CHAIRPERSON: Good afternoon. For the purposes of the record, I am Judge Pillay, I'm going to ask my two colleagues to announce themselves for the purposes of the record and similarly all the representatives to do the same.
MR MALAN: Wynand Malan, Committee Member and Commissioner of the TRC.
ADV SIGODI: Advocate Sigodi, I'm a Member of the Amnesty Committee.
ADV STEENKAMP: Honourable Chairman, I'm Andre Steenkamp, I'll be the Evidence Leader in this matter. Thank you.
MR RICHARD: Tony Richard, I represent the witness, Ernest Ramatolo.
MR NORTIER: I am Adv Nortier from the Cape Town Bar, appearing for Mr Coetzee on instructions of Mr Cooke.
MS VAN DER WALT: I'm Louisa van der Walt, I'm appearing on behalf of Mr H J Prinsloo, the third applicant.
MR PRINSLOO: Honourable Chairperson, I'm H J Prinsloo, appearing on behalf of Mr de Bruin, one of the applicants.
MS CAMBANIS: Crystal Cambanis, appearing on behalf of the Hani family.
CHAIRPERSON: Ms van der Walt, is there any clash between Mr Prinsloo and Mr de Bruin?
MS VAN DER WALT: None, except that Mr de Bruin's evidence will be about a certain aspect during which Mr Prinsloo was not present. It is the concluding section of his application, when Mr Ramatolo returned from Lesotho to South Africa.
CHAIRPERSON: Is there any clash between your client and Mr Coetzee?
MS VAN DER WALT: No, there is none. The instruction came from Head Office, but there are no problems, we have made certain of that.
CHAIRPERSON: You may begin.
MR PRINSLOO: (sworn states)
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, you may be seated.
EXAMINATION BY MS VAN DER WALT: Mr Prinsloo, your amnesty application is in the bundle before the Honourable Committee and it is embodied in the formal application from page 41 to 43. The incident for which you have applied appears on page 44 up to page 47 and then the political motivation is from page 48 to 54, is that correct?
MR PRINSLOO: Yes, that is correct, Chairperson.
MS VAN DER WALT: If we could take you directly to the incident, which is on page 44, the first paragraph, there you state that you were involved with the tracing of MK terrorists and the propaganda onslaught by the ANC within the Republic at that stage. Could you tell the Honourable Committee precisely what you were investigating and how this affected Mr Chris Hani.
MR PRINSLOO
"Chairperson, before 1980, just after the unrest of 1976, firstly there was a tremendous flow of ANC members to Lesotho, from South Africa or other neighbouring States, where they sought political asylum. At that stage I was stationed in Bloemfontein and by nature of the situation I possessed information which I obtained from informers and I also had sight of intelligence documents and reports from other members of the intelligence community. That would be National Intelligence as well as Military Intelligence.
I was also busy investigating the large-scale propaganda campaign which had been launched from Lesotho into the RSA, by means of pamphlets which were distributed through the postal system, as well as documents which were spread by hand in residential areas in the Western Cape, the Eastern Cape and the Free State. The culmination of my investigation indicated that Martin Thembesile Hani, also known as Chris Hani, was the main person of the ANC/MK structure in Lesotho. He was a very high profile persons. He was also a member of the Mombaris group. He was a highly trained person.
The investigation regarding Mr Hani and his activities as well as the propaganda campaign which was launched, was conducted by me on the basis of information at my disposal and I determined that he established structures in Lesotho which entailed the following: That some of the refugees, the political refugees who had defected to Lesotho, were selected by him for MK training and military training abroad. He had also established structures for the reception of militarily trained members of MK who had returned to Lesotho and who were planning on infiltrating from Lesotho to the RSA, as well as for the purposes of weaponry which was coming into Lesotho.
Let me just explain that everything took place by aeroplane. Those were the structures that he had in place. And then also the infiltration of these trained members to the RSA and the creation of safe-houses for MK members in the RSA.
In the process a lady friend, so to speak, of Mr Hani, Dipho Sekemane - I know that she is today as Mrs Hani, she was arrested by other members of the Security Branch and I also interrogated her in Bloemfontein regarding the propaganda campaign.
At that stage I was 90% convinced that the addresses on the postal items were hand-written addresses and that this was the handwriting of Mr Hani."
CHAIRPERSON: ...(inaudible)
MR PRINSLOO: Chairperson, I had examples of his handwriting and there was a hand-writing expert at the South African Criminal Bureau and most of the items were addressed by the same person by hand and the hand-writing expert was convinced that this was indeed the handwriting of Mr Chris Hani. During the interrogation of Dipho Sekemane, I displayed some of the items to her and she confirmed that this was indeed the handwriting of Chris Hani and that she was aware of the items which were sent.
MS VAN DER WALT: Mr Prinsloo, then I would like to take you further in the same paragraph, the first paragraph of your application, you further state that during this period when you conducted the investigation, you received an order from the Divisional Commander, Brig Eben Coetzee. Could you elaborate regarding the particulars of the order that you received. Mr Eben Coetzee is the applicant before the Committee today, is that correct?
MR PRINSLOO: That is correct.
"Chairperson, at an advanced stage of my investigation, Lieut Col Coetzee who was the Divisional Commander of the Security Branch in the Free State, in Bloemfontein, called me to his office and he then informed me that Head Office had made a request to him that a plan should be made regarding Chris Hani. In other words, that he was to be eliminated."
CHAIRPERSON: Is that how you understood the message?
MR PRINSLOO: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: Then why didn't he simply say "Kill the man?" Why did you speak in cryptic language?
MR PRINSLOO: I don't really understand. Kill, eliminate, it's one and the same thing. Perhaps it's just terminology that was used.
CHAIRPERSON: No, I accept what you have said, but I'm asking why cryptic terms were used and not regular language.
MR PRINSLOO: Chairperson, the only explanation that I can offer is that Col Coetzee, at that stage, was up to date regarding the progress of my investigation. He simply called me into his office and said that there had been discussions at Head Office and that Head Office had issued an instruction for Hani to be eliminated.
CHAIRPERSON: That is why your Advocate asked what your actual instruction was.
MR PRINSLOO: May I just proceed, Chairperson? When I asked what it was, he said that the man had to be killed and he wanted to know whether or not I would be prepared to do the job. This task.
CHAIRPERSON: You see we should be rather circumspect here, that is why I have asked the question. Your Advocate wanted to know exactly what was said and your answer was that a plan had to be made and that your interpretation of that was to eliminate the man. Now you have testified that actually you enquired and that you were then informed that the man had to be killed.
MR PRINSLOO: I beg your pardon, Chairperson, that is not what I intend to display to you. Col Coetzee called me in and told me that he had received an instruction from Head Office for us to make a plan with Hani because he had to be eliminated. That was my evidence. So it is about the elimination and the killing. It's a question of terminology.
CHAIRPERSON: Very well, proceed.
MR PRINSLOO
"Then Col Coetzee asked me whether or not I would be prepared to perform the task, seeing as I was well informed regarding Chris Hani's activities. I then told him that I was prepared to do so."
CHAIRPERSON: Before you continue. This order, were you the only person who was completely informed regarding Mr Hani's activities?
MR PRINSLOO: Chairperson, yes, at that stage, because I had viewed all the intelligence documents from the intelligence communities and from Head Office and I had them at my disposal.
CHAIRPERSON: Let me just indicate my destination with this. How would they have been in a position, whoever issued the order, how would they have been in the position, with regard to intelligence, to arrive at this decision? Was this based upon intelligence that you had given them or conveyed to them?
MR PRINSLOO: Perhaps I could elaborate on that point, Chairperson. Intelligence was collected from various informers, not only from me.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, that is why I have asked, were you the only person?
