Amnesty Hearings

MR BESTER: (sworn states)

MR MALAN: Thank you, you may be seated. He has been sworn in, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Malan.

INTERPRETER: Chairperson, Chairperson, just one minute.

CHAIRPERSON: I am requested by the translators to afford them just a minute. You may now proceed, Ms van der Walt.

EXAMINATION BY MS VAN DER WALT: Mr Bester, your amnesty application appears in bundle 1, the formal application form, from page 366 to page 368. The incident which has been served before the Committee today appears from page 369 to page 372, and you political motivation which is Annexure B, is from page 373 to 379, is that correct?

MR BESTER: Yes, that is correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: Now during this time that the incident took place, where were you stationed?

MR BESTER: Security Branch Northern Transvaal, Chairperson.

MS VAN DER WALT: And what was your rank?

MR BESTER: I was an Investigating Sergeant, Detective Sergeant.

MS VAN DER WALT: Who was your commander?

MR BESTER: Capt Crafford.

MS VAN DER WALT: And on this particular day, or on a certain day, of which you cannot recall the date ...

MR BESTER: That is correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: ... you are of the opinion that it should be either 1986 or 1987.

MR BESTER: It was late in the year. I had not been at the Security Branch for very long. Late '86 early '87.

MS VAN DER WALT: Very well. You then went to a certain farm, is that correct?

MR BESTER: Yes, that is correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: And at what time approximately did you arrive at the farm?

MR BESTER: In the evening.

MS VAN DER WALT: And was Capt Prinsloo then already on the farm?

MR BESTER: Yes, he was on the farm.

MS VAN DER WALT: And was anybody else on the farm?

MR BESTER: It was Capt Prinsloo, Const Matjeni, More and Mathebula and Crafford.

MS VAN DER WALT: Now can we just deal with the problem which has been experienced there by the Honourable Committee. You have the same legal representatives during the composition of your amnesty application, as Mr Dos Santos and Mr Prinsloo.

MR BESTER: That is correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: And you discussed this matter with your fellow applicants.

MR BESTER: That is correct. ...(end of side A of tape)

MS VAN DER WALT: ... application was compiled, which you read subsequently and signed.

MR BESTER: That is correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: And the details which are embodied in that application have been given to the applicants by the legal representatives.

MR BESTER: That is correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: Then I would like to take you to your application of page 369, and refer you to paragraph 1, 2, 3, 4. This is certain information which was conveyed to you.

MR BESTER: Yes, by Capt Prinsloo. When I arrived that evening on the farm he briefed me and gave me a background of what was going on.

CHAIRPERSON: Why was it necessary to brief you, as you have put it?

MR BESTER: Because I would have been primarily responsible for guarding him along with Matjeni and I would also have been involved in the interrogation.

MS VAN DER WALT: So if you were involved in the interrogation, do I understand you correctly, that you would then have required background because otherwise you would not have been able to interrogate the man?

MR BESTER: Yes, it would have been senseless.

MS VAN DER WALT: Were you then informed at that stage when you arrived on the farm, that this person's MK name was Comrade?

MR BESTER: Yes.

MS VAN DER WALT: Did you ever know his real name?

MR BESTER: No, I only saw it in the applications when I studied them.

MS VAN DER WALT: And were you informed that there was a certain informer who provided certain information?

MR BESTER: Capt Prinsloo told me that when I arrived at the farm that evening.

MS VAN DER WALT: Did you Const More at that stage?

MR BESTER: Yes, very well, we worked together in the same Section C.

MS VAN DER WALT: Was there any information with regard to him which was conveyed to you on the farm?

MR BESTER: No, not about More himself.

MS VAN DER WALT: Did you know that he was handling an informer?

MR BESTER: I simply knew that it was More's informer which had led to the arrest, according to Prinsloo.

MS VAN DER WALT: Very well. And did you have any knowledge at that stage that this person had a handler, this Comrade, that he had received order from certain persons to conduct certain activities in South Africa?

MR BESTER: Yes, as it appears in paragraph 1 to 4, Prinsloo informed me and asked me to confirm it.

MS VAN DER WALT: Now what do you mean by confirm?

MR BESTER: Well I had to verify whether this was the case or not.

MS VAN DER WALT: Is that with Comrade himself?

MR BESTER: Yes, with Comrade himself.

MS VAN DER WALT: Did you then do so during interrogation?

MR BESTER: Yes, in the four days.

MS VAN DER WALT: And did you obtain confirmation of certain information?

MR BESTER: Yes, Comrade told me.

MS VAN DER WALT: Very well. Then you continue in paragraph 5 and state that you were there on the farm, that is when you described the activities on the farm, and you state that you thoroughly interrogated Comrade for approximately four days and he confirmed all the information that you had about him. Now who are these people that you refer to?

MR BESTER: As it appears in my application, it was Putter, Dos Santos, Prinsloo, More, Matjeni, Mathebula and Botha.

MS VAN DER WALT: You heard Mr Dos Santos say that only once before the incident had he been involved on the farm, and it would appear from his evidence that he had not conducted interrogation. What do you say about what you have stated in paragraph 5?

MR BESTER: As I could recall, upon occasion, not all the time, but upon occasion Dos Santos was present.

MS VAN DER WALT: So he was not consistently present?

MR BESTER: Yes.

MS VAN DER WALT: Very well. Can we just go to paragraph 6 where you deal with the sketch plans which were found in the vehicle of Comrade, according to Capt Prinsloo's evidence, which pertained to the onslaught on Wachthuis. What do you know about this?

MR BESTER: There were three sketch plans which Capt Prinsloo showed me. I was not present when they were found in the vehicle, but I was aware of them.

MS VAN DER WALT: Did you see them?

MR BESTER: Yes.

MS VAN DER WALT: Was this after they had been found and brought to you?

MR BESTER: That is correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: Very well. And then you continue on page 371 and you state that

"Capt Prinsloo gave us the order to request during interrogation, that Comrade draw up plans for us."

What do you say about that? What should the Committee infer from that?

MR BESTER: That Capt Prinsloo, as I knew him, would have wanted confirmation of whether or not those plans had been drawn up by Comrade himself.

MS VAN DER WALT: Were you present when the request was put to Comrade to draw up the plans?

MR BESTER: Correct, I was present, More was present and the Captain was present.

MS VAN DER WALT: That was when the paper and the pen were given to him?

MR BESTER: That is correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: And did he draw up any plans?

MR BESTER: On one piece of paper he sketched the arcade, the coffee shop and the parking area, more-or-less.

MS VAN DER WALT: As it appeared on the other sketches?

MR BESTER: Yes.

MS VAN DER WALT: And then furthermore, you state that

"After Comrade had been thoroughly interrogated (this is in paragraph 8) Capt Crafford and Lt Prinsloo discussed the fate of Comrade."

Were you present? I beg your pardon, after that you state that you were not present.

MR BESTER: Yes, but I know about it because Capt Hennie informed me about it.

MS VAN DER WALT: Do you know that as it appears in Capt Crafford's application, that he went to Brig Cronje?

MR BESTER: Well Capt Hennie told me that he was going. I don't know whether he actually went there.

MS VAN DER WALT: Did he leave the farm?

MR BESTER: Yes, he did.

MS VAN DER WALT: And did he return later?

MR BESTER: If I recall correctly, this discussion took place on the one day and Capt Crafford returned on the following day with the answer.

MS VAN DER WALT: Very well. Then I would like to refer you further to paragraph 8. You state

"Further, Comrade also admitted clearly that he was too deeply involved in the struggle and was not willing to be an informer."

Were you present during this request, as I may put it, to Comrade?

MR BESTER: Yes, upon Capt Prinsloo's request I had to make this request to Comrade because I slept in the room with him, Matjeni and I, and I had to try and turn his mind.

MS VAN DER WALT: Now what other interrogation did you also conduct? I think a statement was put on behalf of Capt Prinsloo, of a certain photo album.

