Amnesty Hearings

MS VAN DER WALT: Mr Chairperson, the next applicant is the sixth applicant on Volume 6 list, Johan Wilhelm Du Plessis.

JOHAN WILHELM DU PLESSIS: (sworn states)

EXAMINATION BY MS VAN DER WALT: Mr Du Plessis, you applied for amnesty and also filled in the form and that is in Volume 1 from page 101 - 117 and Section B from 214 - 223, is that correct?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, that is correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: Mr Du Plessis, you were with the other applicants in the High Court charged and you were found not guilty on all the charges?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, that is correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: And is it correct that you apply for amnesty as you set out the deeds that you did in Annexure A that would then be the pipe bombs that went out to the different places, the bomb to Germiston and the bomb to Jan Smuts?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, that is correct Mr Chairperson

MS VAN DER WALT: You did not have any knowledge about the Bree Street bomb?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Does he apply for amnesty for these offences and found not guilty?

MS VAN DER WALT: That is correct yes.

CHAIRPERSON: I know he can still apply for amnesty but what is the point in applying?

MS VAN DER WALT: May I answer? In the first instance this applicant was the one who gave the instruction for the pipe bomb, I can say yes, the instruction and if there's any civil charges against him, he must apply for amnesty for that.

Mr Du Plessis, the occurrences in Annexure A - you've explained them but there's one aspect I'd like to refer you to and that is paragraph 24, that is on page 112 where it is not completed. You talked about the throwing of the pipe bombs were discussed at the meeting, that you do mention there in paragraph 24?

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct Mr Chairperson.

MS VAN DER WALT: Can you tell this Honourable Committee what was discussed?

MR DU PLESSIS: That specific meeting, we discussed that pipe bombs had to thrown. The instruction or order was given by Nico Prinsloo, other officer who was present was Brigadier Leon van der Merwe. The pertinent target area that was explained to me or given to me was the PWV area.

MS VAN DER WALT: Was that the Pretoria/Witwatersrand area?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, that is correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: Was anything said to you regarding targets?

MR DU PLESSIS: Targets that was indicated by General Nico Prinsloo to me was called taxi ranks.

MS VAN DER WALT: And then you further continue in your application how you conveyed these instructions and you do confirm that?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, that is correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: Then furthermore, page 114, paragraph 27.

CHAIRPERSON: Before you continue, what happened in the meetings? You said that the throwing pipe bombs was discussed in that meeting?

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct, Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: As a result of that meeting certain instructions were given?

MR DU PLESSIS: These instructions were given by me to certain people.

CHAIRPERSON: Before that, did you take part in the meeting?

The meeting, the discussion of the pipe bombs were discussed?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes I was present there.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you take part in the discussions?

MR DU PLESSIS: No, I did not take part - I was at that meeting told that I must gather or bring people together who will throw these pipe bombs. The target area is the PWV area and that the purpose of the pipe bombs would be to create a fear psychosis amongst the people in order to disrupt the elections.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you listen when they said that the pipe bombs or that the targets must be taxi ranks.

MR DU PLESSIS: No, that instruction was given to me pertinently.

CHAIRPERSON: But did you hear when they discussed it at that meeting?

MR DU PLESSIS: No, I did not hear when they discussed it, in other words I did not hear that on a general level where the decision was made that the targets must be taxi ranks.

MS VAN DER WALT: I refer you to paragraph 27 on page 114 -there you mention that on Sunday 24th April, 1994 you went to Koesterfontein. Why did you go there?

MR DU PLESSIS: General Nico Prinsloo gave me the instruction the evening before that the next morning I must go with Jan de Wet to Koesterfontein on a mission. I do not know what mission it was but I thought it could have been a bomb mission.

MS VAN DER WALT: Paragraph 29 page 115 you mentioned that at the shooting range, Barnard further gave the instructions of the Staff Generals and was given instruction that a bomb must be planted in a stolen Peugeot. Why did you say that this instruction comes from the Staff Generals?

MR DU PLESSIS: I had already, it had something to do with Barnard, with the Germiston bomb. I knew that he deals with instructions that was given to him by the Staff Generals in that Nico Prinsloo had told me that I must go with, with the Germiston bomb and the instruction for the Jan Smuts bomb I also received from Cliff Barnard.

MS VAN DER WALT: Was there any Generals at the shooting range present on that day?

MR DU PLESSIS: The day before the Jan Smuts bomb exploded, there were a few Generals at the shooting range itself, at the Waterfall Shooting Range in Rustenburg. General Ackerman, General Smit from Welkom as well as Nico Prinsloo, they were present at the shooting range.

MS VAN DER WALT: And this General Ackerman, it seems that if, according to the application, there was more than one Ackerman, which one do you refer to?

MR DU PLESSIS: This is the General Ackerman, I think he was currently - I think they talk about him as the Commandant General - the highest General there is.

MS VAN DER WALT: Mr Du Plessis, is there anything else you would like to add to the happenings in Annexure A?

MR DU PLESSIS: No, Mr Chairperson.

MS VAN DER WALT: Do you then confirm the content?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes.

MS VAN DER WALT: Do you confirm the content of Annexure A?

MR DU PLESSIS: What annexure is that?

MS VAN DER WALT: That is the ideology of the AWB and the -I would just like to get it for you.

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Du Plessis, are you satisfied that you take note of the content of the document, have you read it before?

MR DU PLESSIS: No, Mr Chairperson, I did not read it.

CHAIRPERSON: Because questions will be put to you regarding that document and it doesn't help to say no now that you agree with it and then later you say "I do not agree", it will not help you. So if you need some time to read it, ask for it and we will give you an opportunity.

MR DU PLESSIS: I would appreciate some time.

CHAIRPERSON: And the content of your application, Annexure A, have you read that?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, I did.

CHAIRPERSON: You do know what the content of it is?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes I do.

CHAIRPERSON: And the fact that you confirm that is that correct?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Is there nothing you would like to change in that?

MR DU PLESSIS: No Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: How long do you think he will need to read that document?

MS VAN DER WALT: I apologise, I did not know that he hadn't read it, that is not my applicant, I accepted it but can I ask for ten minutes?

NO FURTHER EXAMINATION BY MS VAN DER WALT

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

ON RESUMPTION

JOHAN WILHELM DU PLESSIS: (s.u.o.)

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS CAMBANIS: After conviction, one of the family members of the applicants sent a message via the court orderly to Mrs Keane to say we're sorry about your white child's death. Mrs Keane rejected that and said she would only consider it if the apology was extended or the sympathy was extended to all the families of all the deceased regardless of colour and that never came back. Do you have any knowledge of that incident?

Of that specific incident I carry no knowledge.

MS CAMBANIS: What is your attitude to the apology to whites only?

MR DU PLESSIS: I think that it is wrong, I agree that that apology must be extended to all the victims.

MS CAMBANIS: When did you decide that it should be extended to all the victims and their families?

MR DU PLESSIS: That is how I feel about it.

MS CAMBANIS: Is that how you felt during your trial?

MR DU PLESSIS: During the trial? Yes.

MS CAMBANIS: Why such a long hesitation, what did you have to think about?

MR DU PLESSIS: I wanted to think if I can at a specific time decided that - because it was part of a question you put to me.

MS CAMBANIS: Thank you.

NO FURTHER EXAMINATION BY MS CAMBANIS

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR KRIEL: Mr Du Plessis, do you currently live in Ficksburg?

MR DU PLESSIS: I live on the farm of my father in the Ficksburg district.

MR KRIEL: Do you farm there?

MR DU PLESSIS: No, I do not farm, I work in town.

MR KRIEL: This form, the form that was completed, pages 101, 102, 103 - was that in your own handwriting?

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct, part of it was not completed in my own handwriting.

MR KRIEL: What part of it was not completed by yourself or in your own handwriting?

MR DU PLESSIS: Questions 9a and b, 10a and b, c, 11a and b, 12a and b, c, d, e, and that is it.

MR KRIEL: It was not completed by yourself?

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct yes.

MR KRIEL: 13 - did you complete that yourself?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, it looks like it.

MR KRIEL: Tell us about the application that was pending, certain civil cases, pending on the grounds of people who were killed from some of these bombings and the amount that he's asking from you?

MR DU PLESSIS: I'm not quite sure but it's a large amount.

Approximately I think they talk about R120 000 in one case and the other one is more than R200 000.

MR KRIEL: I see that Judge Flemming - he refers to

R15 000 000's of damage - are you aware of that?

MR DU PLESSIS: The damage I am aware of but I do not know if all the people there wanted to make civil claims.

MR KRIEL: When did you decide that you have to apologise to all the victims?

MR DU PLESSIS: When I heard after the bomb, after attacks or explosions, the Germiston bomb and some of the pipe bomb attacks and I heard that people were killed.

MR KRIEL: Approximately when did you hear about the Germiston Bomb?

MR DU PLESSIS: It is difficult, I cannot remember exactly when I heard about it, the bomb was the morning, if I can remember correctly, it could have been the television or the radio, I heard about the bomb itself.

MR KRIEL: So, let me put it as follows, you were a member of the AWB?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, that is correct.

MR KRIEL: And you supported the idealogies and ideals of the AWB?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, that is correct.

MR KRIEL: And you still followed or agreed with it?

MR DU PLESSIS: I identified myself with the Volkstaat, that the AWB wants but I did not identify myself with all their struggles and goals and objectives.

MR KRIEL: So I can still accept that you're still a member of the AWB?

