Special Report Transcript Episode 22, Section 4, Time 22:26

I think the work of the normal hearings where people come and tell their stories is very important. That’s where we started and we have no reason to change our mind about that. The catharsis that has taken place for white and black alike, men and women, old, young, seems to have done something towards the reconciling work that we are committed to. But I think you’re absolutely right, I think we’re being very slow on the whole question of the other side of the question, namely the perpetrators. I mean over and over again we hear appeals, we want to know what happened, we want to know who gave the command, we want to know who did it, not out of a spirit of revenge in most instances but because they want to know. And I think we have a right to know and I think we have been very very slow. // We invited the police generals to come because they said, you don’t have to subpoena us; we are willing to cooperate. Frankly we are totally dissatisfied with their response. They’ve now sent in their submission, we think it’s a waste of our time. We have told them that. And we’ve told them that unless they change that submission to include specifics then we will revert back to subpoena. So, we have become a lot tougher in the last two weeks I suppose. We had the same problem with the military generals. An instruction will go out to regions saying that the people who they have identified as perpetrators through the hearings, so again the hearings are important. People like Niewoudt and others; that we shouldn’t waste any more time; that we should go ahead with the subpoenas in terms of section 29 of the Act. And I think you’re going to find that together with a number of people who have already indicated to us last week that they are tired of the generals, they are tired of the politicians, that they’re coming to ask for amnesty and they’re going to blow the whistle. I think the public are going to see a very different picture in the next few weeks. // Was last week’s indication of new people, was that a breakthrough? // I think absolutely because initially we got a letter from a firm of attorneys giving us writing on behalf of 22 fairly senior policemen, backed by the general saying that they would stand by them and they would accept collective responsibility. Our response was that there is no such thing as collective responsibility. There has to be individual responsibility. Institutions can certainly tell us what went wrong and what went right but individuals if they want to be heard at the amnesty, have to speak as individuals and have to name names and tell the full story. We’ve heard nothing since until last week when six of these guys came into our office, without any announcements saying, with their attorney, we want to tell the truth and we’re not interested in other people now. We feel we’re getting let down and getting left behind and perhaps even have to carry the can, so we’re coming. Now, they are now filling in the application forms, which is quite a formidable form. You have to give a hell of a lot of information on that one. They’re doing that. We have asked the Amnesty Committee to bring that forward, even though they got a long list of hearings which are supposed to be taking place, mostly people in custody. They’ve agreed to do that. So, in the next three weeks, at least these six are going to tell stories which are going to be very similar in gravity to that what we’ve heard from De Kock.

Notes: Dr Alex Boraine interviewed

References: there are no references for this transcript