MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, the next witness is Mr Wasserman. You will find his additional statement in bundle 1 from page 24 onwards. That is the original amnesty application and his additional evidence, Mr Chairman, in bundle 2, from page 4 onwards.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
MR VISSER: I'm sorry, not 4, we've just dealt with 4, page 1 in bundle 2. Mr Wasserman is ready to take the oath, Mr Chairman.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes.
LAWRENCE G WASSERMAN: (sworn states)
EXAMINATION BY MR VISSER: Mr Wasserman, you also gave evidence before this Committee last week, is that correct?
MR WASSERMAN: Correct.
MR VISSER: And do you incorporate the evidence which you gave before this Committee also today?
MR WASSERMAN: Correct.
MR VISSER: Can you tell the Committee what your recollection is in regard to the facts and your participation in this incident for which amnesty is sought?
MR WASSERMAN: I can Mr Chairman.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, please do.
MR WASSERMAN: I remember I went with Maj du Preez and we met Col Taylor at the Winkelspruit shooting range.
MR VISSER: Perhaps just for the sake of background, what was your rank at the time?
MR WASSERMAN: I was a Detective-Sergeant.
MR VISSER: A Detective-Sergeant. And du Preez?
MR WASSERMAN: I think he was a Major.
MR VISSER: Was he a Major?
MR WASSERMAN: A Captain or a Major.
MR VISSER: Alright, you went to the shooting range at Winkelspruit, you say?
MR WASSERMAN: Yes.
MR VISSER: Yes, go on.
MR WASSERMAN: Where we met Col Taylor and we had a discussion regarding a Mr Blessing Ninela who had been picked up by the askaris.
MR VISSER: Did you know Mr Blessing Ninela before that day?
MR WASSERMAN: No, Mr Chairman.
MR VISSER: Did you know anything about his activities?
MR WASSERMAN: I knew nothing first hand. Mr Taylor told me.
MR VISSER: Right.
MR WASSERMAN: I'm unable to recall the full contents of Mr Taylor's briefing to us, Mr Chairman. However, I do remember that we were requested by Col Taylor to eliminate Ninela because of terrorist activities in Durban. He was apparently trained in the use of explosives, as limpets and was responsible for a previous explosion which had occurred in Durban.
CHAIRPERSON: That is what you were told?
MR WASSERMAN: That is what I was told Mr Chairman.
I also remember that he was apparently found in possession of a limpet mine which was handed over to us with Mr Ninela. Mr Taylor also explained why Ninela couldn't be charged, but I'm not, I don't recall all those details, Mr Chairman. However, what was made clear to myself, that Ninela would continue with terrorist activities if released.
MR VISSER: Did you have any reason to doubt the truthfulness or the accuracy of what Taylor told you on that day?
MR WASSERMAN: I would have no reason to do so, Mr Chairman.
MR VISSER: Did you then take charge of Mr Ninela?
MR WASSERMAN: Correct, Mr Chairman.
MR VISSER: Yes, go on.
MR WASSERMAN: We took charge of Mr Ninela as well as the limpet mine explosive and proceeded to the Bulwer area.
MR VISSER: Yes. Mr du Preez was asked, why take him so far, can you shed any light on that?
MR WASSERMAN: Mr Chairman, I concur with Mr du Preez's evidence. It would have been out of our area and would have assisted in the anonymity of the deed.
MR VISSER: To cover your tracks, as it were? Alright.
MR WASSERMAN: We stopped the motor vehicle on the side of the road and went to the railway line. Alongside the railway line we stopped and I shot Mr Ninela from behind in the head and he died instantly. We then placed him upon the railway line itself and placed a limpet mine underneath him, underneath his head and his hands and this device was later detonated by Maj du Preez.
MR VISSER: Now why, according to you, was this necessary?
MR WASSERMAN: What exactly?
MR VISSER: Blowing his hands and his head away?
MR WASSERMAN: The reason for that was so he would remain unidentified.
MR VISSER: Was that also in an attempt to cover your tracks?
MR WASSERMAN: That is correct, Mr Chairman.
MR VISSER: You also noticed, well, first of all you waited in the vicinity for the explosion to occur and then you left?
MR WASSERMAN: That's correct, Mr Chairman.
