2285. Dr. Aggett gestel hy weet hoekom hy hier is nie. Naude het dit aan my gese en ek het daarby ingeval.

Transcription

1 2285. Dr. Aggett gestel hy weet hoekom hy hier is nie. Kaptein Naude het dit aan my gese en ek het daarby ingeval. Do you agree that a person in detention should be given an opportunity to explain such information as may be available to the security police in order that he may make a satisfactory statement in order to gain his r e l e a s e? --- Herhaal net die vraag asseblief. Do you agree insofar as this document was i n f o r mation relating to Dr. Aggett, he should have been given an opportunity to explain so that he could make a sa- (10 tisfactory statement about it to gain his release? ---- Edelagbare dit was nie die enigste dokument, of dit was 0 nie die enigste inligtingstuk omtrent Dr. Aggett nie... ( m n r. Eizos orderbreek) Let's deal with this one only. Kan ek klaar praat asseblief. Dr. Aggett het geleentheid gehad, ek weet nie wanneer hy begin het nie, maar vandat ek by hom aangesluit het tot die 21ste December tot die 8ste Januarie. Hy het in sy sel gesit van die 8ste Januarie behalwe die dae wat hy uitgekom het tot ongeveer weer (20 die 25ste Januarie. Hy het 'n geleentheid gehad van die 25 s te tot die 28ste en Dr. Aggett het pal die plekke waar hy werklik betrokke was probeer ontduik totdat ons vir hom gese het maar hier is die inligting wat ons het, maar ek het nie vir hom hierdie dokument gegee nie en ek dink hy het voldoende tyd gehad om daar sy dinge te v e r d u i d e l i k. Hy weet waar hy betrckke was. Just a moment please. Did ycu interpret that d o cument as Dr. Aggett being a merrber cf a cell in the JNC? --- Dit is korrek so edelagbare. (30 A n d /...

2 2286. And did you interrogate Dr. Aggett on the basis that that was proof of the fact that he was a member of the ANC? --- Edelagbare laat ek eers vir u so verduidelik. Ons kry drie kategoriee van ANC-lede. Die eerste is 'n volwaardige ingeskrewe lid wat ingesweer word en wat met 'n lidmaatskapkaart rondloop. Dan die 2de tipe lid is die aktiewe ondersteuner en die 3de tipe lid is 'n simpatiseerder en Dr. Aggett het beweecs tussen simpatiseerder en aktiewe ondersteuner en dear was redes hoekom hy nie 'n kaartdraer wou gewees het of (10 'n werklik.e aktiewe lid van die ANC nie. This definition of your's perhaps may have to * be revised if you go and look at the unlawful o r g a n i sations Act and some of the cases but I don't think we've got time for that Lieutenant. Let's come to the guestion. Did you interrogate Dr. Aggett on the basis that that showed that he was a member of the ANC? --- Edelagbare ja, maar hierdie dokument het in my ondervraging van Dr. Aggett eintlik 'n baie minderwaardige rol gespeel omdat ek inligting tot my beskikking gehad het wat Dr. (20 Aggett by 'n ander sel van die ANC verbind het. Dit was eintlik vir my n verrassing hierdie dokument, ek het nie geweet hy was by die spesifieke persoon ook betrokke nie. Would he only have gained his release if he proved his innocence to your satisfaction? --- Edelagbare ek verstaan nie die vraag nie. Would you have considered his statement a s a t i s factory statement unless he made an admission that he was a member of the ANC? ---- Edelagbare hy het aan my (30 erken/...

3 2287. erken dat hy 'n lid was van die ANC op die kategoriese basis wat ek vir u uiteengesit het. Daar was verskeie redes hoekom Dr. Aggett nie 'n kaartdraer van die ANC wou gewees het nie. Would you have considered his written statement as a satisfactory written statement if it had not con- \ tained an admission that he was a member of the ANC? ---- Ek verstaan nie die vraag nie edelagbare. Would you have considered his written statement as a satisfactory statement if it did not contain an (10 admission that he was a member of the ANC? --- Ja e d e l agbare, bevredigend in die sin as Dr. Aggett vir my gese het, en wat hy ook gese' het, dat hy nie 'n k a a r t draer was en ingesweerde lid van die ANC, was ek doodtevrede daarmee. Leave out the card carry, would you have considered any statement which did not admit that he was a member

4 Cassette SP Whitehead Dit was eintlik vir my n verrassing hierdie dokument, ek het nie geweet hy was by die spesifieke persoon ook betrokke nie. Yes, if Dr Aggett was to - was he to - would he only have gained his release if he proved his innocence to your satisfaction? --- Edelagbare, ek verstaan nie die vraag nie. Would you have considered his statement a satisfactory statement, unless he made an admission that he was a member of the A N C? -----Edelagbare, Dr Aggett het aan my erken dat hy Vi lid was van die ANC op die kategoriese basis wat ek vir u uit- (10 eengesit het. Daar was verskeie redes hoekom Dr Aggett nie Vi kaartdraer van die ANC wou gewees het nie. Would you have considered his written statement as a satisfactory written statement, if it did not contain an admission that he was a member of the ANC? --- Ek verstaan nie die vraag nie edelagbare. Would you have considered his written statement as a satisfactory statement, if it did not contain an admission that he was a member of the ANC? --- Ja edelagbare, bevredigend in die sin, as Dr Aggett vir my gese het hy was nie - en wat hy (20 ook gese het - dat hy nie n kaartdraer was, *n ingesweerde lid van die ANC nie, was dit vir my, was ek doodtevrede daarmee. Leave out the card carrying, would you have considered any statement which did not admit that he was a member, cardcarrying or other, of the ANC, as an unsatisfactory statement? --- As ons net - edelagbare ek verstaan nie die vraag nie, gaan dit net oor die spesifieke gedeelte van ANC, of..? Lieutenant, would you have considered any statement made by Dr Aggett which did not include an admission that he was a member of the ANC of one kind or another, according (30 to your definition, as a satisfactory statement? ---Definitief

