CHAIRPERSON: Good morning everybody, we apologise for starting late. We had yesterday indicated that we would start at nine thirty, I see it's almost ten. The reason therefore was that we had an, I'm told, administrative and logistical problems, I hope that has been sorted out. Has it been, Ms Patel?
MS PATEL: It has, thank you Honourable Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. The Panel is as appears on the record. Today we'll hear the incident of the Manuscript Bomb, and we have, according to our documentation, three applicants, Mr Eugene Alexander de Kock, amnesty number 0066/96, Mr Jakob Francois Kok, amnesty number 3812/96 and Wybrand Andreas Lodewikus du Toit, amnesty number 5184/96. I would not wish to assume that it's still the legal representatives, but for clarity of our record, could the legal representatives place themselves on record.
MR HUGO: Thank you, Mr Chairman, my name is S W Hugo, I'm appearing on behalf of Mr E A de Kock.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Hugo.
MR VAN DER MERWE: Thank you, Mr Chairman, Francois van der Merwe, I'm appearing on behalf of Jakob Francois Kok and Wybrand Andreas Lodewikus du Toit.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr van der Merwe. Just for clarity, Ms Patel, I see we have implicated persons firstly, Jan Anton Niewoudt and Brig W F Schoon. What's the position?
MR SWART: They have received notices, Honourable Chairperson. And for the record may I also state that I received a letter just before we were due to commence today, from the attorney, Mr Albert Lamey on behalf of his client, Mr Bosch, I beg leave to hand it in at this point. You are already placed in possession of a copy, as has all my learned colleagues here today.
CHAIRPERSON: Should we give it a number straight away?
MS PATEL: Yes, thank you Honourable Chairperson, perhaps Exhibit A.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. And before I now come to the others, would you place yourself on record.
MS PATEL: Yes, I'm sorry, I omitted to do that. It's Ramula Patel, Leader of Evidence. Thank you.
CHAIRPERSON: I see we do have a deceased victim.
MS PATEL: We were unable to identify the victim, Honourable Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Not even the death register can identify the victim?
ADV BOSMAN: The victim was not killed as far as I recall, he was injured.
CHAIRPERSON: So it wouldn't be strictly correct to say deceased.
MS PATEL: Yes, that's correct, Honourable Chairperson.
ADV BOSMAN: Mr Chair, it appears to be a pro-forma form and it was not - there are no details there.
CHAIRPERSON: At Nel, interested party?
MS PATEL: The notice was served, Honourable Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: And no indication whether he would attend or not?
MS PATEL: No.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Hugo, are we ready to start?
MR HUGO: Yes Mr Chairman, we are ready to start.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: (sworn states)
ADV BOSMAN: The applicant is duly sworn, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much. You may be seated Mr de Kock. Mr Hugo?
EXAMINATION BY MR HUGO: Thank you, Mr Chairman.
Mr de Kock, you are the applicant in this matter which is known as the Manuscript Bomb and your application appears in the first section of the bundle and the particulars on pages 7 and 8, is that correct?
MR DE KOCK: Yes, Chairperson.
MR HUGO: And you confirm the content of your affidavit as it appears on pages 7 and 8, as true and correct and the true version of the facts.
MR DE KOCK: Yes.
MR HUGO: Subject to the further details that you will provide during your oral evidence.
MR DE KOCK: Yes, that is correct.
MR HUGO: And just for the sake of completion, you also request that the supplementary submission regarding your background and political convictions and motivations, as well as your supplementary affidavit regarding Vlakplaas, be regarded as incorporated with your current application.
MR DE KOCK: Yes, Chairperson, that is correct.
MR HUGO: You have had the opportunity to re-examine your affidavit and you state that when you attempt to fix a time to this incident, you would say that it was during the late '80s, but in retrospect, would you be more specific about exactly when the incident took place?
MR DE KOCK: No, I still cannot place this incident at a specific date, I think Mr Niewoudt would be able to assist us, but I unfortunately I cannot.
MR HUGO: You have already referred to Mr Niewoudt, how did it come to be that you became involved with the incident?