MR VISSER: You have also noted the contents of bundle 1 page 4 where Col Taylor stated what he recalled of this incident. Is that correct?
MR WASSERMAN: That's correct, Mr Chairman.
MR VISSER: According to your recollection, did Mr Taylor, I'm sorry, did you and du Preez, together with Col Taylor, interrogate Ninela?
MR WASSERMAN: That's not correct, Mr Chairman.
MR VISSER: And did you together with du Preez and Taylor discover that there was no evidence against Mr Ninela?
MR WASSERMAN: I was informed of that by Mr Taylor, Mr Chairman.
MR VISSER: Yes. And when he stated that he accompanied you to the railway line in the vicinity of Bulwer, what do you say about that evidence?
MR WASSERMAN: That evidence is incorrect, Mr Chairman. Mr Taylor didn't accompany us.
MR VISSER: Yes. Now he also says that they, that is referring to yourself and du Preez, were instructed to kill him, that refers to Mr Ninela, and blow up his body to make it appear as if he blew himself up in the process of placing the explosives on the railway line. Do you remember that that was part of your order, the blowing up?
MR WASSERMAN: No, that wasn't part of the order, Mr Chairman.
MR VISSER: Who decided on that?
MR WASSERMAN: That was decided by Maj du Preez.
MR VISSER: And you followed all orders throughout the whole of this incident?
MR WASSERMAN: Correct, Mr Chairman.
MR VISSER: Can you go to paragraph 11? I'm sorry, perhaps I should just ask you, you say in your paragraph 10 that you think that Col Taylor might have been confused with another incident, is that correct?
MR WASSERMAN: That's correct, Mr Chairman.
MR VISSER: Which incident is that?
MR WASSERMAN: Mr Chairman, I believe he might have been confusing this incident with that concerning those killed in kwaMashu , three persons killed in kwaMashu under similar circumstances.
MR VISSER: Yes. Was he present at that occasion?
MR WASSERMAN: On that occasion he was present, yes Mr Chairman.
MR VISSER: Alright. Please go on.
MR WASSERMAN: In doing what I did I executed my duties as a policeman, the way I saw it and my obligation during the time of conflict and political violence. We were conditioned by speeches of politicians and directions by our senior officers to do everything that was in our power to confront the revolutionary onslaught at all costs. There were times when, in terms of the prevailing legislation of the time, it was not possible to solve all the problems that came one's way. The present case is perhaps an example of such an instance. In view of the above, I was of the bona fide belief that what I did in the present instance in order to combat or derail the revolutionary onslaught and to protect the government and National Party from political embarrassment fell within my express or implied authority. I did not participate in the event for any personal gain or was driven by any personal spite or malice an I received no reward.
I therefore humbly request that the Amnesty Committee will grant amnesty as prayed for.
MR VISSER: Yes, and that amnesty will include the abduction, because Mr Taylor told you he was abducted, is that correct?
MR WASSERMAN: That is correct, Sir.
MR VISSER: And your association with this unlawful detention, his murder and the desecration of the body of Mr Blessing Ninela and such lesser offence or delict as may be supported by the facts, is that correct?
MR WASSERMAN: Correct, Mr Chairman.
MR VISSER: Including defeating the ends of justice in so far as you did not report what you had done to anyone, is that correct?
MR WASSERMAN: Correct, Mr Chairman.
MR VISSER: Thank you, Mr Chairman.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VISSER
CHAIRPERSON: Have you any questions to put to this witness?
MR RORICH: No questions, Mr Chairman.
CHAIRPERSON: Ms Gabriel?
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS GABRIEL: Mr Wasserman, Mr Taylor's evidence. When Mr Taylor submitted his first written submission, did you discuss it with him?
MR WASSERMAN: No, Mr Chairman.
MS GABRIEL: So at the time that you submitted your first written submission on the very same day, you had not discussed these matters?
MR WASSERMAN: No, Mr Chairman.
MS GABRIEL: Why then were you applying for amnesty for the death of Mr Ninela?
CHAIRPERSON: I didn't hear that.
MS GABRIEL: Why then were you applying for amnesty for the death of Mr Ninela?
MR WASSERMAN: Well, I applied for amnesty, it's in my original application, for the murder of Mr Ninela.
