MR LAX: Mr Bellingan, are you English or Afrikaans speaking?
MR BELLINGAN: Afrikaans.
MR LAX: Your full names for the purposes of the record please.
WILHELM RIAAN BELLINGAN: (sworn states)
MR LAX: You may be seated. Sworn in, Chairperson.
EXAMINATION BY MR BOOYENS: Please go to page 181 of the first bundle. Do you confirm the background and so forth as embodied in this amnesty application of yours?
MR BELLINGAN: Yes.
MR BOOYENS: This goes to page 198.
MR BELLINGAN: Yes, that is correct.
MR BOOYENS: On page 198 there is Schedule 5, and there you deal with the murder and attempted murder respectively, of Mr Bheki Mlangeni and Mr Dirk Coetzee.
MR BELLINGAN: Yes, that is correct.
MR BOOYENS: Now you explain and you say that this was during 1990.
MR BELLINGAN: Yes, that is correct.
MR BOOYENS: And at that stage you were stationed at Vlakplaas.
MR BELLINGAN: Yes, that is correct.
MR BOOYENS: And practically from the very beginning you were stationed at Vlakplaas.
MR BELLINGAN: Yes, that is correct.
MR BOOYENS: You also served under the command of Dirk Coetzee at Vlakplaas.
MR BELLINGAN: That is correct.
MR BOOYENS: And upon occasion, I cannot mention the specific date, but Col de Kock, your then commander, discussed the possible elimination or the attempt to murder Dirk Coetzee, with you.
MR BELLINGAN: That is correct.
MR BOOYENS: You then proceed and summarise everything that was stated during this discussion. This must have been speculation about what Dirk Coetzee could get up to, that he could recruit people for the left-wing, that he had intimate knowledge about the Security Police and so forth.
MR BELLINGAN: Yes, that is correct.
MR BOOYENS: And that stage had Mr Coetzee aligned himself completely with the ANC?
MR BELLINGAN: Yes, that is correct.
MR BOOYENS: And while the decision for the elimination of Mr Coetzee did not reside with you, were you satisfied that he had aligned himself with the enemy forces, as they were regarded at that stage by the Security Forces?
MR BELLINGAN: That is correct.
MR BOOYENS: There was a struggle at that time between the ANC and the Security Police - I think that is a question of record, and with you personally, was this an unacceptable idea, viewed against the background of the struggle, that someone such as Dirk Coetzee taking into account what he had done, would be eliminated? Or could you associate yourself with this?
MR BELLINGAN: Yes, I could associate myself with this.
MR BOOYENS: Were you also informed, as you have set out in the fourth paragraph on page 199, that there was no other way for you to eliminate him other than sending him a postal bomb?
MR BELLINGAN: That is correct.
MR BOOYENS: Mr de Kock testified that during the discussion between the two of you, he among others asked you, due to the fact that you knew Dirk Coetzee better than anybody else at Vlakplaas, he asked you about his taste and his preferences and so forth and you told Mr de Kock that Mr Coetzee was quite a fan of a certain pop star by the name of Neil Diamond.
MR BELLINGAN: Yes, that is correct.
MR BOOYENS: Do you agree with that evidence of Mr de Kock?
MR BELLINGAN: That is correct.
MR BOOYENS: Sgt Steve Bosch, the witness who testified before you, was your technical man at Vlakplaas, is that correct?
MR BELLINGAN: Yes, that is correct.
MR BOOYENS: And you state that upon occasion you were with Bosch when he went to purchase a set of headphones, can you tell us exactly what you purchased?
MR BELLINGAN: If I recall correctly we went to buy headphones and a cassette player at a technical place near head office, I think it was called Filtron.
MR BOOYENS: Did you buy one or two?
MR BELLINGAN: It may have been one, it may have been two, I cannot say with certainty, but I believe that it would have been two.
MR BOOYENS: And you knew that the Technical Division, that would be the section of Wal du Toit, would be working with this equipment.
MR BELLINGAN: Yes, that is correct.
MR BOOYENS: There was also evidence that Mr Coetzee, Mr Coetzee's wife's telephone and her telephonic discussions were tapped and that she was followed at certain points. Did you know about that?
MR BELLINGAN: Yes, I knew about that completely, I participated in the tapping as well as the surveillance and the following of Mr Coetzee's spouse.
MR BOOYENS: So there was a clearly organised attempt to obtain information as to his movements.
MR BELLINGAN: That is correct.
MR BOOYENS: Now with regard to the instructions for the nature of the bomb and so forth, did you have anything to do with that?
MR BELLINGAN: No, not that I can recall. I wasn't told that it would have a certain appearance or anything like that.
MR BOOYENS: What I actually mean is, did you liaise with the Technical Division and tell them what the bomb should be like or was this left over to Mr Bosch?
MR BELLINGAN: No, it would have been left over to Mr Bosch or Mr de Kock.
MR BOOYENS: Did you go and fetch the package containing the bomb, at any stage from Technical?
MR BELLINGAN: Yes.
MR BOOYENS: Were you and Bosch together?
MR BELLINGAN: We may have been together, but my recollection is not extremely clear about this. I wouldn't dispute it if it came to light that we were together when the bomb was fetched.
MR BOOYENS: And what you received at that stage, can you recall how the package was packaged or wrapped?
MR BELLINGAN: If I recall it was wrapped in brown paper and placed in a plastic bag and I would have handed it over to Mr de Kock on the farm.
MR BOOYENS: Did you give it to Mr de Kock?
MR BELLINGAN: Yes, as far as I can recall.
MR BOOYENS: And Mr Bellingan, as far as you know, did you receive any instructions to inscribe any address on the package or to paste any labels containing an address, on the package?
MR BELLINGAN: I cannot recall that I did anything like that. This is quite a long time ago, I simply cannot recall it. I would have admitted to this if I could recall it.
CHAIRPERSON: But it doesn't really make any difference to your accountability, whether you pasted the labels on of whether you simply participated.
MR BELLINGAN: That is correct.
MR BOOYENS: This package spent a while at Vlakplaas.
MR BELLINGAN: Yes, that is correct.
MR BOOYENS: And afterwards you received further instructions regarding the package.
MR BELLINGAN: That is correct.
MR BOOYENS: Namely that the package had to be posted in Johannesburg.
MR BELLINGAN: That is correct.
