FREDERICK JOHANNES PIENAAR: (sworn states)
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Malan. Mr Prinsloo?
EXAMINATION BY MR PRINSLOO: Thank you, Chairperson.
Mr Pienaar, you are an applicant in this incident where the person, Jameson Mngomezulu, was killed.
MR PIENAAR: Yes.
MR PRINSLOO: And you have compiled and handed up a proper application form with regard to this incident.
MR PIENAAR: Yes, I have.
MR PRINSLOO: Your application appears on page 97 of the documents, and the specific incident appears from page 101 to 103, is that correct?
MR PIENAAR: That is correct, Chairperson.
MR PRINSLOO: And your political objective or political background that you sketch, appears on page 10 of the documents up to page 111.
MR PIENAAR: That is correct.
MR PRINSLOO: Mr Pienaar, according to the evidence before the Honourable Committee, at this stage it would appear that this incident had taken place in the vicinity of 1986.
MR PIENAAR: That is possible, I am not entirely certain of the year and the date, Chairperson. During these events during that time, you were stationed at Piet Retief and you served as the Branch Commander of the Security Branch.
MR PIENAAR: That is correct.
MR PRINSLOO: The previous applicants, Mr de Kock and Mr van Dyk, are they both known to you?
MR PIENAAR: Yes, they are.
MR PRINSLOO: And your fellow applicant, Mr Schoon, is he known to you?
MR PIENAAR: Yes, he is.
MR PRINSLOO: During these events, how did it come about that you became involved in this interrogation? Who approached you and where?
MR PIENAAR: I can only start, Chairperson, by saying that I did not have any knowledge beforehand of this operation that was executed by Capt van Dyk and his team. One morning he approached me in my office and informed me that he had a man at Moolman that was brought from Swaziland, and if I would assist them in the interrogation of this person. He also gave me the name. That is how I became involved here.
MR PRINSLOO: The name of this person, was this name known to you?
MR PIENAAR: Yes.
MR PRINSLOO: Were you familiar with any of his activities or not?
MR PIENAAR: In a roundabout manner, Chairperson. Most documentation about the Ingwavuma area, the activities there, went to the Security Branch, Josini because they were the closest persons to that area.
MR PRINSLOO: And the person in Josini, would that have been Mr Gert Schoon?
MR PIENAAR: That is correct, yes.
MR PRINSLOO: Did you then interrogate the person there at Moolman, as it has been placed before the Committee already?
MR PIENAAR: I went that morning to Moolman, where I found Mr Mngomezulu along with other members from Vlakplaas and upon my arrival there it was clear to me that Mr Mngomezulu had already been assaulted. I don't know by whom. I asked the members present there to focus themselves on the question of Mr Mngomezulu, with regard to ANC/PAC activities in Swaziland, infiltrations and persons who were still in Swaziland, that still had to infiltrate the country, and weapons that were still possibly in Swaziland.
MR PRINSLOO: Were you familiar with the activities in Swaziland itself, of the ANC?
MR PIENAAR: Yes, I was, Chairperson.
MR PRINSLOO: And were you familiar with regard to the activities of informers, sources and so on?
MR PIENAAR: Yes, I was.
MR PRINSLOO: Were there at that stage, several infiltrations into the RSA?
MR PIENAAR: Yes, there were.
MR PRINSLOO: And this place where this person had found himself, were there infiltrations during that time?
MR PIENAAR: Yes, there were.
MR PRINSLOO: Were you aware that a person by the name of Mr Jan van Vuuren was killed between ...(end of side A of tape)
... Northern Natal area?
MR PIENAAR: Yes, I was familiar with that event.
MR PRINSLOO: And did you know at that stage that the ANC was responsible for it?
MR PIENAAR: Yes.
MR PRINSLOO: And during the interrogation there, did you assault him?
MR PIENAAR: Yes, I did.
MR PRINSLOO: In which manner?
MR PIENAAR: I struck him with my fist and I kicked him.
MR PRINSLOO: This person, Mr Mngomezulu, was he a person who would easily talk, or what was you impression of him as an experienced investigator?
MR PIENAAR: No, he would not open up easily, he was one of the old guard, it was clear to me that this man, it would take lots of work to make this man to talk.
MR PRINSLOO: Is that why assault was used?
MR PIENAAR: Yes.
MR PRINSLOO: Did you continually question him, did you remain at the place where the interrogation had taken place, or did you leave there?
MR PIENAAR: Because I was not aware beforehand of the opportunity, I did not make any arrangements at my office to cancel all my other appointments. I was present there during the interrogation for a while and then I departed. When I returned and I went back there, I stayed a little while and then left again, but I was not there all the time.
MR PRINSLOO: Your presence there, did you see it as an instruction coming from Capt van Dyk, who was attached to head office?
MR PIENAAR: That is correct, yes.
MR PRINSLOO: Thereafter, Mr Mngomezulu, as we have heard according to evidence, the man was transferred to Leeupoort, at Josini.
MR PIENAAR: Yes, Mr van Dyk and I discussed that Josini would have more information available for interrogation of Mr Mngomezulu. Lt van Dyk called Mr Schoon at Josini and we went along with Mr Mngomezulu to this place, Leeupoort, on the Northern Natal border.
MR PRINSLOO: Was Mr Mngomezulu interrogated further there at this place, Leeupoort?
MR PIENAAR: Yes, he was.
MR PRINSLOO: Did you participate in it?
MR PIENAAR: Yes, for brief periods I did participate, because it became clear to me that Lt Schoon should have undertaken that interrogation there. I did my part at Piet Retief that I could, but I still participated in the interrogation at Leeupoort.
MR PRINSLOO: And did Mr Schoon arrive there and participate in the interrogation?
MR PIENAAR: Yes, he did, Chairperson.
MR PRINSLOO: This interrogation that had taken place there, was there any assaults there?
MR PIENAAR: Yes, the assaults did take place there by the members who were present.
MR PRINSLOO: And you have already heard the evidence that the questioning was ceased at some point, what do you say of that?
MR PIENAAR: At times the interrogation was indeed stopped, but I cannot say how long it was.
MR PRINSLOO: Was it decided to remove the person from there at a stage?
MR PIENAAR: Yes, such a decision was taken.
MR PRINSLOO: And you have heard what Mr van Dyk has testified about this, that the person was taken away and was taken to a place at an office at Josini, do you agree?
MR PIENAAR: I can only say that there at Leeupoort, Lt Schoon at some time mentioned that he wanted to take this man back to Swaziland. I did not agree with this and I also mentioned this to him, but we did not go in on the matter any further because it was clear to me that there was no use in taking the man back to Swaziland, because of his injuries.
MR PRINSLOO: Mr Pienaar, on page 102 of the documents you refer to the persons who were present. In paragraph 2, Chairperson
"On the farm, Mngomezulu was interrogated by Nofomela, Mgade, Moss and other members."
MR PIENAAR: Chairperson, I can only say here that during the drawing up of these documents, which had taken place long after the incident, I went to Mr van Dyk to find out about the persons who were present, because I could not recall who were all there and I was not well known to them and some of the names were given by him to me for the purposes of drawing up this documentation.
MR PRINSLOO: You have now heard the evidence of what had happened at Josini.
MR PIENAAR: That's correct, yes.
MR PRINSLOO: What did you see there?
MR PIENAAR: We were at the offices. I would like to explain there that Schoon's house at Josini, his house was next to the Security Branch. As far as I could understand we went to Josini to receive messages specifically for Lt van Dyk, maybe messages for Mr van Dyk and whether there were messages for Mr Schoon. There was mention that Mr Schoon wanted to attempt to recruit Mr Mngomezulu as a source. I did not agree with that either because it would not have worked.
MR PRINSLOO: Please continue. What did you see then?
MR PIENAAR: There at Josini we looked at Mr Mngomezulu who was lying in the back of the vehicle. It was clear that this man had died. I would also mention that Josini is a very hot place and Mr Mngomezulu lay under a tarpaulin in the back of the bakkie.
We decided there that we had to dispose of this corpse in order to cover any tracks which might point to the police, and we decided to destroy the corpse by means of explosives. Mr Schoon then collected explosives from his office. I think it was 25 kilograms of explosives, one block.
This we loaded onto the back of the van and Mr Schoon, van Dyk and I drove, I think to the point where Gert Beeslaar and Douw Willemse waited. This Josini embankment was also the same place where there was a crossing to Ndumu and Sodwana Bay.
From there we drove to Sodwana Bay, some way up the coast. I'm not entirely certain how far it was, it was quite a way and Mr Beeslaar and I think, Mr Willemse, I'm not entirely certain, where the two of them remain with Mr van Dyk's vehicle and Mr van Dyk, Mr Schoon and I went in further onwards, quite a way from where Beeslaar waited, where we blew up the body of Mr Mngomezulu with these explosives, and we returned to where Beeslaar and the others were waiting.
We spent the night there on the beach and the following morning we went back to the place where the explosion had taken place and there was no trace of any explosion or any remains and we returned to our respective places. I don't know of any feedback that was given. I did not give any feedback to anyone.
MR PRINSLOO: Mr Pienaar, you knew at that stage that Mngomezulu was illegally detained there at Moolman as well as at Leeupoort.
MR PIENAAR: I knew about that.
MR PRINSLOO: And that it would boil down to abduction.
MR PIENAAR: That is correct.
MR PRINSLOO: And you were also informed as to how he was removed from Swaziland.
MR PIENAAR: That is correct.
MR PRINSLOO: And that he was abducted from there.
MR PIENAAR: That is correct.
MR PRINSLOO: And during the interrogation and assault, did you foresee the possibility or consider the possibility that it might lead to his death?
MR PIENAAR: Yes, I did foresee it because he was assaulted many times.
MR PRINSLOO: And did you associate yourself with it?
MR PIENAAR: Yes, I did.
MR PRINSLOO: Mr Pienaar, did act here for personal gain or because of feelings of malice towards Mr Mngomezulu?
MR PIENAAR: No, not at all.
MR PRINSLOO: At that stage were you on duty?
MR PIENAAR: Yes, that's correct.
MR PRINSLOO: And during that time and under those circumstances, did you act within your tacit or explicit mandate?
MR PIENAAR: Yes.
MR PRINSLOO: Do you then request amnesty from this Committee for any offence which might flow from these events, from the time that the person was abducted to the time that the person's corpse was disposed of?
MR PIENAAR: I do.
MR PRINSLOO: And delictual accountability that might emanate from there.
MR PIENAAR: That is correct.
MR PRINSLOO: Thank you, Chairperson.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR PRINSLOO
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Prinsloo. Mr Prinsloo, can you guide us, you indicated Mr Pienaar's dilemma.
MR PRINSLOO: That's correct, Madam Chair.
CHAIRPERSON: Are we in a position to proceed with cross-examination, or would you request that we adjourn for the day?
MR PRINSLOO: May I just consult with him, Chair?
CHAIRPERSON: Yes.
MACHINE SWITCHED OFF
MR PRINSLOO: ... if possible at all, but he's entirely in the hands of the Committee, as I've indicated to you, Madam Chair.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Prinsloo, I'm sitting with two problems, there is a Member of the Amnesty Committee staff who has to be excused by 4 o'clock and we can't proceed in his absence. It is also a matter that cannot be postponed and it's very important that he has to be excused by 4 o'clock.
We also have not made arrangements with persons from Correctional Services with regard to Mr de Kock. I know we have previously been requested to adjourn at 4 o'clock for their sake, and they've been kind enough to give an indication that in the event that we should want to sit late, we should give them a prior warning. We have not done so, and I don't want to take advantage of that generosity. They have been very kind in the past. We find ourselves in a situation where if we proceed with Mr Pienaar's cross-examination, it's not likely to be finished before 4 o'clock.
MR PRINSLOO: We understand that, Madam Chair. May the matter then be postponed till tomorrow morning then?
CHAIRPERSON: Yes. I don't want to have Mr Pienaar being cross-examined in bits and pieces, I would rather I think, postpone the matter to enable his cross-examination to be conducted properly tomorrow.
MR PRINSLOO: As it pleases you, Madam Chair.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes. I'm sorry, Mr Pienaar, we couldn't complete your evidence and cross-examination today.
We will then adjourn until tomorrow morning at nine thirty.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
