Amnesty Hearings

MR VISSER: And I call ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: I have no doubt that like all the other witnesses he's available to you?

MR VISSER: Yes, they'll be available.

Mr Chairman, the next witness I propose to call is General Du Toit. His application you will find in Volume 2 at page 72 - 78, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: ...[inaudible]

MR VISSER: Yes certainly, I'll repeat it in a moment, Mr Chairman. I I think. J?

Mr Chairman, the application now before you is that of General Du Toit. His application appears in Volume 2 at pages 72 and following. We have prepared although we also anticipate his evidence to be very brief, he only applies in regard to Cry Freedom, one incident in Cry Freedom and we have prepared a document in any event Mr Chairman, which is before you now and you've suggested that it be marked EXHIBIT J.

CHAIRPERSON: What we haven't got in fact is his Amnesty Application have we?

MR VISSER: I'm going to come to that I was just wondering whether Mr de Jager wants to swear him first?

PETRUS LOODWIEKUS DU TOIT: (sworn states)

ADV. DE JAGER: Mr Visser, is it correct he's not applying for Cosatu or Khotso House, it's only in connection with Cry Freedom.

MR VISSER: As it pleases you, Chairperson. I would like to submit to you that these cases of Cry Freedom are very, quite evidently, under the intention of the legislature of the nature of incidents which is really - which should be handled administratively and with that we are not criticising the use of your discretion with regards to incorporating this into the trial but the reason why I'm mentioning this is because we're going to deal very briefly with this type of evidence.

MR PENZHORN: Mr Chairman, if I may just interject with your permission at this stage. I just want to make quite sure, the document that has now been handed to us as J on page 3 refers to Stanza Bopape. I just want to make quite sure that this is the document which my learned friend in fact wishes to produce at this stage?

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, where?

MR VISSER: If that is so, it is an oversight, I thank my learned friend Mr Penzhorn. I can tell you that is quite possible because this is a document that was produced for the Amnesty Committee Hearing of Bopape and was handed in by General du Toit and which formed the basis of it. So if my learned friend has found a reference to Bopape which I may have missed, Mr Chairman, I will be very pleased if you could point it out to me.

MR PENZHORN: Mr Chairman, it's the last three pages or four pages I think.

MR VISSER: No, no, I'm sorry. Mr Chairman there's a confusion which I know exactly how it happened. What you have as an annexure to this document, EXHIBIT J, is an extract from the original application form of General Du Toit because that has been omitted from your volume, Mr Chairman, paragraphs 10 (a) and 10 (b) so as far as a reference is made to Bopape at page three of the annexed paper, that is not relevant. That is not relevant. The only relevance of it is from paragraph 10 (a) down through that document to page 6 at the end of paragraph 10 (b) and before paragraph 10 (c). The reason why we've done so, Mr Chairman, is simply to provide you with the relevant part of the original documentation which was filed as part of - as the application which has been left out of Volume 2. All that you've got before you is an addendum. You see, Mr Chairman, General du Toit made application for Bopape initially and later by way of an addendum which is now in your bundle at page 72.

ADV. DE JAGER: So this could be page 72 (a) (b) and (c)?

MR VISSER: Precisely Mr Chairman, you could either do it that way or deal with it as an attachment to the exhibit. Previously, Mr Chairman, you will remember we had the same problem in Port Elizabeth and at that stage we dealt with it on the basis as Commissioner de Jager suggests, as by simply adding it in as the next page (a) (b) (c) (d) and (e) or whatever the case may be so whatever way you want to deal with it is acceptable, Mr Chairman and I would suggest if you want to deal with it that way, Mr Chairman, it would have to be before page 74 because 74 really is already the addendum which deals with incidents. So it will have to be dealt - well wherever it's convenient, Mr Chairman. There's really no hard and fast rule as to ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: I take it somebody has satisfied themselves that there is an Application for Amnesty lodged and that it is in order?

MR VISSER: Well, Mr Chairman, my submission is that it is so, it's for somebody to say that it isn't so I suppose.

CHAIRPERSON: Well what do you suggest, do we keep it as part of the bundle you've just given in or do we put it in as part of page 73 (a) (b) (c). I think it's perhaps safer to keep it as part of the bundle you've handed in.

MR VISSER: As part of the exhibit.

CHAIRPERSON: Part of the exhibit.

MR VISSER: The problem that we foresaw, Mr Chairman, is that your bundles are ring bound and it's very difficult ....[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, you can't just add something.

MR VISSER: Yes but whichever way is convenient, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: I think keep it as part of EXHIBIT J but perhaps make a note of it, if anybody else has to look at it, on the top of page 3 at the back. This is portion of the original application.

MR VISSER: Yes, that will be on page 3 immediately following page 10.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR VISSER: Thank you Mr Chairman.

General du Toit, you are an applicant and in this instance your application is in connection with an explosion which took place in King's Theatre in Alexandra, Johannesburg on the 29th July 1988 during an attempt at showing of the film Cry Freedom and you're applying for amnesty for all the offences or omissions you've committed before during all - anything in connection with that explosion afterwards. Is that not true?

GEN. DU TOIT: Yes, Chairperson, that is correct.

MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, I may also refer you to paragraph 1.1 of EXHIBIT J where it is just noted that the amendment to paragraph 7 (a) and (b) had already been granted. In this case in the Bopape Amnesty Application by Justice Miller.

And once again you incorporated P45, 46 and 47 and we already know what they are, General?

GEN. DU TOIT: That is correct, Chairperson.

MR VISSER: And on page 2 you set out your career in the South African Police and it started on the 22nd December 1955 and it ends on the 28th February 1994 when you retired from the Police, with pension; and then your personal particulars in 1937, the 14th December you were born at Boshof in the Free State and you grew up in a very conservative household and your parents were members of the Dutch Reformed Church, supporters of the National Party. That's the way you grew up and very few influences on you taught you that the policy of the National Party was wrong, is that correct?

GEN. DU TOIT: That is correct.

MR VISSER: On page 4, paragraph 3.8 you refer to the fact that the friends you had when you were a child were black kids and workers on the farm and with regard to politics after the second world war you became aware of the political emotions between the Nats and the Saps and it's only a long time after that that you got to deal with the wave of black nationalism.

GEN. DU TOIT: That is correct, Chairperson.

MR VISSER: You confirm the content of EXHIBIT J in as far as - well everything is concerned and you also refer to your experiences and insight which you've gained whilst being a policeman and you've explained a lot of that and you also described to us your evidence in J how you were motivated because of your experiences to do as much as you can to fight the struggle against those who wanted to undermine the government of that day.

GEN. DU TOIT: That is so, Chairperson.

MR VISSER: We've already heard in this trial of Mr Vlok and all the others how there was a lot of pressure and the Amnesty Committee members heard this and in the past they've also heard from other applicants how they were under great pressure to solve problems. Was this also - are you saying that this was also your experience that in order to maintain law and order and to ensure the safety of public and members of the public you found yourself in a situation where you were forced to act illegally?

GEN. DU TOIT: That is so, Chairperson.

MR VISSER: In those circumstances for which you have applied for amnesty, we are talking about in general?

GEN. DU TOIT: That is so, Chairperson.

MR VISSER: If we can go directly to page 9 please. This is of EXHIBIT J. Would you please give the Committee the perspective with regards to your participation in the explosion at King's Theatre in Alexandra on the 29th July 1988?

GEN. DU TOIT: Chairperson, by July 1988 I had the rank of Colonel and I was Commander of the Security Branch, Observing Commander at Security Branch and my office at John Vorster Square.

MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, I'm sorry, I gave you the wrong reference, the witness is now referring to page 75 of Volume 2, sorry. The reference is in fact at paragraph 6 at page 9 and I'm sorry, he's reading from page 75 of Volume 2, the second paragraph.

GEN. DU TOIT: In that capacity, Chairperson, I received an instruction from the then Head of Security, General van der Merwe that at a high level it was decided that certain theatres all over the country caused bomb explosions at these theatres where the film Cry Freedom would be shown. He motivated the instruction properly and he told me why these actions would be necessary, it was in order to maintain law and order in our country. In accordance to the mentioned instruction Captain van Huyssteen, I gave him the instruction to give his co-operation with the explosive expert who was also part of our personnel, that was Lieutenant Zeelie, to organise explosions where this film would then have been shown.

He, van Huyssteen, mentioned to me that the film would be shown at the King's Cinema in Alexandra and that he would make sure that the necessary would be done. The same goes for Lieutenant Zeelie, I gave him the instruction to work together with Van Huyssteen and to provide him with the necessary explosive device. My instruction was to identify someone who would be able to keep this order and especially to ensure that no lives would be endangered in this process. The explosion was to be of such a nature that - and I think there's an amendment here, it's a typing error Chairperson - the resistance of white conscientious groups who were opposed to the message that this specific film depicted.