MR BESTER: Yes, that is correct. I cannot recall whether it was on the second or the third day that Capt Hennie, who was in the farm on and off, showed me or brought me a terrorist album as well as loose photos of terrorists who were wanted. I received the order to show these photos to Comrade, which I then did and he identified certain internally trained terrorists in the album to me and also with the loose photos he identified a terrorist by the name of Brown Sugar. That was all that he could tell me at that stage. And this Brown Sugar was apparently active in Soshanguve.

MS VAN DER WALT: And this Brown Sugar, who was the person?

MR BESTER: Later his name emerged as Konne Lekumbi and he was called Brown Sugar.

MS VAN DER WALT: This is the same person about whom Capt Prinsloo testified, who was later involved in a criminal trial.

MR BESTER: That is correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: And during this interrogation of yours and the period during which you were with Comrade, what was your relationship with each other?

MR BESTER: Comrade basically co-operated, if I may so. There was no reason to assault him. I made him food. Jerry and I ate together with him. I was also primarily responsible for guarding him. That is why Capt Prinsloo entrusted this task to me.

MS VAN DER WALT: You were not present when Capt Prinsloo initially arrived on the farm with Comrade, but since your arrival at the farm, did you observe any assault by any person?

MR BESTER: Neither I nor Jerry who was there, know anything about that.

MS VAN DER WALT: Did you notice any injuries on him?

MR BESTER: I noticed no injuries on him.

MS VAN DER WALT: Would you have noticed if he had sustained any injuries?

MR BESTER: Definitely. I would have remembered it. I could not remember anything like that.

MS VAN DER WALT: You state that on the following day Mr Crafford returned, is that correct?

MR BESTER: Yes, it was on the third or the fourth day, but I am speaking under correction.

MS VAN DER WALT: And according to your application on page 372, paragraph 10, Lt Prinsloo gave you the order to dig a hole in the veld.

MR BESTER: To me, Putter and Botha. The three of us left there with spades.

MS VAN DER WALT: Putter and Botha, both of them have passed away.

MR BESTER: Yes, Putter died in a motor vehicle accident and Botha shot himself.

MS VAN DER WALT: Now could you describe to the Honourable Committee what the hole looked like, because I don't think that at this stage there has been any such evidence. How did it look, how did the environment look?

MR BESTER: It was in the veld between low bushes, a dual track path went past the quarry. There was a deep enough dip there. It took us approximately half an hour. The three of us worked very hard to dig this hole very quickly. It was approximately 60cm deep and 2m long.

MS VAN DER WALT: And are you aware of any order which was given to some of the black members by Mr Prinsloo, to go to a shop?

MR BESTER: At approximately the same time when we went to dig the hole, the black members left the farm to go to a shop.

MS VAN DER WALT: Do you know what their order was?

MR BESTER: No. Capt Hennie, I am aware that he sent them and that he sent us at approximately the same time and he told us to hurry up.

MS VAN DER WALT: Were they to purchase something at the shop?

MR BESTER: That is what I assumed.

MS VAN DER WALT: Furthermore, you state in paragraph 12 that

"Lt Prinsloo ground sleeping tablets fine and put them in the beer which he gave to Comrade to drink."

What do you say about that?

MR BESTER: Capt Hennie told us to hurry up, that is why he sent the three of us, that he was going to put sleeping tablets into beer and give this to Comrade. We were to hurry so that we could return.

MS VAN DER WALT: So is it your evidence that he would prepare this there on the farm?

MR BESTER: That is what Capt Hennie told me.

MS VAN DER WALT: Is that what he said. Very well. And did you see that Comrade was unconscious?

MR BESTER: When we returned he lay there on the veranda.

MS VAN DER WALT: And was Comrade then placed in the hole?

MR BESTER: Yes, he was placed in the hole and Putter and Botha remained at the farmhouse. As I can recall, Crafford, Dos Santos, Prinsloo and I drove in the bakkie and placed him in the hole where Crafford shot him with the pistol.

MS VAN DER WALT: What happened after that?

MR BESTER: Afterwards Dos Santos destroyed the body with explosives.

MS VAN DER WALT: Do you know what sort of explosives?

MR BESTER: There were two landmines.

MS VAN DER WALT: Now you have already described the hole as you dug it. After the body had been destroyed with the two landmines, how did the hole then appear?

MR BESTER: It was a crater, it was big.

MS VAN DER WALT: Had you ever before been on scenes where similar landmines had exploded?

MR BESTER: No, I have never been.

MS VAN DER WALT: Now when you refer to a crater ...(intervention)

MR BESTER: I refer to a large hole

MS VAN DER WALT: ... because two landmines ought to cause the creation of a reasonably large hole. What happened afterwards?

MR MALAN: Can you tell us how big this hole was, because you told us that the initial hole was 2m in length by 60cm in depth.

MR BESTER: More-or-less what we had dug.

MR MALAN: Yes, and afterwards, could you give the dimensions?

MR BESTER: From this table to that table.

MR MALAN: What would that have been, a bit more than three meters.

MR BESTER: Yes, it was much deeper as well.

MR MALAN: How much deeper?

MR BESTER: I would say almost a meter deep or deeper.

MS VAN DER WALT: Very well. And what happened subsequently?

MR BESTER: Subsequently I'm not certain, but we used the spades to pick up remnants of flesh which remained after the first explosion.

MS VAN DER WALT: Who is this "we"?

MR BESTER: Dos Santos, Prinsloo, Crafford and I. I don't know whether everybody picked up remnants of flesh but I did, and we used the spades to toss these back into the grave. After that Dos Santos once again destroyed those items of flesh and that is when we left.

MS VAN DER WALT: Do you know from where he obtained the explosives which he used to destroy the remnants?

MR BESTER: W/O Dos Santos drove a blue Sierra vehicle which was his explosives vehicle. This was parked in the dual track path between the farmhouse and the hole which we dug.

MS VAN DER WALT: Did he fetch the explosive from there?

MR BESTER: Yes, for the first and the second explosion.

MS VAN DER WALT: Did you ...(intervention)

MR MALAN: I beg your pardon, Mrs van der Walt, before you continue.

The explosives that he fetched, do you know anything about explosives, are you a trained demolitions expert?

MR BESTER: No, I'm not.

MR MALAN: Can you recall how the other explosives looked? You can say if you cannot recall, I just want to know.

MR BESTER: They weren't landmines. The second explosives were not landmines.

MR MALAN: Can you recall how they looked?

MR BESTER: I recall it being plastic explosives which had the appearance of clay.

MR MALAN: Plastic explosives, is that what you suspect?

MR BESTER: Yes.

MR MALAN: But I cannot recall this or say this specifically?

MR BESTER: No, I cannot.

MR MALAN: Can you recall how he placed it on the remains, was it below or above?

MR BESTER: When we tossed the remains into the hole, when we had finished this I walked away and he continued on his own, W/O Dos Santos. This was after he had already fetched the explosives in the motor vehicle, the second time.

MR MALAN: Where did you go when you left?

MR BESTER: I walked back because there was going to be a second explosion, I didn't want to be there when the explosion took place. I walked away and after the second explosion I went back with the bakkie.

MR MALAN: You did not return to have a second look at the hole?

MR BESTER: No, not again.

MR MALAN: Thank you.

MS VAN DER WALT: Just with that point, you have heard the evidence of Mr Dos Santos, where he has stated that if he worked with the explosives he would work alone and that is understandable, isn't it?

MR BESTER: Yes, it is custom.

MS VAN DER WALT: I was busy asking you whether Cost More, Mathebula and Matjeni were at the hole at any point or at any stage. Did you see them there?

MR BESTER: When I arrived back after the explosion, they arrived there with Jerry's E20 panel van. They were not there to pick up any remnants of flesh. I cannot recall that.

MS VAN DER WALT: And furthermore, in paragraph 13 on page 372, you simply state that the body was destroyed with explosives, you do not describe the two separate occasions.

MR BESTER: What I meant here is that the body was completely destroyed, so that no forensic investigations could be conducted subsequently.

MS VAN DER WALT: And when you arrived at the farm, what did you do then?

MR BESTER: After that I went in the bakkie with Putter and Botha, back to Pretoria.