MS GABRIEL: Just give me a second please. Let me refer you to page 35 of bundle 1,
"The elimination of Blessing Ninela. The nature and particulars of this incident are not immediately recalled to mind. I will do the necessary research etc. in an attempt to provide a full and detailed statement which will be provided at a later stage."
So at that point you knew that you had eliminated Mr Ninela and that was the basis on which you sought amnesty?
MR WASSERMAN: That was it and then I was going to do the research.
MS GABRIEL: yes, now what was the research that led you to make the statements that you have in bundle 2 and that appears from pages 2 and 3 in bundle 2? What is this research that you did?
MR WASSERMAN: I consulted with Major du Preez.
MS GABRIEL: Did you consult with Taylor?
MR WASSERMAN: He was deceased.
MS GABRIEL: So you had never spoken to Taylor about this incident?
MR WASSERMAN: Yes, I had spoken to Mr Taylor about this incident.
MS GABRIEL: When was this?
MR WASSERMAN: I cannot recall the exact time.
MS GABRIEL: You see the problem I have with your evidence ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: I think let's just be fair, you want to know whether he had consulted with Taylor, are you talking about this particular incident, or general discussions with Taylor?
MS GABRIEL: This particular incident.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Alright. Did you discuss this particular incident with Taylor?
MR WASSERMAN: Yes, I did, Mr Chairman
CHAIRPERSON: Tell us about it, we want to when it was, isn't it?
MS GABRIEL: Yes.
MR WASSERMAN: I cannot recall exactly when. It was shortly before making - maybe after the date of this, it was a long time ago, a lot of water has gone under the bridge, I can't recall exactly when it was.
MS GABRIEL: Shortly after making what exactly, Mr Wasserman?
MR WASSERMAN: Shortly after making my initial statement, my initial application.
MS GABRIEL: And at that point you discussed it with him?
MR WASSERMAN: Correct.
MS GABRIEL: And at that point did you point out to him that you disagreed with what was written in his initial application?
MR WASSERMAN: Yes, I did.
MS GABRIEL: The problem I have with your evidence is really this, you are basically telling us that what Taylor as your superior, said in his amnesty application, is incorrect except for the specific instruction that you were told to eliminate Ninela.
MR WASSERMAN: Most of what Col Taylor has said in his amnesty application ...(intervention)
MS GABRIEL: All of it, all of it.
MR WASSERMAN: Not all of it.
MS GABRIEL: Except for the instruction that you had to eliminate Taylor, pardon me, Ninela.
MR WASSERMAN: That is so in that application.
MS GABRIEL: I want to suggest to you, Mr Wasserman, that that's very convenient for your purposes, given that Taylor is dead.
MR WASSERMAN: Why would that be so?
MS GABRIEL: Well, we have no way then of determining whether the instruction really came from Taylor. If everything as you say is incorrect, how are we to know that the actual instruction came from Taylor? Why is it that on that point when he was incorrect about so much else, he would be correct on that specific point?
MR WASSERMAN: Mr Chairman, the evidence I've given you is the truth of how this episode did come to pass. Col Taylor was ill, he had severe brain cancer at the time of this. His memory and his day to day affairs were very intermittent and I feel he's actually just made a mistake in this case.
MS GABRIEL: Subsequent to making your first amnesty application, the only other research that you did in support of your second written submission, your amplified application, was really to talk to du Preez, then?
MR WASSERMAN: Correct.
MS GABRIEL: And you didn't think it was necessary to investigate this matter any further?
MR WASSERMAN: No, Mr Chairman.
MS GABRIEL: Why not?
MR WASSERMAN: What I recalled, I had committed to paper.
MS GABRIEL: Well may I suggest to you that at that point you didn't need to because Taylor was dead and that was your loophole, all you have to say really is that Taylor gave you the instruction.
MR WASSERMAN: I have no comment on that.
MS GABRIEL: You have no comment?
MR WASSERMAN: I don't know how to answer it.
MS GABRIEL: So on your version and the basis of your amnesty application is really, you got this instruction, you don't know, there may have been other facets to the killing of Mr Ninela, but it doesn't really concern you?
MR WASSERMAN: I got the instruction, that's my evidence Mr Chairman.
MS GABRIEL: And it didn't occur to you in support of your amnesty application to research this matter any further?
MR WASSERMAN: No, Mr Chairman.