MR VISSER: Yes, General, at the moment it's written that it indicates to black conscientious groups who were opposed against this and that's faulty. It should be white.

GEN. DU TOIT: That is correct, Chairperson.

MR VISSER: Because the message was that of black conscientious groups.

GEN. DU TOIT: That is correct, Chairperson.

MR VISSER: Please continue.

GEN. DU TOIT: This would come down to the creating of a climate of resistance from amongst our own people, that is the community in that vicinity. I received feedback from them, from Van Huyssteen to the effect that they successfully executed the order and specifically by one of his personnel members, Constable Mdaba and that no one was injured or killed during the explosion.

MR VISSER: General, let me just try and understand what you are saying, are you saying that you got instruction from Van der Merwe, you spoke to Captain van Huyssteen and you told Van Huyssteen that he must receive the explosive device from Zeelie and Zeelie gave this to Van Huyssteen, is that correct?

GEN. DU TOIT: That is correct.

MR VISSER: And then Van Huyssteen must identify someone who would then set off the explosion?

GEN. DU TOIT: To go and place in the cinema, that is correct.

MR VISSER: With the thought that no lives would be placed in danger in this process?

GEN. DU TOIT: That is correct.

MR VISSER: Was that part of the instruction of General van der Merwe's to you?

GEN. DU TOIT: That is correct, as part of his instruction to me.

MR VISSER: Now yesterday or the day before you gave me a message which I conveyed to the Committee that this Van Huyssteen, this person told you that he's applying for amnesty for his contribution in this specific case?

GEN. DU TOIT: That is correct, him and Constable Mdaba, Sam Mdaba.

MR VISSER: And this Sampson Mdaba, is that the person you refer to in your statement, this was the person who was identified to go and place this bomb?

GEN. DU TOIT: That is correct, Chairperson.

MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, I am not sure whether any information has come to light about this from Mpshe and the data base which he referred to, perhaps we can just find out from him?

MR MPSHE: Mr Chairman, as I indicated the other time that through the help of the current witness and the applicant Mr van Huyssteen, we traced that the documents were sent to the Johannesburg office and this - I've sent the necessary documents to Cape Town and Cape Town indicated that they have now traced the applications and then I then subsequently, that is yesterday, got in touch with their advocate, Advocate Louis van der Walt - Louise van der Walt, I'm sorry, who is now currently busy in the Ermelo Hearings and she informed me that the two people have applied for Cry Freedom only and she would have no problem if their applications are not dealt with hear but in chambers and I must confer this to the Committee. I did tell General du Toit.

CHAIRPERSON: We certainly can't hear them now, they haven't been given necessary notice and what have you. I think rather let's leave the matter and we'll consider the papers when we have them and see if we can deal with them without the necessary ...[inaudible] prefer the public hearing. Mr Visser?

MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, would you allow me, I know I'm busy leading a witness but it seems to be very relevant and pertinent at the moment. We have another three witnesses - another two witnesses also only in regards - in fact three witnesses Mr Chairman, another three applicants apart from General du Toit, only in regard to Cry Freedom. They're going to give evidence, they're here, they've got nothing to be afraid of but the question is, Mr Chairman, if you're going to deal with some of the applications in chambers the question is don't you just want to deal with all of them in chambers?

CHAIRPERSON: You see we've had the advantage now that we had evidence of the senior officer, now your other two are for another incident I take it?

MR VISSER: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: They have not been mentioned by the General.

MR VISSER: Yes. No they haven't.

CHAIRPERSON: So they've been set down, there may be other people who although strictly speaking are not victims, may be interested parties to listen, so they have been noticed let's carry on with them but these two, nobody has been notified they're going to be heard here so we can quietly put them somewhere else.

MR VISSER: But then Mr Chairman, there's only one further point and that is that as far as General Du Toit's evidence is concerned, there may contradictions as regard to precisely what happened in regard to this particular incident and we are informed, Mr Chairman, that the evidence presented by Mdaba and by Van Huyssteen are in support of what General Du Toit says but there may be other applicants here who may have a different view for example Lieutenant Zeelie as he was then. The point being this, Mr Chairman, it seems to be relevant to have those applications before you at least at the time when you make a decision ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Well that I think we would certainly do.

MR VISSER: Thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: I think the purpose - we would so far as possible deal with them together.

MR VISSER: We will attempt to get some papers and perhaps place it before you and address it in due course, Mr Chairman, thank you.

ADV. DE JAGER: May I just mention for the information of the public that the only reason why we can deal with it otherwise is because we're not dealing with a gross violation of human rights in this particular application, nobody was injured so the act allows us to deal with it on paper and not at a public hearing.

MR VISSER: Yes, Commission de Jager is quite correct Mr Chairman, I neglected to mention that. In fact I may mention that in not one of single of the incidents wherever it occurred was there any question of a gross violation of human rights.

General du Toit, you've stipulated your political motivations. The fact of the matter is you received an instruction from a higher officer and you executed that order, you obeyed it and now what I want to ask of you is you could have refused to obey this instruction because it was expected of you to do something illegal. Why did you anyway decide to still obey this order and not object to it?

GEN. DU TOIT: Chairperson, I identified myself with the view of General van der Merwe and the like thereof and the circumstances which prevailed at that time. I accepted and I did what was expected of me.

MR VISSER: And you're saying in paragraph 7 and page 9 of EXHIBIT J your own perception of the circumstances was it was a very low political atmosphere and there was constant pressure from abroad on the government to change it's policy. There were sanctions which put the country into difficult spots, there was unrest, there was violence on local level and that you had to take precautions against any catalyst which could turn these circumstances into a bloodbath?

GEN. DU TOIT: That is correct, Chairperson.

MR VISSER: I have no further questions, Mr Chairperson.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VISSER

MR BOOYENS: Booyens. No questions, thank you Mr Chairperson.

MR HUGO: Hugo. I've got no questions, thank you Mr Chairperson.

MR PENZHORN: Mr Chairman, Penzhorn, I have no questions for this witness.

MR CORNELIUS: Mr Chairman, Cornelius for the applicant N.J. Vermeulen, I've got no questions.

MR NEL: Mr Chairman, Christo Nel, I have no questions.

MR DU PLESSIS: Roelof du Plessis, Mr Chairman, I have no applicant who was involved in this incident for once, Mr Chairman.

MR BOTHA: Hannes Botha, Meneer die Voorsitter, ek het geen verdere vrae nie.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR ROSSOUW: Rossouw on behalf of Mr Zeelie and Mr van Heerden for this particular incident, Mr Chairman.

General, I just want to put a few things to you and it's not necessarily that there's a difference. You would have noticed if it was put to you by Advocate Visser that Mr Zeelie said that the instruction to prepare the explosive he received from a person by

the name of Van Wyk and he says that he would concede he discussed the issue with you but he discussed the issue with Niels van Wyk. Can you recall this?

GEN. DU TOIT: Chairperson, I can just mention that I'm sure and it would come from the testimonies and it would be able that you could say that Captain van Huyssteen would say that a person by the name of Van Wyk who was the overhead commander of that unit. He was not present in other words he was on leave or he was somewhere else and Captain van Huyssteen was in his place and he was the man that was called in.

MR ROSSOUW: Mr Zeelie said that is his recollection in so far as it concerns Mr van Huyssteen and he indeed worked with Mr van Huyssteen and that the apparatus was prepared by him and he took it to the offices of Colonel van Wyk. At that stage Mr van Huyssteen was also present and the apparatus - maybe we are using different technology here - but it was not handed over but it was made available and Mr Zeelie will testify that as the bomb expert he would not give an explosive to a person who did not know how to deal with it so he made it available, he kept it with him and it went with them to the bioscope where it was handed to the person who would go and plant it.

GEN. DU TOIT: Chairperson, I will not argue that but to my knowledge Lieutenant Zeelie gave it to Captain van Huyssteen and from there they went to the cinema. If Zeelie was there I cannot confirm at this stage so I have to accept what he says.

MR ROSSOUW: General - maybe just on this point, Mr Chairman, the General is not applying for amnesty for any other events. There is one incident where the General's implicated by one of my clients. I am merely going to put it to him at this stage simply because he didn't - he's not applying for amnesty and it might not even be relevant as far as that's concerned.

CHAIRPERSON: What is the relevance - why do you want to put it to him?