MS VAN DER WALT: Very well. After my cross-examination of Mr Strydom had been completed, there was a question which was put by the Honourable Committee to Mr Strydom with regard to drinking the beers and so forth. And I don't wish to overemphasise this, but it has been stated that everybody had beer and your name was then also mentioned in connection with this. What do you say about that?

MR BESTER: Firstly Chairperson, I don't drink beer. I do drink, but I don't drink beer at all. I did not have beer and it was also not the custom. Discipline was very strict in the unit under the command of Capt Crafford and Capt Prinsloo, we would never have been allowed to have beer during an action.

MS VAN DER WALT: Afterwards yes?

MR BESTER: Yes, subsequently, indeed.

MS VAN DER WALT: Very well. You then request that the Honourable Committee grant you amnesty with regard to the death of Comrade or Mr Lubane, as you have heard him to be now, with regard to any offence which may emanate as well as any delict, is that correct?

MR BESTER: Yes, that is correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: Did you receive any personal gain or rewards emanating from your participation in this incident?

MR BESTER: No.

MS VAN DER WALT: Did you have any personal vengeance against Mr Lubane?

MR BESTER: None.

MS VAN DER WALT: Nothing further, thank you Chairperson.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS VAN DER WALT

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Ms van der Walt. Mr du Plessis?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR DU PLESSIS: Thank you, Madam Chair.

Mr Bester, how long had you been with the Security Branch, in total?

MR BESTER: Approximately 18 months.

MR DU PLESSIS: And you served under Capt Crafford.

MR BESTER: First under Prinsloo and then afterwards under Crafford. He was my senior.

MR DU PLESSIS: And for how long did you work with Capt Crafford?

MR BESTER: I cannot recall for how long I was at the branch when Capt Sakkie arrived there, that would be Crafford. I cannot recall, but I had been there for a number of months when he arrived there.

MR DU PLESSIS: Can you recall anything about his drinking habits?

MR BESTER: I know that Capt Crafford was a diabetic and ...(intervention)

MR DU PLESSIS: But can you recall anything about his drinking habits?

MR BESTER: No.

MR DU PLESSIS: Can you recall that he was a heavy drinker? Because I'm just putting it to you that that was the case.

MR BESTER: Well I would believe you if you say so, but Capt Crafford and I never went out in the evenings after work or visited each other at each other's homes or anything like that.

MR DU PLESSIS: Very well. You have testified, as I've understood you, that you were there on the farm all the time, is that correct?

MR BESTER: As Capt Hennie informed me, on the same day that he was abducted and arrested, I arrived on the farm that evening.

MR DU PLESSIS: Very well. And from that point onwards you were there all the time?

MR BESTER: That is correct.

MR DU PLESSIS: And were you present during all the interrogations?

MR BESTER: Not all of them. During most I was present, that is correct, because I stayed with him day and night and slept in the same room as him.

MR DU PLESSIS: And according to you he was never assaulted?

MR BESTER: Not in my presence.

MR DU PLESSIS: Very well. Do you know whether or not he was assaulted?

MR BESTER: No.

MR DU PLESSIS: Do you not know, or are you saying that he was not assaulted?

MR BESTER: Well as I've said, not in my presence and no-one informed me that he had been assaulted.

MR DU PLESSIS: Did you every see that he had been assaulted?

MR BESTER: No. As I have testified, I did not see anything like that.

MR DU PLESSIS: Do you have any explanation for us as to why he was detained on the farm?

MR BESTER: As I've said, Capt Hennie briefed me when I arrived there and he told me that the man had been abducted and that I was to guard him.

MR DU PLESSIS: And for four days you detained him there on the farm, just to put some questions to him.

MR BESTER: Yes, among others, Capt Hennie gave me the order.

MR DU PLESSIS: And it was necessary to detain him there an not in the offices, although you didn't want to assault him, you had to keep him there so that you could ask him the questions.

MR BESTER: The decision to keep him there was not mine.

MR DU PLESSIS: No, that I understand, but you see there is a determined pattern that I am trying to test here and that is the whole question that he was not assaulted. I know that Capt Prinsloo said that he slapped him a few times, on one occasion, but your evidence and Mr Dos Santos' evidence and Capt Prinsloo's evidence which has been served before this Committee, assumes one pattern and that is that 'we merely detaining the man on the farm so that we could interrogate him and we never really assaulted him during the interrogation'. Is that correct?

ADV PRINSLOO: With respect, Honourable Chairperson, that is not the evidence of Capt Prinsloo, he said that he slapped right at the beginning and that he assaulted him right at the beginning.

MR DU PLESSIS: But I have referred to that. On one occasion he slapped him a few times and not again after that and the other witnesses have stated that they don't know anything about an assault.

Now my question is Mr Bester, it would appear to me as if the pattern of the evidence is, and I accept that Prinsloo said that once he dealt him a few slaps, but for the rest of the time this man was never assaulted while he was detained on the farm.

MR BESTER: Not according to my knowledge or not in my presence.

MR DU PLESSIS: You did not see that he was assaulted?

MR BESTER: That is correct.

MR DU PLESSIS: So he was specially detained on the farm where three, four or five people had been appointed to stay with him and to be with him all the time and so forth, just so that he could be interrogated about issues about which he could have been interrogated here in Wachthuis.

MR BESTER: But the man had been abducted according to Capt Hennie.

MR DU PLESSIS: No, let me give you the correct picture according to Brig Cronje, as he has testified before. His words were simply "You wouldn't take a man to the farm if you didn't want to assault him during interrogation".

MS VAN DER WALT: Honourable Chairperson, I don't understand the extent of this cross-examination. Did Mr du Plessis place evidence before this Honourable Committee, via his client or via any other witness or via Mr Cronje, that on this farm during interrogation there was assault, with the exception of what his client states, that there were marks on the face of the victim. And with respect, that evidence was rather weak. There is no evidence from any of Mr du Plessis' clients that there was assault during interrogation. How can he put such statements of what Mr Cronje had said in previous matters. The Honourable Committee should at least limited themselves to the relevant facts of this matter. I am really lodging an objection to this line of examination by my client, because Mr du Plessis cannot sit here and give evidence.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr du Plessis.

MR DU PLESSIS: Madam Chair, the fact of the matter is simply the following. My client, Mr Strydom, says that when he arrived there on the fourth day there were marks on the face of this person. Now the only person who testified that there were assaults was Prinsloo, who said that he assaulted him probably four days previously.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, but the objection is in relation to what you are now putting to Mr Bester with regard to Mr Cronje.

MR DU PLESSIS: No, but I'm getting to the purpose of the cross-examination. The purpose of the cross-examination is to indicate that it is totally improbable that the person would have been kept there without having been assaulted. I don't have any other evidence to put to the witness, of anybody who saw him having been assaulted, I'm exploring the probabilities. What I put to this witness was evidence that was given by Brig Cronje previously and especially in the Mandla matter, where my learned friend, Mrs van der Walt was present. If she doesn't remember it, then - well she doesn't say she doesn't remember it, she objects against the fact that I made the statement to the witness. And if you want me to retract the statement I'll retract it, I don't need that evidence for purposes of what I'm trying to do.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Bester was not involved in the application of Mr Cronje in relation to the Mandla incident, so he doesn't know what was said by Mr Cronje.

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, I will withdraw it.

Very well. Mr Bester, you were here when the evidence of Mathebula was presented.

MR BESTER: That would be Smuts?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, that is correct. And his evidence was that the man was quite severely assaulted.

MR BESTER: Yes, I heard so.

MR DU PLESSIS: Can you recall this?

MR BESTER: Yes, I can recall this.

MR DU PLESSIS: In fact his application says that he was assaulted with clenched fists and that he was kicked and that he was suffocated with an inner tube.

MR BESTER: Yes, I heard the evidence.

MR DU PLESSIS: And what do you say about that?

MR BESTER: Not while I was present.

MR DU PLESSIS: Do you say that it is possible that it may have occurred while you were not present?

MR BESTER: Yes, that is correct.

MR DU PLESSIS: Do you say that it is possible that it may have taken place while you were not present? Is that what you said?

MR BESTER: Yes, that is correct.