MR BOOYENS: You knew that this was the package, one which was being sent to Dirk Coetzee.
MR BELLINGAN: That is correct.
MR BOOYENS: And Mr Radebe, the previous witness, says that he was with you.
MR BELLINGAN: That is correct.
MR BOOYENS: Was that upon your instruction or the instruction of Mr de Kock?
MR BELLINGAN: I believe that it would have been Col de Kock, but I could also have called him over and said "Simon come with me, we're going to post a package", but it would probably have come from Mr de Kock.
MR BOOYENS: Mr Radebe has just stated under cross-examination that although you told him not to read what was written on the item, you told him that this was something which was intended for Dirk Coetzee, which came from human rights lawyers. Is Mr Radebe's recollection of this conversation correct?
MR BELLINGAN: No, the regular practice would have been that I would have given him the plastic bag and some money to go and post the item with. I don't want to render him a liar in all of this, but I don't believe that we discussed this. There was reasonable compartmentalisation as well.
MR BOOYENS: And Mr Radebe wasn't a member of the conspiracy to kill Mr Coetzee at this stage, is that correct?
MR BELLINGAN: No, he wasn't.
MR BOOYENS: And would you have notified anybody else unless it would have been absolutely vital?
MR BELLINGAN: No, I wouldn't have.
MR BOOYENS: I see that you refer to a post office at the Johannesburg Sun. I don't know Johannesburg, is this the same as the one in Joubert Park?
MR BELLINGAN: Yes, I believe so, I have driven past it quite a number of times. I wouldn't dispute anything about this.
MR BOOYENS: Mr Bellingan, Mr de Kock has already stated this, but Bheki Mlangeni was never a target, not as far as you know.
MR BELLINGAN: That is correct.
MR BOOYENS: Did you know that Bheki Mlangeni's name was indicated as the name of the sender?
MR BELLINGAN: No, I didn't know this. I had either heard of or seen the other name, Cheadle Thompson, but I did not see Bheki Mlangeni's name.
MR BOOYENS: Just to return. Upon occasion, do you know where the address of Mr Dirk Coetzee was obtained from?
MR BELLINGAN: That is correct. One morning I was at head office, Mr de Kock asked me to accompany him to the offices of Gen Nick van Rensburg who was the commander at that stage, I went with him and when I went in I also greeted the Brigadier - I was a junior so I wasn't allowed to enter the office as such, but I stood outside, and the Colonel said "Fetch the address", he walked to a cabinet and he handed over the address and when Col de Kock and I walked down the passage again, he showed me the address, that this was Dirk Coetzee's address. So I assume that that is where he obtained the address from.
MR BOOYENS: Was there any discussion between him and Col de Kock at that stage?
MR BELLINGAN: No, not that I can recall. Not that I could have heard at least.
MR BOOYENS: How long as far as you can recall, was Mr de Kock in the office?
MR BELLINGAN: A few minutes, perhaps even seconds. It was a very brief time.
MR BOOYENS: And as far as you can recall, was Mr van Rensburg alone in his office?
MR BELLINGAN: As far as I know, yes.
MR BOOYENS: Mr Bellingan, do you confirm in terms of the rest of this matter, the content of your application?
MR BELLINGAN: Yes, I do.
MR BOOYENS: So to summarise in other words, the role that you played basically is that you were monitoring Dirk Coetzee's habits, you went to the Technical Division upon certain occasions to take certain items there, you went to fetch the bomb at Technical and after that you took the bomb to the post office. That is the extent of your role in this matter.
MR BELLINGAN: That is correct.
MR BOOYENS: Do you then request amnesty for any offence which may emanate from your involvement in the bomb which as addressed to Dirk Coetzee, but eventually led to the death of Bheki Mlangeni?
MR BELLINGAN: That is correct.
MR BOOYENS: Just by the way, just to be completely certain, if we could briefly consult Exhibit D1 There is handwriting on documented D2, do you recognise this handwriting?
MR BELLINGAN: Yes, I have seen it before.
MR BOOYENS: You have viewed this before?
MR BELLINGAN: Yes.
MR BOOYENS: But do you know whose handwriting this is?
MR BELLINGAN: No. My handwriting samples, both left and right-handed, were taken by the A-G investigating team as well as the investigating team of Col Kritzinger.
MR BOOYENS: And then we have "Evidence - Hit Squads" here, which appears on D4, which is apparently from a cassette cover. Do you recognise this?
MR BELLINGAN: I have seen it before, but I don't know who wrote it.
MR BOOYENS: Therefore you don't recognise the handwriting.
MR BELLINGAN: That is correct.
MR BOOYENS: You referred to the investigation led by Kritzinger and the others, and there has already been evidence that the office which was occupied by Steve Bosch, was cleared when they heard that Kritzinger was going to search the place. You were aware of this?
MR BELLINGAN: Yes, I believe that I would have known about it because I was a member of Vlakplaas. If anything had to be cleaned, I would have been involved in that as well. I would have remembered. There were so many things that happened, I wouldn't dispute it at all.
MR BOOYENS: Now this cleaning, can you recall the reason why everything was cleaned? What was disposed of, what were the people looking for? That would be Kritzinger and the others.
MR BELLINGAN: I believe that they would have been looking for pens and paper, anything that could possibly be connected with the packaging and the bomb.
MR BOOYENS: You yourself were not actively involved in the clearing?
MR BELLINGAN: No, I believe every person would have cleaned his office just in case something had been left there, such as paper or anything like that. I wasn't involved with Steve Bosch's office.
CHAIRPERSON: Can you help us, I should have asked him, but he told us in his evidence that he he'd already left Vlakplaas, can you remember who took over his office?
MR BELLINGAN: Chairperson, I would venture to say that we were already busy breaking up into various groups, because when I returned from an officer's course, that was when Mr Bheki Mlangeni died. I was on an officer's course and when we returned, Steve was already gone and we were broken up into various wings. Col de Kock went to a safehouse, I remained on the farm, van Dyk went elsewhere, so it is possible that the office was standing empty and that Col de Kock may have been finishing off his administrative duties there, I would be able to say, but there was no new appointment.
CHAIRPERSON: Thanks.
MR BOOYENS: Thank you, Mr Chairman, I've got no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR BOOYENS
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR HATTINGH: Thank you, Mr Chairman.