MR DE KOCK: Chairperson, just for introductory purposes, there was a co-operative document which was undersigned by Brig Schoon and DCI, the Directorate for Covert Collections, or DCC, and their second-in-command who was Col At Nel, and in this document authorisation was extended for the Commanders of C1, and then for Commandant Niewoudt who was the senior Staff Officer, SSO1, of Military Intelligence in DCC, for us to cooperate and to have liaison on that level with one another. Naturally, with the proviso that certain actions had to be cleared first. And as a result of that co-operative agreement and based upon that, Commandant Anton Niewoudt approached me on a certain day ...(intervention)
MR HUGO: I beg your pardon, before we get to that aspect, what was DCC's task description?
MR DE KOCK: Their task description was the collection of information, not only internally but also externally, throughout Africa and Europe as well, and they also had various desks, ANC, PAC and then also the desks for the other organisations and countries, such as central Africa, East Africa, West Africa and so forth.
MR HUGO: Which organisations were they working on?
MR DE KOCK: The ANC, the PAC and then also various other organisations such as the End Conscription Campaign and so forth.
MR HUGO: And what was their objective with the information that they obtained?
MR DE KOCK: Chairperson, they had to react to the information and the reaction there was not that they had to perform the tasks themselves but among others, they sent it through to the CCB, to Special Forces for tasks and in certain cases they also made use of C1.
MR HUGO: To act against the liberation movements, such as the ANC?
MR DE KOCK: Yes, Chairperson. For example, for the sake of information I can tell you that the information that led to the explosion of Mr Albie Sachs, came directly from DCC. They had the file with all the particulars and they sent that through to the CCB and the CCB took it from that point forward and performed the action.
MR HUGO: I have interrupted you, you were telling us that Mr Niewoudt approached you with a request, what took place then?
MR DE KOCK: Chairperson, the request was for us to build an explosive device into a manuscript for them. They manuscript would be typed in the Republic. This manuscript was sent in hand-written form from Swaziland to a facility here in the Republic. I can no longer recall precisely, but I suspect it must have been typed at the South African Council of Churches office in Johannesburg. And after the manuscript was typed it was intercepted by Commandant Niewoudt and he brought it to me, with the request for us to prepare an explosive device for them and I said that we would be able to do so.
MR HUGO: Did Commandant Anton Niewoudt come to see you personally?
MR DE KOCK: Yes, Chairperson, the whole affair was on a one to one basis.
MR HUGO: Where did he come to see you?
MR DE KOCK: If I recall correctly, he telephoned me and I saw him at Vlakplaas. They had access to that facility.
MR HUGO: And was he in possession of the manuscript when he came to visit you at Vlakplaas?
MR DE KOCK: Yes, Chairperson, he was in possession of the manuscript as well as an envelope. As far as I can recall, the envelope had not yet had an address on it, he himself would inscribe the address on it, because it would be sent to an address which was used by the ANC in Manzini in Swaziland. We just had to prepare the device for him in this manuscript and he left the entire manuscript and the envelope with me.
I read the manuscript and it was a biography of an MK member who told of how he eventually, or least, what gave rise to the fact that he left the country, the way that he suffered, his unemployment and all the other social and economic and political problems, his process of leaving the country, his journey to Swaziland and his ultimate destination being in one of the African countries where he received training, his subsequent return to Swaziland and his sentiments regarding this, and his struggle against the South African Government. It was some form of a self-descriptive document chronicling his social, economical and political struggle.
MR HUGO: Can you recall whether any reference was made in the manuscript to what he was busy with at that point?
MR DE KOCK: Chairperson, he referred to the struggle, if I recall correctly. I cannot be more specific than that, but he spoke of his struggle against the South African Government. There my have been more details and possibly Mr Niewoudt may still have a copy of it today.
MR HUGO: Very well. That will probably come to light later, but could you just tell us now, the size of the manuscript, do you recall how big it was?
MR DE KOCK: Chairperson, I would place it between an A4 and an A6 size. That is my recollection.
MR HUGO: I beg your pardon, you will have to ignorance, is an A4 size smaller than the volume from which we are working now?
MR DE KOCK: Well A4 is the size of a folio sheet, if I'm correct, but A5 would be somewhat smaller and then A6 a fraction smaller than that.
MR HUGO: And can you recall the thickness of the manuscript?
MR DE KOCK: Yes, Chairperson, I would say that it was the thickness of one-and-a-half Time magazines. I cannot really compare it to anything else.
MR HUGO: And the information which was embodied in the manuscript with regard to the struggle and the training and so forth, in your experience as an operational Commander of Vlakplaas, did it appear to be bona fide information coming from a person who indeed found himself among the ranks of the ANC?
