Publications
Partners
Joao Roderigues stuck to his guns today when he appeared for the third day as the key witness into the death of anti-apartheid activist Ahmed Timol, almost 46 years ago.
Roderigues (78) told the court on Monday that he served as an administrative officer for the state security police when Timol allegedly jumped to his death from the 10th floor of the notorious John Vorster Square building in October 1971.
Up until last week, the family of Timol, who fought to have his inquest reopened, believed Roderigues was no longer alive. It was only when his daughter got in touch with the Timol family after seeing the proceedings in the media that Roderigues was called in to testify.
When he appeared at court on Monday, he relayed the events surrounding Timol’s death, saying that he had witnessed Timol “dive” from the window of room 1026, where he was being detained.
Over the past three days, Advocate Torie Pretorius (on behalf of the state) and Advocate Howard Varney (on behalf of the family) have been grilling Roderigues on his version of events which were in the original inquest into Timol’s death in 1972. Magistrate JL de Villiers had ruled at the time that there was no foul play involved in his death, and that Timol had committed suicide – a ruling his family has continued to dispute.
Roderigues, however, maintains that this is exactly what occurred.
Major discrepancies have emerged in the reopened inquest, including Roderigues’s claims that he was asked to fabricate his testimony by Colonel Hans Gloy and Colonel JZ van Niekerk, who had stepped out of the room when Roderigues and Timol were left alone. Roderigues alleges that he was asked by Gloy and Van Niekerk to keep watch on Timol, after they received word from a certain “Mr X” that more activists had been captured.
After questioning Roderigues on the validity of his statement that he had no involvement in Timol’s death and that he was a mere witness to Timol jumping, Advocate Varney told him in his closing comments that recommendations would be made to the National Prosecuting Authority through the court that he be charged with perjury, with accessory after the fact to the murder of Ahmed Timol or alternatively the murder of Timol.
“We will first put it to this court that you collaborated with the security branch to cover up various crimes. Firstly, the torture or to be more precise, the repeated grievous assault and intent to do harm to Mr Timol, as well as his murder. Secondly, should it be demonstrated that you colluded with the security branch to set up the fall of Mr Timol then you should be held responsible of the crime of murder,” Varney said.
Once Varney said this, he turned to Roderigues and asked if he had anything to say.
“I do not concur to the council’s submission. I am innocent,” he said.
Judge Billy Mothle also probed Roderigues after lunch, asking him to clarify various points including that of Timol’s injuries.
“You will recall at the beginning of your testimony when you testified on Monday I had pointed out to you that there is a possibility or a risk depending on your evidence as I compare it with the other evidence I have heard, there is a risk that there could be a recommendation that you be prosecuted. You remember that?” he asked.
“Yes.”
“I am giving you an opportunity to address those things which bother me in terms of your version of events,” Mothle said.
Mothle went on to seek clarification on Roderigues’s lack of knowledge surrounding the assault of detainees, after he claimed on Monday that he had only ever heard of these assaults from the media.
Mothle probed him on the legitimacy of being awarded a commendation directly from the police commissioner at the time, even though Roderigues’ rank was that of an administrative clerk. A suggestion from the judge was that perhaps Roderigues received it through the recommendations from other senior police officials as a result of him going along with what they wanted him to do regarding Timol’s death.
Roderigues said he didn’t know why he received it, since he was only made aware of receiving the commendation this week during the trial proceedings.
“But why didn’t you go back to your lawyers and ask them for it?” Mothle asked him, after handing his copy to Roderigues to see for the first time in court today.
“I didn’t think it’s important. This was such a long time ago; it’s in my past,” Roderigues said.
Towards the end of the questioning, Judge Mothle said he knew he was the one to decide on the judgment into the inquest, but that he wanted to ask Roderigues certain things to get his “reaction”.
Holding up his affidavit which he had given the courts, Roderigues replied saying: “I cannot tell you anything better than what is written in my statement. This is the truth. There isn’t any other better way that I could tell this court the truth”.
“And you stand by that?” Mothle asked.
“I stand by that. That is the truth and I cannot change the truth,” Roderigues responded.
“In spite of the other evidence that shows to the contrary?” Mothle asked.
“Should I have changed my statement that would have meant that I lied to this court.”
“Yes I didn’t ask you to change your statement. I called on you to tell the truth and if that is what you are saying than that is what you are saying,” Mothle said.
“It is the truth sir, the only truth,” Roderigues maintained.
Proceedings will continue tomorrow at 10am when Ronnie Kasrils is expected to testify.
 |
| ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