MR ROSSOUW: Mr Chairman, it is on the papers before the Committee that the General is implicated and that certainly cross-examination for Mr van Heerden who is the applicant who is implicating General du Toit, will be cross-examined on that point and at this stage although it might not be relevant to his application for the Cry Freedom incident at least the version of Mr ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: But is this Committee hearing that other application?

MR ROSSOUW: Mr Chairman ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: If not, what is the relevance of evidence here?

MR ROSSOUW: Mr Chairman, it relates to the Khotso House incident.

CHAIRPERSON: Oh, one of their matters before us?

MR ROSSOUW: Indeed.

MR VISSER: May I react very briefly, Mr Chairman? My submission to is this is not an inquisition, if General du Toit has chosen not to apply for amnesty for Khotso House and there are others that think he should have then so be it but it's for the Attorney General to take up the matter and it's not for them to use this forum, Mr Chairman, to place evidence on record in cross-examination as to whether or not he should have applied for amnesty whether or not he is guilty of any ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: No, I understand what they want to put on record. It's their client's version so when their client gives evidence in relation to this applications before us, it cannot be suggested to him that he ...[indistinct] this up that it hadn't been raised - is that the problem?

MR VISSER: No, I've got no problem, in fact I was nodding my head when my learned friend said he wanted to put it on record.

CHAIRPERSON: Carry on.

MR ROSSOUW: Mr Chairman, indeed, I'm not going to cross-examine General du Toit on that, I merely want to put it on record.

General, it is just that Mr van der Merwe's recollection is that after the successful operation at Khotso House when they returned to the safe house in Honeydew that you were also present there?

GEN. DU TOIT: Chairperson, no I was not involved at Honeydew or any other planning in terms of Khotso House.

MR ROSSOUW: Mr Chairman ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: So I understood what you put to him was that he wasn't there at any planning, it was after the operation, was it?

MR VISSER: Sorry, Mr Chairman, if you look at Volume 1, the references are pages 170, 1,2,3,4,5 lines from the bottom

"We went to a house in Honeydew and we say that General Erasmus and Piet Du Toit was also present as skeleton members of John Vorster Square as well as two members known as Kotzen and Hammond from explosive unit in Pretoria was also present"

It's before, it's prior, clearly. Yes and at page 176 you have the same situation, Mr Chairman.

ADV. DE JAGER: It was put to General du Toit by the advocate that it happened after the time. His verbal statement was it was after.

INTERPRETER: The speaker's mike is not on.

MR ROSSOUW: Mr Chairman, that was my instructions, that was not from the record for the sake of Mr Visser and my instructions specifically are that that is the recollection of Mr van Heerden afterwards. It will be dealt with as far as the record is concerned, I presume when it comes to his cross-examination.

MR VISSER: I'm terribly sorry, could my learned friend just put the question because I don't understand what the question is?

MR ROSSOUW: Mr Chairman, I'm not putting a question, I'm merely repeating what I've placed on record that the recollection of Mr van Heerden is that after the operation at the safe house at Honeydew that General du Toit was also present.

MR VISSER: I see, thank you, I did not understand that. At the safe house in Honeydew, General du Toit was afterwards he was present. Thank you Mr Chairman.

GEN. DU TOIT: Chairperson, I cannot recall anything like that. I was not involved with the planning of any of those ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: It's not the planning, it's afterwards.

GEN. DU TOIT: As far as I can recall I was not there.

MR ROSSOUW: I've got no further questions, Mr Chairman, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Any questions?

MR JANSEN: Mr Chairman, Jansen on behalf of Ras, no questions.

MR MAFOJANE: Mafojane on behalf of Cosatu, I've got no questions.

MR SOLARI: Solari on behalf of South African Council of Churches, I have no questions, Mr Chairman.

MR MPSHE: Mr Chairman, I'm not putting any questions either but just for record purposes, the owners of the three cinemas were informed and served with notices and the owner of King's in Alexander called me. He said he may come to listen but he does not intend doing any opposition. The owner of the Roodepoort - the cinema in Roodepoort said that he is not interested because he said the insurance has paid him and the owner of the Durban cinema, the Metro 2 has not contacted me at all. Just for record purposes.

ADV. DE JAGER: And the insurers didn't they want to attend?

MR MPSHE: I didn't want to cause a prolonged hearing.

CHAIRPERSON: ...[inaudible] I take it you have no further

questions?

MR VISSER: No, Mr Chairman, only a request. Mr Chairman, my attorney instructs me that - to ask you whether we could see you all in chambers after the adjournment.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS