Amnesty Hearings

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Bizos.

MR BIZOS: Thank you Mr Chairman. On behalf of the persons we represent, we call Mr Oesman Alexander, Mr Chairman.

OESMAN ALEXANDER: (sworn states)

EXAMINATION BY MR BIZOS: Mr Alexander, what is your age?

MR ALEXANDER: I'm 34 years old.

MR BIZOS: And your occupation?

MR ALEXANDER: I'm a sales co-ordinator at ...(indistinct)

MR BIZOS: I think you'd better say those names a little bit more clearly, so that a note can be made of them.

CHAIRPERSON: I'm a sales co-ordinator at Sans Fibers, it's formerly known as S A Nylon Spinners.

MR BIZOS: Okay. Have you any academic qualifications, or have you had any academic studies?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes, I'm currently busy with my BComm Honours degree at UWC.

MR BIZOS: Has a BComm degree been conferred on you yet, or no?

MR ALEXANDER: There was a problem with the credits and I owe them one credit in my first year.

MR BIZOS: In your first year?

CHAIRPERSON: You've got a dispensation to do honours and make up your outstanding first year ...

MR ALEXANDER: That's correct.

MR BIZOS: Which university?

MR ALEXANDER: UWC.

MR BIZOS: And what were you doing in 89?

MR ALEXANDER: In 89 I was studying towards a BSc degree, I was a student at the time.

MR BIZOS: And Mr Chairman, I would ask you to have before you Bundle B, the photographs, Exhibit N, Mr Chairman. Now you, ten years ago, made a written statement in relation to events that have been inquired into before this Committee.

MR ALEXANDER: That's correct, Chairman.

MR BIZOS: Does that appear in Bundle B, page 218 to 220 and did you sign it on the 30th of October 1999?

MR ALEXANDER: That's correct.

MR BIZOS: Have you been through this hand-written statement?

MR ALEXANDER: I've been through the typed version thereof.

MR BIZOS: The typed version. Does that appear in Bundle B, sorry D, pages 8 to 10?

MR ALEXANDER: That is correct, Mr Chair.

MR BIZOS: As far as we were able to ascertain, there are really no differences. They typed copy is a correct copy.

MR ALEXANDER: That's correct.

MR BIZOS: Do you confirm the correctness of the statement that you made at the time?

MR ALEXANDER: It is correct, Mr Chairman.

MR BIZOS: Now would you please read it into the record?

CHAIRPERSON

Oesman Alexander, a Coloured man, 24 years old, living in Kewtown 633271. I'm a student at the UWC. On the 31st of August 1989 I had to attend a meeting of the Kewtown in Athlone. I was late. I arrived at the centre at approximately 10 past 8. The meeting was finished and the people were already leaving the building when I arrived there. At that stage there were also members of the Cape Youth Congress Members, in the front of the building. I'm also a member of this organisation. We were also planning to have a meeting that evening at approximately 25 minutes past eight that same evening.

Myself and other members of the Cape Youth Congress Members, gathered in one of the halls. This is not the same hall in which the Kewtown Youth Movement had their meeting. We remained in this hall because the other hall was going to be used by the soccer union.

On my arrival there were already members of the Soccer Unions who were having discussions in the foyer of the building. Myself, Peter Williams, Miranda Abrahams, Senasla Meira, Gina Isaacs, Mohamed, Fatima Omar and three white men I do not know as well as another man whose name I cannot or did not know, there was also another person, but I cannot recall who that was.

On the 31st of August 1989 at approximately 25 minutes before nine, while we were still having the meeting, I heard a very loud explosion. The explosion was in the Early Learning Centre building. I was thrown to the ground by the blow of the explosions. Apart from the shock, I did not have any other injuries. I did not go and visit the doctor afterwards. I know that Fatima Omar had injuries to her face because of the glass shards. I do not know if any others had injuries. A lot of us were suffering from shock.

Shortly afterwards the Cape Youth Congress left. Some of the members of the Soccer Union were also injured. They were in the foyer when the explosion took place. The explosion took place in the hall right next to the foyer. This is the hall that was used by the Kewtown Youth Movement. This is also the hall where the Soccer Union was supposed to meet. The meeting of the Kewtown Youth Movement was very early because not a lot of people attended this meeting and if more members did arrive, this meeting would have taken a bit longer and the bomb would have exploded in their midst.

My vehicle, an Isuzu bakkie, was parked in front of the building (on the pavement). The vehicle was used by myself, but it was not my property. I know Gakkie Hardien, he was aware that I made use of this Isuzu. If he was close to the building before or after the explosion, he would have realised that I was inside the building.

Three weeks later myself and Glen Joseph and Bruce Malgas met Gakkie Hardien at a party. He told us that he missed us but that we should watch his next move. We understood by that that he referred to the bomb explosion. The Kewtown Youth Movement members also belonged to the Cape Congress.

I understand the contents of this statement and I've got no objection in taking the oath. I see this oath as binding.

Athlone and the date.

MR BIZOS: ...(indistinct)

CHAIRPERSON: Just for the record, if you could just put the date of the statement because October ...(intervention)

MR ALEXANDER: It was October 1990, the 30th.

MR BIZOS: Now, you have managed to obtain at this stage only two copies, but there will be other copies coming in the very near future, the colour aerial photograph of the centre and its immediate vicinity, which may assist the Committee and all of us here in understanding the situation, or at least place it on record what the situation is. You were at the inspection in loco, were you?

MR ALEXANDER: That's correct, yes.

MR BIZOS: Yes, we'll make some reference to that. Now I'll just pass this around to my learned friends so they can have a look at it and assure them that I will give them a copy.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry Mr Bizos, will it be Exhibit P?

MR BIZOS: I'm informed that it will be N.

CHAIRPERSON: The photographs are in fact N.

MR BIZOS: P.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, P.

MR MARTINI: ...(indistinct - mike not on)

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, that's right. Thank you Mr Martini. So it will be Exhibit P.

MR BIZOS: Now you marked spots and marked them by capital letters of the alphabet. May I hand in the one copy so that you may follow and as soon as my learned friends have had a look at it, then ... Now will you place on record please, from A on, what the marked spots represent?

MR ALEXANDER: The capital Z is the hall that exploded where the bomb was detonated, B is known as the Raadsaal in my statement, which was the Boardroom. C is the place where I parked my vehicle, the Isuzu bakkie, ...(indistinct) area. D1 and D2 are spots where the Cayco Athlone Executive or Regional Members were parking and E is the parking at the back, where another member of CAYCO stayed overnight.

CHAIRPERSON: Just before we proceed, Mr Bizos, Lower Klipfontein Road, would that be off the photograph at the bottom, if you go beyond D1 to D2, carry on down that road, you'll get that other road, I think it was called Lower Klipfontein, where you - if you're at the corner, you can see the hall.

MR ALEXANDER: That's correct.

CHAIRPERSON: So that would be just off the photograph below D2.

MR ALEXANDER: But in this particular copy it's ...(indistinct - speaking simultaneously)

CHAIRPERSON: It's on ...(indistinct - speaking simultaneously) where D1 and D2 are?

MR ALEXANDER: That's correct. Further up Springbok you'll get to Lower Klipdrift Road. Your Worship, on this particular copy of it you can see Lower Klipdrift Road clearly.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MR BIZOS: When you arrived at A10, would you please tell us how many people do you say there were in the building upon your arrival and how - well first of all, give us an overall number or tell us the various classes of people that were there and we can add them up. You can please yourself how you want to deal with it, but we just want to get an impression of how many people there were in the building as soon as you arrived.

MR ALEXANDER: In the building and its immediate surroundings, as I parked my car on the side, just immediately outside the front of the building, the Springbok Street side of the building, there were CAYCO members, about eight of them, in the foyer there were three guys of the Soccer Union, the members of the Kewtown Youth, approximately ten of them were still around in the building as well as the Security Guard, Jack, who was also in the building at the time.

MR BIZOS: So you say that there were almost 25 people in the building. Now, you went into the room which has been referred to as the "Saal" or as the ...

MR ALEXANDER: "Raadsaal".

MR BIZOS: No, that's where you finished, the Board room, but where was the meeting of the Kewtown Youth ...

MR ALEXANDER: The Kewtown Youth Movement's meeting was in the hall where the bomb exploded.

MR BIZOS: Where the bomb exploded.

MR ALEXANDER: Inside that hall.

MR BIZOS: Did you participate in a meeting in the hall or was the meeting transferred to the Board Room?

MR ALEXANDER: The Kewtown Youth Meeting was basically winding up. Some of the people were starting to dismiss themselves and leave and I started chatting to the Regional, the CAYCO members which had come for the Regional Meeting and I was in the foyer at the time and towards about, just before 25 past 8 we moved to the Board Room where our meeting started.

MR BIZOS: Now will you say about the foyer, what point is that on the...?

MR ALEXANDER: The foyer is in between points A and B, I haven't marked it on here, but it's basically adjacent to A.

MR BIZOS: Adjacent to A. That's the sort of entrance hall.

MR ALEXANDER: That's correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, Mr Bizos, could I just ask a question? I gather that many of the members of the Kewtown Youth, were also members of the Cape Youth?

MR ALEXANDER: That's correct.

CHAIRPERSON: And the Kewtown had a meeting and then the Cape Youth were going to have a meeting. Now did all the people who attended the Kewtown meeting go across to the Board Room to go to the Cape meeting, or did some of those members leave the hall to go home or wherever else they were going?

MR ALEXANDER: You Worship, those members, except for Peter Williams, the other members left the hall and they exited at the Springbok side of the hall, or the front entrance.

MR BIZOS: The front entrance. Only Peter Williams and you of the Kewtown Youth Committee were left behind?

MR ALEXANDER: That is correct, Your Worship.

MR BIZOS: Yes. And you were in the foyer and you told us that there were some Soccer people there.

MR ALEXANDER: That's correct.

MR BIZOS: Now why didn't the Youth Movement's meeting continue meeting in the hall where the explosion took place?

MR ALEXANDER: Firstly I was late, I was one of the Executive members of the Kewtown Youth Movement, I was late and when I came there, we normally had between 35 and 50 members attending meetings. The meeting wasn't well attended in my opinion and I assume that it was stopped because of the other meeting which would start and myself and Peter being taken out of that meeting to attend the other.

CHAIRPERSON: I think what Mr Bizos was asking you, why didn't the Cape Youth meet in the same hall where the Kewtown Youth had concluded their meeting?

MR ALEXANDER: The Kewtown Youth movement was an affiliate of the Cape Youth Congress, but this was the Regional structure and only youth representatives would attend the Regional meeting, not everyone.

MR LAX: No, you haven't understood the thrust of the question. Why did they change venues for the meeting, that's really the thrust of the question.

MR ALEXANDER: At the time I think Beulah, Mrs Fredericks, the co-ordinator or the principal of the centre itself, had requested that we move to the Board Room because the Union, the Soccer Union was going to meet in front and move into the hall.

MR BIZOS: Was it expected that the Soccer people would be more than the Executive Committee Members of the Youth Congress?

MR ALEXANDER: Well it would have been the Soccer Union's meeting, not a soccer club per se, so it would have been a broader forum.

MR BIZOS: More or less people?

MR ALEXANDER: It would have been at least more than what we were. I think the CAYCO meeting was about 11 or 12 people, is it could have been a bit more.

MR BIZOS: You were to have your meeting in the Board Room?

MR ALEXANDER: That's correct.

MR BIZOS: You told us that those members of the Q Committee who were not to attend the Youth meeting, left and went away through the front entrance. What is the name of the street?

MR ALEXANDER: Springbok Street.

MR BIZOS: Springbok Street. Anybody parked anywhere near where we were shown at the inspection in loco, Mr van Zyl, Mr Botha, Gakkie, had parked, would they have been able to see who was leaving at that time?

MR ALEXANDER: If they were parked at the back, they could not have seen who was leaving.

MR BIZOS: How sure are you that the people there on the Kewtown Committee left through the front entrance?

MR ALEXANDER: I was in the foyer at the time. I saw them exiting as well as, in the event that someone was to leave by car, none of the members that evening except myself had a car, so they could not have exited the building at the back by means of a vehicle.

CHAIRPERSON: But if you lived in a flat on the that main road at the back, then wouldn't it be more convenient to walk through the back and car park to get to that flat, we saw big blocks of flats there.

MR ALEXANDER: That's correct. Your Worship what happened is because we had a lot of younger members attending, they walked in groups and a senior member or an elder person within the group, would make sure that the younger members get safely to their houses and in the past either I would drive them by means of the bakkie, or we would walk together in a group to ensure their safety.

CHAIRPERSON: Now are you saying that none went through the back?

MR ALEXANDER: None went through the back, Your Worship.

MR LAX: And is it not possible that they might have walked round the building and gone that way?

MR ALEXANDER: Around the building in terms of going via the, as Mr ...(indistinct) explained, via the Josephs Town?

MR LAX: Either that way, or as I recall the building, there's a fence all the way round that building.

MR ALEXANDER: That's correct.

MR LAX: ; And if you round the outside of the building, you can walk all the way round the property.

MR ALEXANDER: That is, to an extent, that is correct, but there was - between - as you enter the Springbok Street entrance, there's a gate. Now adjacent to the building's hall, there is another gate to allow you to walk around. That gate was always locked.

MR LAX: Okay.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry Mr Alexander, if you take a look at Exhibit P, the photo, where is this, sorry what did you call it, Jacob's Close?

MR ALEXANDER: Jacobs Close. Josephs Town.

CHAIRPERSON: Josephs Town.

MR ALEXANDER: Josephs Town is the - there's a building with a blue roof, that is Kriek and the building to the west of ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Perhaps if you can mark it with an F.

MR ALEXANDER: Okay.

CHAIRPERSON: On that photo. Yes I don't know if the other members want to see it.

MR BIZOS: After these people had left, if the Committee remonstrates with me, I remonstrate with my learned friends. After the people had left, how many people were there still in the building at the time of the explosion?

MR ALEXANDER: At least 16. It would be the three members of the Soccer Union I saw in front, in reception, the Security Guard as well as the Cape Youth - the CAYCO members, 12 of us.

MR BIZOS: The Security Guard's room, where is that?

MR ALEXANDER: Basically behind, it's close to the - where the young kids are. It's between the kitchen and the Red Unit, at the back thereof.

MR BIZOS: I don't know whether you want that pin-pointed as well Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: I think I can recall it from the inspection in loco.

MR BIZOS: Perhaps I should make use of the photo slides, yes. Could you see on any of the photographs where - have a look at photograph number 5, what does that represent?

MR ALEXANDER: The door jam, or the doors which are blown off, that's the entrance to the hall, the two sets of doors next to that would lead to Springbok side, that's the front entrance. Where these chairs are, that's the point here that I'm referring to. The door closest to, or to the right-hand side of the hall, of the broken doors, that's the entrance towards the parking lot or one of the entrances. You would also walk through the kitchen, there's the very first door, the very first opening on the right-hand side, that's the entrance to the kitchen. Now you would go via there, or via the Red Unit to the room of the Security Guard.

MR BIZOS: I see.

MR ALEXANDER: Or the caretakers ...(indistinct)

MR BIZOS: Yes. You say that there were at least, approximately, well you say precisely 16 people at the time the explosion went off. Could you find the Board Room on the photographs please?

MR ALEXANDER: Let me just check if I can find it.

MR BIZOS: Have a look at photograph 8.

MR ALEXANDER: No, it is the hall, the inside of the hall.

MR BIZOS: The inside of the hall. If you could find the Board Room.

MR ALEXANDER: 29, definitely.

MR BIZOS: Yes. Now was there a door separating the Board Room from the passage at that time?

MR ALEXANDER: There was no door in terms of a fixed structure which separated the Board Room from the passage at the time. If I could just add, when we went to the inspection in loco, it was also said, I think to the Committee, that just after the bomb they had erected a structure to prevent entry into that period.

CHAIRPERSON: A partition.

MR ALEXANDER: Partition, that's right.

MR BIZOS: Now at the inspection in loco, we saw the Board Room represented in photograph number 29. Glass windows, or glass panes, right across that room, were those there at that time?

MR ALEXANDER: They were there at the time.

CHAIRPERSON: Those panes, as far as I can recall, were very high up, at the ceiling.

MR ALEXANDER: That's correct.

MR BIZOS: When you and your colleagues were in the Board Room, were the lights on?

MR ALEXANDER: The lights were on, definitely.

CHAIRPERSON: At that time, those glass panes, were they clear glass, or were they painted over?

MR ALEXANDER: It was clear glass, Your Worship.

MR BIZOS: Anyone looking at the building from any place near where at the inspection in loco Mr van Zyl and others showed where - I think Mr van Zyl, let's confine it to him, showed where they were parked. Would they have been able to see that the lights of the Board Room were on?

MR ALEXANDER: That's correct. From where they were parking, or from the side, the back side of the building, they should be able to see those panes clearly and the lights. Had they been on the other side, they wouldn't have seen them.

MR LAX: ; The other side, you mean the front?

MR ALEXANDER: The front, the Springbok side, because the windows only show to the back, it doesn't show to the front side.

MR BIZOS: Would there have been - if the lights of the lobby or of the room of the Security person or of the kitchen were on, would persons situated where we were shown they were parked, have been able to see those lights?

MR ALEXANDER: Possibly the kitchen lights where they were parking and/or through the Red Unit, they could see the reception, but as far as I can - I don't think they would be able to see the Reception through the kitchen walls, but they could see it via the Red Unit, that the lights are on.

MR BIZOS: What do you mean by the Red Unit?

MR ALEXANDER: The Red Unit is the area where children from the age of 8 months to, I think, about two and a half years, were being nursed in the day, or schooled during the day.

MR BIZOS: Where is that in relation to the entrance hall, or the foyer?

MR ALEXANDER: It's adjacent to the foyer, next to the kitchen, adjacent to the foyer.

CHAIRPERSON: Can you recall what lights were on and what lights were off when you were there?

MR ALEXANDER: When I entered, the light of the hall was on, the foyer's lights were on, the passage leading towards the Board Room, those lights were on, as well as the lights in the Board Room. The Board Room has on the - if you were to walk towards the Board Room from the foyer side, on the right-hand side there are offices, there are two toilets and the offices and those doors are closed, so you don't really check those offices, but the foyer and the passage, as well as the Board Room, those lights were definitely on.

MR BIZOS: Did you have meetings at the Early Learning Centre regularly?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes, Your Worship.

MR BIZOS: Is that for the Q Youth Movement?

MR ALEXANDER: That is correct.

MR BIZOS: Kewtown Youth Movement. Now let's confine ourselves to those meetings. Did you have them regularly on the same day of the week, or did you adjourn to different days of the week?

MR ALEXANDER: We basically met on a Thursday evening, every week.

MR BIZOS: Every week. And did you change the time of meeting and the time of the duration of the meeting, or were they fairly standard?

MR ALEXANDER: The meeting was fairly standard, it started at 7 up until about 9 o'clock. If we had events like games evenings etc., it might go beyond 9 o'clock, because we had a good relationship with Jack, the caretaker of the building and with the principal, so we had flexibility in terms of that.

MR BIZOS: But generally speaking, your meeting started at 7 and finished at 9?

MR ALEXANDER: That is correct, Your Worship.

MR BIZOS: Were the facts that you met there, at what time you met and for how long your meetings lasted, matters of kept a secret, or did the community at large know that these meetings were taking place at that time and lasted approximately for that period of time?

MR ALEXANDER: Basically the entire community knew when we were meeting, at what time and we never had any secret meetings there, or anywhere else for that matter.

MR BIZOS: At your meetings, was it confined to members, or could you have visitors as well?

MR ALEXANDER: Our meetings were open to everyone. Anyone could come in.

MR BIZOS: Whether a member of not?

MR ALEXANDER: Whether they're a member or not.

MR BIZOS: It has been suggested that the information that reached Mr Verster, the Director of this Civil Co-operation, ...(indistinct), that the information that reached him that you were a bunch of gangsters ...

MR ALEXANDER: That's an untruth, Your Worship.

MR BIZOS: Were you in court when you and others were asked to identify yourselves?

MR ALEXANDER: That is correct, Your Worship.

MR BIZOS: There were mainly the members of the Q Youth Movement Committee?

MR ALEXANDER: It was mainly members of the Q Town Youth Movement as well as other CAYCO members who were in the building at the time.

MR BIZOS: Which were in the building at the time. Did you identify yourself at the time?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes, I did.

MR BIZOS: The other people that identified themselves, did you know them well?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes, I did.

MR BIZOS: Did they identify themselves correctly in relation to their activities in 89 and their subsequent educational and social achievements?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes they did, Your Worship.

MR BIZOS: Yes. Where would this information - did you do anything to give any idea to anyone that you were a bunch of gangsters?

MR ALEXANDER: No, Your Worship, in fact we tried to get the kids off the street, it was one of our objectives, to try and redirect their energies and efforts to become not model citizens, but to try and achieve something in life.

MR BIZOS: Was the Kewtown Youth Movement affiliated to the UDF?

MR ALEXANDER: We were affiliated to CAYCO, Cape Youth Congress, who in turn was affiliated to the UDF?

MR BIZOS: Oh so that was. ...(intervention)

MR ALEXANDER: Indirect.

MR BIZOS: Indirect affiliation. Did you ever discuss or permit any act of violence?

MR ALEXANDER: No, Your Worship, never.

CHAIRPERSON: What were the aims and objectives of the Kewtown Youth Movement?

MR ALEXANDER: Objectives were social, economic and political. Basically we wanted to take the kids off the street. We tried to do it by means of entertainment, outings, excursions, we tried to educate them in terms of the dispensation of the day. Essentially we tried to better them as people, to strive for a better Kewtown as well, uplifting the community as a whole.

MR BIZOS: How many of you on the Committee were still at school at that time?

MR ALEXANDER: The majority of our members were aged between 15 and 20 and most of the members at the time were at school, except for myself, Peter, Chris was starting to exit the Committee because he became actively involved in the Trade Union at the time and there were amongst others a school teachers, who was Claude Nicholas, known as Boetie, as well as Roy. I think Roy's surname is Isaacs, I speak under correction. But the rest were school-going kids, high school kids.