MR DU PLESSIS: At various opportunities they've approached me and asked me if I want to take part in marches etc and I refused. In the last few years I also did not pay my membership fees, I did not resign but I will say but I'm not an active member of the AWB any more.

MR KRIEL: You're not an active member but you're still a member?

MR DU PLESSIS: If you do not pay your membership fees, no.

MR KRIEL: No, I do not understand your answer.

MR DU PLESSIS: Yearly membership fees are asked and as far as I'm concerned, if I do not pay my membership fees of a specific organisation for three or four years then I'm not a member any more.

MR KRIEL: But when you joined how many years did you pay in advance?

MR DU PLESSIS: No I've never paid in advance.

MR KRIEL: But you still follow the ideals of the AWB?

MR DU PLESSIS: Some of them, yes.

MR KRIEL: Please tell me about purity of race?

MR DU PLESSIS: It is a term that I would say was inspired by the German's in the second world war.

MR KRIEL: And do you follow purity of race, the idealogy of it?

MR DU PLESSIS: No, I do not.

MR KRIEL: Was it one of the ideologies that you do not follow in the AWB?

MR DU PLESSIS: I would say that the ideology of purity of race is not an ideology of the AWB.

MR KRIEL: Then why in Annexure B, paragraph 2, you would like to further and create in a Boerevolk an awareness of their nationalism, their heritage in the interest of promoting purity of race?

MR DU PLESSIS: As far as that point is concerned I do no longer identify with it.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you identify with it at one point in your life?

MR DU PLESSIS: Chairperson, while I was a member of the AWB on several occasions I asked several people if there's a connection between the AWB and the Nazi's of the second world war and some of these people answered and said that there would never be any such connection. The term of purity of race I consider this to be a term which came from that period in history and I do not identify with it at all.

CHAIRPERSON: Where you aware of the fact that it was a policy of the AWB?

MR DU PLESSIS: This is the policy of the purity of race?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, as it's written there.

MR DU PLESSIS: No, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Were you not aware of it?

MR DU PLESSIS: No, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: So what was your purpose in becoming a member of the AWB?

MR DU PLESSIS: Chairperson, the purpose, the reason why I became a member of the AWB was because I did not want that the ANC/SACP Alliance or government take over our country. I did not want them to be in control of our country and that is completely on a political basis that I became a member of the AWB. I am anti-communism.

CHAIRPERSON: Is the AWB the only party in this country that is anti-communistic?

MR DU PLESSIS: The National Party at that stage, Mr Chairperson, I considered that party to be one which would sell us out to the communists. I was scared that the same would happen here as what happened in Angola and Mozambique.

CHAIRPERSON: Any other party you know of?

MR DU PLESSIS: I also identified myself with the strives of the HNP but they were not militant enough for me, Chairperson. They did not want to become physically involved, they did not want to take up the weapon.

CHAIRPERSON: So the only reason was that because there were Communist reasons, was that your biggest problem?

MR DU PLESSIS: I still believe that there are still communist opinions, that is my opinion.

CHAIRPERSON: What do you say about the PAC?

MR DU PLESSIS: The Truth and Reconciliation Committee?

CHAIRPERSON: The PAC - that they're not a communist party?

MR DU PLESSIS: I'd say that the PAC also have certain communists - they still support communist positions and people - I cannot mention names.

CHAIRPERSON: Are you sure?

MR DU PLESSIS: Well, some of the PAC's people was trained together with the ANC members in certain African states - I'm not quite up to scratch with regards to the PAC.

CHAIRPERSON: That's why I'm asking, you were looking for a party that did not support communism and according to your own opinion, the ANC was one and that's why you wanted to fight against the ANC?

MR DU PLESSIS: That's correct Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: But therefore I asked the question - what with regards to the PAC?

MR DU PLESSIS: I've listened to some of the PAC people and as far as I know they are also socialistically inspired.

MR KRIEL: Thank you, Chairperson.

When you became a member of the AWB did you complete a membership form?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes I completed a membership form.

MR KRIEL: And the last thing that you're confirming on that form if you look at Exhibit 7 in bundle A, if I remember correctly, or item 7 in bundle A - Exhibit A page 7. The last thing which is marked with an asterisk "I confirm herewith that I'm a White South African Citizen" is that correct?

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct, Chairperson.

MR KRIEL: And if you look at page 8 and I read for you second paragraph from the bottom: "To promote among Afrikaner Boers a powerful awareness of their white descendant and heritage, the blood relationship and nationalism and the importance of racial purity" Did you find it?

MR DU PLESSIS: Chairperson, I saw it as they wanted us whites, our ancestry such as Van Riebeek etc, that was what they were referring to - that we are proud of our ancestry and where we are coming from - that's how I see it.

MR KRIEL: But let's stay with this racial purity - what do you understand with regards to that?

MR DU PLESSIS: Let me put it simply to you - if you look at the German's in the second world war and their policy - they put the Jews in concentration camps and a great amount of Jews died - I did not see it - the fact that the AWB would put black people in concentration camps and that they would starve them to death. That's not how I saw it.

CHAIRPERSON: I don't know if Jan van Riebeek believed in racial purity.

MR KRIEL: If you want me follow it up, I will Chairperson.

Let's put it this way, sir. One of the previous applicants did testify to this - you would allow a black person in your Volkstaat if he comes to work for you, is that correct? Do you identify with that statement?

MR DU PLESSIS: I did not see it in such a way, how I see it is that we would allow black people and they'd be free to live there if they wanted to but they would not have the political vote.

CHAIRPERSON: Could they have stayed anywhere they want?

MR DU PLESSIS: As far as I'm concerned yes, they could go anywhere they want and I as a citizen of that republic, if my passport is in order, I would also be allowed to travel outside of the Volkstaat.

MR KRIEL: And a member of the AWB - could they marry a black woman?

MR DU PLESSIS: If it was his choice? Yes, Chairperson.

MR KRIEL: If it's his choice - you did not have a problem with that? That's the general policy of the AWB?

MR DU PLESSIS: If that's their policy then it is so.

MR KRIEL: But is this the policy of the AWB, do they put it like that in these documents? Sir, you were a member, not myself.

ADV PRIOR: I think to be fair to the witness, you started off asking him his views and now you're shifting to the AWB but just as long as you can distinguish.

MR KRIEL: I apologise, Mr Chairman.

Let's clarify this, let's forget about how you see it, let's hear what was the AWB's view of this?

MR DU PLESSIS: The AWB's view, sir?

MR KRIEL: Yes.

MR DU PLESSIS: A member of the AWB can marry a black woman.

MR KRIEL: I do not believe that he would be held in high regard if he married a black member.

CHAIRPERSON: Would he still be a member?

MR DU PLESSIS: I believe they would not expel him immediately but I think if he did that - he would probably retire from the AWB himself. If you asked my personal opinion, about it, no Chairperson, I would not marry a black woman.

MR KRIEL: Further aspects - you did not know anything about the Bree Street bomb?

MR DU PLESSIS: I did not know anything about the Bree Street bomb.

MR KRIEL: When's the first time you heard about the Bree Street bomb?

MR DU PLESSIS: The Bree Street bomb, the first time I heard about that was on television and that was, if I remember correctly, that Sunday evening at the game farm, Chairperson.

MR KRIEL: And did you not discuss it?

MR DU PLESSIS: There were discussions that it was a powerful bomb - we were surprised at the amount of damage it caused. Some of us wondered who did it.

MR KRIEL: Let me just stop you there. At that stage when you heard that report, wasn't there speculation that the SACP, the South African Communist Party was behind the bomb explosion?

MR DU PLESSIS: Chairperson, I did not hear any such speculation - I thought it was the right-wing party that was responsible.

MR KRIEL: But on the news, they did not speculate about who planted the bomb?

MR DU PLESSIS: I cannot remember the specific news reports, maybe I imagined that it might have been in later news reports but if I remember correctly, there was speculation that it was a right-wing organisation that was responsible for it.

MR KRIEL: But it did not become known from the talk amongst the people at the game farm?

MR DU PLESSIS: No, Chairperson.

MR KRIEL: Monday morning you went to Koesterfontein?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes Monday morning I went to Koesterfontein, that is correct.

MR KRIEL: On whose request?

MR DU PLESSIS: General Nico Prinsloo told me that I must go to Koesterfontein on a mission and I went together with Jan de Wet and I left the game farm together with Jan de Wet.

MR KRIEL: When you arrived there, this is now Koesterfontein, did you see that this trailer was changed into a bomb or this trailer is a bomb, let me put it that way?

MR DU PLESSIS: At Koesterfontein I found Cliff Barnard and he told me and Jan that we are going to go on a bomb mission to Germiston.

MR KRIEL: Did Nico Prinsloo indicate to you what would be the target of that bomb?

MR DU PLESSIS: No, Chairperson, I did not know what the target was to be.

MR KRIEL: Who indicated to you what the target would be?

MR DU PLESSIS: The target I learned about when I was together with Etienne Le Roux in the car and he told me that it would be a taxi stand in Germiston.

MR KRIEL: So Etienne Le Roux knew before he arrived at Germiston that the attack would be a taxi stand then?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes.

MR KRIEL: And a taxi stand which is used mainly by black drivers and black members of the public?

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct.

MR KRIEL: So it was a black target?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes.

MR KRIEL: Similar to the instruction given with regards to the firebombs - black targets?

