<?xml version="1.0" encoding="windows-1252"?>
<hearing xmlns="http://trc.saha.org.za/hearing/xml" schemaLocation="https://sabctrc.saha.org.za/export/hearingxml.xsd">
	<systype>amntrans</systype>
	<type>AMNESTY HEARINGS</type>
		<location>PORT ELIZABETH</location>
									<url>https://sabctrc.saha.org.za/hearing.php?id=54832&amp;t=&amp;tab=hearings</url>
	<originalhtml>https://sabctrc.saha.org.za/originals/amntrans/pe/pebco4.htm</originalhtml>
		<lines count="1178">
		<line number="1">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>... busy with the interrogation.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="2">
			<speaker>ADV DU PLESSIS</speaker>
			<text>And you also say that the evening when you arrived there the Askaris were there?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="3">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="4">
			<speaker>ADV DU PLESSIS</speaker>
			<text>Is it correct to say the Askaris were used inter alias to guard these three deceased in the bus on the way there?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="5">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="6">
			<speaker>ADV DU PLESSIS</speaker>
			<text>And the Askaris purpose had already expired when they arrived at Post Chalmers?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="7">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Yes, that is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="8">
			<speaker>ADV DU PLESSIS</speaker>
			<text>And the next morning you also saw the Askaris there?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="9">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="10">
			<speaker>ADV DU PLESSIS</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="11">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="12">
			<speaker>ADV DU PLESSIS</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="13">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No, my recollection of the day is that they departed on the morning of the 9th.  Captain Roelf Venter and Beeslaar were together with the Askaris there and after we ate, they departed.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="14">
			<speaker>ADV DU PLESSIS</speaker>
			<text>Did you see them leave?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="15">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="16">
			<speaker>ADV DU PLESSIS</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="17">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="18">
			<speaker>ADV DU PLESSIS</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="19">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>My recollection of that particular day is that Mr Roelf Venter and Beeslaar as well as the Askaris were present the evening and the next morning between 10 and 11 - perhaps I could make an error with the time that they left, but they were there and then after we ate they departed.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="20">
			<speaker>ADV DU PLESSIS</speaker>
			<text>Could you conceive that you could have made a mistake with regard to the time that they departed?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="21">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="22">
			<speaker>ADV DU PLESSIS</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="23">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="24">
			<speaker>ADV DU PLESSIS</speaker>
			<text>Are you prepared to concede - if we talk about the consumption of drinks with regard to Venter and Beeslaar, it could have been possible that they could have had a few drinks?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="25">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="26">
			<speaker>ADV DU PLESSIS</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="27">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>They had not been assaulted, their heads were not covered.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="28">
			<speaker>ADV DU PLESSIS</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="29">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>If I have to speculate on this, it could have been where I did not see it, when they were transported from the airport to Cradock by the Askaris.  When I saw them at Cradock at Post Chalmers, their heads were not covered.  And with regard to the assaults - while I was busy with one with the interrogation someone could have assaulted them , not that I have any knowledge of that.  I saw no marks of assault for me to gain that impression and that is how I can recall it.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="30">
			<speaker>ADV DU PLESSIS</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="31">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="32">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="33">
			<speaker>ADV DU PLESSIS</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="34">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="35">
			<speaker>ADV DU PLESSIS</speaker>
			<text>Let me put it to  you in this way ...[intervention]</text>
		</line>
		<line number="36">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Mr du Plessis, I think you have dealt with that point.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="37">
			<speaker>ADV DU PLESSIS</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="38">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>I think we should get onto another point.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="39">
			<speaker>ADV DU PLESSIS</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="40">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="41">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="42">
			<speaker>ADV DU PLESSIS</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="43">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY ADV DU PLESSIS</text>
		</line>
		<line number="44">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Mr Lamey?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="45">
			<speaker>ADV DU PLESSIS</speaker>
			<text>Mr Chairman, may I please be afforded to ask just one question, I neglected to ask my attorney and I scolded severely and so I would want the opportunity to ask that question.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="46">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>	Mr Nieuwoudt, can you perhaps just explain to us, in this type of interrogation process where violence is not used, can you just give the Committee an indication as to how information is obtained from activists regarding this interrogation - what steps are taken, because I think that there might be a slight void regarding evidence in this regard.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="47">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="48">
			<speaker>ADV DU PLESSIS</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="49">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>	That type of interrogation, is it effective in certain cases from time to time?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="50">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Yes.  I can just refer you to an incident at the - during the Vula investigation where Minister Mac Maharaj - without any assaults or pressure being place on him, was prepared to identification regarding safe houses, weapons that were concealed etc., so this is not strange.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="51">
			<speaker>ADV DU PLESSIS</speaker>
			<text>Thank you Mr Chairman, no further questions.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="52">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY ADV DU PLESSIS</text>
		</line>
		<line number="53">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Mr Lamey?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="54">
			<speaker>CROSS-EXAMINATION BY ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Thank you Mr Chairman.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="55">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>	Mr Nieuwoudt, what exactly did Major du Plessis come and do there?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="56">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>He came to inform us that the coast was clear.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="57">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Is that all?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="58">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="59">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Did you expect him to arrive there to come and tell you this news?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="60">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Yes, I believe that to be true.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="61">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Or did he arrived unexpectedly?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="62">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="63">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Had it been agreed upon previously that he would pop in there and when he would come?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="64">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="65">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>How did you know that he would arrive there?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="66">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>He would have inform us as to whether we were to continue with the operation.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="67">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="68">
			<speaker>MR BOOYENS</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="69">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="70">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>He was to come and inform us - after we had abducted or arrested the people at the airport, that no-one had pointed a finger at us - so we did expect him.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="71">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>But did you know according to a prior arrangement that he would appear?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="72">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="73">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Was an arrangement made as to when he would make an appearance?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="74">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="75">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Was there an indication given as to how many hours had to pass before it could be determined whether the coast was clear - if the coast was clear as you put it yourself.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="76">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="77">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="78">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="79">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>So if he had arrived a day after, then you would not have found it strange?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="80">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="81">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="82">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="83">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Instead of the 9th - if he had arrived only on the 10th, would you not have found that strange?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="84">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="85">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>At that stage you were part of the information division under the command of Major du Plessis?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="86">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="87">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="88">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="89">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>If that was your position, are you not able to tell us how much time had to lapse before you could determine whether the coast was clear because du Plessis said that there were methods that by which you could ascertain this.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="90">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="91">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Who would they liaise with or contact?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="92">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="93">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="94">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="95">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Could it not have happened like that?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="96">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No, I believe that they would have enquired immediately at the security branch from the commanding officer and they would have said that they had seen so and so - such and such a person, that these people were arrested at the airport and they would have known in immediately.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="97">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>But you organised it so that it would be a British Diplomat who was to meet them and that the persons who were to arrest them would not be identifiable, in other words that they had left there under normal circumstances.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="98">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="99">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>In other words the family could have thought that these persons who would have arranged the funds for them had taken them somewhere?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="100">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="101">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Can I just clarify something, what did you understand under the message: &quot;The coast is clear&quot;? - that no-one had noticed the people had gone or that no-one saw what really happened?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="102">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>That is correct, that no-on saw what really happened that we actually intercepted and arrested them at the airport.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="103">
			<speaker>ADV DE JAGER</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="104">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="105">
			<speaker>ADV DE JAGER</speaker>
			<text>But you want to know whether anybody realised as to how they disappeared?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="106">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="107">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>You say that that is all that Major du Plessis came to do there, just to inform you of this?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="108">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="109">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="110">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="111">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>And at the stage when Major du Plessis arrived there, Captain Venter and the Askaris, had they already left?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="112">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="113">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>And Major du Plessis knew the real facts as to why the persons had been abducted, he knew that the main objective was not interrogation?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="114">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="115">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Can I just refer you to paragraph 20 of your statement in your amnesty application on page 131 - by they way before I ask the question, were you still eating at the stage that Major du Plessis arrived?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="116">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>I cannot remember that exactly but I can remember that the three deceased ate and that we also offered Major du Plessis some of the meat.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="117">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Did you not eat together with Captain Venter and the Askaris and the three persons and then when the meal was over Venter and the Askaris left?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="118">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="119">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>I just want to take you to the point that I want to make and refer you to page 131 of paragraph 20, you say</text>
		</line>
		<line number="120" isquote="true">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>&quot;At that stage Major Herman du Plessis arrived alone in the vehicle, he asked questions concerning the interrogation and then departed&quot;</text>
		</line>
		<line number="121">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="122">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="123">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>He could have spoken to the detainees, I cannot remember correctly - he did not question them, this is as I recall it.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="124">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>But here it does not say that Major du Plessis questioned them, it says that he asked questions concerning the interrogation and thereafter he left.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="125">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="126">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>In other words, the impression is being created that Major du Plessis was interested in the interrogation which he excepted had taken place?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="127">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="128">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="129">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="130">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Why do you not say in your testimony then that Major du Plessis also asked questions concerning the interrogation?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="131">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>He could have discussed this with Captain van Zyl.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="132">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>You say this in this in your statement, in other words it must have been something that you knew about?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="133">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="134">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>But where do you mention the main purpose of his visit?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="135">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>I did not mention it as such in my application.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="136">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>That is the problem, it is this that Mr Lamey wants to know because according to the piece which has just been read, the impression is created that one can almost think that as far as Major du Plessis was concerned the objective was just to question these people.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="137">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="138">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>But that main purpose is not mentioned in your application.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="139">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>If that is so, then it must be an oversight on my part.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="140">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Was it not true that the interrogation also formed a very important and integral part after the abduction of these people?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="141">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>It was just to create the impression amongst the Askaris.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="142">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Just for that reason?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="143">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="144">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>To mislead the Askaris but not to really obtain information from these three important leaders regarding any information which they might have?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="145">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>I did question them in this regard.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="146">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>But I want some clarity now, do you say that the purpose of the interrogation was a dual one - on the one hand to create the impression amongst the Askaris that there was a specific reason for the abduction, and on the other hand that you also had an interest in potential information which these three Pebco members could provide you with?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="147">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>That is true.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="148">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="149">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="150">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="151">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="152">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>COMMITTEE ADJOURNS</text>
		</line>
		<line number="153">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>ON RESUMPTION - 11 NOVEMBER 1997  -  DAY 9</text>
		</line>
		<line number="154">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Mr Nieuwoudt, you are still under oath, thank you.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="155">
			<speaker>GIDEON JOHANNES NIEWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>(s.u.o.)</text>
		</line>
