=====================================================================
ON RESUMPTION ON 20.07.97 - DAY 8
=====================================================================
 ON RESUMPTION ON 20.07.97 - DAY 8

MR BRINK: Yes Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mpshe are there any questions you wish to put to the applicant?

MR MPSHE: Yes Mr Chairman, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Please do so.

CLIVE DERBY LEWIS: (s.u.a.)

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR MPSHE: Thank you. 

&#9;Mr Derby-Lewis I am going to take you back to your evidence-in-chief, just towards the beginning of your evidence on the 12th of August.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman.

MR MPSHE: And I'll quote to you what you said. You testified you said that,

&#9;&#9;"Hani was a soldier for his people. He was in the ANC's own parameters a military target, in the ANC's own parameters a military target".

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman.

MR MPSHE: I want you to explain to this Committee what you mean there by when you say "he was a military target".

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Well Mr Chairman out of his various involvement, his involvement as a soldier, as a member of Umkhonto weSizwe, as a senior member of Umkhonto weSizwe he would obviously be a military target as well as a political target.

MR MPSHE: Are you suggesting by saying "military target" that you have within your knowledge information that he was being targeted by other people other than yourselves?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman I recall hearing on a TV programme which I watched while I was in prison where they had a summary of the late Mr Chris Hani and they mentioned that he had been targeted, if I remember correctly, the dates were 1980 by the SAP, 1982 by the SANDF and then there had been another unknown, an attempt of unknown origin on him I believe it was in August 1992.

MR MPSHE: Now further on in your evidence again you refer to Hani and you say Hani was trying to get rid of Nelson Mandela. I refer here to Operation Vula, you recall that?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That's correct Mr Chairman.

MR MPSHE: This included certain members of the ANC leadership. Now I don't understand that statement when you say he wanted to assassinate Nelson Mandela and this included certain members of the ANC as meaning that other members within the ANC camp wanted to assassinate Mandela, or that Hani wanted to assassinate Mandela and other members?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No, that in terms of Operation Vula President Mandela and other senior members of the ANC were targeted for elimination.

MR MPSHE: Could you mention their names?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I don't - I can give you a copy of the newspaper report ...(intervention)

MR MPSHE: Is it per hit-list that was handed in?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No it's per a newspaper report in the Rapport Newspaper which was talking about the exposé of a secret document which, I am not sure who had discovered it, I mean the details are in the clipping, but I believe it was either Military Intelligence or somebody like that had disclosed the details of this plot.

MR MPSHE: Now let's turn over to your application, that is Bundle A Mr Chairman, I am moving to page 17 thereof, page 17 paragraph 3 thereof under 9A(I).

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman.

MR MPSHE: I will quote it for you. You say -

&#9;&#9;"Although I proposed to delay the actual execution of the assassination of Chris Hani until I'd given it further thought, I, however, accepted an associate and myself would execute it on the day in question".

Now my question is how long did it take you to plan the execution?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: We targeted, as I testified Mr Chairman, we targeted the late Mr Hani in February and he was executed in April. So it's approximately two months.

MR MPSHE: It's approximately two months.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Correct.

MR MPSHE: Now if it had taken you so long, two months to plan the assassination why did you now decide to delay what you had planned for two months?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman, as I had testified previously it was still for me, in my very being, something which was very difficult to carry out although I had already made the decision. It wasn't easy.

MR MPSHE: Ja, I am interested in that which made it not easy for you, what are those things that motivated you to decide about the delay that made you not to accept it readily?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Well Mr Chairman, as I mentioned in my testimony I had had this dream which forebode, in fact in the process of the dream I saw myself being imprisoned, being cashiered as an officer and being imprisoned, and I thought that that had some sort-of connection to what we were planning to do.

MR MPSHE: And I want to believe, if I am right, that that particular dream made you realise that what you intend doing may be a wrong thing you want to do?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman ...(intervention)

MR MPSHE: And that caused the thought to delay, not so?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman even in war time it is not easy to kill somebody face-to-face.

CHAIRPERSON: The question is whether the dream caused you to delay the execution?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: The dream caused me to want to think about it further Mr Chairman, yes.

MR MPSHE: Right. Which means then it has cast doubt on your plans and on your targeting of Hani?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No Mr Chairman.

MR MPSHE: It didn't do that?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Not really, because as I said when I heard that it had been done, and I heard that it had been performed by Walus I fully associated myself with that, with he deed.

MR MPSHE: Can't we again further say that the delay was caused perhaps by your conscience not agreeing with your intentions?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No Mr Chairman, I just wanted time to further consider the whole aspect of assassination.

MR MPSHE: Despite the two months, the obtaining of a firearm from Venter, obtaining of the silencer, travelling with the firearm from Krugersdorp to Cape Town, you still were not satisfied whether what you were doing is to be done?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman I must repeat what I have already testified and that is that as far as the execution of the deed was concerned it was Walus' prerogative to decide the detail and when to do it.

MR MPSHE: Yes but Walus was in your hands, not so?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Not really Mr Chairman.

MR MPSHE: You provided him with the gun, you told him who the target was.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes.

MR MPSHE: And if you wanted to stop this you could have stopped - told him that wait a bit I still have to think about this.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: But I didn't do that Mr Chairman.

MR MPSHE: Despite the intention to ...(intervention)

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Despite my doubts I didn't do that. I ...(intervention)

MR MPSHE: I will tell you why you doubted, you doubted because you knew what you intended doing was not the right thing to be done.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No what I said Mr Chairman is that it wasn't an easy thing to do.

MS KHAMPEPE: Sorry Mr Mpshe, may I interpose. Mr Derby-Lewis, what I don't understand is why you didn't tell Mr Walus about the decision to delay?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Well as I testified Mr Chairman I was responsible for supplying him with subsonic ammunition and I wasn't able to obtain the subsonic ammunition, so that in itself served to delay, I believed, I was not aware of the fact that Mr Walus had a 9mm pistol. When I saw him with a pistol which he used to carry on his ankle it was a much smaller calibre pistol and I didn't know he had a 9mm until I actually read in the newspaper that he'd gone and purchased his own 9mm ammunition, using his own licensed weapon as the justification or the access to that ammunition.

MS KHAMPEPE: But I still do not understand why you simply did not tell him that you had decided to delay the decision to assassinate Mr Hani or that you were now ambivalent to proceed with the assassination.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No I wasn't really ambivalent Mr Chairman, I was just giving myself time to consider something which was not easy to perform. We had made the decision.

MS KHAMPEPE: Thank you Mr Mpshe.

MR MPSHE: Thank you. Let's turn to page 18.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman.

MR MPSHE: Line 12 of that long paragraph, line 12 starting with,

&#9;&#9;"We in the CP...."

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman.

MR MPSHE: &#9;"We in the CP had been committed to the non-violent option...."

then you write in capital letters.

&#9;&#9;&#9;"FOR AS LONG AS THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS REMAINED OPEN TO US".

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman.

MR MPSHE: &#9;"...and our chances of gaining power through the democratic process were growing by the day".

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That's correct Mr Chairman.

MR MPSHE: I fail to understand this, where you say,

&#9;&#9;"FOR AS LONG AS THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS REMAINED OPEN TO US".

I think at this time when you did the planning and the assassination, the democratic process was taking place, negotiations were taking place.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No Mr Chairman, not as far as the CP was concerned. The CP had already CODESA because CODESA was talking about sharing power and the CP is very clear in its attitude in that regard. The CP says if you share power you lose power. When I referred to the democratic process here Mr Chairman there is only one democratic process available to unseat an illegitimate regime and that is to vote them out at the polls, and when the National Party under Mr de Klerk stopped Parliamentary by-elections it was then clear that it was no longer possible to unseat them out of the parliamentary control because how would we ever get a majority in Parliament without by-elections.

MR MPSHE: Yes Mr Derby-Lewis but it doesn't mean that the CP was excluded from the whole negotiations, you could have still been in there and you were actually in there as a member of an opposition that was formed by the rightwingers, and you the CP withdrew.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman the CP is very clearly on record that they would not participate in CODESA because of what CODESA was all about. The CP also objected to the fact, Mr Chairman, that in spite of the fact that the National Party regime at the time knew that they were not acting on a mandate from the majority of the people who supposedly elected them to power proceeded with that, and I mean we have already repeated and we have tendered evidence to the effect that even Mr de Klerk himself admitted that he was not acting in terms of the mandate he received.

MR MPSHE: At that time was the CP not a party or a member to the Volksfront that was formed by Constand Viljoen when negotiations were taking place?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman General Constand Viljoen, with all due respect, only joined the rightwing action after the assassination of the late Mr Chris Hani. He wasn't involved before that.

MR MPSHE: I see. But I am going to refer you to AC1.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman.

MR MPSHE: On the basis of what you said that he joined in later you may answer my question differently, but I still want to refer you to it.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Please Mr Chairman.

MR MPSHE: Mr Chairman AC1 is given to Committee members, it is a one page thing which I gave the secretaries to give to Committee members. All parties do have a copy. It is an extract from the Vryheidsfront as delivered, as a submission by Constand Viljoen representing Vryheidsfront to the Truth Commission.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I assumed as much Mr Chairman.

MR MPSHE: On the 6th February 1997. And I want to refer you to paragraph C thereof and tell me if what he says there was applicable then to yourself, that is the CP.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Shall I read it Mr Chairman?

MR MPSHE: Yes.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: The paragraph C starts off as follows Mr Chairman- 

&#9;&#9;"The demands of the Volksfront were being fed into the political system. The Conservative Party decided to leave the multi-party talks out of protest of not being heard. This action of withdrawal from negotiations was unilateral by this party. It was not a Volksfront decision and the Directorate of Generals were not consulted.".

and it goes on to say - must I read the following paragraph as well?

MR MPSHE: No, no just the paragraph ...(intervention)

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I would actually like to read the following paragraph ...(intervention)

MR MPSHE: Okay do so.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Because I think it's important.

MR MPSHE: Do so.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: -

&#9;&#9;"As the negotiation process was part of the strategic thinking of the Directorate the decision was then taken between the Chairman of the Volksfront Raad, Dr Hartzenberg, and the Directorate to start a secret process of bilateral negotiations with the ANC. This led to a meeting between the Directorate of the Volksfront and Mr Mandela in August 1993".

I wish to remind the Committee Mr Chairman that the assassination of the late Mr Chris Hani took place on the 10th of April 1993 and the establishment of the Volksfront, as I have already testified, and this Directorate of Generals only took place after the assassination of the late Mr Chris Hani.

MR MPSHE: Yes Mr Derby-Lewis, be it as it may, the paragraph that you have read about secret negotiations is that not an indication that even before the assassination of Chris Hani there was still room for negotiations and that it was even done by your own leader, Hartzenberg?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman that was after the assassination of Mr Hani.

MR MPSHE: Yes, what I am saying is that this is an indication that even before that it still could have been done, it could be done even after the assassination. So there was still room open for a democratic process for the CP.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman, as I have testified the whole concept of the Volksfront and the Directorate of Generals was initiated as a result of what we expected the reaction would be after the assassination of the late Mr Chris Hani. So in fact this is testimony to - it actually confirms what we anticipated would happen, that there would be chaos, there would be a lot of uncertainty, there would be a gap, it would bring Afrikaner leaders together, which it did, the Generals and everyone came to this Volksfront and in fact they even went so far Mr Chairman as to elect a Volksraad which had representation like Mr Terreblanche and General Viljoen and Dr Hartzenberg and many others from the right serving as members of that Volksraad. But as I say this action, this total action here, secret talks, the Volksfront and so on, only - it followed only as a result of what had happened. At that stage there was no talk and I can assure you Mr Chairman there was no intention of the Conservative Party, to my knowledge, ever discussed in the caucus that we were entertaining the possibility of secret talks with the ANC.

JUDGE NGOEPE: Mr Derby-Lewis you are making a very sweeping statement to say that what the Directorate did was - their decision to go for example and see Mr Mandela was as a result of the killing of Mr Hani, it's a very sweeping statement.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No what I am saying Mr Chairman is that - I am not ...(intervention)

JUDGE NGOEPE: Sorry were you part of the Directorate?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No I am not saying that the secret discussions, the decision about the secret discussions was initiated by us. What I am saying is that the coming together of Afrikaner leaders which led then to the formation of the Volksfront, and which then led further to secret talks with the ANC, which was an indirect follow-up, the most important point that I am trying to make Mr Chairman is that the Volksfront, which was a coming-together of Afrikaner leaders, or leaders on the right, only took place after the assassination of Mr Hani, and I believe it was as a direct result of the assassination of Mr Hani.

JUDGE NGOEPE: What do you mean by saying, "only took place after the assassination", are you implying that it was as a result of the assassination?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I am saying it was one of the effects.

JUDGE NGOEPE: Or are you only referring to a sequence of events?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No I am actually saying it was, I see it as a direct result of the assassination.

JUDGE NGOEPE: But is - look at the first opening sentence there,

&#9;&#9;"As the negotiation process was part of the strategic thinking of the Directorate, a decision was then taken....."

etc, etc. That decision was as a result of the fact that, or the fact of strategic thinking flowing from the negotiation process, not flowing from the killing of Mr Hani.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That may be Mr Chairman, but the formation of the Directorate was as a result of the killing of Mr Hani.

JUDGE NGOEPE: Well is that in fact the case or is that you are thinking?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That is the factual situation Mr Chairman. There was no talk of this before the assassination of Mr Hani.

JUDGE NGOEPE: Was there no Directorate of - what do you call that - of Generals before the killing of Mr Hani?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No Mr Chairman.

JUDGE NGOEPE: Why do you say it was as a result of that?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Well Mr Chairman there is no other explanation for the formation of that Directorate. Because you see Mr Chairman when we finalised the whole mobilisation process the CP actually approached a retired General, General Bischoff to come in as the chief operator, to coordinate this mobilisation process, but he was the only general besides General Visser of the Police who was already a CP candidate and so on.

JUDGE NGOEPE: Mr Derby-Lewis we are entitled to know whether you are feeding us with your own opinion, which you are entitled to do, or you are giving us facts.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman I ...(intervention)

JUDGE NGOEPE: Is it your view that the Directorate was formed as a result of the killing of Hani?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman.

JUDGE NGOEPE: That is your personal view?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That is my personal view, yes.

JUDGE NGOEPE: Thank you.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I can - sorry Mr Chairman, I am prepared to bring evidence that it is a fact as well, besides being my view. I am sure Mr Chairman that newspaper reports will confirm that and even the minutes of meetings held by the CP will confirm that.

JUDGE NGOEPE: I take your point.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Okay.

MR MPSHE: Mr Derby-Lewis, page 22.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman.

MR MPSHE: First paragraph on the ...(intervention)

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman.

MR MPSHE: First paragraph from line no.5. I am not going to read this, you have said this many a times during your opening address and your evidence-in-chief that whatever you have done must be seen in the light of what the ANC and other liberation movements did.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman.

MR MPSHE: Now I read from what you are saying here a tone of revenge ...(intervention)

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No Mr ...(intervention)

MR MPSHE: That you did this because the ANC and other liberation movements did the same thing, so you also had to do the same thing by killing Hani.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No Mr Chairman that's not correct. What I was trying to do was to bring the whole act of the assassination of Mr Hani into its correct perspective. It was part of an existing war situation.

MR MPSHE: Is it not a justification by yourself as to why you did what you did?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No Mr Chairman, I don't see it as that. As I explained I am trying to bring it into perspective, the whole situation which reigned at the time, everyone was - because I know there was an outrage on the side of the supporters of Mr Hani for the deed, and I was just trying to point out that although I can understand the outrage there was also a lot of outrage over lots of deeds which occurred during the war situation.

MR MPSHE: Supposing I say to you, yes there was these disturbances, upheavals minus the killing of White women and children would you still justify the killing of Hani?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: It had nothing to do with the killing of White women and children specifically Mr Chairman, it was as a result of the war time climate which had been created, not only by the ANC but even by the National Party regime at the time.

MR MPSHE: Just turn to page 26.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman.

MR MPSHE: The first paragraph, line 3, I will read for you, or I will start from line 1.

&#9;&#9;"In the light of this the acts under review were committed on behalf of the Conservative Party".

Let us pause there a little bit. I know you've been questioned about this by my learned friend Advocate Bizos.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman.

MR MPSHE: As to the authority and the order by the Conservative Party, and you have said many a times that you were acting for and on behalf of the Conservative Party, but my question ...(intervention)

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Sorry, and in support of.

MR MPSHE: And in support of.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes.

MR MPSHE: Now my question to you is, was this a directive of any form from the top echelon of the CP?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No Mr Chairman, I have made that clear because Mr Chairman I was part of the top echelon of the CP.

MR MPSHE: You were part of the top echelon of the CP?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That's correct Mr Chairman.

MR MPSHE: But if I recall well you did not discuss this with other top echelons of this, of the CP?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That's correct Mr Chairman. But I didn't see that I had to discuss it with them or even get their approval. I was in the top echelon and a decision like this, in view of what had preceded the action, I could take on my own.

MR MPSHE: But really if you are acting on behalf of and in support of and you were part of the top echelon wasn't it really necessary that you discuss this with the - with your colleagues in that forum?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: As I testified Mr Chairman, I was concentrating on absolute confidentiality and security and Mr Walus and I had specifically decided that we would only involve the two of us, ourselves, only the two of us would know what was going on.

MR MPSHE: Are you saying this was the arrangement, the plan was confidential, you didn't want the other members of the CP to know about it?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That's correct, at that stage Mr Chairman.

MR MPSHE: Why?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Although I intended informing them afterwards having seen how the plan progressed.

MR MPSHE: What made you not to want them to know this, did you suspect that they may stop you and say don't do this or it is not in keeping with the political climate?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That was the furthest thought from my mind Mr Chairman. I was totally obsessed with confidentiality because I knew that we had been infiltrated and I didn't know who the infiltrators were. I had to be very careful, obviously in view of our decision to keep it confidential to the two of us.

MR MPSHE: Even from your very leader Hartzenberg?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Correct Mr Chairman, I couldn't - I had given Mr Walus the undertaking as well that it would be totally confidential and I couldn't break that undertaking either.

MR MPSHE: Do I have to accept that you do not even trust Hartzenberg?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman it's not a question of trusting Dr Hartzenberg, it was a question of total confidentiality. We had taken that decision as part of our discussion and I was not going to break that decision.

JUDGE WILSON: But if it was in the interests and on behalf of the CP why enter into total confidentiality with somebody who was not a member of the CP?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman the reason why I entered into confidentiality with Mr Walus was because the two of us were totally involved with it.

MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Derby-Lewis why would you not discuss this with your leader? Your leader at that time was Dr Treurnicht.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Correct Mr Chairman.