MR BOOYENS: Mr Bellingan, the surveillance of Mrs Coetzee's movements and the tapping of her telephone and other telephones, you say you were involved with this as well?
MR BELLINGAN: Yes, that is correct.
MR HATTINGH: Were you aware from where the order came for you to be involved in these matters?
MR BELLINGAN: Chairperson, if Mr de Kock told us it came from above, we did not question or dispute it. There was no way in which the Technical Division in Rebecca Street could undertake such tapping without an order from above. As it was said, there would be a report, it would have to be channelised and the post office would be responsible for laying the wires. I didn't doubt it at all because it was being done in the heard of the Technical Division and Mr du Toit could not manager something like this by himself.
MR HATTINGH: But did Mr de Kock tell you that the order came from above?
MR BELLINGAN: Yes, he told us that it came from above.
MR HATTINGH: Now you have heard the evidence by Mr Bosch, that the persons who were tapping the discussions made notes of information which could possibly be valuable to head office with regard to Mr Coetzee's movements and so forth.
MR BELLINGAN: Yes, that is correct, sometimes we would receive information indicating that he would be possibly on a farm near de Wild, then in the Bushveld, then it seemed that he was in Mauritius. So there were various messages or requests which were put through to his wife and we recorded all these matters because people at head office didn't have time to sit and listen to the tapes all day long.
MR HATTINGH: Well that's the point that I want to make. The notes were made in order to convey pertinent information which was on tape and to bring this information to the attention of head office.
MR BELLINGAN: That is correct.
MR HATTINGH: And did Mr de Kock hand over these notes that you had made on paper, to head office?
MR BELLINGAN: That is correct, he would have done so, or if he was out of town, one of us would have had to do it.
MR HATTINGH: Can you recall that you ever delivered these notes
MR BELLINGAN: Yes.
MR HATTINGH: Upon more than one occasion?
MR BELLINGAN: Yes.
MR HATTINGH: And to whom did you deliver these notes?
MR BELLINGAN: At some time to Brig Schoon, at others to Nick van Rensburg. We would just place the notes in an envelope and place these envelopes in their offices.
MR HATTINGH: And with regard to the handwriting samples which were taken, this was done for the purposes of the post-mortem inquest, is that correct?
MR BELLINGAN: Yes, and if I have it correctly you accompanied me and Mr Baker and Mr Hugo to a place where they wanted to arrest us, but you negotiated for us to have samples taken.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, that is when Mr Hugo and I represented you and Mr Baker.
MR BELLINGAN: That is correct.
MR HATTINGH: And the investigating team wanted to see you among others, about handwriting samples and to discuss some of these murder cases.
MR BELLINGAN: Yes.
MR HATTINGH: And did they take any handwriting samples from you and Mr Baker?
MR BELLINGAN: That is correct.
MR HATTINGH: And did you hear that the investigating officer expressed any opinion who in his mind was responsible for the handwriting on the documentation?
MR BELLINGAN: He was walking around there saying that he believed that he had the man, he would stand behind you while you were writing and say "We've got the man". That was just part of his tactic to bully you, but they never came back to me and said that it was my handwriting because I knew that I hadn't written anything on that document.
MR HATTINGH: Now with regard to the address of Mr Coetzee, you say that Mr van Rensburg gave this to Mr de Kock.
MR BELLINGAN: Yes.
MR HATTINGH: And you recall that you went there specifically for that purpose.
MR BELLINGAN: Yes. If I can still recall correctly - one would have certain recollective visions in one's mind's eye, Mr de Kock was wearing a greenish suit.
MR HATTINGH: And from where did Mr van Rensburg produce the address?
MR BELLINGAN: From a steel cabinet.
MR HATTINGH: And can you recall that this is the address which was ultimately inscribed on the package, that you obtained in this manner?
MR BELLINGAN: Yes, I believe that this must have been the address. I didn't ...(indistinct) over these proceedings, but this would been the address. Where else would we have obtained it from?
MR HATTINGH: You've heard Mr de Kock's evidence yesterday, regarding how Mr van Rensburg obtained the address.
MR BELLINGAN: I wasn't present here yesterday, but I heard that it was obtained from National Intelligence or something like that.
MR HATTINGH: Are you aware of two policemen in Piet Retief, who had defected to the ANC?
MR BELLINGAN: No, not that I know of. I know about those in Nelspruit.
MR HATTINGH: And that Mr Coetzee had delivered a letter to one of them for delivery here in the Republic. You didn't hear that version?
MR BELLINGAN: No, I didn't.
MR HATTINGH: Would you bear with me a moment please, Mr Chairman.
Your political motivation which you have expressed in the documents on page 198 and over to 199, I assume that this is not the complete motivation. Can you recall that Mr de Kock also told you that the order was for Mr Coetzee to be prevented from giving evidence during the Lothar Neethling matter?
MR BELLINGAN: That is possible.
MR HATTINGH: But you just don't recall this very clearly?
MR BELLINGAN: That is correct.
MR HATTINGH: Thank you, Mr Chairman, we have no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR HATTINGH
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR LAMEY: Thank you, Chairperson.
Mr Bellingan, you state in your affidavit - or before I ask you this, when you became aware of the idea to send a package bomb to Dirk Coetzee, what would your role have been in the whole process, which instructions did you receive from Mr de Kock?
MR BELLINGAN: To be honest, Chairperson, there were no instructions saying A is going to do this, B will do this and C will do that, if Mr de Kock walked past me and said "Riaan, please do this", I would have done it. I wasn't called in and told "Riaan, you are going to do this" or "Willie will do that" or "Someone else will do this". There were no clear instructions like that according to my knowledge. As Col de Kock would give things to people to do, they would do them.
MR LAMEY: Yes, I hear what you're saying, but it is correct that Mr Bosch was the liaison person for Technical.
MR BELLINGAN: Yes, that is correct, but if I wanted to go to Technical and fetch something there I could have done so as well. There was no embargo on movements in and out when it came to other people.
MR LAMEY: But he was also the technical person who was supposed to liaise with Technical Division.
MR BELLINGAN: Yes, when operations were executed he would liaise with the Technical Division.
MR LAMEY: You state that on a certain day you went to buy headphones. Mr Bosch has already conceded that it is possible that you accompanied him, but that he cannot recall it. Are you referring only to headphones or also the walkmans?