		<line number="156">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Mr Lamey, we finished with you yesterday?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="157">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>I beg your pardon Mr Chairman?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="158">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>You finished cross-examining yesterday?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="159">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="160">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>All right, go on.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="161">
			<speaker>CROSS-EXAMINATION BY ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>(cont)</text>
		</line>
		<line number="162">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>Thank you Mr Chairman.  Mr Nieuwoudt, can you hear me?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="163">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Yes, I can.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="164">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>What was the initial purpose of Vlakplaas under the leadership of Captain Venter in Port Elizabeth before this operation was planned regarding the Pebco 3?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="165">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>The purpose was the identification and tracing or tracking down of insurgents.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="166">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="167">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="168">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>You also testified that the creation of the alternative structures by Pebco of which these three specific persons formed the core, created a vacuum among others and a breeding ground for terrorist, is this correct?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="169">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="170">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Can one say that the revolutionary struggle at that stage - with the creation of this vacuum, adopted a very important dimension?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="171">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="172">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Because the ultimate objective of the revolutionary struggle was - by means of an armed struggle, to overthrow the Government, is that correct?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="173">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>That is.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="174">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>And is it also correct that in view of the fact that the three Pebco members formed the core of the unrest and in creating the vacuum, that they had a great deal of information regarding terrorists and insurgents?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="175">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="176">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="177">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="178">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="179">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="180">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Oh, they were present?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="181">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="182">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Did they take part in any way?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="183">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Not when I was interrogating them.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="184">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>What was the purpose of their presence then?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="185">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>The purpose was to create the impression among them that we arrested these people in order to interrogate them and they were left with this impression.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="186">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>But you could still have created that impression even if they were not present during the interrogation - even if they were sitting outside the house?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="187">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="188">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Given the fact that they would have been useful with regard to the kind of information you would have been wanting from the deceased, is it not more likely that the Askaris would in fact actively take part in the interrogation?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="189">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>That might be so but in that case it did not happen, I did the interrogation.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="190">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Mr Lamey?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="191">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>You knew that among these Vlakplaas members were Askaris and as you know Askaris were former ANC members and also MK members, not so?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="192">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="193">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="194">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>As it pleases you Mr Chairman.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="195">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>	The Askaris had a special background knowledge and a dimension which would have been handy to include them in the interrogation so that information which could possibly come forward could be verified by them.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="196">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="197">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>These specific three people, had they been detained previously and questioned?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="198">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>I only know about Mr Hashe.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="199">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Do you know whether he was assaulted during any previous detention?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="200">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Not that I have any knowledge of.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="201">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Were you present during the previous interrogation?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="202">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Yes, on the occasion I did question him.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="203">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Was it your impression that these persons were strong leaders, fearless of the security police as Major du Plessis testified?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="204">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="205">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="206">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>During the interrogation of the deceased I confronted them directly with facts at my disposal and they replied to my questions.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="207">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>If they were so fearless, how did it occur that they said they were prepared to become informants?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="208">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>I saw this in view of the fact that they were all three detained in the garage together and I thought that it was a strategy from their side and that is why I did not believe them.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="209">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>How did the aspect regarding the AK47 come to light?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="210">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="211">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Did you know at that stage that - immediately after he had given the information regarding the AK47, that is was not correct information?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="212">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>I did not know that.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="213">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Are you saying that you did not know that it was correct?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="214">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>I did not believe him.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="215">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>You did not believe him?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="216">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="217">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>I want to put it to you that the two applicants whom I represent will testify that Mr Hashe was assaulted that evening after he arrived at that old farmhouse.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="218">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>I deny this most strongly.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="219">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>And it is then that he spoke about the AK47.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="220">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="221">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>And that Mr Godolozi was also questioned that evening and also interrogated by means of beating him and kicking him.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="222">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>I deny this most strongly, I did question him that evening.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="223">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="224">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>I question or interrogated all three the deceased that evening.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="225">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>The point is that it is their testimony that they were assaulted, that you beat and kicked them.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="226">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>I deny this.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="227">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>And this assault or interrogation did not take very long because it was late and they had already gone to bed or that in their presence it did not take very long because they went to bed.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="228">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="229">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Did you think that the information that these people had, that they would give it to you?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="230">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>They did not give us any new information.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="231">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>No, the question is: &quot;Did you think before this that they would give any information to you - the information that you were looking for&quot;?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="232">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="233">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="234">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>I interrogated them and this is what I can remember as the events occurred that evening.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="235">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>If you knew that these persons were not going to give you the information, surely then you must have had a reason to persuade these people to give you this information by means of assaulting them?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="236">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>I did not assault them.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="237">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>The gist of the previous question as to why it lasted so long was, it these people were co-operative during the interrogation to give the information without pressure and so on and so forth, why did the interrogation have to take so long?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="238">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>I interviewed or interrogated each one of the deceased and I confronted them with the facts at my disposal and I accepted that after three hours of questioning - and secondly we had to create the impression amongst the Askaris and the members of Vlakplaas that we were interrogating these people.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="239">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>When you stopped the interrogation, where you satisfied with the information that you got from them?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="240">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>In my opinion they gave us no new information.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="241">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Were you satisfied that they had given as much information as they were possessed of?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="242">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>They denied some of it and they confirmed some of the questions that I put to them.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="243">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Were you satisfied that they had given you all the information that they were possessed of and which you wanted from them?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="244">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="245">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Is that the reason why subsequently you interrogated them again?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="246">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Are you referring to the morning of the 9th?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="247">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>That is correct, in the morning.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="248">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="249">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Well, did they give you the information to your satisfaction, in other words did you become satisfied that they had given all such information as they might know of which you wanted of them?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="250">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No, they did not satisfy me, we did not obtain any new information - they covered a very wide spectrum.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="251">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>When you stopped the previous session of interrogation, you were still not satisfied?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="252">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="253">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Notwithstanding the fact that you were not satisfied, you did not ill-treat them in any way?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="254">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No, I did not.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="255">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Go on Mr Lamey.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="256">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Thank you Mr Chairman.  The premises where they were detained, was it one of your secret premises?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="257">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="258">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>And you knew that Major du Plessis would at one stage come to give you the green light to go ahead with the elimination?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="259">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="260">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>So up to that stage the possibility still existed that you would not be able to continue with the elimination and that the persons could possibly be released?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="261">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="262">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>And then they would have knowledge of this safe area?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="263">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="264">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="265">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="266">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="267">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="268">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Why did you not think it a good idea to blindfold them in such a case so that afterwards they would not be able to point out Post Chalmers?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="269">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>At that stage I did not think of it and I did not do it either.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="270">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>I put it to you that the evidence or testimony will be - of the two applicants Mr Mogoai and Koole, that at one stage underway to Post Chalmers they were blindfolded.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="271">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="272">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>And that they arrived there being blindfolded.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="273">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>They were not blindfolded at Post Chalmers.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="274">
			<speaker>ADV DE JAGER</speaker>
			<text>The question is whether the moment when they arrived at Post Chalmers, could you say whether they blindfolded then or not?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="275">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Not as far as I can recall.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="276">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Their testimony will be further that it was during interrogation that - at the request of the Pebco 3, their blindfolds were removed.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="277">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>That is not correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="278">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>You activated the source that would lure the people to the airport, is that correct?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="279">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="280">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>And you said that it was a person who pretended to be a person from the British Embassy?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="281">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="282">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Was it a person with an English accent?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="283">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="284">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Was it a White person?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="285">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="286">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="287">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="288">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="289">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>I would.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="290">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="291">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>That may be true but  ...[intervention]</text>
		</line>