MR DU PLESSIS: That was not pertinently put like that but the instruction was definitely taxi stands.

MR KRIEL: And in 1994 - a taxi rank would you consider a black target or not?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes.

MR KRIEL: So once again a black target?

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you understand it in such a way?

MR DU PLESSIS: Chairperson, I saw and realised that it is indeed a black target. What I can say is the way I justified it to myself was that most of the ANC supporters were black people and that it would create fear amongst them.

MR KRIEL: So when you were driving with Le Roux, you did discuss this issue?

MR DU PLESSIS: He only said to me that a taxi rank was the target.

MR KRIEL: I asked the question to the previous applicant, he couldn't help me, but you were at the game farm and you were also at Koesterfontein, how far were they away from each other?

MR DU PLESSIS: I'd say Koesterfontein and the game farm, if I make a rough estimate, I would say about 15 to 20 kilometres away from each other.

MR KRIEL: And from Koesterfontein to Germiston?

MR DU PLESSIS: I do not know the exact distance but if I had to make an estimate I'd say about 100 kilometres.

MR KRIEL: And what did you talk about while you were driving this 100 kilometres?

MR DU PLESSIS: A great part of the distance we did not say anything - I was scared that we might hit a police roadblock and the other part of the distance I was trying to fix the radio because we no longer had radio communication with the other vehicle and that's that.

MR KRIEL: Were you also scared that the bomb might explode on the way?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes I was scared of that as well, Chairperson.

MR KRIEL: And the other members of the crew, of the Koesterfontein group, did they experience similar fears and did they express them?

MR DU PLESSIS: Not that I know of Chairperson.

MR KRIEL: Because I still do not know why it was necessary that four of you went together, in other words, two - I think you used the word "ghost car" or guiding vehicle - and two in the vehicle which towed the trailer?

MR DU PLESSIS: If I can give you my opinion about why I was driving with the first vehicle, I think they wanted to train me to take part, so that I can take part in other similar bomb attacks. I think that's why they gave me the instruction to join them.

MR KRIEL: If I read the statement of Judge Flemming, the word "commitment" was used - he wanted the commitment of the Natalians, he wanted the commitment of members who didn't do anything, do you think they wanted commitment from your side?

MR DU PLESSIS: I do believe that, Chairperson, yes. A physical deed would commit me to the struggle.

MR KRIEL: Would you have helped with the stealing of the 4x4's?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, I was in charge of that meeting, Chairperson.

MR KRIEL: And why would you have stolen 4x4's?

MR DU PLESSIS: Originally, they said that we would have to drive in areas which was difficult to drive in.

MR KRIEL: When was this instruction given?

MR DU PLESSIS: Before the operation of car theft started, that was at the game farm. I'd say the Saturday evening, if that's correct, Chairperson.

MR KRIEL: So at that stage you needed the 4x4 vehicles to go on patrols, it was not to make bombs with them?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, that's correct, that is what General Nico Prinsloo told me.

MR KRIEL: And I accept that by Saturday evening it was very clear to everyone that the Defence Force will not at all provide you with Ratels and other armoured vehicles?

MR DU PLESSIS: It was not pertinently put to us but at that stage I still hoped that the things that was planned with the Defence Force would realise.

MR KRIEL: But if it would realise, why must you steal 4x4's if the government would provide you with it or the Defence Force would provide you with it?

MR DU PLESSIS: I do not know why Nico Prinsloo made that decision.

MR KRIEL: You acted on instructions from Nico Prinsloo, are you going to call him as a witness in your application?

MR DU PLESSIS: I do not know what Nico Prinsloo's position is at the moment and the reason why he doesn't want to testify here.

MR KRIEL: Did you ask him to come and testify?

MR DU PLESSIS: I think some of the advocates have approached him.

MR KRIEL: You yourself, did you ever approach him to come and testify?

MR DU PLESSIS: No, Mr Chairperson.

MR KRIEL: Why not?

MR DU PLESSIS: There was talk about in last week that the advocates would get him here, I did not follow it up further.

MR KRIEL: Did you receive any feedback from your legal team concerning General Nico Prinsloo?

MR DU PLESSIS: No, I haven't, I haven't asked them either.

MR KRIEL: When do you think when you will be able to inform us regarding Nico Prinsloo?

MR DU PLESSIS: I will take it up with my advocates.

MR KRIEL: Orders or instructions were also given by Cliffie Barnard, is that correct?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes.

MR KRIEL: Are you planning to call Barnard to testify regarding his instructions?

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Nicolas Barnard withdrew his application in front of the court.

MR KRIEL: I do not think we've got confirmation about that but will you call him as a witness to give evidence on behalf of you in saying that he gave instructions to you on behalf of the AWB?

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Nicolas Barnard is in the same prison as Koper Myburgh - Koper Myburgh was physically here to withdraw his application. Mr Nicolas Barnard was not even willing to come here and withdraw his own application, he did it through a fax to the TRC and withdrew it in that manner.

MR KRIEL: But would you like him to testify on behalf of you?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, I would be glad if he can do it?

CHAIRPERSON: To say what - how will he help you?

MR DU PLESSIS: He can help me and some of the other applicants in to come and say that he did give us some of these instructions and that would enforce our case or strengthen our case that the instructions came from the AWB top structure.

MR KRIEL: Thank you Mr Chairperson, that's all from my side.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR KRIEL

EXAMINATION BY MR BRACHER: Mr Du Plessis, you were a Commandant in the Ystergarde, is that right?

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct, yes.

MR BRACHER: Barnard was a Captain?

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct, yes.

MR BRACHER: Why did you take orders from him?

MR DU PLESSIS: At various opportunities I saw that Cliff Barnard was in the presence of General Nico Prinsloo and it seemed to me as if Mr Barnard was in charge of certain operations that were launched and because of his order in these operations I accepted his instructions.

MR BRACHER: That's the only reason because you saw him frequently in the company of Prinsloo?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes and I knew that he acted on the instructions of the Generals and staff.

MR BRACHER: Just repeat that last answer please?

MR DU PLESSIS: I knew that he acted on orders or instructions from the Generals and staff of the AWB. As I've just said I saw him in the company of General Nico Prinsloo and I made that assumption.

MR BRACHER: That's what I mean, you made an assumption because you saw him with Prinsloo frequently?

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct, yes.

MR BRACHER: Can you please explain to me what is the purpose of Annexure B that we adjourned for you to read?

MR DU PLESSIS: The reason for that was that I read this typed Annexure B because I haven't seen it in that form. I did - a day before the closing of the amnesty application, we did have a discussion regarding the AWB and their ideologies and objectives and as I said, I did not read that annexure in the typed form.

MR BRACHER: In what form did you see it before?

MR DU PLESSIS: With my advocate it was in an oral form.

MR BRACHER: 'n Mondelingse vorm?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, we spoke about it.

MR BRACHER: But where do all those words come from, whose words are they?

MR DU PLESSIS: The words in that annexure is not my own words.

MR BRACHER: And the first time you've ever heard those words was when you discussed them with your advocate preparing for this amnesty application?

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct yes.

MR BRACHER: So it has nothing to do with your motivation at the time of these deeds because you'd never heard of those words then?

MR DU PLESSIS: Those words no, but I did have time to read through this annexure and that is at times when these deeds were committed, it was my motivation and that is correct yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Tell me, Mr Du Plessis, where did you live?

MR DU PLESSIS: At that stage I lived in the Ficksburg District.

CHAIRPERSON: Were you part of the people who were called up to Ventersdorp?

MR DU PLESSIS: I was called by Leon van der Merwe on the phone.

CHAIRPERSON: Why did you go to Ventersdorp - what did you think will happen there?

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairperson, before the elections, certain promises were made. I attended various AWB meetings and then also meetings of the Volksfront. In the Volksfront, former Generals of the Defence Force and Police also served and they told us that the volk must stand together and the nation must stand together and that is why the Conservative Party and the AWB in the Volksfront or why they combined all of them together was my opinion that the Defence Force, the AWB, the Volksfront will not accept the communist takeover in the country and that there would be a coup.

CHAIRPERSON: So the reason why you went to Ventersdorp was to help in order to create a coup?

MR DU PLESSIS: The reason why I went to Ventersdorp was it was said to me before that an Afrikaner Volkstaat will be created in the Western Transvaal and I wanted to be in that Afrikaner Volkstaat. It was also said to me that some of the Defence Force members and police would walk over to our side and assist us in order to establish that Volkstaat. That is why I left the Free State to the Western Transvaal.

CHAIRPERSON: To go and found or establish or help establish a Volkstaat?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: So you thought there would be a Volkstaat - from home you thought that you were going to your new home?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, that is correct, Mr Chairperson.

MR BRACHER: Mr Du Plessis, coming back to Annexure B, we know that racial purity is not part of your motivation, you've

already said that?

MR DU PLESSIS: That's correct.

MR BRACHER: So those words don't come from you?

MR DU PLESSIS: Purity of race, no Mr Chairperson.

MR BRACHER: When you first saw all those words - it's about eight pages of motivation - whose words are they, did you draw them up?

MR DU PLESSIS: No, Mr Chairperson, I did not write it. Those words are from an AWB policy piece which was drawn up by the AWB's, I assume, Generals in Staff. Mr Chairperson, my advocate has got a copy of it and they call it the "First Phase Wen Kommando Officers Course" and the words appear in that Annexure B or comes from that book.

MR BRACHER: You say the words come out of this book?

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct, yes. I do not know if it is word for word.