MS KHAMPEPE: Why didn't you discuss it with Dr Treurnicht? I think from the evidence that you have already led before us you have made it patently clear that you shared a very special relationship with your leader.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman.

MS KHAMPEPE: In fact as I read the document that you ended up handing up to the Committee I became very envious of the relationship that you shared with your leader.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Thank you Mr Chairman.

MS KHAMPEPE: And just to quote what you have said, you have stated that -

&#9;&#9;"Dr Treurnicht trusted me implicitly and I never gave him reason to regret this. I am not aware of any of my colleagues in the caucus enjoying a similar relationship with Dr Treurnicht, and subsequently also between his wife and mine".

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr....

MS KHAMPEPE: -

&#9;&#9;"We were more than colleagues and I was proud to have been able to consider him also to be a friend".

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That's correct Mr Chairman.

MS KHAMPEPE: Now why didn't you mention such an important decision that you were about to embark upon?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman as I testified ...(intervention)

JUDGE WILSON: Could you hear what was said there, because on my sound it was incredibly bad and someone was chipping in the whole time saying "not getting better, not getting better", could you hear Mr Derby-Lewis?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I heard, thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Chairman as I have previously testified I actually cleared he principle with Dr Treurnicht when I had the discussion regarding what is the duty of a Christian in terms of the struggle or the war against the Anti-Christ? I was always ever conscious Mr Chairman of not wanting to unnecessarily implicate anybody. I mean one always has to think in terms of the possibility that one will be arrested, that one will be caught because anything can happen, and as it turned out Mr Chairman it was a wise decision. But I could never have allowed myself to be put into the situation where I was cross-examined and then asked, "did you clear it with Dr Treurnicht?", and then I have to say "no" when in fact I did. But I cleared the principle very clearly of killing against the Anti-Christ Mr Chairman. In my mind I believed that that was sufficient.

MS KHAMPEPE: But I understand that you had cleared previously with your leader the principle of killing with regard to issues of Anti-Christ, but this is not the same principle, I think ...(intervention)

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No Mr Chairman ...(intervention)

MS KHAMPEPE: This involved the killing or the elimination of a leader of a political organisation.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman who was also the leader of the Communist Party which was the vehicle of the Anti-Christ.

MS KHAMPEPE: Well then if that is so Mr Derby-Lewis I want to understand you clearly, if you had previously cleared that principle what would have prevented you from going back to him, you had this special relationship, and simply seeking direction or confirmation of what you were about to embark upon?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: As I have explained with regards other people Mr Chairman, we took a decision that only the two of us would be implicated so that if anything went wrong it would only be the two of us who would be caught and there was no way that I was going to expose my leader, with the respect that I had for him, both as a friend and as a colleague, to that risk.

MR MPSHE: Then Mr Derby-Lewis I don't understand you again now if you say you wanted only the two of you to be implicated and you didn't want to implicate your leader, then it means that you wanted to take this happening to be your happening together with (...indistinct) and not to be the happening of the CP, because if you don't want to involve the leader of the CP you simply say you are keeping the CP out of the whole thing.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman I didn't want to involve the leader in the risk of the deeds for obvious reasons I think I have made clear now Mr Chairman.

MR MPSHE: Let us continue on page 26.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Okay Mr Chairman.

MR MPSHE: We stopped after the word "Conservative Party". I will continue.

&#9;&#9;"As the applicants believed these acts would bring about a change in the country's direction".

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Correct Mr Chairman.

MR MPSHE: How really Mr Derby-Lewis, did you envisage a change in the country's direction if you yourself stated it clearly that you wanted to cause confusion and mayhem, how did you envisage a direction within a mayhem?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No Mr Chairman, as I have stated here, we believed that these acts, in other words what we did would bring about a change in the country's direction. We were aware of the direction in which the country was moving, it was very clear to us and it was very clear to us that the National Party regime were already planning to abdicate power to the ANC/SACP alliance. That was very clear to us on the right although it seemed other people had difficulty identifying the threat. But that is why we did it Mr Chairman, to try and change the direction. And then it goes on further to say -

&#9;&#9;"A direction continually lambasted by the Conservative Party".

So if I wasn't acting on behalf of the Conservative Party Mr Chairman when they were criticising at every opportunity that direction, and if I wasn't acting in support of the Conservative Party then I fail to see what the whole purpose of the thing was.

MR MPSHE: But the actual person who, if I may use the word "angered" the right, as De Klerk at that time, as you referred to him, sometime in your evidence-in-chief that "he betrayed your nation" and he did things that he was not mandated to do, was he not supposed to have been the actual target in order to direct the country's - to change the country's direction?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman ...(intervention)

MR MPSHE: As the person who was causing all this.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman as I testified earlier, can anyone imagine a reaction which was generated by the late Mr Chris Hani's assassination coming in reaction to the assassination of Mr de Klerk? I wonder if it would even have reached the newspapers Mr Chairman, with respect.

MR MPSHE: If my understanding of what you are saying is correct, you are saying to us, to this Committee, that Chris Hani was a more important target than de Klerk who was the then President causing all the changes?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman I repeat, Mr de Klerk was not worth the (...indistinct), he was not worth the (...indistinct), whereas Mr Hani was the key, he was the ideal target. There wasn't a better target as a result of his involvement.

JUDGE WILSON: Can I clarify this, was the purpose of saying or of choosing Mr Hani, who held these very high offices and was in high regard as a target to provoke the ANC and the SACP into retaliation...(intervention)

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No Mr Chairman ...(intervention)

JUDGE WILSON: To provoke them into stopping negotiations?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Sorry, what we were trying to do was to provoke a general situation of conflict and chaos in the country and we knew that the only direction from which this chaos would be initiated would be from the radicals whose support we knew was totally behind the late Mr Chris Hani.

JUDGE WILSON: Well isn't that just what I put to you, you were seeking to provoke ...(intervention)

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That's correct.

JUDGE WILSON: ...chaos and mayhem from that section of the community.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Correct Mr Chairman, I didn't understand the question in the.....

JUDGE WILSON: And if there had been a certain amount of disturbance after Mr Hani's death, but it had not been the chaos and mayhem that you wanted would you have then continued with further assassinations?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: As I testified earlier Mr Chairman that was the plan. If it didn't have the desired effect then we would have to find another target and that's why I repudiated that address list as a hit list because there were some ridiculous people on there who would never, ever have been considered in terms of a target which would us to achieve our ends.

JUDGE WILSON: Yes but there are one or two people who would have made very good targets and the others may well have been there, as has been suggested, to cover up the fact that this was a hit list.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman I have testified previously that I had nothing to do with the preparation of that list. I had nothing to do with the final nine names that appeared on that list.

CHAIRPERSON: But I thought that it was part of your plan that some names, some innocuous names should be on the list?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That's not correct Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: What was the idea then?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman that was one of the stories that I fed the interrogators during the interrogation.

CHAIRPERSON: I beg your pardon.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: To mislead them, as I testified.

CHAIRPERSON: I see, but that was not the intention, this is what you told your interrogators?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman I have testified here that I had nothing to do with drawing up that list so how could I have done that?

MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Derby-Lewis.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Ma'am.

MS KHAMPEPE: Just to make a follow-up on what you stated as having been one of your objectives for assassinating Mr Hani, and that is to plunge the country in a political chaos, now I want to know what exactly, what kind of chaos did you envisage would take place with Mr Hani's assassination?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Well Mr Chairman we anticipated that there would be a certain degree of unrest and we were hoping that before it escalated to too enormous proportions that the action would generate the coming together of Afrikaner leaders and that they would come in to fill the vacuum. As I testified also, I didn't anticipate being arrested and I was going to go back at a suitable time to my leaders, to the caucus in fact, not my leaders, to the caucus, my colleagues which I shared membership in the caucus, to motivate them to do something, but I had to give it a bit of time to see whether the action had the desired effect.

JUDGE WILSON: As I understand it, and correct me here, what you hoped was that once there was unrest and chaos the military and police would feel they had to take action. If they were not being given a strong lead by the Nationalist Party, which you didn't think they would get, there would be an opening there for the rightwing to step in, to combine with the army, combine with the police to bring about peace and sound government, is that what you were aiming at?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That is quite correct Mr Chairman, and we considered that there were large elements within the generals ranks and the senior ranks, the brigadiers and the colonels of both the SAP and the Defence Force who would have rallied rather to our side than to the side of the de Klerk regime.

CHAIRPERSON: So it now seems that there was a colossal miscalculation on your part?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: As it turned out Mr Chairman, as a result of the events of Bophutatswana, that was the time when it started going wrong, but up until then it was apparently quite an accurate calculation Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Well now leaving aside whatever happened in Bophutatswana I can't see it being directly connected with the killing of Hani.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman that followed as a result of a uniting of the people on the right.

CHAIRPERSON: No I am talking about the chaos. I am saying that this was a colossal miscalculation on your part in that the chaos did not result.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No Mr Chairman chaos did result.

CHAIRPERSON: Was there?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman, there full of reports, in R3 it contains numerous references thereto.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes I understand, but is that what you really thought was chaos which would entitle, or which would afford your party or your group an opportunity to step in and take control?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Certainly Mr Chairman, yes. As I testified earlier we weren't looking for massive deaths, numerous deaths and what have you, we were looking for a climate of uncertainty ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: But then you had a climate of uncertainty in this country for quite a long time.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes, but not the sort of climate which could motivate people into coming together and taking armed action Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you not think that people within the ANC, the leadership of the ANC would go out of their way to ensure that the negotiation process is not derailed as a result of the killing of Hani?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No Mr Chairman we did not. We actually thought that they would react and would almost give tacit support to the radicals who were causing the chaos.

CHAIRPERSON: And is that where your miscalculation came about?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That's where it came about Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: The ANC stepped in and made sure that their appeal to the people to maintain calm is something which you didn't expect?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That's correct Mr Chairman, and that coupled to the fact that I was arrested so quickly and then unable to motivate my caucus colleagues was where the plan went awry as far as I was concerned.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Derby-Lewis I have some difficulty in accepting what you are putting forward. Is it not correct that your miscalculation really was the fact that Walus was arrested so shortly after the offence was committed? ...(intervention)

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That was also, sorry ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Was that not the real miscalculation?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That was also part of it Mr Chairman, I should have said perhaps the arrest of both he and I was not anticipated.

CHAIRPERSON: Because if he had not been arrested it is more than likely that you saw that there wasn't the chaos you expected and therefore you would then proceed to the next person on the list.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Not on that list Mr Chairman, but we would sit back and we would reconsider the situation and decide who would be the next target.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. It would more likely be a target of people whose houses had already been reconnoitred by Walus?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Sorry Mr Chairman?

CHAIRPERSON: It would probably be, the target would probably be persons whose houses had already been reconnoitred by Walus?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman I was not aware of Mr Walus reconnoitring any residence other than Mr Hani's.

CHAIRPERSON: Are there names on this list that you think would have been the next persons to be attacked?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No Mr Chairman. As I mentioned we would have to get the radical element mobilised.

CHAIRPERSON: Wouldn't Joe Slovo, the killing of Joe Slovo be another act of attacking the Anti-Christ?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes but I don't believe it would have had the desired effect Mr Chairman and it wasn't targeting the Anti-Christ that was the whole crux of the issue.

CHAIRPERSON: No I mean the killing of Hani did not produce the kind of chaos, and of course Walus was arrested, had he not been arrested then it may well have been that the next person on the list would have been Joe Slovo?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No Mr Chairman because he wouldn't qualify in terms of what we anticipated as the desired effect. We couldn't see people rising up to avenge the death of the late Mr Joe Slovo.

JUDGE WILSON: Wouldn't Mr Mandela have been the obvious target, the man who had stepped forward to preserve the peace, the man who had managed to quieten down his people, wasn't he the obvious person for you to remove?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No Mr Chairman on the contrary because of that he wasn't ...(intervention)

JUDGE WILSON: But he had prevented you achieving what you wanted to.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: But our information Mr Chairman was that it was the radical elements within the ANC/SACP alliance who were opposing Mr Mandela. So for us to assassinate Mr Mandela would actually have been right in their kraal, as the Afrikaner says.

JUDGE WILSON: Why, they would then have been able to indulge in the violence they wanted to?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: But they would have, at the same time, Mr Chairman, been rid of the man of peace?

JUDGE WILSON: Yes.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: And then ...(intervention)

JUDGE WILSON: And that's what you have told us you wanted. You have told, as I understand you, that you wanted chaos and mayhem so the generals, the colonels would rally around to your support to prevent it.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman I am saying that we did not consider Mr Mandela as a target at that stage, but it's quite possible that with our discussions it may have turned out that Mr Mandela would then be a suitable target. But at that stage we only had one target in mind, and as I testified, Mr Hani.

JUDGE WILSON: No my friend Judge Mall was asking you what would have happened after this, if Mr Walus had not been arrested, that you would have then selected other targets and he's asking you who they would be.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes well let me then say Mr Chairman it is possible that Mr Mandela could have been a target as a result of our further discussions, but at that stage he was not a target.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mpshe have you finished?

MR MPSHE: I've still got ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: You carry on.

MR MPSHE: Thank you. Mr Derby-Lewis you agreed yesterday when you were told that you were referred to as a racist, do you remember that?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman.

MR MPSHE: And certainly if people refer to you as a racist it means it is because of certain acts or behaviour on your part that you are labelled a racist, not so?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman I see a racist as somebody who hates other people and I have never been found guilty or even proven to be hateful towards other people.

MR MPSHE: Yes but what I am saying is in order to be labelled a racist it means certain events had taken place, were made to take place by yourself to earn yourself the word racist, that's what I am saying.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman what my reply to that is, is that that aspect is the interpretation of people in the media, it is not necessarily the truth. I will give you one example Mr Chairman. To accuse me of making a racist statement by saying that African people are not as technologically as advanced as Western people I don't see that as a racist statement, I see that as a statement of fact, and I think we just have to look around us to receive confirmation of that Mr Chairman. But I think the problem, my problem was, as far as the media was concerned Mr Chairman, was that I didn't try and duck and dive when it came to identifying the existing and real differences amongst the various peoples and I didn't criticise the differences Mr Chairman. What I did was I went further even and I complemented for example a difference, and I saw as a difference between Western man and African man the fact that African man had a far greater loyalty and a love and a concern about his whole family structure as did Western man and I admired that Mr Chairman in the African people's.

MR MPSHE: Mr Derby-Lewis if you could just respond to my questioning then we'll have a lot of progress. My statement to you was simply if you are labelled a racist or whatever it is because of your track record, yes or no?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: And I said Mr Chairman it is as a result of the perception of my track record by the media.

MR MPSHE: Alright. Let us see if you can explain some of the perceptions then that you mention ...(intervention)

MR DERBY-LEWIS: To what document are you referring? ...(intervention)

MR MPSHE: ...by the media. I am going to refer you. Bundle R3, Section B page 6 thereof.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Page 6.

MR MPSHE: R3 Mr Chairman and members of the Committee.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Page 6 Mr Chairman?

MR MPSHE: Yes. It reads " A contentious person with a long list of racist remarks behind him", page 6, Section B.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman let me state that I have Section R3 and on my documentation here I've made a note that that statement was actually not included in this bundle when it was handed to us, so I don't know the contents.

MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Mpshe we don't have a page 6 in our bundle.

JUDGE WILSON: I have (...indistinct) 6.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That's confirmation of what I've just said Mr Chairman.

MR MPSHE: In my bundle Mr Chairman, members of the Committee, given to us by George Bizos' team and they have it ...(intervention)

JUDGE WILSON: I have not got it in my papers, I have got a blank page where 6 ought to be.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman may I state further that actually it's not only no.6 that's missing, it's no.5, no.6 and no.7 which I do not have and I am sure that applies to the bundle of the Committee as well. You've got 5?

JUDGE WILSON: We've got 5 but not 7.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Sorry, sorry I have got 5 but I haven't got 6 and 7 and the same applies to the Committee. For some reason they've been excluded from our bundles.

MR MPSHE: Mr Chairman I want to make use of this page, may I hand this page to the Chair and copies will be made thereof.

CHAIRPERSON: They become page no.6?

MR MPSHE: The page no.6 I am told the Committee members don't have page no.6.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes we don't have them, but do carry on.

JUDGE WILSON: But nor does the witness Mr Mpshe.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No I don't have it either Mr Chairman so I can't react on it.

MR MPSHE: Mr Chairman with indulgence can I cause copies to be made quickly?

CHAIRPERSON: Read it to Mr Derby-Lewis unless it's a very lengthy document.

MR MPSHE: Mr Chairman it is lengthy.

CHAIRPERSON: Well let's have copies made then.

MR MPSHE: Copies will be made. I will move to the next question, I will revert when the copies are provided.

&#9;Mr Derby-Lewis I want you to have a look at Bundle C from page 933. Bundle C consists of photos.

CHAIRPERSON: Is it Bundle C of R3?

MR MPSHE: Bundle C of the AC Mr Chairman, thank you. Mr Chairman it consists of photos from page 933.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR MPSHE: At page 933 I want to have a look ...(intervention)

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I haven't got that yet Mr Chairman, if I can just be granted an opportunity to obtain the document, it's apparently the court record Mr Chairman.

JUDGE WILSON: It's volume 12 of the court records.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes.

JUDGE WILSON: I think this is the third.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes. Thank you Mr Chairman. Bundle C I have a copy of Bundle C before me Mr Chairman.

MR MPSHE: Page 933.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Page 933, yes Mr Chairman.

MR MPSHE: Mr Chairman and members of the Committee the showing of these pictures is not intended to provoke any emotions but just to lead him to what I want to ask Mr Chairman.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I accept that Mr Chairman.

MR MPSHE: Thank you. I want you to have a look at photos on page 933 up till 936, just look at them.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman I have examined them, 933 to 936.

MR MPSHE: Thank you. Mr Derby-Lewis you testified the other time that you compiled your own application, am I correct?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes, before I had legal representation, that's correct Mr Chairman.

MR MPSHE: And that would mean that the questions were asked on the application you understood what they were actually seeking to achieve from yourself?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: To the best of my knowledge, yes Mr Chairman.

MR MPSHE: Good. And further that you had to have insight into our enabling Act, that is the Promotion of National Unity Act?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman.

MR MPSHE: You looked at that one as well?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes.

MR MPSHE: And you are acquainted with the provisions thereof?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman.

MR MPSHE: I am going to refer you particularly to Section 20 of the Act. I will read it for convenience. Section 20 subsection 3 paragraph F thereof. It is one of the guidelines. It is the last of the guidelines.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman.

MR MPSHE: I will read it for convenience.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes.