MS GABRIEL: It didn't occur to you at the time of your instruction, at a time at which he was handed over to you with a supposed limpet mine found in his possession, to question the instruction?
MR WASSERMAN: There was no reason to question the instruction.
MS GABRIEL: Du Preez mentioned in his evidence earlier on that one of the reasons for killing Ninela was to serve as a deterrent. Do you hold the same view?
MR WASSERMAN: Mr Chairman, that must be Mr du Preez's opinion, I didn't, I have not come to that conclusion.
MS GABRIEL: So you were just merely carrying out your instruction to execute?
MR WASSERMAN: Correct.
MS GABRIEL: And it was Du Preez's evidence that it was his decision to blow up Mr Ninela's face and hands?
MR WASSERMAN: That's correct, Mr Chairman, I'm not an explosives expert.
MS GABRIEL: Did you question that? Did you question that decision?
MR WASSERMAN: No, Mr Chairman. I concurred with the decision.
MS GABRIEL: Why?
MR WASSERMAN: It made sense for the body to be incognito, or anonymous.
MS GABRIEL: But why? But why? Why did the body have to be obliterated so that nobody could recognise it? All you were told was to execute?
MR WASSERMAN: In my mind, in my conclusion, we could have got away with the fact that Ninela had left the country to join the forces in exile.
MS GABRIEL: Now why would you want that, why would you want that particular idea to emerge?
MR WASSERMAN: That was in my own mind.
MS GABRIEL: Oh, so this wasn't a belief that was shared?
MR WASSERMAN: I had it in my mind that ...(intervention)
MS GABRIEL: Why did you form that belief? You knew nothing about this man.
MR WASSERMAN: I had been informed, he had performed an explosion in Durban,...(intervention)
MS GABRIEL: And so then you hit upon this idea?
MR WASSERMAN: I had been informed that he might continue to do such, I concurred that he might continue to do such, as Mr Taylor had informed me and therefore I carried out the instructions.
MS GABRIEL: And you agreed that blowing up his hands and face would make it seem as if, you would then be able to say that he had left to Swaziland?
MR WASSERMAN: No, that doesn't make any sense, your question. Please say it again.
MS GABRIEL: Well you just said in your own mind...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: It occurred to him that maybe he had gone overseas, out of the border, beyond the border.
MS GABRIEL: I'm afraid that's not how I understood Mr Wasserman's evidence. I understood him to say that if, and please correct me if I'm wrong, that if Mr Ninela was obliterated in ways that he wouldn't be able to be identified, that would help spread, or assist in having people believe that Ninela himself specifically had left the country.
MR WASSERMAN: It was as, that's much of ...(intervention)
MS GABRIEL: Now why did you form this belief? Why did you need to form this belief?
MR WASSERMAN: Mr Chairman, may the learned lady please say it a little bit more concise?
MS GABRIEL: Okay.
CHAIRPERSON: You know a thought occurs to you and the question is being asked, why did this thought occur to you? Whether this was a belief or a thought, we'll leave that out for the time being. In your mind you thought that if this man's body would not be identified, people might assume that Ninela was out of the country.
MR WASSERMAN: Correct, Mr Chairman. I presumed or assumed that the family wouldn't make inquiries about him and they might anticipate that he had left the country and the matter would be left at that.
MS GABRIEL: And so this was a belief that was particular to your own mind?
MR WASSERMAN: I had it.
MS GABRIEL: Please have a look at bundle 1 page 57. This, I understand, was the statement of the 4th applicant in this case, Mwelase. Have a look at the penultimate paragraph.
"We followed Taylor to this place. The man was beaten by Taylor and Myeza. We were taken back to Durban by Mr Brown. I later asked Taylor what happened to him and he told me that they had recruited him and sent him to Swaziland."
It seems then that this was a shared belief?
MR WASSERMAN: No, I don't know anything about that.
MS GABRIEL: Is there anything else about this case that you're not disclosing, Mr Wasserman?
MR WASSERMAN: I've disclosed everything that I, of my portion in this case, I have disclosed.
MS GABRIEL: So you've disclosed everything that you know about the execution of Mr Ninela?
MR WASSERMAN: To my recollection, yes I have.
MS GABRIEL: And you would not be in a position to dispute any of the evidence then that the family presents?
MR WASSERMAN: I don't know what that evidence is.