MR BIZOS: How difficult would it have been for any person that wanted to do anything to you or against you for whatever reason to determine objectively what the ages and objects were, what sort of people you were, whether you were good pupils at school? You were a student at the time.

MR ALEXANDER: That's correct.

MR BIZOS: Whether you were good students, or whether - what your views were and what your activities were?

MR ALEXANDER: It wouldn't have been difficult at all. The meetings were open, we were all known in the community and we interacted with people within the community, so anyone could have free access and entry to our meetings and our activities.

MR BIZOS: It was also suggested that, well it was said, that information came to the Director of the CCB that you were responsible for the two explosions that had taken place in the Post Office and the Magistrate's Court. Did you or any member of the Committee or of the organisation as far as you, in the broader organisation that was responsible for those acts?

MR ALEXANDER: No Your Worship, it was not ...(indistinct) and /or the Cape Youth Congress that had been involved there.

MR BIZOS: Another bit of detail that came to the Director of the CCB was that one of the deceased that placed a bomb at one or other of the two places where the bombs exploded, was the half sister of a member - a lady member of your Committee. Was that true or false?

MR ALEXANDER: That is false. I have known Peter Williams for a very long time. In fact he was basically my neighbour. he lived up stairs from where I lived, so I am acquainted with his family, so that's false.

MR BIZOS: How difficult would it have been to check that information by anyone who intended placing a bomb at the place that you were gathered?

MR ALEXANDER: It would not have been difficult, Your Worship, Gakkie was quite familiar with Peter and Peter's family as well, so he had basically easy access and he could speak to unfairly at the time as well, prior to that.

MR BIZOS: Yes. How far did Hardien live from ...

MR ALEXANDER: At the time of the bomb explosion, Peter was about 100 metres away from Gakkie, but if I could just put it into context, Peter had moved from a different part of Kewtown to that point at that time, so although I say Peter was my upstairs neighbour, at the time, when he was close to Gakkie, he didn't live - he wasn't my upstairs neighbour anymore.

MR BIZOS: Yes. So do I understand you correctly, that if they - they could quite easily have checked that dramatic information would Gakkie, if they took just a bit of care?

MR ALEXANDER: That's correct, Your Worship.

MR BIZOS: Let us return to the evening in question. you've described in your statement of hearing this tremendous explosion.

MR ALEXANDER: That is correct.

MR BIZOS: Incidentally, the injury to your ear, was that a temporary or a permanent?

MR ALEXANDER: Well I think it's of a permanent nature, but I can still hear properly.

MR BIZOS: Yes, it's not serious?

MR ALEXANDER: Not very serious, no.

MR BIZOS: Now what did you do as soon as this explosion took place?

MR ALEXANDER: We all were flung to the ground except for one of the members who stayed seated, I think that is Sensala Meira. I then ran towards the, if I could just use the picture, the photograph?

MR BIZOS: Yes, of course.

MR ALEXANDER: In terms of this picture, B is the Board Room. I ran, not towards the entrance, there is another double door leading towards the Blue and Yellow Units, that's where the bigger children were and we tried running out that way, but we were basically cornered in. There was a fence with barbed wire on top, so we ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, I don't have the photo. So you ran towards the foyer?

MR ALEXANDER: We didn't run towards the foyer.

CHAIRPERSON: Oh you went the other way.

MR ALEXANDER: There is another set of double doors which leads to the Blue and Yellow Units and at that double door, you come outside but you're still within the premises and the entire premises were fenced in. We then decided to go back via the Board Room towards the foyer where people of the community started running in and attempting to help us.

MR BIZOS: At that stage, were the lights still on after the explosion?

MR ALEXANDER: I speak under correction. The lights in the Board Room were still on, in the passage, the foyer were still on, but I don't think the hall had any lights, thereafter it was dark, everything was hanging towards the ground and we exited the front gate.

MR BIZOS: You went out of the front gate.

MR ALEXANDER: That's correct.

MR BIZOS: Did you see the people that you had seen in the entrance hall or foyer of the building, the Soccer Committee people, did you see them?

MR ALEXANDER: I can remember seeing two people. One was a Mr Ericson, ...(indistinct) as know to us and the other was I think Wally, if my memory serves me correctly. I didn't see anyone else in terms of the Soccer people.

MR BIZOS: Did you find out where they were at the time of the explosion?

MR ALEXANDER: We heard that they were in the foyer at the time of the explosion.

MR BIZOS: Did you see or hear about immediately afterwards, whether any people were injured by the explosion?

MR ALEXANDER: Basically three people that I heard about were injured, it was the Soccer people. I don't know to what extent. Some of them were taken by ...(indistinct) vehicles in the area to hospital.

MR BIZOS: Other than your bakkie, was there any other vehicle outside the front part of the building?

MR ALEXANDER: If my memory serves me correctly, Mr Bizos, there were at least two other vehicles in the front, which had been used by CAYCO members. It was, in your, it was parked onto the side of the road on the pavement between the hall and Kriek.

MR BIZOS: Is that the side where your bakkie was parked?

MR ALEXANDER: My bakkie was on the opposite side.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry Mr Bizos. Mr Alexander, you go to that hall regularly, etc., people who live in that area in Springbok Street, the residents, do they not park their vehicles on the pavement ordinarily or usually?

MR ALEXANDER: No Your Worship, where I parked there were two houses immediately next to the Church. At the time those people didn't have a vehicle and around the corner where the CAYCO members had parked, it wasn't on the side of the houses, it was on the opposite side.

MR BIZOS: Let's get clarity, because I'm not sure whether we are on the same wavelength. On the side that you vehicle was, were there other vehicles?

MR ALEXANDER: If you were to come up Springbok Street towards Lower Klipfontein Road, now I was on the left. They were as you come down Springbok Street towards the ELC, they were on the left, so we were on different sides of the road. It was the same - it was the front entrance side, but we were parked on different sides of the road.

MR BIZOS: I see.

MR LAX: To put it plainly, you were on the house sides and they were on the ...

MR ALEXANDER: That's right and they were on the ELC side, that's correct,

MR BIZOS: So are those the three vehicles?

MR ALEXANDER: That's correct.

MR BIZOS: Now what about the parking ground?

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, Mr Bizos. My recollection, although it might not be very good of the photo, was all the D were or the C and the D1 and D2 are on the same side of the road.

MR ALEXANDER: It's the same round, but it's two-way traffic firstly.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, but if you take a look - Yes, no, you're right.

MR ALEXANDER: Thank you Your Worship.

MR BIZOS: Now what - after the explosion, did you see whether there were still any cars on the parking ground?

MR ALEXANDER: What happened after the explosion, I was worried about the vehicles and we were worried about ourselves. I immediately took the bakkie and I'm not sure how many people got in with me, but I then parked the bakkie in Diza Court which was, if you were to view this photograph, the circle where Mr van Zyl-them had been parking, it was just behind those shops, that is where Diza Court is.

CHAIRPERSON: ...(indistinct)

MR ALEXANDER: Because one of our members had lived, or lives in Diza Court and I walked back across towards the centre. One of the CAYCO Regional Members, Nazima Mohamed, had parked her car in the back parking and it stayed overnight as well as some of the ELC's cars which they used during the day were parked there. The ELC is the Early Learning Centre, the staff working there, because they had social workers etc going out to other resource units, educational units during the day.

CHAIRPERSON: These are vehicles that belonged to the ELC that are used during the day but at night are parked in that parking place.

MR ALEXANDER: That's correct, Your Worship.

CHAIRPERSON: How many are you talking about?

MR ALEXANDER: There were about three of those vehicles and Nazima's vehicle was the fourth one. Nazima Mohamed, or the vehicle that she drove that night.

MR BIZOS: Were those four cars visible to anyone sitting in a car anywhere near the place where Mr van Zyl told us that they parked?

MR ALEXANDER: They would have had a clear view of those cars, Your Worship, if they had been parking where they said they were.

MR BIZOS: Did you notice whether any of those cars were damaged or did anyone complain about their car being damaged?

MR ALEXANDER: I can't recall that those cars were damaged, or that they weren't damaged. There were crowds gathering all around on the back side of the ELC as well as the front side and I just mixed in with the crowd.

MR BIZOS: When you were in the Board Room in the state that it was in then, if anyone had come in to the place where the Soccer people were seated, the entrance hall, would that person have heard you speaking in the Board Room?

MR ALEXANDER: They should have heard us speaking because we didn't whisper, we talked normally and the distances basically from the foyer to the Board Room, if I could just put it into context, it's from where I sit now to where that partition is, round about there, the passage way that separates the foyer from the Board Room.

MR BIZOS: About 10 to 12 metres.

CHAIRPERSON: 10 to 12 big metres, I think. A bit longer perhaps, but ...

MR BIZOS: 15 metres?

CHAIRPERSON: More or less 15.

MR BIZOS: Or perhaps to be fair, we should ask somebody with medium pace ...

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, it looks about 15 to 20 paces to me, but...

MR BIZOS: No, I'll accept that. Did you speak as softly as you're speaking here, in those meetings or were they animated meetings?

MR ALEXANDER: Well it was in the evening, it was quiet, there wasn't lots of traffic, so ja, our voices would carry, but we didn't whisper, we didn't plan anything sinister or anything to that effect, so we had no more meetings.

MR BIZOS: And do photographs 8, 9 and 14 correctly show the damage in the room which the Kewtown Youth Movement - if the meeting had not adjourned early and if the Youth Movement Meeting had not changed the place of the meeting to go into the Board Room, would anyone in the hall have had any chance of living?

MR ALEXANDER: Your Worship, it's my opinion that everyone in the hall would have been killed.

MR BIZOS: ; Thank you Mr Chairman.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR BIZOS

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Martini, do you have any questions you'd like to put to Mr Alexander?

MR MARTINI: Thank you Chairperson. Just a few.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR MARTINI: Mr Alexander, let's just start off. The aims of the Kewtown movement you say were political economic and social, is that correct?

MR ALEXANDER: That's correct.

MR MARTINI: And the Kewtown Youth Movement was affiliated to the Youth Congress, if I understand your evidence correctly?

MR ALEXANDER: That is correct. Cape Youth Congress.

MR MARTINI: Thank you, Cape Youth Congress. And that in turn was affiliated to the United Democratic Front?

MR ALEXANDER: That's also correct.

MR MARTINI: And the United Democratic Front, was that affiliated to the ANC?

MR ALEXANDER: It was never affiliated to the ANC. It was above-board, legitimate organisation at the time, it was ...(indistinct) organisation, civics, youths etc.

MR MARTINI: When I say affiliated, maybe I used the wrong word. Did it support the policies of the ANC?

MR ALEXANDER: Well in broader terms, yes, it did.

MR MARTINI: I assume so. I mean, the Kewtown Youth Movement, or the Cape Youth Congress, didn't support the Government of the day, did they?

MR ALEXANDER: That is correct, we didn't support the government of the day.

MR MARTINI: Correct. You were anti the Government of the day.

MR ALEXANDER: That's correct.

MR MARTINI: I accept that. And would you have subscribed to whatever policies the ANC at the time, or the philosophy of the ANC at the time, would you have subscribed to their philosophies and doctrines in respect of their attitude towards the Government of the day?

MR ALEXANDER: To a limited extent. We at no point told people to commit acts of violence, or sabotage, or terror.

MR MARTINI: I'm not putting that to you, but you would agree, you would support the overthrow of the Government of the day? When I say you, sorry, I mean your movement.

MR ALEXANDER: That's correct. Overthrow is a strong word, that's correct.

MR MARTINI: Well, you would rebel against the Government of the day. You'd want to ensure that that Government would be removed from power?

MR ALEXANDER: That is correct.

MR MARTINI: So to put it in a different way, you weren't regarded as a friend - when I say you, sorry Mr ...

MR ALEXANDER: I understand, it's not personal.

MR MARTINI: Ja, I mean the group. You wouldn't regard the Government of the day as your friendly neighbour, so to speak?

MR ALEXANDER: Definitely not.

MR MARTINI: Correct. Now, Mr Alexander, you signed this statement on the 30th of October 1990.

MR ALEXANDER: That's correct.

MR MARTINI: That's approximately over a year, 13 or 14 months after the incident?

MR ALEXANDER: That's correct.

MR MARTINI: Could you just explain to us how it came about that you made this statement?

MR ALEXANDER: Essentially, at the time, Edward Gordon ...(indistinct) speeches after the bombing, as well as Gakkie and we knew that Slang was picked up in terms of Section 29 .

MR ALEXANDER: Oh, so you knew that Slang, Peaches and Gakkie had been arrested under Section 29?

MR ALEXANDER: It was in the newspapers, it was on the SABC news at the time.

MR MARTINI: And did you know that they'd made statements and stuff at the time?

MR ALEXANDER: That's correct and we were - you must understand, in that particular period we didn't trust the Government at all.

MR MARTINI: Sure.

MR ALEXANDER: Up until, to a democratic elected government came into power.

MR MARTINI: I accept that.

MR ALEXANDER: I would want nothing to do with the Government.

MR MARTINI: I accept that Mr Alexander. You've already told us, you didn't regard the Government as your friendly neighbour. so you were aware at the time that Mr van Zyl had been arrested, Gakkie Hardien had been arrested, Peaches had been arrested and I think you also said you knew that they made statements under their detentions.

MR ALEXANDER: That's correct.

MR MARTINI: Were you given the statements?

MR ALEXANDER: No.

MR MARTINI: So how did you know that they made statements?

MR ALEXANDER: It was on the news, the SABC news at the time. It was broadly announced. I didn't know what the content of the statements were, but we were aware that they had been picked up in terms of ELC and other deeds.

MR MARTINI: So then how did it come about that you made this statement?

MR ALEXANDER: If my memory serves me correctly, we were - the Youth at the time as well as Mr Huxley, had the process and that was someone I could trust, I would not go to a police office or whenever, because we were fearful at the time.

MR MARTINI: I hear you but ...

CHAIRPERSON: I didn't quite understand what you said Mr Alexander. So you read in the papers that Gakkie, Peaches and Mr van Zyl had been picked up?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: And what, did somebody come to you to take a statement or what? How did it actually happen that you made a statement?

MR ALEXANDER: It was well-known that we were in the building. Initially after the bomb, I think the Cayco, or the Youth approached lawyers, but we were told by Mr Huxley at the time, if I'm not mistaken.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, who's Mr Huxley?

MR ALEXANDER: Joshua Huxley, he was an attorney in Athlone.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, at this writing, I see if you look at page 208, whose writing is that? It looks the same for - you know it's in various statements here. Is it your writing or?

MR ALEXANDER: It's not my writing.

CHAIRPERSON: So whose writing would that be?

MR ALEXANDER: I think it was one of the legal persons and/or someone from a police agency at the time, if my memory serves me correctly. I'm not too clear, but the signatures at the bottom and on each page, are definitely mine.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Mr Martini.

MR MARTINI: May I proceed Chairperson?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR MARTINI: Sorry, you haven't answered my question. I still don't understand. How did it come about? why did you make this statement? Let me rephrase this question. Why did you make this statement 14 months later?

MR ALEXANDER: Things were coming out. We were not certain, but thins were coming out in terms of the CCB, they became more public. We knew that Gakkie was part of a sinister Government organisation, but we didn't know the detail and because at the time Peaches made a statement to Mr Huxley's office, I think the advocate or the lawyer was Mr Adams, hence we were approached at the time.

MR MARTINI: But for what purpose?

MR LAX: Sorry, who approached you?

MR ALEXANDER: It was Mr Huxley at the time.

MR LAX: Yes and who had approached him?

MR ALEXANDER: I think somehow Mr Adams, who was a lawyer, which was one of Mr Huxley's partners, had got in a statement from Peaches in terms of his doings within the CCB.

MR MARTINI: Yes, but sorry - sorry Mr Lax.

MR LAX: So what was Huxley preparing at the time, that he was taking statements from everybody?

MR ALEXANDER: Well I think it was just to - so that the State was implicated within these deeds of terror and I'm not sure whether he was going to take it further, but there, at the time things became clear of State involvement within, bombings within the area etc.

MR LAX: So was he busy with an investigation, or was there a civil case, or was there a criminal investigation?

MR ALEXANDER: I think it would have been for a criminal/civil case at the time.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Martini.

MR MARTINI: Sorry, Mr Alexander. So a gentlemen approaches you, members of the Kewtown movement.

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR MARTINI: What was his name?

MR ALEXANDER: Mr Huxley.

MR MARTINI: Who was Mr Huxley?

MR ALEXANDER: He was an attorney in Athlone and we were quite familiar with him and we trusted him.

MR MARTINI: Now why were you familiar with him?

MR ALEXANDER: He was a lawyer in the Athlone area.

MR MARTINI: Did you chaps utilise him?

MR ALEXANDER: With regard - no we didn't utilise him.

MR MARTINI: For legal services?

MR ALEXANDER: He was ...(intervention)

QUESTION: Sorry, sorry Mr Chairman, may I just put something right? The attorney that Mr Alexander is referring to, is not Mr Huxley ...

MR MARTINI: Sorry, Chairperson, this is improper.

CHAIRPERSON: This is his evidence. ...(indistinct - speaking simultaneously)

CHAIRPERSON: because he's testifying as a witness now, you can't correct his evidence while he's under cross-examination. Mr Martini.

MR MARTINI: I'll try again, Mr Chairperson, I've really been trying. Right. He's an attorney that you trusted.

MR ALEXANDER: yes.

MR MARTINI: Whom the community trusted. He was well-known in the community. What type of law did he practice?

MR ALEXANDER: He practised criminal, civil law and he was part of the democratic movement at the time.

MR MARTINI: Right he was part of the United Democratic movement?

MR ALEXANDER: Well he would have aligned himself with the UDF at the time as well.

MR MARTINI: Was he politically active?

MR ALEXANDER: I would say he was to an extent.

MR MARTINI: Okay and did he approach you, when I say you, because you know there were various statements, not only you, did he gather all the people that were at the ELC, that centre, and said: "Now I want to take statements from everybody".

MR ALEXANDER: We were a group that gathered, but it was him doing the organising. However, the guy we gave the statements to was a guy from Johannesburg, I can't remember his name.

MR MARTINI: What guy from Johannesburg.

MR ALEXANDER: I think he had a similar surname to yours, but it wasn't you, I think it wasn't Martini, I think it was Mr Martinez, I speak under correction.

MR MARTINI: But sorry, I thought, did you go make the statement to Mr Martinez, or whatever?

MR ALEXANDER: We made these statements in their presence.

MR MARTINI: So it's not this attorney then from Athlone? I'm not understanding your evidence.

MR ALEXANDER: Sorry?

MR MARTINI: This Martinez ...(intervention)

MR ALEXANDER: No, we trusted this guy from Athlone. We trusted Mr Huxley.

MR MARTINI: Yes, but now you've said you made the statements to Mr Martinez from Johannesburg.

MR ALEXANDER: That's correct. He came down from Johannesburg, he was flown down, especially.

MR MARTINI: Okay. Sorry. Sorry. Correct me if I'm wrong. So you were basically assisted by this Mr Huxley attorney?

MR ALEXANDER: That is correct.

MR MARTINI: Because just correct me if I'm understanding your evidence correctly. Mr Martinez wanted to take statements from various people who were present at the ELC the night of the bombing.

MR ALEXANDER: That's correct.

MR MARTINI: Right now who was Mr Martinez?

MR ALEXANDER: I'm not sure whether he was linked to Lawyers for Human Rights.

MR MARTINI: And was he, did he tell you what the reason for wanting statements?

MR ALEXANDER: Once again I assume it would have been for either criminal or civil cases.

MR MARTINI: You were never told?

MR ALEXANDER: No.

MR MARTINI: Now did he come up to - fly down to Cape Town and meet you guys to take the statements, or did Mr Huxley take them and give them to him?

MR ALEXANDER: No, Mr Huxley didn't take them. He was here with - Mr Huxley was the one whom we trusted and who did the organisation locally. This guy came down, especially for the statements.

MR MARTINI: So it's possible the handwriting is this Mr Martinez's, that the Chairperson asked you about?

MR ALEXANDER: That's correct.

MR MARTINI: Because it's not your handwriting?

MR ALEXANDER: No, it's not my handwriting. I agree and I said.

MR MARTINI: No, I accept that Mr Alexander. I'm just clarifying what the ...

MR ALEXANDER: Sure.

MR MARTINI: So when he sat down and wrote out your statement, I'm assuming you're relating to him the story and he's writing it down?

MR ALEXANDER: That is correct.

MR MARTINI: Was he putting to you, you know Mr Hardien has been arrested and Mr van Zyl's been arrested for this incident and Mr Peaches has been arrested, did he put such questions to you? Did he tell you?

MR ALEXANDER: No, I've told you earlier that that was clear on the media but after a while Gakkie was back in the area and thereafter he left the area, so it's no, we knew that Gakkie was involved and it was Gakkie's deeds and there was State involvement, but where would we go? I wouldn't go the ...(indistinct) police station to go and make a statement to that effect.

CHAIRPERSON: Just before you proceed, Mr Martini. Do you know Mr Wessel Rossouw of the Brixton Murder and Robbery Squad?

MR ALEXANDER: I don't recall the name, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: Because he was the Commissioner of Oaths before whom you signed the statement, according to the stamp on page ...

MR ALEXANDER: There were a couple of guys from Jo'burg, but I don't recall his name.

CHAIRPERSON: It said: " Moord en Roof Eenheid, Brixton, Wessel Rossouw" and all the statements seem to have been made on the same day and before the same Commissioner.

MR ALEXANDER: That is correct. All of the statements were made on the same day, but there were a couple of guys from Jo'burg, but I don't remember their names.

CHAIRPERSON: And so that statement, who walked away with it?

MR ALEXANDER: The guy to whom we gave it and there was a group of them.

CHAIRPERSON: So you don't know whether it was to be used for the police in their investigation or whether it was to be used by Lawyers for Human Rights in a potential case?