		<line number="292">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="293">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="294">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="295">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Thank you for that.  He was not White.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="296">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Thank you.  Yes, Mr Lamey?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="297">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>You see now that leaves us with - in the language of the past, at least three other racial groups - do you see how far we are from that person?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="298">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="299">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>He could have been Indian, he could have been so-called Coloured, he could have been African you know?  Thank you.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="300">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Thank you.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="301">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Seeing as this source had pretended to be a person from the British Embassy, it should have been somebody who could have spoken English with a convincing accent surely?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="302">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="303">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>You say that it was not a White person, correct?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="304">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="305">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>But would you think that the Pebco 3 - due to the particularly English accent of this person, had to be convinced that they would meet such a person at the airport?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="306">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>They were convinced.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="307">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>And they could most probably have thought that it was a White person who was to meet them there?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="308">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>That might have been so.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="309">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="310">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="311">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>They could have stopped on any place in the parking area?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="312">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="313">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>They could have stopped a reasonable distance from where the minibus was parked with the Askaris?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="314">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="315">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Let me just ask you, where was this person - what was arranged for the Pebco 3, where were they to meet this person from the British Embassy?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="316">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>At the airport, they had to meet him in the bar.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="317">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>So that means in the airport building itself?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="318">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="319">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>And we also heard testimony that there was a struggle between Pebco and AZAPO at that stage?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="320">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="321">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Major du Plessis even went so far as to testify that this was part of the deception, that the impression could have been created that AZAPO could possibly have had something to do with the disappearance of these three people, is that correct?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="322">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="323">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>And now your testimony is that the three Askaris had to intercept these persons at the airport.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="324">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>That was the instruction that was given to them and that is what happened.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="325">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="326">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="327">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>What did you think, surely you wanted this operation to be successful because a great deal of trouble was taken to get these three people to the airport?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="328">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="329">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>What would have happened if these three persons had parked further away in the parking area and the Askaris had gone to them, surely at some stage these three persons would have realised something strange was happening, not so?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="330">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="331">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>And you should have expected that the three Pebco persons could have drawn the attention of the public because they would realise that something was wrong, not so?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="332">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>It could have been but this is not what happened.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="333">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>What was the specific instructions given to the Askaris?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="334">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>As far as I can remember what Major du Plessis told Captain Venter, was that they had to arrest the three deceased at the airport.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="335">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Did they have to pretend to be policemen?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="336">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="337">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="338">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="339">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Are you sure that the instructions were to arrest them?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="340">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="341">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>And they could only have done that by identifying themselves as policemen?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="342">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="343">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>And you and - you also testified that you and Captain van Zyl were also in the parking area in your vehicle?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="344">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="345">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>If the Askaris had to arrest them, why could you not have done this?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="346">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Because we were known to them.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="347">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>But what would the difference have been if the Askaris had said that they were security police, then surely they could have been linked to the police and their disappearance?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="348">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>They were unknown in this area.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="349">
			<speaker>ADV DE JAGER</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="350">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>That is so.  Thank you, I understand the remark.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="351">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>	But if this was true, then other people could have noticed you and Captain van Zyl in the airport as well as your vehicles?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="352">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>They could.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="353">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>What purpose would it have served to have these Askaris arrest these persons?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="354">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>We did not move around and no-one identified us at the airport.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="355">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>It did not happen like that but it could have.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="356">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>It could have but it did not.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="357">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>The applicants I represent will say that it did not happen in this way at all, they were instructed to park the minibus there and to wait there, it was indicated where they had to wait by Captain Venter.  They saw that Captain Venter and other White men were moving towards the airport building, then they were there and then they were not.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="358">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>	I suppose that in view of the fearlessness of these Pebco 3 that you could just as well have intercepted them at the airport and could have told them that they were being taken for interrogation.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="359">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="360">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Because these people were know to you and as you said Hashe had been interrogated before already.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="361">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="362">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Did you see exactly how the Askaris did the interception?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="363">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>What I could see - as far as I could see, yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="364">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>What did you see?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="365">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>I saw that they persuaded them to get into the bus and thereafter they went to Mr Hashe to where he was parked, they persuaded him and he was helped into the minibus without any resistance.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="366">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>So they first took away the two and Hashe while Hashe was parking his car?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="367">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="368">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>I want to put it to you that I find that version very strange and improbable because Hashe would immediately have realised that there was a problem and that he would have ensured that he would get away.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="369">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="370">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="371">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="372">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>May I just have a moment please Mr Chairman?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="373">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>	You also testified that you did not see whether any photos of the Pebco 3 were shown to the Askaris.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="374">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No, I said that on the morning of the 8th, the three photos of the deceased were given to Captain Venter.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="375">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Yes, to Captain Venter but not to the Askaris?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="376">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="377">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>But they will testify - that is the Askaris, that no photos of these three persons were shown to them.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="378">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>I cannot comment on that.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="379">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="380">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>	They were just given instructions from Captain Venter to meet them at a designated point.  They waited there and at a point it was told that they had to get something to eat and thereafter Captain Venter and other members arrived and they were then said to follow a vehicle which they did right up to the airport and they were shown where to park. </text>
		</line>
		<line number="381">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>They did make the arrest at the airport.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="382">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Were these three persons - the Pebco 3, were they handcuffed on their arrival at Post Chalmers?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="383">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>I cannot remember that.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="384">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Because Mr Mogoai and Koole say that it did happen in this way, at one stage they were handcuffed before they arrived at Post Chalmers.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="385">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="386">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>The morning to the camp beds, are you now referring to the early morning hours?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="387">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="388">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>These camp beds, are they fold away camp beds?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="389">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="390">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>What would be the purpose of handcuffing them to these camp beds?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="391">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Only to ensure that they do not escape.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="392">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Surely they could have just walked away with their camp bed and the handcuffs?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="393">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="394">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>The road that passes Post Chalmers goes by - is close the house?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="395">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="396">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>But is this witness not saying they were chained onto the beds or did I not hear correctly?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="397">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>He said to camp beds.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="398">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Sorry?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="399">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>The witness said that they were chained to camp beds and the point is ...[intervention]</text>
		</line>
		<line number="400">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Sorry, you are saying that they can just stand up and walk away with the handcuffs, beds and all?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="401">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>The point is Mr Chairman, that the camp bed is quite a moveable object, you take it out of the vehicle and you fold it up ...[intervention]</text>
		</line>
		<line number="402">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>I think we should restrict ourselves to important aspects of the matter.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="403">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>As it please you Mr Chairman.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="404">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>	Mr Mogoai, says that he was handcuffed in an old disused farmhouse and that he saw that Mr Godolozi and Galela were in the cells, what do you have to say about this?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="405">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>I deny this most strongly, we did not use the cells.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="406">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Mr Koole will also testify that he can remember you, your name and that you were Niewoudt of the security branch, can you remember him?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="407">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>I cannot.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="408">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>And he will also say that or both of them will say that spent two nights at Post Chalmers.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="409">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>That is not correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="410">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Are you sure of that?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="411">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>I am positive.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="412">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>And before they left - Captain Venter was still there before their departure, they left before Captain Venter and he told them that they had to return to Glen Connor that morning and Mr Koole will testify that you told him how to go or to travel to Glen Connor via Jansenville and Graaff-Reinet.  This was another road,  a different one that they had travelled the evening from the airport to Post Chalmers.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="413">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>I cannot remember that, the only Askari that I knew who was present was Moss whom I knew personally.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="414">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>You say that there was an Askari called Moss?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="415">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="416">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>My instructions are that there two Askaris, Mr Mamasela and Mr Mogoai and one permanent member, Warrant Officer Koole.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="417">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="418">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Is it not possible that you can be making a mistake about this, that Captain Moss could have come to Port Elizabeth together with the Vlakplaas members and that he was there and that during the course of their stay there that - before this operation, that you had something to do with him but that he was not there on this specific evening?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="419">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="420">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>	I was not involved with the terrorist desk and I denied this to Mr Dumisa, I said that they did not report to me namely Captain Venter.  I did not even know Captain Venter - of the whole team and those who were at Post Chalmers, I only knew Moss personally.  And I also said this to Mr Dumisa as well as to Advocate Chris Mac Adam.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="421">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>You know of the existence of Vlakplaas before 1985, is that correct?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="422">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="423">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Did you know that they - as early as 1980 five years earlier, that they already existed from then?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="424">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="425">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>And you said that the reason why these Pebco 3 persons were not to be assaulted was that you did not know whether the Askaris had been involved in assaults previously?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="426">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="427">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Amongst others, the reason?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="428">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="429">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>In view of their main objective of tracking down terrorists and insurgents, why did you come to this conclusion?  Is the opposite not true, that you would have thought that these persons had been exposed to interrogation and had been present at assaults - during assaults?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="430">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>During my career they have never been present before this case, I did not have any knowledge of their abilities regarding interrogation.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="431">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>You heard that apart from the testimony of what Mr Mogoai and Mr Koole will say is that your co-applicants have referred to what Beeslaar said, that they were at Post Chalmers a day or two after the abduction and that that evening they spent a few hours there and that there was a braaivleis or a barbecue.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="432">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="433">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Did they use two vehicles or did they travel in one vehicle?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="434">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>They used two vehicles, Captain Venter was in the Safari Nissan and the Black members were in their minibus.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="435">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>That first evening you were mainly involved in the interrogation, not so?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="436">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="437">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Are you sure about your testimony that the Askaris parked their minibus in front of the garage?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="438">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>That is what I can recall.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="439">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Is there a possibility that this could not have been so?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="440">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>That might be true.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="441">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Because they will testify that it was not so, that they were not given instructions to guard these persons during the evening and that their minibus was not parked in front of the garage door.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="442">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>That is what I can remember.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="443">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>A moment please?  Thank you Mr Chairman, I have no further questions.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="444">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY ADV LAMEY</text>
		</line>
		<line number="445">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="446">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>No, Mr Chairman, the gist of the statement to Mr Nieuwoudt - and that was also my recollection, is what - not directly in front of the garage in order to guard them.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="447">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Yes, but my recollection is that you put it to the witness or rather conceded that they had parked in front of the garage - for what ever reason, but you put it to one of the applicants that the Askaris had in fact pulled up their car and parked it in front of the garage.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="448">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>I definitely did not, my recollection Mr Chairman is not that I put it in the way that it was directly in front of - in close proximity to the garage because ...[intervention]</text>
		</line>
		<line number="449">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="450">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>My recollection from the instructions is Mr Chairman -  but I will just confirm it also again, is that it was some distance away from the garage but let me just make precisely sure.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="451">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>	The point is - it was during I think the evidence of Mr van Zyl, that he said they were supposed to guard them and the vehicle was placed in front of the garage to create the impression in his evidence that that was the way in which they had to prevent them from coming out of the garage.  And my instructions in this regard is that was not so but I will get instructions as to ...[intervention]</text>
		</line>
		<line number="452">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Just get instructions as to whether the car was not parked in front of the garage.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="453">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Thank you Mr Chairman.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="454">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="455">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>	Mr Nyoka, in the meantime you can proceed.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="456">
			<speaker>CROSS-EXAMINATION BY ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>Very short Mr Chairperson.   Mr Nieuwoudt, Mr du Plessis said it was only the three Pebco executive leaders who had to be killed and therefore taken to the airport and you were left with that task, can you tell us how did you manage that feat of ensuring that precisely those three had to go to the airport?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="457">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>That is as it was.  I had the instruction that the three people had to - we had to get them together and there was the opportunity and I also gave the instruction to the source to lure the three deceased to the airport.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="458">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>Do you know precisely what it did in implementing your instruction?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="459">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>I gave him the instruction to - that the President,</text>
		</line>
		<line number="460">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>the General Secretary and the Organising Secretary had to be present and I was assured that Mr Hashe would be present because he spoke to him personally.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="461">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>He must have told you how he did it, did he tell you how he managed to do that precisely?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="462">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="463">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>My instructions are that - from Mrs Hashe, she was at home with her husband, there were many other people in the house and Mr Hashe got a call next door in the neighbourhood, he went to answer the phone and the message that he got was that Mr Fazi said he Hashe, Ngoi, Fazi and Malgas must go to the airport - those four, not these three.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="464">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>	That Mr Hashe, Mr Ngoi, Mr Fazi and Mr Malgas must go to the airport to meet this diplomat but because he and Mr Ngoi had to meet Mrs Blackburn in Utenhage at a meeting, they could not go.  In other words, not those three but four people differently except for Mr Hashe.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="465">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Can you just repeat those names?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="466">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="467">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="468">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="469">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="470">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="471">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>I pertinently gave him the instruction to get the three, that was my instruction that I had to carry out - the instruction that I got from Major du Plessis.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="472">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="473">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>Mr Fazi and Mr Ngoi, they had to go and meet Mrs Molly Blackburn in Utenhage who strangely died that very year in December 1985.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="474">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>	My point Mr Nieuwoudt, is that since your source did not detail how he managed to lure these three, you could not have known what happened - how he managed to do it, you did not even bother to ask him how he managed to do so.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="475">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No, I gave him the instruction for those three people and those three people arrived at the airport.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="476">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="477">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="478">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>What place?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="479">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="480">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>No, the information that I have is that the source phoned the UDF offices in Zwede and this information was relayed to Mrs Hashe.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="481">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="482">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>Unless of course the source was inside the UDF offices, unless of course the source was inside the UDF offices and did not phone from elsewhere, any comment?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="483">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>I do no wish to comment on that.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="484">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="485">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="486">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Mr Nyoka, I missed something, you said - you asked the witness whether he knew as to where to the call was made.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="487">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="488">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>What did you say in that regard - how did you put it to the witness in that regard?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="489">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="490">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="491">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>No, it was made to a neighbourhood.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="492">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>To a what?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="493">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>To a neighbourhood and Mr Hashe was called to go to next door or whatever to answer the phone.  On the other side it was Mr Fazi who said we have got a message that we must go to meet a British Diplomat but because - and he mentioned the names, himself, Mr Hashe, Mr Ngoi and Mr Malgas but because he and Mr Ngoi had a commitment elsewhere, he would like him to go with others.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="494">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>	He did not mention who those others were but because Mr Godolozi and Mr Galela were there, Mr Hashe being an elderly person said: &quot;...[indistinct], accompany me to the airport&quot; - those are my instructions.  So it was just by chance that Mr Galela and Godolozi were there.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="495">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="496">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>That is as far as I know.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="497">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="498">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Can I just refer you to the microfiche that was submitted of Mr Hashe,  ...[indistinct] Mr Chairman.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="499">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Yes, we have it in front of us.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="500">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="501">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="502">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>It was in May the Friday, it was the 3rd, four days before they were abducted, before the 8th - five days.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="503">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="504">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="505">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="506">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>My information that I received from him is that he phoned Mr Hashe and I have no reason to distrust him.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="507">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>All right, I will not belabour the point.  Was this source just an informer or an ordinary person or a member of the Pebco Executive - three choices?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="508">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>He was a collaborator.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="509">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="510">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>I used him as a collaborator.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="511">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="512">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>He was a member of Pebco.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="513">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>I gather that you are not interested to tell the public who he was but are you not keen to have - to take the Committee in your confidence and tell them in camera who this source was because they must be convinced that your are - you are making a full disclosure Mr Nieuwoudt?  I may not be interested to know but can you tell the Committee in camera - we adjourn, you tell them who your source was?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="514">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="515">
			<speaker>ADV DU PLESSIS</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="516">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="517">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="518">
			<speaker>ADV DU PLESSIS</speaker>
			<text>Yes, Mr Chairman, yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="519">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="520">
			<speaker>ADV DU PLESSIS</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="521">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>Maybe Mr Chairman, I can come in here, I was not present when that decision was made but when we read in the paper that there was someone who mentioned names of people who were spies of the previous Government, I thought that - and he did that in Committee, I thought that it was in order therefore to ask  such questions.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="522">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>	I did not know that it depended on the keenness or not of the witness and I thought that it was in conformance with the legal requirement that a  full disclosure must made.  If for instance, a witness does not make a full disclosure of that person, how are we to believe him about the rest of other people implicated in that - in the murder and abduction?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="523">
			<speaker>ADV DU PLESSIS</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="524">
			<speaker>ADV DE JAGER</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="525">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="526">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>Mr Chairman, just one point.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="527">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="528">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="529">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>Okay.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="530">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="531">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="532">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No, he was a full time informer.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="533">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>So, there were other things he informed you about?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="534">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="535">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>All right.  And was he compensated for his role as an informer naturally?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="536">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Yes, he was a paid agent.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="537">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>Mr Mamasela said that the movements of the three activists were monitored from the time that Mr Hashe went to fetch other people, they were known and there was radio contact throughout, in other words they were not just sitting next to the airport and by the time they had left Vlakplaas they were instructed to come specifically for this plot.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="538">
			<speaker>MR BOOYENS</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="539">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>Did you understand my two questions despite what Mr Booyens said, did you understand them?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="540">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>That is so.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="541">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>Thank you, maybe he can answer them for himself.  Can you answer Mr Nieuwoudt?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="542">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="543">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>The day after the 9th ...[intervention]</text>
		</line>
		<line number="544">
			<speaker>ADV DE JAGER</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="545" isquote="true">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>&quot;In the meantime&quot;</text>
		</line>
		<line number="546">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="547" isquote="true">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>&quot;the audio of the observation team, we listened to that&quot;</text>
		</line>
		<line number="548">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>You see that the end of tape 2 - and at that stage the specific tape was changed.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="549" isquote="true">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>&quot;In the meantime&quot;</text>
		</line>
		<line number="550">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>and then the audio seems to me to be:</text>
		</line>
		<line number="551" isquote="true">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>&quot;Over the radio&quot;</text>
		</line>
		<line number="552">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="553" isquote="true">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="554">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>His version is - to summarise, is that there was someone who informed you with regard to the operation from the moment that they picked up the people until the point that they arrived at the airport.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="555">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No, that was not the case.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="556">
			<speaker>ADV SANDI</speaker>
			<text>Sorry, can I ask a question Mr Nyoka, at this stage?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="557">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="558">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="559">
			<speaker>ADV SANDI</speaker>
			<text>Is that the same source you said had an English accent?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="560">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="561">
			<speaker>ADV SANDI</speaker>
			<text>Now, when you gave instructions to this source, did you say he must say to Mr Hashe he must bring Mr Godolozi and Mr Galela along with him?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="562">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="563">
			<speaker>ADV SANDI</speaker>
			<text>Thank you.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="564">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>Just to digress on two occasion a little bit, Mrs Hashe said that on the 9th - after the 9th, the day after the 9th - that is the day after the death, a policeman stormed into her house in the evening and assaulted her sons - tear gas was poured.  As a field worker, did you get to know about that incident just the day after the death of her husband?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="565">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>I have no knowledge of that incident.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="566">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="567">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No, I have no knowledge.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="568">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="569">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="570">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>Who burnt it?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="571">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>What I ...[intervention]</text>
		</line>
		<line number="572">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>Let me put it this way, did the security police have anything to do with the burning?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="573">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No, those were attacks in the feud between AZAPO and UDF.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="574">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>My instructions are that there were no such feud, unless my client is wrong.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="575">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="576">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="577">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No, we just handled both spectrums.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="578">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>Why did you choose the spot at Kwazakele for the burning of the car?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="579">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>There were many vehicles - wrecks being there, who were burnt out there.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="580">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="581">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>I know of this, there were many necklace murders committed there.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="582">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>Two applicants, Mr - the two applicants said there was a roadblock - or it was Mr Mamasela, after the group had left the airport at some stage and you denied that, not so?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="583">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="584">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>Yes, two applicants.  Why will someone just say there was a roadblock if there was none - it had nothing to do with the abduction and murder?  Do you know?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="585">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="586">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>I wish to state that there could have been a roadblock just to ensure that the abduction group was not followed by uninvited persons, hence the roadblock?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="587">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="588">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>And Mr Venter, Mr Mogoai and Mr Koole said the three activists had their heads covered including Mr Beeslaar, you denied that that was the case.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="589">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>As I said earlier, their heads were not covered.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="590">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>Why would three people say so and mention this specific thing which is not ordinary if that is not true?  I have a difficulty with that.  Two of them are represented by one lawyer, the other two by separate lawyers and yet they say the same thing.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="591">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="592">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>And you said that handcuffs - the activists were handcuffed to their camp beds.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="593">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="594">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>Are you seriously suggesting that the handcuffs were brought to Cradock only for that purpose or being handcuffed to the bed and not earlier on?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="595">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="596">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>So, you did not use them once you had them in your custody?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="597">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="598">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="599">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="600">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="601">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="602">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>I will not argue with you, I do not know what you have in your briefcase.  Mr Beeslaar and Venter said they left for Cradock the following day, yet you said they were leaving Cradock for Port Elizabeth - two different versions, which is which?  Which one can you choose of the two?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="603">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="604">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>And again you said that - they said that there was braaing and drinking, you deny all that?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="605">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>It was not a festive occasion, I do not use strong liquor so I deny it most strongly.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="606">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>What I want to know, was there weak and strong liquor but that you did not partake of strong liquor, was there weak liquor at all like beer?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="607">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No, and I know that Captain van Zyl would not have allowed that and that is why I can say quite positively that no alcohol was consumed at that occasion.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="608">
			<speaker>ADV SANDI</speaker>
			<text>Sorry, Mr Nyoka.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="609">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>	Mr Nieuwoudt, I thought yesterday you said - you used the words: &quot;There was no strong liquor&quot;, what kind of liquor did you have if any liquor at all?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="610">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>We had tea which I used and cold drinks.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="611">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="612">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Alcohol.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="613">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>It may be that the interpretation came differently.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="614">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="615">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Okay.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="616">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>You see the strange coincidence is that Mr Dirk Coetzee said that in the Sizwe Kondile matter where the murder was being committed - when the murder was being committed, there was braai and drink - someone separate as if the modus operandi is the same.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="617">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="618">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>Maybe there was such a braai and drinks but you did not enjoy them, they were done so badly that you denied they were held at all?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="619">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Which braai do you refer to?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="620">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>The one that is being referred by Mr Beeslaar and Venter and Mr Mogoai and Koole, maybe the one who made the braai or drinks did it so badly that you deny that it was there - you need not answer to that one.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="621">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="622">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="623">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="624">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Thank you Mr Nyoka.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="625">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>Mr Mamasela stated that all the Pebco leaders starting with Mr Hashe and then Mr Galela - both on the same day and then finally Mr Godolozi, were assaulted by being hit, kicked and struck with an iron pipe and a stick.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="626">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="627">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>	Mr Mamasela stated that the reason for this first assault was because Mr Hashe was - you were not happy with the answers that he was giving you, he provoked anger in you, any comment about that?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="628">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="629">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="630">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>Before the operation was launched, how were the relations between you and him and even during the operation?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="631">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="632">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>Then why would he pick you out of four people as being the one who used an iron pipe, why you if there no bad relations before?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="633">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="634">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>All right.  Is it not correct that during the first amnesty application here in Port Elizabeth or Kuzile Jack, you admitted having assaulted him not so?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="635">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="636">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>With a sjambock?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="637">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>I did.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="638">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>Because he was rebellious or stubborn, not so?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="639">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No, because I wanted to get information from him, that was my instruction.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="640">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="641">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Yes, that is so.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="642">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>You said because he was rebellious you took this sjambock and hit him - I cross-examined you.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="643">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Yes, it is the case.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="644">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>In other words, you were not happy with his responses, not so?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="645">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="646">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>Is it furthermore not correct that in the same hearing you admitted having assaulted township students with that sjambock, not so?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="647">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Yes, it is the case.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="648">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="649">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="650">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="651">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No, in the same case where refer to the sjambock, I also used it in 1980 with school boycotts, so I cannot see how you can make that assumption.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="652">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>And you admitted yesterday that you did assault other people before but in that application you said you only assaulted Mr Jack and the school children.  MR NIEUWOUDT:   I applied for the fact that I assaulted Mr Jack and I also admitted that.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="653">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>You said yesterday, there were other people that you assaulted, you said: &quot;Other people&quot; - plural, to singular.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="654">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>That is correct and then also the late Mr Biko.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="655">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>And both applicants, Mr Mogoai and Mr Koole stated that the Pebco leaders were assaulted by everyone including themselves and yet you said there was no assault.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="656">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="657">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>Are you saying that there was a possibility whilst you were busy interrogating, there could have been an assault with regard to the other two that remained behind?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="658">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="659">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="660">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="661">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>Why not?  Just off the record, why not - why did you not confront them about these strange and wild allegations - off the record?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="662">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="663">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Would that have been the right thing to do?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="664">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>I think so because they are not co-accused, they ...[intervention]</text>
		</line>
		<line number="665">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Well, one could also subsequently come and say you were trying to influence them.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="666">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="667">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>I have some severe misgivings about the validity of your criticism because when people have got two such divergent versions and he goes to one of them - well, he might have done that but he could just as well later be criticised and it be said: &quot;Why did you speak to them, were you trying to influence them&quot; and so on.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="668">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>All right.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="669">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>It could be a problematic situation.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="670">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>All right.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="671">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Thank you Chairperson.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="672">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>You mentioned yesterday - I just want to finish on the assault, you mentioned yesterday about &quot;Operation Vula&quot;.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="673">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="674">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>Is it not correct that the context in which &quot;Operation Vula&quot; occurred was different to the one of the apartheid era in the sense that it occurred in 1990 during the Groote Schuur discussions on the cessation of hostilities, not so?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="675">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Yes, that was while negotiations were continuing, they continued with the liberation struggle.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="676">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>One of the issues being discussed was the release of political prisoners, not so?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="677">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="678">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>The reason why Mr Maharaj was not arrested despite his confession was because there was discussion about the releasing of people doing what he did.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="679">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>He was arrested, Mr Mac Maharaj and in terms of Security Legislation he was detained and President Mandela personally came to visit him in my presence.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="680">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>The reasons why he volunteered the information was because he had nothing to loose because there were discussions about the release of political prisoners.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="681">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="682">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>And he was never convicted and sentenced, not so?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="683">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No, because Mr de Klerk stopped the whole court process that was part of the negotiations because it dealt with the Groote Schuur Minute, the Pretoria Minute that the MK would not cease their armed struggle - that was what the negotiations were all about.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="684">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>You said that there will be no reason why you will omit the assault if you killed - if you murdered the three, there will be no reason for you to omit the assault, not so?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="685">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="686">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="687">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="688">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="689">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="690">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>In that &quot;Bosberaad&quot; about strategy to be adopted towards the TRC process, there was also a strategy about how to tackle this particular issue that you were going to omit - assault.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="691">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="692">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="693">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="694">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>On arriving at Post Chalmers, it was stated that the so-called Askaris were guarding the activists in the garage ...[intervention]</text>
		</line>
		<line number="695">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="696">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Thank you Sir.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="697">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>COMMITTEE ADJOURNS</text>
		</line>
		<line number="698">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>ON RESUMPTION</text>
		</line>
		<line number="699">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Mr Nieuwoudt, you are still under oath.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="700">
			<speaker>GIDEON JOHANNES NIEWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>(s.u.o.)</text>
		</line>
		<line number="701">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Mr Nyoka, you may continue.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="702">
			<speaker>CROSS-EXAMINATION BY ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>(cont)</text>
		</line>
		<line number="703">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>	With regard to your written statement you said:</text>
		</line>
		<line number="704" isquote="true">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>&quot;Before the three Pebco leaders were eliminated you wanted to interrogate them about firstly, their regular visits to Lesotho and secondly, their implementation of the: &quot;M-Plan&quot; and that you started with Mr Godolozi and then the remaining two one by one&quot;</text>
		</line>
		<line number="705">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>Not so?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="706">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Yes, that is the case.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="707">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>So when you said in your oral evidence you asked them about their activities, you are referring about these two particular instances or issues?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="708">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="709">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>Did you not ask Mr Hashe about the whereabouts of his children, one in Lesotho and the other one married to the then - to Mr Popu Molefi before he became Premier of North West?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="710">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>I had knowledge of that, I asked him about that and also that Gumba Pankidobo who had an affair with Dumisa.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="711">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>Is it correct that you began the interrogation in jest by suggesting that the activists love money and which had led to their arrest and you asked Mr Hashe where he got his money from and to which he replied he was a vegetable vendor and a business - shebeen owner?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="712">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="713">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>Is it not correct that in you written statement you said</text>
		</line>
		<line number="714" isquote="true">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>&quot;On the arrival of the three leaders they were taken to the garage and that you were in the house and they were taken one by one and the Askaris were guarding them at the garage whilst the other members - security branch, were moving in and out&quot;</text>
		</line>
		<line number="715">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Yes, that is how I put it.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="716">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>So if that is the case then, the Askaris must have been stationed in the garage and the people who were doing the in and out must be the other security members, not so?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="717">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="718">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>And in fact it was going to flow from their mandate to abduct, to continue guarding them where they were stationed and that is in the garage, not so? - the Askaris mandate.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="719">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="720">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>If that is the case and the Askaris were in the garage, how could Mr Mamasela have known what was being said about the daughters of Mr Hashe - about his businesses, if he was in the garage because I would assume that he will not hear anything?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="721">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="722">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="723">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="724">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>And in your statement you also said that - you further said that, the Askaris role in the former Eastern Province was to quote</text>
		</line>
		<line number="725" isquote="true">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>&quot;The identification and collection of information around terrorism&quot;</text>
		</line>
		<line number="726">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>Unquote.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="727">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="728">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="729">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="730">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>I have said it several times, there was no assault.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="731">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>Mr Mamasela further said that you were quoting frequently from the Bible.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="732">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>I know of two instances where I quoted from the Bible and I can just briefly refer to those two instances and it was not in this instance, the first one was with my case and I refer you to my application, page 98</text>
		</line>
		<line number="733" isquote="true">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>&quot;The State versus Sakkie Makuzoma&quot;</text>
		</line>
		<line number="734">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="735">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>	And then the second instance where I dealt with the Bible and the second instance where I had a discussion with detainees with regard to the Bible was in the Young Christian Workers who were used by the Roman Catholic Church and the terminology that they usually used was:  &quot;See, judge and act&quot;.  They see the opportunity or the problem and then they use the Bible to verify it and those are the only two instances where I refer to the Bible.  </text>
		</line>
		<line number="736">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="737">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>Are you therefore saying that he was dramatising by saying that you were quoting from the Bible?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="738">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="739">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>I wonder why he would say that, it would not help his case?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="740">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="741">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>Were the activists co-operating with you when you were - were the activists - or just to correct you before we move on, Mr Makuzoma is the MD of Transnet, not Director of Spoornet.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="742">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>	Were the activists co-operating when you were interrogating them?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="743">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="744">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>Did you get much information?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="745">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="746">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>Then why did it take so long - I know Mr Lamey asked that, but why did it take so long then?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="747">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>I dealt with the whole spectrum with each one of them based on the information at my disposal.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="748">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>And you said you had interrogated Mr Hashe before?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="749">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="750">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>In that instance where you had interrogated him, did he volunteer such information like an AK47?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="751">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="752">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>If he was not under cohesion, pressure or any assault, why would he do so in this instance if he had not done so before?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="753">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="754">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>I put it to you that he may have mentioned that because he was being severely assaulted and he had to do something or to say something incriminating.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="755">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="756">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>And you said all of them offered to be informers maybe as a ploy for the interrogation to be stopped, why will they do so because they were not being harmed, they were being kept safely and they were given food?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="757">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="758">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>And when you were sitting with them, did they not ask why they were abducted, why they were unlawfully detained, why there were foreign policemen with them and why they were taken 260 kilometres away from P.E.?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="759">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="760">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>Yet as Mr van Zyl said: &quot;They were at ease&quot;, are you saying they were at ease despite all those strange circumstances?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="761">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="762">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>Could you say therefore the interrogation was a success?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="763">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="764">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>Mr van Zyl said he had - involved in the abduction and murder plot and that your role was just to be involved in that, why did you go further and go beyond the bounds of your mandate by interrogating - the mission was thus simply to kill?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="765">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="766">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>But they subsequently left the following morning according to you?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="767">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="768">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="769">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="770">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="771">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="772">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>Then you must have thought they were foolish, very foolish for you to believe that.  Any comment?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="773">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="774">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>With regard to the sleeping mixture, is it not correct that in the 1982 Mthimkhulu and Madaka murder you supplied the sleeping pill, not so?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="775">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="776">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>Why was it not the case this time because the modus operandi was similar?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="777">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="778">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>Did you see the person who was actually administering the sleeping mixture in the coffee?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="779">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Yes, I was present.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="780">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>Who did so?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="781">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>It was Captain van Zyl.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="782">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>And who made the coffee?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="783">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="784">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>So you drank tea and the others drank coffee?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="785">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="786">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>Finally, a final issue of the shooting.  In the Mthimkhulu and Madaka matter you stated that you used your own service pistol, why did you not use it this time?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="787">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Because Captain van Zyl gave me the weapon.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="788">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>In your written statement you said you were not sure who you shot but yesterday I was surprised to learn that you were sure that you shot Mr Godolozi but in your written statement you said</text>
		</line>
		<line number="789" isquote="true">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="790">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="791">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>What page?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="792">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="793">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>I see.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="794">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>Page 41, 132 - so my translation is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="795">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Page what - 132?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="796">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>Page 42.  Page 41 paragraph 22 - no, 1st paragraph, thank you.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="797">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>	In your written statement you said you were not sure who you shot ...[intervention]</text>
		</line>
		<line number="798">
			<speaker>ADV DE JAGER</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="799">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="800">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Where - page 132 and paragraph?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="801">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>1st paragraph on top.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="802">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="803" isquote="true">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="804">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>My question Mr Nieuwoudt, is that for 12 years - let me rephrase, for 11 and a half years you were not sure who you shot but yesterday suddenly you were so sure that you even told Mr van Zyl who you had shot, why is there such a difference?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="805">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="806">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="807">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="808">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Yesterday not only were you sure as to who you had shot but you went so far as to tell us who shot the rest.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="809">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="810">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="811">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="812">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Is it not correct that you re-visited the situation - thought about it, after Mr Lotz was taxed on that aspect this week?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="813">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="814">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>It would have made no harm when you made your statement to have added - just as you did yesterday, to have added that van Zyl shot so and so and Lotz shot so and so - just as you did yesterday.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="815">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Yes, true.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="816">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="817">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="818">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="819">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>I can continue and say that after the bags and the content was thrown into the Fish River afterwards.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="820">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>You noted that I asked you twice, not so - I was fair to you, I asked you twice, not so?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="821">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="822">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="823">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="824">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Yes, Mr Nyoka?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="825">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>I just want to ask you two aspects about that one.  If you shot a person outside and you wanted to cover your tracks, why is that you did not clean that blood to remove the evidence that there was shooting outside - because you did not mention that?  Any comment?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="826">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Please repeat the question.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="827">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>My question is: &quot;If you shot the three Pebco leaders outside and there was blood - in order to cover your tracks, you would have cleared the blood for any intruder in that place so that he or she does not see that there was something happening there&quot;?  In other words, why did you not clear the blood?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="828">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="829">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="830">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="831">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>And secondly, why did you not try to retrieve the cartridges from the rifle - three cartridges.  Was one shot - the cartridge must have gone off, the second one shot etc., why did you not try to check for them and remove them because that was never said by anyone?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="832">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="833">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>You cannot remember because no firearm was used, that is the reason - no weapon was used.  If you were the professionals you proclaim to be, you would have checked for cartridges Mr Nieuwoudt, not so?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="834">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Yes, but they were shot.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="835">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="836">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="837">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>Please comment.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="838">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="839">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="840">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY ADV NYOKA</text>
		</line>
		<line number="841">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Ms Hartle?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="842">
			<speaker>CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>Thank you Mr Chairman.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="843">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>	Mr Nieuwoudt, what is your motivation for applying for amnesty?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="844">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="845">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>This is the first time that we hear any mention of an apology.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="846">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No, I have apologised in my other applications.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="847">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="848">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="849">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>&quot;Verrelangs&quot;</text>
		</line>
		<line number="850">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="851">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>And when did you make your application for amnesty - the various applications, I assume that you lodged them simultaneously?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="852">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>On the 13th of December.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="853">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>And that would be after you were named by Colonel Roelf Venter in the hearings in Johannesburg in October last year?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="854">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="855">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>Would you have brought this application but for the fact that you were named?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="856">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No, at that stage I was in the process of applying for amnesty.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="857">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>Why not?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="858">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Because I still had a case against me and I did not trust in the process at that stage.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="859">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>You recognise the objectives of the Act and the purpose of this Commission and the application for amnesty?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="860">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="861">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>Mr Nieuwoudt, I must put it to you that in my many years of experience as a jurist, I have never encountered before somebody relating such gory details of a death without showing a flicker of emotion on his face.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="862">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>That is your observation.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="863">
			<speaker>ADV DE JAGER</speaker>
			<text>How many years experience Ms Hartle?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="864">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="865">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>As the Committee pleases.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="866">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>	The decision to eliminate the Pebco 3, would you say that that could be attributed to the very successful stay-a-way which had been organised in Port Elizabeth on the 17th, 18th and 19th of March 1985?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="867">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Not only with the stay-a-way actions but we were in a state of war and conflict, anarchy, unrest.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="868">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="869">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="870">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="871">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="872">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>Why do you say no?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="873">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="874">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="875">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Can you just mention the page again please.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="876">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>Page 123, typed page 32.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="877">
			<speaker>MR BOOYENS</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="878">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>My question will flow from that part of the submission.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="879">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>	Were the Pebco 3 specifically identified as persons who were the cause of the uprising?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="880">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="881">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>By whom?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="882">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>By the JSMC and our commanding officers.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="883">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>Did you personally hold the view that those particular three persons were problematic?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="884">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>I did.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="885">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>Now, at page 125 of your submissions just before paragraph 9, it reads</text>
		</line>
		<line number="886" isquote="true">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>&quot;That is was of fundamental importance that the leadership of Pebco be neutralised in order to take away the leaders from the organisation and to frighten the remaining leader element&quot;</text>
		</line>
		<line number="887">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="888">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>Was it your intention - how would it act as a deterrent, what was the intention behind the decision?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="889">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Just as I stated.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="890">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>How would it deter other leaders if - your operation was going to be a clandestine one, how would it deter other leaders?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="891">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Because they did not know what had happened to their leaders and that would have possibly have limited the activities.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="892">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>Mr Nieuwoudt, I want to point to an oddity in your submissions at page 126 in leading up to the political motivation and the decisions which were taken.  You say</text>
		</line>
		<line number="893" isquote="true">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>&quot;At this stage there was no reason for Colonel Snyman to question the submission and motivation of Major du Plessis&quot;</text>
		</line>
		<line number="894">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="895">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="896">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>Why do you mention hearsay in your submissions?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="897">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>My attorney stated it as this and these were deductions that I had made when I mentioned this to him and during our consultations.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="898">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>And then further in paragraph 11 you say</text>
		</line>
		<line number="899" isquote="true">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>&quot;After I struggled with my conscience&quot;</text>
		</line>
		<line number="900">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>For whom?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="901">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Once again this is hearsay, I was not there but I know Colonel Snyman.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="902">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>You see, I fail to appreciate why you should mention in your application how they must have felt or how they must have perceived the situation.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="903">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>This is just a mere deduction and my attorney included this - these whole deductions and hearsay.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="904">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>And in paragraph 12 you say</text>
		</line>
		<line number="905" isquote="true">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>&quot;Colonel Snyman had no further part in the planning or execution of this operation&quot;</text>
		</line>
		<line number="906">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="907">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Because he was not there.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="908">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="909">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="910">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>What about subsequently?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="911">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Because the planning and execution, he was not involved in this at all.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="912">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="913">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="914">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="915">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="916">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>And you disagree with that?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="917">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="918">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="919" isquote="true">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>&quot;possible combating measures&quot;.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="920">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>And by way of introduction:</text>
		</line>
		<line number="921" isquote="true">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="922">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>in respect of a meeting which was to take place on the 19th of March.  Now I want to refer you in particular to paragraph 24 of that document, it begins and the foot of page 245 and carries on 246.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="923">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="924">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>Roman numeral III, could you please read that out?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="925">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>MR NIEUWOUDT</text>
		</line>
		<line number="926" isquote="true">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>&quot;The SA police must use the full means at their disposal to suppress unrest but they still - their actions must lead to the minimum loss of life&quot;?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="927">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>And an instruction to eliminate the Pebco 3 would be inconsistent with that, do you agree?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="928">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="929">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>And then further in C - now, this paragraph was accepted in an amended form and I refer you now to page 242.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="930">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="931">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>Now, this would be the minutes of the meeting of the Security Council held at Tuinhuys on the 18th of March 1985.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="932">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="933">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>At which - if I can just digress briefly, was attended by Mr P W Botha, Mr F W de Klerk and Mr Louis le Grange.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="934">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="935">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>And paragraph C was adopted in an amended form and will you please read what was accepted at that meeting?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="936">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>MR NIEUWOUDT</text>
		</line>
		<line number="937" isquote="true">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>&quot;Agitator leaders, must be removed from the community in a selective way&quot;</text>
		</line>
		<line number="938">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>Please carry on.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="939">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>MR NIEUWOUDT</text>
		</line>
		<line number="940" isquote="true">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>&quot;It is preferable to act against identified individuals from all racial groups where it can possibly in the interest of security, these people must be [no translation]</text>
		</line>
		<line number="941">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>The negative publicity which originates from mass arrests must be weighed up against the benefit which is gained from that&quot;</text>
		</line>
		<line number="942">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="943">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="944">
			<speaker>ADV DE JAGER</speaker>
			<text>Sorry, on page 246 and that was the first document, is that correct - dated the 13th of March?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="945">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>That is correct Mr Chairman.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="946">
			<speaker>ADV DE JAGER</speaker>
			<text>The one on page 242 is dated the 18th of March, is that correct?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="947">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="948">
			<speaker>ADV DE JAGER</speaker>
			<text>And there is a change in paragraph C</text>
		</line>
		<line number="949" isquote="true">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>&quot;Agitator leaders must be removed selectively out of the community and be prosecuted as soon as possible&quot;</text>
		</line>
		<line number="950">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="951">
			<speaker>ADV DE JAGER</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="952">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>Mr Chairman, perhaps if you read paragraph F, the introduction to the amendment to that sub-paragraph C, it might explain the motivation for the change.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="953">
			<speaker>ADV DE JAGER</speaker>
			<text>The point I wanted to make is the matter of the instruction to prosecute has been changed.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="954">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="955">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="956" isquote="true">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="957">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>Now, all of these things were said at this meeting and I want to know how it is that Mr Louis le Grange could have come away from that meeting and had an informal discussion with Mr du Plessis and he could have gained the impression - or rather with Colonel Snyman, that he could have gained the impression that the instruction was to eliminate?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="958">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>I cannot comment on that, I was not there but it is clear that there was pressure - as you have pointed out to me from the amendment, that there was pressure from the side of the Government that the image that we could not control the unrest and perhaps that motivated him to say that to Snyman after Snyman had made a submission that legal options served no purpose.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="959">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>When did you first have access to this document - the minutes of that meeting?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="960">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>1993.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="961">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>Sorry.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="962">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Sorry, am I under some kind of miscomprehension here, was the meeting with the late Mr le Grange, did it not take place in February?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="963">
			<speaker>MR BOOYENS</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="964">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="965">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="966">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="967">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>Yes, as the Committee pleases.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="968">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>	If the instruction was given in February even more so after this meeting at Tuynhuys, Mr le Grange would not I submit, have given an instruction to eliminate because that would have been entirely inconsistent with the feelings of that meeting at Tuynhuys.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="969">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="970">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="971">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>I have no comment, the only deduction - I can only speculate in this regard, that pressure had possibly been placed on him by the Cabinet that he had to speak to the police and ensure that they combat the unrest.  That is all that I can say in this regard because we had pressure placed on us.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="972">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>When for the first time were you given the instruction to eliminate the three?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="973">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>It was approximately a week before the abduction or perhaps even two weeks before, I cannot recall exactly.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="974">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>Was it communicated to you in clear and unequivocal terms that your instruction was to kill?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="975">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>That is true, I had instructions and I want to put it clearly once again, in all my applications I stated that I was the junior, I did everything on instruction, I did nothing on my own - I only acted on instruction and I want to emphasise this.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="976">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>And what was the exact instruction given to you?  How was it communicated to you?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="977">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>That the three deceased were to be eliminated.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="978">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>Those three were named specifically.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="979">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="980">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>And where were you informed of this instruction?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="981">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>By Major du Plessis in his office.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="982">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>Who was present?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="983">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="984">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>Did you discuss the finer details of the plan - how it was to be implemented etc?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="985">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>What I can recall is the method in which it had to be executed, where it had to be done and to create the impression that they had left the country, that is basically what was discussed.  And I was given the instruction to get the three together and the occasion arose on the 3rd of May.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="986">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>Do I understand correctly that you through your source managed to contrive that the three persons - connive rather, that the three persons would be together at one place and thus you would be afforded an opportunity to abduct them?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="987">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="988">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>Was there ever any question of any other of the leadership being involved?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="989">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="990">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>Was there any discussion regarding why the three persons were named - you must have appreciated that it was a drastic instruction?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="991">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>That is so.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="992">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>Was there a discussion around that?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="993">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>That is so, we gave daily reports to Major du Plessis.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="994">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>Was there a specific discussion concerning those three persons in order to justify your decision - the decision that had been given to you - the order that had been given to you?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="995">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>It was discussed often - actually on a daily basis, regarding the activities of those three people.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="996">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>Did you question the order at all?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="997">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No, I did not.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="998">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>Why not?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="999">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Because I was on the ground, I realised that we were in a war situation and there was no other actions that we could take in order to curtail the unrest, so I made peace with the instructions that I had received from du Plessis.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1000">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1001">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1002">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1003">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1004">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>For other reasons, other than Mthimkhulu and the Pebco 3 operation?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1005">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1006">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>Now, you were at the airport when the three were abducted?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1007">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1008">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>Why did you go to the airport if it was intended to - if your intention in involving the Askaris was to keep a low profile?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1009">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>I cannot remember specifically except to ensure that the actions were or that the operations were successful and I know the three persons personally or I knew them personally.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1010">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>The yellow bakkie in which the three had arrived, who removed that from the airport - who drove it from the airport?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1011">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>I did.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1012">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>Mr Joe Mamasela in his submissions in terms of Sections 29, said that he drove the vehicle away from the airport.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1013">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1014">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>Did he see the vehicle at all?  Did he get close to it?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1015">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>I drove the vehicle.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1016">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>Did Mamasela get close to the vehicle?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1017">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>He drove it from where Mr Hashe had parked it to the point - the path where we met - one of them drove it to there.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1018">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>He says in his submissions that he drove the vehicle to a place which was a private yard and that point somebody else took over - somebody took the keys from him and he said that in this yard he noticed that the owners had boats on the premises which were being built or repaired.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1019">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>I have no knowledge of that.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1020">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>Did you not go to such a place?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1021">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1022">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1023">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1024">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>Was a fire kept going the entire day that you were there on the 10th of May?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1025">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1026">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>You stated that you were coming in and out of the interrogation to get some coffee etc., so I assume that you must have required hot water to make coffee?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1027">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1028">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>So, was there a fire burning?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1029">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1030">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>All the time?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1031">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>There must have been.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1032">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>My instructions are that on the 10th of May 1985, two days after the incident, Mrs Godolozi senior received a phone call where she was working at the West End Clinic and the import of that discussion was that she would never see her son again and she was also informed that Messrs Fazi, Ngoi and Malgas would by that weekend also be killed and burnt.  Do you have knowledge of that incident?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1033">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>I find that news, I know nothing about that.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1034">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>And on the 3rd of June 1985 at approximately 2 a.m. her house was burnt, do you have any knowledge of that?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1035">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1036">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1037">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1038">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>Did the security branch have anything to do with that fire?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1039">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>I did not and nor do I believe that the security branch was involved.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1040">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>When the families brought the havious caucus applications for their loved ones to be produced, did you discuss with those involved in the operation with you the fact that there was trouble because you had been detected at the airport?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1041">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1042">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>Did nobody come back to you and discuss the incident with you?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1043">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1044">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>Now in relation to this incident and the various other ones in which you were involved, did you agree that there would never be any discussion arising from those incidents - that you would remove it from your memory as it were?MR NIEUWOUDT:   No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1045">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>How did it happen that you managed to keep these operations secret?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1046">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>We never discussed it and it was done on a need to know basis.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1047">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1048">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1049">
			<speaker>ADV DE JAGER</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1050">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No, no discussions were held.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1051">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>Mr Nieuwoudt, there was always a distinct possibility that in  operations of this nature somebody might spill the beans, I want to know how it is that you managed to stop that from happening?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1052">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1053">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1054">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>He could have done it but it did not happen and no pressure was placed on him.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1055">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>Was there any pressure brought to bear on you Mr Nieuwoudt?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1056">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1057">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>Is this something you decided within yourself - there were no constraints placed on you, you decided within yourself that you were not going to ever mention the incident again?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1058">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1059">
			<speaker>ADV DE JAGER</speaker>
			<text>If you had spoken about it you would have been accused of murder?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1060">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1061">
			<speaker>ADV DE JAGER</speaker>
			<text>Is that the reason why you never spoke of it because you were scared you would be found out?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1062">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1063">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>At the time that the three activists were shot, why was only one firearm used?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1064">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1065">
			<speaker>ADV SANDI</speaker>
			<text>Mr Nieuwoudt, a moment ago you made a statement that</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1066" isquote="true">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>&quot;As far as I was concerned, we were fighting a war&quot;</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1067">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>Would you like to explain that in relation to the three deceased?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1068">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1069">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>	After the meeting of Langa on the 21st of March, Mr Kinikini was the first city councillor who did not want to resign and who was killed by means of the necklace method and the three deceased played a big role during the intimidation and organisation of the execution of the unrest - that in brief.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1070">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>You have just asked him about why one firearm was used.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1071">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1072">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1073">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1074">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>In the Mthimkhulu matter - perhaps the report might have been incorrect in the press, but I believe that there was a suggestion that your decided virtually on the spur of the moment to use the medication that had been prescribed for yourself which you then administered to those activists to cause them to sleep.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1075">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No, General van Rensburg told me before we left that I had to take some sleeping substances along and I had some in my possession that I used during my studies - it was prescribed.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1076">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>Is it your belief Mr Nieuwoudt that the elimination of the three did in fact - as you suggest in your motivation</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1077" isquote="true">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>&quot;Contributed to a large decrease in unrest&quot;</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1078">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>According to my observation on the ground at that stage it really had an effect with regard to Pebco.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1079">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text>And how was it different because I referred yesterday to the Minutes of the GOSS meeting on the 7th of June 1985 where there was a suggestion that perhaps violence was on the increase?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1080">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Yes, it is correct, that meeting was for the whole of the Eastern Cape and if I refer to a decrease in Port Elizabeth with regard to the unrest that is what I referred to - that is besides the feud between AZAPO and Pebco.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1081">
			<speaker>MS HARTLE</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1082">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS HARTLE</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1083">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Mr Brink?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1084">
			<speaker>CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR BRINK</speaker>
			<text>Thank you Mr Chairman.  Mr Nieuwoudt, I refer to page 99 of your application and specifically paragraph 5, there you refer to certain Annexures - that is number 3 that is on page 167, Annexure 4 on page 175 and Annexure 9 on page 208.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1085">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1086">
			<speaker>MR BRINK</speaker>
			<text>Now, these Annexures are copies of Seshaba that was published after the death of the Pebco 3.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1087">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>That is correct, could I just explain?  The publications are published quarterly and events that occurred in the past they then give an update and it is later published.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1088">
			<speaker>MR BRINK</speaker>
			<text>Now, this then goes for the Annexures that you refer to</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1089">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>in paragraph 6 of the application?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1090">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Yes, that is true.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1091">
			<speaker>MR BRINK</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1092">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1093">
			<speaker>MR BRINK</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1094">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1095">
			<speaker>MR BRINK</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1096">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>With regard to the Eastern Cape, that is the case but in Port Elizabeth their was a decrease in the activities of Pebco and I observed that there was a measure of a decrease.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1097">
			<speaker>MR BRINK</speaker>
			<text>But there was a so-called State of Emergency declared in June that year?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1098">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>But perhaps I can refer to a specific incident - why it flared up again.  It was after the funeral of the Goniwe case and then escalated and that is why the month after that on the 21st of July, the State of Emergency was declared again.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1099">
			<speaker>MR BRINK</speaker>
			<text>But the fact remains that the ability or rather the fact that the Pebco 3 had been killed was in no way a solution?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1100">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>MO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR BRINK</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1101">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>If I look at it now, that is the case yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1102">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Mr Nieuwoudt, you say that throughout you or rather the idea was to mislead Captain Venter and Mr Beeslaar and the Askaris as to the purpose why those people were apprehended.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1103">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1104">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Did you really think that you fooled them into believing that only interrogation is to take place?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1105">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>I believe that to be the case.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1106">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>It will be only interrogation without assaulting the people?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1107">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1108">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1109">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1110">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Did you think that by firstly abducting these people</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1111">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>and then taking them some 380 kilometres or so away to an isolated spot, did you really think that you were successfully fooling Captain Venter into thinking - and/or the Askaris, into thinking that these people are not going to be assaulted at all?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1112">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1113">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1114">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.  Sorry, Mrs Hashe says at that time it was not present, it had been present before but it was cut off.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1115">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Disconnected?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1116">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text>Disconnected.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1117">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1118">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1119">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1120">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>The last page?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1121">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1122">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>How do you know that this message was conveyed by telephone to Lusaka and secondly how do you know that he was phoning from his house?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1123">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Firstly, we applied to technically monitor his telephone, listening to the conversations and when you make such an application, then you have to give the particulars of the telephone number as well as the address, as well as the activities of the person.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1124">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1125">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>You did not tap the telephone of the UDF or Pebco?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1126">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1127">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Could he not have phoned from either of those offices?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1128">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>He could have but then it would have been in a different book, then we would have known from which telephone.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1129">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>No, but here you are reporting the content of the conversation and not the transaction.  This is not ...[intervention]</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1130">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>But that is because I have personal knowledge of this because I had the task - instructed by Mr du Plessis, to take these three people - to lure them to a specific place.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1131">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1132">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1133">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Sorry, whether or not he had phoned from the offices of Pebco or UDF, the information would have been exactly the same thing because you are recording what he said - what he did.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1134">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Yes, but I had personal knowledge of the fact that he actually phone out, I personally monitored it and that is why I know.  And that is why I refer you to this particular paragraph.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1135">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Did he make any other calls from the offices of Pebco or UDF as far as you can remember?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1136">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Yes, he did but that was before this incident.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1137">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Were some of them of interest to you - to the security branch?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1138">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Yes, beforehand we knew what they planned - when the next meeting would be and also the planning thereof.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1139">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Are they reflected in here?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1140">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No.  Sorry, I can just point you to 84.11.06.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1141">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>What page is that?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1142">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1143">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Page 9?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1144">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>No, 26.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1145">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Yes, I have it, I have the relevant page.  Which item are you referring to?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1146">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>84.11.06.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1147">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Yes?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1148">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text>Where Mrs Molly Blackburn was contacted by him and that was from the offices.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1149">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>How do you know that?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1150">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1151">
			<speaker>ADV DE JAGER</speaker>
			<text>I see at the bottom there is NLJ and then = and then abbreviation for Blackburn.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1152">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1153">
			<speaker>ADV DE JAGER</speaker>
			<text>And on the other page, the 3.05.85 discussion TSNL = BT.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1154">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1155">
			<speaker>ADV DE JAGER</speaker>
			<text>What does that mean?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1156">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1157">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1158">
			<speaker>MR NIEUWOUDT</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1159">
			<speaker>ADV DE JAGER</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1160">
			<speaker>ADV DU PLESSIS</speaker>
			<text>I can then just say it is from the applicants whom I represent that one Officer Beeslaar would have said that and that Captain Venter at a stage when the black bag or wet bag was put on the head of the person - I think it was Godolozi, that Captain Venter requested that this wet bag should be removed.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1161">
			<speaker>MR DE JAGER</speaker>
			<text>Could you perhaps just help, what is implied by the fact that these people did not know how to do an interrogation?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1162">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1163">
			<speaker>ADV DE JAGER</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1164">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Mr de Jager, that is my instructions and that will be their testimony.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1165">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Mr Booyens?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1166">
			<speaker>MR BOOYENS</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1167">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1168">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Well, I suppose Mr Nyoka ...[indistinct] the point.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1169">
			<speaker>ADV NYOKA</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1170">
			<speaker>MR BOOYENS</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1171">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR BOOYENS</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1172">
			<speaker>ADV LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Mr Chairman, there was just - before Mr Nyoka started with his examination, you asked me about the - my instructions about the parking of the bus before the garage door, my instructions are that the minibus was not parked directly in front of the garage, it was parked at a point more or less between the old farmhouse and the garage.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1173">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>	If I may say it in Afrikaans, it was to the side - almost in a corner at an angle from the garage door but not in such a way that they would have had to guard the three Pebco leaders and they also had no instructions to guard them.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1174">
			<speaker>MR BOOYENS</speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="1175">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>NO RE-EXAMINATION BY MR BOOYENS</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1176">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Have you finished with your clients?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1177">
			<speaker>MR BOOYENS</speaker>
			<text>Yes, I hope so Mr Chairman.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="1178">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>WITNESS EXCUSED</text>
		</line>
	</lines>
</hearing>