MR DE KOCK: Yes, I would put it as such, one couldn't have written about it if one wasn't involved with it oneself. It couldn't simply be a story that someone told you and then you would embellish your own story from that.
MR HUGO: So the manuscript was left with you, with the request that an explosive device be built into it, what did you do then?
MR DE KOCK: Chairperson, I approached Brig Schoon and I cleared it with him and then I contacted Col WAL du Toit, who had the necessary expertise or capacity due to his division, and I requested him to build such a device into the manuscript, with a specific envelope which Anton Niewoudt gave to us. I didn't want us to use any other envelope, it had to be that specific envelope.
MR HUGO: Perhaps you could tell us at this stage, in your own mind, why did you concur with the request which Mr Niewoudt put to you?
MR DE KOCK: Chairperson, it was an action aimed against the ANC and then also against a member of MK who was busy with an armed struggle against the Republic, in his right, and the members of the Police and the Defence Force were on the other side combating the activities and the affects of the struggle.
MR HUGO: And when you approached Brig Schoon, what was his attitude?
MR DE KOCK: His attitude was for me to proceed with it. I just want to tell you that on the scale something like this wasn't a major situation or an operation, it wasn't very overwhelming, his attitude was simply to go ahead with it.
MR HUGO: Did you then approach Mr WAL du Toit?
MR DE KOCK: Yes, I co-opted them and they executed the request upon my request and they were merely instrumental in the entire situation.
MR HUGO: Did you liaise with WAL du Toit on a personal level or did you also liaise with any of the others during this period?
MR DE KOCK: If anybody else was involved, I cannot recall it, I can only recall WAL du Toit.
MR HUGO: Can you recall what you said to WAL du Toit, which would have provided the reason or the purpose for which the device would have been applied?
MR DE KOCK: I would have informed him because he wouldn't simply have done something without knowing against whom it was aimed. So that he would be able to know whether or not one would be using such a device for private purposes.
MR HUGO: And after the device was manufactured, what happened then?
MR DE KOCK: As far as I can recall, the manuscript and the envelope were left there. I must just state that as far as I can recall the envelope had a logo on it. I cannot recall precisely what the logo was, it was either in the middle or on the left-hand side, but there was definitely a logo of an organisation or some institution.
MR HUGO: And can you recall the name of the organisation or institution?
MR DE KOCK: No, unfortunately not, but Commandant Anton Niewoudt insisted that this particular envelope only be used. My only deduction was that the person who would be receiving this envelope would have accepted this sort of envelope with that logo on it when it arrived there.
MR HUGO: And after the device was manufactured, what happened then?
MR DE KOCK: I cannot recall whether I myself fetched it, I believe that I would have because we restricted these matters to a one on one basis. I didn't want any inter-liaison and I believe that I returned the envelope and the manuscript to Commandant Niewoudt. If anybody had gone to fetch it, it would have been me. That is my recollection.
MR HUGO: And if you are correct in your suspicion that you yourself gave it to him, what happened afterwards?
MR DE KOCK: Chairperson, I don't know how he sent it off or what his actions were afterwards, what I did hear of later, through Anton Niewoudt, was that the courier who fetched the ANC post in Manzini, opened the envelope and his hand was seriously injured. His hand and his arm.
MR HUGO: I just want to ask you, from the documentation which was made available to you, was there any indication that the documents had to be sent back to Swaziland?
MR DE KOCK: No, the envelope was completely clean, he would have brought the details of the address onto the envelope.
MR HUGO: Then what led you to believe that the document had to go back to Swaziland?
MR DE KOCK: Because this MK member was in Swaziland and it was his property. This manuscript was his property.
MR HUGO: And with regard to the rank structure, what was your rank at this stage, when you received the request from Commandant Niewoudt?
MR DE KOCK: Chairperson, I think I was at that stage a Major, because I estimate that it was between '86 and '89, and that was my rank during that period.
MR HUGO: And a Commandant in the Military structure, how does that compare to a Major in the South African Police?
MR DE KOCK: It's one rank higher, but as it was among the departments at that stage, a Colonel in the Defence Force could not for example, give an order to a Major in the Police and then expect it to be carried out, there wasn't that sort of overlapping, it was more a question of ethics and etiquette, that one would observe the orders of such a figure.
MR HUGO: Thank you, Chairperson, nothing further.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR HUGO
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Hugo. Mr van der Merwe, any questions?