5 nie edelagbare. Definitief nie - so that your state of mind was that Dr Aggett was going to remain in detention until such time as he admitted that he was a member of the ANC, of one kind or another? --- Dit is nie so nie edelagbare. Well what is it then? --- Edelagbare, ek het inligting tot my beskikking gehad, en totdat Dr Aggett hierdie inligting vir my opgeklaar het en vir my self vertel het van dit wat ek geweet het, sou ek tevrede gewees het. Did it ever occur to you that your information may be (10 false? --- Dit is so edelagbare, ek het dit oorweeg en daar was plekke waar Dr Aggett vir my, waar ek nie persoonlik waarneming gedoen het nie, waar ander persone waarneming op hom gedoen het, kan ek twee gevalle onthou waar Dr Aggett vir my n redelike verduideliking gegee het, en ek het dit, geaanvaar het, maar aan die anderkant het ek ook my eie persoonlike waarnemings gedoen. Yes, now let us just get finality on this, would you - you have already told us you would not have considered a statement which did not contain an admission that he was a member (20 of the ANC as a satisfactory statement, does that not mean that Dr Aggett would not have been in the least - or let's put it this way, you would not have recommended his release unless you obtained an admission from him that he was a member of the ANC of one kind or another? --- Edelagbare, ek het dit reeds verduidelik aan die Hof, en Dr Aggett, het ek ook genoem was nie n ingesweerde lid van die ANC nie. Dr Aggett het ek genoem, se rol in die ANC het gewissel van simpatiseerder na aktiewe ondersteuner. Waar Dr Aggett kon help het hy gehelp, hy het nie opdragte direkte van ANC in die buiteland ontvang (30 nie/

6 word / nie, hy was betrokke in twee selle hier, Dr Aggett was n Marxis, Dr Aggett se eind-doel was dieselfde as die van die ANC, hy het net n verskillende metode gevolg hoe om daarby uit te kom, maar hy het saam met die ANC en 5ACTU gewerk wanneer dit hom gepas het, want hulle het na dieselfde einddoel gestreef. Did he ever - did he ever admit that he worked with the ANC? --- Dit is korrek so edelagbare. Did he admit it? Dit is korrek. When? --- Op verskeie geleenthede edelagbare. W h e n? ----Edelagbare, Dr Aggett het vergaderings gehou (10 met persone wat ingeperk was, wat op n stadium in 1976 na die buiteland gegaan het om fondse by SACTU te gaan kry, SACTU mense te gaan sien wat op die hoofbestuur is van SACTU, wat ook ANClede is, daar het Dr Aggett saam met die mense toe hulle terug kom vergaderings gehou, hulle het probeer om ondergrondse vakbonde in Suid-Afrika te stig, alhoewel daarna n dispuut, het hulle die idee laat vaar, dit was bespreek. Dr Aggett het saam met ANC-lede, erkende ANC-persone wat in hierdie dokument geidentifiseer word as persone wat onder dissipline is, het Dr Aggett vergaderings gehou oor die kwessie van mili- (20 tere opleiding, of hulle moet gaan vir militere opleiding of nie. Daar is verskeie ander voorvalle wat ek vir u kan noem. Now just in case anybody gets any wrong impression, the discussion was whether anybody should go to the South African army, not whether to go outside for military training under the auspices of any unlawful organisation, is that what you are referring to? --- Dit is korrek so edelagbare, en Dr Aggett het ook aan my meegedeel die Hof is bewus dat Dr Aggett nie sy Weermagopleiding gedoen het nie, dat hy weggehardloop het (30 vir die Weermag, en hy het aan my meegedeel dat as hy opgeroep

7 2291. word of as die Weermag ooit by hom uitkom sou hy die ANC se beleid gevolg het en die land verlaat het. Now let me just return to my question. Would you have recommended the release of Dr Aggett unless you got a written statement from him that he was a member of the ANC of one kind or another? COURT Mr Bizos, I have recorded that question twice, I have heard the replies, and I think you can move on to another question.. ADV BIZOS Well is the answer sir, no that he will not (10 be released, because if that is the answer I will... COURT He has given two, on two occasions he has given the answer. ADV BIZOS That he would not have been released sir? ---Edelagbare... HOF Luitenant, antwoord maar weer die vraag sodat mnr Bizos kan hoor wat u se. --- Edelagbare ek het aan die Hof verduidelik - Dr Aggett was daar om die waarheid te praat en Dr Aggett was verbonde met ANC en ANC-lede, en ek wil nie gehad het Dr Aggett moes vir my gese het hy is n kaartdraer, of hy is n (20 aktiewe ingesweerde lid van die ANC nie. Hy moes vir my die waarheid vertel het, hy het my ook die waarheid in daardie verband vertel, want Dr Aggett was Yi Marxis, en ek sal Dr Aggett nie vrygelaat het voor'.ek i nie die voile waarheid gehad het oor die ANC en Marxisme, en enige ander verband nie. Hy was daar om die voile waarheid te praat. ADV BIZOS Yes, thankyou for that answer, I'll assume that the answer is in thenegative. Now you were going to decide whether your information was correct, and whether Dr Aggett had told you the truth? Edelagbare, ek het Dr Aggett se (30 antwoorde, en dit wat hy vir ons verstrek het, gemeet aan inligting/

8 inligting wat ons op hand gehad het. COURT, ADV BIZ05 Mr Bizos, is it convenient at this stage to interrupt? I just want to put one final question - you see if your evidence is correct you were really there to obtain a statement from Dr Aggett in which he admitted his unlawful activities? --- Nee edelagbare, ek was daar om - ek het met Dr Aggett deurgewerk dat hy die waarheid moes praat. And you had the information? Edelagbare, ek het inligting gehad, maar daar het ook uit die ander aangehoudenes se verklarings op daardie stadium, verbasend ook baie inlig- (10 ting omtrent Dr Aggett na vore gekom. So you were not really looking for information, you were looking for a c o n f e s s i o n? -----Ek het ook nie gesoek na n - ek 0 kan nie - ek het nie gesoek na n konfessie nie edelagbare, ek het gesoek na die waarheid, en n konfessie onder Artikel 6 word nie aanvaar nie. AT THIS STAGE COURT TAKES THE TEA ADJOURNMENT ON RESUMPTION : STEPHAN PETER WHITEHEAD (Still under oath) further states : CROSS-EXAMINATION BY ADV BIZOS (ctd) (20 Lieutenant, would you agree that on the information that you have today given us, Dr Aggett was in, what is commonly called, in a Catch 22 situation? --- Herhaal net die vraag asseblief? Do you agree that on what you have now told us, Dr Aggett was in a Catch 22 situation? --- Edelagbare, ek verstaan nie die begrip "Catch 22" nie. Well it's an expression, it's equivalent to "heads you win, tails I lose". --- Kan die advokaat dit net vir my in Afrikaans verduidelik, ek is nie.. (3 q Yes, unless he agreed with the information which you had and/