MR PRINSLOO: No, there were various informers. I referred to Military Intelligence, National Intelligence and other Security Branch informers which I didn't handle. They collected information and it was then synchronised to Head Office. So also the information that I generated during the investigation into the propaganda onslaught, regarding Chris Hani's activities. This was also conducted by means of fortnightly reports which were sent through to Head Office, where all the information would then be centralised.
I had also had sight of the intelligence documents from other areas. For example, the Witwatersrand Security Branch in Johannesburg also had informers reporting about this, as well as the Eastern Cape. P.E. specifically also had informers. So all that information was centralised to the Head Office in Pretoria and I had sight of all those documents.
MS VAN DER WALT: You say that you spoke to Mr Coetzee and declared your willingness to perform the task, what else did you do? Who else did you speak to?
MR PRINSLOO
"Col Coetzee then gave me the order to go to Pretoria, in order to honour an appointment with Col Viktor. At that stage I was aware of the fact that he was part of Security Branch Head Office component and that he was responsible for the various desks at Head Office, that he was responsible, among others, for Lesotho and Foreign Affairs and information pertaining to that."
MS VAN DER WALT: I beg your pardon, this Col Viktor, was he Mr Coetzee's senior or not?
MR PRINSLOO: Yes, Chairperson, that is my perspective.
MS VAN DER WALT: Yes, and what happened then?
MR PRINSLOO
"I came to Pretoria where I had an appointment with Col Viktor and he then conveyed more-or-less the same that Coetzee had conveyed to me, and asked me whether or not I would be willing to perform the task and I responded yes. I only attached one condition which was that I should have sufficient time to enable me to collect further information regarding Chris Hani's movements before the decision regarding how, where and when the operation would be launched."
MS VAN DER WALT: And this order according to you, came from Head Office itself?
MR PRINSLOO: Yes, that is correct.
MS VAN DER WALT: In the paragraph, the first paragraph you state - in the middle, Honourable Chairperson
"During this time I received an order from my Divisional Commander, Brig Coetzee. I think the order came from him or Col Viktor."
Are you now certain that the first order that you received, came from Mr Coetzee?
MR PRINSLOO: Yes, Chairperson, because he was my Divisional Commander.
MS VAN DER WALT: And what did you do then?
MR PRINSLOO
"I reported back to Col Coetzee in Bloemfontein and he gave an instruction to contact a Sgt Kallie de Bruin from the Ladybrand Security Branch, which also fell under the Bloemfontein command. I had to contact him because he had an informer who had direct access to Chris Hani."
MS VAN DER WALT: Therefore, Mr de Bruin would have had the same information regarding Mr Chris Hani, the same information that you had, or would you not say that?
MR PRINSLOO: I wouldn't be able to say, Chairperson, because I believe that I had a more comprehensive background regarding Mr Hani.
CHAIRPERSON: ...(inaudible)
INTERPRETER: The speaker's microphone is not on.
MR PRINSLOO: For all I know, I cannot speculate about that.
MS VAN DER WALT: Did you then establish contact with him?
MR PRINSLOO: Yes, I made contact with Sgt de Bruin and I drew the inference that he was already informed regarding what it was about. I began to discuss the matter with him and it was clear to me - he didn't say that he didn't know about it. He must have known about it. I drew that inference, the inference that Col Coetzee had already approached him in that regard.
MS VAN DER WALT: Because Col Coetzee sent you to him?
MR PRINSLOO: Yes, that is correct.
MS VAN DER WALT: And what did you do then?
MR PRINSLOO
"De Bruin then informed me that he had an informer who had direct access to Hani, as well as the place where Hani was living at that stage.
Basically it boils down to the fact that Hani lived on the Mafiteng Road outside Maseru, in a house where there would sometimes be two to three MK members who acted as Hani's bodyguards as well as his driver.
I then tested the background of the informer - I can say that his name is Ernest Ramatolo, and it was clear to me that he had access to Chris Hani and that he was also aware of certain activities, ANC activities of Chris Hani and I gave him an instruction to return to Lesotho. We made an appointment ..."
CHAIRPERSON: ...(inaudible)
INTERPRETER: The speaker's microphone is not on.
MR PRINSLOO: Yes, Chairperson.
That he had direct access to Hani, because the objective was to determine the movements of Chris Hani ..."
...(intervention
CHAIRPERSON: But you were satisfied that you could trust him?
MR PRINSLOO: Yes, de Bruin gave me the assurance that he had handled this informer for an extended period of time by that stage.
"Then in de Bruin's presence, or at least every time I saw the informer, de Bruin and I were present. I gave the informer certain instructions to determine the movements of Hani.
Upon the first occasion I did not mention to the informer that the purpose was to eliminate Hani. We had various meetings with the informer after that. These meetings were held in the Republic. The informer would come through to the Republic and during these meetings he would report on the movements of Hani, which ultimately emanated that I decided that the best to get rid of Hani would be to plant a bomb under a motor vehicle with which he travelled."
CHAIRPERSON: Over what period of time did you monitor him?
MR PRINSLOO: It was approximately three months.
CHAIRPERSON: What was the purpose of that?
MR PRINSLOO: The purpose was to observe Hani, because he was rather sly. We tried to determine the easiest way to eliminate him. He was the kind of man who went jogging quite regularly in the mornings and initially I considered shooting him with a gun, but he always changed his route, he never followed the same route. So there are various other examples.
"Ultimately it was obvious that he regularly used a certain vehicle with one of his bodyguards. They would use this vehicle to travel to Maseru to conduct ANC business and matters, to fetch post, whatever the case may be, and it was clear that this would be the best way to get rid of him.
I conveyed my decision to Col Coetzee and also conveyed it to Pretoria, to Col Viktor. I told him that I required explosives as well as a strong magnet with - at that stage limpet mines did not exist yet, but the bomb that I would manufacture would work according to the same principles as a limpet mine.
Viktor gave me approximately two kilograms of T&T plastic explosives an electric detonator, as well as the magnet."
CHAIRPERSON: All these materials that you requested were for the purposes of a car bomb?
MR PRINSLOO: Yes, for a bomb to be fitted to a motor vehicle, by means of a magnet.
MS VAN DER WALT: May I just interrupt you at this point. You say that over a period of three months you collected the information, you also stated that Mr Chris Hani lived outside Maseru, did you conduct any investigation into whether other persons such as his wife or children, if he had any at the time, travelled with this vehicle from that house into Maseru?
MR PRINSLOO: Yes, Chairperson. According to all the information from all the other informers, not only this Mr Ramatolo specifically, Dipho Sekemane at that stage, I think she had two small toddlers. They lived in Maseru and upon occasion there was information that he didn't want anybody to live with him because it would have been a security risk. It was only him and two, sometimes three MK members who lived with him in this specific house.
MS VAN DER WALT: You then got the supplies to make the bomb, what did you do then?
MR PRINSLOO: Chair, I prepared and manufactured a bomb and made use of these cake tins with a hole in the middle, which you use to make a ring-shaped cake and it's made of a very light metal and I packed the explosives in this tin and the hole in the middle of the cake tin, in that I placed the magnet and attached it.
MS VAN DER WALT: Now the cake tin you actually attached to these cake tins, one to the other, or you placed one on top of the other.
MR PRINSLOO: Right, and the magnet was in the centre and there was also the source of power, which was a battery and the little battery was also placed in the explosive.
"The fuses from there led to the switch and as soon as pressure was exerted on that, it was a little plastic box, this would cause it to collapse and then the two contact points make a contact and the circuit would be completed and the bomb would be detonated in this way.
The purpose of this was - or the idea was that the bomb had to be placed underneath a front passenger's seat. I don't know what kind of car it was. I remember I did tests on similar cars in the Republic to find out if the magnet was strong enough. Then the switch had to be placed on the back wheel of the car.
The informer, Mr Ramatolo, I told him about this whole story, I gave him proper information and in this process I told him that if he - that I was trying to kill Hani and he associated himself with that objective and declared himself prepared to do that."
CHAIRPERSON: Was this person trained in the use of this type of bomb?
MR PRINSLOO: No, Chairperson, not as far as I know. All that he was required to do is he had to attach this device to the car.
CHAIRPERSON: So it was already pre-assembled?
MR PRINSLOO: Yes, the entire bomb had been prepared and assembled. In other words, you have a bomb and the fuses and the switch and the bomb just had to be attached by means of a magnet to the underside of the passenger seat and the switch had to be attached to the back wheel, so that as soon as the tyres start rolling it would cause pressure on the switch, the circuit would be completed and detonation would take place.
I gave him proper training, I showed him how to attach the bomb, of course in safe circumstance and there was no charge that stage the bomb when I showed him, and he actually could do it very, very quickly, between five and seven seconds it took him to do this, to attach the bomb and the switch and then to depart from the scene.
MS VAN DER WALT: So if I understand you correctly, he practised, he trained?
MR PRINSLOO: Yes, I gave him some training and he practised the scenario.
MS VAN DER WALT: I don't want to keep interrupting you, but Mr Kallie de Bruin, the other applicant, was he present when you spoke to the informer and where he declared himself prepared to do the work? Was he present?
MR PRINSLOO: Yes, he was present on each occasion, because he was actually the handler of the informer and he had to make the arrangements or rendezvous with the informer, who had to come through from Lesotho.
MS VAN DER WALT: Very well.
MR PRINSLOO
"At that stage there was some unrest in Lesotho and there were many Police and Defence Force patrols on the roads in Lesotho and the only way which I could see in which to get the informer and the bomb safely to the place where it had to be attached to the car, was to actually buy a car for the informer. It was a Valiant car and I built in a concealed space behind the front seats, in which I then placed the completed bomb and the informer knew exactly how to open this space and how to take it out and how to go and use it.
De Bruin and I then on one afternoon, I think it was sometime during winter, I don't know exactly when, we met him near the BK border, that's the border post between South Africa and Lesotho. We gave him the car containing the bomb. He went into Lesotho to go and place the bomb in the car that same night, in Hani's car. In other words, Hani would use the vehicle the next morning and then the detonation would take place.
We waited somewhere in the field, in the bushes, until the next day round about 10/11/12 o'clock and the informer, well the arrangement was that the informer after placing the bomb, the next morning as soon as the border post opened, would return to the Republic to report on what happened. He didn't arrive.
I discussed the matter with de Bruin and told him that I was going to go back to Bloemfontein to report to Col Coetzee, because we hadn't heard anything from the informer, we didn't know what had happened. When I arrived in Bloemfontein, Col Coetzee told me that there had apparently been a report on the radio that there had been an explosion and that the informer had apparently been injured in this explosion and was in a hospital in Maseru.
Later I heard, at a stage when I was no longer directly involved with the further fate of the informer, I heard that he had been given bail and that he had been charged in Lesotho and that he'd been given bail. In the meanwhile, Col Coetzee had told me that I had to come to Pretoria to report to, I think it was then Brig Johan Coetzee, later the Commissioner of Police, at that stage he was the Chief of the Security Branch, I had to come and report to him as to what had happened.
I came to Pretoria and along with Col Viktor, I reported to Brig Coetzee, Johan Coetzee that is, regarding everything I knew about this incident up to the point when the informer left us. I don't know what happened to the informer after that.
Approximately seven years after that - well, in the meantime I'd been transferred to Pretoria Security Branch and I met the informer at Vlakplaas for the first time and I asked him what had happened during that incident and he explained to me what took place, or what had taken place."
MS VAN DER WALT: Could you perhaps tell the Committee, because one would like to know what actually went wrong, what was the informer supposed to do? You said he had to attach the bomb to the vehicle, but what safety measures did he have to put in place?
MR PRINSLOO
"As I said earlier on, the bomb was in this cake tin and from there there were these two electric fuses going to the switch, which was long enough to actually fit it onto the back tyre or wheel. There were two poles, a positive and a negative pole and in-between there was a piece of cellophane and the informer had to place this switch on the back tyre to get it out of the way, and then he had to attach the bomb by means of a magnet and after that he had to remove the cellophane strip which was between these two points of contact.
What he explained to me what happened was that he placed the bomb next to the car first and then he removed the cellophane from the switch and then he placed the bomb underneath the car, or when he wanted to do that he actually made accidental contact with the switch with his knee and then that of course completed the circuit and the bomb went off."
CHAIRPERSON: Now ...(intervention)
INTERPRETER: Something about seven seconds. The speaker's microphone was off.
MR PRINSLOO: Yes.
MS VAN DER WALT: You said that you reported back to the Commissioner, Mr Coetzee and Mr Viktor, where Mr Viktor was present. Was he aware of the order which you'd been given? That is Mr Coetzee, the Commissioner.
MR PRINSLOO: Yes, that's how it appeared to me.
MS VAN DER WALT: Mr Prinsloo, was there no other way in which the Security Police could have stopped the operations and activities of Mr Hani in Lesotho, before you got this instruction?
MR PRINSLOO: Chairperson, I wasn't myself involved but I am aware of something, it was told to me by some Security Police members, that there had been certain attempts to entice Mr Hani under cover to cross the Caledon River, to come to the South African side so that he could be arrested and that he could be dealt with further within the Republic of South Africa, but apparently those attempts to lure him across the border failed.
MS VAN DER WALT: Did you regard it as essential to stop Mr Hani's activities?
MR PRINSLOO: Yes, I associated myself with that objective and I saw it as the only way to stop this threat. The only way I saw to avert the threat was to eliminate him.
MS VAN DER WALT: In your Annexure B you set what your political motivation was. Why did you do it? Did you derive any benefit from this act, or why did you commit it?
MR PRINSLOO: No, I gained no benefit or advantage from this act, I set out the reasons why I did in this annexure and I did it by virtue of my convictions, the convictions which I held at that stage.
MS VAN DER WALT: So you did it for the then government and the South African Police?
MR PRINSLOO: That's correct.
MS VAN DER WALT: And you've already testified that that was done on the orders from Head Office.
MR PRINSLOO: Yes.
MS VAN DER WALT: When you went to Mr Viktor and you told him of your decision that you were going to eliminate Mr Hani by means of an explosives device attached to a car, did he approve of it or not?
MR PRINSLOO: Yes, he did approve of it and he also gave me the necessary material, the explosives etcetera.
MS VAN DER WALT: You have ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: I just want to make sure of the way in which he was supposed to be eliminated. Did he tell you about that, because he had already approved the elimination when you got the order?
MR PRINSLOO: Yes, what we were concerned with was the actual manner in which he was to eliminated and that's why he gave me the explosives.
MS VAN DER WALT: In previous applications you've testified before the Amnesty Committee, are you aware of Exhibit A which had been handed in to the Committee and which sets out the general background of the Security Branch?
MR PRINSLOO: Yes, that the general background to the amnesty applications.
MS VAN DER WALT: And are you asking the Committee to incorporate that information in your application?
MR PRINSLOO: Yes.
MS VAN DER WALT: Mr Prinsloo, are you applying for amnesty for conspiracy to commit murder?
MR PRINSLOO: Yes.
MS VAN DER WALT: As well as an attempt to murder Mr Hani and attempted murder of unknown persons that could have been travelling with Mr Hani?
MR PRINSLOO: Yes.
MS VAN DER WALT: And you're also applying for amnesty for malicious damage to property.
MR PRINSLOO: Yes.
MS VAN DER WALT: As well as for obstructing the ends of justice.
MR PRINSLOO: Yes.
MS VAN DER WALT: And the possession of explosives, illegal possession of explosives?
MR PRINSLOO: Yes.
MS VAN DER WALT: You're also applying for amnesty for any other offence or offences which may flow from your acts for which you're applying for amnesty?
MR PRINSLOO: Correct.
MS VAN DER WALT: And any other delictual liability which may arise.
MR PRINSLOO: Yes.
MS VAN DER WALT: Thank you, Honourable Chairperson.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS VAN DER WALT
MS CAMBANIS: Chairperson, I think we've agreed that it would be more fair for Mr Richard to question before me. Thank you.
CHAIRPERSON: Maybe the representatives for the co-applicants should go first.
MS CAMBANIS: I wasn't thinking, I apologise.
MR NORTIER: No questions from Mr Coetzee's side.
NO QUESTIONS BY MR NORTIER
MR PRINSLOO: No questions on behalf of de Bruin.
NO QUESTIONS BY MR PRINSLOO
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR RICHARD: Thank you, Chairperson. With your leave, I'll proceed.
Mr Prinsloo, if I understood your evidence correctly, your unit was stationed in Ladybrand.
MR PRINSLOO: No, I said I was stationed in Bloemfontein.
MR RICHARD: Now was there a unit stationed in Ladybrand?
MR PRINSLOO: Yes, that is what I said. There was a branch, a Security Branch in Ladybrand.
MR RICHARD: Under whose command was that?
MR PRINSLOO: I can't remember exactly, there was a change in the command ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: ...(indistinct - no microphone) Ladybrand, as far as this case is concerned that would have been Mr de Bruin?
MR PRINSLOO: That's correct. Obviously, all the branches fell under Bloemfontein Headquarters.
CHAIRPERSON: But your act in Ladybrand only dealt with de Bruin.
MR PRINSLOO: Yes.
MR RICHARD: Now how many people were in Ladybrand? How strong was the presence of the Security Police?
MR PRINSLOO: I would have to speculate to answer that, especially in respect of that particular time, because as I've already said my investigation covered a whole period after the '76 riots until '80, so I can't say exactly how many members there were. There were white people as well as black members in Ladybrand Security Branch.
MR RICHARD: So that means there were a number of people, it was more than just Mr de Bruin?
MR PRINSLOO: Yes, that's correct.
MR RICHARD: Now within that operation, do you have any idea of how many informers they used in Lesotho, from Ladybrand?
MR PRINSLOO: It's difficult for me to say. Could we just distinguish here between the Security Branch, Security Branch there were quite a few informers and it wasn't only the Ladybrand informers, I also refer to Witwatersrand, Eastern Cape informers who were involved from the Security Branch, then I refer to National Intelligence, I don't know how many informers they had, as well as Military Intelligence.
MR RICHARD: Now when we come to Mr de Bruin, how many informers did he take information from?
MR PRINSLOO: I don't know, I can only talk about the one informer.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Richard, is there any dispute that your client was used the way the applicant described?
MR RICHARD: It's not in dispute, but the question I'm leading to Chairperson, is Mr Ramatolo was chosen and it's clear that I've already established that there were a number to choose from.
Now on what criteria did you select ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: What has that got to do with the price of eggs, on what basis he was chosen? The fact of the matter is that a contact with Mr Hani was sought after and he was produced.
MR RICHARD: Thank you, Chairperson.
In your evidence-in-chief you said that you tested the background of the informer, Mr Ernest Ramatolo, in what way did you test it?
MR PRINSLOO: Chairperson, I had a discussion with him to try and find out whether he really had direct access to Chris Hani's home and that he could give information as to the movements of Chris Hani, and he convinced me that that was indeed the case, that he did have that access and that he could satisfy those needs which I had.
MR RICHARD: Did you make enquiries as to what his political affiliations and opinions were at the time?
MR PRINSLOO: I relied on Sgt de Bruin who was his handler and Sgt de Bruin assured me that this was a reliable person. If I remember correctly, I think the informer, Mr Ramatolo was the Secretary or the Chairperson of a youth wing within Lesotho, which opposed the Basotholand National Party which was in government at the time.
MR RICHARD: So you would not dispute that through one method or another, Mr Ramatolo was persuaded or taught or told that Mr Hani, the SACP, the ANC, were enemies of both Lesotho and the Republic of South Africa?
MR PRINSLOO: No, Ramatolo was an intelligent person and I never got the impression that he had any other opinions of the matter.
MR RICHARD: Thank you. Now were you aware of his citizenship at that time?
MR PRINSLOO: Yes. According to my information he was a citizen of Lesotho.
CHAIRPERSON: Is that your instructions, that he was a Lesotho citizen?
MR RICHARD: Yes, he was a Lesotho citizen.
Now did that matter to you that you chose a foreign national?
MR PRINSLOO: No, I only was looking for a person who had direct access to Chris Hani and he was an informer in the service of the Security Branch of the South African Police, at that stage.
MR RICHARD: Do you know how long he had been an informer?
MR PRINSLOO: No. Apart from what I said in my evidence-in-chief, mainly that de Bruin assured me that Ramatolo had been giving information for some considerable time to the Security Branch.
MR RICHARD: Now money. What your relationship with the informers, did you ever remunerate them for their services?
MR PRINSLOO: Are you talking generally or more specifically in respect of Mr Ramatolo?
MR RICHARD: First generally and then in the specifics of Mr Ramatolo.
MR PRINSLOO: Chair, yes, informers were paid for services rendered and it was based on their production.
MR RICHARD: And was Mr Ramatolo ever paid?
MR PRINSLOO: I don't know about that, I wasn't his handler, so I didn't deal with that aspect. At no stage did I discuss that part with him.
MR RICHARD: Would it have been reasonable in the circumstances of the time, that before the conspiracy to assassinate the late Mr Hani was formed, there was an expectation of money or a taxi in return for the information? The expectation of a taxi or the equivalent in money. A kombi.
MR PRINSLOO: No, Chairperson. Once again I come back to the fact that that would have been de Bruin's function to deal with that aspect.
MR RICHARD: My question was not whose function, it was, was it in the ordinary ...(intervention)
MR PRINSLOO: No, I didn't know. That's what I said, Chair. I'm not aware of that. It wasn't my function.
MR RICHARD: But you do not dispute that it might have been offered?
MR PRINSLOO: No, I can't testify about something which I don't know about.
MR RICHARD: Then by the same token, you would not dispute or know anything about whether Mr Ramatolo was offered anything for the assassination of Mr Hani?
MR PRINSLOO: No, I can't, I can't dispute that because I don't know about that.
MR RICHARD: Wouldn't that have been something that you discussed with Mr de Bruin?
MR PRINSLOO: No, that wasn't my function and my role. De Bruin was the handler of the informer and I only used the informer for a very specific purpose. As far as the remuneration etcetera, payment for services rendered were concerned, as far as the purpose that I used him for, that was de Bruin's baby.
CHAIRPERSON: If I may just take up this point. You would have known that he hadn't done what you'd asked him to do without some form of payment.
MR PRINSLOO: I think that is a reasonable inference, yes.
CHAIRPERSON: I think the question is aimed in that direction. In those circumstances, was it discussed with you how much this person - he's not an informer, or let me put it this way, in English they call it a Mike ...(indistinct), in other words somebody who is paid for murder, I can't remember the correct term now, a mercenary.
MR PRINSLOO: No.
CHAIRPERSON: Was that never discussed with you?
MR PRINSLOO: No.
CHAIRPERSON: No, I understand ...(intervention)
MR PRINSLOO: As far as I was concerned, that was de Bruin's task, he had to deal with that.
CHAIRPERSON: So as far as you were concerned, you knew that it would have been discussed with him but it was de Bruin's job to do that?
MR PRINSLOO: Yes, I was only looking for a person, I was looking for an informer who would give me that specific information.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, his status changed after that?
MR PRINSLOO: Yes, of course, but it wasn't my purpose or function to, in respect of any reward or remuneration etcetera, to offer such money or remuneration.
CHAIRPERSON: Did he ever ask you for these things?
MR PRINSLOO: No, no, he didn't.
MR RICHARD: Thank you, Chairperson.
Now if Mr de Bruin had needed money for any purpose, such as the one I'm eluding to, from whom would he have got it?
MR PRINSLOO: There are certain procedures laid down in terms of which this would have taken place. A claim is submitted, it had to be motivated, an amount of money was mentioned or named and de Bruin was in Ladybrand, so it would have been conveyed via his Branch Commander to Bloemfontein, Divisional Headquarters, it would have been sent through for approval by the Divisional Commander, who would have been Col Coetzee in this case. Each Security Branch and Divisional Security Branch had a certain limit, a certain amount which could be used for this purpose and if that amount exceeded the limit, it then had to be referred to Security Headquarters, who would then approve the disbursement in terms of the extended limit. So I wouldn't know about that, it wasn't my function.
MR RICHARD: So the long and the short of my line of questioning is that while you might not know what was offered or promised or discussed, for a person as important as Mr Hani, you wouldn't find it shocking to hear that a figure of R5 000 or R6 000 was offered as an inducement?
MR PRINSLOO: Chair, I can't comment on that because I don't know what the specific circumstances were. Each case has to be treated on its own merits, so if it was R5 000 or R6 000, I would say it's perhaps a little bit on the low side.
MR RICHARD: Thank you. Now were you aware of any - let me rephrase that. What training did Mr Ramatolo receive?
MR PRINSLOO: Training is a very wide concept, are you referring to the explosive device and the use of that?
CHAIRPERSON: No, I think the question is once again as I put to you earlier, how did he know what to do?
MR PRINSLOO: Yes, I said it in my evidence-in-chief and I will repeat it, there were several occasions in which I gave him practical training in the field using a vehicle, we used a dummy bomb similar to the one which we made later and I also got him to train with the actual bomb, without of course the explosive part and the source of power in it, I told him where to put it and where to put the switch. That was the kind of training which I gave him and I also told him how dangerous it was and that's why I told him "You first put the switch on the tyre, you get that out of the way and then you attach the bomb to the car." The switch had to be gotten out of the way first and on his version, later, as he told me, he just changed the order, he wanted to first attach the bomb and then he wanted to do something with the switch. So that was the training per se in terms of the explosive device was concerned.
MR RICHARD: Was he ever trained in anything else, like a firearm?
MR PRINSLOO: I don't know, Chairperson, my contact with him was regarding the information and the explosive device.
MR RICHARD: Because he will give evidence to the effect that before the bomb was presented as an option, he was trained for some 45 minutes in the use of a Makarov pistol and the idea was to assassinate Mr Hani with that. Would you know anything about that?
MR PRINSLOO: No, Chairperson, I ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: Who does he say gave him such training, Mr Richard?
MR RICHARD: He will say that training was given by Mr de Bruin and the witness under cross-examination.
CHAIRPERSON: It is being put to you that the witness will say ...(intervention)
MR PRINSLOO: Yes, I heard.
CHAIRPERSON: ... at the very least, that you were present when that training was given.
MR PRINSLOO: I cannot imagine anything like that, Chairperson. As I have said, once again the statement has been made here that he will testify that he received training in a Makarov pistol in order to shoot Mr Hani dead and I say no, that is not so. Because I have already indicated that there was an option to take Mr Hani out with a gun or a firearm due to his jogging. The idea would be to shoot him when he was alone at a suitable time, but I abandoned that option because it was not a viable option for me, there were too many risks involved with it. Also the fact that Mr Hani followed a different jogging route every day.
MR RICHARD: Mr Ramatolo will continue to say that indeed he once was in the street with the firearm, a Makarov pistol, and Mr Hani was in his immediate presence and he decided not to proceed because he couldn't shoot somebody that he didn't see as his enemy, in cold blood. Would you know anything about that?
MR PRINSLOO: No, Chairperson, I don't know anything about that.
CHAIRPERSON: Is this the same person who in fact planted the bomb?
MR RICHARD: Yes.
Now the training with the bomb, was it on one or more occasions?
MR MALAN: He did say "on a number of occasions" Mr Richard, please don't repeat the evidence.
MR LAX: Now for how long did the training in total endure for?
CHAIRPERSON: Well obviously not long enough, it didn't work.
MR RICHARD: Minutes? Was it one hour or ten hours or three hours?
MR PRINSLOO: Chairperson, there were various occasions
and the minimum period of time, if I recall correctly, in the field, was at least an hour at a time because I wanted to be certain that the man could place the bomb and the detonator with closed eyes, so to speak. There were various hours of training. As I have stated, he could place the device within five to seven seconds ultimately, as it was presented to him.
MR RICHARD: And if Mr Ramatolo gave evidence to the fact that he was trained for a sum total of 45 minutes, what would your comment be?
MR PRINSLOO: No, I think that he is groping in the dark, I would say that it would be at least a minimum of three hours. As I have already stated, I had him practise with a dummy bomb to begin with, afterwards I gave him the real thing so that he could get used to it, and this took quite a number or exercises, at least three to four hours worth of exercises with the correct apparatus.
MR RICHARD: May I simply confer with my client for one minute to find out if there are any further questions I should put?
Mr Prinsloo, are you certain as to the identity of the opposition party that Mr Ramatolo belonged to in Lesotho? He will deny that he was a Chairperson, but he'll say he was an ordinary member of something known as the BSP. Could that be true?
MR PRINSLOO: It may be so.
MR CAMBANIS: Sorry to interrupt, Chair, I didn't get the question. If it could please be repeated.
CHAIRPERSON: He suggested that he did not belong to a political organisation that the witness had testified to earlier but rather he was an ordinary member of something called the BSP.
MR RICHARD: Nothing of moment turns on the question, it's simply that he wasn't a Chairperson of the BNP, but a member of some other party, which was in opposition to the then Lesotho Government. The second point that my client requested that I amplify, Mr Prinsloo, did you take the implicated person, Mr Ramatolo, to a garage and show him a certain Stanza motor vehicle on a hoist, where you could see the underside?
CHAIRPERSON: ...(indistinct)
INTERPRETER: The speaker was unclear.
MR PRINSLOO: Yes, I would image something like that. I would imagine that was the vehicle which was used by Hani at that stage. It was in preparation for the placing of explosive device for which Ramatolo received training, so that he would know precisely what he was supposed to do.
MR RICHARD: Another point, are you certain about where you instructed him to place the bomb? Was it on the left or right-hand side?
MR PRINSLOO: Chairperson, I've already stated in my evidence-in-chief that it was below the front passenger seat because according to Ramatolo's information, Hani always travelled with one of his bodyguards who also acted as the driver of the vehicle.
MR RICHARD: Would it have been possible to detonate the bomb by inadvertently leaning on the car, with the result that the motor vehicle moved?
MR PRINSLOO: No, Chairperson, the instruction and the training indicated that it should be placed near the top point of the back wheel so it should complete a semicircle before it hit the switch, which would then bring the two contact points into contact with each other.
MR MALAN: Sorry Mr Richard.
Mr Prinsloo, I just want to understand, if the detonator was placed at the top of the wheel, how would you know that it wouldn't fall off onto the road? Would it be fixed to the wheel?
MR PRINSLOO: Yes, a certain glue was used, it was attached to the detonator and this would then be attached to the wheel, the tyre of the wheel, the top part of the wheel so that it would be affixed there and travel with the wheel as it made its revolution.
MR RICHARD: No further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR RICHARD
MS CAMBANIS: Thank you, Chair. I'm instructed by my client that she has no interest in this application and simply wishes to proceed to hear the implicated party's evidence, thank you.
MR RICHARD: Thank you, Chairperson.
I call Mr Ramatolo.
ADV STEENKAMP: Thank you, Honourable Chairman, I've got no questions.
NO QUESTIONS BY ADV STEENKAMP
CHAIRPERSON: Is everybody in agreement that this is the order that we shall follow?
MS VAN DER WALT: I have not objections that it takes place as such.
MR RICHARD: I believe it's necessary for a short adjournment, so as to arrange a place for the witness to sit.
CHAIRPERSON: Before we proceed there are other people who also have a say in this matter. And there is the question of further questions to this witness.
ADV SIGODI: Sorry, I did not get my notes clear when you were saying - how much explosives did you give to Mr Ramatolo. My notes are not clear on that. For the bomb.
MR PRINSLOO: Chairperson, there were two cake tins which were on top of one another. There was approximately 2 kilograms of TNT plastic explosives.
ADV SIGODI: TNT?
MR PRINSLOO: Yes, that is correct, TNT.
ADV SIGODI: And you said you got this from?
MR PRINSLOO: I obtained it from Col Viktor in Pretoria.
ADV SIGODI: And how did you get them across the border?
MR PRINSLOO: Chairperson, I had already prepared the bomb or explosive device and I concealed it in a concealed space of the Valiant motor vehicle which I purchased, so that Mr Ramatolo would be able to cross the border with ease and move around freely in Lesotho. If he were stopped with the vehicle, it would not have been discovered during the search. I was aware of the unrest in Lesotho and the strong Military and Police presence on the Lesotho roads.
ADV SIGODI: So it was Mr Ramatolo who took it from South Africa across the border.
MR PRINSLOO: Yes, Chairperson, as I have stated via the PK Bridge border post.
ADV SIGODI: And what time was this explosion set for? What time was it supposed to go off?
MR PRINSLOO: Chairperson, that depended upon circumstances. The explosion was foreseen for the following morning when Mr Hani got into his vehicle and travelled to Maseru. That was his only fixed routine. It was foreseen that it would be during that period, between 6 o'clock and 8 o'clock in the morning when he drove out.
ADV SIGODI: And where would he park his car normally, inside the yard or outside the yard?
MR PRINSLOO: Chairperson, the sketch plan which was provided to me by the informer indicated that it was an open place and the vehicle was parked next to the house. Outside, in other words.
ADV SIGODI: No, where I'm coming to is, were there any measures or precautions taken so that other people would not be injured by the explosion?
MR PRINSLOO: Yes, that is why I referred to the possibility that only the bodyguard come driver would incur shrapnel injuries if the bomb had exploded as planned. It was a formed charge. In other words, it would have detonated upwards and down to the ground. By nature of the situation one would not be able to control the shrapnel which would be flying all over the place.
ADV SIGODI: Do you know how much damage happened to the car when it exploded?
MR PRINSLOO: No, Chairperson, I have no idea. I assume that the vehicle was a wreck.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Prinsloo, with a two kilogram bomb it is more probable that everybody in the vehicle would also have been killed.
MR PRINSLOO: Yes, Chairperson, I foresaw that possibility. That is what I stated. I just want to add at this point that it would depend upon where the bomb was at that stage, whether it was still on the ground or attached to the car.
CHAIRPERSON: Are you referring to the plan?
MR PRINSLOO: Yes, that is correct.
CHAIRPERSON: Tell me, what was your rank at that stage?
MR PRINSLOO: I was a Warrant Officer.
CHAIRPERSON: And you were involved in the activities of Mr Hani and you had to monitor his activities and collect intelligence regarding his activities.
MR PRINSLOO: Yes, initially it began with the distribution of the pamphlets and then it extended to his general activities, at which point I had sight of all the other information which was generated regarding his activities.
CHAIRPERSON: Why did you not attempt to kill him yourself if he was such a problem for you, why did you have to wait for an instruction?
MR PRINSLOO: I was junior member, I did not possess the capacity to take such a decision. The thought never occurred to me. I would not have done something like that, I was only investigating his activities and the threat that he presented. I don't know what else Head Office knew besides me.
CHAIRPERSON: What I'm trying to determine is that you testified that it was not the only way of eliminating him, was that your attitude towards him? If so, why did you wait for an order?
MR PRINSLOO: I was a junior member at that stage and I already stated that the idea never occurred to me. After Col Coetzee spoke to me about it I began to understand that it was the only possibility in order to neutralise those activities, because Hani was the sort of man who played his cards quite closely. He had a man working for him as the second-in-command, his name was Maloi, he was a comrade, and it was clear that he played his cards very closely.
CHAIRPERSON: On page 44, in the middle of paragraph 1 regarding Mr Hani's application, or the application regarding Mr Hani, it was said that
"At that stage in 1980, I was involved with the large-scale propaganda which was spread by Chris Hani from Lesotho to South Africa. During this time I received an order from my Divisional Commander, Brig Eben Coetzee."
and you continue. The impression that I gain from this application as it appears here is that regarding you, and we are not referring to the order or this conspiracy as such, for you it was about the fact that there was a large-scale propaganda campaign which had been launched from Lesotho to South Africa. That is the only reason, as it appears here.
MR PRINSLOO: Yes, I agree that that is the impression which has been created, that is why I elaborated on it in my viva voce evidence when I stated that the propaganda campaign had been under way for quite some time. At that stage it had already been under way for two years, during which the pamphlets had been distributed and the other information had been obtained.
CHAIRPERSON: Then why did you have to kill him if he was spreading pamphlets?
MR PRINSLOO: No Chairperson, perhaps you don't understand me. What I said was that initially I became involved with Hani and his activities as a result of this propaganda campaign and in the same process I made use of all information from all sources pertaining to Hani and his activities, and from that it emanated quite clearly what his actual role was, not only regarding the pamphlets as it would appear to be at face value in the documents.
CHAIRPERSON: Was there any other way out except the attempt to kill him?
MR PRINSLOO: I could never have thought of anything like that, I was only a junior member.
CHAIRPERSON: Then at which rank were you supposed to have been in order to take such a decision?
MR PRINSLOO: I don't think the rank exists. I was reacting ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: Or how senior would you have had to have been at that stage in order to effect such decisions?
MR PRINSLOO: It's very difficult to say. Under those circumstances I never even thought about it in my wildest dreams, all I knew at that stage was that Hani would have to be neutralised by some or other means at some or other point. I'm not necessarily referring to killing, but neutralisation, whether it be by placing him in exile or destroying his structures.
CHAIRPERSON: Well let us then just stick to the facts. It was decided that he would be killed.
MR PRINSLOO: Yes, under those circumstances that was the decision, that is correct.
CHAIRPERSON: And you say that you would not have been able to make a decision yourself because your status was too junior at that stage.
MR PRINSLOO: Yes, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Then I'm asking in general, at which rank or how senior should a person have been in order to make such a decision independently?
MR PRINSLOO: Then you would have to consider Hani who was a high profile ANC/SACP/MK member, he enjoyed a lot of favour with the Lesotho Government, he came and went as he pleased. I would say that it would have had to have been taken on a senior managerial level.
CHAIRPERSON: How high?
MR PRINSLOO: Well we would at least begin with the Divisional Commander whose area it was within which those activities were taking place, because the Free State was partially responsible for Lesotho as well as KwaZulu Natal, who also had informers there. It would all depend on where the information came from.
CHAIRPERSON: In the Free State, on what level would a person be to make such a decision?
MR PRINSLOO: Divisional Commander level.
CHAIRPERSON: Could any less senior person make such a decision?
MR PRINSLOO: No, not at that stage, not according to my knowledge.
CHAIRPERSON: Did you ever achieve a rank in your career which placed you in the position to have been able to make such decisions on your own?
MR PRINSLOO: No, I would never have taken such a decision on my own per se, it was conducted after a proposal from a colleague of mine who was more senior.
CHAIRPERSON: But if you were ever in the position that you could have made such a decision at any time after the incident.
MR PRINSLOO: No, not me myself.
CHAIRPERSON: You were never that high in the rank order?
MR PRINSLOO: With regard to Hani?
CHAIRPERSON: Yes.
MR PRINSLOO: No. It was the only time that I acted regarding Hani's activities, because in 1983 I was transferred from Bloemfontein. I knew of his further activities, but it was information ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: Where were you transferred to?
MR PRINSLOO: Pretoria Division Northern Transvaal.
CHAIRPERSON: The reason why I have put all these questions is that an attempt has been made in 1980 to kill him. In case I am mistaken, because I never heard of any further attempt, why didn't you once again make a similar attempt in 1985 when things were far more aggravated?
MR PRINSLOO: I don't whether Mr Hani was in Lesotho in 1985.
CHAIRPERSON: But wherever he was Mr Hani was a target for just about the entire government.
MR PRINSLOO: Chairperson once again my job description was not to work with Lesotho after my transfer. Then my job description shifted to the former Bophuthatswana and Swaziland. It was a completely different milieu of work. Swaziland, Mozambique, Botswana. It had virtually nothing to do with the Lesotho situation per se, with the exception of a few documents, but I was never again really involved with Lesotho and Chris Hani as such.
CHAIRPERSON: I've seen in your application you have said that when you participated in this attempt you were a member of the South African Police as well as the National Party.
MR PRINSLOO: That's correct.
CHAIRPERSON: Are you still a member of the Police?
MR PRINSLOO: No.
CHAIRPERSON: Are you still a member of the National Party?
MR PRINSLOO: No.
CHAIRPERSON: Are you a member of any party?
MR PRINSLOO: No, not at all, none.
CHAIRPERSON: Why did you leave the National Party?
MR PRINSLOO: Chairperson, I think that there has been much debate about it, particularly by those appearing before the TRC and the Amnesty Committee. People realised at a certain point they were used by the politicians in order to achieve political objectives and that when one was a foot-soldier, the politicians all ran away and now the foot-soldiers have to stay down the full responsibility and I cannot associate myself with the political party who betrays me, I regard this as betrayal.
CHAIRPERSON: At which stage do you believe you were deceived?
MR PRINSLOO: I think it began with the World Trade Centre, with those negotiations, when they were initiated and put into motion.
CHAIRPERSON: You did not agree with it?
MR PRINSLOO: With what?
CHAIRPERSON: With that as your ultimate destination.
MR PRINSLOO: What took place afterwards and the fact that the politicians denied all knowledge of the government of the day and the orders which it issued in order to maintain its position and to ensure stability in the country.
CHAIRPERSON: You see one of the Act's objectives is an attempt to get this country back on track and to reconcile the people of the country and to achieve this in a spirit of total freedom. Would you be able to do that?
MR PRINSLOO: I'm a realist, I've done that a long time ago already, I've got no problems with that. But once again we just have to look at the milieu in which I grew up.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes no, I understand that. You see I agree with you, a couple of people have testified here and have said here before similar Panels as this that they were misled, that they had been betrayed and that they did what they had done for the country and for the government and nobody has given me an acceptable answer to the following questions. Could they not have thought for themselves that apartheid was wrong and that that was the reason why people were planting bombs etcetera?
MR PRINSLOO: Chairperson, if you talk about they or them I suppose you're referring to the politicians ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: No. Look, we're talking about the so-called enemies of the time, the people who were fighting apartheid.
MR PRINSLOO: I think I'm realistic enough, Chairperson, to realise that. I think at some stage, and I think that goes for all my colleagues as well, that you get a point where you start asking yourself questions. When the political situation started changing we started asking questions. There was a lot of pressure exerted on one and you acted outside of the scope of your normal powers and functions and no questions were asked and your loyalty, well you believed in the cause as a rest of the milieu in which you were born and educated and you believed that that was right and correct. So, I'm not a racist or a hater of people, but in the carrying out of my duties, yes - to keep the government then in power and to protect the country against a total onslaught, yes I associated myself with those things. I associated myself with that until my eyes were opened, perhaps too late.
CHAIRPERSON: You see I don't hold it against you, I'm simply trying to understand how people were thinking in those days. The questions I'm asking now are not aimed at trying to prove that you're not telling the truth, it's got nothing to do with that, it has everything to do with that one factor, namely - and that is something which the Act demands, namely that people must start living in peace with one another irrespective of the colour of their skins and apartheid was based on exactly that. So I'm asking, at that stage all the people who were protecting apartheid for the government's sake and who were acting for the government in this country, my question is simply this, could they not argue and reason for themselves and come to the conclusion that we're actually protecting something which is wrong?
MR PRINSLOO: If you argue like that, Chairperson, then you can ask the same question of the ANC. It's very easy now with hindsight to say our cause was a just cause, as they said, then I can also say my cause was a just cause. So I think with all due respect, if you're an armchair critic I suppose you can take that approach and say yes, you should have asked yourself certain questions and if you realised that you could play the role up to a point. But perhaps you didn't realise that. We in the Security Branch were actually the only line of defence between anarchy and stability, stability of the government of the day and of the people. Well in any case that's how I saw it and that's how I interpreted it. And there were high demands made of you in those days.
CHAIRPERSON: Did you never during your career in the Police think "Look, I'm in the Police and I'm being used and I'm defending the wrong policy"?
MR PRINSLOO: Yes, I conceded that.
CHAIRPERSON: Now I'm asking, during your career as a policeman, did that thought occur to you during your career as a policeman?
MR PRINSLOO: I think I want to distinguish between my career in the Uniform Branch, in the Detective Branch and later in the Security Branch ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: No well at any stage, I'm referring to any stage.
MR PRINSLOO: Security Branch, yes. As I've already said, after the political negotiations commenced and I was also at the World Trade Centre and I was present there and I have had first-hand experience of what happened there, and that's where one realised how cheap politicians and their talk was actually, there was a kind of instigation taking place there, there was a total onslaught. And now, and this is my own quote, everything which you stood for and which you defended they were just giving away on a platter.
CHAIRPERSON: I know you testified that you're not currently a member of any political party, what do you think of all the political parties currently in the country, the Communist Party, ANC, I don't know what the new name is for the National Party democratic alliance, in the old South Africa we said those parties were just all the same, now we know.
MR PRINSLOO: Well if you want my honest opinion, Chairperson, I say I think nothing of the whole business, I think they should establish one party for the whole South Africa.
CHAIRPERSON: A one party State?
MR PRINSLOO: No, no, I'm not saying on party State, I said that they must establish one party which has the right to principles, the correct principles, so that we can prevent our past history re-enacting itself, so we can prevent people being misled again. Misled by government bodies and politicians to carry out their political objectives for them.
CHAIRPERSON: But you are prepared to live in this country with all the people here and with all the political parties with their problems etcetera.
MR PRINSLOO: I've never had any war or problems with them because I grew up with them, I've worked with them for all these years, so I have no problem with that. I did however make a mistake in that I allowed myself to be misled and abused and used.
MR MALAN: Mr Prinsloo, this is very interesting, I don't want to waste too much time. You said you were a member of the National Party, were you a member or a supporter?
MR PRINSLOO: I was a member, fully paid up member.
CHAIRPERSON: Where did you live, which ward, constituency?
MR PRINSLOO: Bloemfontein, Noordhoek.
MR MALAN: Who was your Member of Parliament?
MR PRINSLOO: Kobie Coetzee.
MR MALAN: Did you tell Kobie Coetzee that you were killing people?
MR PRINSLOO: No, it wasn't my duty.
MR MALAN: No, I know it wasn't your duty, but I'm asking you this because you say that the politicians got you to do all these things.
MR PRINSLOO: No, you misunderstand me, I didn't make any exceptions. I said look at the milieu where I grew up in and what was said politically-speaking, by the politicians of the day and by the government of the day. You're aware of what was said from political platforms.
MR MALAN: Yes, but I'm trying to phrase the question for you. Let me just give you the rational behind the question. You're saying that the politicians misled you and abused and exploited you, politicians in general.
MR PRINSLOO: Yes.
MR MALAN: You say the politicians abused the Police.
MR PRINSLOO: Yes.
MR MALAN: And you did everything you could to keep the government and the National Party in power.
MR PRINSLOO: Yes.
MR MALAN: And when the same government and political party, the National Party, decided not to stay in power anymore by starting the negotiations at the World Trade Centre, you decided that they actually betrayed you, that they were giving up everything, everything for which you'd fought. So my question then is, is that a reasonable statement to say that "They used and abused me and then I got angry with them because they betrayed me, because they were simply giving up everything which I stood for, which I believed in." That was your evidence.
MR PRINSLOO: No, we can go and look at the tapes of the evidence. What I said was they did not want to take responsibility and they were abandoning the foot-soldiers.
MR MALAN: No, no, that's the second part. That's why I asked you the question about Kobie Coetzee. Kobie Coetzee was not only a National Party representative and your MP, he was also a member of government.
MR PRINSLOO: Yes.
MR MALAN: Now all these things which you did, according to you Kobie Coetzee must have been aware of it and he must have approved it and given orders for these kinds of things to take place and be carried out.
MR PRINSLOO: Chairperson, you yourself you were in politics ...(intervention)
MR MALAN: Yes, I know and that's why I'm asking the question.
MR PRINSLOO: In that period, you're asking me now about my personal political convictions. I'm not an expert and I've never said I was an expert in the field of politics. That's simply my own personal view and I stand by what I said. You must look at the time when the onslaught was at its critical height, what was said by the politicians from political platforms ...(intervention)
MR MALAN: No, but ...
MR PRINSLOO: Please give me a chance.
MR MALAN: No, I understand that and I accept that.
MR PRINSLOO: You also have to look at the pressure under which you were supposed to work. At all costs the so-called enemy had to be resisted and fought and everything possible had to be done to avert this onslaught. That's what I believed in and that is what I did. As far as I was concerned, the order could not only have come from Police Headquarters, there must have been political Heads as well. There was a State Security Council where these things must have been discussed. So what I'm saying is that they had the responsibility and yet I have not heard a single politician who has come here and said, "Yes, I'm aware of it and I approved of these acts."
MR MALAN: Mr Prinsloo, you have also been involved in other applications and that's the reason for my question. The politicians say that they took these decisions, or the policemen senior to yourself.
MR PRINSLOO: Yes.
MR MALAN: And they said they were not aware of any political approval regarding these acts etcetera, that you also heard, that testimony. In other words that is - and now I get back to the question that the Chairperson put to you. On what level could this decision have been taken? You say you don't know. You said that in the Free State, perhaps on the level of Mr Coetzee, without having to revert to higher authority or perhaps other things had to go to higher authority, it all depended on the gravity the particular order.
MR PRINSLOO: Yes but the question was put to me, "What rank did you have to achieve before you could do X, Y, Z?" So I'm saying that what we're here concerned with is the Hani period and then my later career and it depended on the profile of the person. There was a general code or guidelines laid down, I don't want to say - yes, a policy, that certain things could be done, that it was permissible. So my impression was that these things came from higher up.
MR MALAN: Yes, I accept that.
MR PRINSLOO: So that's the milieu. I as an individual never took that decision all by myself and said right, I am now saying that so and so has to be eliminated ...(intervention)
MR MALAN: No, Mr Prinsloo, you don't understand my question. If I don't accept your word that it was your impression, then from my side you wouldn't qualify for amnesty. You must understand that very clearly. What I find very strange is that on the one hand you're saying that, "We kept the National Party in power but they used and abused us to stay in power, but at the point when they decided no longer to stay in power we became really angry with them because they were just giving away on a platter everything we stood for." I'm putting it to you that I find it very strange. You're finding it hard to explain the matter to me in a way that I can understand, but I don't think it's really relevant and I did say I don't want to waste too much time.
MR PRINSLOO: Chairperson, can I just comment please. What I said was, what I find strange and what I can't understand and the reason why I say I feel betrayed is that political decisions were taken on a high level ...(intervention)
MR MALAN: You assume that, you don't know that.
MR PRINSLOO: Yes, I'm assuming that. And that political responsibility is not properly accepted and assumed and it's the foot-soldier who now has to pay and to take responsibility which should by rights be the responsibility of the politicians.
CHAIRPERSON: In other words with the exception of Mr Vlok and so on, nobody else has said politicians have said, "Look, we accept that we could have at least created the impression that it was alright to do these things"?
MR PRINSLOO: That's correct, that's what I'm trying to say. That's why I feel betrayed. That's the point I'm trying to make. It's not the giving away of the country, that's not what I'm referring to.
CHAIRPERSON: A lot of the policemen say that, how would that have made a difference? Say FW de Klerk had come and said, "Look I accept political responsibility and I accept that all the policemen who had committed murder etcetera, had the right to think that what they were doing was correct and right", how would that have helped you?
MR PRINSLOO: I think that that moral conviction which you had ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: We're talking about murder.
MR PRINSLOO: I beg your pardon, Chairperson?
CHAIRPERSON: We're talking here of murder and I must say that murder and moral policy, those two are contradictions in ...(intervention)
MR PRINSLOO: No, you misunderstand me, what I said is that you had the moral conviction that what you were doing was right, you believed that you had the political backing for what you were doing ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: And you believed that you had it at that stage in the past.
MR PRINSLOO: Yes, Chairperson, I didn't ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: And it's not confirmed now.
MR PRINSLOO: I beg your pardon, Chairperson?
CHAIRPERSON: But it hasn't been confirmed at all at this stage?
MR PRINSLOO: Yes, and that's my point and that's why I'm saying that I, as an individual, feel betrayed. I would at least have expected, and I think it's history now, a matter of history that a person such as Kobie Coetzee, during the negotiations he could have dealt with the situation in a different way and he and the National Party preferred not to do it. Why didn't they make use of that opportunity? Because just in the same way as I am morally responsible for my acts, the enemy of yesterday, the ANC, is also morally responsible for his acts of the past. I think the difference is just that the ANC's leadership has, to some extent in any event, admitted responsibility and accepted responsibility, political responsibility. They said, "That was our objective, that's what we tried to achieve."
MR MALAN: Yes, but they didn't only admit it, it was a declared policy, they said it every single year in the press, but it wasn't the National Party's declared policy, it wasn't even its private policy in gossip halls, but you simply assumed and accepted that that was their thinking and I accept that you accepted that. Because certain things were done as you and other people have testified and we were never called to order, we were never disciplined. And most of the applications are based on that, that because we were not disciplined we thought it was good enough and so we continued.
MR PRINSLOO: Yes well that is what we believed, yes.
MR MALAN: But not that the National Party and its caucus made some decision and prepared a policy document to decide who could decide to murder people and on which level they could do so.
MR PRINSLOO: No, no, that's not what I said.
MR MALAN: Very well, thank you.
CHAIRPERSON: I think it would be better if all the applicants finish their testimony before we go to the witness.
WITNESS EXCUSED
PROBLEMS WITH MICROPHONES
