MR BOOYENS: Mr Chairperson, Mr Cornelius' client has just arrived here. He and I have agreed that I will deal with my team of technical personnel first, so with your permission, may we please make the seating arrangements so that we can all take our positions. Could we adjourn, I don't know what your position is.
CHAIRPERSON: We'll just take a five minute adjournment.
MS LOCKHAT: Please stand.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
ON RESUMPTION
MR MALAN: Mr Booyens, who is your first applicant?
MR BOOYENS: I beg your pardon, it is Mr Hattingh.
MR MALAN: Mr Hattingh, your full names for the record?
PAUL JAKOBUS HATTINGH: (sworn states)
MR BOOYENS: Mr Chairman, this applicant submitted a very cryptic application just at the cut-off date, where he applied for amnesty for "aangepaste wapentuig" but we have subsequently - and I trust the Members of the Committee are in possession a more comprehensive application, it's a loose document that's subsequently been handed to you, a typewritten one.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I have it, Adv Gcabashe has it, I'm sure Mr Malan's got it, but can't find it.
MR BOOYENS: That's a reasonable possibility, Mr Chairman. My attorney has got an extra one.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, no, he does have one. So this will be ...
MR BOOYENS: Exhibit K.
CHAIRPERSON: We'll call it Exhibit K. This is the application form of Paul Jakobus Hattingh. Yes, Mr Booyens?
EXAMINATION BY MR BOOYENS: Thank you, Chairperson.
Mr Hattingh, before you you have your amnesty application, is that correct?
MR HATTINGH: Yes.
MR BOOYENS: Do you confirm what appears on the first, second, third and fourth pages?
MR HATTINGH: Yes, I do.
MR BOOYENS: Now with regard to your involvement in the modification of these weapons, it does not appear from your application documents, but how did you become involved? At that you were the Head of the Demolitions Division.
MR HATTINGH: Yes, that is correct.
MR BOOYENS: And you were a Colonel?
MR HATTINGH: Yes, that is correct.
MR BOOYENS: The Technical Division was an independent division under the command of the then Maj Wal du Toit, I think, which actually resided under you, but they were independent, however, for administrative purposes they fell under your division, is that correct?
MR HATTINGH: Actually Chairperson, they were an independent unit of the Security Head Office and we were also an independent division, however we worked very closely together under certain circumstances.
CHAIRPERSON: Sorry I'd just like to get this straight, Mr Hattingh. So you had a Technical Division which was - you call an independent unit of the Security Police.
MR HATTINGH: That's right, Mr Chairman.
CHAIRPERSON: And then the Demolition Division, was that ...(intervention)
MR HATTINGH: That was my division, Mr Chairman.
CHAIRPERSON: ... was that also independent or was it just part of ...(intervention)
MR HATTINGH: No, we were independent divisions, Mr Chairman, but we were both attached to Security Headquarters and my division had a branch commander, if I can call it that, and they had their branch commander.
CHAIRPERSON: And you were the Branch Commander of the Demolition ...(intervention)
MR HATTINGH: I was the Branch Commander of the Explosives Section, yes.
CHAIRPERSON: You call that the Explosives Section.
MR HATTINGH: That's right.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
MR BOOYENS: And during 1985, you were requested to go to Gen van der Merwe's office.
MR HATTINGH: Yes, that is correct.
MR BOOYENS: And once you arrived there, Gen van der Merwe was there, and during consultation you told me that you can recall that Brig Schoon was there and that there were others, but that you cannot recall exactly who they were.
MR HATTINGH: Yes, that is correct.
MR BOOYENS: That was in Gen van der Merwe's office, who was at that stage second-in-command of the Security Head Office?
MR HATTINGH: Yes, that is correct.
MR BOOYENS: And there you attended a discussion or part of a discussion which had to do with the modification of weaponry.
MR HATTINGH: That is correct.
MR BOOYENS: Can you tell the Committee what it was about.
MR HATTINGH: Chairperson, very briefly, it was explained to me that weaponry would be required for an operation on the East Rand, but full details were not provided. However, handgrenades and a limpet mine would be involved and if possible the detonators of he handgrenades and the limpet mine had to be adjusted so that it would detonate immediately, in other words without the time delay.
MR BOOYENS: And what was your reaction to this?
MR HATTINGH: Chairperson, I told them that I thought that it could be done, but that it required more expertise than that which the usual man possessed and that I would take up the matter with Wal du Toit from the Technical Division.
MR BOOYENS: When you refer to the usual man, do you refer to the usual member of the Demolitions Unit?
MR HATTINGH: Yes, your average man on the street and your average person in the Demolitions Division.
MR BOOYENS: Did this appear to you as something which had to go to the Technical Division?
MR HATTINGH: Yes, it did.
MR BOOYENS: Just with regard to the detail of the operation, did you draw the inference of that which was said to you, that the weaponry had to be delivered to the opposition in some or other fashion?
MR HATTINGH: Yes.
MR BOOYENS: Let us just deal with this now, Mr Hattingh. At that stage although you were employed in the Technical Division of the Security Branch, you were up to date with the security situation in the country?
MR HATTINGH: Yes, that is correct.
MR BOOYENS: And you were also up to date regarding the activities and the situation on the East Rand.
MR HATTINGH: Yes, we received regular security reviews, where we could get a picture of what was going on.
MR BOOYENS: Now this plan to detonate these items as you inferred, without the time delay, the clear intention then would be to kill or injure the handler of the weaponry?
MR HATTINGH: Yes, that is correct.
MR BOOYENS: And that would be illegal in terms of the law?
MR HATTINGH: That is correct.
MR BOOYENS: Did you have a moral problem with that?
MR HATTINGH: No.
MR BOOYENS: Why not?
MR HATTINGH: Chairperson, our division was tasked with various tasks of which this would simply be one. We were directly linked to the revolutionary struggles, we had to find counter-measures to combat the onslaught, so we were always busy with research. We were involved in a war against the enemy and I regarded this as part of our job, this was our contribution to the struggle.
MR BOOYENS: You also told me that you could recall that at a stage Gen van der Merwe left, but that you cannot recall at which stage this request was given to you, or at least the question was asked of you as to whether or not this could be done.
MR HATTINGH: That is correct.
MR BOOYENS: Did you then depart from there with the attitude of "I'll find out from the Technical Division" and did you then go and visit Wal du Toit?
MR HATTINGH: Did you discuss the matter with du Toit, whether or not this was technically viable and did he then give an indication that they would see what they could do?
MR HATTINGH: Yes, he indicated that.
MR BOOYENS: Did he contact you afterwards to tell you whether they would succeed in modifying the handgrenade detonators and the limpet mine detonator, as per the instructions?
MR HATTINGH: Yes, that is correct.
MR BOOYENS: And can you recall personally what took place with the weaponry afterwards?
MR HATTINGH: Chairperson, the weaponry was modified, or at least the detonators were modified by Mr du Toit and his staff and I received it back from them, and it was fetched from us to be taken to the East Rand, along with the bomb. In other words, the handgrenades and the limpet mine were taken together.
MR BOOYENS: Mr de Kock says that he came to fetch the handgrenades, but you cannot recall who came to fetch the handgrenades or whether it was fetched from you in fact?
MR HATTINGH: No.
MR BOOYENS: So you don't have a problem if Mr de Kock states that?
MR HATTINGH: No.
MR BOOYENS: And after that the weaponry was out of your hands, and did you have anything further to do with it?
MR HATTINGH: No, I didn't.
MR BOOYENS: And did you find out by means of the press later on, that explosions had taken place during which people had been killed?
MR HATTINGH: Yes.
MR BOOYENS: Then just to return to your application. You confirm the rest of your application?
MR HATTINGH: Yes.
MR BOOYENS: And you also confirm that the motive for your co-operation or participation in this operation was because it was part of the struggle between the Security Police and the liberation movements at that stage in our county?
MR HATTINGH: Yes.
MR BOOYENS: Just one further aspect, just to amend something on page 5. The date that you have provided there is stated as 1986, that is incorrect, it ought to be 1985.
MR HATTINGH: Yes, that is correct.
MR BOOYENS: Can I just request that amendment please, Chairperson. It's page 5 of the application.
CHAIRPERSON: That is the amendment to paragraph 9(a)(2), by the deletion of 1986 and the substitution of ...
MR BOOYENS: 1985.
CHAIRPERSON: ... substituting it with 1985. Any objections to that?
MR BOOYENS: I think that's actually just a typing error, because ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: I see it says "gedurende ..." ...(intervention)
MR BOOYENS: ... it says '85.
CHAIRPERSON: In sub-paragraph 1 it mentions '85, it looks like a typing error.
MR BOOYENS: Ja. Thank you, Chairperson.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR BOOYENS
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Hattingh, do you have any questions you'd like to ask?
MR HATTINGH: No thank you, Mr Chairman.
NO QUESTIONS BY MR HATTINGH
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Cornelius?
MR CORNELIUS: I have no questions, thank you, Mr Chair.
NO QUESTIONS BY MR CORNELIUS
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Visser?
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, perhaps just one.
Do I understand you correctly that you actually acted according to the instructions of Brig Schoon and Gen van der Merwe?
MR HATTINGH: Yes, that is correct.
MR VISSER: Thank you, Mr Chairman.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VISSER
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mafora, do you have any questions?
MR MAFORA: No questions, Mr Chairperson, thank you.
CHAIRPERSON: Ms Lockhat?
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS LOCKHAT: Yes, Chairperson.
I just want to clarify, the request for the handgrenades and the limpet mine, did it come together in one request to you, or was it - did it happen on different occasions?
MR HATTINGH: Chairperson, I really don't recall, I have listened to the evidence of others who have testified here and it is possible that the two requests were not put in on the same day, it may be that the limpet mine only came forward later, but I cannot recall.
MS LOCKHAT: Over how many days did it take to modify these weapons?
MR HATTINGH: Chairperson, Mr Wal du Toit would perhaps be able to give more thorough evidence about that, I would assume that it would be a day to three days, but I'm not certain.
MS LOCKHAT: And just then the last question is, who was your commander at that time, who was your Head?
MR HATTINGH: We resided directly below Security Head Office. Every unit had a unit commander. I cannot recall whether at that stage it was Brig Schoon, because he was also our commander to a certain extent. I recall cannot recall who was our immediate Head of our unit.
CHAIRPERSON: We know that you had, I think it was C-Section and there was C1 and C2 and later I think, C3. Did the Technical and Explosives Section, were they - what was A-Section and B-Section, do you know?
MR HATTINGH: No, they were all different sections, Mr Chairman, with different functions. So it was just a letter allocated to each section.
CHAIRPERSON: What was yours, can you remember?
MR HATTINGH: We were - it changed through the years, I was there for 10 years and sometimes we were under C and sometimes we were under another one. I can't recall in this specific instance under which letter we resorted.
MS LOCKHAT: Thank you, Chairperson, I have no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS LOCKHAT
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Booyens, do you have any re-examination?
MR BOOYENS: No, thank you, Mr Chairman.
NO RE-EXAMINATION BY MR BOOYENS
CHAIRPERSON: Adv Gcabashe, do you have any questions?
ADV GCABASHE: No, thank you.
MR MALAN: No questions.
MS LOCKHAT: Chairperson, just one last aspect relating to Mr Hattingh's application. I don't know if you've noted, but his application didn't appear in the bundle, the original bundle, but we couriered copies of page 285 that we paginated to 287 of his application and informed everybody to insert it. I have made copies for everybody and if we could just circulate it, and just for record purposes, that we do actually have it, Chairperson, and then mark it Exhibit L. I don't know it that's necessary or if we should just include it.
CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, Mr Hattingh, before you go, can you recall approximately how many handgrenades there were?
MR HATTINGH: Mr Chairman, no I can't. I listened to Mr de Kock's testimony and I must agree, it could have been that amount, I can't remember.
CHAIRPERSON: And can you remember if there was anything notable about the colours of the ...(intervention)
MR HATTINGH: No, Sir, they were the original colour, it's a sort of a khaki-green, we didn't paint them or change them at all.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Any questions arising from questions that have been put by Members of the Panel?
FURTHER CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, merely because you appear to be interested in it, perhaps I could ask a question or two.
Mr Hattingh, in 1983, you were Group K, not so?
MR HATTINGH: It could be so, Chairperson.
MR VISSER: Was your immediate Head, Mr Cruywagen?
MR HATTINGH: Of the unit, no. Let me explain it like this, Mr Chairperson. The Demolitions Unit was subdivided into two sections, the one group of people were responsible for commercial management and Cruywagen was in charge of Demolitions with regard to mines, the transfer of commercial explosives, my unit was involved with the Bomb Disposal Unit. We worked throughout the country on a decentralised basis, we trained personnel, we gave lectures to the public, we did research, we were directly involved in bomb disposal and damage control, and that is what the other group did not do.
MR VISSER: No but the Chairperson just wanted to know who your direct commander was.
MR HATTINGH: No, I was in command of that specific unit.
MR VISSER: And then you resided under head office?
MR HATTINGH: That is correct. We simply referred to it as senior management. Now in this case I refer to senior management and that would be, in this case, Gen van der Merwe and Brig Schoon. That is what I meant.
MR VISSER: Thank you, Mr Chairman.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VISSER
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Thank you, Mr Hattingh, that concludes your evidence, you may stand down.
MR HATTINGH: Thank you, Mr Chairman.
WITNESS EXCUSED