MS GABRIEL: Okay. Well you supposedly know nothing about the history of Mr Ninela, you were just following instructions.
MR WASSERMAN: Yes, Mr Ninela wasn't a subject that got my attention during the struggle days.
MS GABRIEL: Who's attention did he receive?
MR WASSERMAN: I have no idea.
MS GABRIEL: But not yours?
MR WASSERMAN: Definitely not mine.
MS GABRIEL: You mentioned earlier that in those days it was not possible to solve all of the problems that you encountered through legislative means, what did you mean by that?
MR WASSERMAN: The legal process and the arrest of Umkhonto personnel sometimes could not be cleared up via the court system and this is specially relevant when the war in Natal hotted up, sometimes it was deemed necessary that non-legal steps had to be taken by ourselves.
MS GABRIEL: And you noted that Mr Ninela was handed over to you with an explosive or is it a limpet mine was found in his possession?
MR WASSERMAN: I was informed so by Col Taylor, yes.
MS GABRIEL: And you received Mr Ninela and the limpet mine?
MR WASSERMAN: That is correct.
MS GABRIEL: And at that point couldn't you question the instruction to execute because there you had the evidence to take him through the legislative channels? Did it occur to you to question?
MR WASSERMAN: I did not question, I presumed that this is, Mr Taylor had probably thought that the legislation process would not be efficient in this case, therefore he had made that decision.
MS GABRIEL: But it was something that didn't strike you. did it not strike you as odd?
MR WASSERMAN: No, it did not.
MS GABRIEL: Thank you, Mr Wasserman. I have no further questions Mr chair.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS GABRIEL
MS THABETHE: Just one Mr Chair.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS THABETHE: Mr Wasserman, what happened to the body of the deceased after he was executed?
MR WASSERMAN: Do you mean after I had shot him?
MS THABETHE: Yes. Did you leave it there or what happened to it, do you know?
MR WASSERMAN: Exactly where he died instantly, is where Col du Preez set the limpet mine and he was place on top of that limpet mine, all at the same place.
MS THABETHE: No, I mean after he was blown up, what happened to his remains?
MR WASSERMAN: No, after leaving the scene, I never returned back to the scene.
MS THABETHE: So you don't know what happened?
MR WASSERMAN: No, I don't know. I have no idea what happened thereafter at the scene, Mr Chairman.
MS THABETHE: No further questions Mr Chair.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS THABETHE
ADV BOSMAN: Thank you, Chairperson. Mr Wasserman, where were your duties sort of, where did your duties lie? Was it within the terrorism or the intelligence part of the work of the Security Branch?
MR WASSERMAN: I was in the MK Intelligence Unit, but it still formed, fell under the terrorist desk.
ADV BOSMAN: And perhaps it's not fair to ask you this, but why did Mr Taylor, in your mind, summon du Preez to this operation, which fell outside of his normal activities?
MR WASSERMAN: Mr Chairman, I can only conclude that had, with Taylor's involvement with Ninela, then perhaps there had been a transition from Ninela's other activities into MK activities somehow and that's how come Taylor got involved, because otherwise he normally would not have been involved with persons that weren't involved in MK activities in some form or another.
ADV BOSMAN: A question which arises in my mind is that in Taylor's application it is said that he suggested that the body be blown up and Mr du Preez happened to be an explosives expert, would it be unfair to draw the conclusion that he was summoned because of his expertise in explosives?
MR WASSERMAN: That might also be a valid conclusion.
ADV BOSMAN: Were there any indications, as far as you can remember, that du Preez was asked to assist on account of him expertise in explosives?
MR WASSERMAN: I cannot recall that specific aspect, but with the handing over of Mr Ninela's limpet mine, he must have been there because Mr Taylor would never have given me the limpet mine because I'm not a trained expert.
ADV BOSMAN: And then just one more question, it's also something that I'm rather puzzled about, is in the first application both you and Mr du Preez say that you are vague and you cannot recollect exactly what the details were and then you consult with him and he consults with you and then all of a sudden you know, so what jolted your memories? How did it come about that you then remembered?
MR WASSERMAN: Mr Chairman, this man, Mr Ninela, never came to my knowledge via our infiltrations into the Natal machinery and MK structures which I personally had infiltrated, therefore he was never a key figure in my entire career, I couldn't recall where Mr Ninela came in in the whole onslaught of our amnesty applications all the names. Once the facts were given to me, then I recalled that he had come from, he was never a known, a big fish, like other persons that I'd been dealing with.