MR BRACHER: Were you in the Wen Kommando?

MR DU PLESSIS: Before I became a member of the Ystergarde, I was there for a short period of time, yes.

MR BRACHER: And you subscribed to everything in this book?

MR DU PLESSIS: Could you please repeat the question?

MR BRACHER: I say, do you subscribe to everything in this book, is that where you get your motivation from?

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairperson, that specific book I did not read, I did read other policies of the AWB, that specific book is a course for officers in the Wen Kommando.

MR BRACHER: You first said it was the document, then you said it was a verbal form, then you said it was this, now you say it's not that. Will you please tell me where you got your motivation for your deeds at the time you bombed people? What book had you read then or what had you written down or what was your motivation for your deeds then?

MR DU PLESSIS: When the bombs were planted, the book that I read was a black book, I think the title was "The Principles of the AWB". In that book the strives for a Volkstaat is described and the leader structure of the AWB at that stage and that is where I found my motivation.

MR BRACHER: Does it say anything in that book about racial purity?

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairperson, I cannot remember if I ever read the words "purity of race" in that book. Many of the things that is said in that book is similar to what is said in that Boerevolk identity document that Mr Fourie submitted to the Commission.

MR BRACHER: Can we have it absolutely clear - if we get a black book called "Die Beginsels van die AWB" - that is what you subscribed to? And it was different from B - you don't subscribe to B, you subscribed to that at the time of the bombing?

MR DU PLESSIS: I would not say that everything that is pertinently said in that book that that was my personal principles.

MR BRACHER: Right, Mr Du Plessis, take as long as you want this afternoon and the whole of tomorrow if you like, tell this Committee what you subscribed to at the time of the bombing, that cause you to commit these bombings.

CHAIRPERSON: I hope you're not serious.

MR BRACHER: I am serious. Don't read anything, just tell us from your own words what you subscribed to, what - can I just read to you from your form because this is what it's supposed to be. You see it says in your application form "Mention political motive that wanted to be reached and through your motivation say why you committed these offences with a political objective and how you see this." The political objective or your deeds and the motivation for your deeds.

MR DU PLESSIS: Question 10a - we can begin and say that the political objectives that I wanted to reach through my deeds was firstly to fight the struggle against the ANC/SACP Alliance, against Communism.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that contained in one of the documents?

MR DU PLESSIS: I think it is in Annexure B, I would just like to see what specific point that is.

MR BRACHER: That's point number 1 "Fight against the ANC/SACP Alliance.

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct. Point number 2 - the establishment of an Afrikaner Boere Volkstaat. Before the general elections, we realised that such a state would not be handed over to us and that is why we also then ...[intervention]

ADV GCABASHE: Sorry, I had to stop you - you say "we realised" can you make this "you" specific, it helps us better because the question I think is related to your political motivation, your political objective. So in your answer it confuses us if you talk about the "we" and then the "I" - we just want to know about you personally, it will help us a lot more. Thanks.

CHAIRPERSON: That's correct, I'll do it. I was therefore willing to fight for the establishment of a Volkstaat and to fight so that the ANC/SACP Alliance will be prevented from coming into power. That is in short, the political objectives that I personally had. My motivation for the deeds, if I read the question correctly, that was my connection with political objectives, my political objective was that of the AWB movement, it is then also the political party to which I belonged to at that stage and the objectives that I personally had is the same as the AWB's political objectives and that is on the basis of that that I can answer that question in the application.

MR BRACHER: What were those "doelstellings" from the AWB that you identified with?

MR DU PLESSIS: The objectives of the AWB with which I identified myself is the striving for a Volkstaat and as well as the struggle against communism.

MR BRACHER: Now did that include targeting innocent people?

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairperson, at that stage it was decided by the Generals in Staff of the AWB - you will see this I think in that little book that you've got there - they talk about Phase 3 and I think in Annexure B it's also contained that a guerilla warfare would be on the order of the day at certain times.

MR BRACHER: Where do you get that from as the policy of the AWB?

MR DU PLESSIS: Can we just look in Annexure B?

MR BRACHER: No, but you didn't read Annexure B, you've never seen till today so forget about Annexure B, forget about that book because you didn't use that either. Who told you or where did you read that you had to ...[intervention]

MR DU PLESSIS: The ideology of guerilla warfare, I learned this to be - I learned this as a student in the South African Defence Force. For two years I was in the South African Defence Force and I followed a course there in the infantry school in Oudtshoorn and there they elaborated quite extensively with regards to guerilla warfare, that's where I learned about it.

MR BRACHER: When you joined the AWB did you intend in the course of your struggle to target innocent people?

MR DU PLESSIS: If it went as far as that, yes Chairperson.

MR BRACHER: Would you have to get an instruction to do that or would you just do it on your own?

MR DU PLESSIS: I would have had to receive an instruction and I also received an instruction.

MR BRACHER: Now these two bombings of which you were responsible and the pipe bombings - let's leave the pipe bombings for a minute - start with Germiston - who gave you instructions to target innocent people?

MR DU PLESSIS: The instruction came from Nico Prinsloo.

MR BRACHER: Just tell me about that, don't go further, when did he give you that instruction?

MR DU PLESSIS: He gave me that instruction at the game farm and he told me that I must go with Jan de Wet and I must join him for a mission. At that stage I did not know what the mission entailed.

MR BRACHER: No, Mr Du Plessis, that is not an instruction to kill innocent people, that is an instruction to go on a mission. Who told you to target innocent people in those specific instructions not vague stuff. Whoever told you to do that in the AWB?

MR DU PLESSIS: Before the elections, the leader of the AWB, he said on several occasions that the day when the ANC takes over in this country then there would be war. That was his words. It was quite evident to all of us that the ANC would take power.

MR BRACHER: Your leader didn't say when it becomes clear they're going to take over go and kill innocent people, he never said that? Mr Du Plessis, I'm going to ask you once more then I'm going to submit to the Commission that you're not telling the truth, I'm only going to ask you once more. Who in the AWB ever gave you instructions to target innocent people? I'm not asking this question again so think carefully who gave you that instruction ever.

MR DU PLESSIS: In those specific words no, nobody gave me that instruction pertinently, Chairperson.

MR BRACHER: You say in the beginning of your application three times, your enemy was the ANC/SACP Alliance and Communists.

MR DU PLESSIS: That's correct.

MR BRACHER: That was why you joined the AWB and that was why you fought the war?

MR DU PLESSIS: That as well as the establishment of the Boere Volkstaat.

CHAIRPERSON: That's what I don't follow. The reason for the Volkstaat was to get away from communism and all those other things that you do not agree with, is that not true?

MR DU PLESSIS: That's correct, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: If a Boerestaat was founded then you wouldn't have minded whether there was communism around or not?

MR DU PLESSIS: But there wasn't a Boerestaat.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, but is it untrue, if you had a Boerestaat then Communism would not have mattered?

MR DU PLESSIS: Then we would have had a place.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I understand that, but the fact that the ANC would govern the rest of South Africa, would not have mattered because now you've got your Volkstaat.

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: So how did it take place or how did it happen that the motivation for you was to fight communism because if you were successful and you had a Volkstaat, it wouldn't have been necessary? That's according to your evidence, is that not so?

MR DU PLESSIS: If I can put it this way, if the coup, when I'm saying this, it was planned by certain people in this country, if that coup was successful, then there wouldn't have been an election and then it would not have been necessary to immediately obtain a Volkstaat.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Du Plessis, if you really do not understand me well, then say so. Listen carefully. The two reasons why you joined the AWB are not parallel because according to your evidence the reason why you became member of the AWB was because you did not like ANC because they were together with the communists?

MR DU PLESSIS: That's correct.

CHAIRPERSON: The second reason is because of that you wanted to help in the establishment of a Boere Volkstaat, is that correct?

MR DU PLESSIS: That's correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Now if you succeeded in founding this Volkstaat, then it would not have mattered if the ANC won the election or not, is that not true? Then the Volkstaat would have existed and communism would also have existed?

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: If you were successful in your onslaught against communism and the reason for a Volkstaat would have fallen away because then wouldn't it have been communism for your purposes?

MR DU PLESSIS: That's correct. If communism and the ideologies within this country - if we could effectively have fought it then it wouldn't have been necessary for a Volkstaat.

CHAIRPERSON: Let's say all the communists are thrown out of the country, it no longer exists, then the reason for you, for your purposes, the reason for the existence of a Volkstaat are no longer there?

MR DU PLESSIS: That's correct.

CHAIRPERSON: They are two different reasons, they're apart from each other, I do not understand it. It's one or the other, not both of them. Please explain it to me, how could you have fought for both of these reasons?

MR DU PLESSIS: I do not understand the question very well but I will try to answer it.

CHAIRPERSON: Well what do you not understand before you try to answer it?

MR DU PLESSIS: I do not understand how you can say if there wasn't communism that the purpose of a Volkstaat would no longer be necessary because the communism and their part in the ANC is a fact.

CHAIRPERSON: Let's say the AWB was successful in the prevention that the ANC and therefore communism govern the country, then your reason for a Volkstaat would fall away?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, then it wouldn't be necessary for me to go and live in a Volkstaat.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, that's how I understood it. The two do not go hand in hand, that's what I do not understand. Either you've got the one or you've got the other, you couldn't have fought for both of them?

MR DU PLESSIS: I do not understand. Sorry, I do not understand it.

CHAIRPERSON: Let me put it this way. You said yourself - if the ANC did not take over the country, then you would have been satisfied?

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: And then you yourself would not have wanted to obtain a Volkstaat?

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct, yes.

CHAIRPERSON: If the ANC did take over together with communism then you wanted a Volkstaat to get away from the communism?

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct, yes.

CHAIRPERSON: But if there wasn't any communism around, then there also would not have been a Volkstaat?

MR DU PLESSIS: If I can answer it in a different manner, I believe that the communists in the ANC government at the moment they are busy with a lot of legislature which would take the farmers right to water. There are many communist inspired legislature which they are going to implement and which would make the life of the Afrikaner Boer or the actual farmer very difficult and that's why I'd say we'd rather want our Volkstaat rather than having to live under communism.

CHAIRPERSON: Am I correct then that your anti-communist attitude that you hold has got nothing to do with the matter -you only wanted a Volkstaat?

MR DU PLESSIS: I'd say it's definitely got to do with it.

MR BRACHER: Have you got your application in front of you, Annexure A?

MR DU PLESSIS: That's correct, Mr Chairman.

MR BRACHER: Now look at paragraph 3 - "After I left the army, I became more and more interested in politics" can you see that? Now presumably you're not going to try and tell us that you didn't know in March that General Viljoen had pulled out of the alliance and was now entering the election?

MR DU PLESSIS: I knew that he registered himself for the election, yes I did know that. I did not think that the plans which they put there in the first place, that he forgot these plans.

MR BRACHER: But you've no reason to believe otherwise?

MR DU PLESSIS: There were certain instructions given in which it was said that we together with the Volksfront - let's call it we'll fight together for a Boerestaat and as far as I know Mr Viljoen did not withdraw from those plans.

MR BRACHER: ..[inaudible] obviously had.

MR DU PLESSIS: He did register himself for the election but as far as I know, he did not withdraw from those plans.

CHAIRPERSON: This is what's confusing me, Mr Du Plessis. We know that the AWB was opposed against the elections itself.

MR DU PLESSIS: That's correct, Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: And those who took part in the elections were considered to be traitors, is that not true?

MR DU PLESSIS: In a way, yes.

CHAIRPERSON: No, it's not only in a way or to a certain extent, either you're going to take part in the elections or you're not, is that not so and if you did take part in the election then you betrayed.

MR DU PLESSIS: At that stage I did not exactly see it in that way, Chairperson, I thought that maybe Viljoen had a different agenda.

CHAIRPERSON: Where did you get this idea from that maybe this man Viljoen was a double agent? Where did you get the idea from?

MR DU PLESSIS: Chairperson, that idea if I can just run ahead a bit here, all over the country, in almost every town, there were people of the Volksfront and the B.K.A. and they, the leaders of the Volksfront, for example Viljoen, these people were given certain instructions that let's say certain orders were given, those towns had to be taken over - the Commandos and the police stations etc. At that stage I thought it might end up in a coup and those orders were never withdrawn. All that happened was that General Viljoen registered for the elections but those orders were never withdrawn and I was never pertinently told that, that those instructions were taken back or that those plans were not going to realise.

MR BRACHER: Mr Du Plessis, look at your words in the end of paragraph 5: "I was also at meetings where General Constand Viljoen and Ferdi Hartzenberg told the people that there would be no negotiations but that war would be waged." Now, by the time you performed these terrible acts, that was history because he was negotiating, he was negotiating for a Volkstaat, he was appearing on public platforms as a candidate, he was on the ballot paper, he was in the press as a person who was negotiating, not fighting a war and you had no reason to believe anything different. You had no facts upon which to believe anything different.

MR DU PLESSIS: The facts, before the election now which we looked at, at that point was that these promises were made to us.

MR BRACHER: He changed his mind obviously?

MR DU PLESSIS: Before the election or before these events they never told us that the promises are no longer there.

MR BRACHER: He did - he said "I'm going into the election."

MR DU PLESSIS: I did not know about it. I knew that he registered for the election.

ADV MALAN: Again I think you misheard him Mr Bracher. He said that they weren't told in the AWB and you said "or by the AWB". "They did not tell ‘us’ they were suspended" and you said he said that he's referring to Constand Viljoen. So whoever was giving the instructions or passing information through there, there's a mismatch and your understanding of who you're referring to.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Du Plessis, did you know that Constand Viljoen wanted a seat in the Cape's Parliament and that's why he was taking part in the election?

MR DU PLESSIS: I knew he registered for the elections and he registered a political party, I did not know what his agenda was - I still thought that all the other plans which were made would still continue being carried out.

CHAIRPERSON: Why, what made you think that?

MR DU PLESSIS: Neither him nor any other person of the AWB gave the instruction that those plans are being suspended.

CHAIRPERSON: Could you not think by yourself, we now withdraw - he want to go into parliament - why must everything happen through instructions? Couldn't you think for yourself?

MR DU PLESSIS: At that stage I did not think of it, no.

ADV GCABASHE: So essentially, what you are saying is if the NP had granted you a Volkstaat on the morning of the 25th April because your actions followed that, you wouldn't have known about it - you would have continued with your plans because you had been instructed to do particular things and you would therefore not have done anything about it?

MR DU PLESSIS: If the National Party in that morning did give us a Volkstaat, I believe that some of the Generals and Staff or Mr Eugene Terreblanche would convey the message that we do not continue with the instructions that were given to us.

ADV GCABASHE: This is the point - had they not communicated that to you, you would have continued with the bombing of Germiston and Jan Smuts Airport?

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct, yes.

ADV GCABASHE: You weren't allowed to use your heads in the organisation to reason and say logically this is what should happen?

MR DU PLESSIS: No, we were not allowed to think in that line, together with us there were Generals in Staff - Nico Prinsloo - and he was at that stage the representative of head quarters. He had contact with head office, with Mr Terreblanche and if decisions were made regarding the suspension, then I believe that we would have received that instruction or message but we did not receive it.

ADV GCABASHE: This was a condition for joining the organisation, you should strictly follow orders, don't use your head in any particular circumstances?

MR DU PLESSIS: I would not say that it was a condition but I was trained as a soldier for two years and I think that is probably why they also used me for certain things, to do certain things because I follow instructions as a soldier and accept them as such.

ADV GCABASHE: Thank you.

MR BRACHER: Mr Du Plessis, you weren't in the army you were in an organisation where you could have resigned at any minute.

MR DU PLESSIS: That is not correct - if you join the Ystergarde you had to take an oath which amongst other things "If you walk in front follow me, if I turn back, shoot me."

CHAIRPERSON: Are you still a member of the Ystergarde?

MR DU PLESSIS: No, Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: And you're still alive?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes I'm still alive I was not shot, that is true yes.

MR BRACHER: But Mr Du Plessis, we've heard witness after witness saying they have turned their back on the AWB, it's the easiest thing in the world to do? Yes, you're still a member aren't you but all the other people who have testified here have resigned and left the AWB?

MR DU PLESSIS: It is true, I did not physically hand in my resignation but I'm not an active member any more.

MR BRACHER: If you don't like killing innocent people you didn't have to, you could have resigned and gone to the Eastern Transvaal instead of the Western Transvaal or back to Ficksburg?

MR DU PLESSIS: I could have done that yes.

MR BRACHER: In paragraph 11 you refer to a closed meeting, were you present at that meeting?

MR DU PLESSIS: That was the meeting that was held at Trim Park in Ventersdorp if I'm not confused.

MR BRACHER: Were you part of the closed meeting?

MR DU PLESSIS: I was present at that closed meeting yes.

MR BRACHER: No that talks about a coalition with the Afrikaner Volkfront - that had also fallen apart by the time you did the bombings because you couldn't have had General Viljoen in parliament and in a separate Volkstaat, could you?

MR DU PLESSIS: As far as I know, General Viljoen founded a political party, I do not know if he disbanded the Volksfront as such.

MR BRACHER: But the coalition was gone because he couldn't be a member of parliament in one country and a leader of another Volkstaat?

MR DU PLESSIS: Viljoen was not the only member or the only person who governed the Volksfront. There were other Generals in that Volksfront Committee.

MR BRACHER: Who were you relying on? What other Generals were you relying on?

MR DU PLESSIS: The specific names I cannot remember at this stage but I know that there were other Generals who were in the police in the past.

MR BRACHER: Look at paragraph 13, you will remember at Ventersdorp there was a meeting and Mr Terreblanche said that the Commandos must go back and find out whether the people are ready for war or not. Do you remember that?

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct yes.

MR BRACHER: General Ackerman called for war and Terreblanche said "Hang on just go and find out whether people want war". Now nobody has ever testified here in this hearing that anybody came back and said the people wanted war or not?

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairperson, I do not know about that but I personally did not go back and say that the people are looking for war. At that day when General Ackerman and Mr Eugene Terreblanche addressed this meeting, I was pertinently told by Leon van der Merwe that I must go back, prepare myself, get my things ready, that in two or three weeks - he did not give me a specific date - then I will be called up to come back to the Western Transvaal.

MR BRACHER: But no Mr Du Plessis, your leader is Mr Eugene Terreblanche. He says "hang on, General Ackerman has called for war but first go and find out whether people want war or not." How can you override that instruction and say that somebody else told you differently. Do you obey anybody who gives you the order that you want to hear?

MR DU PLESSIS: As far as I know, a decision was made regarding war.

CHAIRPERSON: Were you ever approached regarding war, fighting this war as it stands in paragraph 13?