MR LAMEY: It could have been the headphones and the walkmans together or separately, but today after 10 years I really cannot recall it.
MR LAMEY: Can't you not recall it?
MR BELLINGAN: No, and I wouldn't dispute it either.
MR LAMEY: And you state that you clearly recall that you fetched the package bomb from the Technical Division.
MR BELLINGAN: Yes, as far as I can recall I fetched it. Whether Steve was present or not, I don't know, but I remember that I went to fetch it.
MR LAMEY: And when you went to fetch it, were any addresses already inscribed on the package, the address of Mr Coetzee and a sender's address?
MR BELLINGAN: Chairperson, I would be lying if I said whether or not there were addresses, I really cannot recall today. It was in a plastic bag. At a certain point I saw the address of Thompson and Haysom, but when exactly this took place is something that I cannot dispute.
MR LAMEY: And you state that you recall that you then delivered it to Mr de Kock.
MR BELLINGAN: Yes, I believe so. I simply wouldn't have given it to another junior officer on the farm because this was a very sensitive matter.
MR LAMEY: Do you know where the bomb was kept once it had been delivered to Mr de Kock?
MR BELLINGAN: I believe that it would have been definitely kept in Steve's office because it was relatively secure, there were no windows, it was guarded by quite a sturdy door, or it could have been in the safe, I cannot recall.
MR LAMEY: Steve's office was a security office?
MR BELLINGAN: Yes, it was an old garage of which the front side had been closed with a steel door.
MR LAMEY: And subsequently you then received the order to take the package to Johannesburg and to post it there, and you say that between the delivery and the postage there was a lapse of time.
MR BELLINGAN: Yes, there was. I may have been in Steve's office and I may have seen the package there. I wasn't involved with this operation all the time, so I would concede to these possibilities.
MR LAMEY: You state in your affidavit that you definitely never saw the address of the sender, is it correct?
MR BELLINGAN: I never knew of Bheki Mlangeni, the first time that I heard about him on the news in Paarl, was the first time that I heard about him. To me he wasn't an activist, we didn't have a thick file on him at head office, he was just another lawyer.
MR LAMEY: So Mr Radebe's evidence is not correct, that you told him about it?
MR BELLINGAN: No, I will not dispute anything with Mr Radebe, I do not wish to make him out to be a liar, I simply cannot remember anything like that.
MR LAMEY: Thank you, Chairperson, I've got no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR LAMEY
CHAIRPERSON: I take it that you will be more than three minutes?
MR RAUTENBACH: I think so, Mr Chairman.
CHAIRPERSON: Very well, you can start at 2 o'clock. We'll the adjournment now.
MS LOCKHAT: All rise.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
ON RESUMPTION
WILHELM RIAAN MR BELLINGAN: (sworn states)
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR RAUTENBACH: Thank you, Mr Chairman.
Mr Bellingan, can you tell us when you received the parcel from Kobus - I do not want to use the word "sealed", you get "sealed" and "a seal", what did it look like?
MR BELLINGAN: Chairperson, I presume it was in brown paper, covered with brown paper and it was in a plastic bag. I cannot say if there was a string tied around it, if it was sealed, I cannot remember.
MR RAUTENBACH: Very well. You received it from Mr Kobus Kok and you gave it to Mr Eugene de Kock as you returned?
MR BELLINGAN: I wouldn't have given it to anybody else but Mr de Kock.
MR RAUTENBACH: Can you recall if you had any discussion with Col de Kock when you handed it over to him?
MR BELLINGAN: No, I cannot.
MR RAUTENBACH: And then the time that you dealt with this package was when you were asked by Mr de Kock to go and post this parcel?
MR BELLINGAN: Yes, Chairperson, it might be that I was at the farm and that I walked in and out of Steve Bosch's office and maybe saw the package lying there. If somebody did something to it, I do not know. I remember the last time was when we went with Radebe to go and post the parcel.
MR RAUTENBACH: Could you see any differences between the parcel from the first time you got it from Kobus Kok and the second time when you went to go and post it?
MR BELLINGAN: I would lie if I say that I knew, I could not say if it was wrapped in a different paper or something else was attached to it.
MR RAUTENBACH: Then I would like to ..(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, can I - carry on. Are you finished?
When you saw the parcel, from the time that you collected it and the time you took it to post it, was it always in the plastic bag?
MR BELLINGAN: I wouldn't say that it was the same plastic bag, it could have been a different one.
CHAIRPERSON: A plastic bag.
MR BELLINGAN: A plastic bag, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: So am I correct, you never handled the parcel as such?
MR BELLINGAN: No, Chairperson, I wouldn't have handled it.
CHAIRPERSON: So you can't tell us what it ...(intervention)
MR BELLINGAN: No, Chairperson.
MR RAUTENBACH: When you took the parcel with you, with Radebe who was with you, was it you, Radebe, who else was with you?
MR BELLINGAN: I heard Mr Radebe said that Mr Tait was with us. I cannot remember that, but Radebe said that he was with us and I cannot argue with him concerning that.
MR RAUTENBACH: When you told him "Go and post this parcel", did you give him the plastic bag with the parcel?
MR BELLINGAN: I can remember that it was behind my seat where I left it, I think that it was just because I was trying to be careful with it, and then I told him "Just go and post this parcel". I probably gave him money to go and post it. There was a dispute about it earlier on, but I cannot remember if I gave him the money or if the stickers were stuck on it before or after. It would have been strange if it was insured before. I think that I did give him the money to do it. I believe that it would be the normal practice if one says "Here's R50,00" and such things.
MR RAUTENBACH: Could you just tell me, what do you mean by "normal practice"? ...(transcriber's interpretation)
MR BELLINGAN: As you've just said, one would not just stick it on there and do everything that the post office would normally do, somewhere someone has to pay for that package if it gets insured. ...(transcriber's interpretation)
MR RAUTENBACH: But if you look at for example D2 and we compare it with D6, you will see that at D6 there is a description of who it is, who it is sent to. I would like to ask you if you agree with me that it seems as if the name and address of the sender is a document that was available at the post office? Will you agree with me there?
MR BELLINGAN: Yes, that is correct.
MR RAUTENBACH: And that it is unlikely that somebody got this document beforehand to then attach it while all the information was already on the package. You cannot also remember that you have seen such a document like D2 maybe when you delivered it.
MR BELLINGAN: No, I saw the address somewhere as it was enlarged here, but I cannot say that it was this document.
MR RAUTENBACH: Then I would like to ask you something that I do not understand. Did you know that, or you said it was normal practice to ensure it, but did you at any stage think that if Mr Radebe posts this parcel - and you said that you could have given him money, that he maybe had to pay for insurance, that he had to maybe write something down? Was this something that you thought of?
MR BELLINGAN: Yes, I can also write with a pen without pressing my hand on the paper. I thought that maybe he would have done something like that. There were certain chances you had to take, nothing worked the way it was supposed to always.
MR RAUTENBACH: So you never thought that he had to sign something?
MR BELLINGAN: Yes, well we believed at that stage that if we were caught we would have been protected, we wouldn't have gone to court. We were protected within the Security Branch, we would have covered it up.
MR RAUTENBACH: Just to summarise that part, you were not too worried about the fact that he had to fill something in?
MR BELLINGAN: No, I wasn't.
CHAIRPERSON: Can I interrupt again, I'm afraid I'm hopelessly out of touch with these things nowadays. When you send a parcel, particularly when you're sending one that is going to go into a foreign country, do you have to put what the contents of it are?
MR BELLINGAN: I think in the past you had to say yes, it was either plastic wares or it was rusks or magazines. I do not know if it was necessary, I'm not sure.
MR RAUTENBACH: It seems, concerning the insurance slip and in the evidence in the criminal trial, that the slip does make reference to a cassette. I'm not talking about the photocopy, I'm referring to that this is something that would have appeared, that somebody would know that this insured package contains a tape recorder.
MR BELLINGAN: It may be that I told Simon that it is a tape recorder, I cannot argue that, it was a long time ago.
MR RAUTENBACH: I would just like to tell you concerning that aspect, initially I got the idea that you basically said that you wouldn't have talked to him about it.
MR BELLINGAN: That why I'm saying it could have been. Usually we wouldn't have talked about it, but he could have asked me what he must write on the parcel and I could have told him that.
MR RAUTENBACH: Although there are certain aspects in his evidence which are not satisfactory to say the least and which are contradictory, this part of his evidence that it would have been a parcel for Dirk Coetzee and it would have come from the lawyers for human rights, and then he corrected himself and said lawyers who do these things within that context, it seems to me - and I want to put it to you, as if a conversation must have taken place otherwise he wouldn't have been able to present that evidence.
MR BELLINGAN: I think he may have read that in the newspapers later concerning the lawyers for human rights. I saw the name, but it wasn't an issue at that stage. Maybe it was in the media. It was a conclusion he made.
MR RAUTENBACH: I'm not going to take it any further than that, just to make the picture a bit more clear. I'm not going to tell you that you had to be aware of this, but I think you have to take not that Bheki Mlangeni was the chairperson of one of the biggest ANC branch and that was the Jabulani Branch in Soweto.
MR BELLINGAN: Mr Chairperson, it could have been, but there were various branches in the country and I cannot say that we knew all the branches, we concentrated on more on the freedom fighters.
MR RAUTENBACH: And he was also detained at various times, but as I say, I'm not going to put it to you as a fact that you should have known it. This discussion that you were supposed to have had with - which Radebe talks of, surely there must have been some type of explanation given to Radebe - he's not an askari, he's more a policeman at Vlakplaas, as to why he had to actually hand in the package when you could hand it in yourself. ...(transcriber's interpretation)
MR BELLINGAN: Yes, if Col de Kock said that he had to go with Bellingan or Balletjies, or whatever he calls me, it would have been final, there wouldn't still be an explanation from my side. But we could have communicated, so it's not ...(intervention)
MR RAUTENBACH: So you don't dismiss that evidence of his?
MR BELLINGAN: No.
MR RAUTENBACH: Then concerning what happened at Vlakplaas, evidence was led by Mr Bosch and he indicated that you were the second operator. What is your comment on that?
MR BELLINGAN: I would not differ from him there, I just don't think that we worked in such defined sections, he did something, you do something. I think it may be a bit confusing. The stuff was in his office and we had no access to it.
MR RAUTENBACH: At this stage it does seem, concerning the road that this package went, that there was some link missing and that is the person who put the addresses on the parcel and who basically - I do not want to use the word "manufacture", or went through the process where he printed out the addresses and then attached it to the package and maybe he used the right address and then the wrong address, made a spelling error, the person who was responsible for that as well as the "Evidence - Hit Squad" written on the tape, if it was the same person because that link in the chain is gone. You don't know?
MR BELLINGAN: Well I told my legal representative there's somewhere a missing link. There was a person Charlie who was also in the office, maybe he went with Bosch, I'm not sure. His name is not mentioned.
MR RAUTENBACH: He's also a person who did not apply for amnesty.
MR BELLINGAN: I know it was suggested in various of our applications.
MR RAUTENBACH: If I may ask you this way, if we go through the whole chain or the process, that we cannot find any evidence concerning that specific aspect and it could have been possibly a person or persons who did not apply for amnesty, who fulfilled the task within that link.
MR BELLINGAN: It could have been, but I think is - as I said earlier on, if it was me I would have said I pasted this thing and I wrote on it, but I know it wasn't me. And I'm sure the other colleagues would have done the same thing, I don't think there's one person who wants to hide it, everyone is here to tell the truth, so it is a possibility. ...(transcriber's interpretation)
MR LAX: Sorry, what was the name you mentioned there? I just didn't hear it clearly.
CHAIRPERSON: I take it, because this is a problem that's facing us too, that when you say that somebody may have written the addresses as well as "Hit Squad", that you accept a possibility, on Bosch's evidence, that somebody not only read "Hit Squad", but opened the package and substituted it and we've heard nothing about that. That's part of what the mystery is.
MR RAUTENBACH: That is correct, Mr Chairman, this is 100% correct.
MR BELLINGAN: The name is Charlie Chait, not Tait that we spoke of earlier on. Chait, C-h-a-i-t. - "e". I think there's an "e" as well. It could be a possibility, it's not for definite.
MR SIBANYONI: Were his fingerprints and writing specimens taken?
MR BELLINGAN: I cannot say, Chairperson, I do not know what the investigative officer's reports say. I do not know whose fingerprints were taken, I cannot say that it wasn't taken.
MR RAUTENBACH: Mr Bellingan, a section in your evidence I am not quite sure if I understand and that is concerning the cleaning process in case it may be incriminating. How did you hear of it, did you have any contact with Kritzinger?
MR BELLINGAN: No, I had no contact with him, it was a rumour. You get a call from head office and we hear we have to clean up because Judge Goldstone is on his way, we take everything and throw it in the trash cans.
MR RAUTENBACH: It sees, according to the evidence of Kritzinger, the he basically conveyed this directly, that he would have said - or I understand out of Mr Klopper's evidence that ...(intervention)
MR BELLINGAN: He's have to comment about that.
MR RAUTENBACH: You don't know anything about this, you just accept it that this is again a rumour we have to clear up?
MR BELLINGAN: Yes, at that stage we had to retrace our steps and clean everything up.
MR RAUTENBACH: No more questions, Mr Chairman.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR RAUTENBACH
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS LOCKHAT: I just want to ask you a couple of questions relating to the surveillance of the Dirk Coetzee family. Who was with you on occasions when you did carry out this surveillance?
MR BELLINGAN: Chairperson, at one stage it was myself and Steve Bosch who did the surveillance, some of the other members, some of the black members were also involved. One night we went to the restaurant where she met people, so I cannot specifically say, but I would say mostly it was the Vlakplaas members.
MS LOCKHAT: Because Klopper in his evidence in the criminal trial, stated that Mr Tait was one person that went with you to that particular restaurant. He mentioned four people, himself, yourself, Mr Tait and Martinus Ras.
MR BELLINGAN: It could have been, yes. We were a large group of people who were around the restaurant on that night.
MS LOCKHAT: That's on page 20 of bundle 2, where he mentions that.
Did Mr Martinus Ras and Mr Tait work for Vlakplaas?
MR BELLINGAN: Yes, Chairperson.
MS LOCKHAT: Were they involved in this operation as well?
MR BELLINGAN: Not as far as I know.
MS LOCKHAT: But they accompanied you on the surveillance and the tapping in of the phones and so forth or ...?
MR BELLINGAN: Yes, they did accompany us in the surveillance and the surveillance only.
MS LOCKHAT: Is it possible that any of them, after the operation, after you got the package and so forth, dealt with the package as well? Is it possible?
MR BELLINGAN: I cannot say, Chairperson.
MS LOCKHAT: And Mr Tait also accompanied you, as Mr Radebe said, to the post office, is that correct?
MR BELLINGAN: According to his evidence, but I cannot believe why Mr Tait did not apply because he's applying for many other incidents. I cannot remember him in the vehicle, but I will not argue with him though.
MS LOCKHAT: I just want to get back to the meeting. You said you didn't attend the meeting but de Kock went to the office of van Rensburg, is that correct?
MR BELLINGAN: That's correct, Chairperson.
MS LOCKHAT: And you didn't accompany him inside the office, is that correct?
MR BELLINGAN: No, he went to go and fetch something, an envelope, I stood in the door and waited.
MS LOCKHAT: Was the door closed or open?
MR BELLINGAN: It was an open door.
MS LOCKHAT: Did you hear what they were discussing?
MR BELLINGAN: As I can recall, de Kock said that he came to fetch the envelope and then afterwards I heard that it was the address of Coetzee.
MS LOCKHAT: Was there anybody else in the room?
MR BELLINGAN: No, not as far as I can remember.
MR LAX: Sorry, I didn't hear the answer, just repeat.
MR BELLINGAN: Not as far as I can remember.
MS LOCKHAT: And you don't know whether du Plessis was there or not.
MR BELLINGAN: No, I cannot remember.
MS LOCKHAT: Did Mr de Kock tell you at that stage - after he got the address, did he tell you what you're going to do with it at that time?
MR BELLINGAN: If I can remember correctly, we walked down the passage and he said "This is Dirk's address and we're going to make a plan". He did not give me the details in what we are going to do.
MS LOCKHAT: Did you understand what he meant by "make a plan"?
MR BELLINGAN: Yes, Dirk Coetzee was enemy number one, so I could agree with that.
MS LOCKHAT: Thank you, Chairperson, I've no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS LOCKHAT
MR SIBANYONI: Mr Bellingan, apart from merely posting the parcel at the post office, was Mr Radebe also expected to pretend, as if he was Bheki or was he only going to say he's posting the parcel on behalf of Bheki?
MR BELLINGAN: I believe that he would have said that he would just like to post this parcel on behalf of somebody. I don't think he would have pretended to be Bheki, but I think if somebody asked him for identification he just would have said he's a courier. I believe he would have done that.
MR SIBANYONI: Thank you, Mr Chairperson.
MR LAX: Thanks Chair.
Just firstly about the money you would have given him. You would have drawn those funds from the normal secret source of funds, you would have had to make some kinds of entries to get those funds.
MR BELLINGAN: Chairperson, if I would have given him the money, it would have been that way, yes. I would have written out a claim, a false claim, because I also had access to it, de Kock trusted me. So I would have just handed in a claim for that. I believed I would have given him the money.
MR LAX: What I'm suggesting to you is that it would have been an additional factor in the process which would probably have triggered your memory or something that would have stayed in your mind a bit more than just delivering it to the post office.
MR BELLINGAN: Yes, that could possibly be so.
MR LAX: So the fact that you don't recall it may well imply that it didn't happen at all.
MR BELLINGAN: Yes, it could have been that it did not happen, that he got money from somebody else, money that I did not give him, but it just seems that it would be normal that I would have given it to him.
MR LAX: Because he doesn't recall the money either and he clearly doesn't recall taking it out of his own pocket and claiming it back afterwards.
CHAIRPERSON: But quite clearly somebody had to pay for the postage.
MR BELLINGAN: Yes, somebody would have to pay, Chairperson, it could have been me ...
MR LAX: Okay, that's the first aspect. The next aspect is, at the time you and Col de Kock went to van Rensburg's office that day, were you already aware of some sort of operation of this nature? Had it already begun to take place?
MR BELLINGAN: Chairperson, at that stage we did surveillance, tapping, and there must have been discussions amongst each other that we had to get Dirk Coetzee. We would have tried to do something else, for example getting the address. So I believe, maybe not in detail, but we would have started a plan at that stage to bring ideas together.