MR ALEXANDER: No, Your Worship, I'm speculating. I was assuming it was going to be for either civil or criminal investigation.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Martini,

MR MARTINI: Thank you Chairperson. You say there were others guys with this certain Mr Martinez, is that correct?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR MARTINI: Were they police officers?

MR ALEXANDER: Well, that is what we assumed, but I can't remember them. I remember Martinez because it came back to me when I saw him on television and it rings a bell.

MR MARTINI: Two olives, never shaken, slightly stirred. Mr Alexander, so you just go in and you give a statement, you don't know why you're making the statement. You see I'll tell you why, I was always under the impression this was as a result of the police investigating the bombing, that that's why you made these statements.

MR ALEXANDER: My assumption was that it was for criminal investigation or a civil case, so I assumed and accepted it would be for that.

MR MARTINI: Sure, but 14 months later, here comes a chap Martinez, let's assume his name was Martinez, together with other gentlemen from Johannesburg, not even the Athlone area and they say now: "We want statements from you" and you don't ask him: "Why, what for?"

MR ALEXANDER: Mr Martini, we trusted the lawyer from our area, hey and for a long while after that bomb, I would go to the area at night, into the area at night, because we were fearful, we didn't know what to expect, for about three or four months I wasn't really in the area. I would go into the area at night to get clothes, to get money for food, etc.

MR MARTINI: So you were afraid after the bomb?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes, definitely. We knew they wanted to hit us.

MR MARTINI: So isn't it correct when Mr van Zyl says that was one of the purposes, was to frighten you guys?

MR ALEXANDER: In what regard, because we were not involved in any of those acts.

MR MARTINI: No, no, Mr van Zyl says the purpose of the bomb was to frighten you chaps and you've just conceded that you were frightened after the bomb.

MR ALEXANDER: That's correct. Who wouldn't be? If you were in a building where a bomb explodes, you're in the building, but you were supposed to be in that venue for that whole evening.

MR MARTINI: The point I'm making ...(intervention)

MR ALEXANDER: You would be just as afraid.

MR MARTINI: I accept that, but the point I'm making, you were afraid afterwards.

MR ALEXANDER: That is correct, but it didn't stop me from being politically active. I was still and activist.

MR MARTINI: I accept that Mr Alexander, but it did have the effect of frightening you?

MR ALEXANDER: ...(indistinct)

MR MARTINI: When you were making this statement, were you answering to questions? Was this Martinez, or one of these other gentlemen asking you questions and as you were answering, they were writing it out?

MR ALEXANDER: If my memory serves me correctly, they asked us what happened that night and in my own words, I gave it to them, which they took down verbatim.

MR MARTINI: So the purpose of your statement was really to give them facts of what happened that night, is that what you're telling us?

MR ALEXANDER: That's what I told them.

MR MARTINI: Is that what you're telling the Committee?

MR ALEXANDER: Well, that's what I put into the statement, what happened that night.

MR MARTINI: But, listen to my question carefully, Mr Alexander, the purpose of your statement then was just to give facts of what happened on the night of the 31st of August 1989, is that correct?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR MARTINI: Correct?

MR ALEXANDER: That's correct.

MR MARTINI: Could you - I'm going to work from Bundle D, the statement you said you also worked from, correct, the typed one?

MR ALEXANDER: That's right.

MR MARTINI: Which we'll accept what Mr Bizos told us, that it correlates to your hand-written statement. You see you say, look at paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. Fifth paragraph, and I'm counting the one sentence earlier up as a paragraph. Have you got it. Sorry, page 9, sorry, sorry.

MR ALEXANDER: Page 9, yes.

MR MARTINI: Bundle D.

MR ALEXANDER: Yes. Which paragraph?

MR MARTINI: Five.

MR ALEXANDER: "Die vergadering van Kewtown Youth"?

MR MARTINI: You see the second sentence

"If more members had arrived the meeting would have continued for longer and the bomb would have exploded in their midst."

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR MARTINI: That's an inference you're making, because that's not what happened, it's not a fact, it's not the actual facts.

MR ALEXANDER: I agree it's an inference, but that was my opinion at the time, but the norm was that we would meet up until 9 o'clock.

MR MARTINI: Right, so you're not stating a fact there, you're making an inference, so it seems as if you were asked this question, that's why you made that statement.

MR ALEXANDER: No.

MR MARTINI: But then why put that in? Why say

"In the even event that more members had arrived, the bomb would have gone off in their presence"?

MR ALEXANDER: From custom and practise our meetings basically stopped at nine.

MR MARTINI: You see, now go down another two paragraphs.

"Ek ken Gakkie Hardien. He was aware that I used the Isuzu. If he had been near the building before or during the explosion, he would have realised that I was inside the building."

MR ALEXANDER: That is also a fact. I'd been driving that bakkie for more than a year at that time.

MR MARTINI: You're missing my point.

MR ALEXANDER: I understand your point, I'm just saying.

MR MARTINI: You're now blaming him and you're saying, not as a fact, you're saying: "Gakkie knows my car and if he was near the building at the time, he would have known I was in the building". Why are you stating that?

MR ALEXANDER: Because it's a fact. Gakkie knew what I was driving. In fact the entire one side of Kewtown knew what I was driving.

MR LAX: Well how did it come about that you made such a fact in this statement? That's really what you're being asked.

MR ALEXANDER: I just wanted to make it clear that Gakkie knew that I was in the building.

MR LAX: Yes, but were you responding to a question that someone put to you about Gakkie? Did someone say to you for example: "Gakkie says there were no cars there"?

MR ALEXANDER: I can't remind myself whether ...(intervention)

MR LAX: Because really that's what Mr Martini's getting at.

MR ALEXANDER: At the time I thought I was putting it in my own words. I can't remind myself that someone asked me questions. I was asked to give a statement in terms of what happened that night and I knew that Gakkie knew that I was driving that vehicle.

MR MARTINI: That's the point, you had to give a statement of what happened, of facts, you've told us that. That I can accept, someone ...(intervention)

MR ALEXANDER: That I drove that vehicle.

MR MARTINI: I accept someone will want the statement of facts from you, but why do you say: "Ek ken Gakkie"? Did someone ask you: "Do you know Gakkie Hardien?"

MR ALEXANDER: I can't recall that someone asked me but if they had, I can't say yes they have or they have not. I know that Gakkie knew that I was driving that vehicle and so did the entire one part of Kewtown.

MR MARTINI: I accept that but in the statement that you make, why do you say in this statement - you see earlier you said you were asked to give this statement to describe the facts that happened on the night of the 31st of August 1989, the bombing. Now you say: "I know Gakkie Hardien". That suggests to me someone asked you: "Do you know Gakkie Hardien?" at the time that you're making the statement.

MR ALEXANDER: At the time that I made the statement, it was known that Gakkie was responsible for planting that bomb and Gakkie even threatened us. If you read further in the statement, Gakkie threatened to come and finish us.

CHAIRPERSON: We'll get there. Gakkie doesn't say they must come and finish you, he says: "Ek het gemis", that can mean anything and he says: "Next time ek sal jou kry". Now we've also heard the evidence that when he arrived there, there was a bit of turmoil between other members because of Gakkie's presence, people were very unhappy that he was there, but let's stick to this.

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR MARTINI: Did someone ask you? Why out of your own accord there, if you're making a statement of fact, you say: "Ek ken Gakkie Hardien" and then go on

"He was aware that I was driving the Isuzu. If he had been near the building before or during the explosion, he would have realised that I was inside the building."

MR ALEXANDER: Let me once again repeat, Mr Martini. In terms of me at the time, we knew that Gakkie planted the bomb. Okay? It was public knowledge within Kewtown and in line with that, I wanted, me, I wanted to make sure that I put that fact there because, in terms of me, it was important, because he knew I drove the car, or the bakkie.

MR MARTINI: Okay. Well we'll argue it. Let's move on. At this time Gakkie had been arrested, he'd made a Section 29 statement, did you know that Gakkie was saying he didn't intend to kill people, at the time he made this statement?

MR ALEXANDER: I can't recall that, but I knew that he was arrested or that he planted to bomb.

MR MARTINI: How did you know he planted the bomb at that time?

MR ALEXANDER: Well, he was seen the afternoon with a haversack. He told - because obviously we were afraid and we wanted to inquire some more.

MR MARTINI: How did you know Gakkie planted the bomb at the site?

MR ALEXANDER: He was seen at the venue with the haversack. He told the staff of the ELC that he was tired, he wanted to sit in the foyer and he had been walking from I think Heideveld, or Manenberg.

MR MARTINI: You forget also, according to him, he says he put a bomb in there and he warned him.

MR ALEXANDER: I don't think Mr Williams would allow us to be blasted to pieces, that's ludicrous.

MR MARTINI: But you heard what Mr Hardien's reply was from Mr Williams?

MR ALEXANDER: Once again Mr Hardien also conceded that Mr Williams never uses that language and will never.

MR MARTINI: But just - so you say because Mr Hardien was seen sweating, walked in with the haversack, that's why he planted the bomb?

CHAIRPERSON: No, I think it was a little bit further and also because of the fact that he had been detained in terms of Section 9.

MR MARTINI: Okay.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay. 29, at least.

MR MARTINI: Also because he was detained under Section 29, for the bomb.

MR ALEXANDER: Where he had made certain admissions, but I don't know ...(intervention)

MR MARTINI: Stop there. Where he made certain admissions. How do you know he made those admissions?

MR ALEXANDER: SABC news, newspaper, but the content, all I was interested in at the time was that he planted that bomb, not his intentions were. He was the one who took the bomb inside there.

MR MARTINI: Well if you weren't interested in his intention, then why do you say: "He would have known I would be in the building"?

MR ALEXANDER: Because clearly, he knows what I drive, I'm familiar to him, that's why I said it.

MR MARTINI: Mr Alexander, we'll argue the point. We'll move on ...

CHAIRPERSON: Just one little question. After the bomb and before this in their normal course of investigating the explosion, did you make a statement to the police, Athlone police or whoever it was, that were investigating the actual bombing as from the night of the 31st of August, an ordinary police statement?

MR ALEXANDER: No, Your Worship. What happened was on that evening there was a Casspir parked on the corners of I think Thornton and Klipfontein main road, on that field there. We always thought that there was police involvement. We never, until the statement, I never saw the police, they never approached me.

MR LAX: If they had approached you, would you have made a statement at that time?

MR ALEXANDER: Most probably very fearfully and under duress, but I would have, but I was in the building, I couldn't say I wasn't in the building, but we were fearful of them at the time.

MR SIBANYONI: When people gathered at the centre after the explosion, where were you?

MR ALEXANDER: Excuse me?

MR SIBANYONI: When people gathered at the centre after the explosion, where were you?

MR ALEXANDER: Initially I took the car to Diza Court, as I've said, or the bakkie, sorry, to Diza Court. I mingled in with the crowd and the back and in the front of the centre and thereafter within 15 or 20 minutes, I just decided to take myself and others out of the area because we were afraid. We were of the opinion that they would say it's Kewtown Youth is responsible for this and we would be picked up in terms of Section 29 or whatever, we would be detained and it was just normal, and we basically, at the time we basically took ourselves out of the area. I would only come into the area at night thereafter and I wouldn't park the bakkie at my mother's place or wherever it would be easily noticeable.

MR MARTINI: Sorry Chairperson, would this be an appropriate time for a short adjournment?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, we'll take the tea adjournment now thank you.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

ON RESUMPTION

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

OESMAN ALEXANDER: (s.u.o.)

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Martini.

MR MARTINI: Thank you Chairperson.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR MARTINI: (cont)

Mr Alexander, just to go back, I didn't quite understand your evidence where you were talking about, I think in reply to the Commissioner's questions, that groups were led out the hall, younger children were accompanied by an older member, I didn't quite understand that and I don't want to mislead you. Do you recall that evidence?

MR ALEXANDER: I'm saying it was the norm that we had a couple of members who were a bit older, older being in the sense of their early twenties. The youngest members were about between 15 and 20, I said, but they would leave in groups, that's correct.

MR MARTINI: So the gist of your evidence was that the older children accompanied the younger ones home sometimes?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR MARTINI: Now on this evening, did that happen?

MR ALEXANDER: That would be correct, as I said earlier.

MR MARTINI: And how many children were there in these groups, or younger children, let me put it that way?

MR ALEXANDER: Normally it would be between, as I've said before, our unit consists of about 35 to 50 people and about 10 would be over 20, roughly.

MR MARTINI: So that evening, were there about 10 children that were accompanied by an older child, so to speak?

MR ALEXANDER: There were in all, when I came there, in terms of the youth, the members that counted ten roughly. Of all the members, I think Glen Josephs was around, ...(indistinct) etc.

MR MARTINI: No, no, let me ask you this. That evening were there a group of younger children that were accompanied home by an older child?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR MARTINI: Right. Now within that group - well let me put it to you this way, how many groups of younger children were there, first of all that were accompanied?

MR ALEXANDER: It would be one group because the members that were there would be roughly ten in terms of the youth.

MR MARTINI: So was there only one group that left accompanied by an old, 1, 2, 3, 4 older members?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes, there was one group that left. I'm not sure - the older member that would have left with them that evening was Glen Josephs.

MR MARTINI: Okay, so there was one group that left.

MR ALEXANDER: That's correct.

MR MARTINI: Now how many members were in that group?

MR ALEXANDER: I would assume it would be in total between 8 and 9 people.

MR MARTINI: 8, 9, 10.

MR ALEXANDER: Well, Peter was counted in with the bigger ...(indistinct - speaking simultaneously)

MR MARTINI: He stayed behind?

MR ALEXANDER: He stayed behind.

MR MARTINI: But the group that left?

MR ALEXANDER: About 9 people, 8 or 9 people.

MR MARTINI: Including the older person?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR MARTINI: Now were they all Kewtown Youth members?

MR ALEXANDER: That is correct.

MR MARTINI: And were they all the members that were there, for the Kewtown Youth Movement, other than Mr Williams?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes, that's correct.

MR MARTINI: So by the time you arrived, all the Kewtown Youth members that were there, willingly, is that correct?

MR ALEXANDER: They were just finishing off, ready to exit, ja.

MR MARTINI: Sorry?

MR ALEXANDER: They were finishing off, ready to exit. Some of the people, the meeting was unwinding and as it unwinded, some people came out and they were preparing to leave, that's correct.

MR MARTINI: But there was an older one that was going to accompany the younger ones?

MR ALEXANDER: That's correct.

MR MARTINI: So that they group together and leave.

MR ALEXANDER: That is correct.

MR MARTINI: So did you see them leave?

MR ALEXANDER: I was in the foyer, I saw them leave.

MR MARTINI: You see in your statement you say

"The meeting had adjourned and people were already leaving the building during my arrival."

MR ALEXANDER: During my arrival, I was in the foyer, that is correct.

MR MARTINI: So before you even arrived, people were leaving?

MR BIZOS: No, my learned friend must be careful, you mustn't put a gloss or editorialise the answer and ask a question on the edited version.

MR MARTINI: Chairperson,

"MR ALEXANDER: The meeting was completed and the people were already leaving the building during my arrival."

I read that to mean that while you were arriving the meeting had ended, people were already leaving.

MR ALEXANDER: People were exiting the hall, they were unwinding. I was in the reception area. You will see that I said I came there ten past eight. The Cayco meeting only started at twenty five past eight.

MR MARTINI: Tell me what this means, go to page 8 of your statement.

MR ALEXANDER: Yes?

MR MARTINI: Page 8, bundle D, the typed version.

"... The meeting was over and the people were already leaving the building during my arrival..."

What does that mean?

MR ALEXANDER: To put it into context for you sir, every night when we leave here, or ...

MR MARTINI: No, what I ...

MR ALEXANDER: I want to put it into context for you sir. When the Commission leaves the hall, does everybody immediately leave the hall when everything is stopped?

MR MARTINI: Mr Alexander ...

MR ALEXANDER: That is what happened there, people were unwinding.

MR MARTINI: Mr Bizos objected, and I want you to tell me what that means. Does that mean, correct me if I am wrong, I am going to try and help you. To me that means as you were arriving, people were leaving, is that correct, my interpretation, or is that wrong?

MR ALEXANDER: It is not fully correct. The meeting, the formal meeting of the Kewtown Youth Movement was done and people were starting to come outside of the hall, unwinding, and they would talk before they leave. It is not, you get done and you walk out.

MR MARTINI

"... leaving the building ...",

not busy standing around in the building, talking, but to leave the building, the building, not the hall, the building (transcriber's own interpretation)

MR ALEXANDER: That is how I stated it, but that was in fact my meaning.

MR MARTINI: So your meaning then is that they hadn't left, they were standing around, talking?

MR ALEXANDER: That is correct.

MR MARTINI: So they didn't leave the "gebou"?

MR ALEXANDER: That is correct.

MR MARTINI: Mr Williams, if you look down at ...

MR ALEXANDER: Mr Alexander.

MR MARTINI: Sorry, Mr Alexander, further down the page you say, you know where you list the gentlemen that were present at the Cape Youth Congress, point 8.

CHAIRPERSON: The people because they weren't all gentlemen?

MR ALEXANDER: There were females ...

MR MARTINI: Sorry.

CHAIRPERSON: By that I mean there were females as well.

MR MARTINI: My apologies

"... three whites whose names I did not know, as well as another man whose name I also do not know."

Do you remember the white man's name?

MR ALEXANDER: I cannot recall.

MR MARTINI: Did you know a Peter Oliver?

MR ALEXANDER: No. Under no circumstances was a Peter Oliver a member of Kewtown Youth as well, I don't know a Peter Oliver.

MR MARTINI: Right.

MR LAX: This is not a list of the Kewtown Youth.

MR MARTINI: No, this is ...

MR LAX: This is just - yes.

MR MARTINI: The persons that left, in terms of the Kewtown Youth, the people that were at the "vergadering", you say there were three people, white people ...

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, this is the second meeting, this is not the first meeting.

MR ALEXANDER: The Cape Youth Congress meeting.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, it is not the Kewtown Youth.

MR LAX: Just put your microphone on.

MR MARTINI: Sorry Chairperson, yes. If you look at page 8, paragraph 2.

MR ALEXANDER: Yes?

MR MARTINI: You list three whites, I don't know if it is female or males, and you say there was another white man.

MR LAX: It says "'n ander man", nie ander wit man nie."

MR MARTINI: Was that man Peter Oliver perhaps?

MR ALEXANDER: I do not know a Peter Oliver, sir.

MR MARTINI: You don't know ...

MR ALEXANDER: Peter Oliver was never part of Kewtown Youth or of that forum, I don't know a Peter Oliver.

MR MARTINI: Yes, but you said that your meetings were open to everybody, to the public, that anyone could arrive?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes, but obviously if people arrived, we would let the person introduce himself to the bigger forum.

MR LAX: But hang on, just can I stop you. The Cape Youth, there has been no discussion about whether those meetings were closed or open, Kewtown Youth were open, that is what he said so far? Talking about Cayco, that is a different matter.

MR MARTINI: Let me ask you, the Cape Youth Congress meetings, were they open to the public?

MR ALEXANDER: Those meetings were only affiliated branches, not open to the public.

MR MARTINI: So in other words if there was a Cape Youth Congress meeting going on, only members were allowed to attend, it wasn't open to any member of the public to come in?

MR ALEXANDER: That is right.

MR MARTINI: Right. But your evidence is the Kewtown Youth Movement's meetings were open to the public?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR MARTINI: Now, is it also correct that various members of the Kewtown Youth Movement were members of the Cape Youth Congress?

MR ALEXANDER: That is correct.

MR MARTINI: Were you a member?

MR ALEXANDER: That is correct.

MR MARTINI: Of both, when I say both, Kewtown and Youth Congress?

MR ALEXANDER: That is correct.

MR MARTINI: Mr Williams?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR MARTINI: Fatima Omar?

MR ALEXANDER: Fatima wasn't part of Kewtown Youth, but she was part of Cayco.

MR MARTINI: She was only part of the Kewtown Youth?

MR ALEXANDER: She wasn't part of Kewtown Youth. She belonged to a different Youth.

MR MARTINI: Well, I am asking you. Miranda Abrahams?

MR ALEXANDER: Different Youth.

MR MARTINI: She wasn't part of ...

MR ALEXANDER: Kewtown Youth?

MR MARTINI: Let me help you this way, I am going to read out these names, tell me if these names belong to both movements, in other words Cape Youth Congress or Kewtown. Yourself, a member of both?

MR ALEXANDER: Both.

MR MARTINI: Peter Williams, member of both?

MR ALEXANDER: Both.

MR MARTINI: Miranda Abrahams?

MR ALEXANDER: Cayco.

MR MARTINI: Shinaaz Lamera?

MR ALEXANDER: Cayco.

MR MARTINI: Regina Isaacs?

MR ALEXANDER: Cayco.

MR MARTINI: Nazeema Mohammed?

MR ALEXANDER: Cayco.

MR MARTINI: Fatima Omar?

MR ALEXANDER: Cayco.

MR MARTINI: Now, did you all know each other?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes, we knew one another.

MR MARTINI: Did you know the members by name? Sorry, in the Cape Youth Congress, in the Cape Youth Congress, did you know each other?

MR ALEXANDER: Well, broadly because we saw them much more frequently, so I would know their names.

MR MARTINI: No, no, the members of the Cape Youth Congress, did you all know each other?

MR ALEXANDER: The Cape Youth Congress was a vast organisation sir, it had numerous Youth Branches, it was Youth structures throughout the Cape.

MR MARTINI: How would you know if someone arrived to a meeting there, whether he was a member?

MR ALEXANDER: It was regionalised. (Indistinct) consisted of x amount of branches.

MR MARTINI: Right, but at your meeting at ELC, would you know all the members?

MR ALEXANDER: We would be familiar with faces or names.

MR MARTINI: Let me finish. Would you know all your members when they arrived at that meeting? Would you know who they are?

MR BIZOS: Mr Chairman, it may be that these matters are completely foreign to Mr Martini, I think the evidence is clear that the Youth Congress meeting consisted of representatives of Youth organisations, it was not the members of the organisation as a whole that attended it.

I don't know if Mr Martini wants further explanation, I think the witness will deal with it, but he must not assume with respect, that any member of any Youth organisation could come to an Executive meeting.

MR MARTINI: No Chairperson, I don't assume that, I am asking the witness to make me understand. Now please tell me, the Cape Youth Congress, the members, I understand it might be regionalised, now this Cape Youth Congress, this regional congress of which you were a member, they met at the ELC, is that correct?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR MARTINI: Right. Would you know the members of that regional congress by name?

MR ALEXANDER: I would know most of them by name and those which I don't know, someone else in that meeting, present, would know. We all came from various branches within the region.

MR MARTINI: All right, so when someone arrives at the meeting, there was no identification process, was there, to get into the meeting or not? You just walked in?

MR ALEXANDER: It wasn't a secret organisation sir, we don't do that.

MR MARTINI: That is my point.

MR ALEXANDER: But we knew our members, not by name or by face etc, because we ...

MR LAX: Mr Alexander, just get a bit closer to the microphone. As you go further away, it gets softer.

MR ALEXANDER: Sorry, I want to see his face, sorry.

CHAIRPERSON: Just before you proceed, was this an Executive Meeting?

MR ALEXANDER: It was a regional meeting, it was representatives of the various Youths within the region. Cayco was broken into regions, we had the Athlone region which consisted of eight or ten branches of respective Youth.

CHAIRPERSON: I think what I am trying to get at, was it restricted to people who were in managerial or executive positions within their branches, or theoretically could a couple of hundred people pitch up?

MR ALEXANDER: It was never a couple of hundred people.

CHAIRPERSON: No, but I mean theoretically?

MR ALEXANDER: No.

CHAIRPERSON: So it was just people from Executive Committees of their branches who attended this sort of Regional meeting?

MR ALEXANDER: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MR MARTINI: You say it wasn't secretive, so why didn't you open to the members of the community, as you did with the Kewtown Youth?

MR ALEXANDER: This was a different forum, Kewtown Youth was a particular forum, this was the parent forum in terms of Kewtown Youth, if I can draw the analogy as such.

MR MARTINI: But it wasn't secretive?

MR ALEXANDER: It wasn't secretive.

MR MARTINI: So was there any reason to exclude members of the community from attending those meetings as they were allowed to do with Kewtown?

MR ALEXANDER: There was no reason, but we basically dealt at a different level, it was the Executive or members of those branches which were elected to go there.

MR MARTINI: I want to get to one more point, you heard, were you here when Mr Peter Williams were putting certain versions on the record to Mr van Zyl and even during the arguments over the venue? Did you recall him saying that, that was more in argument, that this bomb divided the community. Would that be correct?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes, to an extent.

MR MARTINI: How did it divide the community?

MR ALEXANDER: Because there was mistrust for a long time within the community. The community mainly consisted of working class people, it was a sub-economic community, and you had your gang groupings within that community, which would side with the likes of, or certain of those guys, would certainly side with the likes of Isgak, because of his connection to them.

MR MARTINI: When you say mistrust, what would that mean, what do you mean, why didn't they trust, for example another group not trust the Kewtown group, the Kewtown Youth Movement?

MR ALEXANDER: Not in that particular way, but we were fearful, we didn't know what to expect, we didn't know who else was coopted by the CCB.

MR MARTINI: Were you, were there rumours at the time that this was your own bomb that went off and that what are you guys getting up to, within the community?

MR ALEXANDER: Never within the community?

MR MARTINI: Never?

MR ALEXANDER: There was disinformation in terms of the State and that is what we feel, the people in the community knew and stood by the members of the Kewtown Youth, all along.

MR MARTINI: So you say there was disinformation?

MR ALEXANDER: In terms of the State. We thought that the State wanted to pick us up in terms of it.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry Mr Alexander, you say there was disinformation on the part of the State, was there actually any newspaper reports or in the media, what ...

MR ALEXANDER: No, it was spread by means of ...

CHAIRPERSON: Were you afraid that there would be disinformation, I just want to find out whether there was actually disinformation?

MR ALEXANDER: Sorry, let me correct myself, I was afraid that there would be, but Gakkie was also spreading rumours. Gakkie was sowing seeds to that effect.

MR MARTINI: Do I understand you then correctly, if he spread the rumours, there were rumours within the community?

MR ALEXANDER: Well, not to the people that mattered. Amongst his friends, but in essence the mothers, the Residents' Association, etc, supported the Kewtown Youth. That is why I could go there at night, that is why I wasn't fearful in terms of walking there at night. In terms of the day, I felt that the police could pick me up and label me.

That is the way we thought at the time.

MR MARTINI: Did you think that the police would have thought that it was your bomb, that you were involved in radical activities? Not yours, when I say you ...

MR ALEXANDER: I know what you are saying sir. We knew how the State operated, and we were fearful.

MR MARTINI: You haven't answered my question. Was that one of your fears?

MR ALEXANDER: That was a fear.

MR MARTINI: That the State might believe this is what, it is a limpet mine, it is one of theirs and they are radicals and arrest you guys. Did you fear that?

MR ALEXANDER: Well, yes and no, because we weren't radicals.

MR MARTINI: Okay. Wrong choice of words. Did you know Rev Lionel Louw?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes, I did.

MR MARTINI: Who was he?

MR ALEXANDER: I didn't know him in a personal capacity, but I knew he was part of the Board of the ELC.

MR MARTINI: Would it be correct if I say he was the Foundation's Vice-President?

MR ALEXANDER: That is correct. I know he was on the top structure, I don't know in which capacity.

MR MARTINI: The Foundation, I take it that would be the Western Cape Foundation for Community Work in Athlone?

MR ALEXANDER: FCW, that is right.

MR MARTINI: Now, have you got Exhibit J in front of you? It is an exhibit, a newspaper clipping that my learned colleagues handed in?

MR ALEXANDER: Is it in Bundle J?

MR MARTINI: No, it is an exhibit, unfortunately Mr Alexander. My one seems to have - sorry Mr Lax, it has two press clippings. According to my notes it is marked Exhibit J, Mr Chairperson.

It seems to be that one, yes. On the right it's got "bomb blast at the Western Foundation", is that the one you have, Mr Alexander?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR MARTINI: The top bit, do you see it says "state of emergency - Cape Times - 1-09-1989", do you see that? The top article?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR MARTINI: Can you read, I will read to you, let's read the bottom, the last paragraph

"... the Rev Lionel Louw, the Foundation's Vice-President said responsibility for the blast lies with those opposed to our struggle."

Is that correct, will you support that statement?

MR ALEXANDER: I would support that statement.

MR MARTINI: Would you agree that in this press statement he is placing blame, maybe to some of the agents of the Apartheid government at the time?

MR ALEXANDER: That is correct.

MR MARTINI: He goes on, he says

"... community organisations used the hall, and in no way do we consider that members of any community organisation would have placed the bomb."

MR ALEXANDER: That is also correct.

MR MARTINI: He is making a statement to dispel, would you agree, any suggestions that it was a bomb of one of the communities that operated from his hall, would you agree with that?

MR ALEXANDER: I would agree with that fully.

MR MARTINI: Would you therefore agree that by making that statement, it is because there must have been such rumours floating around the community?

MR ALEXANDER: Not necessarily, but ...

MR MARTINI: Sorry Chairperson, the audience mustn't help him answer the question.

MR ALEXANDER: Not necessarily. Immediately after the bomb, I had still dealings with the ELC, I still knew the people there and we would be in contact, but beyond that, to the people that matters, like the people of the ELC, the KRA at the time, Kewtown Residents' Association and the people within the broader area, we were never labelled as the bombers.

MR MARTINI: Why do you think he would make such a statement?

MR ALEXANDER: As I have said before, most probably, in my opinion, disinformation which was being spread by either the media or the State, I cannot recall.

MR MARTINI: Correct, so then you would agree, there must have been such rumours floating around?

MR ALEXANDER: But as I have said before sir, about 90 percent of the area ...

MR MARTINI: Just answer me, Mr Alexander, would you agree with that? Would you agree with that?

MR LAX: Your microphone is off, Mr Martini.

MR MARTINI: Sorry. Would you agree with that statement, that there must have then rumours?

MR ALEXANDER: There might have been.

MR MARTINI: Do you accept that?

MR ALEXANDER: I would accept that.

MR MARTINI: Thank you. Now just a few more questions, Mr Alexander.

I accept that after the bomb, you must have been shocked and traumatised?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes, I was.

MR MARTINI: Just tell us briefly, after the bombing, exactly what did you do?

MR ALEXANDER: As we exited, or what? Immediately as the bomb exploded?

MR MARTINI: Just shortly thereafter, the bomb explode, I can accept there must have been chaos in that hall.

MR ALEXANDER: That is correct.

MR MARTINI: You must have been shocked?

MR ALEXANDER: I was.

MR MARTINI: I think you said you actually got flung to the ground?

MR ALEXANDER: That is right.

MR MARTINI: What did you then do?

MR ALEXANDER: We, as I have explained earlier, we tried to go towards the yellow ...

MR MARTINI: No, you, Mr Alexander?

MR ALEXANDER: Because I knew the centre, I ran towards the double doors which led towards the yellow and blue unit, we went into the, it is almost like an open area outside, but it was still within the parameter, there was a fence around.

MR MARTINI: Facing the front, let's call it the front then?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes, we were still within the premises, we couldn't find our way out there, and we ran towards the main entrance, the front side, which was the entrance towards Springbok Street.

MR LAX: Can I just ask you to indicate on this picture which direction you ran in? There is Springbok Street along the one side, and there is Klapperbos Street along the other side, and then there is Abduraman Avenue on the other side, and then there is Klipfontein Road on the other side, those are the sort of four accesses if you like.

MR ALEXANDER: That is right.

MR LAX: Let me just put on record, I have a photograph with a much broader focus, a wider focus.

CHAIRPERSON: It is different to the one I have, which is Exhibit D?

MR LAX: It shows all four streets? The building is still substantively there.

MR ALEXANDER: Could I draw on there, or ...

CHAIRPERSON: Shouldn't, before we proceed, shouldn't we all have a photo or number this photo, because I see it is marked Exhibit P, but it is not the same?

MR LAX: Perhaps we can call it P1 and P2, yes.

CHAIRPERSON: The first one that was handed in, that is the close-up version, which doesn't show Lower Klipfontein Road, will be P1 and then the wider angled lens photo, will be P2.

MR LAX: Okay.

MR MARTINI: We don't seem to have these documents, Chairperson. I have P1.

CHAIRPERSON: We will get them both.

MR LAX: Be that as it may, the actual image of the building is just slightly smaller on P2 and for the purposes of this, you say you ran towards these other, you used various colours, blocks?

MR MARTINI: We cannot follow this, we don't have all these blocks and colours.

MR LAX: With the greatest of respect, if you listened to the question ...

MR MARTINI: The colours, we don't have ...

MR LAX: Just listen to the question, the witness referred to certain blocks, they aren't on the picture.

MR ALEXANDER: The blue and yellow unit.

MR LAX: He spoke about the blue and yellow units.

MR MARTINI: We don't have blue and yellow units?

MR LAX: With respect, they are not on the picture, Mr Martini, if you would just stop and listen.

MR MARTINI: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Martini, they said they had a red unit which was somewhere else, near the foyer, where young kids played, and then within the building, they've got an area called the blue unit and the yellow unit which is the other side of the boardroom, but it is not reflected on the map.

MR MARTINI: Chairperson, we are at cross purposes, I was - earlier there were certain markings on this plan, there was A is this, D is ...

CHAIRPERSON: No, it is not that at all. It is not that.

MR MARTINI: I saw some yellow colours then, and now ...

MR LAX: No, that has nothing to do with it.

MR MARTINI: (Indistinct) I will try and follow Mr Lax.

MR LAX: From the nature of the photographs, I realised that there were certain colour codings on door frames, and those were the blocks that you were talking about?

MR ALEXANDER: That is correct.

MR LAX: Now, if one looks at this picture, both pictures are I don't know what the, in terms of the compass, which is north and which is south, but if one looks at Klapperbos is on the right, and Klipfontein is on the left of the actual exhibit as you are looking at it, as you are looking at it in landscape view, landscape as opposed to portrait, in other words horizontally, longwise like this. Okay, is that correct?

MR ALEXANDER: If I turn it landscape and with the circle at the back, closest to me?

MR LAX: Correct. The circle away from you. The circle away from you.

MR ALEXANDER: Away from me? Okay, the other way around. Then Klapperbos would be on the right.

MR LAX: Correct. Now with the picture in that orientation, which direction did you run in?

MR ALEXANDER: We ran towards Klapperbos side.

MR LAX: Thank you.

MR MARTINI: Okay. And then?

MR ALEXANDER: There is a double door there, which we opened, and if you look at the picture still in front of you, there is, next to the road there is a parameter there, there is vibracrete with a fence on top of it, so we came into an open area, but we were still within the premises.

MR MARTINI: I accept that, yes.

MR ALEXANDER: We couldn't go beyond that point, and we turned back, came back through those double doors, went towards the foyer and exited the building towards Springbok Street side, which is the front entrance.

MR MARTINI: The front entrance, right?

MR ALEXANDER: That is right.

MR MARTINI: And then?

MR ALEXANDER: After we were sure that all of our members were out of the building, I immediately took my bakkie and I went to go and park it in Disa Court.

MR MARTINI: Which, when we are looking at this landscape is to the right or to the ...

MR ALEXANDER: Disa Court is, I think you attended the scene in loco?

MR MARTINI: Yes.

MR ALEXANDER: There are shops, at the parking, at the back of the ELC, there is a group of shops, Disa Court is just behind those shops.

MR MARTINI: Okay. Now, is there any reason why you didn't run through ...

MR LAX: Just, just, sorry, are the shops on the Lower Klipfontein side or on the Dr Abduraman Avenue side?

MR ALEXANDER: Dr Abduraman, they are in that road, Abduraman Avenue.

MR LAX: Thank you.

MR MARTINI: Now, is there any reason why you didn't run through the doors leading to the parking area?

MR ALEXANDER: No, we wanted to get out of the building, and as we ran out, the norm was that more than one bomb would explode, and we were fearful, we just wanted to exit the building.

MR MARTINI: But when you exited, looking at this thing, you were out, actually outside, but within the parameter of the building, it looks green on this map? Were you not outside the first time you ran out?

MR ALEXANDER: The first time we ran out, we were outside, but we weren't out of the premises.

MR MARTINI: Yes.

MR ALEXANDER: Our cars were parked in front, we wanted to get away from the building.

MR MARTINI: You were out of the building, you were out in the open?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes, but we were within the parameters, that is right.

MR MARTINI: Yes.

MR ALEXANDER: There was a vibracrete fence and on top of that, there was a wire fence.

MR MARTINI: So you couldn't jump over?

MR ALEXANDER: You couldn't jump over.

MR MARTINI: Now, coming through he foyer, the way I remember, if you had run straight, you could have run straight through the doors leading to the parking area, is that correct?

MR ALEXANDER: You could have.

MR MARTINI: Is there any reason why you didn't do that?

MR ALEXANDER: Because my car was parked in front of the building.

MR MARTINI: You just wanted to get home?

MR ALEXANDER: I didn't just want to get home, I wanted to get out and make sure that all of us were out and move my car away from the building, the bakkie, the vehicle.

MR MARTINI: And you took it home?

MR ALEXANDER: I didn't take it home. I took it to Disa Court.

MR MARTINI: Disa Court?

MR ALEXANDER: One of our members lived there.

MR MARTINI: All right, and then you came back?

MR ALEXANDER: I walked across, I didn't come back with the vehicle.

MR MARTINI: Yes, you walked back, and when you walked back, by then I assume that there was a lot of activity at this place?

MR ALEXANDER: That is correct, there were people on the - apparently today there is almost like a basket ball court next to the ELC, I think you must have seen it, there were people standing on that field there, I mixed in with the people, and I also went around, because the entire building on both sides, had people.

MR MARTINI: The back as well?

MR ALEXANDER: At the back, there were people standing as well.

MR MARTINI: Did the Fire Brigade arrive, the Police arrive? I am not saying they did as a fact, I am asking you?

MR ALEXANDER: There were, as Mr Hardien stated, "daar was baie ligte", meaning that there were police vehicles and I would assume fire brigade vehicles as well.

MR MARTINI: That is when you walked back?

MR ALEXANDER: No, because within, I think within minutes, not even, literally speaking I just went across and it takes me less than a minute to run across again.

MR MARTINI: Coming back?

MR ALEXANDER: So within minutes of the bomb, I came back, but there were police, within minutes there were police at the scene.

MR MARTINI: Within minutes of the bomb exploding or with you leaving?

MR ALEXANDER: No, within minutes of the bomb exploding.

MR MARTINI: Were they at the front, at the back?

MR ALEXANDER: I think they were at the back entrance more, but there must have been police cars in front, but I have also testified earlier that there was a casspir sort of vehicle on the corners of Thornton and Klipfontein Road, on that field next to the Civic Centre, which was parked there all night.

MR MARTINI: Did the police go and park in the parking area at the back?

MR ALEXANDER: Not in the area no, they didn't. They were outside, as you would remind yourself, there is a fence around the parking area with a big gate. That gate was always there.

MR MARTINI: Was the gate locked?

MR ALEXANDER: Well, I do not, I don't think so because police had to get access into the building, it wasn't locked.

MR MARTINI: Well, that is why I asked you did the police park in the parking area?

MR ALEXANDER: They didn't park in the parking lot, they parked outside where we parked.

MR MARTINI: How many police cars were there? Sorry, when you say "outside where we parked", outside in the front or in the parking area?

MR ALEXANDER: No, no, where we parked when we went for the inspection in loco.

MR MARTINI: In the parking area?

MR ALEXANDER: No, all of us didn't park in the parking area, people were parking outside the parking area.

MR MARTINI: Okay. So there is that extra piece there?

MR ALEXANDER: There is a big piece there.

MR MARTINI: Were there a lot of cars parked around there?

MR ALEXANDER: Not a lot of cars, but it was basically police vehicles.

MR MARTINI: How many would you say were there?

MR ALEXANDER: I cannot give you a definite answer in terms of that.

MR MARTINI: If you can't, you can't. I am just asking.

MR ALEXANDER: There were a number of vehicles parked.

MR MARTINI: And there was a lot of activity, I take it, people mingling around?

MR ALEXANDER: I was mingling with this people as well. I could fit in, I was from the area. I could walk amongst whoever.

MR MARTINI: Yes, but there were a lot of people?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR MARTINI: In the parking lot, were there a lot of people when you arrived back after you had left your car?

MR ALEXANDER: Not in the parking lot, because people were moved away from the building by the police.

MR MARTINI: So there was no access into the parking lot?

MR ALEXANDER: Not really.

MR MARTINI: What was your state of mind at the time, were you shocked, concerned, traumatised?

MR ALEXANDER: I was shocked, concerned, but I was right, all my faculties on top.

MR MARTINI: But you were discussing, talking to people, I assume, what went on here?

MR ALEXANDER: Mixing and mingling with the people, that is correct.

MR MARTINI: What made you stop to see if there were cars in the parking lot?

MR ALEXANDER: Because we knew that one of the members, Nazeema Mohammed's car was still there, in the parking lot.

MR MARTINI: How did you know that?

MR ALEXANDER: She was with me in the meeting, and I went to go and park my bakkie there and there were pamphlets in that car.

MR MARTINI: Now you see you also said that there were cars that belonged to the ELC, correct me if I am mistaken?

MR ALEXANDER: That is correct.

MR MARTINI: Were used by the ELC?

MR ALEXANDER: That is correct.

MR MARTINI: You see Mr Williams put versions to Mr van Zyl and at no stage did he ever put that there were cars that were used by the ELC, stationary in that parking lot? Can you explain why?

MR ALEXANDER: He might have omitted to see that, but in my opinion, I knew from (indistinct), and I went to go and check. I cannot speak for Mr Williams, but from my experience and memory, there were cars in the parking lot.

MR MARTINI: Will you say it was an oversight on Mr Williams' part?

MR ALEXANDER: I would assume that.

CHAIRPERSON: These ELC vehicles, what were they, kombi type vehicles to transport kids?

MR ALEXANDER: No, sedan vehicles.

CHAIRPERSON: Or were they sedans, what sort of vehicles?

MR ALEXANDER: It was sedan type of vehicles, sir.

MR MARTINI: One last question, Mr Alexander ...

MR LAX: Your microphone, Mr Martini.

MR MARTINI: Oh, sorry.

MR LAX: You've got no junior to help you?

MR MARTINI: It keeps going off. One final question, Mr Alexander, were you in court when Mr van Zyl testified?

MR ALEXANDER: In court or ...

MR MARTINI: In the hearing, sorry?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes, I was here.

MR MARTINI: Did you hear him apologise to the victims?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes, and no. I heard him apologise, but did he mean it? He was still not being truthful about what happened, so ...

MR MARTINI: That is your opinion, but I am just asking a simple question, did you hear him apologise?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes, I did.

MR MARTINI: Now, do you accept his apology?

MR ALEXANDER: No, I don't. He was not truthful. I came here with the sole reason to get the truth, and if that was, had been spoken, I would have given my hand in friendship and or, which I did to Mr Ferdi Barnard.

MR MARTINI: Yes, we will get to that, but you don't accept his apology?

MR ALEXANDER: No. He wasn't truthful.

MR MARTINI: You are not prepared to reconcile with Mr van Zyl?

MR ALEXANDER: If he is prepared to come and testify and speak the truth, at any other point ...

MR MARTINI: Answer my question, after these hearings?

MR ALEXANDER: No, I am not.

MR MARTINI: I am going to finish off with you now, you are not prepared to reconcile with Mr van Zyl?

MR ALEXANDER: No, I am not.

MR MARTINI: And I take it you have been discussing it with other members and victims that all sat here, that that is also their opinion or not?

MR ALEXANDER: Well, I cannot speak and decide for them, but from my experience, I know that he was not being truthful.

MR MARTINI: I ...

MR ALEXANDER: I was in the building, I cannot speak for them.

MR MARTINI: I am not asking you whether he is being truthful or not, that the Commission will make a decision on. I am asking you when you say you are not prepared to reconcile with him, can I, I am not being unfair to you, having, I saw you mingle with the other victims.

MR ALEXANDER: Yes, I mingle with them.

MR MARTINI: You had discussions, do they hold the same view?

MR ALEXANDER: I am of the opinion that they hold the same view.

MR MARTINI: That they don't want to reconcile either with Mr van Zyl?

MR ALEXANDER: That is correct.

MR MARTINI: Thank you, no further questions.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MARTINI

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Martini. Mr du Plessis, do you have any questions that you would like to put?

MR H DU PLESSIS: I have no questions. I would just like to know if my client and I may be excused, and I would like to place on record that the date for the continuation of these hearings, has been arranged with me, and it does suit me.

CHAIRPERSON: Certainly, Mr du Plessis.

MR H. DU PLESSIS: Thank you Mr Chairperson.

NO CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR H DU PLESSIS

CHAIRPERSON: Mr van Eck, do you have any questions?

MR VAN ECK: (Indistinct)

INTERPRETER: The speaker was unclear, could he repeat his statement?

MR LAX: Would you just repeat it, the translators didn't get what you said, I am afraid.

MR VAN ECK: Pardon Chairperson, Mr du Plessis on my right, will go ahead of me.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR P DU PLESSIS: I won't be leaving, I will actually be asking some questions. Thank you Mr Chairman, can I proceed? Mr Alexander, firstly I just want to mention a few names to you from the statements made available.

Shinaaz Shamira?

MR ALEXANDER: Shinaaz Lamera?

MR P DU PLESSIS: Sorry?

MR ALEXANDER: Lamera?

MR P DU PLESSIS: Is it Lamera? I think it is incorrectly spelt in the index. This person, is this person known to you?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: From the Cape Youth Congress?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: As a friend from the same community?

MR ALEXANDER: Not from the same community, but from a different community, but I know her.

MR P DU PLESSIS: You at a stage, we are talking about 1989, did you know her well?

MR ALEXANDER: I knew her to an extent, we didn't interact daily, but I knew her, and we went to various meetings, yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: So you actually knew her well by the time of this explosion?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes, I knew who she was and where she lived, which area she lived, not necessarily which house she lived in.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Did you socially interact with her?

MR ALEXANDER: On occasion at Youth functions, but not on a daily basis.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes. But, so you did socialise and you did go to the same meetings?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: And obviously, if I understand correctly, she was a member of the Cape Youth Congress and one of the senior members?

MR ALEXANDER: That is right.

MR P DU PLESSIS: One of the ...

MR ALEXANDER: In terms of her branch, she would have been senior.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Executive members?

MR ALEXANDER: In terms of her branch, she would have been senior.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes?

MR ALEXANDER: Not, any way ...

MR P DU PLESSIS: But in any event she was part of the Executive?

MR ALEXANDER: Regional Executive.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Regional Executive, yes, is that correct?

MR ALEXANDER: Correct yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Then obviously Mr Peter Williams you knew?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: And also as a friend?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes, I knew him well.

MR P DU PLESSIS: At that time? You knew him very well?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes, very well.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Fine. The next person is Regina Isaacs?

MR ALEXANDER: I knew her, I still know her.

MR P DU PLESSIS: On a social basis?

MR ALEXANDER: On a social basis.

MR P DU PLESSIS: As a friend?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: And also as a member of the Cape Youth Congress?

MR ALEXANDER: That is correct.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Fatima Omar? Is it the same position?

MR ALEXANDER: I knew her, didn't interact with her, but I knew who she was.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Well, did you only know who she was, did you ever attend meeting with her?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Just tell me by the way, what was your position in the Cape Youth Congress?

MR ALEXANDER: Mine?

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes?

MR ALEXANDER: I was a senior member of the Kewtown Youth Movement. We were representatives of our movement's meeting on a regional basis. Not the Cape Youth Congress ...

MR P DU PLESSIS: You were affiliated to the Cape Youth Congress?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Were you serving on the Executive?

MR ALEXANDER: On the Regional, the Regional Executive.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Regional Executive? Sorry?

MR ALEXANDER: We attended regional meetings.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Of what, of the Cape Youth Congress?

MR ALEXANDER: That is right.

MR P DU PLESSIS: As?

MR ALEXANDER: But I wasn't an official office bearer of the Cape Youth Congress.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes.

MR ALEXANDER: I was an office bearer of the Kewtown Youth Movement.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes, and Fatima Omar? Was she also ...

MR ALEXANDER: She was a representative from a different Youth.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Also a Youth organisation?

MR ALEXANDER: That is right.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Which one?

MR ALEXANDER: Thornhill.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Thornhill? And as such you knew her and you attended numerous meetings with her? Isn't that so?

MR ALEXANDER: That is right.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Is that correct?

MR ALEXANDER: That is right.

MR P DU PLESSIS: And Nazeema Mohammed?

MR ALEXANDER: I knew her as well.

MR P DU PLESSIS: On the same basis?

MR ALEXANDER: That is right.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Also attended many meetings with her, is that correct?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: The following person is Wallace Jonathan Stevens? Do you know this person?

MR ALEXANDER: I knew who he was, he played soccer in the area, but he wasn't resident within the Kewtown area, but I knew who he was.

MR P DU PLESSIS: You didn't know him socially?

MR ALEXANDER: No.

MR P DU PLESSIS: You had no interaction previously with this person?

MR ALEXANDER: No.

MR P DU PLESSIS: No problems with this person?

MR ALEXANDER: No.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Like, while I am on the point, on the point, you obviously knew Gakkie who testified here?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes, I knew Gakkie.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Did you have problems with him before, personal clashes? Political, of political nature perhaps?

MR ALEXANDER: We were on different sides of ...

MR P DU PLESSIS: Of the political spectrum?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: He knew that?

MR ALEXANDER: He knew that but we could live together.

MR P DU PLESSIS: But that wasn't the position with Mr Wallace Stevens? This Mr Wallace Jonathan Stevens, you didn't have any political associations with him?

MR ALEXANDER: No, I didn't have any associations or have any social links with Mr ...

MR P DU PLESSIS: Nothing at all?

MR ALEXANDER: With Mr Wallace Stevens.

MR P DU PLESSIS: So he is not, it is not for instance known to you that he was, if he was, from the opposite political spectrum or from the same?

MR ALEXANDER: No. No.

MR P DU PLESSIS: He may have been an anti-government person as well? Do you agree with that?

MR ALEXANDER: I don't know him in that fashion.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes. And Terrence Coetzee?

MR ALEXANDER: No, I don't know him.

MR P DU PLESSIS: So before this incident, you didn't know who Terrence Coetzee was or did you?

MR ALEXANDER: Let me just put it into perspective ...

MR P DU PLESSIS: Well, this Mr Terrence Coetzee ...

MR ALEXANDER: I don't know him, however that was a soccer union meeting, and we had a rebel league within the Kewtown area. There were something like 16 soccer teams playing, so they came there, I don't know them.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Fine. I just want to establish whether you knew this person. I see he ...

CHAIRPERSON: When you say you don't know him, you know of him, I mean Terrence Coetzee, now you are talking about somebody belonging to the soccer people, so you know, you have heard the name and you know that he belongs to soccer, but you don't know him, or do you say "I don't know him, I have never heard the name and I am just guessing that he might have been ..."

MR ALEXANDER: I don't know of him in terms of soccer or whatever, but if I were to see him on the soccer field or if I were to see him in the area, I would know he played soccer, but I don't have any interaction or social ...

CHAIRPERSON: And you would know him to be Terrence Coetzee?

MR ALEXANDER: I wouldn't know him to be Terrence Coetzee, I would just know the face. It is like ...

CHAIRPERSON: So how do you know when Mr du Plessis mentions the name Terrence Coetzee now?

MR ALEXANDER: Because I read the statements.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, so you know just from your knowledge of these documents?

MR ALEXANDER: Let me just add, the only soccer person I knew there was someone by the nickname of Boere Erickson. That is the only person I knew in terms of the soccer grouping.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Thank you Mr Chairman. Godfrey Blignaut?

MR ALEXANDER: I don't know him.

MR P DU PLESSIS: His position is the same as Mr Coetzee?

MR ALEXANDER: That is correct.

MR P DU PLESSIS: You may have known the face, but not the name? Sorry?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Now, just tell me, you say that you have read the documents, is that referring to the statements to which I was referring now, when I read the names?

MR ALEXANDER: I read it this morning.

MR P DU PLESSIS: You read the statements?

MR ALEXANDER: Because I had the thick book with the hand-written version, and I saw these things. I didn't basically go out and prepare myself around things like that.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Well sir, you said you read the statements?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes, this morning.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Did you read the statements, don't interrupt me please, did you read the statements or didn't you read the statements?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes, I did this morning.

MR P DU PLESSIS: This, the Cape Youth Congress, Cape Youth Congress, did they meet at the Early Learning Centre regularly?

MR ALEXANDER: No, they did not.

MR P DU PLESSIS: On how many occasions say per year, can you remember, more or less?

MR ALEXANDER: I could almost be certain they could have met there once in two months, or whatever, but it was never part of the venue. We had floating venues wherever.

MR P DU PLESSIS: You had several venues, and it depended on whose turn it was to stage the meeting, is that what you are saying?

MR ALEXANDER: That is right. That is correct.

MR P DU PLESSIS: So you would from time to time have a meeting at the Early Learning Centre?

MR ALEXANDER: That is a possibility, yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: So, is it possible or not, did it happen?

MR ALEXANDER: It is possible, I have just said it is a possibility, yes. We would have meetings there from time to time, not regularly.

MR P DU PLESSIS: But you would arrange it for the Early Learning Centre?

MR ALEXANDER: Not necessarily the ELC, it could have been CRIC which is adjacent.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Sorry?

MR ALEXANDER: CRIC, Careers Research Information Centre, which is next to the ELC, that same road.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Did you arrange meetings or did you just go to a certain place and by coincidence, there would be a meeting, obviously you would arrange it beforehand?

MR ALEXANDER: You would arrange it, that is correct.

MR P DU PLESSIS: And you would have arranged it for a specific date, time and venue?

MR ALEXANDER: That is correct.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Who was responsible for arranging this specific meeting that evening?

MR ALEXANDER: I cannot recall whose responsibility it was that evening, but the meeting point would have been CRIC and from there we would have gone to the venue. CRIC is adjacent to the ELC.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Is it part of the same building?

MR ALEXANDER: Have you got your map in front of you?

MR P DU PLESSIS: I have, yes.

MR ALEXANDER: There is a centre with a blue roof, do you see it clearly?

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes.

MR ALEXANDER: That is CRIC.

MR P DU PLESSIS: So are you saying that the meeting was in fact arranged for that building?

MR ALEXANDER: No, I am not saying, that was the meeting point, outside CRIC, it wasn't arranged for that building.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Did you meet the people who were supposed to come to the meeting, at that venue that you have just referred to now? Did you meet them there?

MR ALEXANDER: No, I said I came late, I came there at ten past eight. I didn't meet them there ...

MR P DU PLESSIS: (Indistinct)

MR ALEXANDER: They were coming towards the ELC, because they knew we were there.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Alexander, I just cannot quite understand it. If I attend a meeting at the ELC, why should I go and meet people at CRIC?

MR ALEXANDER: No.

CHAIRPERSON: And go from CRIC to there, why can I not go straight there, if the meeting is arranged for the ELC at eight o'clock or whatever?

MR ALEXANDER: In the era, Your Worship, we would get together at a central point, and from there, we would move to the venue.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, but why get together at a central point, I mean we all came here today from different places, we didn't all meet at the end of the freeway and come in as a group, there is no point in that? What was the point, why did you meet at a central point to go to a meeting at another place?

MR ALEXANDER: The point was, we were all political activists and we would meet at a particular point and go from there to the venue.

MR LAX: That still does not explain to us. I mean if the venue of the meeting was the ELC, why not meet at the ELC? The problem is if the venue was known, then you would go to the venue?

MR ALEXANDER: The venue wasn't known, at the time, it was decided on that evening, that we would meet at the ELC. The meeting point would have been CRIC and from there we would have gone to a venue, but because we were the closest and our meeting was in process, sort of round about the time, that is when we decided we will use ELC.

But there was never a predetermined matter that the Cayco meeting would be at ELC.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, because you said to Mr du Plessis that the venue, the date, etc, was arranged, I just assumed that it would have been arranged before that date? So you all meet at a certain designated point and then there, decided on an ad hoc basis for that night, where to have a meeting?

MR ALEXANDER: That is correct.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Thank you Mr Chairman. So that was for purposes of avoiding the wrong people knowing where you were, the wrong people being the authorities of the time, the government, the police, Secret Police, etc?

MR ALEXANDER: That is correct, for safety purposes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: For safety purposes? So, are you saying that the place where you were actually supposed to meet, would only be decided on once you meet at a specific predesignated point, then you would say "okay, from here we will move to that building and we will have our meeting there"?

MR ALEXANDER: It would be the norm, yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: So you would go to this, you said CRIC, how do you spell it, by the way?

MR ALEXANDER: C-R-I-C.

MR P DU PLESSIS: You would go to CRIC and you would say "okay, from here we will go to that house or that shop or to this building and we will have our meeting there", is that so?

MR ALEXANDER: Not to the end degree, but it would have happened in that manner. There were only x amount of venues available within the area.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Well, obviously you didn't go, it is now very clear that you wouldn't go to the same place every time?

MR ALEXANDER: That is right.

MR P DU PLESSIS: So you would meet at CRIC and then you would only then decide to go to A, B or C, isn't it so?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: So it was lucky that you found them at the ELC, because you wouldn't have known they were meeting at the ELC?

MR ALEXANDER: No, I was coming to my Youth meeting, to Kewtown Youth Meeting.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, like I am saying it was fortunate that they happened to choose the ELC to meet that night, after having met at CRIC because you said you were late and didn't go to CRIC, so when you entered the building, you didn't know where the Cape Youth were meeting?

MR ALEXANDER: No, when I entered, they were standing outside the building, and CRIC is basically on the side, I could see them. And hence we, from there ad hoc decided we would meet there.

They were standing outside.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry Mr du Plessis?

MR P DU PLESSIS: Sorry, thank you Mr Chairman. So the fact of the matter is that you didn't know where they would be going, correct?

MR ALEXANDER: Sorry?

MR P DU PLESSIS: When you arrived at the Early Learning Centre, you didn't know where the meeting would be, the Cape Youth Congress meeting?

MR ALEXANDER: That is right. It was decided there and then.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Sorry?

MR ALEXANDER: It was decided there and then.

MR P DU PLESSIS: But you weren't there? You weren't present when it was decided? You weren't at CRIC?

MR ALEXANDER: No, I have just stated now that they were outside CRIC, when I came there, I could see them, I could go and talk to them, that is what my statement also says.

MR P DU PLESSIS: So, did you actually then go to CRIC and meet them there? Did you go there or didn't you go there?

MR ALEXANDER: I didn't go to CRIC, they were standing outside, parked on the pavement. Look at the Exhibit P2, the (indistinct) version is D1 and D2, that is where their cars were parked.

MR P DU PLESSIS: In any event, let me leave that for a moment. Did the, perhaps I should see the point, I cannot distinguish.

The fact of the matter is, I see the building, CRIC and I see the Early Learning Centre, and it is quite some distance apart, isn't it?

MR ALEXANDER: It is about 40 metres apart, sir. 40 Metres, and the gate from CRIC to where these guys were parking, was less than 20 metres.

MR P DU PLESSIS: So did you in fact communicate by talking to them and asking them where they were going for the meeting?

MR ALEXANDER: You will see where I parked sir, position C on there, I had to walk across the road, then I saw these guys.

MR P DU PLESSIS: But did you go there sir? Did you go to them and talk to them, that is the question?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes, that is right.

MR P DU PLESSIS: So you did? Just answer the question then.

MR ALEXANDER: That is right.

MR P DU PLESSIS: And then they said that they were going to meet at the ELC, at the Early Learning Centre?

MR ALEXANDER: That is right, it was an ad hoc decision.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Now tell me, at what time was the Kewtown Youth Movement's meeting supposed to take place? The Kewtown Youth Movement's meeting?

MR ALEXANDER: We normally met between seven and nine o'clock.

MR P DU PLESSIS: So was it set for seven o'clock?

MR ALEXANDER: That is right, round about there.

MR P DU PLESSIS: And at what time did you arrive there?

MR ALEXANDER: Ten past eight.

MR P DU PLESSIS: And was that then when you met up with the people from the Youth Congress, then you at that stage, ten past eight, you met up with the people of Cape Youth Congress?

MR ALEXANDER: That would be right sir. And we walked into the foyer.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Of ELC?

MR ALEXANDER: That is right.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Now, at that stage, was the meeting of the Kewtown Youth Movement adjourned already?

MR ALEXANDER: It was unwinding, as I have said, people were starting to come out, and people were starting to talk in the foyer.

MR P DU PLESSIS: So they were standing around socialising?

MR ALEXANDER: That is right.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Some of them did in fact leave or not?

MR ALEXANDER: No.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Did some of them leave?

MR ALEXANDER: Some of them were outside of the building, some of them smoked, etc. They only left before our meeting, so between ten past eight and twenty five past eight, people were still around there and people were talking.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes. And your meeting of the Cape Youth Congress only started at twenty five past eight?

MR ALEXANDER: That is correct.

MR P DU PLESSIS: And then only did the people of the Kewtown Youth Movement go home?

MR ALEXANDER: Not then only, when our meeting started, they had gone home already.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes. So you, your meeting started about ten minutes before the bomb went off?

MR ALEXANDER: That is correct.

MR P DU PLESSIS: And while you were standing around there, did you see people from the soccer club who arrived?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: And when you went into your meeting, were they there?

MR ALEXANDER: They were there.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Where were they?

MR ALEXANDER: They were in the foyer.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Doing what?

MR ALEXANDER: They were chatting.

MR P DU PLESSIS: They were just standing around, chatting? How many of them?

MR ALEXANDER: They were seated.

MR P DU PLESSIS: How many of them?

MR ALEXANDER: I saw three, I counted three people.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Three people?

MR ALEXANDER: That is right.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Did you at that stage, see or could you see the hall in which the bomb exploded?

MR ALEXANDER: Where?

MR P DU PLESSIS: From where you were in the foyer?

MR ALEXANDER: In the foyer, yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Could you see it?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes, I could see the hall.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Were the lights on?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: You saw it personally, you could see into the hall?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: And you saw that the lights were on?

MR ALEXANDER: You must remember that the people from the Kewtown Youth Movement was coming out of the hall, I could see it.

MR P DU PLESSIS: I see. And actually if I understand you correctly, until shortly before your meeting started, there were still some of the Kewtown Youth Movement's people in the hall, in the hall itself, where the bomb exploded? They were standing around there?

MR ALEXANDER: Not in the hall, outside of the hall, but as you, if you look at your front entrance, there are two sets of doors.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes.

MR ALEXANDER: On the one hand side, on the right, there are those windows which you open, almost like (indistinct) windows, on top of one another, which you pull down with one of those things, you can see if the light is burning there. There are no curtains.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes, fine, but the situation is that you are saying that the situation is that you personally looked into the hall?

MR ALEXANDER: I could see from where I was standing that the light was burning, I didn't go and open the door.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Okay, were the doors closed? Were the doors closed?

MR ALEXANDER: It could have been, but when the people from Kewtown Youth Movement exited, the lights were on.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Could you see them exit?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: So you saw them walking out of the door?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: And if you could see them walking out of the door, you could see into the hall?

MR ALEXANDER: That is right.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Then the doors were open, sir? Isn't it?

MR ALEXANDER: Well, those doors have got those pulley arms, they can close again. If you don't open it completely wide, it closed automatically sir.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Did anyone open it completely wide, or not?

MR ALEXANDER: Not to my recollection.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Did you see, yes or no?

MR ALEXANDER: Not to my recollection, they didn't open it completely wide.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Do you still remember that they didn't open it completely wide?

MR ALEXANDER: Well, from my memory it is clear that they didn't open it completely wide. Because those doors (indistinct)

MR P DU PLESSIS: Either you remember that the doors were open wide and were standing open, or you remember ...

MR ALEXANDER: They were not standing open.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Or you remember that they weren't open completely, or you cannot remember, one of three, which one do you choose?

MR ALEXANDER: The doors were not open completely sir, so they automatically closed thereafter.

MR P DU PLESSIS: All right, you can clearly remember that?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry Mr du Plessis, I just want to get some clarity, while you are on this point. Photograph 5, was there glass in the doors?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes, it was a glass door.

CHAIRPERSON: So what difference does it make if it is closed or not, could you see through the glass?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes. It was that ...

CHAIRPERSON: So why are you making a distinction whether the door was open or not open if you can see through the glass?

If the door were closed at that time, could one be in the foyer and see people sitting in the hall, through the glass or was there curtaining or was the glass painted?

MR ALEXANDER: The glass wasn't painted, I think there was curtaining on the top side of the glass. You will see, it must have had four panes of window, four window panes, the top ...

CHAIRPERSON: Looking at this photo, I cannot see.

MR ALEXANDER: But right on top, you could see that ...

CHAIRPERSON: I cannot see the remnants of curtains? Yes, it might be. Anyway ...

MR ALEXANDER: But you could see the lights were on inside.

CHAIRPERSON: From the top?

MR ALEXANDER: From the top.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Thank you Mr Chairman. If you look at the door, it is obviously completely blown out there, were there glass panes in there, in the door?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes, there were glass panes in the door.

MR P DU PLESSIS: So you could see through there?

MR ALEXANDER: No, I think the top part, there were four panes in the door, the top part had curtains, but if you look at photograph 1, if you stand in the foyer, you look through those double doors, you see those windows on top there, you can see the lights there, clearly.

MR P DU PLESSIS: But it is just interesting that you would after all the years, specifically remember that no one cared to open the doors open wide, so that they wouldn't swing shut in the next person's face. Why do you remember that so well?

MR ALEXANDER: Sir, some things you remember, some things you don't.

MR P DU PLESSIS: But you know if you remember some small detail like that, there is normally something which make you remember that, like a beautiful blond coming out and letting the door go and letting it smash into someone's face, something like that.

MR ALEXANDER: Blondes might excite you sir, it does not excite me. With all due respect.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes, but the point is any good looking lady excites me, but anyway the point I wish to make is that there is nothing on which, to which you could refer and say this is why I remember it, isn't it?

MR ALEXANDER: Sir, the point is that that door had pulleys on it, and I knew when we walked in towards the boardroom, the doors were closed, so it had to close by itself. I remember it.

MR P DU PLESSIS: You are saying when you walked into the foyer?

MR ALEXANDER: No, when I walked in towards the boardroom to the Cayco meeting.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes?

MR ALEXANDER: The doors were closed, I remember it. I am just that type of guy, I can remember certain things if I wanted to.

MR P DU PLESSIS: And from that fact now you say that it wasn't previously opened wide, and that is why they were shut when you walked to the boardroom?

MR ALEXANDER: That is correct.

MR P DU PLESSIS: The fact of the matter is sir, they could have been opened wide, and someone could have come like the night watchman and closed it, do you agree with me?

MR ALEXANDER: No.

MR P DU PLESSIS: The point is you are saying to me, and I will get to the relevance of this point, you are saying to me that why you remember that the doors were not opened wide, is because of the fact that when you went into the boardroom for the Cape Youth Congress meeting, the doors were closed, correct?

MR ALEXANDER: Correct.

MR P DU PLESSIS: So they must have swung closed automatically?

MR ALEXANDER: That is correct.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Is that correct?

MR ALEXANDER: And before that, I fully agree, that is correct, but before that, I was in the foyer all along, so I would have remembered that Jack, the caretaker, come and close the door, but he didn't.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Sir, there were many people around in the foyer, isn't it? They were standing socialising there?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Correct, smoking as you said? Correct?

MR ALEXANDER: That is right.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Were you talking to people?

MR ALEXANDER: I think I should have?

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes, sir?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: So did you have any reason to specifically note whether the night watchman was coming or going, walking around there, did you?

MR ALEXANDER: I knew how Jack acted around people, Jack was a shy guy, but beyond that I was an inquisitive guy, I looked around.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Did you have any reason to note what the night watchman was doing, yes or no?

MR ALEXANDER: No, but I knew that he would never come and interfere if people were still around, he would come and or close if there was no one in the building.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Would he always wait until the whole building was vacated before he would go to a specific place, a specific hall or a specific room and lock that, is that what you are saying?

MR ALEXANDER: Come again?

MR P DU PLESSIS: Did you know his comings and goings and the way he did his work to such an extent that you can say that he would never lock a specific room or a specific hall if there was any person still present in the building, is that what you are saying?

MR ALEXANDER: I can clearly say that sir, because the hall didn't have a lock like a key that you put in and turn, that he could do to lock the hall, was to put the chain across the arms of the door.

MR P DU PLESSIS: And was it done?

MR ALEXANDER: It was not done.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Was it done to lock the hall on occasion, if it was necessary?

MR ALEXANDER: It was very seldom done.

MR P DU PLESSIS: But it was done sometimes?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes, but then you would see the chain.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, I am not understanding this.

MR LAX: Sorry, are you suggesting, sorry, I just want to be clear, are you putting a version to him that the hall was locked?

MR P DU PLESSIS: Mr Lax, I will get to that, I will refer to documents. I cannot put a version to him, because I haven't got instructions on that, and my people weren't there, but it is a very important point, and I will get to some documentation. I will not belabour the point any longer.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry Mr du Plessis. Was Mrs Beulah Fredericks there that night?

MR ALEXANDER: She was there earlier the evening.

CHAIRPERSON: What (indistinct)

MR ALEXANDER: In fact what would have happened is ...

CHAIRPERSON: No, what is early in the evening?

MR ALEXANDER: Just before, at about, just after eight she left as well. When I came there, she was still there.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes?

MR P DU PLESSIS: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Peter Williams, was he also supposed to attend the meeting of the Cape Youth Congress that evening?

MR ALEXANDER: Excuse me?

MR P DU PLESSIS: Was Mr Williams also supposed to attend the meeting?

MR ALEXANDER: He went to the meeting.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Was he supposed sir, to attend the meeting?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: So he was, this is a regional meeting and because of his position, if I am now understanding it correctly in the Kewtown Youth Movement, he was supposed to attend?

MR ALEXANDER: That is right.

MR P DU PLESSIS: It was not an open meeting?

MR ALEXANDER: That is right.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Only specific people were invited?

MR ALEXANDER: That is correct.

MR P DU PLESSIS: And was he invited?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: He knew about the meeting? Did he know about the meeting?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes, that is right.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Was he informed and notified about the meeting?

MR ALEXANDER: He knew about the meeting.

MR P DU PLESSIS: How did you know, were you people notified by phone, by letter?

MR ALEXANDER: We would telephonically be advised about the meeting, and we would have links daily with other people.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Which other people sir, the people attending the meeting?

MR ALEXANDER: That is right, for instance Regina worked at UWC for the SRC, I would link up with her daily and so would Peter.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes, you had daily links to all these people I mentioned here?

MR ALEXANDER: That is correct.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Of the Cape Youth Congress, is that correct?

MR ALEXANDER: Not all, but some of the people in the area, closer to us.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Fine, but the fact of the matter is, he knew he had to attend the meeting?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: And you say they had to start at what time?

MR ALEXANDER: Excuse me?

MR P DU PLESSIS: The Cape Youth Congress meeting had to start when?

MR ALEXANDER: The time that people were supposed to be meeting?

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes?

MR ALEXANDER: At CRIC?

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes?

MR ALEXANDER: Not what time the meeting started, the pick up point would have been CRIC, it would have been passed eight.

MR P DU PLESSIS: No sir, if someone tells me to be at a specific point passed eight, I wouldn't know when to be there. What was the specific time, was there a specific time?

MR ALEXANDER: Eight or soon thereafter.

MR P DU PLESSIS: And when would the meeting then convene? As soon as you get to the point where you have the meeting, correct?

MR ALEXANDER: That is correct, it could, that point could be three, or four, or five kilometres away.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Fine. Do you go to this specific point in cars?

MR ALEXANDER: Excuse me?

MR P DU PLESSIS: Were you supposed to go by car to this specific meeting point?

MR ALEXANDER: Not necessarily. Some people came by foot, some people came by car. Depending where, in which area you were and there were always enough lifts.

MR P DU PLESSIS: What I mean is, you meet at CRIC?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Now from there you move to the point where you decide to have the meeting?

MR ALEXANDER: That is correct.

MR P DU PLESSIS: So it depends whether, how far it is?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes. No, no, if you go to CRIC and for instance say we would go to St George's Hall, we would take our cars there, but everyone who came to CRIC, might not necessarily have cars. You could get into another car, as easy as that, sir.

MR P DU PLESSIS: I see.

MR ALEXANDER: We shared.

MR P DU PLESSIS: You see, why I am asking you this as well, Mr Williams also made a statement and in his statement he says the following

"... at that stage (referring to after the adjournment of the Kewtown Youth Movement meeting) other people arrived who were also holding a meeting, they were from the Cape Youth Congress. At that stage we stood outside the building. The people from the Cape Youth Congress then asked me if they could also make use of the building. I then told them that they could use the building."

Is that correct?

MR LAX: Where are you referring to, just for the record?

MR P DU PLESSIS: I am reading at page 213, Mr Chairperson, bundle D, page 213.

MR ALEXANDER: Can I answer?

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes.

MR ALEXANDER: I cannot remember the detail, but I have already told you that we decided on an ad hoc basis that we would meet at the ELC on that night.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes. But it is clear, I put it to you, from this, that Mr Peter Williams who was supposed to attend the meeting, does not seem as if he was aware that there was a meeting, and he wasn't notified?

MR ALEXANDER: No, he would have been notified.

MR P DU PLESSIS: But you agree with me in the way that he states it here, it does not seem as if he was aware of such a meeting taking place?

MR ALEXANDER: That is your opinion sir. I would have to agree, but he was notified.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes?

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, are you saying you assume that he was notified, or do you know personally as you sit here, that he was in fact notified? Were you present when he was notified or did you notify him yourself, what are you saying?

MR ALEXANDER: Your Worship, it would be my assumption, because we had links with other people daily, at UWC, within the area, with other Youth. I am assuming at this point that he was notified.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Thank you Mr Chairman. You see we find the same in Nazeema Mohammed's statement on page 226 where she says

"... on that night we asked Peter Williams if we could use one of the building's rooms for our meeting. He agreed and all of us ..."

and then she carries on, the same aspect?

MR ALEXANDER: Sir, I said that we decided on an ad hoc basis that we would meet there, so that is it.

MR P DU PLESSIS: But he is supposed to know about the fact that he will have to go to CRIC otherwise he will miss the meeting, may I remind you, was set for eight or as soon as possible thereafter, and we don't find any indication in Mr Williams' statement that indicates that he was aware that he had to go to CRIC to meet up with you people?

MR ALEXANDER: Sir, the Cayco meeting didn't come out of a vacuum, it was publicised to the branches, to the members at Executive level and yes ...

MR P DU PLESSIS: Did you have agendas and minutes?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Did you have that available for that evening?

MR ALEXANDER: No.

MR P DU PLESSIS: What happened to those documents sir, you had a meeting, so surely some of it had to be noted before the bomb exploded. What happened to those minutes?

MR ALEXANDER: I wasn't the Secretary at that meeting, sir.

MR P DU PLESSIS: And what happened to the agenda, because you had an agenda for the evening, correct, which would state the date and the time, isn't it?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes. It wasn't a typed agenda, it was something that we would prepare amongst ourselves.

MR P DU PLESSIS: You would prepare ...

MR ALEXANDER: Amongst ourselves, we would prepare amongst ourselves. I am not the Secretary to that forum.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes. And let's have a look at this, in Shinaaz Limera’s statement on page 209, she states

"... On the 31st of August (that is page 209, bundle D) at approximately eight o'clock, I was at the Early Learning Centre in Springbok Street, Athlone, to attend a meeting of the Cape Youth Congress (sorry Mr Chairman, this I cannot really make out this part of the handwriting) we held our meeting ...

MR LAX: Mr du Plessis, it is on page 1 of bundle D.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Bundle D? Let me read then again, paragraph 1, page 1, bundle D

"... when we entered the building, there were already people inside the building. We held our meeting in the boardroom. On the same date, at approximately 20H35, I heard a loud noise ..."

and from this nothing appears of the fact that these people of the Cape Youth Congress were going to meet at CRIC at about eight o'clock? Here it is stated as a virtual fact that at eight o'clock this good lady was at Early Learning Centre, Athlone, and that the meeting was in progress as from then, do you agree with me?

MR ALEXANDER: In terms of the statement, but I must say that I know from my experience that the meeting started at 25 past eight, in terms of Cayco.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Sorry Mr Chairman, let me just - see the same goes for the statement of Fatima Omar, referring again to bundle D, page 224.

"... On the 31st of August 1989, after eight o'clock, I arrived at the Early Learning Centre, Athlone, to attend a meeting of the Cape Youth Congress. The meeting started at about 20H30."

Which is more in accordance with what you say. The fact of the matter is also this lady does not mention anything about CRIC or the fact that you first had to give the necessary, get the necessary permission to use this hall?

MR ALEXANDER: The ELC is adjacent to CRIC, sir, they were standing outside. What more do you need?

MR P DU PLESSIS: The same Nazeema Mohammed, page 226 once again

"... at the 31st of August 1989, at about eight o'clock, I had a meeting with the members of Cape Youth Congress at the Early Learning Centre, Athlone ..."

You see, let me get straight to the point.

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: We have in the same bundle, that is bundle D, pages 228 up to page 237, we have three statements by more or less objective people of the soccer club, who were unfortunate enough to be in the building, however not in the hall, when the bomb exploded.

Let me deal with them quickly. First of all, let me refer to page 231, the statement of Terrence Coetzee. This is the gentleman of whom you said that you would recognise his face if you see him, correct? You had no political or personal problems with him before, correct?

MR ALEXANDER: If he was in the area, and I see his face, I might have known him. But I would know the face.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes. You see this statement, I am referring to the typed version now, page 233, 234, from this it appears that this statement was made in April 1990, which is about six months before you people made your statement?

MR ALEXANDER: Okay.

MR P DU PLESSIS: I am referring to paragraph 2

"... On Thursday, 31 August 1989, at quarter past eight, I arrived at the Early Learning Centre, in Springbok Street, Kewtown, to attend a certain meeting. We held the meeting in the foyer of the centre, because the hall was locked."

The hall was locked? Do you see that?

MR ALEXANDER: Sir, the doors were closed, not locked. I cannot see that, I don't have it in front of me, but the only way you could lock those doors, was by chains. There wasn't a lock that you could turn, I told you that earlier. That is an assumption...

MR P DU PLESSIS: The fact of the matter is, this gentleman wanted to attend a meeting, and from the other statements it is clear that it is alleged that this meeting had to take place in the very hall where the bomb exploded, correct?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: I think we find it in your own statement that the soccer people had to use the hall, therefore you had to use the boardroom, correct?

MR ALEXANDER: That is correct.

MR P DU PLESSIS: So one would assume that this good gentleman who wanted to attend a meeting in the hall, would at least have a look whether the hall is open or not? He would at least test the doors?

MR ALEXANDER: That is your assumption sir.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes.

MR ALEXANDER: The doors were not locked, the doors were closed.

MR BIZOS: Mr Chairman, I am often accused of not being a student of Afrikaans, but I seem to remember people saying, going out of this doors "sluit die deur", it doesn't mean lock. "Sluit" does not mean lock, Mr Chairman? It can be, but it certainly isn't, it means closed or locked and I know whenever this arises, my Afrikaans speaking friends often tell me I don't understand Afrikaans.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes, Mr Chairman, I don't think that Mr Bizos would be able to save the moment. The point is, what this gentleman is saying that they had to use the foyer, you would agree with me firstly that that wouldn't be a normal place to have a meeting, do you agree with me?

MR ALEXANDER: Sir ...

MR P DU PLESSIS: Just answer the question, do you agree with me, yes or no?

MR ALEXANDER: No, I don't agree, they were a few members at a time, they were waiting on their members, sir.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Let's leave that point and move on, the fact of the matter is that this person says he gives a reason why they had to use the foyer. The reason which is advanced is because the hall was locked?

MR ALEXANDER: I repeat sir, the hall wasn't locked.

MR P DU PLESSIS: That is your version?

MR ALEXANDER: The only way you could lock, no, because I knew, I was familiar with the centre, I would go there.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry Mr du Plessis. Mr Bizos, my understanding, reading it in the context of the sentence, is that it must obviously mean that it was locked, because you don't not hold a meeting merely because the door was closed, which you could easily open and go in?

In the context of that to find that it was not locked, would be a bit absurd, I think, with respect, and I am certainly not a student of Afrikaans.

MR BIZOS: Could you please have a look at paragraph 3, sir? Page 14, of another statement

"... but I do not know if it was locked."

That is on page 14 of ...

CHAIRPERSON: No, I am just looking at this ...

MR BIZOS: A different statement.

CHAIRPERSON: I am just looking at this particular one, if one reads this sentence

"... we held the meeting in the foyer of the centre, because the hall was locked."

I think there any interpretation would be that it was locked.

MR BIZOS: (Indistinct)

CHAIRPERSON: I am not concerned with the other, but just that particular one.

MR BIZOS: Yes, it may be, (indistinct)

CHAIRPERSON: And I am not saying whether this person is correct or not, but just on that ...

MR BIZOS: I will concede in that context, but the other statement of the other soccer players ...

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I haven't got ...

MR BIZOS: I suppose my learned friend will ask some questions.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes, thank you, Mr Chairman, indeed I have to, because these statements do not make any sense to me.

Now, referring to the people of the Cape Youth Congress, not the soccer players, sir, I will proceed. At least this one gentleman says that the hall was locked, and the other two say that the doors were closed, but they do not know whether it was in fact locked. The position is further that referring to another statement of Mr Godfrey Blignaut, also a person you say which you cannot say you had any dealings with before, no bias of any nature between the two of you as far as you know, do you agree?

MR ALEXANDER: I agree. I told you earlier.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Right, now Mr Godfrey Blignaut made his statement also long before you did yours, on the 6th of December 1989, referring to page 235 to 237 of bundle B.

He says the following ...

CHAIRPERSON: Mr du Plessis, have you got a reference, a page number?

MR P DU PLESSIS: Page 235, Mr Chairman of bundle B. My learned friend can perhaps assist me if there is a typed written one. It is not in the typed written one, it is page 235 at the bottom, virtually at the bottom.

Let me just read it from a little bit higher up.

"... Terrence and I, it was our club (then there is a name mentioned) and delegates. The meeting was said to begin at eight o'clock, but by 20H35 it was only the five of us. With the exception of the black caretaker who was in the building, I am not aware of any other persons in the building. I noted that the hall doors were closed, I don't know if anyone was inside."

Then he goes on to say on page 236 in paragraph 4, inter alia that after the explosion, they went to the caretaker who was in his room, they found him there.

"... all five of us went through the door."

Sorry he says -

"... they found the backdoor with his assistance."

On this point, the following, you see according to your evidence, you and even the people of the Kewtown Youth Movement, were standing around in the foyer, and then at a certain stage, about 20H25 you went into the boardroom, correct?

MR ALEXANDER: That is correct, just before then, yes. Our meeting started at twenty five past eight.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes, you had to, do you go to the boardroom from the foyer, or do you go out of the building to do that?

MR ALEXANDER: No, we came via the foyer.

MR P DU PLESSIS: You were in the foyer and from there you moved into the boardroom section?

MR ALEXANDER: That is right.

MR P DU PLESSIS: So for anyone sitting around in the foyer, it must be clear that people are moving into the boardroom, correct?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes, depending what time a person came there, that is right.

MR P DU PLESSIS: In fact it is very clear from this gentleman's statement that he was there from about eight o'clock and that he was there with five other people. For some reason sir, he is totally unaware of your presence in the boardroom. Can you explain that?

MR LAX: Sorry Mr du Plessis, just to be absolutely clear, put your question correctly, he was there from about quarter past eight, according to his statement. That is Mr Blignaut?

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes, thank you. 20H15, and that would be before you moved into the boardroom, on your own evidence?

MR ALEXANDER: 20H15, yes, that is correct. It was, as I have said earlier, between ten past eight and the time I came there, and 25 past, just before 25 past, we were in the ...

MR P DU PLESSIS: Well, it is very clear from your evidence that just before the meeting convened at 25 past, you moved into the boardroom?

MR ALEXANDER: That is correct.

MR P DU PLESSIS: So this gentleman as well as the others, must have seen you? I will argue on the papers?

MR ALEXANDER: I would assume that.

MR P DU PLESSIS: And for some reason, some mysterious reason, these people who have no reason to lie about the incident, never saw anyone moving into the boardroom, do you agree with me?

MR ALEXANDER: That is a mysterious reason, I would ...

MR P DU PLESSIS: Sir, there is nothing mysterious I would submit to this Committee about their statements, but what I would be saying, what I am going to argue is that it cannot be accepted on your evidence, and on the evidence contained in these statements that you were at the hall at the time that the bomb went off.

MR ALEXANDER: Sir ...

CHAIRPERSON: Please, let Mr Alexander answer the question.

MR ALEXANDER: Sir, I was in the hall when the bomb exploded. I promise you I was in there, I don't have any reason to lie about that.

MR P DU PLESSIS: You see, that explains why Mr van Zyl never saw the cars there, because you weren't there.

MR ALEXANDER: The cars were definitely there.

MR P DU PLESSIS: You had left, if you were there before?

MR ALEXANDER: The cars were definitely there, yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Let's move on. I will return to this statement, because obviously the clients I represent, were not there.

But they gave certain instructions to the subordinates or Mr Botha and Mr van Zyl ...

CHAIRPERSON: Please, all this talking is interrupting the proceeding, please.

MR P DU PLESSIS: That is to see to it that people were not hurt and that in fact sir, is what eventually happened, no one was seriously hurt or people did not have to be killed, and that is what happened eventually?

MR ALEXANDER: Sir, the fact is by chance no one was seriously hurt.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes, let's just proceed for a moment.

MR ALEXANDER: By chance.

MR P DU PLESSIS: You see, your statement, all right, let me just cover this point with you quickly. You already described to us how you left the centre and you went to park your car at a certain place, you wanted to remove your car?

MR ALEXANDER: The vehicle, the bakkie.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Was that so that the police couldn't or shouldn't see your car? You didn't want your car to be seen at the scene?

MR ALEXANDER: That is correct, because we would then be linked in terms of the police saying "it was definitely you guys." It was a limpet mine of Russian origin and "you guys had the political motive."

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes, so your political sentiments were well know, correct?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: At that time. It was known that the Cape Youth Congress was affiliated to the UDF, correct?

MR ALEXANDER: That is right.

MR P DU PLESSIS: The UDF's sentiments as far as the ANC is concerned, was already also well know, correct?

MR ALEXANDER: Sorry?

MR P DU PLESSIS: The UDF's sentiments as far as supporting the ANC as a front organisation was well known?

MR ALEXANDER: A front organisation in which regard sir?

MR P DU PLESSIS: Sorry?

MR ALEXANDER: In which regard? They had support for the ANC, but they were not involved in acts of terror or violence.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes well, I didn't say that, I don't know why you mention it.

MR ALEXANDER: I am clarifying it, because you are leaving it open to interpretation.

MR P DU PLESSIS: The point is sir, that you were afraid that because of the knowledge that the police had of your personally and some of the other people, that you would be linked to the bomb, isn't it? Why should they think that ...

MR ALEXANDER: Out of fear.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Sorry?

MR ALEXANDER: Out of fear I left, I took my car.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Why should the police think that you were responsible for exploding the bomb?

MR ALEXANDER: Because I was an activist.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Sorry?

MR ALEXANDER: Because I was an activist.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes, an activist on which the police had correctly or wrongly, had information that you were involved in for instance, disrupting the elections, isn't it?

MR ALEXANDER: Disrupting the elections in which - by educating people, by telling people what is right and wrong, they make up their own minds?

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes, but the police for some reason, according to you and I will respect your evidence in that regard, for some reason the police were under the misapprehension that you were an activist involved in violence, isn't that so?

MR ALEXANDER: No ways.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Not?

MR ALEXANDER: No.

MR P DU PLESSIS: And I believe Mr Peter Williams who was closely associated with you, was locked up under the Internal Security Act, isn't it?

MR ALEXANDER: Mr Chairperson, there is no evidence to that effect.

CHAIRPERSON: He is asking that.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Chairperson, he put it to the witness himself, to Mr van Zyl.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I think it is fair.

MR P DU PLESSIS: I will get the record, he put it to van Zyl himself.

CHAIRPERSON: You can continue with that if you want, Mr du Plessis.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Thank you. I am referring to page 4, bundle D, where it is said that

"... in terms of the Emergency Regulations, he was detained from 28th of October 1985 to the 10th of November and again in 1986"?

That is what Mr Williams says himself?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes, but under which circumstances?

MR P DU PLESSIS: Sorry? I am not going into that.

MR ALEXANDER: I am just saying you are trying to draw your own things here.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes.

MR ALEXANDER: Under which circumstances? He was a school pupil at the time?

MR P DU PLESSIS: Mr Alexander, I am not trying to attack you, do you understand?

MR ALEXANDER: No, I know that.

MR P DU PLESSIS: I am not trying to do that.

MR ALEXANDER: I am just trying to give a bigger picture, because you are painting half the picture.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes, I am saying that apparently there was the impression in your, in the society of which you were a member, Athlone, which we heard from Gakkie, that you were an activist and he was at least under the impression that some of your members were involved in violence? Do you agree with me?

MR ALEXANDER: That is his assumption.

MR P DU PLESSIS: It was his assumption?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: And like it was his assumption, you would agree with me, it could have been the impression of many other people of the same society?

MR ALEXANDER: I don't agree with that sir, because we had the support of the people of that society at the time.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes, you had the support, but there were obviously people like the person who is going to stand for parliament in the tricameral dispensation, who also agreed with Gakkie, if it was only him and Gakkie, I don't know. do you know, there were other people supporting the government of the day?

MR ALEXANDER: Should have been.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes. So, you will not be able to deny that there were people who were referring to you people in your own terms, as activists, correct?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: And associating you people with violence, correct?

MR ALEXANDER: No.

MR P DU PLESSIS: And because, well, I am not saying you were involved with violence, but that is the impression which could have been formed by certain people in the community?

MR ALEXANDER: That was an impression formed by Gakkie, most probably for money, for the reasons of money.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Sir, are you denying that anyone else could have formed that impression, are you denying that?

MR ALEXANDER: I am not saying that.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes, exactly. And even ill-meaning people, people who disagreed with your politics, could have gone to the police, giving them false information that you were involved in violence, do you agree with that?

MR ALEXANDER: They could have, but they didn't.

MR P DU PLESSIS: But you were very ...

MR ALEXANDER: It is a fact.

MR P DU PLESSIS: You say as a fact that no one went to the police linking your organisation, the Cape Youth Congress, or any other organisation ...

MR ALEXANDER: Linking Kewtown Youth Movement with violence, never, we were never picked up for any acts of public violence, whatsoever.

MR P DU PLESSIS: But you were not attending a meeting, according to you, of the Cape Youth Congress, associated with the UDF? Do you agree with me?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: So sir, do you exclude the possibility that anyone could have gone to the police accusing you of violence and being involved with that?

MR ALEXANDER: I cannot exclude that, but Cayco was a vast organisation.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Because I must say, getting back to the point, that according to your statement sir, I find the following - let me just get to the point, paragraph 3 on page 220 of bundle B

"... shortly after the explosion, all the members of the Cape Youth Congress left."

You went home, you left the place?

MR ALEXANDER: We didn't go home.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Well, you left?

MR ALEXANDER: I took my car away and I came back there. I didn't stay there for very long either.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes, you see the point is you don't even say that you moved your car, but we know why you moved your car? You didn't want to be associated with the explosion?

MR ALEXANDER: That is correct, precisely.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Because you were afraid that the police were going to connect you and your organisation with the explosion?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: So obviously it stands to reason that the police must have had some reason even if it was only gossip, that you people were involved with violence?

MR BIZOS: With respect, the evidence has been Mr Chairman, and we all know, that part of the dirty tricks campaign was to have "dekstories", putting the blame on other people. The fact that the witness may have feared of such a "dekstorie", is one thing, but to say that that it is evidence that the people were connected, is a complete (indistinct), with respect.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Thank you. I welcome the assistance of Mr Bizos, but the fact is that you were at least afraid that because of the dirty trick campaign by the police, you could have been linked, correct?

MR ALEXANDER: That is a fact.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes. And just to conclude that point, you would obviously agree that it is quite possible that ill-meaning people of your community, supplied information which eventually got to the CCB, that you people were a bunch of gangsters involved in violence? It is possible that that information could have gotten to the CCB, quite incorrectly as it now appears to be? Do you agree?

MR ALEXANDER: It is possible.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes. Now ...

MR ALEXANDER: There wouldn't be any ill-meaning people within the community, we were well accepted within the community, we assisted the community all the time.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes, fine, except, obviously except, with the exception of Gakkie and similar people? Correct?

MR ALEXANDER: That is correct.

MR P DU PLESSIS: People you would describe as gangsters in turn? You would describe Gakkie as a gangster?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR BIZOS: Mr van Zyl also described it as that?

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes. Mr Chairman, I am not going to state my opinion of him, it is irrelevant, but the fact is, I am asking the witness whether he was describing him as a gangster, I am not putting it in dispute. Maybe the worst gangster we have seen. Do you agree with me?

MR ALEXANDER: I answered it, yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: And how many gangsters were in that community, sir? How many?

MR ALEXANDER: Quite a number, but ...

MR P DU PLESSIS: Quite a number?

MR ALEXANDER: That is right.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes. Enough said about that.

CHAIRPERSON: Perhaps, when we get to a convenient stage, we can take the lunch adjournment, Mr du Plessis. Just finish, yes, I think and then we will continue.

MR LAX: Just put your button on, thank you.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Sorry, just getting to the last aspect. I also find it very interesting sir, that Nazeema Mohammed makes a statement, bundle B, page 226, and I find her reaction to the bomb explosion very interesting, about at the bottom third of the page

"... I didn't see at that stage (let me read from the typed written page 13, bundle B) anything is wrong with the building, and I then immediately went to my Attorneys, hence I suffered no injuries."

Not very elegantly put, but she rushed off to her Attorneys. Do you know the reason for that?

MR ALEXANDER: Panic, fear?

MR P DU PLESSIS: Fear of the police, fear of being picked up and arrested?

MR ALEXANDER: That is right.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes.

MR ALEXANDER: That is an assumption. I cannot talk for her.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Sorry?

MR ALEXANDER: That is an assumption, I cannot talk for her.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes, that will be your only conclusion, why else would she go to her Attorney?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: She didn't sustain any injuries, she didn't know who put up the bomb, so she wouldn't be able to claim civilly from them?

Let me refer back to your statement ...(end of side B of tape)

"... Bruce Malgas met Gakkie Hardien at a party. He told us that he missed us, but that we should watch his next move. We understood by that that he referred to the bomb explosion."

MR P DU PLESSIS: ...(start of new tape) that?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: So it was a few weeks after the 31st of August, correct?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: At that stage, who was your attorney? Did you have an attorney?

MR ALEXANDER: I didn't have an attorney at that stage.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Or this attorney who protected you or represented you when these statements were taken, who was this person?

MR ALEXANDER: I told that we were approached by ...(indistinct) Joshua.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes?

MR ALEXANDER: I further told you that there was an attorney and other guys from Jo'burg.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes. Now ...(intervention)

MR ALEXANDER: But beyond that, Gakkie bragged in the area that planted the bomb.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Sorry?

MR ALEXANDER: Beyond that, Gakkie bragged in the area, after the bomb blast it was a well known fact in the area that Gakkie planted the bomb.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Now this was a very serious crime wasn't it, to set off a bomb?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes, it was.

MR P DU PLESSIS: And the centre was extremely seriously damaged at least.

MR ALEXANDER: That's correct.

MR P DU PLESSIS: And some people apparently got slightly hurt, correct?

MR ALEXANDER: That's correct.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Now I suppose you would immediately say to me you didn't approach the police because you didn't trust the police, correct?

MR ALEXANDER: That's a fact.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Now did the police know anything about you Sir, were they biased against you? Did the police at that stage consider you as an activist against the government? The police of Athlone.

MR ALEXANDER: The police of Athlone?

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes.

MR ALEXANDER: I would assume that, Sir. Van Zyl's brother worked there.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Sorry?

MR ALEXANDER: Van Zyl's brother worked in Athlone at the time.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Sir, the fact is, what was your impression at that stage?

MR ALEXANDER: My impression of any police officer at that stage was that he was an agent of the government.

MR P DU PLESSIS: He was?

MR ALEXANDER: An agent of the government.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes.

MR ALEXANDER: He was there to protect and further apartheid. You don't understand that?

MR P DU PLESSIS: You knew about attorneys, I'm sure, at that stage.

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: You knew that an attorney could protect your interests, correct?

MR ALEXANDER: To a fact, but limited.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Well legal representatives in general, correct?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes, but only to a limited extent because the order of the day was still there, they could still protect themselves.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes, the fact of the matter is, here this person is not only admitting that he planted the bomb, he's now threatening obviously to kill him, isn't it?

MR ALEXANDER: That's right.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Did you understand it that way?

MR ALEXANDER: That's right.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Did you go to an attorney, Sir, to assist you and protect your interests, to write to the Minister of Justice or the Commissioner of Police? Did you do that, yes or no? Did you approach an attorney Sir, yes or no?

MR ALEXANDER: No, I did not.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Why not?

MR ALEXANDER: Sir, you must take the epoch into consideration, you know that the State, the Security Police, there was other dirty tricks departments which had the protection of the State, why would we go and do that?

MR P DU PLESSIS: Are you saying that all attorneys and legal advisers were working for the government, Sir, and sympathetic to the government? Do you?

MR ALEXANDER: Most of them were. Most of them were at the time.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Most of them.

MR ALEXANDER: There was an elite group of attorneys which took care of our interests.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Fine, and you knew about the elite group of attorneys.

MR ALEXANDER: To an extent.

MR P DU PLESSIS: People like - well not an attorney, but distinguished advocate, like Mr Bizos.

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: You knew about them?

MR ALEXANDER: I wasn't in contact with them at the time.

MR P DU PLESSIS: But you knew about them, Sir.

MR ALEXANDER: I should have known about them, that's right.

MR P DU PLESSIS: And you would agree with me, Sir, that you realised at that stage, or you should have realised at least, that if you went to such a distinguished gentleman attorney or advocate, that at least they could place on record that there was such a threat that this person, Gakkie, was responsible for setting off a bomb and he was now again threatening you. So that if something does happen to you in the future, at least people would know where to look to, to solve the crime, do you agree with me?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes, I know, but I told Gakkie straight I'm not afraid of him.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Sir, the question still is, why didn't you take further steps?

MR ALEXANDER: Because he had the protection of the State at the time.

MR P DU PLESSIS: And the last point, I put it to you Sir, that the real situation is this, you were not, and that's what I'm going to argue to this Committee eventually, you were not present when the bomb exploded. There was no crime against you and a later stage, in 1990, you people conspired, the people making these statements, except the people from the soccer club, conspired to give this evidence that you were in the building and that Gakkie and Van Zyl and Botha should have known that because of certain factors you mention in your statements. Isn't that the true position?

MR ALEXANDER: It is an untruth. At no stage is there a conspiracy and you can go and get those soccer people.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Just to tie this all up, the fact of the matter is you, all of you made your statements only at the end of October, 30th of October, and one person on the 1st of November, correct? In 1990, more than a year after the explosion. You agree with me?

MR ALEXANDER: That's right.

MR P DU PLESSIS: And you were all represented by the same attorney.

MR ALEXANDER: That is right.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Yes. And at that stage Sir, you had read widely in the press about Mr van Zyl and Botha and what Mr van Zyl was saying, correct?

MR ALEXANDER: Please, you want me to believe that I was doing the wrong thing.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Well Sir, I don't want ...(intervention)

MR ALEXANDER: I promise you, the fact is things were coming to the fore, but we were in that building when it exploded.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Why don't you want to answer my question, Sir.

MR ALEXANDER: What is your question?

MR P DU PLESSIS: My question is simple, at that stage when you made your statement you already read widely in the press about Van Zyl and what he was saying, correct?

MR ALEXANDER: It was known, I testified to that effect earlier, but I didn't know the detail of what he was saying in his Section 29 or any other statements.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Well Sir, by that time the Harms Commission also concluded its, the Harms Commission brought out its report already, correct?

MR ALEXANDER: Sir, I'm a layman, I don't read ....

MR P DU PLESSIS: But the fact is you read papers, Sir.

MR ALEXANDER: I read papers, yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: You watch television, Sir, correct?

MR ALEXANDER: It's a fact.

MR P DU PLESSIS: You cannot exclude the possibility that by the 30th of October you read in the press and heard on the television that Van Zyl was denying that he wanted to hurt anyone, correct?

MR ALEXANDER: Sir, we were in the building, Van Zyl tried to kill us. I couldn't put it to you in more simple terms, whether you believe me or not.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Once again you're not answering my question for some reason.

MR ALEXANDER: Come with your question again, I'll tell you now.

MR P DU PLESSIS: I'm putting this to you, that you cannot exclude the possibility that you read in the papers or heard on television that Van Zyl was in fact denying that he wanted to hurt or kill anyone.

MR ALEXANDER: I can't exclude that possibility, but I can ...(break in tape) in the building at the time. That's a fact.

MR P DU PLESSIS: And what I'm putting to you Sir, is that this attorney came to you and you and your friends, fellow people, persons from the Cape Youth Congress who were politically inclined to do the same thing, came together and you conspired to make these statements and to make it clear in these statements that Van Zyl and Botha should have known because of the fact that there were vehicles or there were people moving in and out, etcetera, etcetera. And I ...(intervention)

MR ALEXANDER: That is facts Sir, whether you like it or not.

MR P DU PLESSIS: I am therefore not willing to accept on these papers and statements that in fact you people, the people who made these statements, were present at the Early Learning Centre when the bomb went off.

Thank you, Mr Chairman, that is all.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR P DU PLESSIS

CHAIRPERSON: Yes thank you, we'll take the lunch adjournment now.

MR WESSELS: Mr Chairman, may I interrupt, I have only two or three questions at most, would it be possible to conclude that because we've made arrangements.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Mr Wessels.

MR WESSELS: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

MR BIZOS: Has my learned friend Mr du Plessis finished, Mr Chairman?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Mr du Plessis is finished and Mr Wessels just wants to ask a few questions, he says he's got a very few questions.

MR BIZOS: Yes. Mr Chairman, I merely want to place on record that this suggestion that is made by Mr du Plessis who has no specific instructions from Mr van Zyl or Mr Calla Botha, and to do it for the, to suggest that such a conspiracy exists at the very end of these proceedings, Mr Chairman, is a matter which we submit is completely unacceptable and to which we will particularly refer to during the argument, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes thank you, Mr Bizos.

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, may I just say, obviously I do not have any such instructions, but the fact of the matter is that it was suggested by Mr Bizos himself that there were no specific instructions that people should not be killed or hurt. In fact, Mr Bizos' argument or what he put to all the witnesses is that in fact the plan was to kill as many of the members of the Kewtown Youth Movement as possible, and therefore I have to investigate this matter. And may I say, Mr Chairman, that these document were made available to me and there was no earlier stage at which I could make such allegations because there were no witnesses who were called before.

Furthermore, may I just before I forget, I see that in Mr Williams' statement there is reference to a further statement which he has made and which is not part of these bundles. I'm referring to page 211 of bundle B, paragraph 1. There's mention of a statement which he made on the 19th of March, I suppose it's 1990, obviously it can't be '89, and I would ask respectfully Mr Chairman, that this statement be obtained by my learned friend, Ms Coleridge, if it is not one of the statements we have at hand.

MS COLERIDGE: I just want to refer you to ... it is in bundle D.

MR WILLIAMS: It starts on page 212.

MS COLERIDGE: It's also the typed version in bundle D, Chairperson, page 3 to 4.

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, the statement starting on 212 to 217 is dated the 30th of October 1990, now there's mention in paragraph 1 of a statement made on the 19th of March. Otherwise I just don't understand it.

CHAIRPERSON: Where it says ...

INTERPRETER: The speaker's microphone.

CHAIRPERSON

"... on the 19th of March 1990"

and then you give that it was made, not only on the 19th of March 1990, but at 10.36 in the morning.

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, to Detective-Sergeant Lloyd.

MS COLERIDGE: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: I recall seeing some statement, it's just like a declaration, it doesn't say much I remember.

MS COLERIDGE: Chairperson, if you look at bundle D you will note on page 2 is the statement that he made on the 30/10/90, where he refers to the previous statement made on the 19/3/90, and if you turn the page, on page 3 and to page 5, you will note there it's dated there 19/3/90, the bottom of the page.

MR DU PLESSIS: Thank you, Mr Chairman, I see that, I will accept it for the moment.

CHAIRPERSON: So it seems that they're there, Mr du Plessis.

MR DU PLESSIS: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Wessels.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR WESSELS: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

Mr Alexander, Mr Williams made a statement, the one on the 30th of October 1990, wherein he says in paragraph 1:

"I just want to state it clearly that on the evening of 31 August 1989 I held a meeting with members of the Kewtown Youth Movement. After we had concluded the meeting we went outside where the members who were with me went home."

MR ALEXANDER: Which one is this?

MR WESSELS: Will you accept that position as being correct?

CHAIRPERSON: It's bundle D, page 2 and it's paragraph 1 of the statement, the typed version.

MR LAX: That's the second sentence of that paragraph.

MR ALEXANDER: That's not correct. Peter stayed behind for the Cayco meeting.

MR WESSELS: I see. No, afterwards he says then that he stayed behind, but the people that were with him all went home then.

MR ALEXANDER: Oh yes.

MR WESSELS: The Kewtown Youth Movement members or the people who attended that meeting then all left.

MR ALEXANDER: That's right.

MR WESSELS: So would you accept then that anyone outside who saw these people leaving, these Kewtown Youth Movement members leaving, would then be under the impression that that was the end of the meeting?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes and no.

MR WESSELS: Well why do you say no?

MR ALEXANDER: Well people who knew us in the area would know I'm driving, (a), and would see us walk together all. If they could identify us by name, they would know who would have left and who would not.

MR WESSELS: Alright.

MR LAX: Sorry, Mr Wessels.

But you'll concede that if they saw a group of people leaving the building, they'd assume that at least one meeting was over?

MR ALEXANDER: Ja, that's right.

MR WESSELS: Mr Alexander, you said that you're not afraid of Gakkie, correct?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes, I'm not afraid of him, today I'm still not. I can walk past him without any fear.

MR WESSELS: You never were afraid of him, correct?

MR ALEXANDER: I'm not afraid of Gakkie, but I was afraid of the State.

MR WESSELS: Yes. Just listen ...

CHAIRPERSON: The question was, Gakkie ...(intervention)

MR ALEXANDER: I'm not afraid of Gakkie.

MR WESSELS: You have never been afraid of Gakkie. You see there was a newspaper clipping read out to Gakkie when he gave evidence, where he had stated in the newspaper about

"That he was the iron hand of Kewtown"

or words to that effect. You remember that?

MR ALEXANDER: I heard it here for the first time.

MR WESSELS: Yes, no yesterday it was read out to him. Now that seems to me as if those are the words of a braggart who wanted to be important and to create the impression that he is powerful. Would you agree with that?

MR ALEXANDER: That's right. The way he carried himself yesterday was of a similar nature.

MR WESSELS: Yes. And wasn't it of a similar nature on the evening of the party where you told you that he'd missed you but next time you must watch your move?

MR ALEXANDER: Gakkie basically came and confronted us, he wanted to fight, we walked away and that is what he told us. It wasn't just as simple as talking, he wanted to physically attack us.

MR WESSELS: But he said that next time he'll get you, as if he could get you with a bomb or something like that. That's the impression you gained.

MR ALEXANDER: That's right.

MR WESSELS: Wasn't that just a matter of "groot praat"?

MR ALEXANDER: I don't think so. I know Gakkie for a very long time, Sir, so I don't think so. But I'm not fearful of him as a person.

MR WESSELS: If it hadn't been "groot praat", then surely you would have been afraid because you thought that he had the assistance of the State, in your mind you knew or heard that he put off the bomb, then you must have been scared of him.

MR ALEXANDER: Scared of his connections, not scared of Gakkie. There's a big difference. But you can infer that ...(indistinct), but I'm not scared of him.

MR WESSELS: Yes. Thank you Mr Chairman, I have no further questions.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR WESSELS

CHAIRPERSON: We'll take the lunch adjournment now, thank you.

MR MARTINI: Chairperson, sorry, can we just get an indication because if we have to re-arrange flights, how long we're going to be.

CHAIRPERSON: Well I don't know at all, there's still questioning to be done by Mr Hockey, Mr Williams, Mr Coetzee, Mr van Eck.

COUNSEL: Mr Chairman, I've got no further questions and I'm likewise going to ask whether I can be excused, I believe this anyway has nothing to do with my client.

CHAIRPERSON: Certainly.

COUNSEL: At this stage Mr Chairman, I can also indicate that after Mr du Plessis I've got no further questions.

MR WILLIAMS: Mr Chairperson, I can just indicate I'll be five minutes, no more than that.

MR MARTINI: If they can be finished by 2 o'clock, then I would suggest we carry on through the lunch hour and adjourn at two.

CHAIRPERSON: There will also be re-examination by Mr Bizos.

MR BIZOS: ; ...(indistinct - no microphone) 15 minutes, I'm sure that we ...(indistinct)

CHAIRPERSON: Do we want to proceed now and then break for lunch.

MR BIZOS: Yes, try and finish. I would like to accommodate my learned friends.

CHAIRPERSON: I'm just thankful that we didn't carry on last night, we would have sat till after midnight I think. Yes, we'll carry on then. Mr Williams, do you have any questions you'd like to put to Mr Alexander?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR WILLIAMS: Yes thank you, Mr Chairman, just a few questions.

Oesman, do you know who was Peaches' attorney at the stage where he revealed his involvement with the CCB?

MR ALEXANDER: I think it was Mr Adams and/or Mr Joshua.

MR WILLIAMS: Is that the same Mr Adams or Joshua that you referred to in your earlier evidence?

MR ALEXANDER: That's correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Adams and/or Mr Joshua, is that one person with two names, or is it two different people?

MR WILLIAMS: Two different people.

CHAIRPERSON: From the same company or completely apart?

MR WILLIAMS: Same firm I think, at the time.

Would you agree that the name is actually Huxley Joshua and not Joshua ...(intervention)

MR ALEXANDER: Sorry, I get confused, but it's Huxley Joshua.

MR WILLIAMS: And in what year did you join the Kewtown Youth Movement?

MR ALEXANDER: Either late '82 or early '83. 1983 or '82.

MR WILLIAMS: And then in a statement you mentioned names of people that attended the Cayco meeting.

MR ALEXANDER: Yes.

MR WILLIAMS: Now Naziema Mohamed is one of the names that you mentioned, do you know where Naziema Mohamed lived at that stage?

MR ALEXANDER: Yes, I knew where she lived.

MR WILLIAMS: Where?

MR ALEXANDER: She lives in District 6, or the - adjacent to District 6.

MR WILLIAMS: That's close to Cape Town, not so?

MR ALEXANDER: Cape Town, ja.

MR WILLIAMS: Do you think in the normal course of events that she would have walked to Athlone?

MR ALEXANDER: No, she would not have walked to Athlone.

MR WILLIAMS: Fatiema Omar, where did she live at that stage?

MR ALEXANDER: She lived in the Thornhill/Gatesville area, Rylands, which is also about 7 or 8 kilometres away from where the centre is.

MR WILLIAMS: Shanaaz Limera, where did she live?

MR ALEXANDER: Shanaaz Limera lived in Hanover Park and that was even a bit further away.

MR WILLIAMS: Do you think that Shanaaz or Fatiema would have walked from their homes to Kewtown?

MR ALEXANDER: No, they would not.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you know how they got from their homes to Kewtown? Did they catch a taxi or did they come in a car driven by themselves, or what?

MR ALEXANDER: It's either a car driven by themselves or they would, one of the other executive members from their branch would bring them or drop them.

CHAIRPERSON: Are you saying "would" or do you know?

MR ALEXANDER: That was the norm.

MR WILLIAMS: Miranda Abrahams, did she live in Kewtown?

MR ALEXANDER: She lived in Silvertown.

MR WILLIAMS: Regina Isaacs, did she live in Kewtown?

MR ALEXANDER: No, she didn't live in Kewtown either.

MR WILLIAMS: Now you've stated - Mr Martini asked you something relating to possible reconciliation with Slang van Zyl, did you discuss this issue with all of the victims, or are you assuming that people would not want to reconcile with him if you'd want to reconcile with him?

MR ALEXANDER: I'm assuming from their actions, because he's telling the - he's not telling the truth here. We're sitting in the audience, we're not discussing it, you can see their body language, the way they react. So in my opinion they would not reconcile with him.

MR WILLIAMS: Now do I understand that to mean that you do not, or that you cannot state as a fact that the other victims would not want to reconcile?

MR ALEXANDER: You are correct, Sir.

MR WILLIAMS: Now Mr du Plessis has shown you certain untested statements of some of the soccer people that were in the building that night. Are you sure that the version that you've given to us here is the correct version?

MR ALEXANDER: It's the correct version, it's the truth. You can't bend the truth, it's absolute.

MR WILLIAMS: Do you know whether Dr Boesak had ever been detained under the emergency regulations?

MR ALEXANDER: I can't recall, but he might have been.

MR WILLIAMS: Or do you know whether Dullah Omar had ever been detained under the emergency regulations?

MR ALEXANDER: I think he was picked up on a number of occasions.

MR WILLIAMS: Does it therefore follow that he was involved in violent actions?

MR ALEXANDER: No, that's - being picked up and being detained without trial doesn't mean that you have ever been involved in anything.

CHAIRPERSON: I think this is a question of argument, I don't think we need evidence on that.

MR WILLIAMS: And then my last question to you is, why would you want to conspire with a group of people to falsely implicate anyone, what do you stand to gain from it?

MR ALEXANDER: I stand to gain nothing, I just want the truth. Hurt. And I want them to admit to the truth, that's all, so that we can reconcile.

MR WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr Chairperson, I've got no further questions.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR WILLIAMS

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Williams. Mr Hockey?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR HOCKEY: Thank you, I've just got two aspects that I want to clear up.

Mr Alexander, when you were at the Early Learning Centre, did you see Gakkie at all there that evening? Before the bomb.

MR ALEXANDER: I can't recall, I came a bit late. I don't think I saw him.

MR HOCKEY: So you're not aware of the discussion he had with Mr Williams?

MR ALEXANDER: No.

MR HOCKEY: There were suggestions that people were identified as they were leaving the meeting that evening, there were suggestions that the people, well Mr van Zyl, Mr Calla Botha and Gakkie Hardien, when they were standing at the back of the building, that they saw Mr Williams coming out of the building. Now did Mr Williams at any stage leave the building towards the back, according to your knowledge?

MR ALEXANDER: No.

MR HOCKEY: Was Mr Ferndale at that meeting at any point that evening?

MR ALEXANDER: He wasn't there at all.

MR HOCKEY: Did you see Mr Ferndale there?

MR ALEXANDER: No, he wasn't there at all that evening.

MR HOCKEY: So the suggestion that Mr Ferndale could have been identified leaving the building that evening, can't be true?

MR ALEXANDER: It's not true.

MR HOCKEY: Thank you, that's all questions I have, Mr Chair.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR HOCKEY

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Bizos, do you have any re-examination?

RE-EXAMINATION BY MR BIZOS: Yes, I do.

Now I want to place some facts before the Committee, so that Mr du Plessis may consider apologising to you for what he put to you. Firstly, this business of being got together by an attorney and making statements to him in a conspiracy in order to falsely implicate his clients and those that put on the bomb directly. Would you please have a look at the statements, I'll merely read out the dates and the times and who took the oath, in order to show that the statements were really taken by members of the Police Force from ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: ... on that Mr Bizos, I think each statement contains a police number, a docket number.

MR BIZOS: A docket number and everything else, but also that it was sworn to before a police officer from Brixton. I'll just put this record for the attention of the Committee. First of all, that Shanaaz Limera, she gave her statement to Sgt Lloyd of Brixton Murder and Robbery, as did Naziema Mohamed, also on the 30/10/90. The first one is to be found at page 210, the second is to be found at page 227. I am referring to bundle D, Mr Chairman, the pages on which the oath is sworn. It will appear that some of the statements on that very day, the same day Mr Chairman, were taken by, also by Lloyd is Miranda Abrahams, which appears on page 221. And Mr Chairman, the statements of Peter Williams was taken seven months before, Mr Chairman, this alleged conspiracy took place, in which his presence and the presence of others and the holding of a second meeting is dealt with, which blows up completely the suggestion that there was a conspiracy in October, a year later, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes I think this is argument now.

MR BIZOS: Let me just place the facts. That there was a statement on the 19/3/90, Mr Chairman, and the contents of that document are consistent with the witness' evidence. Then we have W/O Rossouw who took the witness' statement, Mr Chairman, and you'll find the statement at page 221. Regina Isaacs, which you will find at page 223 and Fatima Omar, which you will find at page 225.

Now can you recall whether there were police officers that took your statement down, a police officer took your statement?

MR ALEXANDER: I cannot recall, but I knew there were a couple of people with this legal guy from Jo'burg.

MR BIZOS: You didn't know that they were police officers?

MR ALEXANDER: No.

MR BIZOS: Did they ask you questions and did they record the statement?

MR ALEXANDER: I recorded the statement. I spoke from memory at the time.

MR BIZOS: You spoke from memory at the time that they recorded the statement. And then Mr Chairman, we have the Stevens statement taken by the Security Police in Cape Town on 14/7/90, we'll find that at page 230, and Terrence Coetzee on the 18th April '90, which you will find at 234.

Now I'll go onto another topic, Mr Chairman.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Sorry Mr Chairman, can I just say that I never disputed the fact that these statements were taken by policemen, etcetera, that's not my argument. I had to point out certain inconsistencies in the statements and especially some specific aspects dealt with by Mr Martini. So I'm not saying that these people forged these statements and that the police were never present and that these statements were never taken up in a police docket. That's not my argument. Just to make it clear to Mr Bizos.

MR BIZOS: Yes. Mr Chairman, it's not something that I can leave in the air. Mr du Plessis said that "after you learnt of the Van Zyl and Gakkie's involvement in the Harms Commission, then you decided in October for the first time, to talk about there being another meeting". That is contradicted by Mr Williams' statement of March 1990, Mr Chairman, and I will leave it to Mr du Plessis to take the matter further during these proceedings or not.

Now we have seen Gakkie here and he said that he was never afraid of being arrested because he had the protection of the police and the government, do you recall that evidence?

MR ALEXANDER: I recall that evidence.

MR BIZOS: When he was making admissions to you and speaking out in the community and making threats, did he have that same attitude?

MR ALEXANDER: Exactly the same attitude.

MR BIZOS: And were there any substantive facts which were known to you, which made you believe that his confidence that nobody would do anything to him, was well founded?

MR ALEXANDER: To an extent he was bragging about it. Surely there were police informants within the community, no-one picks him up. Why wouldn't it be?

MR BIZOS: Well we have also heard that although he made a statement and he admitted it in 1989, he told us that nobody has asked him about it, he was not prosecuted and he has been leading the life of a free person.

MR ALEXANDER: That's correct.

MR BIZOS: So his assumption that he had the protection of the police, at least for some of the, that early period, was well justified?

MR ALEXANDER: It was justified, Sir.

MR BIZOS: Yes. In relation to his - your reconciling with Gakkie, how do you view Gakkie's continued employment at R1 500 a month doing unspecified work? Do you think that he's become reconciled or has he broken away from the loyalty he felt to Mr van Zyl?

MR ALEXANDER: He's still loyal to Mr van Zyl and he's, still today he doesn't realise that he's being used. Or he realises, but he doesn't want to accept it.

MR BIZOS: Yes. You said that you were afraid of the Security Police, you haven't in part answered the question, did you have to be a violent person or a bomber to be afraid of the Security Police during the apartheid years?

MR ALEXANDER: No, you just had to be an activist, be associated with the Mass Democratic Movement and they would pick you up for no reason, you could be detained, you could even disappear.

MR BIZOS: You were also asked rather forcefully, by Mr du Plessis, what happened to the documents of the Youth Congress and you said you were not the secretary. Was this a professional organisation, did you have filing cabinets or did you keep agendas on file and record?

MR ALEXANDER: No Sir, we did not.

MR BIZOS: Would you like to see their documents? They had files.

MR ALEXANDER: I'm sure they had.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR BIZOS

MR BIZOS: Mr Chairman, that concludes my re-examination, but what I would like before the adjournment is if we could by agreement, place the motor car that Mr van Zyl, Mr Calla Botha - on Exhibit P1 and P2, Mr Chairman. For the sake of completeness, I think it will be helpful so that people don't have to go to the record searching for it. But this was a matter within the observation of the Members of the Committee, I think that you have got a note and a clear recollection of where it was. If we can't agree, then perhaps we should leave it to you, Mr Chairman and the Members of the Committee, to merely put it in as the next letter of the alphabet.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes I think if you can try to agree, but before we do that I'd just like to ask my colleagues if they have any questions of Mr Alexander. Sorry, Ms Coleridge first. Do you have any questions to ask Mr Alexander? I should have asked that before re-examination, I'm sorry.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR COLERIDGE: No, that's fine, Chairperson. I just wanted to ask him one question in relation to the police.

You said there were a lot of police present after the bomb had occurred.

MR ALEXANDER: Yes, correct.

MR COLERIDGE: Did any of the policemen take any statements from any of the witnesses at the scene of the incident?

MR ALEXANDER: Not as far as I can remember.

MR COLERIDGE: No statements were taken. Do you know whether they came back to the centre, maybe a day or two later, requesting persons to make statements?

MR ALEXANDER: I think they came back to the centre, 'cause I spoke to Beula Fredericks that time and she gave a statement to the police I think.

MR COLERIDGE: And did she inform the police of the persons that were in the building at the time the incident had occurred? Did she forward with any names to the police?

MR ALEXANDER: I don't know the content of her statement to the police.

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

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS COLERIDGE

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Sibanyoni, do you have any questions?

MR SIBANYONI: Just one.

Mr Alexander, the people who were attending the meeting of the Cape Youth Congress, basically were people representing structures.

MR ALEXANDER: That's correct.

MR SIBANYONI: And those, for example, who were not representing structures but were members of some other structures in the community, am I correct? In other words like yourself, you were not an executive of a smaller structure but you attended that meeting. Did I understand you correctly?

MR ALEXANDER: I was on the executive of Kewtown Youth Movement.

MR SIBANYONI: And Williams was not in the executive?

MR ALEXANDER: He was on the Kewtown Youth Movement's executive as well.

MR SIBANYONI: Basically my question is, as a result the meeting of the Cape Youth Congress was closed to ordinary members of the public.

MR ALEXANDER: That's correct.

MR SIBANYONI: Unlike that one of the Kewtown Youth Movement.

MR ALEXANDER: It was open to members of our level, that's right.

MR SIBANYONI: Yes. Thank you, Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Sibanyoni. Mr Lax?

MR LAX: Thanks, Chair.

Just to follow up on that, what was your actual position in the Kewtown Youth Movement?

MR ALEXANDER: At the time I was ...

MR LAX: Were you an office bearer?

MR ALEXANDER: I was an office bearer, I started to ...

MR LAX: You can't remember exactly which portfolio you had?

MR ALEXANDER: I'm not sure which portfolio, but I was quite ...(intervention)

MR LAX: And was Mr Williams an office bearer?

MR ALEXANDER: That's correct.

MR LAX: Now I just want to clarify this. You said that this was a regional executive within Cayco, what region was it of Cayco?

MR ALEXANDER: It was the ...(indistinct) of Cayco.

MR LAX: Sorry?

MR ALEXANDER: It was the ...(indistinct) region of Cayco ...(intervention)

MR LAX: Sorry? Athlone region of Cayco?

MR ALEXANDER: Athlone region, but not all at the meeting, present at the meeting would have an office bearing function for that Athlone region.

MR LAX: But they were reps of the various branches within the Athlone region?

MR ALEXANDER: That's correct.

MR LAX: And around Cape Town there would have been a whole range of other sub-regions, all making up the Western Cape, for example?

MR ALEXANDER: That's correct.

MR LAX: Now did Mr Williams ever tell you, soon after that or at any time after that, that Gakkie said to him: "Listen man, you guys must get out of here, I put a bomb in this place"?

MR ALEXANDER: At no point, that's ludicrous. At no point, ja.

MR LAX: He didn't come to you say: "Jeez, Gakkie is out of his tree, he told us he put a bomb there"?

MR ALEXANDER: No, Sir, he never said anything to that effect. At no point did Peter come and tell me that.

MR LAX: Were you ever approached, up until the time you actually did make a statement, were you approached by the police to make a statement?

MR ALEXANDER: At no point, Sir.

MR LAX: Thank you, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Alexander, did you own a Valiant?

MR ALEXANDER: I owned a Valiant. It was my brother's Valiant, but that was in 1984/'85.

CHAIRPERSON: Because Gakkie's testified that he didn't know that you drove an Isuzu bakkie.

MR ALEXANDER: That's not the facts, Sir. The Valiant was last driven in '85 and by mid-'85 I bought an Audi. I had an Audi 100. I think it was a cream colour.

CHAIRPERSON: And also we heard from the evidence of Gakkie, that he got some documents of the Kewtown Youth Movement which he handed over. He can't read, but he said he could discern Kewtown, but he didn't know the content, what sort of documents do you think - accepting that, what sort of documents do you think he could have handed over?

MR ALEXANDER: It might pertain to informing people around the elections, but not threatening or of such a nature. We weren't in the business of threats. We tried to inform people.

CHAIRPERSON: What sort of pamphlets, because Mr Williams when questioning, also mentioned pamphlets, Kewtown pamphlets, what were the contents of those pamphlets, what would they have been?

MR ALEXANDER: Explanations around the elections, what in fact you do by voting, you're legitimising the current government, but ...

CHAIRPERSON: So they were against the upcoming tricameral elections and just voicing that?

MR ALEXANDER: That's right.

CHAIRPERSON: And then also just one last point, you heard the evidence of Mr Hardien, he said that there was a lot of violence, political violence at the time, tyres being burnt in the street, trucks, vehicles being burnt and he said that he saw a lot of this and every time he was at such a scene he saw members of Kewtown, and he was of the opinion that they must have been associated or involved with the commission of the deeds, the burning of the tyres and the trucks, what's your comment on that evidence?

MR ALEXANDER: At no point did any members of Kewtown youth commit arson or did any acts of public violence, Sir. If I may just add, Isgak was a paid guy to try and do those things. We've heard evidence from Mr Barnard that that was the type of things that these guys were paid to do.

MR LAX: Just one last thing. Were yourself or any other members of the Kewtown youth ever prosecuted for any such acts?

MR ALEXANDER: Never, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Any questions arising out of questions that have been put by Members of the Panel? Does that then conclude the evidence in this matter?

MR BIZOS: That is so.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes thank you.

WITNESS EXCUSED

CHAIRPERSON: And I believe that arrangements have been made regarding the filing of Heads of Argument and hearing argument. Would you like to put that on record, Mr Coleridge?

MR COLERIDGE: Yes thank you, Chairperson. We're going to hear argument, Chairperson, it's been set down for the 18th and the 19th of November. Unfortunately it's a Saturday and a Sunday, Chairperson, but we couldn't get - we're all be available on those days Chairperson, everybody's diaries are pretty booked up.

And then Chairperson, just for applicants to file by the 6th of November and objections by the 15th of November, Chairperson. Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Will it be in Cape Town? A venue to be arranged and everyone will get due notification of that venue?

MR COLERIDGE: That is correct, Chairperson. At this point we have a strong feeling that it's going to be at the TRC offices, Chairperson, which could accommodate a few of us.

MR BIZOS: Mr Chairman firstly, may I express our gratitude to you and Members of the Committee, even though I understand that you were not specifically consulted on sitting during the weekend in order to primarily accommodate our own available, Mr Chairman, we are really most grateful for that.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Bizos.

MR BIZOS: There is just one other matter, Mr Chairman. I don't know that we can get any agreement before the adjournment, could we ask you Mr Chairman, from ...(indistinct) in consultation with Members of the Committee, to indicate where you intend marking where the vehicle was. If anybody has got any objection, they can voice it.

CHAIRPERSON: This is the vehicle at the time it was stationary and before it was reversed a little distance. That one?

MR BIZOS: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: It's almost - if one takes a look at P2, there seems to be, I don't know if it's a vehicle parked in that photograph.

MR LAX: There's a white rectangular object on the road, on the left of the road.

CHAIRPERSON: Approximately there. That's before it was reversed back.

MR BIZOS: Yes, we would agree with that.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Martini, do you see that? P2, that's the ... It might have been slightly closer to the wall, but more-or-less there.

MR MARTINI: Chairperson, I just can't orientate myself to the inspection, I can't even ... I can see the mark there, but I can't even recall ...

MR LAX: Can you see in the car park there's a red rood or something, that wasn't there at the time, we were told that at the inspection in loco. That is at the back of the building and you can see the circle of the road coming round forms a D-shape, can you see that?

MR MARTINI: Yes.

MR LAX: Now that is the circle within which Mr van Zyl indicated they'd parked the vehicle.

MR MARTINI: My only problem is I can't visualise that circle in that direction, I recall ...(indistinct - no microphone)

INTERPRETER: The speaker's microphone.

MR MARTINI: I recall we looked away from the Early Learning Centre, from the parking lot and I just can't place this circle. I'm not trying to be ...

CHAIRPERSON: It's a very big circle, it's not a roundabout circle, it's a big circle and there's a main road behind it. You can see the main road there.

MR LAX: Can you see - just listen, can you see Abduramen Avenue, that mark there?

MR MARTINI: ; Mr Lax, sorry, you keep telling me "just listen", I'm saying I accept where that little mark is.

MR LAX: Thank you.

MR BIZOS: Could we agree on the next letter of the alphabet that's got to go through.

CHAIRPERSON: G. Make that G.

MR MARTINI: You see Chairperson, that's the point I complained of earlier, which Mr Lax wouldn't let me explain to the Chair. We don't have a diagram, A, B, C, D, E, F, G on it. Now you've marked G, but none of us know - well, I certainly don't know what A is, B, C, or D.

CHAIRPERSON: That must be done and here's the original which is not the same as P2, but we can get them from here.

MR BIZOS: We will give Mr Martini our copies.

MR MARTINI: May I suggest Chairperson, next time we come and argue, that we have a uniform one, the one that the Chair has, because Mr Kahanovitz says "copy mine", I assume it's the same as the Chair's.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes but I think it's probably better to do it now before you prepare your arguments. I think when we adjourn, Mr Martini, I'll give you these and you can do it from there.

MR MARTINI: Shall we copy it from the Chair's one?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR MARTINI: Thanks, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes well thank you very much, that then concludes the evidence in this matter and as you heard, we'll next be meeting on the 18th of November at a venue still to be finalised, for argument, final argument after the presentation of written Heads. But tomorrow we'll be proceeding with another matter at this venue. What time will we be starting tomorrow, Ms Coleridge? Half-past nine?

MS COLERIDGE: If we could start at nine-thirty, Chairperson.

HEARING ADJOURNS