MR DU PLESSIS: I just want to put it to you that I will argue that it is quite probable that the assault, as Mr Mathebula testified, did indeed take place and that it is possible that there were further assaults during this period that he spent on the farm. What is your comment about that?

MR BESTER: Once again I will confirm that I heard Mr Mathebula's evidence, but that I can also recall that he never mentioned my name or stated that I was present when it took place.

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, I understand that, but you conceded.

MR BESTER: I said that it was possible.

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes. In other words it is possible that there were further assaults of which you had no knowledge?

MR BESTER: Once again not while I was present.

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, while you were not present. I agree with you.

MR BESTER: I was on the farm all the time with the man, from the first evening that I arrived there to the day that he was killed and I am not aware of this.

MR DU PLESSIS: I don't understand this. You say that you were with the man all the time, does that mean that he was always in your presence?

MR BESTER: What I mean is I slept in the same room as him, I interrogated him, I gave him food. I also said that I was not present during every single interrogation.

MR MALAN: But then you mustn't say that you were with him all the time, because there were times that you were not with him.

MR BESTER: I beg your pardon.

MR DU PLESSIS: And were there times that Capt Crafford interrogated him?

MR BESTER: I cannot recall. I know that there were times when I was present, but in my evidence on page 5, Prinsloo, Dos Santos, Putter, Botha, we were all members of the interrogation.

MR DU PLESSIS: But what I want to know is whether or not there were times when Capt Crafford interrogated him?

MR BESTER: Yes.

MR DU PLESSIS: And you would concede that it is possible that Capt Crafford may have assaulted him during those interrogations.

MR BESTER: It is possible, but I was not present.

MR DU PLESSIS: The reason why I ask you is because on page 485 of the bundle, Capt Crafford is not here today to give evidence and he does not say anything about assault in his application. Madam Chair, he does ask for assault ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: 48?

MR DU PLESSIS: 485. He does ask separately from the murder, he asks for amnesty for assault. Now I never consulted with him at the time when this was drawn, so I don't know exactly what the situation is pertaining to Crafford, I'm just making that point that it may be a possibility that he wanted to ask for assault. But I can't take it further than that.

Very well. And Mr Bester, this second explosion, why wasn't this incorporated in your original application?

MR BESTER: Paragraph 13 of my original application states and I quote

"We placed Comrade's body in the hole after which Dos Santos destroyed the body with explosives."

I also didn't say one explosion, I meant completely destroyed as I stated in my evidence, so there would be no forensic investigation, but I am completely certain that I was present and that with the exception of the landmine explosion there was a further explosion of the pieces that we had picked up. That is what I mean by "destroy with explosions".

MR DU PLESSIS: I have no further questions, Madam Chair.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR DU PLESSIS

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. I think before we proceed to affording Mr Jansen an opportunity to cross-examine, it will be an appropriate time to have a lunch adjournment for 45 minutes.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

ON RESUMPTION

MR BESTER: (s.u.o.)

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Jansen, do you wish to put any questions to Mr Bester?

MR JANSEN: I have no questions, thank you Chair.

NO QUESTIONS BY MR JANSEN

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Prinsloo?

ADV PRINSLOO: No questions, thank you Madam Chair.

NO QUESTIONS BY ADV PRINSLOO

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Joubert?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR JOUBERT: Thank you, Madam Chair, I just have a few questions.

Mr Bester, in your application and in your evidence you've indicated - and I refer you to page 370, paragraph 5, the very last sentence where you give the names of those who were present on the farm and the last name that you provide is that of More. You would recall that when More gave evidence he stated that he was on the farm only for a few minutes and then thereafter he returned. Is it possible that you may be mistaken in identifying him as present there when you arrived there? Isn't it possible that he was already departed from the farm when you arrived there?

MR BESTER: As I understand this Chairperson, there were various interrogations and various members entered the farm from Pretoria and returned from the farm. I would accept that according to your reference he was there for a few minutes, but he returned, the same as Mathebula.

MR JOUBERT: Mr More's evidence is that he was there shortly after the abduction of Comrade X and that he returned to Pretoria directly afterwards and that he only returned on the day when the elimination of Comrade took place. Would you dispute this?

MR BESTER: Yes, I would dispute it, that is not the way that I recall it because Putter, Botha, Mathebula, More and Capt Prinsloo and Crafford and the others went back and forth and Jerry and I guarded primarily in the evenings.

MR JOUBERT: And if you dispute it then, could you be able to tell us when Mr More was there?

MR BESTER: In this period of four days I definitely saw him there when I was there.

MR JOUBERT: Upon how many occasions?

MR BESTER: I would not be able to tell you, but he was there.

MR JOUBERT: And what did he do when he was there?

MR BESTER: He was member of the interrogation.

MR JOUBERT: Did he physically participate in the interrogation?

MR BESTER: It is possible, yes.

MR JOUBERT: I'm not asking you whether it is possible, I want to know whether or not you observed him physically interrogating the person.

MR BESTER: I can remember quite clearly when Capt Hennie gave the paper and the pen to Comrade to draw up the sketch plan of Wachthuis, then More was there and shortly after he commenced the sketching, More left.

MR JOUBERT: But that is More's evidence as well, but you state that he participated in the interrogation of the person and I want to know what he did.

MR BESTER: Let me just put this clearly, Madam Chair, that the interrogation during which I was present, along with More, Mathebula, Matjeni and the others, we would remain silent, we wouldn't say anything, but we were present during the interrogation and Capt Hennie would do the talking. Then we were part of the interrogation as I saw it.

MR JOUBERT: You see Mr Mathebula and Mr More and the others were present, but Mr More wasn't there the whole time, he only returned on the day when the elimination took place, he was not consistently present on the farm. Are you not perhaps mistaken by saying that he was there in-between? Are you perhaps not confused?

MR BESTER: No.

CHAIRPERSON: May I interpose, Mr Joubert.

Mr Bester, when you say that Mr More was a member of the interrogation team and participated in the interrogation of Mr Lubane, are you saying that he would be present during the interrogation conducted by Capt Prinsloo, but wouldn't do anything, wouldn't put questions to Mr Lubane?

MR BESTER: Correct, I was also part of similar interrogation. When Capt Prinsloo spoke, we would remain silent and observe and take in what was being said.

CHAIRPERSON: So when you say he was part of that interrogation, at no stage did he put any questions to Mr Lubane.

MR BESTER: No, not usually that I can recall of Capt Prinsloo's interrogation, unless we were given the opportunity to do so.

CHAIRPERSON: Were you given such an opportunity and was Mr More in particular, given such an opportunity?

MR BESTER: I cannot recall Mr More, but I specifically had such an opportunity when Capt Prinsloo told me to use the photo albums, but that was after the interrogation, that I was to continue after their departure.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. And that would be done after Mr Prinsloo had left the interrogating room.

MR BESTER: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Joubert.

MR JOUBERT: Thank you, Madam Chair.

I'm going to put it to you that Mr More at no stage participated or formed part of the interrogation, with the exception of the time when the pen and paper was handed over to Comrade X. And that any reference that you have made to him, could be due to possible confusion in your mind, because your evidence indicates that you are not completely certain of every single event. You have answered on several occasions that as far as you can recall, or if you recall correctly, or this would have been the practice, but you never make a factual statement. Am I correct?

MR BESTER: You may be correct, but I recall the man being there.

MR JOUBERT: And then just one further aspect. You testified that after the alleged second explosion you returned to the house, is that correct?

MR BESTER: I first went to the bakkie, then the explosion took place and that is when I went back to the house with the bakkie and then Putter and Botha and I went to Pretoria.

MR JOUBERT: But you testified that when you were there at the house, as far as you can recall, or you said that at that stage the black members arrived there with Jerry's E20 panel van.

MR BESTER: Yes, the white panel van, that is correct.

MR JOUBERT: The evidence of Mr Mathebula and the other black members is that they arrived at the scene of the explosion and that they participated in the search for any pieces of evidence. Can you recall specifically whether this was not the case, or are you simply inferring?