MR MPSHE: &#9;"Where the particular act, omission or offence contemplated in Subsection 2 is an act associated with a political objective shall be decided with reference to the following criteria:"

and then I am quoting that criteria, F.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman.

MR MPSHE: &#9;"The relationship between the act, omission or offence and the political objective pursued and in particular the directness and proximity of the relationship and the proportionality of the act, omission or offence with the objective pursued".

We stop there.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman.

MR MPSHE: Having seen the photos in Bundle C would you regard yourself to have satisfied the provisions of paragraph F?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman I believe that if there was one act that qualifies in terms of that section it was the assassination of Mr Chris Hani.

MR MPSHE: What about the proportionality thereof?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Exactly that Mr Chairman.

MR MPSHE: The manner in which it was being done.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No Mr Chairman I don't ...(intervention)

JUDGE WILSON: That is not the proportionality test here, he was shot Mr Mpshe. The fact that the photographs you have referred to are singularly gory does not make it other than a shooting does it?

MR MPSHE: Yes Mr Chairman it does not make it anything other than the shooting but it makes it a shooting that was done in a brutal manner, that is the point I am trying to make.

JUDGE WILSON: Why do you say it was done in a brutal manner as compared with other shootings? Are not all shootings brutal, whether you shoot a man in the head or the body which happens in almost all killings?

MR MPSHE: Mr Chairman that may be so and I take the point.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Thank you Mr Chairman.

MR MPSHE: Mr Derby-Lewis, Mr Chairman and members of the Committee we now have copies of R3.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman if I may with respect say this is a copy which has been reduced in size from the original thing and it's very difficult to read. I am 61 years of age, as you see I wear glasses and it's really difficult to read this. I think other members may also have that problem. I don't know why it was reduced.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mpshe there is just no doubt that some of us will find it very, very difficult, the print is very small.

MR MPSHE: Yes Mr Chairman I am aware thereof, perhaps I will refer to it by means of question and check whether ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Yes please put your questions ...(intervention)

MR MPSHE: ....the witness will recall what is contained therein.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman I have no objection to that I just pray your indulgence if I take a bit of time to read this before I reply to the questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Well let's listen to the question first it may not be necessary to read it.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Certainly Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Thank you.

MR MPSHE: Do you recall an instance wherein you were being reprimanded because you had said it was a pity that a Black man was not run down on the runway at the airport by the Zimbabwe lines, do you recall that?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I am aware of that report Mr Chairman, yes.

MR MPSHE: Do you recall further that you were referred to as the racist by a magistrate who actually said that you qualify to the meaning of a racist in the dictionary?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: You mean a National Party Cabinet Minister's statement Mr Chairman?

MR MPSHE: A magistrate, a Landros.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: A magistrate, yes I am aware of that Mr Chairman.

MR MPSHE: Yes.

JUDGE WILSON: That appears quite clearly and in large print on B5, the page before the one you have referred to, R3, B5 there's a great deal of comment on this airport incident as there is in B4. We don't have to look at this tiny print.

MR MPSHE: Yes, Mr Chairman unfortunately I didn't look into B5 I went directly to this one but I will try to make use of what I have here by way of questions. I just ask for indulgence to read so that I could quote to him.

JUDGE WILSON: I think if you look Mr Mpshe the whole, almost all the B sections relates to this airport incident.

MR MPSHE: Yes Mr Chairman that may be so but page 6 I am referring to is not only the airport incident it is the airport incident, the incident where the magistrate made that remark and other incidents quoted wherein Mr Derby-Lewis has been quoted as a racist.

&#9;Mr Chairman it may be difficult to go through this type of print but Derby-Lewis has already agreed to two questions that I have put to him and the intention is to endorse him being a - the fact that he's been referred to as a racist and I will continue with my questioning.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman if I may just interrupt and say that I am at this stage confirming what you have stated in your question, but I expect to have an opportunity at the end of your question to motivate why this happened. And so if we can just take these instances slowly because there is a perfectly understandable explanation for each one of these so-called racist statements.

MR MPSHE: Mr Chairman with a bit of indulgence and it means we must go to each and every one of them because it is more than two in this article.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman ...(intervention)

MR MPSHE: There are more than two Mr Chairman, I will have to read them one-by-one.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Sorry Mr Chairman. If one studies this whole question of "what a pity", under B, "racist remarks made by Clive Derby-Lewis", it must be apparent to the Committee that the first five statements all refer to exactly the same incident and are not five separate incidents. 

&#9;As far as this other document is concerned, with the small print, it refers to other statements and I have perfectly legitimate explanations regarding these instances. For example Mr Chairman it is true that a magistrate declared me a racist at a trial, but it is also true that when the Appeal Court to which I went to get the decision reversed and they granted me absolution, the Court actually in their judgment stated that there was nothing in the testimony offered to support the magistrate's remarks. So I mean how can I accept Mr Chairman that I am a racist on the basis of a Broederbond magistrate, who served in the same Broederbond organisation as my opponent in Krugersdorp and who were in cahoots together to discredit me in the eyes of the electorate of the Krugersdorp constituency. &#9;And Mr Chairman this is supported by a publication which the National Party issued in 1989 as a result of manipulating of the date of the hearing to make the date of the hearing coincide with just before the September '89 elections and in their propaganda document, issued by the National Party regime and my opponent that was the whole crux, "Magistrate declares Clive a racist", and that cost me votes Mr Chairman and it was a blatant lie as far as the detail was concerned. So Mr Chairman I must be given an opportunity to defend myself against these allegations. It's not a simple matter of, is that statement on this - I think it is here, but it's not correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Right. Mr Mpshe are you going to traverse the ground that Mr Bizos already raised in cross-examination on the issue of whether Mr Derby-Lewis is a racist or not, or are you raising fresh material?

MR MPSHE: Mr Chairman I am raising fresh material.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes please do. Carry on.

MR MPSHE: Mr Chairman I will just refer to the other three incidents in the article. I will read for convenience, they are not so long and pause to get a comment from Mr Derby-Lewis for convenience of Committee members and those who can't read.

&#9;I will read Mr Derby-Lewis ...(intervention)

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Sorry Mr Chairman, can I just get this correct. The first incident was the airport and the second was the magistrate?

MR MPSHE: That's it.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Thank you Mr Chairman.

MR MPSHE: The third, the fourth and the fifth are coming.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Right, thank you Mr Chairman.

MR MPSHE: This is paragraph 7, I am just counting the paragraphs but I will read.

&#9;&#9;"He, in the course of the court case inter alia testified that he has spoken to at least 50 radical Blacks and his practical experience is that a few of them can repair a toilet".

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Now Mr Chairman I would like to respond to that immediately. That statement is not correct as it stands in this newspaper. What I acknowledged during the court case, because the magistrate wanted to know whether I ever communicated with Blacks, and in the process of the cross-examination I stated to him yes I had. In act I had spoken to more than 50 radical Blacks. And I can tell you Mr Chairman that I was speaking to people in the UDF when nobody else wanted anything to do with them including the National Party, because I was trying to find opportunities to put the CP's policy of separate development to as many people as possible. But Mr Chairman the context in which the 50 radicals and the toilet episode was concerned is totally out of context in terms of this report.

MR MPSHE: You have been misquoted?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I have been, definitely. And I haven't been misquoted, this is not a quote of mine Mr Chairman, this is a report by a journalist stating what he says I said.

MR MPSHE: Alright, let us continue.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Thank you Mr Chairman.

MR MPSHE: &#9;"He also testified that there are cultural differences between Whites and Blacks and that it is a fact that Blacks like to make babies".

Is it not a racist remark again?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman let me repeat what has been read. I also, and I am going to say it in English,

&#9;&#9;"He also testified that there are cultural differences between Blacks and Whites".

is that racist? Or that's not the part you are talking about?

MR MPSHE: No.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: You are talking about the further part. And it is a fact that Black people like to have babies. Mr Chairman is that not a fact? Mr Chairman with respect I don't see anything wrong with that fact. In fact I would like to have many more babies.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Derby-Lewis admits that he makes that statement, but disagrees with you that it was a racist remark. 

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Correct.

MR MPSHE: Thank you Mr Chairman.

JUDGE NGOEPE: Well why didn't you add and say so yourself and say I too want to make children? The sting would have been taken out of the sentence.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman we weren't talking about that, we were talking about my relationship with Blacks and I said earlier in that testimony that I admired the cultural difference of Blacks, between Blacks and Whites in that they were more family oriented ...(intervention)

JUDGE NGOEPE: Mr Derby-Lewis don't pretend that you don't see the sting in this thing. The sting in this thing, the suggestion in this is that as compared to Whites Blacks want to make babies ...(intervention)

MR DERBY-LEWIS: But Mr Chairman ...(intervention)

JUDGE NGOEPE: Now you are coming with a statement to try and introduce some ambiguity in this sentence.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman the point I am trying to make is that to use the word "om babas te maak" as my quotation why didn't they put my full quotation in?

JUDGE NGOEPE: That is not what I am asking you about.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No Mr Chairman you are saying Mr Chairman that this has a sting in it and I am saying that using that small portion of what I said may quite correctly, as you say, have a sting in it ...(intervention)

JUDGE NGOEPE: Yes.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: But Mr Chairman to understand in what context that was said it must have the full sentence ...(intervention)

JUDGE NGOEPE: No we understand the context, we understand the context, you actually compare, you say there are differences between Whites and Blacks and then at the end thereof, in the context thereof, you say Blacks want to have babies.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No Mr Chairman that's the point I am making, that second statement was not in the context of the first statement. It was probably even days apart, because I want to tell you Mr Chairman I sued Mr Wessels ...(intervention)

JUDGE NGOEPE: Well that is not what you said to the question, you only bring that up when I tell you that you are introducing something, try to introduce some ambiguity in the sentence.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No Mr Chairman I am trying to refute this whole allegation that I am a racist with the use of selective quotations.

JUDGE NGOEPE: Well that's a strange way of refuting evidence.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman it's not there in the context in which it was said and I must mention to this Committee that in spite of the fact that I was the person who brought a damages claim against Mr Wessels, Mr Wessels had three teams of advocates present at the trial and they were allowed by the magistrate to cross-examine me for four days and before even allowing my advocate then to call witnesses in my defence Mr Chairman the magistrate stopped the case and he said "I find Derby-Lewis is a racist" and that's that.

MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Derby-Lewis I must say I fail to understand what you are explaining. May I try and understand what you want to say to us.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Please Mr Chairman.

MS KHAMPEPE: In what context did you allude to the fact that Blacks like to have babies?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I don't remember Mr Chairman but it wasn't in the context of the cultural difference.

MS KHAMPEPE: If Mr Mpshe put his interpretation to what you stated therein how can you refute it if you can't remember in what context ...(intervention)

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman in a case like this where it is quite obvious that they are not quoting my full sentence I expected the understanding of the Committee in terms of that this would be used out of the context in which I stated it. I don't remember the details, as I said, I was under cross-examination for four days in a case which I initiated. And in fairness I think that if the Committee wants to carry on with this then I must be given the opportunity to go back, to take the testimony which was offered in court and to produce the whole statement I made before I can be judged a racist on a portion of what I said. That is my point Mr Chairman, with respect.

JUDGE NGOEPE: Well I did not hear you, I did not understand you as saying that you deny having said that.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: What I am saying Mr Chairman is it's out of context ...(intervention)

JUDGE NGOEPE: You are saying - you said the words were uttered in a context that you are today not able to remember.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That is correct Mr Chairman. But it's with - Mr Chairman I am not a racist, I do not hate Black people, I don't hate yellow people, I don't hate Greeks, I don't anybody, but I am very proud of the fact Mr Chairman that I am an Afrikaner and I love my people.

JUDGE NGOEPE: Yes we hear you thank you.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Thank you Mr Chairman.

MR MPSHE: The final question Mr Derby-Lewis then we will conclude. I will read again.

&#9;&#9;"Mr Derby-Lewis testified to the effect that in August 1986 he had said in an interview with a magazine that he would leave the country should a Black government come to rule South Africa, because Black people are paid more than they need to survive".

MR DERBY-LEWIS: With respect Mr Chairman it must be patently obvious that that whole statement is out of context with what I said. Nobody would make a statement in that context, certainly not I Mr Chairman. And I once again request that if this is accepted as the truth Mr Chairman that I then be permitted to obtain the court record of the evidence and then be allowed to submit that at a later date to the Committee, if it is considered as evidence that I am a racist because I deny that categorically.

MR MPSHE: Mr Derby-Lewis in conclusion then I want to put it to you that you killed Chris Hani not for the reasons that you have stated to this Committee but you killed him because you saw this Black man who has the potential of a leader and who is going to take up government. That is all Mr Chairman.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman I have already testified why Mr Hani was targeted and that is my testimony.

MR MPSHE: That concludes my questioning Mr Chairman. Thank you Mr Chairman.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MPSHE

ADV POTGIETER: Mr Derby-Lewis just to try and complete this catalogue of references to your apparent attitude. In volume R4, page 82, have you got that?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Volume R4.

ADV POTGIETER: Page 82. It purports to be a profile sketch, it's a document in Afrikaans.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman I have it.

ADV POTGIETER: And this is a typed version of a handwritten document and this particular paragraph that I want to refer you to on page 82 is paragraph 3.7, that purports to be a typed version of paragraph 3.7 on page 75 of the handwritten document.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman.

ADV POTGIETER: Have you got that?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Well I haven't got the handwritten document.

ADV POTGIETER: Won't you just page back to ...(intervention)

MR DERBY-LEWIS: This was not my handwritten document.

ADV POTGIETER: I assume that, yes.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Thank you.

ADV POTGIETER: Yes, I just want to ask you about the content of that paragraph.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Of 3,7?

ADV POTGIETER: Yes. If you go to 75 you will see that 75 is the handwritten version of 3.7 on 82.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes.

ADV POTGIETER: And in 3.7 on 82 there are some words which are left out and there seem to be some typographical errors which one can actually pick up from the handwritten version. But in effect what this says it purports to refer to the Sunday Star of the 18th of April 1993 and it seems to be a paraphrasing of what apparently appeared in that newspaper. And it say that, referring to yourself, 

&#9;&#9;"Was in 1987 elected as a CP member of Parliament...."

and then the word should be "verkondig", there's a typing error there,

&#9;&#9;"..... and announced that Blacks should be kicked out of White universities and that Black persons would not become landowners under a CP government".

The word left out where the "XX" indicate is CP Government. Have you got that?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I have Mr Chairman.

ADV POTGIETER: Have you got any comment on that one?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman, may I first as a follow-up of what I requested after Mr Mpshe came with various statements, may I just draw the Committee's attention to the "What a pity" statement. And I want to draw specifically the attention of the Committee to a statement which I made in Parliament regarding the whole incident. Because as a result of the possible misinterpretation of what had been said and whether what had been said as a result of the National Party regime's political antics Mr Chairman, I requested the opportunity to present a statement of clarification and it reads as follows:

&#9;&#9;"Commandant C J Derby-Lewis. Mr Chairman...."

Oh no this was my original speech, sorry I won't - I will read the reference to my actual, where I made the statement in the speech and it will be clear that what I said after "What a pity" was drowned out by hysterical interjections on the part of the National Party regime and other people.

ADV POTGIETER: Has this got to do with this paragraph 3.7?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No it has to do with the whole concept of racism Mr Chairman ...(intervention)

ADV POTGIETER: Oh it's something else, okay.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I actually asked the Chairman to grant me the indulgence of explaining each of them because ...(intervention)

ADV POTGIETER: And you'll come back to 3.7?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I'll come back certainly ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Can't you just deal with 3.7 please because we might just get - go off on a tangent again, just answer the question here please.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman may I then have your permission to answer the question and then explain the "What a pity" statement?

CHAIRPERSON: Well let's first see the answer.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Thank you Mr Chairman. As I say Mr Chairman this is a report in the Sunday Star which I don't have, I don't have the full report but if I look at this then what I am doing here is categorically stating Conservative Party policy, not my own personal opinion. Because it was Conservative Party policy that, because of the cultural differences that people should be educated within their cultural context, and I think Mr Chairman that will also be confirmed if one looks at the whole aspect of the different universities. There was the University of Venda, there was the University of KwaZulu, the University of Fort Hare and so on, they were all in a cultural context. And what we were saying here, what is being said here is that it is CP policy that Whites go to a White university, that Vendas go to a Venda University, that Zulus go to a Zulu University and so on. 

&#9;Then the next question Mr Chairman, it is quite clear also from CP policy, and remember Mr Chairman when I announced CP policy whilst I support it it's not my personal sentiment. I think I make that clear. It says further that,

&#9;&#9;"Blacks will not become landowners in South Africa under a Conservative Party government".

That is Conservative Party policy Mr Chairman in terms of the citizenship regulations which will be enforced when a Conservative Party government rules its country, when it is the government of the country, and that's the policy. So as I say I haven't seen the statement but I was quoting official Conservative Party policy and nothing else.

&#9;Then Mr Chairman to go back to the "What a pity". I am just trying to find the reference to that Mr Chairman. Here is my explanation Mr Chairman and I will submit this document. It's on page 2040 of the Parliamentary Hansard dated Friday the 3rd of March 1989. That was the first opportunity that I could obtain to present a personal explanation to the House. It starts off, the Chairman of the House of Assembly, 

&#9;&#9;"Order! Order! The Honourable member Commandant Derby-Lewis asked me to give him an opportunity to make a personal explanation. I shall now do so. (interjections)"

already the hysteria was there once again.

&#9;&#9;"Order! says the Chairman of the House. It is the custom when an honourable member makes a personal explanation he shall be heard in silence".

And this is my explanation Mr Chairman.

&#9;&#9;"Mr Chairman I wish to tender a personal explanation regarding my speech yesterday when I used the words 'What a pity'. An insinuation has been made that my words implied..."

implied, because I didn't say it,

&#9;&#9;"... my words implied that I wanted the person concerned to be run over. That was not my intention at all. I refer Honourable members to my speech where I quoted an answer from the honourable the Minister..."

that's the Minister of Transport, Mr Eli Louw, the one who made the statement also about my being a racist, from the honourable minister which I quoted in full Mr Chairman.

&#9;&#9;"In the honourable the Minister's answer reference was made to a Black man who gained unauthorised access to the runway at Jan Smuts Airport. Immediately after the honourable the Minister's quote I said, 'What a pity'...."

and you will notice on my original speech that it was (interjections).

&#9;&#9;"...In using the words 'What a pity' I actually expressed my shock...."

and that is what I was trying to explain,

&#9;&#9;"....that such an incident could have taken place at an international airport like Jan Smuts".

&#9;And I think you will agree with me Mr Chairman that for something like that to happen, and the ramifications that could have happened if that aircraft had, for some reason, gone out of control as a result of the collision and the passengers had been killed, an Air Zimbabwe aircraft in the racist apartheid South African territory it would have caused an international incident of which we aren't able even to speculate over the ramifications of that. That was the basis Mr Chairman.

ADV POTGIETER: Mr Derby-Lewis whilst I am busy can I just try and clarify some other issues that I am not quite sure about.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Certainly Mr Chairman.

JUDGE NGOEPE: Sorry, sorry, can I interrupt my colleague here just to sum up this question. Perhaps in all fairness to the witness Mr Mpshe when you read that newspaper you stopped at a certain point but in all fairness to the witness perhaps you should also have read further on to say that,

&#9;&#9;"He also testified that he was not a racist but he was racialist, that's quoted. He said a racist hated people of other race groups whereas he quotes then 'racialist is only proud of his own people'".

I just thought that in fairness to the witness perhaps that portion, you stopped immediately before that portion and I think it is only fair that that should also be put in.

MR MPSHE: I take your point.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Thank you Mr Chairman, I wasn't aware of that because as I said it's difficult to read the document. Thank you.

ADV POTGIETER: Can I just deal with this Mr Derby-Lewis. You and Mr Walus started discussing what you viewed as the deteriorating situation in about September of 1992 is that correct?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No Mr Chairman, no, we had discussions over the deteriorating situation in South Africa from 1989 already.

ADV POTGIETER: Was there any change in the nature of your discussions around September 1992?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman, because after that the referendum, that fraudulent exercise in futility had been held and it was then obvious to us that Mr de Klerk and his regime were acting totally dishonestly in terms of political approach.

ADV POTGIETER: That was about the time when you decided that you have to take some action?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No Mr Chairman it was when everyone was discussing what action to take.

ADV POTGIETER: Yes I am just talking about yourself and Mr Walus.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No I said that we actually decided in the latter part of 1992 what action to take.

ADV POTGIETER: Right, then I understand you.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Thank you Mr Chairman.

ADV POTGIETER: Now you were discussing with Mr Walus as a friend, correct?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman.

ADV POTGIETER: A like-minded person in terms of politics ...(intervention)

MR DERBY-LEWIS: A supporter, a supporter yes Mr Chairman, ja.

ADV POTGIETER: And in about February of 1993 between the two of you you jointly identified Mr Hani as the person to be assassinated is that correct?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No I didn't say that Mr Chairman. I said I identified Mr Hani as the target for assassination after his statement regarding the regaining the weaponry and arms and what have you which belonged to the ANC in Angola, and I couldn't - and I also mentioned I couldn't connect up this man of peace with a man wanting all of this weaponry in South Africa and for what purpose would he want it.

ADV POTGIETER: Yes, well be that as it may.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes.

ADV POTGIETER: At some stage in February, if I understood your evidence correctly and perhaps you can correct me if I am wrong, in February of 1993 you and Mr Walus jointly agreed on that assassination?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman.

ADV POTGIETER: You were still talking as friends, not so?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: As colleagues, as co-supporters, ja, in every aspect, yes.

ADV POTGIETER: And you were talking privately between the two of you?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That's correct Mr Chairman. At all times our discussions were privately between the two of us when we discussed matters which involved our personal approach. We had numerous, I had many discussions with many people from various organisations who used to come to my house and talk about what they thought should be done.

ADV POTGIETER: Yes. And then Mr Walus volunteered to execute your joint decision?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That's correct Mr Chairman.

ADV POTGIETER: He was not under any pressure to do that, not so?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Well I mean no Mr Chairman, certainly not.

ADV POTGIETER: He volunteered.

ADV POTGIETER: Yes. The insinuation that I paid him to do it also is devoid from the truth.

ADV POTGIETER: In fact you said in answer to a question from Advocate Mpshe that you didn't really have any control over Mr Walus.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: In terms of the execution that's correct Mr Chairman.

ADV POTGIETER: And of course ...(intervention)

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Once we had decided on that target the execution was his.

ADV POTGIETER: And of course Mr Walus was not acting under an instruction, he had volunteered to execute a joint plan which the two of you as friends had decided upon.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I would think that he would even see it as an instruction because of my position in the Conservative Party Mr Chairman.

ADV POTGIETER: But why, why, why would he see that as an instruction, you are friends why would he see anything in the context of that discussion as an instruction?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Because Mr Chairman, besides being friends he was aware of my position within the party ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: I can't understand that you know, why should he be looking upon you for instructions when you have just said that he volunteered to do it of his own?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Well Mr Chairman he volunteered yes after we had decided on a target.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: But I mean it was quite clear that once he volunteered that I was going to hold him to it. He was acting under my command if I can put it that way rather than acting under instructions.

CHAIRPERSON: No that's not what he meant you see. When you are going to hold him to it means you are going to insist on seeing that he carries out what he had volunteered to do.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

ADV POTGIETER: Now when you decided jointly did you also decide that the execution is going to be by means of shooting?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No Mr Chairman at that stage we hadn't discussed any of the detail, that was only at a subsequent discussion in March some time.

ADV POTGIETER: So you didn't discuss the means of executing your agreement?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No Mr Chairman. No he obviously had to go and think about what he was going to do now and I believe he recced the Hani residence and then we started getting down to the finer detail.

ADV POTGIETER: But what did you have in mind and how was he going to effect the assassination, what means?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I don't know Mr Chairman I think that that is a question that perhaps the Committee can put to Mr Walus himself.

ADV POTGIETER: No, no, no, no ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: I thought it was abundantly clear that you and he discussed that a weapon would be used, he asked you for a weapon and you undertook to give it to him?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That was in March Mr Chairman, not in February.

ADV POTGIETER: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Do carry on.

ADV POTGIETER: But apart from that we will ask Mr Walus, hopefully he can explain, but I am asking you now, in your mind how did you think this assassination was going to be effected?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I didn't have an idea of really what he was going to do. He may have decided to do what was attempted with me Mr Chairman where somebody attempted to put plastic explosive on the front wheel of my motor car. That would have assassinated me just as quickly as a bullet. I think it would have blown me into pieces. So I mean, as I say that was his responsibility to decide in terms of the execution of the deed.

ADV POTGIETER: Very well. Now all this in February, are you with me?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Thank you Mr Chairman.

ADV POTGIETER: All this in February was prior to your discussion with Mr Faan Venter in regard to the firearm, correct?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No I said the firearm was not in February Mr Chairman.

ADV POTGIETER: Yes the firearm was subsequent.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes. And that was subsequent to my discussion with Mr Venter.

ADV POTGIETER: Yes.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes.

ADV POTGIETER: No, no, no, no, no, you misunderstand me, listen very carefully. In February you and Mr Walus had agreed, we know that now. As I understand it in March, that is subsequent to your agreement you had this discussion with Mr Venter in regard to the firearm?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes that's correct.

ADV POTGIETER: So in other words when you spoke with Mr Venter you knew that Mr Hani was going to be assassinated is that correct?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That's correct Mr Chairman, yes.

ADV POTGIETER: And you then requested a firearm from Mr Venter?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: But Mr Chairman I didn't know I was going to see Mr Venter in March.

ADV POTGIETER: Yes, be that as it may, you did then request a firearm from Mr Venter?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes as part of the accumulation of weaponry and for personal defence as I have already testified.

ADV POTGIETER: Why was it necessary for that firearm to be untraceable?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman from my own personal point of view and I've already testified to that extent that it had to be untraceable so that if the government decided to withdraw weapons they wouldn't know about that.

ADV POTGIETER: So that was the only reason?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That's correct Mr Chairman.

ADV POTGIETER: Do you have a silencer for any one - well you said you had one other licensed firearm, a revolver?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman.

ADV POTGIETER: Do you have a silencer for that?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No Mr Chairman it is not possible to fit a silencer to a revolving chamber because the whole objective of the silencer is to stop the sound, and with a revolving chamber the sound emanates from the chamber itself and not from the barrel.

ADV POTGIETER: One other thing the list that was referred to as the "gravy train list".

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman.

ADV POTGIETER: When did that come into the picture between yourself and Mr Walus?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: In February Mr Chairman.

ADV POTGIETER: In February.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That's correct.

ADV POTGIETER: That's before you got the firearm?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That's correct. There was no question of a firearm at that stage Mr Chairman. And I mean I knew Mr Walus had his own firearm.

ADV POTGIETER: Did you present the list to Mr Walus?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I did, Mr Chairman, yes, correct.

ADV POTGIETER: And you also explained to us that there was some grading done on that list in terms of enmity towards the right or towards the CP ...(intervention)

MR DERBY-LEWIS: The degree of opposition towards our call, correct Mr Chairman.

ADV POTGIETER: Why was it necessary to do that on that list?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Well Mr Chairman obviously we were looking at a target. We had decided on Hani. We decided then to list the whole lot in terms of priority so that we would have a code number which we could use to discuss the target to avoid our wives and girlfriends becoming aware of what we were planning, for security reasons.

ADV POTGIETER: So if you wanted to discuss anybody on the list you would simply refer to the number of that person?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That's correct Mr Chairman.

ADV POTGIETER: In the context of assassination?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That's correct Mr Chairman.

ADV POTGIETER: And if I understood you correctly there were no, on that list, there were no names which were to act as a decoy, as a sort of a - superfluous names?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman as I testified I had nothing to do with ...(intervention)

ADV POTGIETER: You had nothing to do with that?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That's correct Mr Chairman.

ADV POTGIETER: Thank you very much.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: This might be a convenient stage to take the adjournment. We will adjourn for 15 minutes.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

ON RESUMPTION

CLIVE DERBY-LEWIS: (sworn states)

JUDGE NGOEPE: Mr Derby-Lewis if you could refer to that document AC1 which was given to you this morning.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: If I can just have a moment to locate it again Mr Chairman.

JUDGE NGOEPE: The one-page document.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes, AC1. Thank you Mr Chairman I have it in front of me, yes.

JUDGE NGOEPE: I left this point hanging with you because at the time I was really interrupting Mr Mpshe's questioning.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman.

JUDGE NGOEPE: I understand your evidence to be that the Conservative Party had already pulled out of negotiations at the time of the killing of Mr Hani?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No I didn't say that Mr Chairman, I said that the Conservative Party had rejected CODESA.

JUDGE NGOEPE: Ja they were not part of it.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That's correct Mr Chairman.

JUDGE NGOEPE: And you said that the Directorate of Generals was formed after the killing of Chris Hani?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That's correct Mr Chairman.

JUDGE NGOEPE: This would not be in accord with what appears in paragraph C of AC1. Paragraph C reads, 

&#9;&#9;"The demands of the Volksfront were being fed into the political system, the Conservative Party decided to leave the multi-party...." etc etc

&#9;&#9;"...this action of withdrawal from negotiations was unilateral by this party, it was not a Volksfront decision an the Directorate of Generals were not consulted".

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman.

JUDGE NGOEPE: This implies that a the time when the Conservative Party left the multi-party talks the Directorate of Generals was already in existence.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman, but I think I must clarify what I said. I said the Conservative Party was not in CODESA. I believe the multi-party talks they are referring to here were in terms of what they referred to as the Multi-party Forum which I mentioned in my statement which was functioning at the time of the late Chris Hani's death and of which the CP was part. There was CODESA and the Multi-party Forum. CODESA the CP rejected and this is talking about when the CP left the Multi-party Forum which I believe was some time in July of 1993 Mr Chairman, and that's what they are referring to here.

JUDGE NGOEPE: I see.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That it was a unilateral CP decision, it wasn't a decision of the Directorate.

JUDGE NGOEPE: I see. Alright, we will leave it at that point. You must understand I am just jumping around because I am just picking up points on which I need some clarity.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I understand.

JUDGE NGOEPE: The person to whom you gave that note which you wanted to be smuggled out of prison.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman.

JUDGE NGOEPE: Yesterday you were asked as to who that person was.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman.

JUDGE NGOEPE: And you said that you could not remember that person.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That's correct Mr Chairman.

JUDGE NGOEPE: Today are you still not able to remember it?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I am not able to remember it Mr Chairman, and I can tell you Mr Chairman that when my wife brought me the envelope she didn't know where it came from either and she actually asked me during this visit where does this come from and she showed me the envelope and I took it out and that was in the envelope. And then I explained to her the circumstances. But I have no idea who took it out and I don't know how it got to my wife either because it wasn't supposed to get to her.

JUDGE NGOEPE: To your knowledge it never landed into the hands of the police?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: To the best of my knowledge, yes Mr Chairman.

JUDGE NGOEPE: This is in implicating document isn't it?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes I would say it is Mr Chairman, yes.

JUDGE NGOEPE: It must have been somebody you trusted?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Probably yes, I agree with that Mr Chairman, yes it must have been someone I trusted.

JUDGE NGOEPE: Well it's more than just probable. I mean if you didn't trust that person you would not have given that person the document.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Sometimes Mr Chairman when one is in a difficult situation one has to take risks.

JUDGE NGOEPE: I would have thought you would have been cautious especially if the document was implicating you, if you are implicating yourself.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman if I look at the date on the document it could possibly have been my legal representative, and that could also be the reason why it never got out to the media because they then read it and saw the contents and said this is dynamite, we will hold onto it.

JUDGE NGOEPE: Are you saying that if you had in fact given that document to your legal representatives you would not have been in a position to can so remember?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman I am saying that because remember I was under Section 29 Mr Chairman.

JUDGE NGOEPE: Yes I know that ...(intervention)

MR DERBY-LEWIS: And I was very concerned about things and I've actually forgotten in fact that I'd even drawn that up. If you look at the handwriting on that document also Mr Chairman you will see that that's not my normal handwriting.

JUDGE NGOEPE: What do you remember about this person? What is it that you remember about this person?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No when you asked the question now you have generated a thought process Mr Chairman ...(intervention)

JUDGE NGOEPE: Yes.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Which leads me to believe that it could only have been my legal representative, particularly in terms of the question of trust and so on. And as I said that could also explain why it didn't get to the source, but I couldn't remember at the time who I had given it to. And even when my wife asked me in prison I couldn't remember.

JUDGE NGOEPE: Well yesterday you could not even remember whether it could have been your legal representative.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That's correct Mr Chairman. You triggered off a reaction Mr Chairman when you said obviously it must have been someone you trusted and then I looked at the date and worked it out in terms of my initial detention in terms of Section 29 and the 30th of April was 10 days, roughly speaking, after that. And that was the time when they would consult with me regarding the application to oppose the Security Branch's application to detain me for a further ten days. I can't - Mr Chairman I think you can understand it's four and a half years ago I can't expect, I can't be expected to remember everything.

JUDGE NGOEPE: Thank you. Now you told us that you thought that from even among the ranks of members of the police force and the defence force some of them might come onto your side and take advantage of the situation.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Correct Mr Chairman, I said that. That was my perception.

JUDGE NGOEPE: Had there been some kind of plan with them or some other people?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No, no Mr Chairman I can't say that.

CHAIRPERSON: When you prepared - or when that document of mobilisation was prepared, were generals and top-ranking policemen not taken into account?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Only General Bischoff in his capacity as a paid employee of the Party was present Mr Chairman.

JUDGE NGOEPE: Now they wouldn't have known who would have killed Mr Hani would they?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: They wouldn't have known?

JUDGE NGOEPE: No.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No Mr Chairman, not at that stage.

JUDGE NGOEPE: Now on what basis would you just expect that in the absence of any previous planning with yourselves and other people, members of the police, the defence force would just get themselves in that kind of situation?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No Mr Chairman I stated that they weren't aware of who had killed Mr Hani at the time. I don't believe that statement is correct and I shouldn't have answered you in the affirmative. I think everyone knew who was involved with the assassination of the late Chris Hani when the generals, the Directorate of Generals was initiated.

JUDGE NGOEPE: No, no....

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Sorry is that - sorry I am misunderstanding the ...(intervention)

JUDGE NGOEPE: At the time of the murder.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes.

JUDGE NGOEPE: Or in fact in terms of your plan, you did not plan to go public as to who the murderers would be?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No, except I was going to go back to the caucus and tell them and then generate their support.

JUDGE NGOEPE: Only after the killing would you go to the caucus?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Correct, because I would have to first see Mr Chairman whether the planned objective was achieved.

JUDGE NGOEPE: And they could have rejected your suggestion?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: They could have Mr Chairman, but I don't believe that would have been very likely.

JUDGE NGOEPE: In which case the killing would have been in vain, particularly with regard to the objective that you sought to achieve?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: In the unlikely event of them rejecting me, yes Mr Chairman.

JUDGE NGOEPE: Well to me this looks like this killing was just in vain. Nothing had been arranged in advance to make sure that things would fall into plan after the killing.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman my assessment of the situation in the country which prevailed at that time was taken into consideration when it was planned and I believed that it would have a natural result, a natural sequence of events without even having to precipitate it.

JUDGE NGOEPE: Yes, but taking away the life of the kind of person that have described was it just enough to rely on your personal assessment? Didn't you have to make sure that things are planned so that you know the plan should materialise?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman, as I mentioned there was nothing personal in the assassination of the late Mr Chris Hani, but my assessment and I can assure you Mr Chairman that I gave this matter a lot of thought and I had many informal non-committal discussions with many, many people across a very broad spectrum and obviously Mr Chairman I took a calculated risk because I had no idea of really knowing whether what our objective was would have been achieved. But I had to take that calculated risk and as it turned out it was the correct decision. It had the desired effect.

JUDGE NGOEPE: Well the police and the generals didn't join you did they?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: You mean talking about the people in the permanent army, no. But Mr Chairman that what did happen was a whole sequence of events, the Afrikaner Volksfront was formed, the Directorate of Generals was formed, why Mr Chairman would they form a Directorate of Generals if they weren't intending something? If the reports which I followed in the media are correct even General Viljoen, whom I believe has also applied for amnesty, made some very strong statements after that to the farmers, mobilising them to joint the struggle.

JUDGE NGOEPE: You may have to be careful not to impute certain things to other people.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I mentioned, when I mentioned it Mr Chairman that I am going according to reports which I read in the press.

JUDGE NGOEPE: And in the mayhem how would you have been able to keep, as you said, casualties to a minimum?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Well Mr Chairman obviously the quicker one gets the take-over accomplished and completed, and I believed that if the Generals saw that there was a determined effort by the united rightwing leaders to really cooperate together in terms of taking over control of the country I believe the generals would have come forward. They were just waiting for a lead from the politicians.

JUDGE NGOEPE: And there was no plan in advance?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: In terms of the generals, no Sir.

JUDGE NGOEPE: In terms of your plan as well.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No Sir.

JUDGE NGOEPE: Now the letter which - I am talking about something else now, the letter which your wife wrote in which she said you had not been given the chance at a meeting which I believe was going to talk about or debate about the question of referendum.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman.

JUDGE NGOEPE: Well on the face of it does it not express a complaint?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No Mr Chairman in fact it expresses to me confirmation of what I believed and that is that there had been so much tension within the Conservative Party as a result of the decision to participate in the referendum and there had been a lot of dissenting opinions expressed from the floor including one expressed by my wife, that I think that the late Dr Treurnicht wanted to end that debate, and although I wasn't standing up to talk in connection with the referendum decision I had actually been asked by Dr Pieter Mulder to present his Information Committee report to the Congress, because I was also a member of that Information Committee and Dr Pieter Mulder was not able to be present. He thought, when I wanted to present that report I wanted to, after he had already made a decision to close the debate on the referendum participation that I wanted to overrule that and I think he was a bit irritated and I can understand his irritation Mr Chairman.

JUDGE NGOEPE: I don't have a copy of that letter because I don't intend to ask you questions about it, but my recollection is that it opens by saying that Clive had not been given the chance ...(intervention)

MR DERBY-LEWIS: ...to present your information report.

JUDGE NGOEPE: And you say that's not an expression of complaint?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: It's certainly an expression of refusal to let me speak Mr Chairman, but in view of the circumstances it's not an expression of rebuttal or rejection of me.

JUDGE NGOEPE: The other thing is the statement, the speech which was made by I believe Dr Treurnicht in Krugersdorp.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman.

JUDGE NGOEPE: In that hall, Skilpad's Saal?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No it wasn't in a hall Mr Chairman, it was at the Paardekraal Monument itself.

JUDGE NGOEPE: Whatever yes.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes.

JUDGE NGOEPE: Do you have a copy thereof?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Of the speech?

JUDGE NGOEPE: Yes.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman. In fact I intend making it available to the Committee, we just haven't had time to photocopy it because it's a large number of pages and in view of the timeframe which we had to prepare for today we were not able to ...(intervention)

JUDGE NGOEPE: I see. Are you having it at hand now?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I have, yes Mr Chairman, yes. I will actually make it available to the Committee ...(intervention)

JUDGE NGOEPE: Ja, can you just read the opening sentence thereof.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I have it here Mr Chairman. The opening sentence ...(intervention)

MR PRINSLOO: It's the original Mr Chairman.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Sorry it's the original in Dr Treurnicht's handwriting with a little message on the top corner, "With Compliments - A P Treurnicht" and his personal signature. Now you wish me to read the first page Mr Chairman, or just the first statement?

JUDGE NGOEPE: No, no, I think the opening sentence, I tried to catch up with you when you read it but I couldn't, you said something like,

&#9;&#9;"The time had come...."

or something like it.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No Mr Chairman the opening statement reads as follows:

&#9;&#9;"Today, I emphasise today, we are saying to each other...."

...(intervention)

JUDGE NGOEPE: Sorry I don't want to take you through that. If you are not able to get that sentence which says, 

&#9;&#9;"The time has come...."

we can leave it.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No I can get it Mr Chairman but it's within the body of the speech, it wasn't the opening statement.

JUDGE NGOEPE: Yes, yes, where may it be?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Is this the statement that you are referring to Mr Chairman, quote -

&#9;&#9;"I stand here, God help me, I cannot do otherwise".

is that the statement Mr Chairman?

JUDGE NGOEPE: No that sentence says, "Die tyd het amper gekom". I think it was referring to ...(intervention)

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes, yes okay, now I know exactly Mr Chairman. Just give me an opportunity to find it because I was actually quoting broadly from the speech because I was actually quoting from a newspaper report referring to this I believe when I made that statement. It was in fact out of the newspaper report, not out of the speech I believe Mr Chairman and it reads as follows:

&#9;&#9;"Alfred Milner could not break the back of the Afrikaner and today the Afrikaner is again standing at Paardekraal and once again there are powers and organisations who are planning to help ripen the time for the Afrikaner and other nations to cry out that they cannot do otherwise but to take up the struggle".

Is that the statement Mr Chairman?

JUDGE NGOEPE: That is the statement but it doesn't get to the portion which I was referring to, but it doesn't matter you will make a copy for us later on.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I can read the last paragraph because I think that that may be get to it.

&#9;&#9;"Dr Treurnicht concluded his speech by reading a message from the Women's Monument in which the freedom of a nation is lauded and where an undertaking is given that 'the struggle which our fathers had started will continue until we either win or die'".

But Mr Chairman I intend presenting the whole speech ...(intervention)

JUDGE NGOEPE: Yes, yes please do that.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Because the whole speech actually presents a complete, in my opinion, theological, philosophical, political motivation for what has happened.

JUDGE NGOEPE: Ja please.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Thank you Mr Chairman.

JUDGE NGOEPE: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: I'd like to take you back to something else. When did you cease being a member of the President's Council?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: On the 30th of June 1993 Mr Chairman. But I believe that my membership of the Council was actually, in terms of some arrangement made by Parliament, it actually on ended on the 31st of December 1993 when I was in prison.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. And can you remember when last you attended a meeting of the President's Council?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman it was the - I came home from a session of the President's Council on the weekend before the 6th of April.

CHAIRPERSON: And had you been attending meetings of the President's Council regularly?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Am I to understand that at some stage you had come to the conclusion that your people were at war with your enemies in South Africa?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That's correct Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: And at that time you were still a member of the President's Council ...(intervention)

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That is correct Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Attending its meetings.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That is correct Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: And did you declare this war in the President's Council, did you notify the people in the President's Council that your people are at war and have declared war?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No I didn't Mr Chairman. In fact I think it was a given that the country was at war, but the climate of war was permeating through our whole society.

CHAIRPERSON: No I wasn't thinking about the country at war because there were all kinds of people in the country, different factions ...(intervention)

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: .... in conflict. I am more concerned about your position.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes correct Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. So you continued to be a member of the President's Council taking part in all its decisions when you had already in your mind declared war?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman I cannot remember supporting a single President's Council decision that was made while I was a member, and the reason why I was on the President's Council is because I had been appointed to the President's Council by the Conservative Party and there was no way that I could leave the President's Council.

CHAIRPERSON: No, my question was that in your heart and mind you had already declared war and yet you continued to be in the President's Council?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That's correct Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Now wasn't that an anomalous position, unless you didn't think of this as a war at all?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: It could be seen as an anomalous position Mr Chairman, yes, but I think I explained why I was there.

CHAIRPERSON: You were already planning with Walus that the time had come when it may be necessary to assassinate at least Hani and all that was taking place whilst you were serving in the President's Council?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That is correct Mr Chairman. But the mobilisation process also Mr Chairman was continuing while I was serving in the President's Council.

CHAIRPERSON: Ja, I was talking about your particular role, that document, the mobilisation, that document wasn't prepared by you was it?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No Mr Chairman. 

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. I am really concerned with your position.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: But I was part of the mobilisation.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. 

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Appointed by the Conservative Party as part of it.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes the mobilisation plan is something which might happen if certain events took place, but here you were having firmly come to the conclusion that you'd identified the person that you are going to kill and all that was taking place and you continued to be a member of the President's Council.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: For one session of two weeks Mr Chairman, yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. No one session means the attending of the meetings, but you continued to be a member of the President's Council.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman after I was arrested I was not repudiated by the President's Council and was entitled to membership, yes.

CHAIRPERSON: You know I am not concerned so much about the President's Council repudiating you, I am just trying to wonder how you can reconcile yourself being present in the President's Council when secretly in your mind you had already taken certain very, very crucial decisions about assassinating an important public figure.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman you questioned my continuous membership of the President's Council after I had been arrested and I can assure you that in the situation I was in the last thing I thought about was my membership of the President's Council.

CHAIRPERSON: No I am not talking about your membership after you were arrested. I am concerned with your presence in the President's Council when secretly you had already made up your mind and were planning the execution of Hani.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That was, I explained, Mr Chairman a two week period, yes.

MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Derby-Lewis.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Ma'am.

MS KHAMPEPE: I just want to clear one thing with you. In your evidence you have testified that the reason why you ruled out the execution of the assassination of Mr Hani during that Easter weekend was because there would be people in the neighbourhood who would be sitting in their gardens.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Correct Mr Chairman, and there would be a lot of movement around, yes.

MS KHAMPEPE: And I would presume that that would have increased Mr Walus' chances of being detected also by people in the vicinity?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Certain Mr Chairman, and it also would increase his chances of involving innocent people.

MS KHAMPEPE: Now at that time had you taken a firm decision about where the assassination was going to take place of Mr Hani?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No Mr Chairman.

MS KHAMPEPE: Then why did you have to cancel the execution of the assassination on the basis of the fact that there would be people in the vicinity of where Mr Hani was staying?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I am sorry Mr Chairman but when we planned on the assassination as I explained that the rest of the assassination plan would be executed by Mr Walus.

MS KHAMPEPE: Yes. And I wanted to make sure if he was - because he was recce'ing his home, he told me, I wanted to make sure that if he planned to perform the assassination at his home, that it wouldn't happen on an Easter weekend because of the possibility that there would be lots of people there.

MS KHAMPEPE: But had Mr Walus by that time told you that he would be carrying out the assassination next to his home?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No Mr Chairman, that was his decision.

MS KHAMPEPE: You are obviously aware that there is a general trend amongst South Africans, particularly those staying in Gauteng, to go on holiday during any Easter weekend, you are aware of that general trend?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman I am aware of the fact that many people do go on holiday but I am also aware of the fact that probably more than those many stay at home.

MS KHAMPEPE: But many people would have left on holiday.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I have no doubt about that Mr Chairman, yes.

MS KHAMPEPE: Now when you initially planned the assassination you had not given any specific instructions on when the execution would be done on Mr Hani?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No except that I indicated that I would prefer it not to take place on the Easter weekend.

MS KHAMPEPE: No I mean ...(intervention)

MR DERBY-LEWIS: ...in the week of Easter.

MS KHAMPEPE: From your evidence you only indicated that after April, but when you initially selected Mr Hani as a target, which was late in February.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes.

MS KHAMPEPE: And you - Mr Walus volunteered to execute the assassination, there had been no indication about when the actual execution would take place.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That is correct Mr Chairman.

MS KHAMPEPE: In fact you had left those details to Mr Walus.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That is correct Mr Chairman.

MS KHAMPEPE: Now that would therefore imply that the execution could have been carried out at any day.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No Mr Chairman because when I gave him the weapon on the 6th of April that was when I indicated that I didn't know when he planned, he also wasn't sure when he was going to do it. He told me that he was going to wait for a suitable opportunity and then I indicated.

MS KHAMPEPE: I don't think we are on the same wavelength Mr Derby-Lewis.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Sorry Mr Chairman. 

MS KHAMPEPE: The way I understand your evidence, and probably you will correct me if I have not understood you properly, you planned the execution, you selected the target and that was about late February 1993?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Correct.

MS KHAMPEPE: At that stage you gave instructions to Mr Walus to execute, you, however, intimated that the work had to be carried out sensibly.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Correct. I also Mr Chairman, must mention that I was in discussions with him when he spoke about how he was going to disguise himself and how he was going to disguise the motor vehicle when he carried out recces and I assume with the assassination as well. So we had general discussions surrounding how it was going to be done.

MS KHAMPEPE: Yes, but at that stage you didn't know how Mr Walus was going to execute the assassination.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: On the 6th of April?

MS KHAMPEPE: No before the 6th of April when you selected Mr Hani as a target.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Correct Mr Chairman. 

MS KHAMPEPE: And if Mr Walus had in fact proceeded to carry out the instruction between February and before the 6th of April you would have assassinated Mr Hani by whatever weapon, because according to your evidence he only requested the weapon around April.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Right.

MS KHAMPEPE: But before then you had hoped that he would use his own devices to execute the assassination?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That's correct.

MS KHAMPEPE: That's the ambit of my enquiry.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman.

MS KHAMPEPE: Now that being so why was it necessary for you to bring out, to rule out the execution during the weekend of, during that Easter weekend?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Because as I explained Mr Chairman, when I came back from Cape Town I had this unlicensed firearm to which I had had a silencer fitted. We had already then decided that he was going to use a weapon and when I gave him the weapon when he came to see me on the 6th of April I expressed that reservation.

MS KHAMPEPE: Didn't something happen Mr Derby-Lewis that triggered you to give instructions with regard to when the assassination had to be carried out after the 6th of April?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I don't know what the Committee is referring to Mr Chairman, unless it's to do with my dream that I had, and I had these problems about ending up in prison.

MS KHAMPEPE: At that stage had you had your dreams?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman.

MS KHAMPEPE: Well that would explain then because that has been a source of puzzlement with me.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Right Mr Chairman, thank you.

MS KHAMPEPE: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Re-examination?

RE-EXAMINATION BY MR PRINSLOO: Mr Derby-Lewis I want to refer you to Bundle E, the list that appears on that bundle and I want to refer you to a document, I want to refer you to R4, a continuation of R4, it's page 420 which is the statement of one of the State witnesses, Arthur Kemp, that testified during the trial.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Right Mr Chairman, thank you I have page 420.

MR BIZOS: Mr Chairman before the evidence is read out I just wish to place on record that although we admit that that is the evidence given we are not to be understood that we accept that what Mr Kemp said to the Judge President and the learned assessors in the trial is the truth. I thought I would put that on record.

CHAIRPERSON: We understand. You carry on Mr Prinsloo.

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Chairman for the record what is now being referred to is a statement of the witness and not his evidence in court, that's his statement, written statement.

MR BIZOS: The clarification of our attitude goes for the statement as well Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes do carry on.

MR PRINSLOO: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Derby-Lewis in the statement of Mr Arthur Kemp, paragraph 4 thereof.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman.

MR PRINSLOO: &#9;"Mr Slovo's, I found an article, it appeared in the Star newspaper of the 16th of June 1991 in which Mr Slovo's house ... " 

....(intervention)(Speaker's microphone not on)

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Sorry can you just repeat that.

MR PRINSLOO: May I quote it again. 

&#9;&#9;"Mr Slovo's, I found an article which appeared in the Star newspaper of 16 June 1991 in which Mr Slovo's house was described. This was a description I annexed to the drawing of a list gave to Mr Derby-Lewis".

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That's correct Mr Chairman.

MR PRINSLOO: If we can turn to page 422, I beg your pardon, 421 Mr Chairman, and if you look on the right side of that page, have you got that Mr Derby-Lewis, Mr Chairman?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes, right Mr Chairman.

MR PRINSLOO: If you look towards approximately 15 lines for the top of that particular write-up ...(intervention)

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman I have it.

MR PRINSLOO: Where it starts, "He and his wife Helen...." would you read that to the Committee please?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Certainly Mr Chairman, it reads as follows:

&#9;&#9;"He and his wife, Helen, have now moved to 'a medium-sized tin-roofed home in nearby Observatory which is not overlooked by any other buildings'".

is that the ...(intervention)

MR PRINSLOO: And then will you turn to, on the right side of that same particular write-up, if you look towards the, it's almost towards the middle ...(intervention)

MR DERBY-LEWIS: The Sunday Star starting with ...(intervention)

MR PRINSLOO: The same write-up, yes.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman.

MR PRINSLOO: Where it starts with the "back area".

MR DERBY-LEWIS:&#9;"The back area has a - and double garage are protected by heavy-duty bars".

Mine has been cut off Mr Chairman so it's not complete, but I think that's the gist of it.

MR PRINSLOO: Now if you compare that particular write-up in the newspaper of the Star with Bundle E, the description given on the list, the so-called hit list where it's in inverted commas, will you read that particular passage to the Committee please.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Certainly Mr Chairman. On Bundle B page 1A.2, quote:

&#9;&#9;"He lives on an Observatory/Yeoville border in 'a medium-sized tin-roofed three-bedroomed, study, small kitchen, sitting and dining rooms, an old garden with huge trees and no access from the front. The back area faces onto the road and has heavy duty metal bars covering all open areas. There is also a double garage facing onto the road'".

MR PRINSLOO: Now Mr Derby-Lewis if you compare what is described in the newspaper, the Star and the list is there any difference?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Well Mr Chairman I didn't read out the information preceding the business about the back and the area with the double garage. The preceding sentence says,

&#9;&#9;"The Sunday Star had an exclusive tour of a new home which in particular needs a coat of paint. It has three bedrooms and a study, a small kitchen, sitting and dining rooms and an old garden with huge trees and no access from the front".

It's the exact same details Mr Chairman as contained on this address list.

MR PRINSLOO: Now Mr Derby-Lewis from the same set of documents presented to the Committee by Mr Bizos' team for the family, same statement of Mr Arthur Kemp, paragraph 5, page 420, have you got that?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman.

MR PRINSLOO: Now here Mr Kemp refers to Mr Mandela's file, an article which appeared in the Citizen newspaper on the 9th of May 1992 in which a description and photograph of Mr Mandela's house appeared. 

&#9;&#9;"This is the picture and description I used in drawing up the lists I gave to Mr Derby-Lewis"

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That's correct Mr Chairman.

MR PRINSLOO: Over the page, which you referred to earlier of the Star.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Page 422?

MR PRINSLOO: That's correct.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Correct Mr Chairman.

MR PRINSLOO: Now will you please refer to that page Mr Derby-Lewis.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I have that page Mr Chairman, yes.

MR PRINSLOO: The write-up is Mandela's house in Houghton.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That is correct Mr Chairman.

MR PRINSLOO: Is this the same page which was referred to by Mr Kemp with regard to the description appearing on the list?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I believe so Mr Chairman, yes.

MR PRINSLOO: Will you please read the relevant portion to the Committee Mr Derby-Lewis?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman it's on the first column of the report Mandela's house in Houghton and it commences with,

&#9;&#9;"A high brick wall surrounds the property and (something about)...spiked brass tipped iron ...(something) on top of the (something) and two electronically-controlled gates (something about).... the curious. The gates opened yesterday for a delivery van offering a brief glimpse of the house and partially completed landscaped garden. A large newly thatched outdoor entertainment area overlooks the (something) garden where workers were busy planting shrubs and lawn".

Then it goes on down the - misses a paragraph and then the next paragraph, the second sentence Mr Chairman,

&#9;&#9;"New high-tech security equipment has been installed along with a sophisticated intercom at the gates which disguises a miniature closed circuit television camera".

I think that's the relevant information Mr Chairman.

MR PRINSLOO: Thank you. Mr Derby-Lewis I now refer you to R3, also a bundle presented by the family, Mr Bizos.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I have it Mr Chairman.

MR PRINSLOO: That will be R3D.29.

JUDGE WILSON: What was the reference for R3?

MR PRINSLOO: D29.

JUDGE WILSON: D29.

MR PRINSLOO: Correct Mr Chairman.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I have that press clipping Mr Chairman, it's in the bundle provided by Mr Bizos.

MR PRINSLOO: Now Mr Derby-Lewis I refer you to the left side column of that particular write-up, the write-up is:

&#9;&#9;"Hani buried as 14 killed in clashes".

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That's correct Mr Chairman.

MR PRINSLOO: That's the third paragraph from the bottom where it commences with,

&#9;&#9;"ANC leader Nelson Mandela...."

will you read from that please?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Certainly Mr Chairman. The report reads as follows:

&#9;&#9;"ANC leader Nelson Mandela said the government had to accept partial responsibility for Hani's death because it had consistently criminalised him and MK (quote) - 'to criminalise is to outlaw and hunting down an outlaw is legitimate. Those (who created) this climate are as much responsible for Hani's murder as the man who pulled the trigger'. 

Further quote:

&#9;&#9;"In this regard the Minister of Law and Order and the Chief of the Army have a great deal to answer for, Mandela said".

Is that the statement?

MR PRINSLOO: That's the relevant portion Mr Derby-Lewis.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Thank you Mr Chairman.

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Derby-Lewis I now want to refer you to again R3, if you could look at A11, Mr Chairman.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I have A11 Mr Chairman, "Clive's arrest..."

MR PRINSLOO: That's right, 

&#9;&#9;"Clive's arrest - great shock to CP leaders".

do you have that text? Will you please look at the portion that starts with the words - which starts about a third from the top left-hand column,

&#9;&#9;&#9;"The CP however at this stage does not consider any action against him".

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Right Mr Chairman.

MR PRINSLOO: Can you read that.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Right Mr Chairman. It says,

&#9;&#9;"The CP at this stage, however, does not consider any action against him. Dr Andries Treurnicht, the CP leader who is regaining strength in hospital after what is suspected to have been a heart attack only heard the shocking news yesterday morning. It was kept away from Dr Treurnicht until Dr Willie Snyman, CP of Pietersburg and a medical doctor of profession informed him in hospital about this yesterday, also that his confidante was a suspect in the murder case".

MR PRINSLOO: Will you continue reading?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes. The next paragraph reads:

&#9;&#9;"Dr Snyman stated that everybody in the CP were upset to hear about Mr Derby-Lewis' arrest. However, he was not of the opinion that Dr Treurnicht was very shocked because 'in the political arena there is nothing that upsets one terribly'. In addition no particulars were known at that stage about the case against Mr Derby-Lewis".

MR PRINSLOO: Now Mr Derby-Lewis just that far. In that clipping that you read from, firstly that no steps were considered against you, until now have any steps been taken against you or considered?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No Mr Chair.

MR PRINSLOO: Have you ever been kicked out of the party?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: On the contrary I just received support from the Party.

MR PRINSLOO: From the second part was there anything - well let us refer to this, 

&#9;&#9;"I was informed yesterday in the hospital that his confidante was a suspect in the murder case".

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes I was the confidante of Dr Treurnicht as everybody knew.

MR PRINSLOO: And then the last portion where Dr Treurnicht said, and I quote -

&#9;&#9;"There is nothing in politics which upsets one terribly".

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chair.

MR PRINSLOO: What is your commentary in this regard?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: It is possible Mr Chair that at this stage the late Dr Treurnicht remembered my conversation with him and used these words.

ADV POTGIETER: I beg your pardon is that a quote of Dr Snyman's or Dr Treurnicht's?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No it appears to me as if those were the words of Dr Treurnicht to Dr Snyman.

ADV POTGIETER: Is it not a quote by the reporter of the conversation with Dr Snyman?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No Sir, a reporter cannot put something in quotes as his own commentary.

ADV POTGIETER: No but if the quote is referred to - isn't the quote that of Dr Snyman's who says - 

&#9;&#9;"He was not of the opinion that Dr Treurnicht was terribly shocked because...."

and then in quotes.

&#9;&#9;"'there is nothing in politics which shocks one terribly'".

In other words that paragraph gives the view of Dr Snyman of Dr Treurnicht's reaction. 

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I see that as an expansion on what happened after he had seen Dr Treurnicht, because he says clearly,

&#9;&#9;"He was, however, not of the opinion that Dr Treurnicht was very shocked".

Dr Treurnicht had to indicate this when visited by Mr Snyman and it's quite possible that also Dr Treurnicht had said that he was not shocked because nothing happened in politics that shocked one terribly.

ADV POTGIETER: Or that it was Dr Snyman's words?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes it's possible.

CHAIRPERSON: Nowhere in this report is there any approval indicated of your conduct is there?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman there is no - in this I don't see anything which indicates approval of the CP, no, but I don't see anything which indicates repudiation either.

CHAIRPERSON: Do carry on.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Thank you Mr Chairman.

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Derby-Lewis I now refer you to still the R3 Bundle, A6.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I have it Mr Chairman, yes.

MR PRINSLOO: With the heading,

&#9;&#9;"Walus a Boer fighter against Reds - BWB".

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That's correct Mr Chairman.

MR PRINSLOO: Now the organisation BWB, are you familiar with them?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I am Mr Chairman, they were one of the group that I mentioned of rightwing organisations that came together to try and effect united action on the right.

MR PRINSLOO: And the leader of that organisation, do you know him?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Is Mr Andrew Ford, Mr Chairman.

MR PRINSLOO: Is he personally known to you?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: He is personally known to me, yes Mr Chairman. In fact I have seen him on a couple of occasions in prison subsequent to my arrest.

MR PRINSLOO: Now will you look at the - will you please read the left column first for the Committee?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: The first paragraph Mr Chairman?

MR PRINSLOO: Yes the left column yes, first....

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Certainly Mr Chairman. It reads as follows:

&#9;&#9;"South African Communist Party Secretary General Chris Hani's alleged assassin was known to the Boere Weerstandbeweging as a 'first class fighter against communism', the BWB said in a statement yesterday". 

MR PRINSLOO: Then will you read in the second column, towards the middle of that column down Mr Derby-Lewis?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Certainly Mr Chairman. After the comma halfway through it says,

&#9;&#9;"...had immigrated to South Africa from Poland to 'rid himself' of communism. He had then 'joined Boer freedom fighters'".

Then it goes on further to say,

&#9;&#9;"The BWB does not accept that Mr Walus is a murderer or a terrorist, but a soldier and a freedom fighter for the Boer people".

MR PRINSLOO: And then will you read in that same column, that's the third paragraph from the bottom Mr Derby-Lewis.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman it reads as follows.

&#9;&#9;"It said the BWB demanded Mr Walus be treated as a Boer soldier and a political prisoner. 'The BWB will also support Mr Walus and help him because he was prepared to offer his life for God, Volk and Fatherland'".

MR PRINSLOO: Now what is your comment in regard to this, the views of the BWB, Mr Derby-Lewis?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman I think that this report is one of the most supportive reports I've ever seen from an organisation regarding the assassination of the late Mr Chris Hani by ourselves.

ADV POTGIETER: That last paragraph they would have no other choice but to take up arms.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman.

ADV POTGIETER: So does that indicate that the BWB was not involved in an armed struggle at that stage?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No I think they were referring to a specific instance here. If I may read the paragraph Mr Chairman, it reads:

&#9;&#9;"The BWB also warned that should Blacks cause intimidation and violence in White areas it would have no other choice but to take up arms".

I think that specifically related to intimidation and violence in White areas. Thank you Mr Chairman.

MR PRINSLOO: Now Mr Derby-Lewis, Mr Koos Botha who was referred to in this particular hearing was he a member of the Conservative Party at the time when he allegedly blew up or caused damage to the Hillview School?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: He was Mr Chairman, yes.

MR PRINSLOO: And Mr Derby-Lewis to your knowledge was he granted amnesty or not?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I believe he was granted amnesty Mr Chairman, yes.

CHAIRPERSON: By this Amnesty Committee?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Pardon Mr Chairman?

CHAIRPERSON: By this Amnesty Committee?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: By this Amnesty Committee yes Mr Chairman, in fact it was a decision which I believe was taken without Mr Botha even having to appear before the Amnesty Committee, physically.

MR BIZOS: Mr Chairman our information is that he was given indemnity under the old legislation, indemnity by or in terms of the Act as it then existed and the debate Mr Chairman that he had taken part in was repudiated by the Conservative Party, was about this that he supported the indemnity bill under which he was indemnified and the Conservative Party opposed it (...indistinct). The information available to us was that he was indemnified and did not receive amnesty. And that of course, that was a completely political presidential discretion.

MR MPSHE: Mr Chairman to bring clarity it is said Mr Botha was granted amnesty by this Committee, not indemnity, amnesty by this Committee in chambers.

MS KHAMPEPE: I think Mr Bizos I am able to confirm that it was amnesty which was granted to Mr Koos Botha.

MR BIZOS: .... any of the decisions, this is why we thought it was in terms of the Indemnity Act.

MS KHAMPEPE: But it wasn't as a result of a public hearing, it was amnesty granted in chambers.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes do carry on.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Thank you Mr Chairman.

MR PRINSLOO: Now I refer you Mr Chairman to Bundle C, that is the applicant's application at page 185 Bundle C. It's from Bundle B but - I beg your pardon it's Addendum C Mr Chairman, Bundle B. Page 185.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I have the page Mr Chairman.

MR PRINSLOO: The write-up of that particular section.

&#9;&#9;"The ruthless killer who planned South African terror attacks..."

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That's correct Mr Chairman.

MR PRINSLOO: The left side of the page if you look Mr Derby-Lewis under the heading, sub-heading of "Wasteland", the last paragraph above the "necklace", will you read that to the Committee please.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman. The last paragraph above the necklace reads as follows:

&#9;&#9;"At the peak of the revolutionary violence which wracked South Africa in the mid-1980's he openly called for the killing of Black 'collaborators' such as police....."

sorry 185 Mr Chairman from Bundle B. Can you hear me?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, you say above the sub-heading 'necklace', is that it?

MR PRINSLOO: That's correct Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Do carry on.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Thank you Mr Chairman. It reads,

&#9;&#9;"At the peak of the revolutionary violence...."

I don't think I need to repeat up to collaborators.

&#9;&#9;"...such as policemen, township councillors and those opposed to the revolution. An aspect, as the London Times pointed out on the 8th of June 1988 that, 'leaders of the organisation's political wing tend to play it down ascribing such killings to 'spontaneous anger' of the people".

MR PRINSLOO: On the same page Mr Derby-Lewis the bottom middle column, the last paragraph where it starts "nor has he hesitated", have you got that?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman, I have it Mr Chairman.

MR PRINSLOO: Would you please read that to the Committee.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman it reads as follows:

&#9;&#9;"Nor has he hesitated to express his desire to strike at the White community where it hurts. He publicly advocated intensified attacks on White suburbs while declaring White parliamentarians, government officials, security police and members of the judiciary, 'legitimate targets for attack or assassination'".

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Derby-Lewis what is your comment with regard to these two passages that you have read to the Committee?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Well it was clear to me Mr Chairman that Mr Hani in his leadership position had targeted White suburbs, White parliamentarians, including I assume cabinet ministers, even the State President himself Mr Chairman, because it's not spelt out clearly here. But I think that we all know that the State President is a parliamentarian.

MR PRINSLOO: The same section page 192 Mr Chairman.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I have that Mr Chairman.

MR PRINSLOO: Have you got that?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I have Mr Chairman.

MR PRINSLOO: Where the heading is "Hani a Saint", have you got it?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes I have that Mr Chairman.

MR PRINSLOO: If you look on the right side of that particular heading.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman.

MR PRINSLOO: At the top of the page, will you read that to the Committee?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: From the top, the right side column?

MR PRINSLOO: Yes.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Right Mr Chairman. Starting with "Hani was unapologetic"?

MR PRINSLOO: Yes.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: It reads as follows Mr Chairman:

&#9;&#9;"Hani was unapologetic in a support of terrorist violence. At the height of the revolutionary violence, which racked South Africa in the mid-1980's he openly called for the killing of Black collaborators...."

I think that's a repetition of the report in the London Times of the 8th of June, but it goes on, the next paragraph says Mr Chairman,

&#9;&#9;"On occasions Hani was publicly repudiated by Oliver Tambo himself for his bloodthirsty rhetoric and the merciless attacks by his terror gangs on 'soft' civilian targets. After the July 1988 bomb blast at Johannesburg's Ellis Park Rugby Stadium, killing two and injuring 30, Tambo insisted that such attacks were not ANC policy. Hani directly contradicted this telling the Weekly Mail on the 10th to the 16.6.1988, 'we are prepared to see a wasteland if that is the price of freedom".

MR PRINSLOO: What is your comment with regard to that section Mr Derby-Lewis?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Well Mr Chairman it's clear to me that in fact Mr Hani at times was acting in conflict with official ANC policy.

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Derby-Lewis I now refer you to page 194.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: 194, I have it Mr Chairman.

MR PRINSLOO: That's on the right side of the page Mr Chairman, the fourth paragraph.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I have it Mr Chairman. It reads as follows:

&#9;&#9;"In the minds of many White South Africans he is public enemy number one because of his role in Umkhonto. He was accused of murder and torture against dissident Umkhonto soldiers in Angolan camps when they mutinied against going into battle against Unita rather than the White regime of South Africa".

And then in apostrophe's Mr Chairman.

&#9;&#9;"It was a sad episode in our history", he said, "I didn't derive any pleasure from the death of the mutineers, it was our duty to save Umkhonto from disintegration. I agree I took part in the suppression of the mutiny".

And it says here Mr Chairman that this is an extract from the report in the London Sunday Telegraph dated the 8.12.1991.

JUDGE WILSON: Where is ...(intervention)

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Page 194 Mr Chairman.

JUDGE WILSON: Where on the page, can you hold it up?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: The fourth paragraph Mr Chairman on the right-hand side, under the heading "Hani on the record".

JUDGE WILSON: That's not what I've got at 194.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Is it a different page?

CHAIRPERSON: There are five columns, which column are you ready from?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No I am not referring to that one Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Page 194.

JUDGE WILSON: It's got a picture of Hani in the top right-hand corner, and it's headed "Marxist shaping a new South Africa". You are reading from "On the record" which is page 193.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That's correct, I am reading that Mr Chairman.

MR PRINSLOO: Could we pass it up to the Committee Mr Chairman we have a loose page here.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: They have it, it's 193.

CHAIRPERSON: 193 you are reading from.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: 193 sorry Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Just tell us where.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: It's on the right-hand side column.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: The fourth column down.

JUDGE WILSON: The fourth paragraph.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Sorry, the fourth paragraph down Mr Chairman, and I've read out that paragraph, and I've given the reference the London Sunday Telegraph of the 8th of December 1991. Mr Chairman, this I think was a mere 16 months before Mr Hani's assassination and certainly I don't think that this is a peaceful admission to make.

MR PRINSLOO: Is there any further comment you have to make with regard to that paragraph Mr Derby-Lewis?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman I think it's clear from that paragraph that he actually admits that he participated in the killing of ANC members who mutinied because they didn't want to fight against UNITA.

MS KHAMPEPE: Excuse me Mr Derby-Lewis, where does it appear that he participated in the killing? I think what I see here in front of me is that - I quote him:

&#9;&#9;"I agree I took part in the suppression".

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Well Mr Chairman it says here, he was accused of murder and torture against dissident Umkhonto soldiers in Angolan camps when they mutinied against going into battle against UNITA rather than the White regime of South Africa. And then he says,

&#9;&#9;"It was a sad episode in our history. I didn't derive any pleasure from the deaths of the mutineers".

why would he say that if he wasn't involved himself Mr Chairman? I interpret that as an acknowledgement of direct involvement where he says in his last sentence -

&#9;&#9;"I agree I took part in the suppression of the mutiny".

MS KHAMPEPE: Precisely.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: But I mean doesn't that mean that he was part of the deaths of those mutineers?

MS KHAMPEPE: No.

CHAIRPERSON: Well that's a matter for interpretation -do carry on.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Okay Mr Chairman, thank you.

MR BIZOS: For the record Mr Chairman the witness stated that this was 18 months before his assassination. Maybe the report of it may have been the mutiny was in the eighties Mr Chairman.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman, but I think this was in interview conducted by the London Sunday Telegraph conducted in 1991.

MR BIZOS: That's the point that I wanted to make, thank you Mr Chairman.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Chairman it goes on to read:

&#9;&#9;"King William's Town...."

and then it talks about, halfway down that paragraph addressing mourners apparently the people mourned the deaths of 28 demonstrators shot dead during the September 7th march on Bisho and addressing mourners Chris Hani chanted -

&#9;&#9;"We hate de Klerk, we hate Pik Botha, we hate Hernis Kriel, we hate apartheid, we hate capitalists..."

and then it closes the quotes -

&#9;&#9;"He also promised 'we are going to embark on more and more mass action'".

and that was the Citizen of the 19th of September 1992 Mr Chairman, and that was a report on something which I assume, I may be incorrect, but I assume that that report was referring to something quite recent, the 19.09.92.

MR PRINSLOO: Is there any further comment you would like to make Mr Derby-Lewis with regards to this particular passage?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Well obviously Mr Chairman it was clear from this that Mr Hani was certainly not interested in reconciliation or peace and he was preaching - he was actually Mr Chairman preaching hatred and promising what he said here, "more and more mass action" relative to the deaths of those people who marched on Bisho.

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Chairman may this be an appropriate stage to take the lunch adjournment, but may I also request Mr Chairman that we be given the opportunity to look at the video that was shown yesterday, the sound wasn't very clear to us. We would just like to listen during the adjournment.

CHAIRPERSON: You can listen to it during the adjournment.

MR PRINSLOO: Yes Mr Chairman, that's the request.

CHAIRPERSON: If it is at all possible. I don't know whether arrangements can be made for that to be done.

MR PRINSLOO: Thank you Mr Chairman.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

ON RESUMPTION 

CLIVE DERBY-LEWIS: (s.u.a.)

EXAMINATION BY MR PRINSLOO: (cont)

Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Derby-Lewis we referred, before the lunch adjournment to page 194, I refer you now to page 201 of that same document, Addendum C, Bundle B Mr Chairman, 201.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman I have the document.

MR PRINSLOO: Now Mr Derby-Lewis this document was published by the International Freedom Foundation which appears at page 196 of the same document.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That is correct Mr Chairman.

MR PRINSLOO: Now page 201 the last paragraph which commences with the words, "Shortly before the Groote Schuur talks", would you please read that to the Commission.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Certainly Mr Chairman, it reads as follows:

&#9;&#9;"Shortly before the Groote Schuur talks between the ANC and government on 6 May 1990 tensions surfaced in the ranks of the ANC when younger more radical leaders, including MK leaders made it clear that they would not tolerate entry into negotiations in which the ANC's bid for total control of South Africa would be lost. Hani wanted to have 10,000 'in place in South Africa' before negotiations curtailed operational activities of MK. (reference no.55)"

It goes on to say,

&#9;&#9;"The prospects of talks certainly did not please Hani when, in an interview shortly after the unbanning of the ANC and SACP he cautioned that 'I think we must struggle very hard for our comrades not to feel that sitting down with the enemy is betrayal'. (reference no.56)".

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Derby-Lewis what is your interpretation of that, your comments to it?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Well Mr Chairman this was preaching anything but peace.

MR PRINSLOO: Over the page Mr Derby-Lewis, page 202 of the same document, the last paragraph starting with "Discussion between the ANC".

MR DERBY-LEWIS: The last paragraph Mr Chairman on page 202 reads as follows:

&#9;&#9;"Discussion within the ANC on the suspension of the armed struggle were 'agonising' according to insiders. (reference 60). Hani was apparently enraged at not having been consulted about discussions on the suspension of the armed actions a decision that was made initially between Mandela and Tambo in London".

It reads further Mr Chairman, the next paragraph,

&#9;&#9;"Mandela's determination to continue talks with the government despite the arrest of high-ranking SACP MK leaders in connection with Operation Vula further strained relationships between the ANC leadership and MK".

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Derby-Lewis what is your interpretation and comment with regard to that particular passage?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Well Mr Chairman it's obvious to me that there was conflict within the alliance, particularly in terms of MK and their attitude towards Mr Mandela.

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Chairman I now refer to Bundle R5, page 42 Mr Derby-Lewis.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I have it Mr Chairman, the document.

MR PRINSLOO: Now that's a document presented by Mr Bizos Mr Chairman, statement of Mr Kroon(?), page 42 Mr Chairman.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman I am picking up quite an annoying traffic sound on the mike here, I don't know what's going on. 

MR PRINSLOO: Just a moment please Mr Chairman. I beg your pardon Mr Chairman it's page 18. Thank you Mr Chairman it is indeed page 42, the last paragraph Mr Derby-Lewis?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman this I must mention is part of the record in terms of this documentation of a Radio 702 interview with Chris Hani and Jerome Cronin, the John Robbie Show March 5 1993, and the participants were Chris Hani, Jerome Cronin and John Robbie. On page 42 the last paragraph reads as follows, and this is apparently Mr Chris Hani speaking. He is referring in reaction to a question from a gentleman by the name of Hans of Springs who talks about, to Chris Hani, it's the previous paragraph Mr Chairman, I think it's relevant to mention this just to put it in the correct context. Chris Hani says "Hello" and this Hans says "Hello". 

&#9;&#9;"To Chris Hani. Top notch in ANC- failed there. ANC military wing - top notch in Communist Party. Mr Slovo mentioned that as a White man he would not have tracked Black people. If Chris fails in the Communist movement which club is he going to move to then? Does he move to Mr Tutu or what?"

Then I've got letters here "JR", John Robbie, then John Robbie responds and says,

&#9;&#9;"Okay Chris allegations - you've failed everywhere, you've gone - you're a party-hopper".

And then "CH" which is the reply by Mr Hani:

&#9;&#9;"Hans I don't think I failed. I think basically probably I succeeded. You know I am a member of the National Executive Committee of the ANC, I was elected at the Durban conference last year by a very big majority, I have been and still am a member of Umkhonto weSizwe. I have not resigned from Umkhonto weSizwe nor from the ANC. I still play an active part in both organisations".

It goes over the page Mr Chairman and I don't want to burden the Committee with the whole thing, I will just go through the last sentence which confirms -

&#9;&#9;"I am playing a role in Umkhonto weSizwe so I don't know why you think I've failed and I'm moving from one organisation to the other".

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Derby-Lewis what is your interpretation to that, your comment in regards to this?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Well Mr Chairman this to me I believe to be confirmation of the fact that in spite of what Mr Bizos alleged about Mr Hani being a man of peace and having withdrawn and resigned from Umkhonto weSizwe and I think he said 1990, this clearly contradicts and it's out of the mouth of the Communist Party themselves Mr Chairman.

MR BIZOS: Allow that to pass Mr Chairman. The only thing that we put on record was that he had resigned as Commander-in-chief of Umkhonto weSizwe.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman may I then state that in terms of what Mr Hani says in the last sentence -

&#9;&#9;"I am playing a role in Umkhonto weSizwe..."

and that's the only thing he uses, besides his membership of the NEC to say that he's not a has-been, so he must have been, I believe, I can interpret that to believe he was playing a significant role in the Umkhonto weSizwe.

CHAIRPERSON: You can't take it any further than what the words say.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Right Mr Chairman, thank you.

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Derby-Lewis in your evidence you make reference to a - I beg your pardon may I detract that Mr Chairman, just a moment please. Before I proceed with this, Mr Derby-Lewis at page 43 at paragraph 2 from the top of the page, would you please read that to the Committee.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Certainly Mr Chairman. John Robbie once again refers to the armed struggle and he says -

&#9;&#9;"The ANC/Communist alliance, they've still got Umkhonto, they've still got an armed struggle, again in the interest of moving forward wouldn't it be better to disband, to finally to declare the armed struggle over?"

That's that statement Mr Chairman. Then there is nothing in the next paragraph that refers to that ...(intervention)

MR PRINSLOO: Did he reply to John Robbie?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: There is no reply, but in the reply by Mr Chris Hani there is no reference to the - well maybe I should read it.

&#9;&#9;"Ultimately the objectives of the ANC and the Communist Party are to disband Umkhonto weSizwe but I want to proceed by saying that it is a question of time. We must reach a period in our negotiations where we are satisfied that there will never be a reversal, there will be no going back and then we shall sit down and discuss the whole issue of a future security force to serve a democratic South Africa. We are going to be building up a new society, a democratic South Africa and that democratic South Africa must be served by a new army, an army which is going to uphold the norms of that democracy".

And then the next paragraph if I may Mr Chairman John Robbie comes back and says again-

&#9;&#9;"That could be - when the vote comes in the referendum that could in part be influenced by Umkhonto weSizwe, by the armed struggle still being there, won't you in fact put the process backwards, isn't there a danger?"

Then Mr Hani says -

&#9;&#9;"I want to begin by saying that the Communist Party and the ANC and COSATU have called upon the voters to deliver a yes vote......"

and then it carries on but there is no talk of a repudiation of the armed struggle Mr Chairman at that stage.

CHAIRPERSON: Had the armed struggle been suspended at that stage?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: According to the information I have Mr Chairman I think it was suspended in 1990.

CHAIRPERSON: That's what I mean.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes.

MR PRINSLOO: Now Mr Derby-Lewis you mentioned in your evidence during these proceedings that there was an interview with John Bishop on the South African Broadcasting Corporation and the late Mr Hani and that particular interview was on the 8th of December 1991, that's just for the information of the Committee Mr Chairman, that's the information we have obtained.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman I think the Committee will remember that I referred to some information which had been passed on to me regarding Mr Hani's statement "I don't believe in God", and in fact my information now which I have obtained is that it was during that video 2, the Agenda programme held on the 8.12.1991 and it was in an interview conducted by John Bishop with Mr Hani.

CHAIRPERSON: What do you make of this when a man says that as a process of intellectual reasoning he's not convinced that there is a need for him to believe in God, what do you make of that?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman I have no right to comment on a man's belief, I am just mentioning it to illustrate that as the leader of the Communist Party he did not believe in God.

CHAIRPERSON: What is the significance of that, that is what I mean?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Well Mr Chairman ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Isn't it possible for a man intellectually, as a result of searching his own thoughts to come to the conclusion that there is no need for him to believe in a God?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Certainly Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: So now what is the point that you are trying to make about this?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Well the point I am making Mr Chairman that in terms of that statement he was not - some people actually tried to present him as having converted - I think in my testimony, if I remember correctly I stated that some people were trying to present as a fact that Mr Hani went back to christianity and this was a clear contradiction with that attitude. So it was in support of my testimony and not a valued judgement on his beliefs Mr Chairman.

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Derby-Lewis the Conservative Party - first of all let me put it to you this way. The late Mr "Loot" van Schalkwyk, was he known to you?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes he was Mr Chairman, in fact I met him in prison, he was also on death row.

MR PRINSLOO: Now Mr "Loot" van Schalkwyk was convicted and sentenced to death for a bomb that was sent down to a person whom they identified as a member of the ANC in Durban, is that correct?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That's correct Mr Chairman, I think the gentleman's surname was "Cruse" or "Cruser" or something like that.

MR PRINSLOO: And Mr van Schalkwyk also made an application for amnesty is that correct?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That is correct. In fact he had made an application under the prior legislation which existed which had not been granted, although two of his accomplices were granted and then he applied in terms of the new amnesty legislation Mr Chairman.

MR PRINSLOO: And Mr van Schalkwyk died in prison, is that correct?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That is unfortunately correct Mr Chairman, yes, before his amnesty application could be heard by the Committee.

MR PRINSLOO: And Mr Veenendal, is he known to you?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman, Mr Veenendal, Mr Leon Veenendal.

MR PRINSLOO: And are you aware of it that he was to be extradited, or there was an application made for his extradition to Namibia?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I am aware of that Mr Chairman, yes.

MR PRINSLOO: And that he was - the reason for his extradition application was on allegations of murder in Namibia?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That's correct. He had apparently killed two people, one a security guard in the process of the armed struggle.

MR PRINSLOO: And both those persons were members of the rightwing?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That's correct Mr Chairman.

MR PRINSLOO: Yes. And do you know what was the attitude of the Conservative Party with regard to those two persons, support or not?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Well Mr Chairman I believe that in spite of the deed they had committed the Conservative Party came out in full support of them.

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Derby-Lewis I now show you a document from the Conservative Party. We have copies available for the Committee Mr Chairman. I think it will be referred to as G, G1-3 Mr Chairman, the last document being F.

EXHIBIT G1 TO 3 HANDED IN - DOCUMENT FROM CONSERVATIVE PARTY

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I have that document before me Mr Chairman.

MR PRINSLOO: Could copies be handed up to the Committee and to Mr Bizos. Mr Derby-Lewis I refer you to paragraph 4 of the document, page 1.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman. The Committee will clearly see it's on the letterhead of the Conservative Party of South Africa and it's entitled,

&#9;&#9;"Media statement - death of Dr Loot van Schalkwyk on 18 March 1996".

Sorry Mr Chairman, the fourth paragraph reads as follows:

&#9;&#9;"It may be expected that this tragic death of Dr van Schalkwyk which had its origins in his love for his nation to such an extent that he was prepared to sacrifice his life for this purpose, to fight for freedom, will not be lost sight of by his fellow members of his nation".

&#9;I think I should mention Mr Chairman that it is signed on behalf of Dr W J Snyman, who is described here as the Deputy Leader of the Conservative Party of South Africa, and the date on the statement is the 23rd of March 1996.

MR PRINSLOO: And then on page 2 Mr Derby-Lewis, at the bottom of the page, first of all it's a commentary in Die Patriot.

&#9;&#9;"Freedom fighter dies".

bottom section of this newspaper article, will you please read it?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I read the last sentence Mr Chairman.

&#9;&#9;"The difference is situated in the fact that Biko wished to overturn the peaceful dispensation for the sake of a revolutionary communist system, whereas Dr Loot van Schalkwyk wished to maintain a peaceful dispensation and wished to prevent a revolutionary communist dispensation".

MR PRINSLOO: I would like you to refer to page 3.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I have page 3 Mr Chairman.

MR PRINSLOO: Would you please read it to the Committee.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Certainly Mr Chairman. It is a letter addressed to Mr L Veenendal and it reads as follows:

&#9;&#9;"Re extradition order to Namibia.

&#9;&#9;The Conservative Party wishes to as you as member give its full support in the application for amnesty. We are aware and we are convinced that the deed for which you apply for amnesty was purely politically motivated. In this regard we oppose any further action against you which will include extradition to Namibia, and we strongly oppose this".

He concludes by stating -

&#9;&#9;"We wish you strength and all of the best in the struggle which you are waging".

And that was written by Mr D W Hoffman, the secretary of the Conservative Party on 19 November 1996.

MR PRINSLOO: Is that the support which the Conservative Party gives to these two people, or did give them?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chair I think this support shown in these documents is very clear.

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Derby-Lewis with reference to Exhibit E3, it is a letter addressed to Colonel Roos, the Station Commander, Exhibit E. Have you found this Mr Derby-Lewis?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Just a second please. Sorry Mr Chairman I am just trying to locate that document.

CHAIRPERSON: What is the document purported to be?

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Chairman I am referring to E3, that is the letter, and then I am referring to R4, 27, that is the written statement of the applicant made whilst he was in detention in terms of Section 29.

CHAIRPERSON: What page on R4?

MR PRINSLOO: 27 Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR PRINSLOO: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Derby-Lewis you were cross-examined yesterday by Mr Bizos with regard to the writing that appears on R4, 27, which is your statement or a document purporting to be your statement.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That is correct Mr Chairman.

MR PRINSLOO: Now would you please compare E3 and the statement which appears on R4 from 27, the writing thereof, would you say is identical or what's your comment with regard to that?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman it is quite clear from the letter to the colonel and the written statement that the writing on the written statement is more heavily done, it's the letter is thicker and it's also larger if one compares it with the letter to the colonel. The colonel's letter is far more neat and it's far more lightly written, it's obviously written in a more relaxed atmosphere.

CHAIRPERSON: It depends upon the subject matter that you are writing about. You are writing a letter of thanks, and here is a lengthy statement in which you are claiming to set out your part of the case. I don't know whether any purpose is served in trying to compare your - the way you wrote, or your handwriting in one as against the other.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman, with respect, that letter that I wrote to the colonel was written on the 16th of May 1993, that was already almost ten days after I had been released from Section 29 detention and this was written directly after I had been subjected to isolation in terms of solitary confinement. I had been subjected to harassment, to pressure, I mean during the process of writing this it was in and out all the time, when are you going to finish, when are you going to finish, when are you going to finish? I had been suffering from sleep deprivation Mr Chairman and ...(intervention)

JUDGE NGOEPE: Sorry, sorry, did you use the same pen?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Pardon?

JUDGE NGOEPE: Did you use the same pen?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman, I only had one pen with me at that stage and in fact it was a problem even to have that pen. And then of course Mr Chairman there was also, as I mentioned in my testimony this problem, this worrying concern at the back of my mind of when they were going to begin with the tough tactics, when they were going to start beating me up as I had been familiar with in terms of treatment of other political prisoners.

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Derby-Lewis you referred to solitary confinement, were you detained alone in the cell or with others?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I was detained alone in a cell throughout the duration of my Section 29 detention Mr Chairman.

MR PRINSLOO: Now Mr Derby-Lewis is it correct that Colonel Human and Captain Holmes and others they were from the Murder and Robbery Unit?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That's correct Mr Chairman.

MR PRINSLOO: And that was actually the investigating team that investigated this case.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: And Mr Chairman it was on the strength of their investigation that I was found guilty by the Judge President of the Witwatersrand, not on the strength of these under duress obtained Section 29 statements. I think that it was an indication of to what extent the Murder and Robbery squad had conducted an efficient investigation regarding the case. So that they managed to convince the Attorney General and in turn the Judge President that I was guilty without my testifying and also without resorting to those statements.

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Derby-Lewis is it also correct that Colonel van Niekerk from the Security Branch and his team which comprises of, amongst others, Captain Deetliefs, Warrant Officer Beetge, Captain de Waal and a number of other members?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman as far as my interrogation was concerned I was mainly in the company of Captain Deetliefs and Warrant Officer Beetge.

MR PRINSLOO: But the officer in charge of that group was Captain van Niekerk?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: The officer in charge was Colonel van Niekerk and Colonel van Niekerk in that capacity promised me amnesty, yes.

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Derby-Lewis Colonel van Niekerk, did they act independently from Colonel Human and the Uniform Branch which was Colonel Roos?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Totally Mr Chairman, in fact I think I mentioned in my testimony that the Murder and Robbery squad and the Uniform Branch were in the same building, whereas the Security Branch were in a totally separate building.

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Derby-Lewis is it correct that none of the statements or interrogation documents obtained by members of the Security Branch were ever presented during your trial?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That is correct Mr Chairman.

MR PRINSLOO: That the only statement that was presented which you made was the one as referred to as in E4?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That is correct Mr Chairman.

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Derby-Lewis would you have had any reason whatsoever to write a letter to Colonel van Niekerk thanking him for detaining you in terms of Section 29 and asking for an extension of time?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That would be the last thing I would have done Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you say letter E4 when you - didn't you mean E3 instead of E4?

MR PRINSLOO: I beg your pardon Mr Chairman?

CHAIRPERSON: When you talked about the letter you really meant E3 not E4 isn't it?

JUDGE WILSON: That was the statement used at his trial.

CHAIRPERSON: Oh I beg your pardon.

MR PRINSLOO: E4 being the statement during the trial Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MR PRINSLOO: That was tendered as evidence. I ask for a moments indulgence Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Chairman the witness yesterday, or today rather, referred to a document which he read from, I ask leave to hand that in to the Committee. That will be referred to on its own as H1 Mr Chairman, it was this morning indeed. Copies available for the Committee, that's reference to the remark "What a pity".

EXHIBIT H1 HANDED IN

MR PRINSLOO: Thank you Mr Chairman. Now I will be referring to another set of documents, may that be referred then as, the next will be "I", may I refer to it rather as J otherwise I will be confusing with the figure 1 Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Exhibit J.

MR PRINSLOO: Exhibit J Mr Chairman, Exhibit J ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: What is it?

MR PRINSLOO: Exhibit J, it's a Die Patriot, " Die Hani les" is the heading of it. It comprises then Mr Chairman of five pages, it's not all Die Patriot it's also other documents, it's J1 - 5 then Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Press cuttings are they?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chairman.

MR PRINSLOO: Yes Mr Chairman, with the exclusion of the third page, it's not a press cutting.

EXHIBITS J1 - 5 HANDED UP

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Derby-Lewis I now show you document J, it is from Die Patriot, "The Hani lesson", would you please look at that Mr Derby-Lewis.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I have that Mr Chairman.

MR PRINSLOO: And the date is 23 April 1993, is that correct?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That is correct Mr Chair.

MR PRINSLOO: Will you please look at the introductory paragraph and read that to the Committee.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Certain Sir. It reads as follows:

&#9;&#9;"The South African Christian nations and communities have to open their eyes after the Hani assassination. They will have to stand up and stand together and resist before it becomes too late".

That's the first paragraph Mr Chair.

MR PRINSLOO: Then if you look at the fourth paragraph will you please read that as well. It starts with "Minister Roelf Meyer".

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chair that is the fourth column and it reads as follows:

&#9;&#9;"Minister Roelf Meyer, the Minister of Governmental Development could not react quickly enough after the Hani death to state at an international press conference that a transitional council would have to be established very quickly".

And then the question is posed in column 5:

&#9;&#9;"Why do you think Mr Roelf Meyer wants to capitulate so quickly?"

And the reply is that,

&#9;&#9;"He wishes to prevent the Whites from mobilising who will prevent the plans of his and his fellow cabinet members to capitulate to the communist pressure".

MR PRINSLOO: And if you turn the page, second column, about one third from the bottom.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I have that Mr Chairman. That's the sixth paragraph and it reads as follows:

&#9;&#9;"If you confuse the White's religion then you will confuse the White's sense of political values and also the White's will to resist".

That's the paragraph Mr Chair.

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Derby-Lewis what is your interpretation of this newspaper article in Die Patriot?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chair I cannot but regard this as a gesture of support.

MR PRINSLOO: It was referred to yesterday your membership of the APK Church, is that correct?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That is correct Mr Chair.

MR PRINSLOO: If you turn to page 4 of the document which is serving before the Committee, the letterhead of the APK, Afrikaanse Protestante Kerk.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That is correct, I have that Sir.

MR PRINSLOO: To whom is the letter addressed?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: The letter is addressed to the State President Sir.

MR PRINSLOO: The date of the letter?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: The date is 10 March 1995.

MR PRINSLOO: Will you please read that to the Committee. 

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I read it as follows Sir:

&#9;&#9;"Dear President Mandela

&#9;&#9;The Central Church Commission (SKK) of the Afrikaans Protestant Churches, the (APK), hereby wishes to address a serious appeal to you to give to Mr Clive Derby-Lewis, who is a member of the Afrikaanse Protestante Kerk in Roodepoort amnesty. We are also asking for indemnity for Mr Janusz Walus. The SKK is of the opinion that these two gentlemen were possibly of the same impression as other individuals could have been, namely that they were of the opinion that it was their task in this manner to participate in the low intensity warfare which over years has been waged and which preceded the elections in 1994. The way in which others with similar guilt obtained amnesty or were indemnified requires that the government will also act consistently in the case of Mr Derby-Lewis and also of Mr Janusz Walus. The climate of forgiveness which thus far you have helped create and which has also led to peaceful acceptance by Afrikaners of men with blood on their hands, even in your government, can suffer serious damage if unjust and unequal treatment takes place here".

The letter is signed by the Director of Church Administration and the signature appears to be that of Reverend Adendorf.

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Derby-Lewis yesterday during cross-examination there was also reference to the APK Church in your testimony and I refer you to page 5 of Bundle J Mr Chair. Could you please look at this document. It is from Beeld, 20 August 1997, if you look at the second column, in the middle of that column and read that to the Committee please.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I will do that. It reads as follows Mr Chair.

&#9;&#9;"Duminy Miguel Adendorf...."

MR PRINSLOO: There appears to be a problem with the interpretation.

MR BIZOS: Can we have the first paragraph read out in order that we don't ask for leave to read it later.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chair it is from the Beeld and Mr Bizos had requested that I read it from the start so that we don't - do I understand correctly, does Mr Bizos want me to read the whole, from the beginning? Thank you. It reads as follows:

&#9;&#9;"The Afrikaans Protestant Church yesterday did not accept Clive Derby-Lewis' statement that the church had approved of the murder of Mr Hani. He testified in front of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and stated that he believed that the APK, of which he was a member, had approved of the murder. 

&#9;&#9;Duminy Miguel Adendorf, the scribe of the APK's Central Church Commission said that the 'SKK had understanding for the fact that Christians such as Clive Derby-Lewis should have been quoted correctly had meant that they had participated in or had to participate in the struggle that existed before '94. Although the APK resists itself against the communist ideology the SKK wishes to state categorically, 'with all love and sympathy' that the church never made any statements which could be interpreted as encouragement or approval of participation 'in a private war with accompanying murder'".

&#9;That is the end of the article.

MR PRINSLOO: Page 2 of the same document which you referred to, it's from Die Patriot again. 

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I have that in front of me Mr Chair.

MR PRINSLOO: Could you please look at that report, it's a report written by whom?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: By Duminy Andre van den Berg who is a leading church minister in the Afrikaans Protestante Kerk.

MR PRINSLOO: And the page states "Where is Chris Hani now?"

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That is correct Mr Chair.

MR PRINSLOO: And then the report on the next page.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I have that.

MR PRINSLOO: Would you please look at about the fourth paragraph on the first column of that report, would you please read that to us.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes, it reads as follows:

&#9;&#9;"Just as Hani he himself is a Communist..."

this is with reference to Mr Joe Slovo in the previous paragraph,

&#9;&#9;"... and we know what communists think of religion. They say firstly that there is no God, and secondly that religion is the opium of the nation".

And that is the end of that paragraph.

MR PRINSLOO: And then the top portion of the third column.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: The third column of this report Mr Chair reads as follows, that first paragraph.

&#9;&#9;"Most of them live by the sword, and a person who lives by the sword must also expect to die by the sword".

MR PRINSLOO: Is that passage ...(intervention) (Loud noise from the audience)

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I beg your pardon Mr Chair, I cannot hear.

MR PRINSLOO: The portion which you have just read out Mr Derby-Lewis, is that the same quote that was used by the late Dr Treurnicht?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes, that is correct Mr Chairman, it was the same quote.

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Derby-Lewis you previously requested of the Committee, Judge Ngoepe, with reference to the original speech by Dr Treurnicht, which you have with you, is that correct?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes I do.

MR PRINSLOO: You refer to certain portions thereof when Judge Ngoepe asked you in this regard, is that correct?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes that is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: Are there any further sections which you would like to refer to in that speech as indicated by you?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes Mr Chair, may I just repeat that the fact that Dr Treurnicht at the start of his statement said there was a reason why Paardekraal was sought out for this festival and then he describes the history and background, the circumstances of the pile of stones that occurred, the piling in 1890, because of the first Anglo-Boer war where the British army were eventually defeated completely at Majuba and he referred to the piling of stones that took place to commemorate that, what the thought behind it all had been ...(intervention)

MR PRINSLOO: Just for the purposes of the record Mr Chair it is a handwritten document in the writing of the late Dr Treurnicht and Mr Derby-Lewis will you please refer to the specific page you are referring to so that when the document has been photocopied people will be able to follow this.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I am not going to read everything, just what I regard as important, relevant, but the whole speech creates a certain situation very clearly. But to save some time I would like to start on page 9 Mr Chair where Dr Treurnicht starts, that's page 8 where it starts, the sentence starts and it reads as follows:

&#9;&#9;"And now I would like here today at Paardekraal to state there are powers, persons, organisations in South Africa which are operating and plans are being made with regard to our nation and our country which is helping to ripen the time (this has been underlined) when not only the Afrikaner nation but also other nations will pick up the banner for Christian freedom of the nation and will call out "here we stand, God help us". We cannot do otherwise".

&#9;Mr Chair he further states,

&#9;&#9;"This time is becoming ripe for the purpose, not just because of the hot-headed Afrikaners who are looking for an opportunity to shoot and murder the innocent, that is not true of us as a nation, our nation do not accept such people, but the time is being ripened by those who wish to force a new world order upon us who wish to force nations to come together who wish to renounce reconciliation in terms of nationhood by referring to democracy which is attempting to put nations into one political straightjacket; which is twisting theology in order to preach revolution; which is declaring that the striving for freedom is actually a sin; which is regarding your fatherland as everybody's property; which is negating and combating Christian education; which is destroying the triune Godhead to state that nations must come together as a unity; which is taking the nationalism of a nation which wishes to stand together and which testifies to that as racism. And what we find really bad about all these statements is that we want to say as Paul Kruger, 'this is a Christian state'.

&#9;&#9;I wish to state that it is these things, (and these three words are underlined) which will bring the religious Afrikaner to the point where he will say, "here we stand, God help us", we cannot do otherwise".

MR PRINSLOO: And what is the message conveyed to you by this speech?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: It is very clear to me that what Dr Treurnicht said here is that the time is almost there where we will have to act somehow or other in a manner which we had not turned to in the past in order to defend ourselves and to retain our fatherland.

&#9;Mr Chairman on page 11 Dr Treurnicht changes to speaking English, to acknowledge the presence of a large contingent of English-speaking people and he says as follows, and draws them into his bosom -

&#9;&#9;"Ladies and gentlemen

&#9;&#9;Patriotic South Africans we will see here today a wonderful symbolic act by English-speaking patriots who share our urge for freedom in our own land and who are wholeheartedly with us in our resistance against ANC threats of domination. You know this imposing monument was designed in such a way that the stones packed by the thousands of burgers gathered here from the 11th of December 1880 were visible and protected. The monument was completed in November 1890 and unveiled on the 16th of December 1891. On that occasion President Kruger said -

&#9;&#9;'This memorial proclaims the acts of God. Pay attention to what is recorded on it. I declare this memorial open for you to enter mindful of God's hand and power for which this memorial was erected.'

&#9;&#9;During the Second Anglo-Boer War the stones were removed from here by British soldiers and dumped into the Vaal River near Vereeniging, but now after all these 92 years English-speaking patriots decided to bring those stones back to Paardekraal. I wish to say this is an act of friendship and solidarity expressing our mutual dedication and our commitment to the struggle for survival in freedom in our fatherland".

&#9;Mr Chairman there are still a couple of pages which I have marked important but I think if the Committee will continue reading - I think I have described the whole situation.

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Chairman a copy will be made available at the conclusion of the hearing today, it will be photostatted. We are not going to burden the record with further references, it's all in the document. May I ask a moment's indulgence Mr Chairman. You wanted to say something Mr Derby-Lewis ...(intervention)

MR BIZOS: Is this the - was the date on which the speech is said to have been delivered the 10th of October 1992? I just want to get clarity on that?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That is correct Mr Chairman.

MR BIZOS: Yes. Mr Chairman I am going to ask, because we did not have this speech before I concluded my cross-examination I want to put a couple of questions to Mr Derby-Lewis and I will ask for leave, and I am raising it at this stage because in order to put to him what was said on the 21st of October 1992, that is 11 days afterwards, that the CP policy was against violence in Parliament.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Thank you Mr Chairman. I think that if I can just refer finally to page 25 it is part of a call to everyone present where Dr Treurnicht says,

&#9;&#9;"I request you now to support each other and to enter into a commitment as follows:...."

he mentions a number of points, and he says,

&#9;&#9;"We believe in God the triune and we accept His almighty-ness in what happens to our nation. We believe that our nation's history will carry away His blessing and His discipline to us. We state that we are dependent upon Him. We take the Bible as an expression of everything of our nationhood. We honour the memory of our forefathers and we undertake to protect their and our own ideals of freedom and never to let go of that. We do not accept the equality of Christianity with other religions for the sake of tolerance in religion. We turn down the fall of accepted moral values. We stand with Christian education and we turn down totally the fact that people are fighting against it. We want our freedom to be returned to us and we want to retain our identity and we will offer sacrifice for the sake of our freedom and our fatherland. We will reach out a helping hand to our fellow people in our nation and to others in economic straits, and the fight which we have started will continue until we either die or succeed".

And then it is emphasised with a "Yes!", and then everybody present got up and also said "Yes!". And that is all that I wish to quote from that.

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Chairman I am about to complete his re-examination, could I ask for just a five minute adjournment. May I just consult with the attorney then in the presence Mr Chairman. (Recording switched off)

&#9;Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Derby-Lewis during the recess - I beg your pardon, let me put it this way, at the Easter weekend when Mr Hani was assassinated were the members of the caucus and members of the Conservative Party readily available during that weekend?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No Mr Chairman they were all on holiday. In fact they were all enjoying the Easter recess holiday and were not in a position where I could contact them.

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Derby-Lewis it was yesterday spelled out by Mr Bizos that apart from you and Mr Walus there were other people involved as well and he made reference to your wife, Mrs Gaye Derby-Lewis, was she involved?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No Mr Chairman.

MR PRINSLOO: He made reference to other people who reconnoitred, as I understood him to say, "houses" in the plural.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman I don't know what he was referring to but if there were other people reconnoitring houses they had nothing to do with Mr Walus and I.

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Faan Venter, was he in any way involved in any conspiracy to assassinate Mr Hani?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No Mr Chairman I have already testified that the two of us were the sole participants.

MR PRINSLOO: And Mr Arthur Kemp was he involved?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No Mr Chairman he was not. And it was actually, I believe, accepted by the Court, I think that was one of the conditions that he wasn't prosecuted was - or that they would first hear his version and then decide whether they were going to prosecute him or not and after hearing his version they accepted it and he was not prosecuted and so also with Mr Venter.

MR PRINSLOO: Is it indeed so that in the further particulars requested from the State the State represented by Mr von Lieres at the time emphatically stated that Mr Kemp was not regarded as a co-conspirator in this matter?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That is correct Mr Chairman.

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Derby-Lewis when Mr Hani was assassinated in your mind was it to you in any way clear or not that the policy of separate development would not be accepted whatever?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman there was no doubt in my mind, in fact we already had information at that stage that the election would have been held in April 1994, the whole schedule had been part of a secret agenda of the National Party, and we had obtained this information, there was no doubt in our minds that the policy that we support would ever be accommodated in what was proposed.

MR PRINSLOO: At present are there any, are you aware of any political parties who still aspire to attain separate development as a policy?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman to the best of my knowledge not one of the organisations that formed that Blanke Volksfront have defected and turned against that policy. To the best of my knowledge the Freedom Front and the Conservative Party support that political philosophy. I know the Boerestaat Party support that philosophy. In fact I cannot think of one Afrikaner organisation on the right that does not support that policy.

MR PRINSLOO: Do you believe Mr Derby-Lewis if amnesty is granted to you that reconciliation will indeed be achieved?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman I think that I have, during my testimony, indicated my feelings in terms of reconciliation. I have also indicated that I don't see myself in a political role in the future. I have also indicated that the new Constitution is an improvement and that it allows for peaceful methods of resolving difficulties which was not possible in terms of the old Constitution. And Mr Chairman I would like to reiterate that I am going to be spending a lot of time with my children and my grandchildren.

MR PRINSLOO: Thank you Mr Chairman.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR PRINSLOO 

CHAIRPERSON: That letter, speech of Dr Treurnicht, when that is made available it is only fair that you may have to be questioned on that document which has not been seen by us nor counsel for the family.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I understand that Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much, you are excused for the time-being.

MR BIZOS: (...indistinct)

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR BIZOS: ..... to now also some very important information that I have to put to the witness appears from a document which has just been handed to us by counsel for the Commission. May I put these two matters very briefly Mr Chairman?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I urge you to try and avoid going over material we have already covered.

MR BIZOS: No, no it's not material that we have already covered Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. 

FURTHER CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR BIZOS: I merely want to say, Mr Derby-Lewis the Paardekraal document that you read from was a speech delivered on the 10th of October 1992?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That is correct Mr Chairman.

MR BIZOS: You do not mention it in your application for amnesty.

LOUD NOISE FROM AUDIENCE

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman I have testified regarding that speech and I made it very clear in my application that the third freedom struggle was launched on the 26th of May 1990.

MR BIZOS: Yes, please don't repeat your evidence, you did not mention that document in your application for amnesty or that specific speech. You mentioned one speech and one resolution, you didn't mention that document in your application.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That is correct Mr Chairman because I did not have the document available to me at that stage.

MR BIZOS: Very well. Do you agree that that speech was made 11 days before the speech in Parliament by Mr du Plessis?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I agree, yes, Mr Chairman that is correct.

MR BIZOS: And the members, the honourable members of the Conservative Party that were in Parliament and endorsed Mr du Plessis' statement that the CP did not have a policy of violence must of necessity, if not every one of them have been at Paardekraal as well?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I am not sure Mr Chairman, I can't remember who was there. There were between 12 and 15,000 people there.

MR BIZOS: Well can we assume that at least a number of the members of Parliament and senior officials were there?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Some of them, yes Mr Chairman.

MR BIZOS: They obviously did not interpret that speech in the manner in which you do now?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That is Mr Bizos' opinion Mr Chairman.

MR BIZOS: Well I won't debate it anymore, I just wanted to bring that ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, yes.

MR BIZOS: Now you see you told us yesterday when I asked you questions about Mr Edward Clarke when - you remember that he is mentioned in a section of an application for amnesty in relation to the theft of the 300,000 odd rands that were stolen?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I remember that Mr Chairman.

MR BIZOS: Will it come as a shock to you that the person applying for amnesty, Mr Johannes Nicholas Visser, says in his application which we handed in by counsel for the Commission, that amongst the other things that he did was to be an "intelligence officer in the Volksfront/Freedom Front under Edwin Clarke", will it come as a shock to you that the person who had been a member of the Security Police, and who is applying for, I just want to see the number of offences for which he is applying, 16 offences committed by him, that he was a junior to Mr Edwin Clarke the person who fixed your computers and came for breakfast?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman as I stated when the subject came up previously the Volksfront was not in existence at the time of Mr Hani's assassination, so what Mr Visser says will obviously have to be tested by the Committee Mr Chairman. I can't comment on that.

MR BIZOS: Some of the acts for which he is asking for amnesty were committed with Mr Edwin Clarke before the killing.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman then he must be a second Sina van Rensburg, he obviously saw it coming before anyone else did. I have no explanation for that Mr Chairman. I think the Committee will deal with Mr Visser's application and I am not qualified to comment on that because it's obvious to me that Mr Visser is lying.

MR BIZOS: Yes. I merely want to put to you that it would appear that you and your wife had been less than frank in relation to the activities and your knowledge of Mr Clarke.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Whatever Mr Chairman.

MR PRINSLOO OBJECTS: Mr Chairman the issues raised by Mr Bizos now at this stage does not arise from re-examination, these are totally new issues he's raising. Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: ...these documents came to hand now, but I don't think it can take the matter very much further. Visser has made an application and whether he's reliable or not reliable and so on are matters on which we can't comment at this stage.

MR BIZOS: .... was still in the witness box I thought I would bring this to the Committee's attention.

CHAIRPERSON: Have you finished Mr Bizos? Yes, thank you. Yes you are excused Mr Derby-Lewis, thank you.

MR DERBY-LEWIS EXCUSED

MS VAN DER WALT: Unfortunately I will have to ask for a brief break. I would like to discuss the procedure to follow with Mr Mpshe and I also wish to clarify something with the Interpreters because we are going to work in Afrikaans, English and Polish and I would like a brief break of five minutes so that we can sort out these matters.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, we will give you a break for five minutes.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