ADV BOSMAN: Which facts are you referring to? Which facts were given to you?
MR WASSERMAN: When we consulted.
ADV BOSMAN: Who?
MR WASSERMAN: Du Preez and Mr Taylor.
ADV BOSMAN: But this is what I don't understand. Mr du Preez said that he couldn't remember, as a matter of fact he testified that only last week did he establish that he had arrested him in connection with his trade union activities and this puzzles me, who jolted whose memory? Did you jolt Mr du Preez's memory, or did he jolt your memory? How did this come about?
MR WASSERMAN: Mr Chairman, the Bulwer railway line, the elimination of him at the Bulwer railway line, jolted the memory and during the composition of our statements then Mr du Preez didn't mention anything about arresting, so I presume he had forgotten that portion, but we did recall eliminating Ninela on the railway line.
ADV BOSMAN: In what respect did you jolt Mr du Preez's memory? Can you tell us?
MR WASSERMAN: Mr Chairman, I was the person who shot Mr Ninela.
ADV BOSMAN: One would expect you to have remembered that, but was there as far as the other detail which we have heard about this morning is concerned, what did you remember that Mr du Preez had forgotten?
MR WASSERMAN: Between the two of us we recalled going to the shooting range to collect Mr Ninela and then transporting him out to a likely site in Bulwer.
ADV BOSMAN: And who recalled what Taylor had told you?
MR WASSERMAN: Mr du Preez recalled the limpet mine, then I recalled that episode taking place and between us we recalled what Mr Taylor basically said. I can't remember who remembered what sentence where, but it's a long time ago and he was not really a subject of mine. He wasn't under my attention, Mr Ninela.
ADV BOSMAN: And was it between the two of you that you remembered sufficient to say that Mr Taylor's application is a confused version of what had happened there?
MR WASSERMAN: It's definitely a confused version, especially the fact that he accompanied us.
ADV BOSMAN: Thank you. Thank you, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Any re-examination?
MR VISSER: Yes, sorry Mr Chairman, with your leave.
RE-EXAMINATION BY MR VISSER: Mr Wasserman, did you, were you instrumental at pointing out the precise point where Ninela was killed and blown up to the investigation unit of the TRC?
MR WASSERMAN: That's correct, Mr Chairman.
MR VISSER: Did you also- this happened during approximately January 1997, I'm told.
MR WASSERMAN: That must be correct, Mr Chairman.
MR VISSER: And did you then accompany members of the investigation unit to the scene?
MR WASSERMAN: Correct, Mr Chairman.
MR VISSER: And thereafter here in Durban in I believe July that year, 1997, did you make yourself available for questioning by the investigation unit?
MR WASSERMAN: That's correct, Mr Chair.
MR VISSER: And in this process during that period of time, were you able to recall aspects of this incident and refresh your memory along what you have seen at the scene of the crime as well as in preparing for the questioning?
MR WASSERMAN: That's correct, Mr Chairman.
MR VISSER: And did it occur to you that the investigation team was busy with a pretty thorough investigation?
MR WASSERMAN: That is correct, Mr Chairman.
MR VISSER: Thank you Mr Chairman. I see I've gone a minute, two minutes over the time. I do apologise for that Mr Chairman.
MS THABETHE: Mr Chair.
CHAIRPERSON: Do you wish to put questions?
MS THABETHE: No, Mr Chair, can I make a request?
CHAIRPERSON: Yes.
MS THABETHE: I realise it's 1 o'clock and with the permission of the Committee and my colleagues, I would have suggested that we continue the other applicant's evidence, I don't think it will take that long, so that after lunch we start with the victim's case. I don't know whether that's acceptable to you?
CHAIRPERSON: I have no idea how long the evidence of this other applicant is going to be.
MS THABETHE: I don't know whether my learned colleague can give us an indication?
MR RORICH: I have no objection to that Mr Chair, but the evidence may be in the vicinity of half an hour.
CHAIRPERSON: Well, we'll take the adjournment now and resume in 45 minutes.
MS THABETHE: As it pleases you, Mr Chair.
MR RORICH: As it pleases.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
