JAN HATTINGH CRONJE: (sworn states)
MR MALAN: Thank you, Chairperson, sworn in.
EXAMINATION BY MR DU PLESSIS: Thank you, Madam Chair.
Brigadier, your application is embodied in the second application, which is a separate document which has been served before the Committee, which has three schedules and your application appears on page 19, the third schedule, where you apply for actions of your subordinates which you cannot specifically recall, but which you know took place while you were their commander, is that correct?
BRIG CRONJE: Not which took place. I cannot recall when they took place or whether they took place.
MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, pertaining to what you cannot recall having taken place, but what they undertook while you were their commander.
BRIG CRONJE: That is correct.
MR DU PLESSIS: And Comrade X can be found on the last paragraph of page 19.
BRIG CRONJE: That is correct.
MR DU PLESSIS: And is it correct, Brigadier, that you cannot recall anything about this incident?
BRIG CRONJE: That is correct.
MR DU PLESSIS: You have studied the affidavit of Mr Crafford, in which he has stated that he approached you about Comrade X Lubane. That is on page 488 of the first bundle. Do you see this?
BRIG CRONJE: Yes.
MR DU PLESSIS: And Crafford said that you gave the order for him to be interrogated, and then later in this second paragraph he states that a submission was made to you for his elimination and that you extended your approval for it. Can you recall anything about that?
BRIG CRONJE: No.
MR DU PLESSIS: And what is your attitude towards this, would you accept that he says this, would you accept the correctness of his evidence?
BRIG CRONJE: I trusted Crafford, and I don't believe that he would have lied to me, therefore I accept it.
MR DU PLESSIS: And when he compiled his amnesty application, did he come to you about this?
BRIG CRONJE: Yes.
MR DU PLESSIS: And did he tell you about this?
BRIG CRONJE: Yes.
MR DU PLESSIS: Thank you, Madam Chair, I have no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR DU PLESSIS
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr du Plessis. Mr Jansen, do you wish to put any questions to Brig Cronje?
MR JANSEN: No questions, thank you Chair.
NO QUESTIONS BY MR JANSEN
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Prinsloo?
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY ADV PRINSLOO: Madam Chair.
Brigadier, during the period that you were the commander and Capt Crafford served under your command, there must have been numerous interrogations of various persons during that period in time.
BRIG CRONJE: That is correct.
ADV PRINSLOO: And Capt Crafford would have brought you up to speed about all these interrogations and the matters which were being investigated.
BRIG CRONJE: Yes, he would have.
ADV PRINSLOO: And today you sit here without any notes or any record of who those persons were and what exactly took place.
BRIG CRONJE: Yes.
ADV PRINSLOO: Is it possible that Capt Crafford may have discussed this matter with you and my have received an order from you to eliminate this person?
BRIG CRONJE: Yes, it is so.
ADV PRINSLOO: Given the facts which are presented here with regard to this specific persons, Comrade X, if the facts were presented as such by Capt Crafford to you, would you have issued the order to him or extended permission to him to eliminate Comrade X?
BRIG CRONJE: Yes.
ADV PRINSLOO: And Brigadier, was it the custom - or let me rather put it this way. In the case where a person was to be eliminated, to the extent that nothing was to remain of him, was it also viable, as it occurred in this case, that the person be destroyed completely and that there be no suggestion of him accidentally having blown himself up? Would this have been viable?
BRIG CRONJE: Yes.
ADV PRINSLOO: In the period to which has been referred here, and there has been evidence about this, there was a reasonably severe onslaught and a total onslaught particularly in the Pretoria area, by the ANC on the Security Forces.
MR MALAN: You can accept that we know about that, Mr Prinsloo.
INTERPRETER: The speaker's microphone is not on. The speaker's microphone.
CHAIRPERSON: ...(inaudible)
ADV PRINSLOO: Thank you, I beg your pardon, Madam Chair.
Mr Cronje, in this case where there was a plan to destroy the Wachthuis building and The House of Coffees, this would have had dire consequences if the plan had indeed been carried out.
BRIG CRONJE: That is correct.
ADV PRINSLOO: And it would have been a tremendous victory for the ANC in their campaign.
BRIG CRONJE: Yes.
ADV PRINSLOO: It would have dealt a serious blow to the police and would have influenced them and the public.
BRIG CRONJE: Yes.
ADV PRINSLOO: And it would have been of tremendous advantage to the ANC in the struggle which was being waged at that stage.
BRIG CRONJE: That is correct.
ADV PRINSLOO: Thank you, Chairperson, I have nothing further.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY ADV PRINSLOO
CHAIRPERSON: Mr van der Walt?
MS VAN DER WALT: No questions, thank you Chairperson.
NO QUESTIONS BY MS VAN DER WALT
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Joubert?
MR JOUBERT: I have no questions, thank you Madam Chair.
NO QUESTIONS BY MR JOUBERT
CHAIRPERSON: Mr van Heerden?
MR VAN HEERDEN: No questions, thank you Madam Chair.
NO QUESTIONS BY MR VAN HEERDEN
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Steenkamp?
ADV STEENKAMP: No questions, Madam Chair.
NO QUESTIONS BY ADV STEENKAMP
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Motata?
ADV MOTATA: Just one, Madam Chair.
Brigadier, we believe in this incident of Mr Lubane, Mr Crafford was in command. Do you recall that specifically?
BRIG CRONJE: He was in command of the interrogation division. I cannot recall this case, so I assume that he must have been in command, yes.
ADV MOTATA: We have heard evidence here previously and in mind comes Justice Mbizana, that if I recall the evidence correctly it was that he was new in the Security Branch and he had for some stage to work under Mr Prinsloo, so that he learns the ropes. But if we look at this incident together with that of Mbizana, it's during the same period. Would we say with this incident he had learnt the ropes, that is Crafford?
BRIG CRONJE: He did not work under Prinsloo, he was still his senior and his commander but for the purposes of interrogation he was not as connected to the Security Branch. However, he was an experience detective and he was well experienced when it came to interrogation.
ADV MOTATA: Thank you, Madam Chair, I've got no further questions.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Malan?
MR MALAN: Mr Cronje, you say that you do not recall this incident at all.
BRIG CRONJE: That is correct.
MR MALAN: Isn't it strange that if there was such a plan to blow up Wachthuis and if there were already sketch plans and reconnaissance had been undertaken for these plans, that you cannot recall anything about it?
BRIG CRONJE: Chairperson, I simply cannot recall. I see your point, that if it was such an extensive matter I must recall something about it. But I cannot say whether or not I was informed about it either.
MR MALAN: And you have no recollection that Wachthuis and the police arcade and The House of Coffees sketch plans were presented to you and you were informed about what they had done and that on the basis of this the man was to be eliminated?
BRIG CRONJE: I cannot recall ever viewing any plans.
MR MALAN: Perhaps we are in a disadvantageous position in the sense that we could not have read all the previous evidence. Why do you say that you do not recall this, what other reasons for your lack of recollection of this, among others?
BRIG CRONJE: I cannot say, my memory has simply failed me. That is all.
MR MALAN: Thank you, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: You have in other instances given evidence before the Amnesty Committee in which you stated that you couldn't recall the many incidents that you might have been involved in as a Commander of the Northern Transvaal Security Branch, is it not so?
BRIG CRONJE: That is correct.
CHAIRPERSON: Do you wish to re-examine?
RE-EXAMINATION BY MR DU PLESSIS: Just one question that relates to this issue, just to provide more clarity Mr Malan.
You will recall Madam Chair, that at the beginning of our applications we indicated that Brig Cronje, Capt Hechter, van Vuuren and Mentz to a lesser extent, were all involved in various incidents, in lots of incidents. In fact, there were applications where they said "We were involved in lots of bomb attacks, but we cannot even remember where, who, how, what. We cannot identify them anymore. We know we were involved in them." And we approached on post-traumatic stress, Professor Robertse, who did a whole profile on all the applicants, and may I just point out that in that report he highlighted the fact and the result of post-traumatic stress as being a kind of a selective memory situation. And you will remember Capt Hechter has the worst of that. He would remember one incident to the finest, finest detail of the incident and then another incident there is just nothing. And there's no sort of explanation why he would remember one incident. He would remember an incident of grave importance, which he would remember vaguely and then a small incident which he shouldn't be supposed to remember even, he remembers in the utmost detail. And Professor Robertse said that that is one of the symptoms of post-traumatic stress. He highlighted that in the report. And I think you will recall with Brig Cronje's evidence, to lesser extent that was the situation too in respect of that.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes. We have that on record.
MR DU PLESSIS: May I just request a question, Madam Chair.
May I just ask you, Brig Cronje, do you recall that Professor Robertse undertook such an evaluation of you and your memory?
BRIG CRONJE: Yes.
MR DU PLESSIS: Thank you, Madam Chair.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR DU PLESSIS
WITNESS EXCUSED
MR DU PLESSIS: Madam Chair, my next witness is Mr Strydom.