9 and you believed to be correct, he could not make a satisfactory statement? --- Nee, dit is nie so nie edelagbare. Would you have ever been satisfied that your information was incorrect and Dr Aggett was telling the truth? ---Edelagbare Dr Aggett het die waarheid vir my vertel en ek was tevrede daarmee, dis hoekom hy begin het om sy tweede verklaring te skry f. We'll come to those notes in the second statement, and we'll show how wrong you are about that Lieutenant, but let's start with the first statement for the time being. Do you (10 agree that the statement of 26 pages, which was signed by Dr Aggett and indexed by him, was completed after 41 days of detention? ---Edelagbare, ek het nie die* dae getel nie, maar ek aanvaar dit as korrek. And you've already told us that you and Captain Naude had all the information that you required including the trump card, during this period? Dit is ook so korrek. Yes, now would you agree that that typewritten and indexed statement shows that Dr Aggett, although he may not have agreed with your view of what the role of Trade Unions in our (20 society is, was not guilty of any offence? --- Kan die vraag net weer aan my gestel word? That there is no offence disclosed in that 26-page statement, taken after 41 days of detention? --- Ek verskil edelagbare. I beg your pardon? --- Ek verskil. What offences are disclosed in the first statement? --- Edelagbare, in die eerste verklaring, as ek nou vinnig kan onthou erken Dr Aggett dat hy simpatiek is teenoor die ANC en dit is n oortreding, dit is bevordering van die belange... (30 Where did you get that from Lieutenant? Is that the

10 basis upon which people are kept in detention, on the basis that if you admit that you are sympathetic to the ANC, you commit an offence? --- Nee edelagbare, ek het nie so gese nie. Do you consider if a person makes an admission that he is sympathetic to the ANC he commits an offence? Edelagbare in die totale verband gesien, met Dr Aggett se simpatiee en met sy samewerking waar hy kon gee, en die feit dat hy n Marxis was, is dit duidelik dat hy skuldig was aan...(intervention ) No, we are talking about the first statement. We are (10 going to take issue with you as to whether he said he was a Marxist freely and voluntarily, or not. I am talking about the first statement. Do you regard anything said in the first statement as an admission of any offence by Dr Aggett? Edelagbare nee, nee daar is nie n misdaad wat uitstaan nie, maar ek het vir u alreeds verduidelik hoe dit gekom het met die eerste verklaring en hoe...(intervention) Do you now agree that there is no offence at all admitted by Dr Aggett after 41 days of detention? Ek stem saam edelagbare. Good, because you see we are going to suggest to his (20 Worship, that you were going to "one-up" Captain Naude, because he had no difficulty in telling his Worship at page 1724 line 21 that there is no information in the first statement that Dr Aggett had any information in relation to terrorism or any unlawful organisation of which he had personal knowledge, would you agree with that? --- Ek stem saam edelagbare. Yes. You had been tailing Dr Aggett for 3 years?--- Nie net ek persoonlik nie, en ook nie vir 3 jaar aanhoudend nie edelagbare, met tye. Yes, if what Captain Naude said, and the document proves (30 was/

11 strong/ was correct, your work had come to nothing? Edelagbare, ek stem nie saam nie. Well, you had been following the man for a couple of years, you take him in for 41 days, you interrogate him and you produce a statement in which no unlawful activity is disclosed. Didn't you feel rather disappointed, didn't you feel that your work had come to nothing? --- Edelagbare, ek het reeds aan die Hof verduidelik dat toe Dr Aggett daar aankom het Kaptein Naude aan hom sekere dinge ontbloot en vir hom gese hy weet hoekom hy daar is, hy moet h verklaring skryf. (10 Hoekom Kaptein Naude vir hom gese het om daardie eerste verklaring te tik, en voortgegaan het met dit weet ek nie, want Kaptein Naude was self nie tevrede nie. Ons het nie vir Dr Aggett onmiddellik met troefkaarte gekonfronteer en gese dit is wat ons het, ons weet jy is n lid van die ANC, ons weet jy is n Marxis nie, se nou vir ons daaroor nie. Ons wou gehad het Dr Aggett moet uit sy eie uit daar wees, en hy moes n bevredigende.. (intervention) Was 41 days not enough? Edelagbare, Dr Aggett was al die tyd gegun om sy eerste verklaring te maak. (20 Did you show the first statement to Mr Cronwright? Edelagbare, sover my kennis strek het ek dit nie gedoen nie, ek sou hom seker van tyd tot tyd ingelig het wat Dr Aggett gese het, maar Kaptein Naude was op daardie stadium in bevel van die verklaring neem. Did you take it to Mr Swanepoel, the Deputy Attorney- General? Edelagbare, ek het dit nie na mnr Swanepoel toe geneem n ie. And do you agree that in paragraph 73 to 77 of the first statement Dr Aggett shows himself with strong democratic (30 ideas, dedicated to the Trade Union movement, and who had