MR BESTER: As far as I can recall we four were there at both explosions, "ek, Prinsloo, Crafford, Dos Santos. Ek kan nie onthou dat die mense daar was nie".

MR JOUBERT: I'm referring to the second explosion.

MR BESTER: Yes.

MR JOUBERT: So you would not be able to dispute that they were at the scene?

MR BESTER: No.

MR JOUBERT: I have no further questions to put to the witness, thank you Madam Chair.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR JOUBERT

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Joubert. Mr van Heerden?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR VAN HEERDEN: Thank you, Madam Chair. Can you recall where the farm was?

MR BESTER: It was in the vicinity of Rust-de-winter. That is all that I can recall, because I arrived there at 1 o'clock, I arrived there late afternoon and the day after the explosions I left. I did not travel back and forth, which would enable me to remember where the farm was located. Besides that I travelled with Putter, so I would not be able to locate the farm again.

MR VAN HEERDEN: Was the farm used only on this one occasion, according to your knowledge?

MR BESTER: Well I was only there for that four day period, yes.

MR VAN HEERDEN: Thank you, nothing further.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VAN HEERDEN

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Steenkamp?

ADV STEENKAMP: No questions, thank you Madam Chair.

NO QUESTIONS BY ADV STEENKAMP

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Malan?

MR MALAN: Thank you, Chairperson.

Do I understand you correctly when you say that you left there on the day after the explosion?

MR BESTER: No.

MR MALAN: But those were the last words that you stated when you were asked where the farm was. You said you arrived there that evening and it was the day after the explosion that you left.

MR BESTER: No, it was the day of the explosion, after the explosion I departed.

MR MALAN: Very well. How long after the explosion, can you recall?

MR BESTER: It wasn't very long because Putter and Botha and I returned to the office with the bakkie.

MR MALAN: Where were Putter and Botha while these explosions were taking place and the search was conducted?

MR BESTER: They were at the farmhouse.

MR MALAN: Why did they remain at the farmhouse?

MR BESTER: It was the order of Capt Prinsloo.

MR MALAN: Very well. I just want to understand what your idea of participation in interrogation is, because you said that if Prinsloo spoke, you kept quiet.

MR BESTER: That is correct.

MR MALAN: Would that mean that if Prinsloo was present during an interrogation, only he would conduct the interrogation?

MR BESTER: Yes, only he. Because I had been involved in many other investigations where he had taken the lead and one couldn't always interrupt while he was speaking, there had to be order.

MR MALAN: But you were present.

MR BESTER: Yes, one would be present.

MR MALAN: But you wouldn't say anything.

MR BESTER: No, not a word.

MR MALAN: Very well. If I could take you back to your application and specifically paragraph 6 on page 370, at the very bottom of the page, onto page 371. You state that Prinsloo asked you to ask Comrade to draw up sketch plans. Is that correct?

MR BESTER: No. Prinsloo asked Comrade himself in the presence of More.

MR MALAN: Very well. He did not give you an order to obtain sketch plans from him during your interrogation of him?

MR BESTER: Not upon that occasion.

MR MALAN: On no occasion?

MR BESTER: No, on that occasion he asked him, he gave him the pen and the paper.

MR MALAN: No, listen to my question. We have the evidence that he asked Comrade to draw up sketch plans.

MR BESTER: That is correct.

MR MALAN: And you state in your application that Prinsloo asked you to ask Comrade to draw up sketch plans.

MR BESTER: I was present when Prinsloo asked Comrade, he didn't ask me directly.

MR MALAN: Therefore paragraph 6 is incorrect, in which you state that Prinsloo gave you the order to get Comrade to make sketch plans during interrogation.

MR BESTER: Yes. I assume that it was the order because I was present. Because the sketch plans which were drawn up ...(intervention)

MR MALAN: No, please just answer me. Did he give you such an order or not?

MR BESTER: As I have stated previously, I was present, he did not directly order me.

MR MALAN: That is correct. So you cannot assume that it was an order to you because no such order was ever issued to you.

MR BESTER: Correct, I was present.

MR MALAN: You didn't receive an order.

MR BESTER: No, not specifically.

MR MALAN: You heard coincidentally that he asked Comrade to draw up the sketch plans.

MR BESTER: Not coincidentally.

MR MALAN: No, because you were there, you were present.

MR BESTER: That is correct.

MR MALAN: How often was Comrade interrogated when you were not present? You didn't spend the whole four days with him in the room, you must have left the room when others interrogated him.

MR BESTER: That is correct, I was not present with every interrogation, as I have already testified when such a question was put to me. I was not there all the time, but I was on the farm.

MR MALAN: Very well. And you and Matjeni received the order to guard him, but it was not both of you all the time because you also took turns.

MR BESTER: Yes, and we stayed there at night.

MR MALAN: Yes, at night you stayed there and at night he was not interrogated, you were asleep.

MR BESTER: That is correct.

MR MALAN: And during the day he was interrogated, but the both of you were not always present.

MR BESTER: That is correct.

MR MALAN: And sometimes neither one of you were there because you were sent out when he was interrogated.

MR BESTER: That is correct.

MR MALAN: So you were not always present with every interrogation.

MR BESTER: That is correct.

MR MALAN: So we could deduce that for the greater proportion of his interrogations you were not present.

MR BESTER: No, with many of them I was present.

MR MALAN: Would you say that you were present with the majority of these interrogations?

MR BESTER: Yes, that is correct.

MR MALAN: Very well. Then I would just like to know from you, you have heard that Mr Dos Santos stated that paragraphs 1 to 5 were not within his personal knowledge, that this was part of a compilation of his complete application and that he does not have personal knowledge of these offences. I don't know what the evidence-in-chief is with regard to your personal knowledge, because Mrs van der Walt has referred you to paragraphs 1 to 5 and if I understand you correctly, you stated that Capt Prinsloo specifically informed you as such.

MR BESTER: Yes, when I arrived there on the farm on the first evening, he gave me a briefing of his available information and I was to confirm this for him, as I have stated in paragraph 5, and he confirmed all the information that we had about him.

MR MALAN: Very well. Then on this point I would like to ask you, if I had to infer correctly, from the 1st of September you were with the Security Branch, from the 1st of September 1987.

MR BESTER: That is correct.

MR MALAN: And this took place at the very latest, at the end of 1987.

MR BESTER: Yes.

MR MALAN: And you testified that you were probably there for a month or two.

MR BESTER: I had not been there for a very long time.

MR MALAN: Yes, you were there for quite a short period. My experience of all the evidence - and you have also heard Mr Dos Santos refer to the need-to-know principle, we have had much evidence that if it was someone's order to guard someone, then only he would undertake the guarding and guarding alone, no interrogation. There appears to be a discrepancy here. The other most important discrepancy for which I would like an explanation from you, because I find it rather strange, is that you had only been there for two months, but you were called to the farm to guard someone. Despite the need-to-know principle, you received a thorough briefing which if I understand you correctly, included all the details from 1 to 4. In fact, yes, 5 would be your own experience. But all those details were conveyed to you.

MR BESTER: That is correct. Upon the first question I would say that I had only been at the branch for two months, but I had five years worth of detective experience before I went to the Security Branch and I was an experienced detective. This was not the first person that I had interrogated. I don't know why Capt Hennie chose me.

MR MALAN: Yes, and we have evidence from Capt Crafford who was his superior, and Capt Prinsloo didn't even trust Capt Crafford because he wasn't that experienced in these matters, but you were completely briefed. Are you sure that he gave you all this information upon the first evening?

MR BESTER: I don't know whether Capt Crafford was connected only the uniform branch and that he didn't have sufficient detective experience and that is the reason perhaps why Capt Prinsloo did not involve him to a greater extent. But I was an experienced detective.

MR MALAN: No, but I understand that Capt Crafford was also an experienced detective.

MR BESTER: Well I wouldn't know.

MR MALAN: Very well. And then you made a remark, do you have any particular expertise in forensic matters?

MR BESTER: No, but in the detective course we would learn that hairs and flesh and teeth and bones and other such items could provide forensic links.

MR MALAN: That is correct. Now I don't know how to interpret this second aspect of evidence regarding the second explosion, because the message that we have to infer from this would be that every single piece of evidence would be completely destroyed during the second explosion, that it would never be found again, that one would never even detect a hair or a shred of bone or a shred of flesh after the second explosion. Is that what you're trying to tell us, is that your information?

MR BESTER: Yes, there may have been further remains, but as I have stated, not much was picked up, and this was again destroyed by Dos Santos. After I had placed it in the hole and walked back to the bakkie, I never again visited the crater, I went back to the house.

MR MALAN: Where were you when you heard the second explosion?

MR BESTER: I was at the bakkie which was near Dos Santos' vehicle, a safe distance away. And after the explosion I got back into the bakkie, drove to the house and drove back to Pretoria afterwards.

MR MALAN: Were you alone

MR BESTER: Yes, up to the farm and that is where I found Putter and Botha and the three of us travelled back to Pretoria together.

MR MALAN: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Malan. Mr Motata?

ADV MOTATA: Thank you, Madam Chair.

Mr Bester, when you refer to Capt Hennie, you're referring to Capt Prinsloo.

MR BESTER: Yes, I apologise for addressing him so informally.

ADV MOTATA: What were your instructions when you were taken on the farm on the evening when Mr Lubane was taken to the farm? Were you instructions to look after him or to interrogate him, what were your instructions?

MR BESTER: My instructions were - and I beg your pardon, he would have addressed me at Kat, that was his nickname for me. He gave me the background information and I was to confirm this information and guard the man. He told me these two things.

ADV MOTATA: Interrogate the man and guard him.

MR BESTER: That is correct.

ADV MOTATA: Now you say you were there like September '87. How long after you were engaged by the Security Branch, for how long did you work with Capt Prinsloo?

MR BESTER: As I have previously testified, approximately 18 months.

ADV MOTATA: That is before this incident?

MR BESTER: No, that was the total period of time that I had been with Unit C at the Northern Transvaal Security Branch.

ADV MOTATA: I want to know before this incident of Lubane, when you were requested to interrogate and look after him.

MR BESTER: Approximately two months.

ADV MOTATA: And you knew his modus operandi in full.

MR BESTER: Correct, because as I stated I had been involved in previous interrogations where Capt Prinsloo was involved and we swiftly realised how he thought and what he expected.

ADV MOTATA: Let's take this incident. Before this incident, how many other incidents were you involved with him where you got his modus operandi?

MR BESTER: What I can recall is Sipho Solly Makwena, an ANC member whom we charged with terrorism. That is a specific incident which I can recall.

ADV MOTATA: Now you say you were given a background of this Comrade, that is Lubane, were you told by Capt Prinsloo that he was assaulted before he was brought onto the farm?

MR BESTER: No.

ADV MOTATA: Now if the suggestion as it was made, that he was assaulted, can you deny that?

MR BESTER: I have already stated that I cannot deny it. However, I am before this Committee because I was involved in a murder. If I had known about an assault in my presence, or if someone had informed me about an assault, I would openly have spoken about it here. I have admitted to much more heinous acts and I would have freely disclosed this before the Committee.

ADV MOTATA: I think we'll go much faster if you can confine yourself to the questions, we don't want to know your past at this stage. Was Matjeni, Jerry, always with you when you looked after Lubane?

MR BESTER: Primarily at night, yes.

ADV MOTATA: And when you were shown this terrorist in an album and loose photos, was it during the day or in the evening?

MR BESTER: I suspect that it was later afternoon. But Jerry and I were responsible for him, yes.

ADV MOTATA: Can you recall whether Jerry was present?

MR BESTER: I suspect that he must have been present.

ADV MOTATA: You have testified that the black members were sent off to go and buy some items. Did they come back to the farm whilst you were still there, after the body was destroyed?

MR BESTER: That is correct, I have stated that after the second explosion took place, I went back to the farmhouse with the bakkie. Shortly after that they returned and then Putter and Botha and I left for Pretoria again.

ADV MOTATA: Then I want to know, had you already departed?

MR BESTER: No, I stated that I was there in the farmhouse when they arrived there.

ADV MOTATA: Now what items had they gone to buy?

MR BESTER: I wouldn't know, I didn't see what they had with them.

ADV MOTATA: Oom Struis said there was drinking on the farm and he went further and said that More, Mathebula and Matjeni were sent to buy more liquor. Did you see any drinking?

MR BESTER: No, I didn't.

ADV MOTATA: From the scene of the explosion where the body was destroyed, did you go back to the farmhouse or you drove away?

MR BESTER: I drove directly from there to the farmhouse.

ADV MOTATA: Now when you were given instructions to dig, I may say "the grave" for Lubane, did you hear the instructions given to More, Mathebula and Matjeni, that they should purchase certain items from a shop nearby?

MR BESTER: Capt Prinsloo spoke to them first and they departed, then afterwards he gave us our instructions. I know that they were sent to a shop to buy certain goods. I don't know what they were supposed to purchase, I cannot recall, but I know that they were sent away from the farm.

ADV MOTATA: Did you hear the instructions "Go to the shop and buy"?

MR BESTER: It is possible, otherwise I would not have stated it in my application.

ADV MOTATA: I don't think there's a necessity to be sarcastic, I want to clear my mind about certain things and I would appreciate if you could do it in the same spirit because I'm not here to cross-examine you, but to clear up things which are not clear to me. And I would very much, I repeat very much, and emphasise that, that I won't stand any sarcasm. Do we understand each other? Before we proceed.

MR BESTER: I humbly apologise, if that is the impression that I created, it was not my intention.

ADV MOTATA: Because it becomes strange to me that if you heard somebody being sent to a shop to buy items, that selectively you would not hear what he's sent to buy. It becomes very strange to me.

MR BESTER: As I have stated, they were sent to a nearby farmstall to purchase certain goods and I don't think they sell beer in a farmstall.

ADV MOTATA: In all fairness to you, Mathebula has testified to the fact that they were sent to buy more liquor and Mr Strydom also testified to that fact that they came back after being sent with more liquor. Could you have missed such instructions?

MR BESTER: It is possible, because I have stated that I didn't see any liquor. I didn't see what they had on them when they returned from the shop.

ADV MOTATA: Because if you have listened to Strydom, he says there was drinking, but he cannot with certainty say which people were drinking, but there was drinking on the farm. Even Lubane was given an Amstel to drink.

MR BESTER: I did not see this, and Strydom also said that I was drinking if I recall correctly and I stated that I don't drink beer. I did not drink anything on that farm.

ADV MOTATA: Did you see when Lubane was given a beer?

MR BESTER: No, as it appears in my evidence I was away to dig the hole with Putter and Botha at that stage.

ADV MOTATA: Is it not an essential element, Mr Bester, that ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: May I just interject.

That's not what you say in your evidence, Mr Bester.

ADV MOTATA: It was under cross-examination, Madam Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Oh. I have been corrected.

ADV MOTATA: That wouldn't it be an essential element when we come to the actual elimination, that when it is a requirement that there must be full disclosure, that we should be should be told up front in an affidavit, on an application, that two occasions were made of the explosives there to destroy the body. Wouldn't you say that is an essential element regarding full disclosure, that we are not just told on viva voce evidence only?

MR BESTER: Correct. As I have stated in my previous evidence, the explosives were used to destroy the body completely in order to prevent any forensic evidence, as I have stated and I do not state that there was only one explosion in my application. Explosives were used to destroy the body and there were two explosives that day.

ADV MOTATA: No, no, I don't want interpretation, it must be clear. Are you saying because the victims are here, that they would interpret it as you do right now, that if I say he had to be destroyed with explosives, then it must be read that we meant two explosives? Are you suggesting that?

MR BESTER: The destruction by explosives would include the two explosions.

ADV MOTATA: Madam Chair, I'm not taking it any further, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Motata.

You are saying that the reason why explosives had to be used was in order to destroy any forensic evidence.

MR BESTER: That is correct, that is what I stated, because it would destroy forensic evidence completely.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR BESTER: The body, the pieces of the body, that is what I am referring to.

CHAIRPERSON: And would that not be destroyed by the first explosion? Will that kind of evidence not be destroyed by the first explosion?

