CHAIRPERSON: Morning everybody. Who's next?
MR CORNELIUS: Thank you, Mr Chair. Cornelius on behalf of Vermeulen, I intend to call him, with your permission.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Cornelius, does your client speak Afrikaans?
MR CORNELIUS: He's Afrikaans-speaking, Mr Chair.
INTERPRETER: The speaker's microphone is not on.
NICHOLAAS JOHANNES VERMEULEN: (sworn states)
EXAMINATION BY MR CORNELIUS: Thank you, Mr Chair.
Mr Vermeulen, you are an applicant and in terms of Section 18 of Act 34/95, you have prepared a proper application and submitted it as such.
MR VERMEULEN: That is correct.
MR CORNELIUS: You were in service of the South African Police, as defined in Section 20(2)(b) and 20(2)(f) of this Act, is that correct? I'm terribly sorry, Judge, it's on page 124 of bundle 1, that is the merits part, the initial part and the political motivation is on page 109, Judge.
You submitted the application punctually and you gave your support to the Investigative team of the TRC, is that correct?
MR VERMEULEN: Yes, that is correct.
MR CORNELIUS: Is it also correct that you were deployed to the section which was known as C1, under the command of Col Eugene de Kock?
MR VERMEULEN: Yes, that is correct, Chairperson.
MR CORNELIUS: During the incidents of this incident of Lesotho, what was your rank?
MR VERMEULEN: I was a Warrant Officer.
MR CORNELIUS: And it is also common knowledge before the Committee, as per previous evidence, that at all times you executed the orders given by Eugene de Kock and acted on a need-to-know basis.
MR VERMEULEN: Yes, that is correct.
MR CORNELIUS: And you confirm that the political objectives of that time are as they are set out in your current application.
MR VERMEULEN: That is correct.
MR CORNELIUS: I take you back to the 19th of December 1985, did you receive orders from Eugene de Kock to participate in this operation?
MR VERMEULEN: That is correct.
MR CORNELIUS: And it is common cause that you travelled down to Ladybrand, is that correct?
MR VERMEULEN: Yes, that is correct.
MR CORNELIUS: Could you tell the Tribunal briefly what your participation was from the moment that you travelled down to the river.
MR VERMEULEN: At the river, Mr Coetser and I placed all the equipment in the rubber dinghies.
MR CORNELIUS: What equipment was this?
MR VERMEULEN: It was our weapons.
MR CORNELIUS: And what did you do with the weapons?
MR VERMEULEN: They were packed into the dinghies and taken across the river, on the other side the people received the weapons and we moved out to the house ...(intervention)
MR CORNELIUS: Just a moment. So you moved over the river to the target house.
MR VERMEULEN: Yes, that is correct.
MR CORNELIUS: In your application you state that you crossed the border at the border post with vehicles and false passports, did you use vehicles to cross the border?
MR VERMEULEN: No.
MR CORNELIUS: Therefore you request an amendment of your application.
MR VERMEULEN: That is correct.
MR CORNELIUS: I understand that in consultation with me you mentioned that you moved into Lesotho every two to three months.
MR VERMEULEN: That is correct.
MR CORNELIUS: Did you move through the border post every time?
MR VERMEULEN: Yes.
MR CORNELIUS: Did you use false passports on these occasions?
MR VERMEULEN: Yes.
MR CORNELIUS: Did you confuse the crossing at the border post with the crossing at the river?
MR VERMEULEN: That is correct.
MR BERGER: Chairperson, with respect, if my learned friend could not lead the witness so much, there's just yes and no to all the questions that my learned friend is putting at the moment.
MR CORNELIUS: I will do so.
The inflatable boats, when you crossed the river what happened?
MR VERMEULEN: One sank ...(intervention)
INTERPRETER: The speaker's microphone is not on.
MR VERMEULEN: One of the dinghies sank and took water in, we had to transfer the equipment to the other boat.
MR CORNELIUS: Where did you go after you had crossed the river?
MR VERMEULEN: Once we had crossed the river we gathered together where the people took their equipment and we moved up towards the house.
MR CORNELIUS: At what time of the night was this?
MR VERMEULEN: It is difficult to say but I estimate that it must have been approximately 10 o'clock to 11 o'clock at night, if I recall correctly.
MR CORNELIUS: What were your orders?
MR VERMEULEN: My order was to take up position at the side of the house and to ensure that people did not exit the house and also to see that any of the Lesotho Defence Force members did not come to the house.
MR CORNELIUS: I see. And did you have any orders to shoot any of the targets?
MR VERMEULEN: If they departed from the house yes, I would have shot them.
MR CORNELIUS: Very well. Did you then move to your position?
MR VERMEULEN: That is correct.
MR CORNELIUS: What happened then?
MR VERMEULEN: I took up my position. I heard shots in the house. Nothing exited from the windows or the entrances where I was positioned. At a certain stage there was a man who peered over from the neighbouring house, I told him to go away. He remained there. I tried to shoot him but the weapon was still on safety and when I set it to fire, the person was gone. I didn't see him again.
MR CORNELIUS: Very well. What happened then?
MR VERMEULEN: After the shooting we all returned to the river, where I had a television. I don't know where I obtained this, but I carried a television and a case across the river.
MR CORNELIUS: Whose television was this?
MR VERMEULEN: Mr McCaskill's.
MR CORNELIUS: Did you receive an order to take this TV, or what was the objective?
MR VERMEULEN: That's correct, Chairperson.
MR CORNELIUS: Who gave you the order?
MR VERMEULEN: Col de Kock.
MR CORNELIUS: What happened to the vehicles that you used?
MR VERMEULEN: The vehicles were set alight on the bank of the river. We walked and swam through to the other side.
MR CORNELIUS: What did you do then?
MR VERMEULEN: There was a vehicle waiting for us. All of us climbed into the vehicle and we returned to Ladybrand.
MR CORNELIUS: And after that you returned to Vlakplaas?
MR VERMEULEN: That is correct.
MR CORNELIUS: With the exception of your regular salary, did you receive any bonus or extra financial remuneration for your participation?
MR VERMEULEN: No.
MR CORNELIUS: Did you receive any honour or award?
MR VERMEULEN: Only the medal.
MR VERMEULEN: Which medal?
MR VERMEULEN: I think it was the Silver Cross for Bravery.
MR CORNELIUS: Who presented this to you?
MR VERMEULEN: I'm not certain, but I think it was Gen Basie Smit.
MR CORNELIUS: Was this indicative or not that the operation had been approved?
MR VERMEULEN: I assumed as such.
MR CORNELIUS: Did you have any feelings of personal hatred or vengeance towards the victims?
MR VERMEULEN: No.
MR CORNELIUS: And in as far as you can remember, this is a long time ago, you have given a full disclosure of the relevant facts.
MR VERMEULEN: That is correct.
MR CORNELIUS: You request that this Amnesty Committee would grant you amnesty for the conspiracy and murder of a number of persons who were situated in the target house.
MR VERMEULEN: That is correct.
MR CORNELIUS: You also request amnesty for the illegal crossing of State borders and intentional damage to property.
MR VERMEULEN: That is correct.
MR CORNELIUS: And by nature of the matter, all other delicts which may emanate on a civil basis from these proceedings.
MR VERMEULEN: That is correct, Chairperson.
MR CORNELIUS: Thank you, Mr Chair.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR CORNELIUS
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Cornelius, are we empowered to decide on whether your client is guilty of malicious injury to property in Lesotho?
MR CORNELIUS: Strictly not, I would say Mr Chair, I think that is covered by ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: It's different from a plan to murder and carrying out the plan to murder in South Africa and carrying it out elsewhere.
MR CORNELIUS: You are quite correct, Mr Chair.
CHAIRPERSON: The carrying of all those - the possession of all those weapons, I would assume it could be argued that if they were issued by the South African Police or whatever, but they were really being carried for illegal purposes, would the possession of those firearms be illegal?
MR CORNELIUS: In terms of the Arms and Ammunition Act, there are so many offences that we would have committed, I think to cover that we would say all offences that arise out of the Arms and Ammunitions Act, I think that would cover most of the incidents. The transportation thereof, the ammunition ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: ...(indistinct) it's a fine line and I'm asking for your assistance here. They were policemen and these firearms were in fact issued by the authorities of the Police, but they were issued for an illegal purpose, does that make the possession of those firearms illegal?
MR CORNELIUS: I think the possession would be legal, according to my interpretation. I think the possession would be legal, they were properly issued. The fact that it was used for illegal purposes ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: ...(indistinct - no microphone)
MR CORNELIUS: For various purposes, Mr Chair, from illegal to legal purposes.
CHAIRPERSON: Well what was legal about anything that they did ...(indistinct)
MR CORNELIUS: You see Mr Chair, I think what confuses the issue is that a lot of these weapons were brought back from Ovamboland, so we'll have to typify each weapon and find out if it was weapons which were ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: I'm talking generally, I'm talking about a general picture. They embarked on an illegal escapade, in order to succeed in that escapade they were issued with firearms for the purpose of carrying out illegal activities. That's the way I read it.
MR CORNELIUS: It's a very technical line, Mr Chair, I would say if you view it in that line we would then ask for the illegal possession of firearms then as well, to be safe. There's a further issue, the passports, the false passports, I mean that is forging and uttering of passports and also carrying a false passport, so we can really go into detail as far as offences are concerned.
CHAIRPERSON: But I'm really in your hands for what your client is applying for, I mean, I'm just asking about the prospects of this.
MR CORNELIUS: Yes, I would rather play it safe and ask for amnesty for the illegal possession of firearms because we don't have the specific identity of the firearms, Mr Chair. And for the fact that it was used for unlawful purposes.
ADV BOSMAN: And what about the travel documents and the crossing of the border, are you asking for amnesty?
MR CORNELIUS: Thank you, Advocate Bosman, I've asked for the illegal crossing of the border, but I would obviously also ask for the carrying of a false passport, forgery and uttering ...
MACHINE SWITCHED OFF
ON RESUMPTION
CHAIRPERSON: Where did they get these illegal passports?
MR CORNELIUS: According to my mandate it was issued at Police Headquarters, it was a passport with the photograph of my client on, with false names and ID numbers, obviously. It was standard, it was issued ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: I don't know how standard it was, if it was illegal, but surely it must have been issued with the connivance of the Department of Internal Affairs or Homelands.
MR CORNELIUS: My instructions are yes.
CHAIRPERSON: Well maybe you can do us a favour, can you ask your client does he know whether that option's still open and operative.
MR CORNELIUS: He has no knowledge, he doesn't know, Mr Chair.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you. Mr Hattingh.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR HATTINGH: Thank you, Mr Chairman.
Mr Vermeulen, upon various other occasions before Committees you have given evidence and I note that in your application on page 126, you make mention of the fact that you suffer from the so-called post-traumatic stress disorder, is that correct?
MR VERMEULEN: Yes, that is correct.
MR HATTINGH: And that the condition that you suffer from, has affected your memory.
MR VERMEULEN: That is correct.
MR HATTINGH: I also note that with your application as in the past with other applications, there is also a report from a psychologist by the name of Russel Matthews, which has been attached to your application, in which he states on page 130
"Mr N J Vermeulen suffers from a serious chronic post-traumatic stress disorder, which renders him one hundred percent unsuitable to be used in the labour market in any way."
Is that correct, that you were diagnosed as such?
MR VERMEULEN: Yes.
MR HATTINGH: Is it also correct as he states on page 129
"Since 1992 the patient has been undergoing psychiatric treatment. During May 1997, he was once again psychiatrically evaluated by Prof J H Robertse, whose report is attached and marked Annexure A."
This is unfortunately not available with these documents, but was it also that psychiatrist's opinion that you suffer from this disorder?
MR VERMEULEN: Yes, that is correct.
MR HATTINGH: Mr Vermeulen, you testified today that you crossed the border and that you then moved towards the house, did you go directly to the house from the border or did you first go elsewhere?
MR VERMEULEN: We went directly from the river to the house.
MR HATTINGH: Did you travel in two vehicles?
MR VERMEULEN: It is difficult for me to recall that portion, but as far as I can recall we travelled for some distance in vehicles, at which point we disembarked and then travelled further afoot.
MR HATTINGH: But from the border onwards did you travel in vehicles?
MR VERMEULEN: From Ladybrand to the border?
MR HATTINGH: No, from the point where you crossed the border to the house. When you crossed the river and landed on the other side, did you travel to the house with vehicles or did you travel by foot?
MR VERMEULEN: If I recall correctly we climbed into vehicles at that point, drove some distance towards the house, at which point we disembarked and travelled further afoot to the house.
MR HATTINGH: Is your recollection about this somewhat unclear?
MR VERMEULEN: I'm not entirely clear, that is what I can recall.
MR HATTINGH: And can you recall whether or not you stopped in the near vicinity of the post office in Maseru?
MR VERMEULEN: No.
MR HATTINGH: Would you dispute this?
MR VERMEULEN: I would not dispute it.
MR HATTINGH: Did you enter the house where the attack was launched after the attack?
MR VERMEULEN: No, Chairperson.
MR HATTINGH: And can you recall who of you were involved in the attack on the house where you stood guard?
MR VERMEULEN: What I can recall is that Col de Kock, Willie Nortje and myself were there.
MR HATTINGH: Were any other members with you on the operation as far as you can recall?
MR VERMEULEN: Yes.
MR HATTINGH: What happened to the other members when you took up position there at the house ?
MR VERMEULEN: At that stage I didn't know what had happened to the rest, because all I knew is that Steve Bosch was the driver of one of the vehicles.
MR HATTINGH: Therefore you didn't hear the order which was given to Messrs Adamson and Coetser, to go to another house?
MR VERMEULEN: No, Chairperson.
MR HATTINGH: Did you know that some of the members, or at least one of the members that you aimed to kill at the house was no longer at the house, that he had departed from that place?
MR VERMEULEN: No.
MR HATTINGH: Thank you, Mr Chairman, I have no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR HATTINGH
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR VISSER: Thank you, Chairperson, Visser on record.
Mr Vermeulen, the question regarding the award of the medals, you stated that you think that it was Basie Smit and you also refer to this in terms of Brig Schoon, if I were to put it to you that Brig Schoon did not have any direct share in the awarding of these medals and was also not present during such a ceremony, would you dispute it?
MR VERMEULEN: No, Chairperson, I would not.
INTERPRETER: The speaker's microphone.
MR VISSER: ...(inaudible)
INTERPRETER: ; The speaker's microphone is still not on.
MR VISSER: I will begin again. Regarding Basie Smit, he was a Colonel at that stage and the evidence of Gen van der Merwe here, was that he cannot recall it all that well but he thinks that it could have been him who awarded the medals, do you have any problem with that?
MR VERMEULEN: No, Chairperson.
MR VISSER: Thank you, Chair.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VISSER
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lamey.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR LAMEY: Thank you, Chairperson.
Mr Vermeulen, regarding the final aspect it is my instruction from Mr Nortje that it was indeed Gen van der Merwe who awarded the medals and not Gen Basie Smit. That is Mr Nortje's recollection.
MR VERMEULEN: I do not have a problem with that, Chairperson.
MR LAMEY: Then just one other aspect, can you recall any aspect, or may I put it as follows, were you present at any stage when members of Special Forces were encountered at the Thaba'Nchu Sun?
MR VERMEULEN: I am not certain, Chairperson, there were people because we were there one evening, but I cannot recall specifically whether or not we encountered some of those people there.
MR LAMEY: Very well. I have nothing further, thank you Chair.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR LAMEY
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR JOUBERT: Thank you, Mr Chairman, Joubert on behalf of McCaskill.
Mr Vermeulen, apart from the fact that you were aware that the TV belonged to Mr McCaskill, are you aware of any other involvement or actions by Mr McCaskill?
MR VERMEULEN: No, Chairperson, I did not deal with him until after the time.
MR JOUBERT: And you also mentioned a case that you took across the river, you cannot say to whom this case belonged?
MR VERMEULEN: No, Chairperson.
MR JOUBERT: Thank you, Chair, nothing further.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR JOUBERT
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Berger.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR BERGER: Thank you, Chairperson.
Mr Vermeulen, when were you born?
MR VERMEULEN: I beg your pardon, Sir?
MR BERGER: When were you born?
MR VERMEULEN: 1946.
MR BERGER: Where?
MR VERMEULEN: Port Elizabeth.
MR BERGER: Where did you go to school?
MR VERMEULEN: In Pretoria.
MR BERGER: High School?
MR VERMEULEN: Also Pretoria, Mr Chair.
MR BERGER: And after that, what did you do?
MR VERMEULEN: I joined the Police Force, Mr Chair.
MR BERGER: When was that?
MR VERMEULEN: 1965, Mr Chair.
MR BERGER: Where were you based?
MR VERMEULEN: Pretoria Headquarters, Mr Chair.
MR BERGER: All the time?
MR VERMEULEN: Most of the time ja, till 1971, when I went to Groblersdal for a - the Coin training facility there. I stayed there till 1975, I think. Then I joined the Special Task Force and in '85 I went over to C-Section.
MR BERGER: So from 1975 to 1985, what were you doing?
MR VERMEULEN: I was based at - just say again, sorry.
MR BERGER: If you want to speak in Afrikaans, it's fine.
MR VERMEULEN: Ja, I just didn't get the dates properly.
MR BERGER: You said from 1975 to 1985 you were where?
MR VERMEULEN: The Special Task Force.
MR BERGER: Doing what?
MR VERMEULEN: I was an operative there and later I became an Instructor.
MR BERGER: And where were you based?
MR VERMEULEN: In Pretoria.
MR BERGER: And then when did you join C-Section?
MR VERMEULEN: In 1985.
MR BERGER: When?
MR VERMEULEN: October.
MR BERGER: Do you remember the day?
MR VERMEULEN: No, Sir.
MR BERGER: And then you went to Vlakplaas.
MR VERMEULEN: Yes, Sir.
MR BERGER: Until when?
MR VERMEULEN: I think in 1992 or 1993 I went off medically unfit, Mr Chair.
MR BERGER: So from 1985 until 1992, you participated fully as a member of Vlakplaas.
MR VERMEULEN: That's correct, Mr Chairman.
MR BERGER: You had no difficulty carrying out orders, you had no difficulty remembering your orders?
MR VERMEULEN: No, Mr Chair.
MR BERGER: You've got no difficulty remembering the neighbour who put his head out and nearly had it shot off by you because you were standing guard outside the house?
MR VERMEULEN: No, I've got no problem with that.
MR BERGER: You have no difficulty remembering that you helped Mr McCaskill carry a TV set across the river?
MR VERMEULEN: No, Mr Chairman.
MR BERGER: But you've forgotten everything else.
MR VERMEULEN: I won't say I've forgotten everything else, but the rest of it was not important to me. I didn't partake in most of the other activities, Mr Chairman.
MR BERGER: You see your psychologist doesn't say anything about your having lost your memory.
MR VERMEULEN: That's not my problem, you can ask him, Sir.
MR BERGER: Well it's just your say-so that you lost your memory, or you have difficulty with your memory.
MR VERMEULEN: That's correct, Mr Chairman.
MR BERGER: Has any doctor, psychologist, psychiatrist, medical doctor, made a diagnosis that you have a problem with your memory?
MR VERMEULEN: As far as I know Mr Matthews made that diagnosis.
MR BERGER: Well as I read his report he doesn't say that anywhere.
MR VERMEULEN: Mr Chair, I'm not a psychiatrist, I think he will be better able to answer that question.
MR BERGER: Well I put it to you that if he had made such a diagnosis, it would be in his report.
MR VERMEULEN: That can be, Mr Chairman.
CHAIRPERSON: What diagnosis did he make, Mr Berger? As I read this report, it was a clinical assessment to establish whether he's fit for work on the labour market, in which he says
"Hundred percent unfit."
I'm not going to comment on that, but wasn't the intention of this report to establish his ability to find work? I'm suggesting, it looks like it.
MR BERGER: Chairperson, probably the intention of the report was whether or not Mr Vermeulen was entitled to be placed on pension.
CHAIRPERSON: I have my suspicions, but the nature of the report indicates that it was an assessment for whatever reason, to establish whether he was capable of being employed in the open labour market. ...(indistinct - no microphone) Sorry. ... rather than giving a clinical assessment on his ability to remember or whatever other psychiatric ailment he may have laboured under.
MR BERGER: Chairperson, with respect, if one looks at the report, page 128, it's a clinical psychological report, it doesn't say what the purpose of the report is, it ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: Precisely. I'm reading from the contents of it. I did preface my comments to you and said I'm not going to try and comment on the purpose for which this report was made and what I think of the report itself, it's just from the contents one gets the irresistible feeling that it was designed to indicate his capabilities of finding a job on the open labour market.
MR BERGER: Indeed, Chairperson, and 4.1 says that Mr Vermeulen suffers serious - this is at page 130, chronic post-traumatic stress, which makes him one hundred percent unable to find work in the market. Now that doesn't mean and it doesn't say that he has problems with his memory, it may be that every time someone ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: I know that, Mr Berger, I'm just pointing out that by the nature of the report one doesn't expect that kind of comment, that he's lost his memory or whatever. The lack of detail of this report does impact on the quality of the report, I concede, but to put it to the witness that the doctor didn't put it into his report and therefore we must question his allegation that he's lost his memory, I'm not saying you can't question that, but to base it on what the doctor has said or omitted to say, is another matter.
MR CORNELIUS: Let me be of assistance, Mr Chair, it will assist Mr Berger as well, the report was drawn for a claim against the Compensation Commission, to assess his ability in the open labour market, that was the report. ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: There are a lot of policemen who even could work did that at some time during the 1990s, some of them are running their own businesses.
MR BERGER: Chairperson, the reason I point out that there's no finding in the report of a loss of memory, is that at page 122, Mr Vermeulen says the following, he says - this is the second paragraph, in the middle of that paragraph. He says
"Currently I suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder, as it appears from reports in the possession of my psychologists, which results that my memory has been affected by it. I attach to this a copy of the report by Dr R E Matthews."
My point is simply that the only evidence we have of Mr Vermeulen's loss of memory, is his say-so, nothing more.
CHAIRPERSON: And that you're quite entitled to question. I'm saying that the nature of the report on which - one of the aspects you question is allegation of loss of memory, it's that it's not mentioned in the report. All I'm saying is, take cognisance of the quality of the report and perhaps the reasons why the report was drafted in the first place.
MR BERGER: Chairperson, the point simply is that Mr Vermeulen relies on the report.
CHAIRPERSON: To prove his loss of memory?
MR BERGER: To substantiate his loss of memory, yes.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: And he has also repeated that reliance when Mr Hattingh put it to him during his cross-examination.
MR BERGER: Indeed.
CHAIRPERSON: You say on 122, page 122?
MR BERGER: Yes, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: It says
"Currently I suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder, as it appears from reports in possession of my psychologists."
I suppose it can be read both ways.
MR CORNELIUS: Mr Chair, you will note if you look at page 129, paragraph 3, "Clinical Finding", there's an obvious omission of one full page, because it jumps from Clinical Finding to 4.1, so obviously the complete report is not before you. That is quite apparent.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: You prepared his application, Mr Cornelius, you should be the one to give us more guidance about whether it's complete or not.
MR CORNELIUS: You're quite right, Judge, but I've noticed it now, it's been drawn to my attention.
CHAIRPERSON: Well is it complete or not?
MR CORNELIUS: It's not complete, paragraph 3 is omitted.
CHAIRPERSON: Have you got the missing section?
MR CORNELIUS: I will have to obtain it from the psychiatrist, from the clinical psychologist.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Annexure A appears to be not part of this report that has been referred to at 2.4 on page 129.
MR CORNELIUS: You're quite correct, Judge, so I'll have to obtain the report from Robertse, the full - it was fully submitted at the initial application but there's been so many photostats and at one stage a part of his whole amnesty application was lost by the TRC in Cape Town, we had to photostat the whole lot and send it down to Cape Town again.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, but Mr Berger, all I'm saying is, bear in mind what the possible purpose of this report was, that the doctor, whatever his qualifications may be, omitted to say certain things, is neither here nor there. I am prepared to allow the questions that you ask on the basis you ask, but I want to point out on page 122, that second paragraph is capable of two interpretations, one of which is your interpretation.
MR BERGER: Well Chairperson, I accept what you say but one can't say that the doctor left out certain findings if there's a whole page of his report missing.
CHAIRPERSON: Well what we've got in front of us, that's why I'm saying bear that in mind.
MR BERGER: Mr Vermeulen, let's go on. You say that you harboured no hate or malice towards the people that you set out to kill, is that right?
MR VERMEULEN: That's correct, Mr Chair.
MR BERGER: You also say at page 118 of your amnesty application, that you were indoctrinated by your political masters. Do you remember that?
MR VERMEULEN: That's correct, Mr Chairman.
MR BERGER: Weren't you indoctrinated to hate your enemy?
MR VERMEULEN: No, Mr Chairman.
MR BERGER: You say you were indoctrinated and ordered to consider political opponents, which had to be deterred, disrupted and eliminated in their political struggle.
MR VERMEULEN: That's correct, Mr Chairman.
MR BERGER: What was your attitude towards your enemy in this indoctrinated state of yours?
MR VERMEULEN: It was just a job that I had to do, that's all.
MR BERGER: What was the extent of your indoctrination?
MR VERMEULEN: Mostly the political side.
MR BERGER: Which was what?
MR VERMEULEN: That they didn't believe in all the indoctrinations that ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: Well Mr Vermeulen, you say you were indoctrinated and all the advocate is asking is, how were you indoctrinated? It's not a question of it must have been political, I mean you tell us.
MR VERMEULEN: They gave us lectures, we received many lectures ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: No, the question is, how were you indoctrinated? You say that you were indoctrinated, how did this happen? Is that the question, Mr Berger?
MR BERGER: Thank you, Chair, yes it was.
MR VERMEULEN: As I understand it, Chairperson, we received many lectures regarding communism and the political parties against which we fought in the past. That is as far as I can take it.
CHAIRPERSON: How do you feel about communism today?
MR VERMEULEN: I still believe that it is wrong. Some of their ideas are right, some of them are wrong, but I am not more politically oriented that what I was before, I actually want nothing to do with it right now.
MR BERGER: Were you indoctrinated to regard the ANC as your enemy?
MR VERMEULEN: That is correct, Chairperson.
MR BERGER: And are you still so indoctrinated or not?
MR VERMEULEN: In some ways, yes Mr Chairman.
MR BERGER: You still regard the ANC as your enemy?
MR VERMEULEN: Not all of them, some of them.
MR BERGER: Which of them?
MR VERMEULEN: I don't know at the moment.
CHAIRPERSON: Ordinary members?
MR VERMEULEN: I beg your pardon, Sir?
CHAIRPERSON: Members of the African National Congress you regard as enemies, is that what you mean?
MR VERMEULEN: Yes. Persons, ja.
CHAIRPERSON: ...(indistinct - no microphone)
MR VERMEULEN: Ag I don't know at the moment, Mr Chairman, as I've said I'm not really interested in politics, I don't want anything to do with it, I want to put this whole mess behind me, because it is something that we have to overcome. Politically I am no longer oriented, I'm not even interested in it, I don't even listen to it.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Vermeulen, I don't know where we are leading but Mr Berger asked you whether or not you still think that the ANC is the enemy and your answer was no, not all of them, but some of them are still your enemy, that was your response.
MR VERMEULEN: Yes, that's correct.
CHAIRPERSON: And all that Mr Berger then asked is who are these persons or members of the ANC who you still regard as your enemy. That's all.
MR VERMEULEN: I cannot recall all the names, Chairperson, but there are many things which are not right. I don't know, I'm just not interested in it, I don't want to know about it. I don't know what the names of these persons are.
MR BERGER: Have you forgotten that as well?
MR VERMEULEN: No, I haven't forgotten it, but I don't want to think about it anymore, it's past, it's gone.
CHAIRPERSON: But Mr Vermeulen, you are here before an Amnesty Committee, where you must be able to remember because you will be examined about it. Once you leave her you can forget about it, but you cannot evade a question by saying that you don't want to think about it. And I'm saying this for your own best interests.
MR VERMEULEN: I understand that, Chairperson.
MR BERGER: You see Mr Vermeulen, you gave evidence this morning about your political motivation, you were asked questions, you confirmed what is in your amnesty application, now I' testing what's in your amnesty application, I'm testing your political motivation. You said that you acted the way you acted - correct me if I'm wrong, you acted the way you acted because you were indoctrinated, am I right?
MR VERMEULEN: Yes.
MR BERGER: I asked, how were you indoctrinated?
MR VERMEULEN: I said we had a lot of lectures, we received lectures about the communism, the ANC and all that. There was a lot of literature that was past on to us that we had to read.
MR BERGER: And you were indoctrinated to believe that the ANC and the Communist Party were your enemies.
MR VERMEULEN: That's correct, Mr Chair.
MR BERGER: Now if you say that you were indoctrinated, you must understand now, seeing it from a distance, that there was a process of indoctrination taking place. Is that right?
MR VERMEULEN: I don't understand that question.
MR BERGER: Well if you can allege that you were indoctrinated, it must follow that today you believe or you don't see things the way you saw things then.
MR VERMEULEN: Ja, that's correct, Mr Chairman.
MR BERGER: But then I asked you whether you still regarded the ANC as your enemy and you said "Yes, some of them."
MR VERMEULEN: Persons.
MR BERGER: Yes. And then my question is, who do you still regard as your enemy and now you say you don't know.
MR VERMEULEN: I don't know, Mr Chair, because we're still operatives from the old regime. I don't think people have forgotten what happened, there might be revenges, I don't know.
MR BERGER: So is it that you do know but you just don't want to name names?
MR VERMEULEN: No, I don't know any names.
CHAIRPERSON: How were you able to tell us that some of them still are your enemies? If you don't know whether these people exist, you don't know who they are, how can they be your enemies then?
MR VERMEULEN: Chairperson, if I may put it as follows, we were operatives from the former Vlakplaas, in the new dispensation I believe that people aren't very fond of us and we are not really on a very high pedestal and I believe that there are still persons who have feelings of vengeance towards us.
CHAIRPERSON: I can understand that you are their enemies, but the question is, who is your enemy?
MR VERMEULEN: I wouldn't be able to name a specific person or organisation as such. If one looks at the right-wingers, there is the AWB and whoever, I believe that in the new dispensation there must also be such persons who would go out and see whether or not they could find any of our people and eliminate us as well.
CHAIRPERSON: Then I'm going to give you another opportunity to answer the question. I can understand your thought process, we just want to know which persons you would regard as your enemies, who do you view as the enemy?
MR VERMEULEN: It is difficult for me to explain, Chairperson.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Mr Vermeulen, maybe to assist you, if you don't remember or you can't say who amongst the ANC members are your enemies today, are you in a position to say who amongst those members were previously your enemies are no longer your enemies within the ANC?
MR VERMEULEN: Mr Chairman, in the previous time it was the MKs, they would have fought us, and I still think there is still MKs today that would like sought things out with us, but I can't name a specific person or a specific cell or whatever, but I do think there will be some of that people that will still be out looking for us. I'm quite sure about that.
ADV BOSMAN: Mr Vermeulen, may I put it to you as follows. You think that there are persons who want to sort things out with you.
MR VERMEULEN: Yes, that is correct.
ADV BOSMAN: Now the question is, are there any persons with whom you need to sort things out still?
MR VERMEULEN: No, I don't have a problem with anyone, I just want to be alone and at peace at this stage. That is all that I want.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Why did you then in your response to Mr Berger's question, state that you still regarded some of the ANC members as your enemy?
MR VERMEULEN: Because, Mr Chairman, they must still have grudges from the old time.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: So you personally don't regard any person within the ANC, as your enemy?
MR VERMEULEN: No, Mr Chairman.
MR BERGER: Okay Mr Vermeulen, let's move on. You say at the bottom of page 116 of your amnesty application that your further motives and objectives were to act as an anti-terrorism unit, to track all infiltrating units of the exiled political parties, to carry out arrests where possible and in general to act as a counter-terrorism unit, to exercise all possible measures to prohibit the total onslaught of the members of the exiled parties in the political struggle against the former State. Do you confirm that?
MR VERMEULEN: That's correct, Mr Chairman.
MR BERGER: And then you say, although this is written in the third person, it's on your behalf, you say that your objectives were furthermore to eliminate and to bring the perpetrators to justice. Do you confirm that?
MR VERMEULEN: That's correct, Mr Chairman.
MR BERGER: In that order?
MR VERMEULEN: Yes.
MR BERGER: Do you understand what I've just asked you?
MR VERMEULEN: In the order it can be - you can change the other ones around yourself, it doesn't matter.
MR BERGER: You mean to bring the perpetrators to justice and then to eliminate them?
MR VERMEULEN: Ja.
MR BERGER: What were - let's go to the specific event, when were you called down to Ladybrand?
MR VERMEULEN: I don't remember, Mr Chairman. We worked there for a long time, so I can't remember now on what specific date. I think it might be the 19th.
MR BERGER: No, Mr Vermeulen, you can't just say you don't remember because you told the Committee a little while ago that you joined C-Section in 1985.
MR VERMEULEN: That's correct.
MR BERGER: The attack took place at the end of 1985.
MR VERMEULEN: That's correct.
MR BERGER: So let's just work backwards. How long had you been with C-Section before the attack took place?
MR VERMEULEN: It couldn't have been long, about three months, two months.
MR BERGER: Alright, so then that means that you joined C-Section in about September/October 1985.
MR VERMEULEN: No, October, sometime in October.
MR BERGER: Alright. October 1985 you joined C-Section. You would have been at Vlakplaas, am I correct?
MR VERMEULEN: I don't know where, I could have been any place.
MR BERGER: When you joined C-Section, where did you report?
MR VERMEULEN: Headquarters.
MR BERGER: Pretoria?
MR VERMEULEN: That's correct.
MR BERGER: And from there where were you sent?
MR VERMEULEN: Vlakplaas.
MR BERGER: And from there where were you sent?
MR VERMEULEN: All over the country, Mr Chairman.
MR BERGER: Before December 1985?
MR VERMEULEN: Yes, Mr Chairman.
MR BERGER: Well where did you go to first?
MR VERMEULEN: I don't know, Mr Chairman, it's along time ago, sometimes we'd go to Soweto, sometimes we'd go to Durban, Cape Town, wherever, so I can't remember exactly where I was at that time.
MR BERGER: Alright. So then for a while, we'll establish how long that was, when you were based at Vlakplaas you used to go all over the country, Soweto, Durban, other places.
MR VERMEULEN: That's correct.
MR BERGER: This was all before you were sent to Ladybrand?
MR VERMEULEN: Ja, it could be, ja.
MR BERGER: How long before the attack were you sent to Ladybrand?
MR VERMEULEN: I'm not sure, I think we worked there for two weeks, it can be even a month, I'm not sure Mr Chairman.
MR BERGER: Between two weeks and a month. And what work were you doing in Ladybrand?
MR VERMEULEN: What we would have been doing, we would send out our people to gather information, general work.
MR BERGER: Who was there? Who was with you in Ladybrand? I'm talking about people from Vlakplaas.
MR VERMEULEN: I think Adamson was there, I'm not sure.
MR BERGER: And who else?
MR VERMEULEN: I don't know any more white people, and then we would have had a lot of blacks working with us, I can't remember who they were.
MR BERGER: And I suppose you can't remember any of their names.
MR VERMEULEN: No, it's difficult to put a specific person in the specific time sequence wherever it must be.
MR BERGER: Was Almond Nofomela there?
MR VERMEULEN: I'm not sure, I don't think so.
MR BERGER: And Mr Nortje, when did he arrive in Ladybrand?
MR VERMEULEN: I don't know, Sir.
MR BERGER: And Mr Coetser, when did he arrive in Ladybrand?
MR VERMEULEN: Also I don't know.
MR BERGER: And Mr Bosch, when did he arrive in Ladybrand?
MR VERMEULEN: I don't know, Sir.
MR BERGER: But what you do know is that you were in Ladybrand with Mr Adamson for some time before Coetser, Bosch and Nortje arrived, would that be correct?
MR VERMEULEN: Ja, that can be correct.
MR BERGER: And your work was just a general intelligence gathering exercise.
MR VERMEULEN: That's correct, Mr Chairman.
MR BERGER: Intelligence about whom?
MR VERMEULEN: I don't know, Sir, I can't remember that Mr Chairman.
MR BERGER: You have no idea what work you were doing in Ladybrand?
MR VERMEULEN: This is 15 years ago that we did that work, you don't go out and put that in a little computer, I can't remember what we did specific at that time, Mr Chairman.
CHAIRPERSON: When you went to Lesotho you knew why you were going there.
MR VERMEULEN: That's correct, Mr Chairman.
CHAIRPERSON: Surely you must have been part of the planning of that escapade or operation.
MR VERMEULEN: That's correct, Mr Chairman.
CHAIRPERSON: That planning took place over at least three weeks.
MR VERMEULEN: That's correct, Mr Chairman.
CHAIRPERSON: Were you there from the beginning of the planning?
MR VERMEULEN: I don't know what happened with the planning, that was Mr de Kock's story. We are all trained people, he doesn't have to tell us what we must do before the time, it just come on ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: My question was, were you part of the planning?
MR VERMEULEN: No, Mr Chairman.
CHAIRPERSON: When did you become part of the operation?
MR VERMEULEN: The night that we went in, Sir.
CHAIRPERSON: That's all?
MR VERMEULEN: Yes, Mr Chairman.
MR BERGER: Chairperson, I see it's 11 o'clock, perhaps we should take the adjournment now.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
ON RESUMPTION
NICHOLAAS JOHANNES VERMEULEN: (s.u.o.)
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Berger, I understand you're now in possession of those reports and pages that were omitted.
MR BERGER: Yes, Chairperson, we have now page 3 of the report that we were reading and in paragraph 3.9 of that report it says that, well I'll read the Afrikaans
"His memory is poor and he has to write down everything that he has to do."
Unfortunately it doesn't indicate whether that's long-term memory or short-term memory and it would seem from the context that it's short-term memory, but one can't really take that further.
Mr Vermeulen, are you still receiving a disability grant?
MR VERMEULEN: I don't understand what you're saying.
CHAIRPERSON: A grant.
MR VERMEULEN: I get a normal pension, Chairperson.
MR BERGER: Is it a disability pension?
MR VERMEULEN: No, an normal pension, Chairperson.
MR BERGER: Is this a pension from the South African Police?
MR VERMEULEN: Correct, Chairperson.
MR BERGER: And the reason that you had to leave the South African Police was for medical reasons.
MR VERMEULEN: Correct, Chairperson.
MR BERGER: And that's why this clinical or this psychological report was commissioned.
MR VERMEULEN: Yes, Chairperson.
MR BERGER: Do you know a person called Lionel Snyman?
MR VERMEULEN: Yes, Chairperson.
MR BERGER: You work with him, don't you?
MR VERMEULEN: Yes, Chairperson.
MR BERGER: In Josini.
MR VERMEULEN: No, Chairperson.
MR BERGER: Where do you work?
MR VERMEULEN: Mbazwana(?)
MR BERGER: Sorry?
MR VERMEULEN: Mbazwana.
MR BERGER: Where's that, Northern Natal?
MR VERMEULEN: That's correct, Chairperson.
MR BERGER: And what work are you presently employed to do?
MR VERMEULEN: At the moment I'm just looking after a camp.
MR BERGER: You fly around in helicopters, isn't that so?
MR VERMEULEN: No, Mr Chairman. What helicopters? There's no helicopters in Mbazwana as far as I know, Mr Chairman.
CHAIRPERSON: What kind of work is it?
MR VERMEULEN: I'm camp manager at the moment.
CHAIRPERSON: Camp manager.
MR VERMEULEN: Ja.
CHAIRPERSON: What kind of camp?
MR VERMEULEN: A tent camp and the caravans.
MR BERGER: So is this not a private security company that you work for?
MR VERMEULEN: No, Mr Chairman.
MR BERGER: Is it a tourism company?
MR VERMEULEN: Basically yes, Mr Chairman.
MR BERGER: So you draw a pension and a salary.
MR VERMEULEN: No, Mr Chairman.
CHAIRPERSON: Don't you get a salary?
MR VERMEULEN: For the camp? No, Mr Chairman.
MR BERGER: Do you work for free?
MR VERMEULEN: Ja, at the moment, Mr Chairman.
MR BERGER: Were you in Madagascar in 1994?
MR VERMEULEN: No, Mr Chairman.
MR BERGER: How have you managed to get to this hearing?
MR VERMEULEN: I came by car, Mr Chairman.
MR BERGER: You drove from KwaZulu Natal here.
MR VERMEULEN: That's correct, Mr Chairman.
MR BERGER: In your Land Rover.
MR VERMEULEN: Yes, Mr Chairman - not Land Rover, Isuzu.
MR BERGER: Isuzu four-wheel drive.
MR VERMEULEN: Two-wheel drive.
MR BERGER: Let's got back to Ladybrand.
CHAIRPERSON: I hope it's not in the two-wheel drive.
MR BERGER: The first that you knew of this operation to attack targets in Maseru, was the night that you left, is that your evidence?
MR VERMEULEN: Ja, I'll say the night of the 19th, Mr Chairman. That's what I can remember.
MR BERGER: The 19th of December 1985?
MR VERMEULEN: Yes, Mr Chairman.
MR BERGER: So earlier that day you were just hanging around the offices in Ladybrand and you had no idea that that night you were going to be leaving for Maseru.
MR VERMEULEN: I don't know, I'm not sure, but I don't think I was hanging around the offices because that was not our style, Mr Chairman.
MR BERGER: Well what you do know is that it was during the night that you were first informed about this attack and it was that night that you left on the attack.
MR VERMEULEN: That's correct, Mr Chairman.
MR BERGER: What were you told immediately before you left, or from the time that you were made aware that you're now leaving or there's a plan to leave, what were you told about the attack?
MR VERMEULEN: As far as I can remember I was told that we're going to attack an ANC house in Maseru, that's all, Mr Chairman.
MR BERGER: Who told you that?
MR VERMEULEN: Mr de Kock, Mr Chairman.
MR BERGER: Was this one-on-one or did he call you all together into a room and brief you?
MR VERMEULEN: I can't remember, but all that I do know is that I was told I must go join the group and I must go to Maseru and we're going to attack a house with the ANC people in it.
MR BERGER: Did you know who was in this group?
MR VERMEULEN: No, Sir.
MR BERGER: No names?
MR VERMEULEN: No.
MR BERGER: What they had done or what they were planning to do, were you told that?
MR VERMEULEN: No. Not that I can remember, but I will stick to "no".
MR BERGER: You'll stick to "no"?
MR VERMEULEN: Ja.
MR BERGER: Okay. So you were told there's an ANC house, in other words a house with ANC people inside "that we are going to attack, you must come along"?
MR VERMEULEN: That's correct.
MR BERGER: So you knew nothing about the boats or vehicles or weapons or anything before that?
MR VERMEULEN: The boats were bought by Adamson before, that's what I heard after the time. I wasn't involved in that. The boats came there and that's the time when we went onto the river, we put the stuff into the boats and we went over the river. I was not involved in getting the boats and getting weapons and everything.
MR BERGER: Who told you after the time that Adamson had bought the boats?
MR VERMEULEN: I can't remember, it can be in a general conversation.
MR BERGER: Where, back in Ladybrand?
MR VERMEULEN: I don't know, Sir.
MR BERGER: Well when you left - I take it you left from the Ladybrand offices, or did you leave from your house in Ladybrand?
MR VERMEULEN: I think we left from the house on a farm in Ladybrand.
MR BERGER: Alright. When you left from the house you were not given any instructions about what was going to happen along the way, whether you were going to go through the border posts, whether you were going to go over a river?
MR VERMEULEN: Could have told me that but I can't recall any of that instructions.
MR BERGER: And what was your instruction as to what you were going to do when you got to this ANC house, was it that you were going to kill everyone inside, was it that you were going to arrest them?
MR VERMEULEN: As far as I can remember we were going to kill them, were going to shoot them.
MR BERGER: Now would you turn to page 124 please, bundle 1, page 123 over to 124, that there are a number of incidents that you speak about, for which you're applying for amnesty.
MR VERMEULEN: Yes.
MR BERGER: And you can remember a little bit about each of them, is that correct?
MR VERMEULEN: That's correct.
MR BERGER: Then you come to Lesotho, 19 December 1985, at the bottom of page 124, you say
"We drove with a vehicle to Ladybrand and amongst others, there was a Land Cruiser and two Jettas. We stayed there in a caravan park."
Now what if any of that, is correct?
MR VERMEULEN: The caravan park is not right, because we were there before the time as well, we were in Ladybrand and we stayed in the caravan park but after refreshing my memory, the caravan park is not right, it was on a previous occasion.
MR BERGER: Who refreshed your memory for you?
MR VERMEULEN: I think Mr Nortje, I spoke to him.
MR BERGER: And the Land Cruiser?
MR VERMEULEN: The Land Cruiser was Col de Kock's. That Land Cruiser could have come there the day that we wen to the border, because as far as I know the Land Cruiser picked us up when we came back from the operation.
MR BERGER: And the two Jettas?
MR VERMEULEN: They were on the other side already.
MR BERGER: You see because then you say
"Willie (that's Willie Nortje), de Kock, Joe Coetser and I, amongst others, drove with the vehicles through the border post and I used a false passport.
MR VERMEULEN: Well there I think I a little bit confused there, but we went through with the boats. On previous occasions we crossed the border yes, and I think here I became confused.
MR BERGER: Aren't you applying for amnesty for using a false passport?
MR VERMEULEN: Yes, Sir.
MR BERGER: Well did you show your passport when you crossed the river?
MR VERMEULEN: No.
CHAIRPERSON: What offence did you commit, possession of a false passport?
MR VERMEULEN: It can be yes, Mr Chair, because I used the passport on previous occasions that we crossed the border, Mr Chairman.
CHAIRPERSON: The application that we're busy with relates to the attack on a house in Lesotho on the 19th/20th December 1985, we're not busy with any offences that you may have committed on other occasions.
MR VERMEULEN: Well this is not right, Mr Chair, it's just me and Coetser that went over the river by boat. I did not go by car.
CHAIRPERSON: Which means on other occasions you crossed the border in the company of Willie, de Kock and Joe Coetser also.
MR VERMEULEN: On different occasions it can be yes, Sir, and with people of the Security Branch of Ladybrand.
CHAIRPERSON: Well you see what I'm trying to establish is that if your memory is questionable and you're making a mistake about a previous occasion, then you must have had the same company on the previous occasion.
MR VERMEULEN: Ja, I won't deny that, Sir, but Coetser and Nortje, it's not necessary that they were both with me at a certain time, we could have been, rotated different people, Mr Chairman.
MR BERGER: Mr Vermeulen, would it be correct to say that you, Mr Nortje, Mr de Kock and Mr Coetser had during the time you were working in Ladybrand, gone into and out of Lesotho on a number of occasions?
MR VERMEULEN: That's correct, Mr Chairman.
MR BERGER: Using Mr de Kock's Land Cruiser?
MR VERMEULEN: No, Mr Chairman.
MR BERGER: Using the two Jettas?
MR VERMEULEN: No, Mr Chairman.
MR BERGER: Well then why do you say "met die voertuie deur die grenspos".
MR VERMEULEN: On the previous occasions it was with, mostly we crossed the border with a security car from Ladybrand, we didn't use these vehicles.
MR BERGER: And what did you do when you got into Lesotho? On the previous occasions.
MR VERMEULEN: We mostly had discussions at the Lesotho Sun, or Maseru Sun, whatever that hotel is called.
MR BERGER: With who?
MR VERMEULEN: I can't remember, Sir.
MR BERGER: Mr McCaskill?
MR VERMEULEN: No.
MR BERGER: When was the first time you met Mr McCaskill?
MR VERMEULEN: I think it was the night when we came back, Mr Chairman.
MR BERGER: The night of the operation?
MR VERMEULEN: Ja.
CHAIRPERSON: Look at page 125, in the middle of the last relevant paragraph, you say
"We took a source along with us. I think his name was Frik."
Who was that?
MR VERMEULEN: That is Mr McCaskill, that's the name that I knew him by, Mr Chairman.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes Mr Berger.
MR BERGER: Thank you, Chair.
Who crossed the river, it was just you and Mr Nortje, is that correct?
MR VERMEULEN: No, me and Mr Coetser.
MR BERGER: Sorry, Mr Coetser. Just the two of you?
MR VERMEULEN: As far as I can remember, yes Sir.
MR BERGER: You each took a boat.
MR VERMEULEN: Ja.
MR BERGER: Didn't one of the boats sink?
MR VERMEULEN: Yes.
MR BERGER: Whose boat?
MR VERMEULEN: I'm not sure. We just had the two boats and we pushed them together, so I can't say this boat was mine and that one was Joe's, we just pushed the little boats, the two little small boats that we pushed over. I can't remember whatever one, there wasn't said "This boat, this number one, that's yours and that's boat number two, that's yours".
MR BERGER: Oh did you walk through the river pushing the boats in front of you?
MR VERMEULEN: Yes.
MR BERGER: And everyone else drove through the border post.
MR VERMEULEN: As far as I know, as I can remember, yes Sir.
CHAIRPERSON: If you were able to walk through the river, what was the purpose of the boats?
MR VERMEULEN: The equipment was heavy and the river was in flood, Chairperson.
MR BERGER: Mr Vermeulen, what I can't understand is, if you can remember that you didn't got through the border post, that you didn't use the vehicles as you've written here, that in fact you and Mr Coetser went by boat or walked with the boats, if you can remember all of that and if you can remember now as you described it, putting the boats together and crossing the river, how is it that all of a sudden when you get to the other side, your memory deserts you? How is it that you don't remember anything that happened at the post office?
MR VERMEULEN: I don't know that - as far as I can recall, I wasn't at the post office. I don't recall at all going to the post office.
MR BERGER: Well according to Mr de Kock, you were all at the post office waiting, you waited for some time, the informer, Frik, came to you.
MR HATTINGH: Mr Chairman, that is not my recollection of Mr de Kock's evidence, they were in two cars, he never said that both cars were at the post office.
MR BERGER: My error then.
Well if you were not at the post office, where were you?
MR VERMEULEN: We were on our way - when we crossed the river, gave out the weapons and then we walked up to - or we drived and stopped and then we got out of the cars and we walked up to the house. That is ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Berger, I don't know if you're quite correct to concede that, as I remember the evidence it's that at the post office, de Kock was informed by McCaskill that the main target that had left that ...(indistinct), he then gave an order to Coetser and Adamson to do what he told them to do, and the rest left with that car from the post office to whether the targets were. And this witness, Vermeulen, was part of that group that went to the main house where the party was, so it follows that it was at the post office. That was the rendezvous place, isn't it?
MR BERGER: Well Chairperson, I thought so, but ... (intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: Well that's how I understand ...(indistinct - no microphone). Carry on. If you need another minute ...
MR HATTINGH: Thank you, Mr Chairman. Mr Chairman, perhaps I omitted to lead Mr de Kock on this, but he could have given relevant evidence and according to what he tells me now, the only people who were at the post office waiting for Mr McCaskill, was Mr de Kock himself and Mr Nortje, from there they went and picked up the others and then travelled to the house. That evidence was not led but if necessary Mr de Kock can be recalled to give that evidence.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Hattingh, will you concede that that's the impression that could have been ...
MR HATTINGH: Indeed, on the evidence that was led, that is a valid impression, yes Mr Chairman.
MR BERGER: Chairperson, if that evidence is going to be placed before the Committee, the it will have to be led through Mr de Kock, because there are further questions one would want to ask.
CHAIRPERSON: On that basis?
MR BERGER: On that small aspect ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Berger, now we're in the situation - I'm going to assume that Mr Hattingh is then going to, or I'll call Mr de Kock back and allow Mr Hattingh to lead that bit of evidence, even if it's going to take a few seconds, then you can proceed on the basis that that evidence will be led.
MR BERGER: I'll do that.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Hattingh, I've just informed Mr Berger ...(intervention)
MR HATTINGH: I heard what you said, thank you Mr Chairman.
CHAIRPERSON: Are you comfortable with that?
MR HATTINGH: Yes, that is quite in order with me, yes Mr Chairman. I understood you to say you want to do it now, Mr Chairman.
CHAIRPERSON: No, I said we find ourselves in the situation, I will call Mr de Kock back and ask you to lead him on this bit of evidence, even if it's going to take a few seconds, so Mr Berger can proceed with the present situation as if that evidence is on record already.
Are you comfortable with that, Mr Berger?
MR BERGER: Yes, Chairperson, I am.
Mr Vermeulen, let's get accuracy on this. The only people who crossed the river by boat were you and Mr ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: Not by boat, they walked over, pushing a boat. It sounds strange, but ...
MR BERGER: Yes, Chairperson.
The only two people who crossed the river were you and Mr Coetser.
MR VERMEULEN: I will say that's correct, Mr Chairman, as far as I can remember.
MR BERGER: Mr Adamson, Mr Bosch, Mr de Kock, Mr Nortje, they went through the border post.
MR VERMEULEN: Yes, I will say so, ja.
MR BERGER: You had been told "We're going to attack an ANC house in Maseru".
MR VERMEULEN: That's correct, Mr Chairman.
MR BERGER: You were not given any further instructions.
MR VERMEULEN: No, Mr Chairman.
MR BERGER: When you got to the other side of the river, you and Mr Coetser proceeded to the house.
MR VERMEULEN: No, Mr Chairman.
MR BERGER: Oh, that was the way I understood your evidence and that is the way you're written it at page 125. You say
"After we had crossed the border we stopped and moved by foot towards a house."
What have I left out?
MR VERMEULEN: I'm not sure, I think we - at that place where we crossed the river, the weapons were distributed and as far as I can remember, I think we went with the car for a while and then we stopped and then we walked from there to the house. I didn't know where the house was, I didn't have the faintest idea, so I just followed.
CHAIRPERSON: Coetser should have known where that house was.
MR VERMEULEN: Yes, he would have known, Chairperson, because he had been through more times.
CHAIRPERSON: No, I just want to get clarity here. I do not know what Mr de Kock will come and say, but do I understand correctly that the two of you, Coetser and yourself walked across the river, left the boat or whatever it was there and went directly to the house that was to be attacked?
MR VERMEULEN: I recall, or I'm almost certain that there were vehicles that came to pick us up, I think it was the two Jettas and we drove with them up to a certain point and there we climbed out and walked on foot to the house.
CHAIRPERSON: So you never went to any hotel or anything similar, or post office building?
MR VERMEULEN: Not as far as I can recall, Chairperson.
ADV BOSMAN: But where were the weapons distributed?
MR VERMEULEN: I have told you, Chairperson, when we went through the river the guys came down and we distributed the firearms there, because the vehicles did not go through the border post with weapons.
MR BERGER: Thank you, Chairperson.
What weapons did you bring across?
MR VERMEULEN: As far as I can remember it was mostly Uzzis.
MR BERGER: How many?
MR VERMEULEN: I don't know, Sir, I can't recall.
MR BERGER: Well how many in your party, in your attack party?
MR VERMEULEN: I don't know, Sir.
MR BERGER: Well let's count, there's Mr de Kock, Mr Nortje, Mr Adamson, Mr Bosch, Mr Coetser and you, that makes six people.
MR VERMEULEN: Ja.
MR BERGER: Have I left out anybody?
MR VERMEULEN: Not as far as I know, no.
MR BERGER: Was there anyone else present?
MR VERMEULEN: No.
MR BERGER: Any black members present?
MR VERMEULEN: No. It can only be the weapons that was in that boat was for the operatives that went to the other side.
MR BERGER: Well then why do you say you don't know how many people were in your party?
MR VERMEULEN: Some guy can put in a pistol extra, we didn't look.
MR BERGER: No, no, I said how come you don't know how many members there were in your party, in your attack party?
MR VERMEULEN: I didn't recall that, you just asked me how many weapons were in the boat, as far as I remember.
CHAIRPERSON: Well answer that question.
MR VERMEULEN: What I can recall now, Mr Chairperson, it would have been myself, Coetser, Nortje, Adamson, Bosch and Mr de Kock.
MR BERGER: So you would have had, at most, six Uzzis.
MR VERMEULEN: That's correct, Mr Chair.
MR BERGER: Any other arms?
MR VERMEULEN: Usually the guys would have put in their side arms, I'm not sure.
MR BERGER: When you got the other side of the river, were you met by any other members of your group?
MR VERMEULEN: I can't recall, I think we were there first with the boats and they came on later, a couple of minutes.
MR BERGER: All four of them?
MR VERMEULEN: I'm not sure, Sir, I can't remember exactly what happened there.
MR BERGER: And then you loaded the arms into the Jettas.
MR VERMEULEN: No, I just think everybody took his own weapon, I don't think they loaded in the back ...(intervention)
MR BERGER: And everybody got into the vehicles.
MR VERMEULEN: That's it.
MR BERGER: And then you were driven for a distance.
MR VERMEULEN: Ja.
MR BERGER: And then you and Mr Coetser got out.
MR VERMEULEN: All of us got out I think, Mr Nortje and de Kock and myself. I can't remember from there what happened to Coetser and the others.
MR BERGER: You, Mr Nortje, Mr de Kock and Mr Bosch ...(intervention)
MR VERMEULEN: Ja I think Bosch, ja, he was also in the car, that's it.
MR BERGER: The four of you got out of the car.
MR VERMEULEN: Ja. No, Bosch stayed in, just the three of us.
MR BERGER: You, de Kock and Nortje.
MR VERMEULEN: Ja.
MR BERGER: You got out and then you went to the house.
MR VERMEULEN: That's correct.
MR BERGER: Didn't you say to the Chairperson a little while ago that you and Coetser went to the house?
MR VERMEULEN: No, I'm not sure I said that.
MR BERGER: So who knew the way to the house?
MR VERMEULEN: It was Mr de Kock and I think Mr Nortje. I didn't know where it was.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Vermeulen, did I not ask you earlier if you did not know the route to the house then it had to have been Coetser and then you testified that what happened was, the vehicles came to fetch you at the river and you drove up to a point.
MR VERMEULEN: That's correct, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: And then you walked from there.
MR VERMEULEN: That's correct.
MR BERGER: And the impression that I gained was that you and Coetser walked from that point to that house.
MR VERMEULEN: No, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Who walked?
MR VERMEULEN: It was myself, Nortje and Col de Kock.
CHAIRPERSON: Only the three of you?
MR VERMEULEN: That's correct, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Yourself, Nortje and Col de Kock, where was Bosch?
MR VERMEULEN: I think he remained behind in the car, he did not get out.
CHAIRPERSON: And who else was there?
MR VERMEULEN: It was only us.
CHAIRPERSON: Where was Adamson?
MR VERMEULEN: I don't know.
CHAIRPERSON: And Coetser?
MR VERMEULEN: I do not know where he was.
MR BERGER: So only three people attacked the house?
MR VERMEULEN: That is correct, Mr Chairman.
MR BERGER: The other three people just disappeared.
MR VERMEULEN: Ja, I don't know where they were, I didn't ask.
MR BERGER: And when did you see them again?
MR VERMEULEN: I think I saw them when we were back on the other side again.
MR BERGER: How did you get back onto the other side?
MR VERMEULEN: We went through the river again.
MR BERGER: Who?
MR VERMEULEN: All of us, as far as I remember.
MR BERGER: All three of you, you, Mr de Kock, Mr Nortje.
MR VERMEULEN: And Bosch.
MR BERGER: Oh where did he appear from?
MR VERMEULEN: He "mos" stayed in the car. We left from the river in the car and we went to a point, we got out and walked further to the house. Bosch stayed in the car.
MR BERGER: And then after the attack you got back into the car with Bosch?
MR VERMEULEN: Yes, Sir.
MR BERGER: The three of you plus him?
MR VERMEULEN: Yes, Mr Chairman.
MR BERGER: And then you saw - you only met Adamson and Coetser on the other side of the border.
MR VERMEULEN: That's correct, Mr Chairman, that's what I can recall.
MR BERGER: And so when did you meet Frik for the first time, on the other side of the border?
MR VERMEULEN: No, I think I met him there when we got to the river, that's where I took the, I think the TV or whatever, I'm not sure, where I got possession of the TV. It could have been at the house before we left or it might be down at the river. I'm not sure where I took hold of the TV and that suitcase.
MR BERGER: So the informer was at the house where the attack took place, where you were present?
MR VERMEULEN: I don't know, I didn't see Frik at all, Mr McCaskill.
MR BERGER: You just met him at the river?
MR VERMEULEN: That's when I - ja, it could have been from the river up back to the house, I'm not sure where I met him.
MR BERGER: And why did you have to carry this TV set and suitcase across?
MR VERMEULEN: That was, I think it was his possessions and he couldn't swim properly and the river was getting strong, that's why I took it over because I can swim.
MR BERGER: But that's absurd, what, did he think there were no television sets in South Africa? Why did he have ... (intervention)
MR VERMEULEN: Ask him, Sir, I don't know why he wanted the television set.
MR BERGER: Who asked you to take the television set?
MR VERMEULEN: I go the instruction from Col de Kock, I think - ja, but I know the television set was his, because he told me when I took possession of it, it was his.
MR BERGER: And his suitcase?
MR VERMEULEN: I don't know if it was his suitcase but it was a suitcase.
MR BERGER: You were carrying a television set and a suitcase as you crossed this river that's in flood?
MR VERMEULEN: Yes, Sir.
MR BERGER: And your weapon?
MR VERMEULEN: Yes.
MR BERGER: And no boats?
MR VERMEULEN: No boats. I'm not sure if they took one back because the other one was completely broken. I think that went down the river, I'm not sure.
MR BERGER: And where were the cars burnt?
MR VERMEULEN: On the river edge.
MR BERGER: Who burnt them?
MR VERMEULEN: Col de Kock. I'm not sure which people were involved in the burning, but they were burnt there.
MR BERGER: You weren't involved?
MR VERMEULEN: I don't think I participated in that.
MR BERGER: Why were they burnt?
MR VERMEULEN: 'Cause we didn't want to go back with them over the border.
MR BERGER: You can remember that you took up a position outside the house.
MR VERMEULEN: That's correct.
MR BERGER: You can remember that you never participated in the attack.
MR VERMEULEN: That's correct.
MR BERGER: You can still remember seeing that man, that neighbour put his head out to see what was happening.
MR VERMEULEN: That's correct, Mr Chairman.
MR BERGER: You can remember taking aim at him.
MR VERMEULEN: That's correct, Mr Chairman.
MR BERGER: And firing.
MR VERMEULEN: No, Mr Chairman.
MR BERGER: No, but it didn't go off.
MR VERMEULEN: Ja, it didn't go off.
MR BERGER: But you tried to fire.
MR VERMEULEN: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: Why would you want to kill him? That wasn't part of your instruction.
MR VERMEULEN: No, but he could have been a witness to the fact that we were there, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: I understand that, but was that your instruction?
MR VERMEULEN: It was not my instruction, my instruction was to secure the people who were in the house shooting the people in the house.
CHAIRPERSON: So the reason why you wanted to shoot him was to avoid him recognising you?
MR VERMEULEN: That's correct, Chairperson.
MR BERGER: Do you remember the person outside the house, who was getting something from a car?
MR VERMEULEN: At which stage, Mr Chairman?
MR BERGER: As you attacked ...(intervention)
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Getting something from a car or getting into a car, Mr Berger?
MR BERGER: He was busy getting into the car, he was in the vicinity of the car.
MR VERMEULEN: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: Can you recall whether someone came out of the house who would be attacked? And he was close to a car.
MR VERMEULEN: That's correct, Chairperson, when we walked up to the house a person came out of the house, he wanted to climb into the car and Col de Kock shot him.
CHAIRPERSON: Did he see you?
MR VERMEULEN: I would not know whether he saw us.
CHAIRPERSON: Why was he shot?
MR VERMEULEN: Because he came out of the house and I would assume that he was part of the people at the party.
CHAIRPERSON: How far were you from that person when he or she was shot?
MR VERMEULEN: I would guesstimate, it's difficult, it was at night, but I was say between 10 and 20 metres.
CHAIRPERSON: You say this was at night.
MR VERMEULEN: It was not entirely dark but the lights in the vicinity gave some light there.
CHAIRPERSON: That's why I ask, why do you have trouble in judging how far you were?
MR VERMEULEN: Because it's difficult in the dark ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: Could you see who it was?
MR VERMEULEN: We could not see the face but we could see it was a person and he came out of the house.
CHAIRPERSON: Where was McCaskill then?
MR VERMEULEN: At that stage I did not see him yet, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: no-one would have known whether that person was a member of the ANC, whether he was a member of the group who threatened South Africa?
MR VERMEULEN: No, Chairperson, the only thing we saw is this guy coming out of the house, the house that we had to attack.
MR BERGER: Mr Vermeulen, how did you know that there was a party at that house?
MR VERMEULEN: I didn't know there was a party.
MR BERGER: No? You just said now he was one of the people coming from the party.
MR VERMEULEN: I've been listening the whole week, I've been sitting here and everybody's been speaking about a party, so it's a party, Mr Chairman.
MR BERGER: So you had not been told that a party has been arranged for certain people who were about to attack South Africa.
MR VERMEULEN: No, Mr Chairman, the nitty-gritty, I did not know, I'm an operative, I just get my instructions and that's what I do, I don't want to know who and what and where. He just tells me I must go there and that is my job and that I do. That's how we're trained and that's how I accept it. If they want to tell me anything more they will tell it themselves.
MR BERGER: I see your psychiatrist says that you're still fit to be a soldier.
MR VERMEULEN: Still?
MR BERGER: You're still fit to be a soldier.
MR VERMEULEN: I think I can, ja.
MR BERGER: And in order to be a soldier you must still be able to carry out instructions.
MR VERMEULEN: Yes, I think so I can, Mr Chairman.
MR BERGER: Try and recall the man who came out of the house and who was getting into that car, was he shot in the car?
MR VERMEULEN: I think he was shot while he was getting into the car.
MR BERGER: You can still remember that?
MR VERMEULEN: Yes.
MR BERGER: And then you can't remember seeing Mr McCaskill at any time before you got to the river.
MR VERMEULEN: No.
MR BERGER: And you can't remember seeing Mr Adamson or Mr Coetser at any time until you got back into South Africa.
MR VERMEULEN: No.
MR BERGER: Did you at any time go into the house?
MR VERMEULEN: No.
MR BERGER: You can remember that clearly, you never went into the house?
MR VERMEULEN: I didn't go into the house.
MR VERMEULEN: That was not my instructions.
MR BERGER: You never fired your weapon at all through this whole operation?
MR VERMEULEN: No, Mr Chairman.
MR BERGER: When you got back onto the South African side, did you go back to the farmhouse?
MR VERMEULEN: As far as I can recall, yes Sir.
MR BERGER: And was there a debriefing?
MR VERMEULEN: No, not that I can remember.
MR BERGER: You were never told what Mr Adamson and Mr Coetser did?
MR VERMEULEN: I think they could have told us later on but I don't think I actually asked. It could have come out when everybody was speaking, I don't know, I can't remember.
MR BERGER: Why do you say in your amnesty application that Brig Schoon and Basie Smit were present when you received your medal for bravery?
MR VERMEULEN: 'Cause I think they were the people that were at that time in charge of the Security Police.
MR BERGER: Are you confusing this with another occasion when you got another medal for bravery?
MR VERMEULEN: No, I haven't got - didn't get any more medals for bravery.
MR BERGER: Is this the only medal you got?
MR VERMEULEN: Ja.
MR BERGER: Are you proud of your medal?
MR VERMEULEN: For what?
MR BERGER: For bravery.
MR VERMEULEN: No.
MR BERGER: Do you still have it with you?
MR VERMEULEN: Yes.
MR BERGER: I have no further questions, thank you Chairperson.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR BERGER
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS PATEL: Thank you, Honourable Chair.
Mr Vermeulen, there's just one aspect that I would like to deal with with you and I must say at the outset that it's not an aspect that flows out of your amnesty application or the merits of the matter, it is an aspect that deals with the integrity of this process and it related to an incident that occurred yesterday. It was reported to me that you referred to this process as a circus, is that correct, Mr Vermeulen?
MR VERMEULEN: No, it's not correct, Mr Chairman.
MS PATEL: Then what exactly did you say?
MR VERMEULEN: I was in a private telephone conversation with a friend of mine and what I called a circus was not the process, I've got a lot of respect for the process, but what I haven't got - what's like a circus to me was the time up and down and all that, that I described as a circus. I've got no problem with the authority and the process that's going on, but there's a lot of things that is bothering me, especially going up and down and coming here and all that, that doesn't make sense to me. Sometimes I've been sitting here for a month that I didn't give any evidence and all that, that was all. I haven't got any problem with the whole process.
MS PATEL: Inasmuch as it was a conversation on the telephone, it was a conversation that you held in earshot of the victims who are present, of some of the victims who are present here, it was in the earshot of some of the media who was present here, do you deny that?
MR VERMEULEN: I don't know, I didn't even see them. I didn't do that on purpose.
MS PATEL: It's not really the point, whether you did it on purpose or not, Mr Vermeulen, the point is you attack the integrity of this process.
MR VERMEULEN: I did not do that.
MS PATEL: And I must say to you that as an official of this Commission, I take grave exception to what you have said and your views on this process, it puts into question your motivation for participating in this process to start off with and it also - I must remind you that one of the primary objectives of this process is to try to foster reconciliation between parties and with an attitude as you have expressed inasmuch as I have heard you explanation, which I must say I don't accept, inasmuch as I've heard your explanation you make it very difficult for that to ever occur in this country and I must say to you that not only on behalf of myself but on behalf of colleagues of mine who are present at the hearing, we must say that we find your attitude unacceptable and unconscionable. Thank you, Honourable Chairperson, I have no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS PATEL
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Cornelius.
MR CORNELIUS ADDRESSES: Thank you, Mr Chair. I'd like to reply to what Ms Patel said now. I would just like to say my client tendered his apology personally to her yesterday afternoon, which she did not want to accept and place it formally on record, so I'm placing it formally on record that he did apologise, he had no ...(indistinct) at all and didn't want to publicise anything.
CHAIRPERSON: ...(inaudible - no microphone)
MS PATEL: Your microphone.
CHAIRPERSON: If his explanation is to be accepted, that he did not refer to the process as a circus, then why did he apologise?
MR CORNELIUS: I'm sorry, Mr Chairman, I'm not with you.
CHAIRPERSON: It's a simple question, Mr Cornelius. If I have to accept what he said in respect of the allegation, that he did not refer to the process as a circus, then why did he find it necessary to apologise to Ms Patel?
MR CORNELIUS: I found it necessary because I was present with the argument that resulted in the restaurant next-door, so we felt it was necessary to apologise. For what it's worth, Mr Chair.
CHAIRPERSON: Have you got any re-examination?
MR CORNELIUS: I've got no re-examination, Mr Chairman.
NO RE-EXAMINATION BY MR CORNELIUS
FURTHER CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR LAMEY: Chairperson, before my learned friend ... there's just one aspect that came out here during the cross-examination, which I just want to quickly put to Mr Vermeulen.
Mr Vermeulen, I just want to put it to you that Mr Nortje was with you when you waded through the river, when you went into Lesotho. You testified that your recollection indicated that he went through in a vehicle, but I put it to you that he will testify that he went through the river with you.
MR VERMEULEN: I would accept that I could have made a mistake there, I'm not certain.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lamey, is that also for Coetser?
MR LAMEY: Nortje, Vermeulen and Coetser went through together.
Then upon the return after the attack was launched, my instructions are ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: Before you continue, Mr Lamey, was that up to the incident or after their return?
MR LAMEY: This is the crossing from South Africa to Lesotho, this is while they were under way, not during their return.
CHAIRPERSON: Very well.
MR LAMEY: Then upon returning it is my instruction that a dinghy was found beside the river, which had gone flat and then all the members, including Mr McCaskill, waded through the river back to the RSA. In other words, you did not encounter the other members on the RSA side of the river again, you found them on the Lesotho side and all of you crossed the river back to the RSA again.
MR VERMEULEN: Yes, that is correct.
MR LAMEY: And that one dinghy was still usable and that the television was placed in the dinghy when you went back over.
MR VERMEULEN: It may be so, but I'm under the impression that we carried it.
MR LAMEY: It is a minor aspect, but insofar as it is relevant. Thank you, Chair.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR LAMEY
ADV BOSMAN: I have no questions, thank you Chairperson.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Mr Vermeulen, I note that your written application contains many factual errors, as you were able to concede during Mr Berger's cross-examination of you, and I got the impression that you had discussions with Mr Nortje and Mr Coetzee(sic) who were able to refresh your memory and you were able to recollect better after you had had this consultation. Is my impression correct?
MR VERMEULEN: That's correct, Mr Chairman.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Did you make Mr Cornelius aware of these corrections prior to you giving testimony to this Panel this morning?
MR VERMEULEN: Not this morning, no, Mr Chairman.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: But you at an earlier occasion, make him aware of these corrections?
MR VERMEULEN: I spoke to him yesterday, Mr Chairman.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: And still this morning these corrections were not corrected when your evidence-in-chief was led. That's an issue to take up with Mr Cornelius, not with you. It's just that I think it perturbs us when such a situation occurs, because it reflects very badly on an applicant whilst he is legally represented.
MR LAMEY: Judge, with due respect, you would recall I did make the corrections in his evidence-in-chief, it was specifically led, that was when Mr Berger made the remark "Stop leading the witness", that is when I corrected it.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: I don't think so, Mr Cornelius, you didn't make the factual corrections that came out during Mr Berger's cross-examination and I don't think you should belabour the matter any further. Otherwise I have no questions for Mr Vermeulen.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Vermeulen, when did you decide to make this application?
MR VERMEULEN: I beg your pardon, Chairperson?
CHAIRPERSON: When did you decide to make this application?
MR VERMEULEN: The amnesty application?
CHAIRPERSON: Yes.
MR VERMEULEN: I cannot recall, Chairperson, it was a long time ago.
CHAIRPERSON: How did it come to be that you decided to apply?
MR VERMEULEN: I was a witness for the investigating team from the Attorney-General's office, I provided information for them and from there they advised me to apply for amnesty and I then went to Mr Cornelius and he became my legal representative.
CHAIRPERSON: You attached all the relevant documentation such as reports and psychological reports and evaluations to your application.
MR VERMEULEN: That is correct.
CHAIRPERSON: And this was sent through to the TRC office by Mr Cornelius.
MR VERMEULEN: Yes, that is correct.
CHAIRPERSON: Did you ever have the opportunity or did you indeed ever discuss this matter with fellow applicants before you applied for amnesty?
MR VERMEULEN: Before I submitted my original application? Yes, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Was there a meeting during which you decided that you were going to make these applications?
MR VERMEULEN: No, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: At which stage did you meet?
MR VERMEULEN: We met on various occasions at the A-G's office.
CHAIRPERSON: To discuss whether or not you were going to make applications?
MR VERMEULEN: No.
CHAIRPERSON: No, I'm speaking of you in your capacity as applicants.
MR VERMEULEN: No, there wasn't such an occasion.
CHAIRPERSON: Did you perhaps discuss what actually happened there, perhaps because you had forgotten a number of facts regarding this particular incident?
MR VERMEULEN: Regarding this specific incident or do you mean incidents in general?
CHAIRPERSON: Incidents in general and this specific incident.
MR VERMEULEN: Yes, we did because there were many incidents that we had forgotten about, which we couldn't always recall.
CHAIRPERSON: And with regard to this incident?
MR VERMEULEN: This specific incident. I think I may have refreshed my memory with Mr Nortje on a few occasions.
CHAIRPERSON: Let us attempt to recall the events in Lesotho. As I have understood your evidence you were very low on the rank list and you just did your job as you said.
MR VERMEULEN: That is correct.
CHAIRPERSON: You followed your orders and that was all.
MR VERMEULEN: That is correct.
CHAIRPERSON: Didn't you ever during any one of those journeys, ask why you were supposed to go and kill people because it is wrong?
MR VERMEULEN: No, Chairperson, it never occurred to me.
CHAIRPERSON: Why not?
MR VERMEULEN: I don't know, Chairperson. If you received an order, you received an order and there was no way to question that order.
CHAIRPERSON: Even though you were a policeman or a soldier, when you kill someone illegally then you should be concerned, then you should ask why. One wouldn't commit murder without knowing why.
MR VERMEULEN: I wasn't concerned.
CHAIRPERSON: Not at all?
MR VERMEULEN: No.
CHAIRPERSON: Why not?
MR VERMEULEN: Because it was necessary to be concerned, I had the authorisation.
CHAIRPERSON: But I cannot blame you because after all you do not know the Act, but an order to commit murder isn't going to assist you, didn't you know this at that time?
MR VERMEULEN: It never occurred to me, I simply received the order and we moved out.
CHAIRPERSON: When you joined Vlakplaas, did you know that you would doing all sorts of things like this, such as murder?
MR VERMEULEN: No, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: You didn't know?
MR VERMEULEN: I wouldn't say that I didn't know, but I didn't think that that was Vlakplaas' work. That we would be involved in shooting incidents, yes I was aware of that.
CHAIRPERSON: What did you think Vlakplaas was?
MR VERMEULEN: An investigating team, people who conducted investigations and who traced suspects and arrested them and if they were not arrested and a shooting took place, you would have a licence to shoot.
CHAIRPERSON: Oh. When you joined Vlakplaas, were you not informed that it was a secret place and that whatever happened there should remain a secret?
MR VERMEULEN: That is correct, I signed the official Secrecy Act, so I knew.
CHAIRPERSON: But you knew then that nobody was supposed to know about this place and what you were doing there, isn't that so?
MR VERMEULEN: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: It wasn't a regular police station.
MR VERMEULEN: No it wasn't.
CHAIRPERSON: And at police stations, regular police station, regular policemen would also take the oath.
MR VERMEULEN: Not as far as I know.
CHAIRPERSON: Can you not recall?
MR VERMEULEN: I do not know, because when I worked at a regular police station I didn't sign the Oath of Secrecy.
CHAIRPERSON: What rank did you have at that stage?
MR VERMEULEN: Warrant Officer.
CHAIRPERSON: And these firearms that you carried there, did you know that they were illegal?
MR VERMEULEN: To me they were legal because they were State issue.
CHAIRPERSON: And what did you think you were going to do there is Lesotho? Did you think that you were going to kill people?
MR VERMEULEN: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: Commit murder?
MR VERMEULEN: I didn't view it as murder.
CHAIRPERSON: What did you think it was?
MR VERMEULEN: I thought that it was the prevention of murder here in South Africa.
CHAIRPERSON: So you did not have the intention to kill?
MR VERMEULEN: No, I did not harbour any malice towards these persons.
CHAIRPERSON: Listen to the question because it's important. Do you understand intent?
MR VERMEULEN: Yes, intent indicates that you want to kill someone.
CHAIRPERSON: Now when you went there did you go there with the intent to kill someone?
MR VERMEULEN: At that stage my life was not in jeopardy, so no, but if something had happened or occurred, then I would have shot the person, I would have shot to kill.
CHAIRPERSON: But you knew what your colleagues were going to do.
MR VERMEULEN: Yes, that is correct.
CHAIRPERSON: Did you agree with that?
MR VERMEULEN: Yes, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Why?
MR VERMEULEN: Because all of us were members of the same team.
CHAIRPERSON: I beg your pardon?
MR VERMEULEN: We were all in one team.
CHAIRPERSON: Why did you agree with what your colleagues were going to do?
MR VERMEULEN: I could just as well have been the man in Mr Nortje's shoes, Mr Nortje could have stood on the side and ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: No, I'm not referring to Mr Nortje, I'm speaking of you. I want to know whether or not you agreed with what Mr de Kock and the others were going to do in that house, before the incident.
MR VERMEULEN: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: Why?
MR VERMEULEN: Because that was the order, that is why we went from South Africa to Lesotho, to penetrate the house and to kill the persons inside that house.
CHAIRPERSON: And that is murder, isn't it?
MR VERMEULEN: To me it wasn't murder.
CHAIRPERSON: What was it then?
MR VERMEULEN: I prevented further bloodshed and acts of terror in South Africa.
CHAIRPERSON: Was your attitude towards this incident an attitude of believing that you were acting in defence of South Africa?
MR VERMEULEN: Yes. I would actually say more the people of South Africa, the South African public.
CHAIRPERSON: One final aspect. When you acted there in going along with them to go and kill these people, you say that you acted in the defence of the people of South Africa, did you think that people would be killed?
MR VERMEULEN: When we went to Lesotho?
CHAIRPERSON: Yes.
MR VERMEULEN: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: Who told you this?
MR VERMEULEN: In my mind I knew that we were not going there for nothing, we weren't going there to arrest people and I think that if I'm not mistaken, Mr de Kock told us we are going to strike this house and eliminate the people inside.
CHAIRPERSON: There was no other reason except the defence of the people of South Africa?
MR VERMEULEN: That is correct, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
Mr Cornelius, your client states that these documents were in your possession when the application was sent through to Cape Town, is that correct?
CHAIRPERSON: That is correct, Mr Chair. ...(inaudible - no microphone) ... and the other report was omitted.
MR CORNELIUS: Yes, that was annexed to the total application which is a very voluminous application and I've never, as you would see in evidence-in-chief, I did not rely on the report either, I didn't lead it.
CHAIRPERSON: ...(inaudible)
MR CORNELIUS: My learned friend, Mr Hattingh, I think referred to the report. I omitted to see that page 3 wasn't there, we obtained it through the TRC, which faxed it from Cape Town.
CHAIRPERSON: I know that, what I want to know is why you didn't pick it up, we've been sitting here so long in this hearing, and see to it before your client testified, that that documentation was forthcoming.
MR CORNELIUS: That was my omission, I admit that.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you, your client is excused.
MR LAMEY: Thank you, Sir.
WITNESS EXCUSED
CHAIRPERSON: Shall we take the lunch break instead of breaking up the next witness? We'll adjourn till 2 o'clock.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
ON RESUMPTION
CHAIRPERSON: I was informed that one of the applicants have taken ill and I spoke to Mr Lamey and the representatives of the family about that, in order to establish time limits for how we're going to proceed in this application in future. That's why I didn't call any of the other representatives.
Mr Hattingh, can we get to the small bit of evidence that must be led?
MR HATTINGH: Certainly, Mr Chairman.