12 strong objections to infiltration from outside, by outside organisations, more particularly unlawful organisations? Edelagbare ek het ook n kopie van daardie verklaring by my, kan ek miskien net kyk...? Yes, of course. --- Kan u net die paragrawe herhaal asseblief? Yes, paragraphs 73 to Kan u net vir my die vraag weer herhaal asseblief? Yes, I'll try and repeat myself if I can - that they show that he had strong democratic principles, committed to (10 Trade Unionism, and had strong objections to Trade Unions being infiltrated or manipulated by any outsiders, and more particularly unlawful organisations - I think it's a repetition of the question. --- Edelagbare, ek stem saam dit is daar, maar dit is omdat - soos ek reeds aan die Hof verduidelik het - Dr Aggett was n Marxis, hy het dieselfde einddoel gesien as wat die organisasies het, maar hierdie organisasies werk op n teorie van Marxisme-Leninisme, waar geweld ingebring word, en Dr Aggett wou nie onder dissipline van hierdie - een van die organisasies staan nie, want hulle het geweld voorgestaan. (20 Dr Aggett het geglo - en soos dit hier se - om werkers demokraties en militant voor te berei in lyn - dit is in lyn met SACTU se "policies" en optrede, wou hy die werkers voorberei ook vir die oorname van ons regering en hierdie Staat. No, but is there anything in paragraphs 73 to 77 in which he subscribes to Marxist-Leninism or to any militant workers, or taking over the Government, is there anything like that, or do you see this evil behind every bush? --- Nee, dit is nie so nie - dit was nie so nie ede1agba re...(intervention) Well where is it in paragraphs 73 to 77? --- Die hele, (30 die paragrawe van die ANC, van die SACTU is deurspek met die/

13 die gedagte edelagbare. So you say that when Dr Aggett denies that he is a member of the ANC and he denies that he has anything to do with SAC TU, and he says that he has objection, you say that if you read it as a whole, it means the opposite? --- Nee, kan ek so - ek het vir die Hof verduidelik, Dr Aggett het saamgestem met die beginsels van die ANC, ek dink hy noem dit ook hier. Dr Aggett het saamgestem met die beginsels van SACTU. Dr Aggett het net nie met die metode wat hulle gebruik, ANC, die geweld-metode in die strategie...(intervention) Why do you want to use your own words? --- Kan ek net klaar praat asseblief edelagbare? Or Aggett het op n SACTU wyse opereer, en SACTU is n aparte organisasie van die ANC, maar SACTU is nie net n ekonomiese Vakbond nie, hy is ook Vi politiese Vakbond, en SACTU se hoofbestuur is algemeen bekend is bykans almal ANC-lede, en die enigste rede hoekom Dr Aggett net nie onder dissipline wou staan nie, want dan het hy homself te beperk gevoel. Hy het gewerk vir dieselfde einddoel as die ANC en SACTU, maar hy was n Marxis, en hy het net in h verskillende metode geglo om by daardie einddoel uit te kom wat ooreenstem met SACTU se mani.er van mense organiseer en militant maak. Let's confine ourselves to the first statement which you have before you. Do you accept that what is contained in the written document is a fair reflection of what Dr Aggett said? ---Edelagbare ek is nou nie seker op watter stadium word daar bedoel nie. During the course of the 41 days of detention and the days on which he was interrogated, a written statement was produced Lieutenant, which is before you. We do not have to rely on your memory, your interpretations or your veracity about/

14 about it, it is a written document. Do you agree that it says what I put to you it says? --- Edelagbare, ek het reeds verduidelik hoe hierdie verklaring tot stand gekom het. Ons het ander inligting tot ons beskikking gehad wat hierdie verklaring verkeerd bewys het. Do you want to add anything to - as an answer to my question? --- Ek het die vraag beantwoord edelagbare. I'm glad you think so. Right, now tell me, where Dr Aggett says in his second statement - have you got that in front of you - the handwritten one please? Ek het onge- (10 lukkig nie die handgeskrewe gedeelte nie. We'll show you a c o p y. ---Ek het n getikte weergawe daarv an. Yes, but that's false. * There is a very important omission out of the typed version, it is a false document, I would like you to have a look at the original in Dr Aggett's handwriting.. ADV 5CHAB0RT Edelagbare, met respek, my geleerde vriend het dit nou tweemaal gese, he said that it is a false document, on what is that based? There is certain evidence before you concerning that document, and concerning that particular (20 omission, now he is putting this to your Worship as a statement of fact, whether your Worship has made a finding accordingly I would not be aware sir, but I can only say to put that on that basis to this witness is a falsity in itself. ADV BIZOS It's an incorrect copy, I'll amend my question sir. COURT Thankyou Mr Schabort. That's better. ADV BIZOS Don't worry about the typed copy at the moment, because it's incorrect, look at the original. Now please tell us, try and confine yourself to the question please - (30 please tell us when Dr Aggett wrote the words "I believe in the/

15 2299. the Marxist ideology and I am therefore a Communist", when did he wrote those words on the document before you? --- Edelagbare op die dokument staan voor my "I support the Marxist Ideology and therefore I am a communist". Yes? --- Ek kan nie vir edelagbare se wanneer dit geskryf is nie, ek vermoed dit was op Maandag die lste Februarie toe Dr Aggett met hierdie weergawe van sy verklaring begin'het. Was that how the statement began on that Monday, or was that paragraph put in after Dr Aggett had started writing this document? --- Edelagbare ek sal nie kan se of hy dit (10 agterna ingesit het of terwyl hy geskryf het nie, want op Maandagoggend die lste Februarie het ek sy eerste verklaring, sy bykomende verklaring, en notas wat hy gemaak het gedurende die naweek, het ek aan hom voorgele en gese daar is h kantoor, daar is die lessenaar, hy het gesit en op sy eie begin skryf. Adjudant-offisier de Bruyn was by hom en ek het van tyd tot tyd ingeloer, ek kan nie se wanneer in daarde vier dae hy dit geskryf het nie, maar ek vermoed dis die eerste dag want dit is so getik ook. Now - and when did he write in the following words: "I (20 am also an idealist"? --- Ja edelagbare, ek het gekyk daarna na dit, soos hy die bladsye geskryf het, van die Dinsdag af, het Adjudant-offisier de Bruyn - ek weet nie hoe ver hy was op die Dinsdag nie - het Adjudant-offisier de Bruyn die bladsye geneem en begin tik. Ek sien op die getikte weergawe is daar net "I support the Marxist Ideology and therefore I am a Communist". Ek vermoed dat hy moes hierdie agterna hierby ingevoeg het, nadat die ander weergawe alreeds getik is. Right, has Mr Lodge's affidavit been shown to you? --- Nee edelagbare. (30 Now do you agree that if we have a look at it, that it looks/

16 2300. looks as if the words "I am also an Idealist" were squeezed in? --- Ek kry daardie indruk edelagbare. And if you have a look at the line on the left, - if you have a look at the line of the left, the - for this first paragraph "I support the Marxist Ideology.." it looks as if it was written not at the same time as the words "My father was a farmer", you know, the paragraph is pushed out to the left? --- Edelagbare ek is nie n handskrifdeskundige nie, ek sal my nie uitlaat daaroor nie. As a detective, and not as a handwriting expert, would (10 you agree that it would appear that what - it would appear that what is now a one, was written after a one had been written, which has subsequently been changed into a two, as a # detective, not as a... if you were investigating the case? Perhaps the original will make it clearer to your Worship and the learned Assessor sir. --- Edelagbare, die teorie maak vir my sin, ek kan net nie se of dit so is of nie so nie. But as a detective, this is the sort of conclusion you may well have come t o? ---Edelagbare, ek is nie n Speurder nie, maar ek kom tot dieselfde gevolgtrekking. (20 Oh I see, didn't you have any training as a detective? ---Ek is nie n speurder nie edelagbare. I see, and do you agree that if you look at it as a Security police officer, that the statement orginally started in the same way as the first statement, there was the name and there was the address, and it started over again "My father was a farmer", correct? --- Ek stem saam edelagbare. But for some reason or other the pattern was changed and it was considered important to put a very important admission in right at the commencement of the statement? --- Edelag- (30 bare, soos ek vir u se ek was nie persoonlik by waar dit geskryf was/

17 2301. was nie, dit moes in elk geval gedurende die Maandag gebeur het, want Adjudant-offisier de Bruyn het Dinsdag begin om dit oor te tik, en die "I am also an idealist" was heelwaarskynlik na die Dinsdag ingevoeg want toe was dit alreeds getik, maar ek was nie persoonlik by nie, ek kan nie kommentaar daaroor lewer nie I want you please, as a Security police officer, to try and inform us under what circumstances Dr Aggett would have wanted to put "I am also an idealist" after this statement, the first part of the statement? Edelagbare, ek kan vir (10 u nie se nie. Now do you agree that the words "I am also an Idealist", for a person who has had some knowledge of some elementary political philosophy, is a contradiction? --- Nee edelagbare. You don't? Now elsewhere in the statement, the word "communistic" is used, do you agree? --- Dit is so edelagbare. Do you agree that the word 11communistic" is used in a derogatory sense by people who are opposed to communism and Communists? Have you ever heard a person who is not a (20 declared enemy of communism, using the word "communistic" in ordinary parlance? --- Edelagbare ek vind dit bietjie moeilik om die vraag in Engels te verstaan, as die advokaat net vir my n klein bietjie duideliker sal stel. The English word "communistic", is it a word which people whom you have interrogated, like Dr Aggett, do they use the word "communistic"? --- Dr Aggett het op verskeie plekke die woord "communistic" gebruik, maar hy het ook op n ander plek die woord "Marxist" of "Marxism" gebruik, ek is nie seker nie. Didn't you know that "communistic" is used in a de- (30 rogatory sense by the opponents of Communism? --- Ek moet erken/

18 erken edelagbare ek verstaan nie die woord baie mooi, "derogatory" of wat die woord ookal is nie. You see "communistic" you see, "communistic" is a word which is more likely to be used by a person who has translated the word "kommunistiese" into English, the word "communistic" is not an adjective which is common parlance in English, did you know that? --- Edelagbare ek het dit nie geweet nie, maar.. (intervention) You didn't know, good. Now I want to read to you the conclusion, and the reasoning of Mr Lodge, appearing on page (10 6 of his affidavit of the 12th of April, He says, at page 6, that anything - the question posed - "That anything in statement B and C contradict this conclusion". I will tell you what - it will become clear what "B" and "C" are. "To an uninformed reader this may appear to be the case, as despite the obvious similarity of the main narrative and it's argument, including the retention of the critical view of SACTU strategy, there are two fresh admissions concerning Dr Aggett's political sympathies. They are: (20 'I support the Marxist ideology and therefore I am a communist. I am also an Idealist. that is page 1 paragraph 1.. "..'When I began working in AFCWU I had communistic ideas'. In addition Dr Aggett states that in 1977 he was a member of a Capital (reading? - not clear) group." Now just listen to what Mr Lodge's conclusion is and I will ask you some questions. "These admissions do not convince me that Dr Aggett (30 was a Communist. They are expressed in a way that invites/

19 invites disbelief. I have three reasons for thinking this. The first problem with these admissions is their extremely cryptic nature. Elsewhere Dr Aggett in his statements - in his statement exact and precise especially when defining his attitudes to political movements. He was obviously a man who thought his way carefully through political problems and expressed himself about them articulately. These sentences are inconsistent with the fashion in which the rest of these documents are written. The strongest (10 implication incidentally that can be drawn from these sentences, is that he had an intellectual affiliation to Marxism, not that he was an SACP member. This is inconsistent with Dr Aggett's personality as it is expressed in the rest of the statement, that of a pragmatic and undoctrinary (? not clear) man. The second point arises from the language of these admissions. as an ideology. Communists would not describe Marxism In Marxist texts, this word relates to a class-based system of beliefs, values (20 and cultures and is often used in derogatory sense. To Communists, Marxism would mean a set of theories about society, history and economics or a mode of analysis. To Communists it does not necessarily follow that one is a Communist merely because one believes in the utility of such theory and analysis. Only someone with a very naive conception of Marxism would state 'I support the Marxist ideology and therefore I am a Communist'..." I want to pause here for a moment. Would you say that you (30 have anything more than a naive conception of Marxism? ---Edelagbare/

20 2304. bare ek het n kennis, maar n gebrekkige kennis van Marxisme. Would you say that it is a naive..? --- Ek sal se dit is h gebrekkige kennis. I see, you see because we are going to try and show his Worship that these are not Dr Aggett's words, but yours. "Only someone with a very naive conception of Marxism would state 'I support the Marxist ideology and therefore I am a Communist', and no Communist would voluntarily employ the word 'communistic' to describe his own political inclinations. The word is (10 normally used in a derogatory sense by people who are politically extremely conservative. As such it has an unpleasant association for anyone on the left. Thirdly, the statement 'I support the Marxist Ideology and therefore I am a communist', should be read in' conjunction with the next sentence omitted from statement "B",..." that is the typed statement, "...'I am also an Idealist'. I do not believe that this was a casual inclusion. It is intended to (20 make nonsense of what has preceded it. If one subscribes to a materialist philosophy such as Marxism, then one cannot describe oneself in the philosophic sence as an idealist. The most basic exposition of Marxist philosophy would normally begin with Marx's repudiation of Hege1's (? name not clear) divine idea of world spirit. Dr Aggett's Journal contains notes on Hegel's concept of idealism, thereby providing convincing evidence that Dr Aggett was familiar with., these issues. Furthermore, I am informed that (30 Dr Aggett's most admired intellectual figure was (?..name ) /

21 2305. (?..name not clear) A..., not a writer of whom a Communist would approve. My conclusion therefore is that Dr Aggett, for reasons unknown to me, allowed these references to Marxism and Communism to be included in statements "B" and "C", but in a terminology which he would not normally employ and with the qualification concerning his idealism to demonstrate their falsehood." Now, I've read that to you at length, what I want to ask you is this, do you - are you ina position to admit or deny that (10 what Dr Aggett must have slipped in was intended as an avoidance of the first sentence. --- Edelagbare, onder omstandighede # heelwaarskynlik, maar dit is nie die enigste plek waar Dr Aggett gepraat.het of erken het van Marxistiese ideologiee of dat hy kommunistiese gedagtes gehad het nie...(intervention) Do you agree Kan ek klaar praat asseblief edelagbare. Dr Aggett het aan my verduidelik dat hy -is n Marxistiese kommunis, en dat hy het homself n Euro-communist(?) genoem, dit is die kommunis wat op n - ekonomie met politiek probeer koppel en deur middel van die ekonomie die politieke mag wil win, (20 en nie deur middel van rewolusie of wapengeweld nie. I don't want to have a discussion with you about Eurocommunism or any other type of communism, we are trying to find out whether he made this statement freely and voluntarily or not. Do you agree, or are you in a position to disagree with Mr Lodge's view that by slipping in "I am also an Idealist" with a capital "I", Dr Aggett was - I'm sorry it's not a capital it's in the typewritten document that I have been reading that it's a capital "I" - by writing in that he is an idealist, that he was trying to negative the meaning of the first (30 statement, are you in a position to negative that? ---Edelagbare

22 ek kan nie kommentaar lewer op daardie wat Dr Aggett bygeskryf het nie...(intervention) So that..«adv SCHABORT Your Worship may the witness please just give his full answer sir, before my learned friend fires the next question? --- Edelagbare, maar ek sien dit dat dit was nou aan my gestel dat n persoon kan nie Vi Marxis en n Idealis wees nie maar ek sien dit in n ander lig, n persoon moet n Idealis wees om Marx se teorie te glo en dit te wil volvoer, want Marx het die Utopia op aarde voorgestel, en die paradys kan nie werklik met daardie teorie tot stand kom nie. ADV BIZOS Yes, well perhaps that may show how little you may know about these things Lieutenant, but let me try and explain this - the way it was explained to me by Mr Lodge perhaps, so that we can all understand it. I want you to please furnish any explanation you can by the parallel that I am going to give you. You see Mr Lodge's view is, if we could take it in terms of which we all understand, that if a Moslem had been compelled to acknowledge the existence of the Holy Trinity, and he wrote down "I believe in the Holy Trinity", and wanted to show that that was against his will, he would thereafter have written, "There is but one God and he has only one Prophet" in order to indicate that he did not make the first admission voluntarily. That is what it means according to Mr Lodge. Are you able to negative that suggestion? Edelagbare, dit is mnr Lodge se siening. I beg your pardon? --- Ek het aan die Hof gestel edelagbare dat dit mnr Lodge se siening is. Now can you explain Mr de Bruyn's evidence, that it was not there when he typed, assume that we accept that that evidence is correct, and that it was not deliberately left out

23 --- Ek is nou nie seker nie, bedoel u die gedeelte van 'I support the..' - wat is dit - 'I support the Marxist ideology and therefore I am a communist', want dit het Adjudant-offisier de Bruyn definitief ingetik, die ander gedeelte was nie daar gewees nie. "I am also an idealist", assume that it was not there. \ Now was - did Dr Aggett know that his statement was being typed? --- Dit is korrek so, Adjudant-offisier de Bruyn het by hom in diekantoor gesit en die verklaring getik terwyl hy gesit en skryf het. (10 And were the pages of the completed typing available to Dr Aggett there in the room? --- Dit is ook so edelagbare. When did you first notice the words "I am also an idealist"? --- Edelagbare, na die dood van die oorledene. How long after the death of..(inaudible, voice drops) ---- Ek is nie seker nie, toe ek al die inligting weer begin byme- kaar kry. Ek het hierdie tweede verklaring eintlik nooit gesien daardie laaste week nie edelagbare. Now did you - besides Mr de Bruyn, would anyone have had any knowledge as to - de Bruyn and yourself - would anyone (20 have had any knowledge as to how those words came to be slipped in by Dr Aggett? --- Edelagbare ek kan nie se die woorde was ingeglip nie. Dit klink skelm. Dr Aggett het daar gesit en skryf by sy tafel, hy het een tafel tot sy beskikking gehad waar hy gesit en skryf het met sy notas. Soos hy klaar geskryf het, het hy dit oorgegee vir Adjudant-offisier de Bruyn. Adjudant-offisier de Bruyn het dit oorgetik en hy het dit maar weer daar op sy tafel kom neersit, so ek kan net nie se wanneer hy dit ingevoeg het nie. At this stage he had opened his heart and he was fully (30 co-operating with you I take it? This is from the 1st of February/