MR BESTER: I think that that was the objective with the first explosion, but when they saw that there were remains, that is when the second explosion took place in order to destroy the remains completely.

CHAIRPERSON: How far were you from Dos Santos when the first explosion took place?

MR BESTER: I was not near him, I was approximately 100 metres or 80 metres to 100 metres away from him.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you see Dos Santos being spoken to by Capt Prinsloo or Capt Crafford, immediately after the first explosion?

MR BESTER: It is possible, they must have had a discussion, yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Why must they have had such a discussion?

MR BESTER: I think because the order came after that to look for any remains.

CHAIRPERSON: Now who issued the order to look for any remains of Mr Lubane?

MR BESTER: As far as I can recall, Capt Prinsloo said we had to look for the remains.

CHAIRPERSON: And how long did it take you to look for such remains?

MR BESTER: Approximately 10 minutes, 5 to 10 minutes, perhaps 15 minutes.

CHAIRPERSON: And how long after you had looked for the remains of the blown up body of Mr Lubane, did the second explosion take place?

MR BESTER: As the remains were found we tossed them back into the grave with the spades. After that Dos Santos went to fetch explosives in his car again and it would have been approximately 20 to 25 minutes from the second explosion to when I drove back to the farmhouse and departed from the farm.

CHAIRPERSON: How big would you say were these pieces of the blown up remains of Mr Lubane that you had to look for?

MR BESTER: They were pieces, they were not large chunks of flesh, small pieces with hairs.

CHAIRPERSON: Could you be able to make out the particular part one's body from the blown up pieces? Like, could you make up a head or - I'm trying to find out just how big these pieces were.

MR BESTER: Some were pieces of flesh. The pieces of flesh with the hairs on may have come from the head, but they were not large body parts such as an arm or a leg or a hand or anything like that.

CHAIRPERSON: So these were not large body parts that you had to retrieve?

MR BESTER: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: You have evidenced that you were given a profoundly important duty to persuade Mr Lubane to turn into an informer for the Security Branch. You recall saying that?

MR BESTER: Yes, I recall that. I remember that I said that I had attempted to turn his mind.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. And these instructions came directly from Capt Prinsloo.

MR BESTER: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Now can you recall - as you have already stated, you were on the farm for approximately four days, how long after you had been on that farm were you given such instructions?

MR BESTER: I would assume that it must have been from the second day when it was said to me, because it was not said to me on the first day. On the first day when I arrived there, I was to confirm certain information which was conveyed to me by Capt Prinsloo. I can recall that that was my very first order.

CHAIRPERSON: By that stage had the sketch plans been found in Mr Lubane's car, when such a request was conveyed to you to try and turn Mr Lubane?

MR BESTER: The sketch plans, I cannot recall on which particular day the sketch plans were found. I cannot recall that, no.

CHAIRPERSON: Can't you recall even if it's in relation to when you were instructed to turn Mr Lubane? This was quite an important responsibility I imagine, to try and turn someone into an informer to me is very important. That is why I've actually selected my words that it was a profoundly important duty for you to have been selected to try and turn him. That's a fundamental responsibility.

MR BESTER: That is correct, it was a profound responsibility. But as I have stated, I cannot recall upon which particular day those plans were found.

CHAIRPERSON: You are able to recollect however, that the instructions to turn him were conveyed to you on the second day of your arrival on the farm.

MR BESTER: That is correct, because I stated that it was definitely not on the first day.

CHAIRPERSON: Now how did you go about discharging this important duty of turning Mr Lubane into an informer?

MR BESTER: Basically I spoke to him about his involvement which he had already confirmed and I basically attempted to convince him verbally to become an informer for us.

CHAIRPERSON: What did you do? What did you say to him?

MR BESTER: I would have put it to him that because he was already involved and because he had admitted that he was internally trained, he should come and work for us as an informer because we would have been able to use him again. If he was an informer of ours, I believe that it would have been possible.

CHAIRPERSON: How long did you take in your attempts to turn him into an informer?

MR BESTER: I think it was during the evenings when Jerry and I were alone with him and showed him the photos in the late afternoon. I would have discussed it with him various times, yes.

CHAIRPERSON: You were there for four days, Mr Bester, and as you have vividly recollected, the turning operation you conducted on the second day of your arrival. Now how long did it last? Did you attempt to turn him up to the fourth day of his detention on that farm, shortly before he was killed?

MR BESTER: As I have stated, it may have been the second and the third day, possibly also the fourth day. All I know is that I had discussions with him about it during the evenings, as I have already told you.

CHAIRPERSON: So you are conceding that there is a possibility that you could have proceeded with your attempts up to the last day of his existence.

MR BESTER: Or possibly the day before, before the decision was taken to eliminate him.

CHAIRPERSON: I wasn't there, I am trying to find some clarity from you. Is it something that is within your recollection or is it something that you do not know or you can't remember?

MR BESTER: I believe it would have been on the day before Capt Crafford departed for Brig Cronje. I believe that it would have been up to that day or on that day.

CHAIRPERSON: Now when to your knowledge, did Capt Prinsloo depart to speak to Brig Cronje?

ADV PRINSLOO: Madam Chair, with respect, there's no evidence that Capt Prinsloo ever went to Brig Cronje.

CHAIRPERSON: I thought that's what the witness has just stated.

ADV PRINSLOO: Not what I heard him say, Madam Chair, with respect. I heard that he said Capt Crafford went to Brig Cronje.

CHAIRPERSON: Capt Crafford.

ADV PRINSLOO: I beg your pardon, yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Thank you, Mr Prinsloo.

Let me correct myself then, Mr Bester. To your knowledge, when did Capt Crafford depart to have a meeting with Brig Cronje?

MR BESTER: It was the second-last night before the day of the elimination.

CHAIRPERSON: That would have been the third day of your arrival on the farm, am I correct?

MR BESTER: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Is this within your personal knowledge? Are you aware that he actually left, or is it something that you heard from someone?

MR BESTER: I know that he left the farm because he drove off and Capt Hennie told me that he was going to Brig Cronje.

CHAIRPERSON: What time of the day was this?

MR BESTER: It must have been in the afternoon.

CHAIRPERSON: You and Mr Matjeni were given instructions by Capt Prinsloo to look after Mr Lubane, am I correct?

MR BESTER: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Were you together at all times when looking after Mr Lubane, or were there occasions when you and you only looked after Mr Lubane and were there occasions when it was only Mr Matjeni who would look after Mr Lubane, in your absence?

MR BESTER: At night both of us would have remained with Mr Lubane, but during the day, as I have stated, I was not always present.

CHAIRPERSON: So by so saying you are in short saying there were occasions when Mr Matjeni would look after Mr Lubane alone, not in your presence, and there were occasions when you and only you would look after Mr Lubane without Mr Matjeni being present. - save for the nights.

MR BESTER: Yes, during the day. That is correct, it is possible.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. May I be granted just an indulgence, I want to confer with my notes to see if there is something else I had indicated to my brain that I wanted to ask you. I cannot recollect. Yes, Mr Malan will ask you a question whilst I do that.

MR MALAN: Chairperson, while you are consulting your notes.

I'm sorry, but I omitted to ask you about your evidence concerning the discipline and the disallowance of alcohol during an operation. I would just like to a definition of that sort of operation. What would the operation be, the explosion of the body or the week on the farm?

MR BESTER: The operation to which I have referred was the explosion of the body and the stay on the farm. That was one operation, but there were also other operations where we would penetrate homes and look for suspects.

MR MALAN: But an operation wouldn't be four to five days on the farm. You have beers while you were on the farm.

MR BESTER: No.

MR MALAN: Well not you specifically, I'm referring to the other members. What I mean is, there wouldn't be a ban on drinking beer if members spent four days or a week on the farm.

MR BESTER: It would depend on whether or not Mr Prinsloo had sanctioned it.

MR MALAN: Would he tell you beforehand, you're allowed to have beer here, or you're not allowed to have beer here?

MR BESTER: Not during operations when I was present.

MR MALAN: But you told me that the operation would be when you conducted a home penetration or when you blew up the body.