MR LAX: Because you're aware of the differences between Mr de Kock's evidence yesterday, and of course you weren't here, but I'm sure your legal representative pointed out to you the differences between what you're saying and what he said. Just to repeat it for your benefit, is that van Rensburg was with du Plessis in the office and they spoke to de Kock about this matter, and what I want to get to is the issue of the other address, in other words the address of the sender of that parcel, because Mr de Kock left HQ that day with both of them. You have no recollection of that at all?
MR BELLINGAN: No, none at all.
MR LAX: And in your mind this was just a short message, you went there to pick up an envelope and nothing more.
MR BELLINGAN: An envelope or a note yes, but I cannot remember that he took or received any addresses. I was standing outside of the door, so I could not really see what specifically happened. It could have been two notes.
MR LAX: You see the evidence was that du Plessis left the office, so if he left the office he would have walked past you.
MR BELLINGAN: Yes, I would have seen him.
MR LAX: And it would have been something that stuck in your mind.
MR BELLINGAN: Yes.
MR LAX: He then went to another office and came back with another piece of paper with an address on and a name on it.
MR BELLINGAN: I will not argue that.
MR LAX: The fact is though that you were told by, on your version, that you had Dirk's address, you weren't told you had another address.
MR BELLINGAN: No, that is correct, yes.
MR LAX: You can't be confusing some other meeting with the meeting where the decision to make a plan was taken?
MR BELLINGAN: No, Chairperson.
MR LAX: Because prior to this you didn't know anything about the making of the plan with Dirk. Have I got it correctly?
MR BELLINGAN: Yes, I do agree.
MR LAX: Now you said that there wasn't a very thick file at HQ, and from that I wanted to check whether you actually ever saw his file at HQ.
MR BELLINGAN: Yes, I would just like to rectify something there. I didn't see the file, so I cannot say how thick it was. I did not have any knowledge about this file.
MR LAX: Okay. You maybe just expressed yourself a bit excessively in that instance.
MR BELLINGAN: That's correct, Chairperson.
MR LAX: Then this last - sorry, there's two other points I just wish to follow up on. The first is, it seems clear from the way you've spoken about whatever interaction there may have been between you and Radebe, that you yourself weren't particularly concerned about being caught or leaving behind traces that might lead back to you. Because your subsequent evidence in relation to that was "Well if we were, it would just be covered up in any event, as was always the practice".
MR BELLINGAN: Yes, I believed so.
MR LAX: And consequently it's highly unlikely that you would have therefore, in that instance and in that context, told Radebe to take any special precautions.
MR BELLINGAN: Yes, I believe - I think out of experience he knew that he must not leave any fingerprints, it was logical that he shouldn't just touch anything. But I believe he would have known not to leave any fingerprints behind.
MR LAX: You see his evidence is he had not inkling this was a lethal package, so he would have had no reason to suspect that he should take any special care.
MR BELLINGAN: I will not argue about what he thought.
MR LAX: And then finally, all of you so far don't seem to know who this missing link is, how is it possible that all of you working together in the same place and in constant communication with each other all the time, studiously avoid knowing who this other person or persons are that may have, in one way or another, had something to do with this parcel?
MR BELLINGAN: Chairperson, I told my legal representatives I cannot believe it. If it was me who wrote it I just would have said yes, but Charlie was also at the farm at that stage. I do not believe it was him, but I cannot give an explanation where that missing link is. I cannot really understand why anything would be held back concerning this, it just doesn't make sense to me.
MR LAX: There would only be one reason why and that is because you know that person didn't apply for amnesty and therefore you might want to cover up for that person.
MR BELLINGAN: I do not believe so, Chairperson.
MR LAX: No, fair enough. That's it, Chairperson, from me.
CHAIRPERSON: Well I would like to continue from there. This package we are told about, how it was wrapped up at the offices, the Technical Division, how you fetched it from there, took it and gave it to Mr de Kock, who presumably would have treated it with a great deal of care, knowing what it was, it then emerged on Mr Bosch's desk and somebody had written or stuck a label onto it, it was taken from there by you, was it? Or who gave it to you?
MR BELLINGAN: I think Col de Kock or Mr Bosch gave it to me.
CHAIRPERSON: It was taken from there and given to you to be posted and it had labels stuck on it. We have been told that it was either kept in Mr Bosch's office, which was a secure room with a steel door, or in a safe, yet nobody can explain how suddenly from something merely wrapped up with brown paper, it becomes a parcel addressed, with the sender's name and address on it, with, it would seem, postage stamps or postal payment stuck on it, with insurance having been arranged, and nobody knows. Doesn't this appear to be a deliberate concealment of information?
MR BELLINGAN: Chairperson, I do agree with you, it does not make sense. I told my advocate that I couldn't believe that there was a missing link. As I said, if I did it I would have said well, I did it and get it over with, but I cannot believe that there's a missing link. Somebody in the group had to do it, had to write it.
CHAIRPERSON: My final question is, were you told what post office to go to?
MR BELLINGAN: Chairperson, I do not want to lie, but I believe they would have said in Johannesburg in the centre of town, close to the offices of the sender. If I decided on Jeppe or Braamfontein, I cannot say but ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: That's the point I wish to make, and you've made it for me, "close to the offices of the sender". That was a factor in choosing the post office, to build up the proof where who had sent it.
MR BELLINGAN: I agree with you.
CHAIRPERSON: And you think you were told that?
MR BELLINGAN: I believe so, Chairperson.
MR LAX: Just to follow up on that. I mean the office close to the sender's office would have been the Braamfontein Post Office, not the Joubert Park Post Office.
MR BELLINGAN: I can remember where I stopped, but I see it was Braamfontein, but I always thought it was Joubert Park or Jeppe Street Post office.
MR LAX: Ja. No, Jorisson Street is right up, quite far from Joubert Park.
MR BELLINGAN: Yes, it could have been, I do not know Johannesburg that well. But I will agree with it, that it was Braamfontein, it was on the document.
MR LAX: It sounds strange that having got that instruction you then didn't go to the one at Braamfontein but you went to the one at Joubert Park.
MR BELLINGAN: I cannot argue with that.
MR LAX: Some explanation may assist, but obviously you can't remember.
MR BELLINGAN: I agree, there.
CHAIRPERSON: I thought you did remember that it was to be posted somewhere in central Johannesburg, to link up with the offices of the sender.
MR BELLINGAN: If it was Joubert Park or Braamfontein, I cannot remember specifically.
CHAIRPERSON: Which one. But that was the purpose of going there.
MR BELLINGAN: That's correct, Chairperson.
MR LAMEY: Chairperson, I don't know whether - I've just seen on Exhibit D6, there's a stamp of Joubert Park and then later there's the writing "Braamfontein" on the other exhibit. I'm also - I just picked that up, I don't know whether you ... D5 is Braamfontein and then D6, there's a post office stamp "Joubert Park".
MR RAUTENBACH: Mr Chairman, may I just be of some assistance here. D5 has been pointed out, it was a document that was most probably - on the evidence of the inquest records you'll notice "retour" on the right, in other words "on the way back", and that the office of - although it says "Office of Posting - Braamfontein", I think it was common cause in the inquest, even for the witnesses that were called, that the parcel was in fact posted at Joubert Park and that the "Braamfontein" that appears on D5, was a document that was filled in at Lusaka, probably with the idea of indicating the destination, being Braamfontein.
You will also notice on D5, there's a date, "Date of Dispatch". Now there was evidence that there was tippex, with tippex the date was changed and from the evidence in the inquest, it transpired that a "9" was tippexed out and was replaced with the "10/11", that's 10th of November, which corresponds with the actual sending of the parcel from Lusaka back to Johannesburg. I just hope that may just clarify some of the issues.
CHAIRPERSON: I can't understand who or what organisation should be so interested to tippex out the date from the 9th to the 10th.
MR RAUTENBACH: I may just point out that at the inquest that question was raised "Why was the tippex on the yellow ticket?" And then some forensic expert looked at it and actually removed the tippex and basically came to the conclusion that the "0", in other words, "10", that there was a "9". So whoever - it actually pointed towards, at the posting of the documents, someone changed the date from the 9th to the 10th, which in itself doesn't seem to be suspicious at all.
What we understood was that the yellow document, the yellow card, was something used all over the world as - I'm not sure whether a post office is supposed to, when they get back the yellow ticket, to forward it to some central office, which of course South Africa at that stage wasn't part of the arrangement. But that's the way we understood it.
CHAIRPERSON: I don't know whether we're going to have someone giving evidence about this package and the postage, because I must say I'm totally confused as to what this first envelope on D1 is, going to Switzerland, which looks from the way it is there, that it might have been an envelope in which the insurance certificate was put. But was it found stuck onto the parcel? Where does it come from? We were given a photograph of what appears to be an envelope addressed to Bern in Switzerland, which doesn't tie in with any of the other information we've been given.
MR RAUTENBACH: Mr Chairman, may I just point out that if you look at D1 for instance, you will see that this was taken at the crime scene - there's a box of cigarettes that you will see sticking out at the bottom of the page, so what happened was, the two documents that you see "Insured Parcel" and the "Union de Postal Universal", is not the same document as such. My understanding was - and if it's necessary to get that evidence, we will have to do so, that that was the reverse side of the so-called yellow document, the document that eventually gets forwarded to one central place, and that seems to be a Switzerland address.
CHAIRPERSON: So that you say comes from the other side of D5.
MR RAUTENBACH: That is correct.
CHAIRPERSON: Now I ...(intervention)
MR LAX: There's automatically that worries me about that assumption and that is if you look at D5, it's all crumpled on the one end and the envelope on D1 isn't.
MR RAUTENBACH: I have checked this now with my instructing attorney, the document that we are - our definite recollection that that is the reverse side of the document, but I'm not sure whether the photostat doesn't make that clear or what the situation is, but that was, the understanding was that it's a yellow card that is used internationally and forwarded to one central place. I don't know what they do with it, why they want to have this information and what the purpose of it is, or whether only some countries are registered at this specific organisation.
I will, Mr Chairman, also just look at the record that is available, just see what I can get from the record, but you will notice in the extracts from Kritzinger's evidence that there was a lot of cross-examination about for instance, the change from "9" to "10", about the yellow card. And it started off - the bone of contention was, if you look at the investigation docket, it was put forward as yet another piece of overseas material and therefore it wasn't something that was manufactured in South Africa. That was the theory at the time, advanced by the police as well as by the Attorney-General's office, that it was something that was manufactured somewhere with Eastern European material, somewhere overseas, brought into the country for this purpose to get to Coetzee.
And during that cross-examination, in the course of that investigation it was basically established on the probabilities, that the document was something that was attached to the parcel in Lusaka and not in South Africa. The post office officials in South Africa didn't know what this document was about and they didn't know how to deal with, especially when a matter is being posted from South Africa to overseas. That's as far as I can take it, Mr Chairman. If it's necessary and we'll have to call a witness on that issue, then we'll have to do so.
CHAIRPERSON: Well these photographs to me are entirely confusing. If you look at D1, there's a packet of cigarettes above the envelope, you can see the bottom of it, right? You've seen that?
MR RAUTENBACH: I do.
CHAIRPERSON: When they come to take D3, they put a cassette on top of the same envelope. When they come to take D5, they put the notice on top of the packet of cigarettes.
MR RAUTENBACH: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: What are they doing?
MR LAX: Just one other thing that one can notice, and if you look carefully, what I refer to as the crumpled portion of that thing, is in fact the balance of the insurance slip because you can see the remainder of the cross that's on the top, it you look on the other portion, coming through there. And in fact there's a separate line dividing that card from the piece underlying it and it says "OPU Quality of Service Test". So this is obviously some organisation of postal unions that are running some sort of statistical data collection on how long it takes items to go from point A to point B.
MR RAUTENBACH: I will agree with that observation, it seems that that seems to be the case.
CHAIRPERSON: And if you look below the OPU, there's a little nick in the thing, they're two different - as my colleague says, they're two bits of - it's not the one sheet of paper going through, they've put one on top of another.
MR RAUTENBACH: Yes, I agree with that observation as well. But in any event, it seems that those were then -from the photostat at least, as I was basically explaining what our understanding was, two separate documents. The one was the insurance and the other one was this yellow card referring to whatever data they needed in this organisation.
MACHINE SWITCHED OFF
MR BOOYENS: ... no thank you, Mr Chairman.
NO RE-EXAMINATION BY MR BOOYENS
WITNESS EXCUSED
MACHINE SWITCHED OFF
MR BOOYENS: I call my next witness, Mr Wal du Toit.
