but we haven't had any contact with him. I've spoken to our investigator, Mr Mbatha who said he will try to track him down. However, there is a lawyer that has been instructed by us to represent him.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. How is the lawyer going to contact Mr Mwelase?

MS THABETHE: I informed the lawyer that he will have to hear from me. As soon as we've contacted him, I'll contact him.

CHAIRPERSON: Right. Now then ...

MS THABETHE: But I've given him the bundle in the meantime.

CHAIRPERSON: Gentlemen, can we commence at 9.30 on Monday morning, instead of 10 o'clock?

MR VISSER: Monday is going to be a problem for us Chairperson, because we're flying out, to save costs, on Monday only.

CHAIRPERSON: I see.

MR VISSER: We're always ready to start and to spend longer hours, but Monday will be a problem for us.

CHAIRPERSON: Alright, we'll start at 10 o'clock then.

MR VISSER: Thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: We'll adjourn till 10 o'clock on Monday morning. We'll proceed with the Ninela matter. Are we then in a position after that, time permitting, with the matter of Mamela and 4 others, the Quarry Road incident?

MS THABETHE: Yes, Mr Chair, and I would also like to add that the operation ...(indistinct) and Shabalala incident and Gordhan and Lalla will also be heard during that week as well.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. And have you been able to communicate with the dependants of the deceased or the victims in the Ninela matter?

MS THABETHE: In the Ninela matter?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MS THABETHE: They're aware Mr Chairman, they have to be here next week Monday.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Very well. At least we have some idea as to what we are going to do when we commence on Monday morning. Thank you very much. We will now adjourn until 10 o'clock on Monday morning. The Committee will rise.