MR BESTER: That is correct.

MR MALAN: Now question refers to when you were out in the field for quite some time, such as with this case, according to your evidence, approximately four days. Upon the evidence of others it was perhaps a week or even longer. Now question is, upon your recollection, would it have been acceptable that beer was used or that alcohol was used somewhere during the course of the period of time that you spent on the farm?

MR BESTER: According to me it would acceptable, but I didn't see any liquor.

MR MALAN: I'm not asking whether it was acceptable to you, I want to know whether or not there were any rules about it. Was it permitted or was it not permitted?

MR BESTER: According to me there were definitely rules, yes.

MR MALAN: And what did these rules say? You are not allowed to drink at all while you were on the farm?

MR BESTER: Or on another operations, yes.

MR MALAN: So no alcohol was ever consumed while you were on the farm, except for the time when you were on the veranda when the Amstel was given to Mr Lubane, which you don't really even know about because you were informed about it by Capt Prinsloo after you'd dug the hole.

MR BESTER: That is correct.

MR MALAN: He told you that he had put sleeping tablets in the Amstel and that is how he had immobilised Mr Lubane. But to the best of your knowledge, whenever you were in the field, no drink was allowed because it was an operation, as you described it?

MR BESTER: Yes.

MR MALAN: And none of the other members ever participated in drinking at such a place?

MR BESTER: Not when I was present, not that I know of.

MR MALAN: Yes. In other words, according to the best of your knowledge, no drinking was ever allowed.

MR BESTER: We had drinks after operations.

MR MALAN: Where, on the farm or back at the office?

MR BESTER: No, back at the office.

MR MALAN: So you would be drinking in the office?

MR BESTER: Or we would braai at Wonderboom near the Apiesrivier.

MR MALAN: Are you telling me that you drank in the office and when you went for a braai at the Apiesrivier, but not when you were on the farm?

MR BESTER: I didn't drink in the office.

MR MALAN: Only at the Apiesrivier.

MR BESTER: Yes.

MR MALAN: Did the others drink at the offices?

MR BESTER: Not that I know of.

MR MALAN: Thank you.

MS VAN DER WALT: There's just something which Mr Malan stated, which is not entirely correct, which I wish to address.

You stated that he only became aware of the beer containing the sleeping tablet after he had dug the hole. That is not Mr Bester's evidence, Mr Bester's evidence was that when he received the order to go and dig the hole, Mr Prinsloo told him that he would now put the sleeping tablet in the beer and that he would have to hurry up. Just to clarify that.

MR MALAN: Very well, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I confirm that evidence, Ms van der Walt.

MS VAN DER WALT: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Just one question, Mr Bester. During your evidence-in-chief you stated that you had a very good relationship with Comrade, to an extent that he was able to cooperate with you and because of that kind of co-operation, there was no reason for you to assault him.

MR BESTER: That is correct, because he conducted the identifications for me and he also disclosed Brown Sugar to me.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. And how would you describe this co-operation, what did it entail? Did it entail you asking him questions and he immediately responding to the questions that you had put to him, in a manner that you found quite satisfactory?

MR BESTER: Correct.

CHAIRPERSON: And that would be by disclosing information that you sought from him through such interrogations.

MR BESTER: Correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Now why did this interrogation have to last for four days if he offered this kind of co-operation?

MR BESTER: I wouldn't be able to answer that, it was Capt Prinsloo's decision.

CHAIRPERSON: Your evidence is that Capt Prinsloo brought you up to speed with Lubane's activities and gave you questions that you had to put to Mr Lubane in order to obtain information from Mr Lubane, is it not so?

MR BESTER: And to confirm what Prinsloo had told me, yes.

CHAIRPERSON: What do you mean, and to confirm what Prinsloo had told you? Mr Prinsloo would request you to conduct an interrogation only to confirm what had already been told to him by Mr Lubane. Is that what you mean by confirmation?

MR BESTER: By confirmation I refer to the briefing that he gave me when I arrived at the farm the first evening. That is the confirmation that I referred to. The further information had to do with the identifications that he made to me with the photo albums as well as the loose photos.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Were you required to conduct an interrogation that had not been covered by Mr Prinsloo? I'm trying to find out what kind of interrogation you conducted and what kind of interrogation was conducted by Mr Prinsloo.

MR BESTER: If he had made any information known to me by means of identification and so forth, I would have conveyed it to Mr Prinsloo. But that is what I can recall, what I told Prinsloo about the photographs and Brown Sugar. And I confirmed what he had conveyed to me on the first evening, which I confirmed upon the request of Prinsloo. Comrade told me this when I discussed it with him.

CHAIRPERSON: You have stated that you conducted several interrogations on Lubane, were you on each and every interrogation you conducted of Mr Lubane? Am I incorrect when I say - Mr Bester, are you saying no?

MR BESTER: As I have stated, I was not present with every interrogation, I was present with the most of them, as I have stated, as I can recall, but not with every interrogation which was conducted with Mr Lubane on that farm.

CHAIRPERSON: I'm talking about the interrogation conducted by you on Mr Lubane. You have stated that you conducted several interrogations on Mr Lubane, on your own.

MR BESTER: That would have been during the evenings, with regard to the identifications with the photographs and also then to attempt to turn him to become an informer.

CHAIRPERSON: Now apart from the photographs and the order to try and turn him into an informer, were you given any specific information on which to conduct any interrogation other than the one that related to the photographs and the one that related to attempting to turn him into an informer? Did you conduct any other interrogation, other than those?

MR BESTER: No, except for when I was present with other interrogations and I remained silent. I did not conduct any other interrogations.

CHAIRPERSON: So the co-operation you are referring to is one referring to when you were conducting an interrogation about the photo album, and secondly, the one that related to turning into an informer. Those are the two interrogations you conducted.

MR BESTER: That is correct. Which I personally conducted.

CHAIRPERSON: And when you state that you received Mr Lubane's co-operation, it is in respect of those two interrogations that you refer to the co-operation you received from Mr Lubane. Am I correct?

MR BESTER: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: And in fact you didn't receive any co-operation at all from Mr Lubane with regard to the second interrogation that was aimed at turning him into an informer.

MR BESTER: As I understood, you just asked me whether or not I had his co-operation with the photographs. He did not give me his co-operation to become an informer, but I did interrogate him about it, I did try to turn him. But you are correct when you say that he did not give me his co-operation when I attempted to turn him to work on our side. You are correct when you say that.

CHAIRPERSON: And you have earlier on testified that the reason why you did not assault him was because he offered you his co-operation, but in respect of an attempt to turn him into an informer, you didn't get his co-operation. Did you not then try and assault him?

MR BESTER: No, definitely not. I don't believe that I would have been able to convince him in such a manner.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Ms van der Walt, do you wish to do any re-examination?

RE-EXAMINATION BY MS VAN DER WALT: Just a singular aspect.

I would just like for you to offer perhaps an explanation when you say that you interrogated Mr Lubane with regard to the photo album. According to your evidence, certain persons were identified to you with the photo album, not the loose photos.

MR BESTER: The photo album was the terrorist photo album which was held at the unit with regard to ANC terrorists who were wanted.

MS VAN DER WALT: Were there many photographs inside?

MR BESTER: Yes, it was quite thick.

CHAIRPERSON: So it took quite a time.

MR BESTER: That is correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: Now if a person had been identified by Mr Lubane, would you then remain silent if he made the identification, or would you question Mr Lubane with regard to the persons whom he was identifying?

MR BESTER: Naturally I would have questioned him about their MK names, as it happened with Brown Sugar when he pointed him out to me.

MS VAN DER WALT: Well if I put it like this, there would be no sense to it if he pointed out a photo to you and you didn't ask him about the name or of the circumstances of this particular person?

MR BESTER: That is correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: No further questions, thank you Chairperson.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS VAN DER WALT

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Bester, you are excused as a witness.

MR BESTER: Thank you, Madam Chair.

WITNESS EXCUSED

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Jansen, are we to take it that you are going to call Mr Matjeni as a witness?

MR JANSEN: Indeed, Chair.