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR VAN DER MERWE: Thank you, Mr Chair, just one or two questions.
Mr de Kock, Mr Kok tells me that while you just testified it occurred to him that at a certain point you told him that this parcel would not be sent through the regular postal system, that the parcel would be delivered personally to the post box, that it wouldn't follow the regular channels of postage, do you have any recollection of that?
MR DE KOCK: It is probably so, because I would have tried to convey as much as possible information to the person who had to manufacture the device, because the person who was manufacturing it had to bring other factors into consideration which would emanate from the postage or handling of the item. So it is most probably so.
MR VAN DER MERWE: And then the last aspect. Mr Kok will testify that his recollection is that he gave the parcel to Mr Bosch after he manufactured it and that he does not recall specifically that he gave it to you, the fact is that it went back to Vlakplaas.
MR DE KOCK: I would not dispute that.
MR VAN DER MERWE: Thank you, Chair, nothing further.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VAN DER MERWE
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr van der Merwe. Ms Patel?
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS PATEL: Thank you, Honourable Chairperson.
Mr de Kock, when Mr Niewoudt approached you did he give you specific instructions as to the strength of the bomb, how strong it had to be, what the purpose of it was? Did he want to damage the surroundings or just injure the person who was opening it, or what? What was his instructions to you?
MR DE KOCK: Chairperson, when one compiles such a parcel usually, as it was in the struggle of the past, our objective was to kill someone, we didn't go out to injure people, at least not we who worked at Vlakplaas and certainly not the Commandant. What I do know is that the person who was supposed to prepare it, and I foresaw the problem, apart from my own knowledge which wasn't really that extensive, I saw that the thickness of the manuscript and the size of it would cause problems in building a very powerful bomb, so we had to make do with what we had. But it would not have been intended only to injure, the intention would be to kill the person who was going to open the parcel.
MS PATEL: Thank you, Honourable Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Ms Patel. Advocate Bosman?
ADV BOSMAN: Just bear with me, Honourable Chairperson, perhaps my colleague, Adv Sandi, can go first. There was something I wanted to ask but it's just slipped my mind.
CHAIRPERSON: Okay, take your time. Advocate Sandi?
ADV SANDI: Thank you, Chair, I don't have a question to ask.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
ADV BOSMAN: Yes, I do recall now.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
ADV BOSMAN: Mr de Kock, the person who wrote the manuscript, could you infer at all what danger he posed as a person?
MR DE KOCK: Chairperson, he was definitely an operational member of MK, he was a trained MK member or solider, he wasn't a remington raider, he wasn't someone who sat in the offices, I could see that quite clearly from the manuscript, but he was also not a high profile person, in other words he didn't occupy a high level combat position. I would say that he was a more junior level person. That was a clear inference from the document.
ADV BOSMAN: The reason why I have asked you this is because people usually write an autobiography once they have retired or once they have completed the great struggle. Could you make any inference in that regard?
MR DE KOCK: I personally regarded it as a person - if one examines the psychological background, although I'm not an expert, one could see this as a person who was seeking self-recognition and acknowledgement. That was my inference. But when it came to the knowledge that the person possessed regarding how to be an operative, there was definitely no doubt. One could only have spoken of these things if one had been involved in these things oneself.
ADV BOSMAN: Thank you, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Advocate Bosman.
Mr de Kock, because my understanding, I may incorrect, that when you have these cadres like there would for instance be in Swaziland, they wouldn't be living alone, there would be a number, say perhaps two/three, wouldn't that be so?
MR DE KOCK: I beg your pardon, I didn't hear you properly.
CHAIRPERSON: I say these MK operatives who had come back to the adjacent country, that is Swaziland, they wouldn't be living alone wherever they are, wouldn't that be so?
MR DE KOCK: Chairperson, one can accept they were not alone, but one could not really set a norm there. Some of them lived in apartments, the others in houses, it fluctuated. It's difficult to say, but I would accept that there may have been other persons there as well, yes.
CHAIRPERSON: When a bomb of this nature would be manufactured and like you said, the purpose was to kill the person, the recipient of the parcel, wouldn't there be precision that it would be directed only to that person?
MR DE KOCK: It would only have been the person who would open that letter or envelope, Chairperson. I must just state that the device, as far as I know, could not be restricted by metal, because there would be the manuscript and then the envelope. In other words, only the person opening the parcel would have been the person who would be injured or killed, the rest would have been light blows. In other words, something like a very loud cracker going off. I will prevail upon Mr Kok for further technical details regarding that, but bystanders would not have been injured because there wouldn't have been any shrapnel affect.
CHAIRPERSON: Let's suppose one is accompanied by somebody and has interest and in this instance, in the manuscript, if I'm next to the person and he opens it, I take it that there wouldn't be shrapnel, wouldn't that still injure the person next to the opener?
MR DE KOCK: Chairperson, I would foresee that it could, because an explosion is a release of high energy, so one could probably find that the person would have burn wounds, light to medium type burn injuries and perhaps also a burst eardrum. All of this depending upon how they were seated. There may be secondary injuries but it would be of a very minor nature.
CHAIRPERSON: And in this instance, if my reading has been correct, is that a courier was injured.
MR DE KOCK: Yes, that is correct, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Was provision made that it would be the person addressed to and not any other person? I'll tell you why I'm asking you this, is that we're not saying in every instance it would be the operative or a certain operative who is a courier, but anybody else because they are in another country for safety, not to be detected by the enemy which would be you, that you would send a neutral person.
MR DE KOCK: Chairperson, here I would have to prevail upon the Commandant who dealt with that entire aspect. We simply prepared the device and I couldn't find any fault with his bona fide regarding his way of reaching his enemy, who was also my enemy at that stage. With regard to the addressing and the establishment of contact with the person itself, I would have to prevail upon the Commandant. And I believe that if we could bring him here, I do have his telephone number, we could get the name of the MK member as well, I have no doubt about that.
CHAIRPERSON: Now what did Anton Niewoudt say to you how he intercepted it, to whom was it directed to firstly?
MR DE KOCK: Chairperson, if I think back the inference that I drew at that point was that he had an informer at this place where the manuscript was typed and I think that it was at the South African Council of Churches in Johannesburg, that must have been where he had his source.
CHAIRPERSON: And it had to go back to him? That is the author of the manuscript.
MR DE KOCK: That is correct, Chairperson, because as I've stated there was a log on the envelope but there was no address on it and Niewoudt in all regards, insisted only upon that envelope and no other envelope.
CHAIRPERSON: Since you did not personally address it too, did it have to go back to Anton Niewoudt?
MR DE KOCK: Yes, Chairperson, definitely.
CHAIRPERSON: And we would assume here he knew the address of the author.
MR DE KOCK: Yes, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Did he mention that to you or you gave just instructions to get this manuscript ...(indistinct) with bombs only?
MR DE KOCK: Chairperson, the name of the author was in the typed manuscript, as I believe, I simply cannot recall it because I dealt with so many names in a day and under so many circumstances, but I can assure you that I have no doubt in my mind today that Mr Niewoudt would be able to tell us who the author was, and I also have no doubt whatsoever that he would be able to tell us who the courier was who was injured.
CHAIRPERSON: Since at Vlakplaas, my understanding is that you were not only a courier but has some technical knowledge, would I be correct to say I understood you so whilst testifying over several days?
MR DE KOCK: Yes Chairperson, I myself had limited technical knowledge, but I am no expert in the technical aspects so to speak.
CHAIRPERSON: And you would probably give instructions, let's say in this instance, to Mr WAL du Toit, how much of power should be contained in such a manuscript bomb in this instance?
MR DE KOCK: Yes, Chairperson, that it would be sufficient to kill the person, but then we would be bound to the manuscript and the packaging of it. Let me just put the comparison to you. It wouldn't help if I sent a six-page letter which weighted two kilograms, one would be restricted to the device that one was manufacturing because it had to be authentic. Let's suppose I take a Reader's Digest, the person receiving it shouldn't think this looks like a Reader's Digest, it's as big as a Reader's Digest, but it weighs five kilograms. Everything had to be proportionate. And then one would look at the different types of explosives which one could use, because some had a higher speed and crumbling affect or a higher temperature. But my knowledge about that is very rusty.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Hugo, any re-exam?
MR HUGO: No re-examination, thank you Mr Chair.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr de Kock, you are excused.
MR DE KOCK: Thank you, Chairperson.
WITNESS EXCUSED
CHAIRPERSON: Any further evidence in respect of Mr de Kock?
MR HUGO: No further evidence, thank you Mr Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Hugo. Mr van der Merwe?
MR VAN DER MERWE: Thank you, Mr Chairman. The next applicant will be WAL du Toit.