MR DU PLESSIS: At that meeting I was not pertinently asked.

CHAIRPERSON: But that is my point, Terreblanche according to this paragraph said "wait, hold on it's good to on the one hand shout for war but go and find out if the people want a war, if they are prepared and ready for war." Were you yourself asked about this war?

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairperson, at some of the previous meetings where Mr Terreblanche made this address that there would be war, I did agree with his speeches and some of my Commanders like Brigadier van der Merwe...[intervention].

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Du Plessis, if someone approached you, it could have been that you might have answered yes. I would like to know, did someone ask you if you are ready and prepared? As the order was given?

MR DU PLESSIS: Pertinently at that meeting, I would not say that they asked me that but they knew it.

CHAIRPERSON: And at home did they ask you at a later stage?

MR DU PLESSIS: When I was called up Brigadier Leon van der Merwe did ask me if I was ready and if I can come up to the Western Transvaal.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Du Plessis, when you received the call up the decision was already made there is going to be a war. In order to make that decision, Eugene Terreblanche asked "go and find out from the people if they are ready for war" at home, at work or wherever. Were you approached?

MR DU PLESSIS: That question was not put to me as pertinently as that?

CHAIRPERSON: Or any other place - were you asked if you were ready?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, when Brigadier Leon van der Merwe called me up he asked me if I was ready.

CHAIRPERSON: So before that decision was made you were never approached to find out if you were ready for war?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes I agree with that, it was not a democratic decision.

ADV BOSMAN: Mr Du Plessis, concerning this question - you were now a Commandant - the people over which you had command was that in the Ficksburg area?

MR DU PLESSIS: It was yes and the Eastern Free State area.

ADV BOSMAN: Did you hear from them if they were ready for war and what their role would be in this whole call up?

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairperson, they were not prepared to leave the Eastern Free State and go to the Western Transvaal.

ADV BOSMAN: Not even a single person?

MR DU PLESSIS: There were a few people but most of the people under my command did not go with.

ADV BOSMAN: Did you report that back to your higher command?

MR DU PLESSIS: I did report it to Brigadier Leon van der Merwe.

ADV BOSMAN: Thank you.

MR BRACHER: How many people were under you command in the Eastern Free State?

MR DU PLESSIS: If I can make a rough estimate it would be thirty.

MR BRACHER: Just move on to paragraph 22 - what does it mean to be a Commandant of Operations?

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairperson, at that stage I saw it, at the game farm that they placed me in command of the patrols and of certain operations that might take place. When I was appointed in that position I did not know exactly what those operations would entail. I thought that I would be used in liaising with the Defence Force or that it could include war deeds.

MR BRACHER: When you were appointed Commandant of Operations that was to oversee the patrols?

MR DU PLESSIS: Originally yes.

MR BRACHER: Now when you spoke on Sunday 24th April, this is paragraph 24, there was a meeting and the question of throwing of pipe bombs were discussed - the meeting where they said it should be taxi ranks?

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct yes?

MR BRACHER: And when you went out to the meeting of the members - in the next paragraph - were they told to throw bombs at taxi ranks?

MR DU PLESSIS: When I left there the meeting where I addressed the other people and got them to form groups to go and throw pipe bombs, yes that is correct.

MR BRACHER: Was that an instruction given to people - throw them at taxi ranks?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, that was an order that was given to them.

MR BRACHER: That's an order they had to obey?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes.

MR BRACHER: Look at the next page - I think you're already there - "they had to choose their own pipe bombs, the groups were sent to different towns where they had to find their own targets." Now how does that agree with what you've just said?

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairperson, I came from the Free State and I did not know where the taxi ranks were, I did not even know where most of the towns in the PWV area was and when I told the people to go and throw these pipe bombs at the taxi ranks I asked them what towns they know well and they could specify or choose to which town they want to go and some of them or most them could choose the groups in which they wanted to go.

MR BRACHER: I understand all that but look at the next bit -after you've chosen the dorp where they have to choose their own target - how does that agree with what you have said because they were told to choose taxi ranks.

MR DU PLESSIS: There could be a few taxi ranks in some of the larger towns - they could choose which one they wanted to attack.

MR BRACHER: They must choose their own taxi ranks?

MR DU PLESSIS: I could not exactly tell him to go to that taxi rank on the corner of that and that - I could not say that pertinently which target to choose.

MR BRACHER: Now if you look on the next page it says three of the pipe bomb missions were a success - now the Pretoria one wasn't at a taxi rank - why was that a success if they disobeyed an order?

MR DU PLESSIS: I do not know, Mr Chairperson, I do not know why they did not listen to this instruction - the bomb did explode though.

MR BRACHER: But it wasn't a success because they were told to bomb taxi ranks?

MR DU PLESSIS: I would say that it was a success because the bomb did explode.

MR BRACHER: As long as the bomb went off you didn't mind where?

MR DU PLESSIS: That is true yes.

ADV BOSMAN: Where did the bomb explode, Mr Du Plessis, in Pretoria?

MR DU PLESSIS: The Pretoria bomb, if I can remember correctly, I think it was a beer hall, Timbaraba's Town close to Pretoria.

MR BRACHER: Go back to paragraph 24 - you had a meeting with a General, a Brigadier, a Commandant, a Major, you yourself as a commandant, the question about the throwing of pipe bombs was discussed. Now we are now on Sunday night the 24th April 1994, there's no discussion about car bombs, not so?

MR DU PLESSIS: That's correct.

MR BRACHER: Can I just ask you something that occurs to me, in order to be acquitted in the criminal case, I presume you lied?

MR DU PLESSIS: In the criminal court, I did lie yes, that is correct.

MR BRACHER: You originally made a confession and then you withdrew it didn't you?

MR DU PLESSIS: I did not make a statement, no.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you make a written admittance?

MR DU PLESSIS: No, not at all, I did give evidence yes.

MR BRACHER: Now - Bree Street bombing - all you knew about that bombing was what you saw on television?

MR DU PLESSIS: The Sunday evening yes.

MR BRACHER: That's the same night when you had meetings to discuss pipe bombs? None of your Generals said "well we've got bombing squads out there already with vehicle bombs, car bombs, nobody said that to you?

MR DU PLESSIS: No, nothing.

MR BRACHER: Nobody afterwards said "three cheers we've had a success with the car bomb" the state has begun?

MR DU PLESSIS: No, Mr Chairperson.

MR BRACHER: Despite the fact you'd gathered after that as well, didn't you, after the bomb had gone off?

MR DU PLESSIS: Which bomb?

MR BRACHER: The Bree Street bomb.

MR DU PLESSIS: A meeting after the bomb?

MR BRACHER: That was in that - when you were watching TV there was a whole group of AWB people watching, 70 of them probably.

MR DU PLESSIS: I do not think everybody, but I think there was quite a few who watched the T.V.

MR BRACHER: There were many AWB people and nobody says "our bomb has succeeded" or "great guys we've got in Koesterfontein" nothing like that?

MR DU PLESSIS: No, nothing.

MR BRACHER: No General comes and announces the successful beginning of operations?

MR DU PLESSIS: No, Mr Chairperson.

MR BRACHER: Now move on to paragraph 27 because you've got seven lines about a most significant event and I want details. That first sentence says that Barnard, Le Roux, Koekemoer, built the bomb at Koesterfontein on the Sunday night. Were you there at the time?

MR DU PLESSIS: No, Mr Chairperson.

MR BRACHER: Now why do you say that in your submission then?

MR DU PLESSIS: The next day, the morning, when we went to Germiston I found that out. Myself and Jan de Wet arrived at Koesterfontein and there we found Etienne Le Roux, Koekemoer and Cliff Barnard. Cliff Barnard told me that the bomb will go to Germiston, that it is a bomb and that it's going to Germiston and that I must drive with Etienne le Roux.

MR BRACHER: When did you arrive there, with whom? Did you come with de Wet and Vlok?

MR DU PLESSIS: No, I arrived there with De Wet, coming from the game farm.

MR BRACHER: When the two of you were driving there, did you know that you were going on a bombing mission?

MR DU PLESSIS: I did not know that I'm going on a bomb expedition, no.

MR BRACHER: So the first time you heard was from Barnard?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes.

MR BRACHER: When you got to the farm was it already - was the bomb complete and covered in sand already or did you help?

MR DU PLESSIS: Some of the people were busy there to use spades and to throw soil on top of it. Not long afterwards they closed it up and the trailer was hooked onto Jan de Wet's vehicle, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Now you think that you were taken on that mission in order to lock you in so that you could do further bombings because once you've been part of one crime it's in for a penny in for a pound as they say?

MR DU PLESSIS: That's correct Chairperson.

MR BRACHER: Now that is not consistent with AWB conduct as you've explained it today. You didn't have to be locked in, you told us that if the AWB gave you an order, you'd perform it, you didn't have to be locked in to anything. You were being locked into a splinter group weren't you?

MR DU PLESSIS: No, Chairperson, it was not a splinter group.

MR BRACHER: Why did you have to get locked in then when you already have the best obeyer of orders I have ever heard?

MR DU PLESSIS: As I already said, it was not a splinter group and I identified myself with the goals those people strived for and I went along with it.

MR BRACHER: Why did you think then that they would lock you in by taking you as a passenger on the first run?

MR DU PLESSIS: The reason therefore I do not know.

MR BRACHER: Well there's only one reason because that was the way to get your commitment to that group?