24 February onwards? --- Dit is korrek so edelagbare. And he must have been aware of the progress or lack of progress that Mr de Bruyn was making in the typing of his statement? --- Edelagbare, ek verstaan nie die vraag mooi nie. He must have been aware of how Mr de Bruyn was getting on with the typing of the statement, how far he was getting? --- Dit is korrek so edelagbare. And he must have known long before - a number of days before the 4th, that Mr de Bruyn had typed his statement without this second word "I am also an idealist"? --- Edelagbare (10 ek kan nie daarop kommentaar gee nie, want ek weet nie wanneer dit ingeskryf is nie. Yes, now whose idea was it by the way that this paragraph, this new paragraph 1 should be put right in the forefront, before any personal details, whose idea was it that it should go there? --- Edelagbare ek kan nie se nie, Dr Aggett het al sy notas en vorige verklarings gekry en vir hom gese "begin Vi nuwe verklaring". But why should Dr Aggett himself have wanted to put this which he had denied - presumably denied and which is not (20 included in his first statement, why should he have wanted to wave it as a flag so to speak, right at the beginning of his statement? --- Edelagbare, ek kan nie kommentaar daarop lewer nie. Because you see the only inference that we will submit that can be drawn is, that this was the real fruit of your unlawful conduct, that this is what you forced Dr Aggett to write right in the forefront of his statement? --- Edelagbare, ek wil net vir u so noem dat ek weet nie hoe n mens een persoon kan forseer om te skryf nie, maar Dr Aggett het dit op ander (30 plekke ook geskryf gedurende daardie week. Yes/

25 2309. Yes, well you say you don't know how you can force a person to write - what about if you have electrically shocked him and you threatened to do it again? --- Edelagbare, ek ontken dit, dit is nie n metode wat gevolg word nie. Well isn't that one of the ways in which you can get a person to write s o m e t h i n g?---edelagbare ek kan nie n persoon se hand gaan vashou en se skryf dit, en saam met sy hand beweeg nie. No, I haven't suggested that, what I have suggested Lieutenant is, that one of the ways that you can force a person(10 to write something is by shocking him and threatening him to do it again if he doesn't write what you want him to write? --- Edelagbare, dis moontlik, dit kan seker so gedoen word. Why did you say you didn't know how you could force a person then? --- Ek het die vraag verkeerd verstaan edelagbare, ek het verstaan n mens moet Vi persoon se hand vat en hom gaan se skryf dit, en sy hand vashou, Yi persoon sal my nie dwing om iets te skryf wat ek nie wil skryf nie edelagbare. You see I am going to put to you that as soon as Captain Naude turned his back on the 4th of January, Dr Aggett was (20 assaulted for not making the admissions that you wanted him to make? --- Edelagbare ek ontken die bewering. Now if your evidence is correct, Dr Aggett was not doing anything of any importance either on the 4th or the 6th of January? --- Ek verstaan nie die vraag mooi nie edelagbare. Dr Aggett was not doing anything of particular importance either on the 4th or the 6th of January? --- Sover ek kan onthou het Kaptein Naude Dr Aggett laat tik op daardie dae edelagbare. Well he was learning how to operate an electric (30 machine, typewriter? --- Ja, ek kan nie daaroor getuig nie edelagbare/

26 2310. agbare, ek het hom nie geleer nie. Yes, now did you know that the magistrate and the Inspector of detainees wanted to see him on the 4th and the 6th? --- Ek het nie geweet nie edelagbare. Didn't Mr McPherson telephone you to tell you that the magistrate is here, the Inspector of detainees is here? ---Nee edelagbare, Adjudant-offisier McPherson het my nie geskakel nie maar as die Inspekteur my geskakel het by die kantoor of ek glo seker die Brigadier of Majoor Cronwright, sou hulle hom toegelaat het om Dr Aggett te sien. (10 And is it a coincidence that he was not available to either of them either on the 4th or the 6th? --- Edelagbare Dr Aggett was nooit nie beskikbaar nie, hy was net nie in sy sel gewees nie, hy was beskikbaar op die lode vloer. But if his statement that he had been assaulted on the 4th is correct, there would have been every reason for the Inspector and the magistrate to be told that he was not available? --- Edelagbare, daar was nooit aan enige magistraat of inspekteur gestel dat Dr Aggett was nie beskikbaar nie. Well the evidence is to the contrary, but we won't (20 quarrel with you about that. As far as this statement is concerned, there would have been no purpose would there if the second statement that was intended to obtain from Dr Aggett commencing on the 25th, was just a rehash of the first statement? --- Edelagbare dis korrek, Dr Aggett het'net begin met die tweede verklaring. Yes - my learned friends have made certain notes available to us. I want to show you these notes which were made available to us yesterday, and I want you... ADV 5CHAB0RT Sir these notes have been made available to (30 our learned friends on the other side as well, and we have copies/

27 copies for the bench. ADV BIZOS I am dealing with these at this stage only.(discussion sotto voce between advocates, inaudible) Now it would appear to us, correct me if I'm wrong, that these notes are expansions, paragraph by paragraph, of the first statement? Dit is korrek so edelagbare, dit is wat Dr Aggett gedoen het van die 25ste tot die 28ste Januarie. Now you see I am going to come back to what happened to Dr Aggett on the 25th, but despite all that Edelagbare op die 25ste Januarie het Dr Aggett uitgekom, ek het hom onge- (10 veer half-nege, twintig voor nege die oggend..(intervention) Yes, I didn't ask you a question. -- Oh, sorry. Yet. Now can you recall whether during this period Dr 0 _ Aggett admitted that he was a member of the ANC? --- Edelagbare op hierdie tydperk van 25 tot 28 Januarie wat Dr Aggett hierdie notas geskryf het, was daar geen vrae aan hom gestel gewees nie. Hy het geleentheid gehad homself, daar waar hy gebrekkig was en waar hy nog nie vir ons die voile waarheid vertel het nie, uit te bring en hy het die bykomende notas geskryf tot sy eerste verklaring, wat natuurlik nie bevredigend was nie. (20 Now let's just take the page 17 and..(scuff1ing of papers on microphone, inaudible) (18?) - yes, and you now - when you categorise whether people are telling the truth or not, you can only express an opinion, I don't think that it has been - I don't think that you have really qualified yourself to tell us what is the truth or not. You may have believed that Dr Aggett did not tell the truth, but will you please read from the bottom of page 17, paragraph 75? --- Kan u net vir my aandui watter sin, of watter paragraaf? Paragraph 75, "The general.."? "The general (30 feeling among the Trade Unionists that I had contact/

28 find/ tact with, was that SACTU did not have a membership inside the country and was not an effective Trade Union body at present. I shared the feeling that the task of the Trade Union were to build up their organisations to involve all the members in the genuine decision-making of the Union so that the workers would see the'benefit of being organised together and improve their conditions of existence." Moet ek verder voortlees? Just carry on yes. --- ".. I have become aware that (10 Oscar Mpeta used to be a member of the ANC and also that Samson Ndao had been on Robben Island, but I worked with them on a Trade Union level. My attitude was that I supported the Freedom Charter and sympathised with the aims of the ANC, however I did not become a member, and had no active contact with the organisation. My feeling was that it was more important to build up basic democratic organisations in the country that could not be manipulated by anyone. In this way the people themselves (20 could see what changes they want. I was prepared to work with people like Oscar Mpeta and Samson Ndao, but I was not prepared to get involved in any secret organisation. I also felt that SACTU had lost its true Trade Union character and had become more of a political organisation, and although our Union used to be an affiliate of SACTU when it was a legal organisation, SACTU had become something completely different in exile. Also in the past SACTU had never been very strong in its factory (30 organisation, the things that Trade Unionists

29 2313- find not... that's a different part. Moet ek voortgaan edelagbare? Yes, just one other, the first sentence "Industrial Council"? ---"Our feeling is that the present Industrial Council system was not acceptable as a viable means for negotiation. The system does not..." Yes-, I don't want you to read any further, but would you please turn to page 21, paragraph 9, "The present laws regulating legal strikes.."? --- "The present laws regarding legal strikes. We would like to see amendment (10 because the procedure is so cumbersome and takes such a long time that often the workers ignore the legal machinery and go out on strike before all the legal procedures have been gone through." Yes, and paragraph 10? --- "The present laws regarding registration. We would like to see the laws changed so that to become registered should be the same procedure as for a company to become registered-, that is that the Union should submit its officebearers, its Constitution, address, financial (20 statements to the Government, but it should not have any interference from the Government in its scope of membership, its constitution and so forth." Now would you agree with me - up to when did Dr Aggett write these notes, I don't know if your Worship wants to identify them in any way? COURT Well it is quite clear what is referred to Mr Bizos. As far as I am concerned it is clear what is referred to. --- Edelagbare, Dr Aggett het op die 25ste Januarie begin en tot op die 28ste Januarie geskryf aan die notas. (30 ADV BIZOS Do you agree that there is nothing in these notes of/

30 of any nature whatsoever indicating that Dr Aggett had committed any unlawful act or was a member of any unlawful organisation or that he furthered the objects of any organisations? --- Edelagbare ek stem saam, dis hoekom ek teruggegaan het na Dr Aggett en gese het, ons het nog inligting tot ons beskikking. And he goes as far as to say that he did not and was not prepared to act in any unlawful way? --- Dit is korrek in hierdie verklaring se hy so edelagbare. Now on the morning of the 25th who was in charge of his interrogation? --- Edelagbare op die 25ste was ek alleen by (10 Dr Aggett, en toe het Adjudant-offisier de Bruyn en Kerr by my gekom en gese dat die Majoor gese het hulle moet my bystaan en kom help. Ek het omtrent n halfuur na veertig minute by Dr Aggett gespandeer, waarop ek terug is na my kantoor op die grondvloer. Now you see - have you been made aware of Mr Smithers' evidence? --- Edelagbare ek het deur wat getuig is in die hof en koerantberigte, het ek bewus geraak van wat mnr Smithers getuig het en daar was ook aan my gevra om n verklaring te maak. Now the interrogation of Dr Aggett up to that stage, (20 prior to the 25th had always taken place in Lieutenant Magoro's office? --- Edelagbare ja, dit was in Luitenant Magoro se kantoor tot en met die 8ste Januarie. And whoever it was that was going to fetch Dr Aggett, knew that he had to be fetched from the cells and taken into Lieutenant Magoro's office? --- Edelagbare nee, dis nie die prosedure nie. Die persoon wat hom gaan haal bring hom gewoonlik na die kantoor toe waar daar vir hom gese word waar jy wag - somtyds wag jy vir die persoon in die gang wat opgebring word. (30 Yes but why, if a person had been regularly interrogated in/

31 Historical Papers, Wits University Collection Number: AK2216 AGGETT, Dr Neil, Inquest, 1982 PUBLISHER: Publisher:- Historical Papers Research Archive Location:- Johannesburg 2013 LEGAL NOTICES: Copyright Notice: All materials on the Historical Papers website are protected by South African copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, or otherwise published in any format, without the prior written permission of the copyright owner. Disclaimer and Terms of Use: Provided that you maintain all copyright and other notices contained therein, you may download material (one machine readable copy and one print copy per page) for your personal and/or educational non-commercial use only. People using these records relating to the archives of Historical Papers, The Library, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, are reminded that such records sometimes contain material which is uncorroborated, inaccurate, distorted or untrue. While these digital records are true facsimiles of paper documents and the information contained herein is obtained from sources believed to be accurate and reliable, Historical Papers, University of the Witwatersrand has not independently verified their content. Consequently, the University is not responsible for any errors or omissions and excludes any and all liability for any errors in or omissions from the information on the website or any related information on third party websites accessible from this website. This document is part of a collection deposited at the Historical Papers Research Archive at The University of the Witwatersrand. 07:52:17 AM]