MR DU PLESSIS: It might be the case, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Did they know that you came with De Wet?

MR DU PLESSIS: Chairperson, I do not know if they knew it.

Maybe Cliff Barnard and Nico Prinsloo had a meeting, I do not know.

CHAIRPERSON: Why did you go with De Wet?

MR DU PLESSIS: Because Nico Prinsloo told me that I must go with De Wet, I must drive with him and go on a mission.

MR BRACHER: Mr Du Plessis, you gave in your evidence what I thought was a terrible answer, an awful answer. You said "I heard that people died" when you were talking about the Germiston bomb. Now you helped take the bomb there, you parked it - you actually armed the bomb, didn't you?

MR DU PLESSIS: No, Chairperson.

MR BRACHER: Well you knew it was going to go off in a crowded place?

MR DU PLESSIS: I did drive through with Etienne le Roux, I saw that there were a lot of taxis so I knew about it.

MR BRACHER: Not taxis - people. Real people.

MR DU PLESSIS: If I might say, a lot of the taxis were empty.

MR BRACHER: There were people around there, you killed lots of people in a busy time.

MR DU PLESSIS: There were people, I agree.

MR BRACHER: "I heard people were dead" - you knew you were going to kill people.

MR DU PLESSIS: There was a possibility that people might not have died, Chairperson, a lot of the taxis were empty and the people who were commuted by the taxis early that morning was no longer in the taxis.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, but Mr Du Plessis, your instruction was to take the lives of people.

MR DU PLESSIS: That was not - I was not told that pertinently but I assumed that people would lose their lives -that was the tactics, Chairperson.

MR BRACHER: If you had looked into the shop you would have seen the Ontong's son working there. There were people working in the shops neighbouring, weren't there?

MR DU PLESSIS: I couldn't see into the shops but I assume that there must have been people working there.

MR BRACHER: You'd seen on the T.V. the night before what a bomb can do in a public place - dead and injured all over the place is that not so?

MR DU PLESSIS: I did see that, Chairperson.

MR BRACHER: Mr Du Plessis, what worries me, you're still a member of the AWB, you want amnesty, what's to say that you're not going to do the same for the next election? Nothing has changed in your mind - you still subscribe to these aims and objects - you're still a member of the AWB, you're still a person who doesn't care about human life apparently. Why shouldn't you do it at the next election?

MR DU PLESSIS: I can only tell you that I would definitely not do it again. In those specific circumstances which reigned at that time and the instructions we were given and the promises which were made - because of that we thought we would get away with it. What happened in this specific cases we did not get away with it and the law took it's course against us and I definitely will not do it again.

MR BRACHER: You say definitely not?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, definitely not.

MR BRACHER: Under the same circumstances you would do it again. If some leader arises now between now and the next election, that you've got faith in, you would do the same again?

MR DU PLESSIS: No, I will not do it again?

MR BRACHER: Why not, what has changed?

MR DU PLESSIS: If I can put it this way, in the Defence Force we were indoctrinated to follow orders and to fight against the communist, physically. I mean to fight physically against them and now after these events I realise we were only used as pawns, that we had to do the dirty work for some or other political organisation and to spread propaganda for them and we got into trouble. I definitely won't do it again.

MR BRACHER: But if you found an organisation which you had confidence in that wasn't going to drop you, you would do it again. The Communist Party is going to be in the next election isn't it?

MR DU PLESSIS: I do not know.

MR BRACHER: Yes, I'm telling you it is.

MR DU PLESSIS: Then I accept it as such.

MR BRACHER: Will you still treat them as an enemy?

MR DU PLESSIS: I still regard them as an enemy of the Boere people but I would not make war against them in the next election, Chairperson.

MR BRACHER: Who chose the target in Germiston?

MR DU PLESSIS: I do not know who gave the general instruction for that bomb.

MR BRACHER: Who chose that spot to blow up people?

MR DU PLESSIS: That place if I remember correctly was indicated by Etienne le Roux, Chairperson.

MR BRACHER: What is his rank?

MR DU PLESSIS: At that time I think his rank was that of Lieutenant, Chairperson.

MR BRACHER: You were senior to him?

MR DU PLESSIS: I was his senior yes.

MR BRACHER: You could have overridden that instruction?

MR DU PLESSIS: Not on that mission.

MR BRACHER: Yes, exactly, exactly. Not in that mission because if you were doing it for the AWB you could override it, if you were in a splinter group that you had just joined, you can't override it, can you?

MR DU PLESSIS: I'd say maybe that was another grouping of the AWB.

MR BRACHER: Yes another grouping, not of the AWB?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes of the AWB.

MR BRACHER: They were all members of the AWB but the ranks had all changed, different people were giving orders to different people. It was all upside down, it had nothing to do with the AWB structure.

MR DU PLESSIS: Seniority on those missions depended not on rank so much but on what they did before. I was a novice in that milieu.

MR BRACHER: Who told you that?

MR DU PLESSIS: Chairperson, that's how I understood it.

MR BRACHER: You were not a novice, you were the Commandant of Operations. There wasn't anybody more senior than you there.

MR DU PLESSIS: From before, I never planted any bombs.

MR BRACHER: That had nothing to do with it.

MR DU PLESSIS: I think it's got a lot to do with it.

MR BRACHER: You were a senior officer, if you're on an AWB mission - you don't deny that?

MR DU PLESSIS: I agree with that yes.

MR BRACHER: Now tell me what was the purpose of the Jan Smuts bomb?

MR DU PLESSIS: The reason which I was given by Nicolas Barnard with regards to the Jan Smuts bomb was that foreign tourists must be prevented from coming into the country. That was the reason I was given.

MR BRACHER: To prevent tourists from entering the country? Then why did you put it in the parking garage?

MR DU PLESSIS: It would have been difficult to drive the bomb into the airport itself.

MR BRACHER: You could park it outside the front entrance of International Arrivals?

MR DU PLESSIS: In what parking area are you now talking about?

MR BRACHER: There's a thing called a drop off area, you drop people right outside the door when they want to get on an international flight?

CHAIRPERSON: He wasn't going to drop people, he was going to drop a bomb.

MR BRACHER: You know when you go to an airport, you go to the front door and the people get out of your car and walk in - your car's parked there all day every day. You could have put your bomb there.

MR DU PLESSIS: Is that not where we put the bomb?

MR BRACHER: But why not there if you wanted to attack overseas tourists? Most overseas tourists don't go and park underground.

CHAIRPERSON: He's not saying he wanted to attack overseas -he wanted to discourage tourists.

MR DU PLESSIS: Chairperson, that specific bomb as far as I know was not aimed at killing people. That specific area - when the bomb exploded, there weren't people there, there were no people around. Inside the building there were people, yes, but the important thing here according to me is that maybe who wanted to cause damage to the building and to focus the media's attention to it and that foreign tourists would be discouraged from coming into the country.

MR BRACHER: There were people injured, weren't there?

MR DU PLESSIS: If I remember correctly, I think two people.

MR BRACHER: Eighteen.

MR DU PLESSIS: Eighteen? I don't know about that Chairperson. It might be the case.

MR BRACHER: Those were also innocent civilians, you weren't targeting any particular state personnel?

MR DU PLESSIS: No, Chairperson, they were innocent people I agree.

ADV GCABASHE: Thank you. Now you're saying that this bomb at Jan Smuts was not intended to kill people, yes?

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct, Chairperson.

ADV GCABASHE: Now, I have understood the evidence generally to be that the idea was to create chaos before the election and as part of that chaos, people had to be killed?

MR DU PLESSIS: That's correct.

ADV GCABASHE: Who changed this instruction, who said people should not be killed?

MR DU PLESSIS: Me personally, placed that bomb in such a way. I had two options, I could either plant the bomb on the middle level next to a tour bus and this bus was full of people or I could have taken the left exit and I could have placed the bomb on top of that where there were no people who were standing around outside and I took the second option to go and place it above the other level. That's where I took the decision not to kill the people in the tour bus.

ADV GCABASHE: Now the question is, were you authorised to change that targeting because as I've understood it, people had to be killed. This was part of the impact of your struggle. Were you authorised in those circumstances to choose one level and not the other and if so who authorised you to do that in those circumstances?

MR DU PLESSIS: I was not specifically told by Clifton Barnard that people had to die therefore I took the decision on my own and I thought that if the bomb explodes and the building is damaged then that would create enough publicity for us, Chairperson.

ADV GCABASHE: Now did you discuss this with Mr le Roux?

MR DU PLESSIS: I did not.

ADV GCABASHE: Because if my memory serves me well, Mr le Roux told us that there was a specific instruction that foreigners should not be killed?

MR DU PLESSIS: I cannot remember that.

ADV GCABASHE: You know nothing at all about that?

MR DU PLESSIS: I cannot remember it. I cannot remember that I was told that, Chairperson.

ADV GCABASHE: You see this still doesn't clear up for me when you could use your own discretion and when you had to follow orders strictly, you know considering your last answer the last time I asked you about when you could use your head and when not. This is a reversal of what you said earlier. Here you used your head and put it in a non-lethal sense, not so risky area whereas with the others you didn't seem to have this discretion.

MR DU PLESSIS: At none of the other explosions did I have that discretion. The bomb missions on which I went the first time was to Germiston and there the decision was taken by someone, by Etienne le Roux and this bomb mission to Jan Smuts which the first mission I was on or which I led and therefore Le Roux indicated to me that I must follow that road and physically we did go to the building and I executed the instruction which I had to.

ADV GCABASHE: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Have you got many more questions?

MR BRACHER: I've got about three more.

Now this bomb at the airport had nothing to do with stopping the election?

MR DU PLESSIS: I think in a way it did have to do with the election. There were several observers from abroad who had to come through the airport but the reason I was given was to discourage foreigners from entering the country.

MR BRACHER: The election was just about begun by then?

MR DU PLESSIS: What day was the Jan Smuts bomb - was it the Wednesday?

MR BRACHER: It was the day of the election.

MR DU PLESSIS: The same day? In a sense, in a way it could have served as a way maybe stopping the elections but I don't think it would have done that.

MR BRACHER: What was the purpose in relation to your aims and motivation, what did you have to achieve for your motivations by this bomb?

MR DU PLESSIS: By planting this bomb, I thought that we could gain publicity for our Volkstaat idea.

MR BRACHER: Killing and causing damage does that give you the publicity you want?

MR DU PLESSIS: Chairperson, the strife for a Volkstaat is something that's come a very long way, a long time and it always fell on deaf ears and I'd say that these bomb explosions was a desperate attempt from our side to focus attention on our political strife.

MR BRACHER: You see you're the second witness who has used the word desperate. I'm putting to you that what happened at the end here, you'd failed and you were just letting off bombs in some desperate show of force by your little splinter group as an ultimate frustration of a totally failed plan or your whole organisation had disbanded just about?

MR DU PLESSIS: In a way it's correct - we did feel that the Volksfront and the National Party and even the AWB left us in the lurch.

CHAIRPERSON: Let's ask the question in a different fashion. At that time several arrests were being made. Your war was finished and as things looked, there was no chance of stopping the election, because it was already in progress, why did you then plant a bomb at the airport?

MR DU PLESSIS: The airport bomb was the last bomb before the people were arrested at the shooting range.

CHAIRPERSON: Beforehand?

MR DU PLESSIS: That morning we left the shooting range with the car bomb and I do not know specifically when the police arrested the people at the shooting range but I thought it was before we planted the bomb. That's when they got arrested.

MR BRACHER: When the pipe bombs were sent out, you were the Commandant of Operations for that operation?

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct?

MR BRACHER: That is the first time you've been a Commandant of Operations for a pipe bomb operation?

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct, Mr Chairperson.

MR BRACHER: Thank you Mr Chairman.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR BRACHER

MR MALAN: Thank you, Mr Chairperson, just a few questions.

Mr Du Plessis, did you know that during January 1994 in the State Gazette it was announced that the establishment of a Volkstaat Council in order to discuss the idea of this Volkstaat at a very high level. In other words, the proposition was that there would be 20 members, that the people would be in parliament and that the people there who supported this idea in parliament would be included in this council?

MR DU PLESSIS: I was aware that there was a Volkstaat Council in order to investigate the idea of a Volkstaat and I think it was presented in parliament.

MR MALAN: That information, did that get to you or did you receive that information?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, I knew that they did establish such a council.

MR MALAN: And what was the reaction of the AWB towards this suggestion in the State Gazette?

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairperson, I do not know what the reaction of the AWB was but I thought that it was just another way to deter.

MR MALAN: Did you not think that it was a positive step to deal with this very difficult question so close to the elections in order to defuse the situation. Terreblanche called for a war and if the government of the day went over to this positive step in order to establish a council for those who supported the idea of a Volkstaat, was that not enough?

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairperson, I do not know if the people who served on that committee did support that idea. What I know is that they were appointed to investigate it. What I thought was that the government of the day established such a council because they saw that certain rightwing groups became militant and they wanted to calm down or quiet down the rightwing.

MR MALAN: Is it correct if I put it to you as follows that Mr Eugene Terreblanche refused that concept?

MR DU PLESSIS: I cannot positively answer on that but I think that is what he would have done, yes.

MR MALAN: It is interesting that you mention that the groupings of the Germiston bomb group and the Jan Smuts bomb group was differently grouped as the other members at the game farm. That was your evidence?

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairperson, the Germiston bomb group originally came from Koesterfontein and that grouping of the members who were at the game farm, they wanted to include them in their activities as in the Jan Smuts bomb, an extra person was included who had to drive the vehicle.

ADV MALAN: The judge, on page 95 of Bundle 2, in his statement talked about the Bree Street bomb and how it was built and how it was executed and he said that the offence could have been done by the BKA of which applicants 1 - 4 were members, i.e. Myburgh, Le Roux and De Wet. Was that when you talked about a different grouping Ystergarde or AWB members? Did you not maybe indicate towards the BKA who built these bombs and planted them?

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairperson, as far as I know, those four members were not members of the BKA.

ADV MALAN: And you yourself?

MR DU PLESSIS: No I'm not a member of the BKA.

ADV MALAN: Page 85 - just for your comment - the judge in the second or third paragraph said the following: "In general, it is the interpretation that the Jan Smuts Airport Bombing stands alone and was executed by a conspiracy, an independent conspiracy. Evidence shows that later that evening at the shooting range that someone took a decision to make a last bomb seemingly out of frustration in order to illustrate something to the security police." What is your comment on that?

MR DU PLESSIS: I would not say that it was a separate grouping - the grouping was still Mr Cliff Barnard, Koekemoer still built the bomb and Cliff Barnard gave me the order to go and detonate the bomb.

ADV MALAN: As you understood it from Prinsloo, did you still understand the favour or as the Judge discussed it that in the end out of frustration to go out on a last mission. Did you do it out of frustration?

MR DU PLESSIS: Nico Prinsloo was present at the shooting range. Later that evening he left. I'm also sure that he was aware that Cliff Barnard was present there. I'm also sure that he knew that explosives were there, I think he's got the blessing.

ADV MALAN: I understand it was a broader part of the instruction that you got initially to execute these operations?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, that is correct.

ADV MALAN: Can you say Mr Randall, Mr Fred Randall, did you know him?

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairperson, I did not know him up and to that stage - I did meet him in court, at the High Court.

ADV MALAN: During your court case did he give evidence or testify?

MR DU PLESSIS: He was at the court case yes. I cannot remember if he testified or not.

ADV MALAN: At page 13 of Bundle A, that is at the Annexure file that was submitted, words were ascribed to Mr Randall and amongst others I quote: "According to Mr Randall the AWB plans to" - I would just like to say the date, this is the 22nd April 1994, that was now before the court case. He was quoted as follows: "According to Mr Randall the AWB plan to protect people on farms within the area, their property, the offices of town councils will also be protected" and this is the part that is important: "we are not planning to act aggressively but if our people are attacked they'll have to face the force of the whole AWB and furthermore we will not disrupt the elections. What must we do to prevent them to get to the voting polls, we will not do it because we are not kaffirs." It seems to us out of this article while the AWB was busy saying that on the 22nd, especially the 22nd April before you started with your bomb attacks that the AWB will not go over to aggression, they were not planning to do it.

MR DU PLESSIS: It was definitely not true, the AWB did go over to aggression. I do not remember in what capacity Mr Randall made those utterances, I heard in this hearing that he was the spokesperson of the AWB but I do not see him as the spokesperson of the leader of the AWB or of the Generals in Staff.

MR MALAN: A last quote, there was an article in the Citizen on the 2nd April 1996 and that was just after your court case. The headline reads as follows: "AWB never gave orders for bombings - leaders of the Afrikaner Weerstandsbeweging had never issued instructions to members to plant bombs to derail the April 1994 general election, AWB media spokesman, Mr Randall told the Rand Supreme Court in Germiston yesterday."

Did you hear that evidence?

MR DU PLESSIS: I'm not aware of it no.

MR MALAN: It seems that in mitigating ...[inaudible]

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, I was found not guilty.

MR MALAN: Did you then leave?

MR DU PLESSIS: I do not know if I was present then, no.

MR MALAN: But you do identify or you don't identify yourself with that utterance of Mr Randall if it would be the truth?

MR DU PLESSIS: I assume that it is the truth but I do not identify or reconcile myself with that, that is not how it was conveyed to us.

MR MALAN: Thank you, I've got no further questions.

ADV BOSMAN: Can I just clarify something, you said that you do identify yourself that it is the truth, what do you mean by saying that it was the truth?

MR DU PLESSIS: I assume, Mr Chairperson, that Mr Randall made those utterances at the court but I'm not saying that it is the truth that it was the AWB's viewpoint.

ADV BOSMAN: Thank you. In Annexure A you said to the Committee it will be that orally certain things were discussed with your advocate?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes that is correct.

ADV BOSMAN: Where did you sign your statement?

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairperson, it was a day before the Application for Amnesty had to be in, it was typed in Bloemfontein. What I can add there is that it could have been possible that I have seen that typed version, I cannot remember at this stage.

ADV BOSMAN: So you say it was a day before the closing, it would be then the 9th May, although it's not very clear on my copy on page 103, I don't know about your copy. So it was the 9th May in Bloemfontein where you signed it?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, I did.

ADV BOSMAN: No further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. We adjourn till tomorrow morning at half past nine.

WITNESS EXCUSED

MR PRIOR: ...[inaudible] certainty over Mr Barnard's application be obtained. Unfortunately, all the investigators in Gauteng have gone down to Cape Town to a meeting. The prison authorities have indicated they are very loathe to get involved and take statements so we're at an impasse until I have an investigator to go and visit Mr Barnard at the jail. That is in the pipeline and we hope to have an answer tomorrow.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS