Amnesty Hearings

CHAIRPERSON: Good morning everybody. Today is the 29th of August 2000, a Tuesday. When we adjourned yesterday afternoon, Mr McIntyre had finished his evidence-in-chief.

ROBERT PETER McINTYRE: (s.u.o.)

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Joubert, before I ask the other legal representatives to commence with their cross-examination, is there anything else which you want to cover at this moment?

MR JOUBERT: No, there's nothing further, Mr Chair. Thank you very much.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Hattingh?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR HATTINGH: Mr McIntyre, may I just refer you to paragraph 8.2 of your statement, Exhibit A.

MR McINTYRE: I have the paragraph.

MR HATTINGH: Very well. Therein you motivate the decision that you took for the building to be damaged, is that so? And then on page 11, paragraph 8.5, you state that you cannot recall specifically at which stage you gave the order, but that you would recall that it was approximately one to two weeks before the incident. Now this isn't about the precise date for me, all I want to know is whether you explained your motivation for the order to the person to whom you issued the order, did you tell the person why you were of the opinion that it was necessary for the building to be damaged?

MR McINTYRE: Chairperson, I believe that I did.

MR HATTINGH: Yes. And then one could also accept that he in his turn similarly explained and informed the persons that he approached to assist him with the operation?

MR McINTYRE: Yes.

MR HATTINGH: Thank you, Chairperson, I have nothing further.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR HATTINGH

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Hattingh. Mr van der Merwe.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR VAN DER MERWE: Thank you, Mr Chair.

Mr McIntyre, as you have become aware from the statement made by Mr Hattingh, it is his evidence that he states that you gave him an order to continue with this operation, and you have confirmed this, you stated that you were not completely certain but that you would accept it as such.

MR McINTYRE: Yes, that is correct.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Now although you indicate in your evidence that you are not completely certain of the wording of the order, I would like to know whether there was any mention of a fire in your order, or did you simply mention the damaging of this building?

MR McINTYRE: Chairperson, I really cannot recall what the precise wording of my order was.

MR VAN DER MERWE: This information to which Mr Hattingh referred you on page 9, paragraph 8.2, is this information that you received from your Intelligence sources? Can you recall from whence you obtained the information?

MR McINTYRE: Chairperson, this is information that came, not only from Intelligence sources, but the Stratcom component also responded to information which came via the Security Head Office's desk. So it was information that came from various Security Branches, it wasn't restricted to Intelligence sources as such.

MR VAN DER MERWE: At the time of your decision for an action to be launched against Khanya House, were you aware, or did you have any information which indicated that there were persons residing in this building?

MR McINTYRE: No, Chairperson, I did not possess such information.

MR VAN DER MERWE: My instructions from Mr Hattingh are indeed that upon the conveyance of this order, you indicated that specific attention should be paid at not involving innocent persons and not damaging closely situated property.

MR McINTYRE: Yes, that is correct.

MR VAN DER MERWE: And then in the final instance, Mr Hattingh states that he is not certain, he confirms the feedback in his statement, the last paragraph of his statement, he's not certain to whom he reported back, but he's prepared to accept that it might not necessarily have been you.

MR McINTYRE: Yes, that is correct.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Just one moment, Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Certainly.

ADV SANDI: Sorry, if I can just ask a question whilst you're getting ready, Mr van der Merwe.

But did you personally get any report after this operation was carried out?

MR McINTYRE: No, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: When you read about this in The Citizen, did you speak to any of the people you were working with?

MR McINTYRE: Chairperson, not that I can recall, I cannot recall that I discussed it with anybody.

ADV BOSMAN: Mr McIntyre, I find it strange that you issued the order, yet there was no report-back and no further discussion.

MR McINTYRE: Chairperson, I could answer as follows, this was an illegal covert operation, I would really not have discussed it with everybody and I would not have expected anybody to return with a report-back, explaining exactly how everything happened. I indicated in my statement that after the incident, towards the end of October 1988, I received a call indicating that I had been transferred, I then took leave. In other words, what I wanted to say was that I probably didn't have the occasion upon which to have a discussion about the incident, but I wouldn't have done it, because in the security community everybody worked on a need-to-know basis.

ADV BOSMAN: I'm not suggesting that you would have discussed it with all and sundry, but there were so many persons involved and I find it peculiar that you would not have followed it up within that group. That is the point that I'm trying to make.

MR McINTYRE: Chairperson, I was not aware until I read the applications, of precisely who had participated in the operation. My order to Mr Hattingh was the first and the last word that I uttered regarding the incident, so I wasn't aware of who participated, so that I could go and discuss it with them after the incident occurred.

ADV BOSMAN: Thank you, Mr van der Merwe, you may proceed.

MR VAN DER MERWE: I have no further questions, thank you Mr Chair.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VAN DER MERWE

CHAIRPERSON: But again, even though it's a covert operation and Khanya House posed a threat in the sense that they printed material, harboured insurgents, nothing else is discussed about the success of this covert operation, how would it, because if it was not successful, Khanya House would proceed with whatever they were doing?

MR McINTYRE: Chairperson, I would just like to remark with regard to the word "insurgents". In my statement I refer to activists. Secondly, Honourable Chairperson, the purpose with the operation was to damage the building so that they could be put out of action temporarily or in the long term. I don't believe that it was at all necessary to have a subsequent meeting to discuss the successes and/or failures of the operation. When I read on the front page of The Citizen, that the building had been seriously damaged, it was accepted that the operation had been successful.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Nel?

MR NEL: Thank you, Mr Chairman. I've got no questions for Mr McIntyre.

NO QUESTIONS BY MR NEL

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Wagener?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR WAGENER: Mr McIntyre, I'm appearing in this matter for an ordinary footsoldier, Mr du Plessis, who simply carried out orders, however, you heard yesterday afternoon that Ms Cambanis indicated that her clients would be opposing the application and she basically explained the framework of that opposition, did you hear that?

MR McINTYRE: Yes.

MR WAGENER: You also heard that her clients are of the opinion that your application is insufficient, among others, in the regard that there is not sufficient political motivation which relates to the deed itself. You heard that?

MR McINTYRE: Yes, I did.

MR WAGENER: Now in terms of this, I scratched around in my old documents yesterday evening and there are one or two statements that I would like to put to you and I would like to hear your commentary on these statements. I am referring to paragraph 8.2 of your statement where you state that in terms of your position, you obtained certain information which indicated that Khanya House was promoting the objectives of the liberation movements, do you see that?

MR McINTYRE: Yes, I do.

MR WAGENER: Do you concur that the overall purpose of the liberation movements was to take over the former government of the country by any means conceivable, including violence?

MR McINTYRE: Yes, that is correct, I agree.

MR WAGENER: And that we always heard that they were trying to render the country ungovernable.

MR McINTYRE: That is correct.

MR WAGENER: By means of various forms of mass action, if I were to use that term.

MR McINTYRE: Yes.

MR WAGENER: Protest actions and so forth.

MR McINTYRE: Yes, that is correct.

MR WAGENER: Are you aware that in terms of this action, we in our country, from 1986 onwards, experienced a general State of Emergency?

MR McINTYRE: Yes, I am aware.

MR WAGENER: And that the basis of the announcement of a general State of Emergency was that the regular laws of the country could no longer maintain the situation.

MR McINTYRE: That is correct.

MR WAGENER: And are you aware of the fact that in terms of the general State of Emergency, emergency regulations were announced?

MR McINTYRE: Yes, I'm aware of this.

MR WAGENER: In terms of which large numbers of persons were arrested and put in detention.

MR McINTYRE: That is correct.

MR WAGENER: And that the general basis for this detention was that the activities of the detainees entailed a threat to the internal security of our country.

MR McINTYRE: That is correct.

MR WAGENER: Now I would like to show a document to you which was published in The Weekly Mail of the 13th of March 1987, indeed more than a year before this incident took place. However, it is a document which was published by the Southern African Catholic Bishops Conference, an open letter to all detainees. I would just like to show it to you and then I will request your commentary on the document.

Mr Chairman, I have copies, I will see that everyone has his own copy also.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Wagener. Can we mark it at this stage, Mr Wagener? I think our next would be C.

MR WAGENER: Maybe I should I should wait a moment, Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Ja, let most of the people get what you would be talking about. Thank you. You may proceed now, Mr Wagener.

MR WAGENER: Perhaps, Mr McIntyre, I should simply ask you without leading you, for your commentary on this.

MR McINTYRE: Chairperson, it is the first time that I view this report, the content thereof is obvious in indicating that the Catholic Church in general opposed the apartheid government in all its forms. This is proof, an example of the attitude that they adopted to all the actions of the former dispensation.

MR WAGENER: In order to cut it short then, is this the sort of information that you refer to when you state in paragraph 8.2, that you obtained certain information?

MR McINTYRE: Chairperson, this is part of the type of information that we were obtaining.

MR WAGENER: Did you have knowledge at that stage of a publication by the name of The New Nation?

MR McINTYRE: Yes, Chairperson.

MR WAGENER: It was a weekly which was published by the Bishops Conference, do you recall this?

MR McINTYRE: Yes, I can recall something like that.

MR WAGENER: Are you aware of the fact that this publication, The New Nation, was banned at a stage towards the end of 1987, it was a forbidden document?

MR McINTYRE: I cannot recall that.

MR WAGENER: Because I will put it to you that it was indeed the situation. In terms of the former media emergency regulations, this publication was banned for period of three months, towards the end of 1987.

MR McINTYRE: I am not aware of it.

MR WAGENER: And that the basis for this ban was generally - Mr Chairman, and I will give you a full reference to this, it was generally that the publication, in terms of the emergency regulations, and I will read the relevant section to you, it is 7A(1)

"It had the affect, this systematic or repeated publishing in his opinion (and this is the Minister of Internal Affairs, or Home Affairs) has, or is calculated to have, and is causing a threat to the safety of the public or to the maintenance of public order, and is causing a delay in the termination of the State of the Emergency."

This constituted the basis for the ban of the New Nation. I accept that you do not have this knowledge, but I'm just informing you that there was such a case.

MR McINTYRE: I was not aware of it.

MR WAGENER: And that this case preceded to the highest level of our court system, the Appeals Division, after they had not had any success in the lower sections of our judicial system. Their appeal was not successful, but this is what the ban of the newspaper boiled down to.

Mr Chairman, this is a matter, it's been reported in the Law Reports, The Catholic Bishops Publishing Company vs The State President and Another. It is reported in the South African Law Reports, 1990 NO 1st Edition. On page 849 and further you will find this.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MR WAGENER: The only reason why I have put these questions to you is because I want to know whether or not this was the sort of information that came to your attention when you state what you stated in paragraph 8.2.

MR McINTYRE: That is correct.

MR WAGENER: Nothing further, Chairperson.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR WAGENER

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Wagener.

Now these - or let me start by saying, Ms Cambanis I recall you saying that amongst the people you are representing, I see in this there would be Bishop Umkhumishe(?) and those I can remember, Bridget Flannagan, and I see there are signatories to this document, at least. I'm just recalling the people you said you represented.

MS CAMBANIS: Yes, that's correct, I represent Sister Bridget Flannagan, yes. I'm just checking the names, Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: The second column you'll see Bishop Umkhumishe.

MS CAMBANIS: Yes, you are correct. And also in the second column, Bishop D Verstrate. I can't pronounce it, I apologise to my clients.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MS CAMBANIS: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: These activists which they were harbouring, were they illegal in the country or were they just people who were in the country but opposing the regime of the day?

MR McINTYRE: Chairperson, to the best of my knowledge, the activists were not illegal or illegally in the country, they were local, they were RSA citizens. Chairperson, I also do not want to say that the activists were accommodated there, but they had access to the Catholic Bishops offices.

CHAIRPERSON: Because on page 9, paragraph 8.2, that would be the second-last sentence, you say - or the third

"The information further indicated that various meetings were held by the liberation movements in Khanya House and that activists were quite often harboured there."

My question is based on that.

MR McINTYRE: Chairperson, I mentioned yesterday that upon an occasion we, the Security Branch, had to arrest an activist on behalf of the Eastern Transvaal Security Branch. The information indicated that she was in Khanya House, and it was confirmed that she was in Khanya House and she was arrested outside Khanya House. The point that i want to make is that there were meetings held in Khanya House under the umbrella of the liberation movements and activists had free access to Khanya House. Once again I would like to emphasise that they did not necessarily reside there permanently.

CHAIRPERSON: In this Exhibit C, that the Southern African Catholic Bishops Conference expressed their distaste about the repression and called for solidarity with those detained, how was it unpalatable to the government that people of the cloth would express such solidarity?

MR McINTYRE: Chairperson, could you please repeat.

CHAIRPERSON: I say the - I want to use the same words, but I trust my utmost that my reading, quick reading of Exhibit C, which is before you, the conference, the Bishops Conference expressed their distaste about the further repression in the country and show solidarity with those detained for fighting this repression, and I say if people of the cloth showed this solidarity with those detained, what do you find unpalatable towards the government of the day?

MR McINTYRE: Chairperson, I think that the actions of the Catholic Church go further than mere opposition to the detention of certain activists or troublemakers. I do not expect that the Catholic Church or the Bishops Council would associate themselves with the action of the former government. However, one of the tasks of the Security Branch was to collect information regarding all organisations and activists who opposed the government of the day or the objectives of the government of the day in maintaining stability in the country, or at least attempting to maintain stability in the country.

CHAIRPERSON: When they say in the second paragraph, the second sentence

"In condemning violence and injustice we admire and support you."

Would you say, if they say these are the injustices meted out, that that is opposition to the government?

MR McINTYRE: If we have to examine violence and injustice, the Catholic Church had their own view on violence and injustice and the Security Branch, and I'm speaking for myself, had its own perspective on violence and injustice.

CHAIRPERSON: I am conscious that we are speaking of the intensification of opposition which started in 1976, and if we particularly look at the years 1985/'86/'87, there was violence on both sides, and would you say when there was no differentiation between the youth and the adults, that the police who were particularly targeting the youth, that was not viewed as violence from the State by Intelligence, or only what the youth was doing against the State, was it then viewed as violence?

MR McINTYRE: Chairperson, I reckon that if the youth had revolted against the government and if they were incited into revolt against the government or governmental institutions such as schools, then yes, I would have regarded this as going over into violence, and I suppose it was also a form of injustice from their side as well.

I beg your pardon, Chairperson, if I mix my English and my Afrikaans.

CHAIRPERSON: No, no, that's in order, you can use any language interchangeably at any given stage, Mr McIntyre.

MR McINTYRE: Thank you, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Because it goes further and says

"We recognise in your suffering, especially those of you who have been physically assaulted and who suffer solitary confinement, a very important contribution to our struggle for liberation."

That's the violence I was asking about.

MR McINTYRE: Chairperson, in my opinion this is a general statement, there were allegations of assaults which I personally did not know of or investigate, and to "suffer solitary confinement, a very important contribution" from the perspective of the Catholic Church, Chairperson, if I was a member of the church, I would also have adopted that viewpoint, or this perspective.

CHAIRPERSON: If we think back and think of the existence of Vlakplaas and how they treated those which the State perceived as their opposition, wouldn't you say violence was perpetrated at an alarming scale in that instance?

MR McINTYRE: By whom Chairperson?

CHAIRPERSON: I say if we look at Vlakplaas, which was the operational wing, basically, of Intelligence, and the people who they came across as opponents of the State, the violence meted out, wouldn't you say it was alarming? And are you suggesting that people had to keep quiet even in the fact of that?

MR McINTYRE: No, not at all, Chairperson. If there was evidence of violence by the police, whether in detention or not, then it had to be exposed. I did not condone it for one moment and I do not condone it.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr McIntyre. I was informed that Mr du Plessis will run late and somebody will stand in for him.

MS PATEL: It's Mr Jansen, Honourable Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Jansen. Oh, Mr du Plessis, I apologise.

MR BUNN: Thank you, Mr Chairman, Steven Bunn on behalf of applicant Ras, we have no questions.

NO QUESTIONS BY MR BUN

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Lamey?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR LAMEY: Thank you, Chairperson.

Mr McIntyre, I see that one of the signatories to this document was Archbishop Dennis Hurley, did you know anything about him at that stage?

MR McINTYRE: Chairperson, nothing in particular.

MR LAMEY: Then I won't take it any further. This incident took place not very long after the Khotso House incident, is that correct?

MR McINTYRE: Yes, that is correct.

MR LAMEY: Were you aware of the fact that there was information regarding the utilisation of Khanya House for the liberation movements, and were you aware that the Khotso House incident had taken place already?

MR McINTYRE: Yes, I was aware of it.

MR LAMEY: Were you aware that the Khotso House operation was approved from the upper levels and that Khotso House was also a structure which was used in promotion of the liberation movements, more specifically the South African Council of Churches, in promotion of the objectives of the liberation movements such as the ANC? And I'm saying this in a nutshell, I do not want to go into the entire Khotso House incident, it is history and the facts have already been put before the Committee. I just want to summarise these facts. Were you aware of it?

MR McINTYRE: I was aware of the incident of the explosion at Khotso House, but I was not informed, I didn't have concrete knowledge that it had indeed been a Security Branch operation, I drew my own inferences from the relevant information.

MR LAMEY: Very well. When you refer in paragraph 8.2, to liberation movements, do you refer specifically to the ANC, or other liberation movements as well?

MR McINTYRE: Chairperson, specifically the ANC. Perhaps I should have mentioned the umbrella organisations or the front organisations of the ANC.

MR LAMEY: I beg your pardon, I interrupted you, would you continue.

MR McINTYRE: I would also like to state in a nutshell that during the '80s there were many organisations on practically every level of society, which were opposing the government, from schools and universities through labour and the service industry, and I regarded this as their promotion of the objectives of the ANC.

MR LAMEY: Is it correct that at that stage there was a perception of the political scene in South Africa, which was viewed as a situation of total onslaught and total danger and that this view was fostered among the members of the security community? And what I mean by this is that the opposition to and the struggle against the government which came in essence from the ranks of the ANC at that stage, was managed on a sympathetic level by various front organisations?

MR McINTYRE: Yes, that is correct.

MR LAMEY: And there was also information that the Khanya House facility was used, and more specifically a printing press in Khanya House was used in order to print and distribute material which was in promotion of the ANC's objectives.

MR McINTYRE: With regard to the printing press, the information which was available indicated that the printing press was being used by the front organisations as such. I do not wish to link it directly to the ANC itself. Pamphlets were printed, there was a printing press to which activists had access in order to print materials that they needed.

MR LAMEY: But this was the view on the side of the Security Branch and you specifically, who issued the order, and this was viewed as something which promoted the conflict which was committed against the government.

MR McINTYRE: Yes.

MR LAMEY: There may have been a moral justification, there may have been another perspective regarding the justifiability of the situation, but the fact remains that this was the perspective of the government and the Security Branch at that stage.

MR McINTYRE: Yes, that is correct.

MR LAMEY: Thank you, Chairperson, nothing further.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR LAMEY

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Lamey. Mr du Plessis?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR DU PLESSIS: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

Mr McIntyre, I would just like to put a few statements to you and I would like you to say if you agree with me or not. The Catholic Church specifically, but also some of the other churches supported the liberation movements in their struggle against apartheid in this time when Khanya House was burnt down, is that correct?

MR McINTYRE: Yes.

MR DU PLESSIS: And that was the information that you had.

MR McINTYRE: That is correct.

MR DU PLESSIS: And then they also did not do it silently, but they also did it publicly by criticising apartheid, by taking part in protest marches and publicly announcing that they do support the liberation movements, is that correct?

MR McINTYRE: That is correct, Chairperson.

MR DU PLESSIS: And if I'm talking about the liberation movements, I'm talking about the ANC, the SACP alliance, is that correct?

MR McINTYRE: Yes.

MR DU PLESSIS: And the Catholic Church and the other churches who supported the liberation movements also on behalf of these liberation movements, did certain tasks, for example in assisting them in some way or another and that assistance will then be for people who also wanted to leave the country.

MR McINTYRE: It is possible, Mr Chairperson, I cannot recall that I had such concrete cases, or I cannot specifically recall something like that, but it is possible, yes.

MS CAMBANIS: Sorry, Chairperson, this evidence being led by legal representative is most sweet, but when we are referred to the Catholic Church and other churches, is it the intention of my learned friend to put evidence before this Commission that the Catholic Church was actively assisting in getting people out the country? The propositions he's putting, is that the evidence that he has against the Catholic Church, that he will be placing that information and evidence before this Commission?

MR DU PLESSIS: May I answer that in the following way, Mr Chairman, firstly, I'm busy with cross-examination, I'm not leading evidence, which means that I may ask with ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: No, no, she says are you later going to proffer evidence.

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, yes.

CHAIRPERSON: That's how I understood her.

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, I'm coming to that, Mr Chairman, if you'll just give me a moment with your permission and if you will allow me. And I want to make the point that I'm entitled to ask leading questions in respect of this witness. But firstly, and - but secondly, my questions relate to a specific document which we have been given, called, The Catholic Church Submission to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, dated August 15, 1997, and each and every statement I make, I derived from this document. The question that I've asked now of Mr McIntyre, was a question based on this document, which was formulated in the following way.

CHAIRPERSON: I would allow that question.

MR DU PLESSIS: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: That line of cross-examination.

MR DU PLESSIS: May I then base the question on this document?

CHAIRPERSON: Certainly.

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr McIntyre, on page 6 - and if my learned friend wishes to lead evidence in this matter to contradict the Catholic Church's own statement to the Truth Commission, Mr Chairman, she would be most welcome, with respect.

Mr McIntyre, I'm going to read for you from the Catholic Church's presentation document to the TRC. On page 6, the last paragraph reads as follows:

"The church was part of the Standing for Truth campaign and organised and participated in protest marches throughout the country."

You've already confirmed that that was your information as well.

MR McINTYRE: That is correct.

MR DU PLESSIS

"Many activists were given refuge on church property."

Was that your information?

MR McINTYRE: Yes, Mr Chairperson.

MR DU PLESSIS

"While others were helped to leave the country."

That is what I asked of you just now and which you confirmed was your information as well. ...(transcriber's interpretation)

MR McINTYRE: Yes.

MR DU PLESSIS: While we're busy with this document let us page to page 4 of this document, I beg your pardon, page 2, let us start there. The bottom paragraph. I just want to know if you agree with the allegations that are made in this document and that this correlates with the information that you had at that stage.

MR McINTYRE: I understand, yes.

MR DU PLESSIS: It is said in the last paragraph on page 2, the third sentence, third line

"The church's teachings and the Bishops' statements were aimed at conscientising the public to the horrors of the apartheid system. Some people felt compelled to engage themselves in an active way against the system."

Would you say this is correct according to the information that you obtained?

MR McINTYRE: Yes.

MR DU PLESSIS: So would you agree that some people who were members of the Catholic Church, placed themselves in an active role, or made themselves actively involved in supporting the liberation movements?

MR McINTYRE: That is correct, yes.

MR DU PLESSIS: Then if we page to page 4, the third paragraph, it is said, the second sentence

"There is a consistency in statements from as far back as 1948, condemning apartheid."

Do you see that?

MR McINTYRE: Yes.

MR DU PLESSIS: Was that your information and perception, that the Catholic Church was opposed to the political system of the apartheid years?

MR McINTYRE: That is correct, yes.

MR DU PLESSIS: And therefore, your perception was that the Catholic Church was part of the struggle against the political system of apartheid?

MR McINTYRE: That is correct.

MR DU PLESSIS: And if you page to page 5, at the top of the page, there in the second-last sentence it says, the sentence starting with "While understanding"

"While understanding the call for sanctions the Bishops, fearing a grave increase of poverty and unemployment, endorsed it only with reservations."

Can you recall if your information was that the Catholic Church sanctioned, even if it was with reservation, supported the sanctions against South Africa and the government?

MR McINTYRE: I can recall that some of the front organisations who had access to the Bishops Council, did ask for sanctions. I cannot recall if I ever saw a document issued by the Catholic Church asking for sanctions.

MR DU PLESSIS: Very well. But you had no reason to deny what was said to the TRC?

MR McINTYRE: If the church say this, yes, I do believe it.

MR DU PLESSIS: Page 6, the second paragraph

"From the days of the early church, Catholics have tended to believe that the seed of faith has to be watered by the blood of martyrs before it can germinate and grow. This has once again proved to be the case in South Africa. The growing commitment to justice within the church has come about through those who have suffered and paid the price. Archbishop Hurley, as President of the SABC - SACBC ..." (let me just formulate that correctly)

...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Ja, I was going to ask you whether you are talking about one, two or three.

MR DU PLESSIS

"... SACBC, and Father Makatchwa, the Secretary-General, had to appear in court. The conference headquarters, as has been pointed out, was burnt down. Several priests were imprisoned and Father Makatchwa was tortured while in prison."

Can you recall these facts? Can you confirm it as correct, the fact that Father Makatchwa was in jail, that he was interrogated and tortured, that he and Archbishop Hurley had to appear in court?

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, I am aware that Makatchwa was detained under house arrest, but I do not have any knowledge of the assault on him.

MR DU PLESSIS: Very well. In this regard, can I just state to you concerning Father Makatchwa, that two previous clients that I represented in the amnesty process, Hechter and Paul van Vuuren, applied for amnesty for attempted murder on Father Makatchwa, they attempted to, if I may use the English word, assassinate him by means of a specific rifle that they built and that they attempted to use at the Durban international airport when Father Makatchwa disembarked from the plane. And as God maybe ordained it, there was a woman in front of Father Makatchwa when they wanted to shoot him and they then couldn't shoot. They then drove behind him, he was quite a distance in front of them and where the road split to Pietermaritzburg and the North Coast, they had to choose which one he took and then they took the wrong turn and they never found him.

But to make a long story short, they testified that they applied for amnesty and they did receive amnesty for it, and in that amnesty hearing there was also evidence led in detail concerning Father Makatchwa's involvement in the struggle. You do not have any knowledge of that, I will ask that ...(end of side A of tape) ... in the struggle.

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, no, what you said there, I knew that he was involved in the Bishops Council, he was an activist. I cannot think of any other specific evidence that I can add to that.

MR DU PLESSIS: I'd like to put to you for the purposes of argument at the end of this hearing, I would just like to put to you that Father Makatchwa during that amnesty hearing, did not oppose the application of my clients and when he testified he made it very clear that from his, the viewpoint of his church involvement, he does forgive my clients and there was a very long discussion between him and my clients about this matter and there was some reconciliation and forgiveness in that hearing. We do not know how this hearing will end up, but I would like to put to you that his action was a very good example of reconciliation and it is different from the actions of the church today, in their opposition to this application. You do not have any knowledge of that?

MR McINTYRE: No.

MR DU PLESSIS: I will then attempt to place this record in front of this Committee and then argue on this later.

If you can look on page 6 - I beg your pardon, we've already referred to that. These are the aspects that I would like to mention to you. This instruction that you gave, did you expect that the people who you gave this instruction to, will follow it?

MR McINTYRE: Yes.

MR DU PLESSIS: And you therefore accept that those who acted under those instructions, acted on the instructions that you gave?

MR McINTYRE: That is correct.

MR DU PLESSIS: And do you also agree that the subordinates who acted in this operation, amongst others, my clients, Mr Hammond and Kotze, did not have the same information from an Intelligence perspective concerning the church's involvement in the struggle and the use of Khanya House, in the way in which you had?

MR McINTYRE: That is correct.

MR DU PLESSIS: And do you also agree that they would have followed this instruction because they would have accepted that if this instruction came from you, it was an instruction that had a purpose and it was justified in the circumstances?

MR McINTYRE: That is correct.

MR DU PLESSIS: And did you ever have direct contact, just concerning this event, the Khanya House incident, with my clients, Hammond and Kotze?

MR McINTYRE: No, Mr Chairperson.

MR DU PLESSIS: Thank you, Mr Chairperson.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR DU PLESSIS

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr du Plessis. Mr Cornelius?

MR CORNELIUS: Thank you, Mr Chair, I have no questions for this witness.

NO QUESTIONS BY MR CORNELIUS

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS CAMBANIS: Thank you, Chairperson.

Mr McIntyre, you speak about front organisations extensively, just let us clear, are you suggesting that the Catholic Church was a front organisation for the liberation struggle?

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, no.

MS CAMBANIS: Which front organisations do you refer to?

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, the information was that the students, trade union members, activists in the unions and those activists in the tertiary institutions, civics, etcetera, that they had access to the Catholic Bishops Conference and that these activists with their organisations were seen as front organisations for the ANC.

CHAIRPERSON: Could you give us some names?

MR McINTYRE: I beg your pardon?

CHAIRPERSON: You've mentioned students, unions, etcetera, did they have any names?

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, I'm now trying to put by back in the position of about 12 or so years ago, I cannot give you specifics, or there were various organisations who were active in the struggle against apartheid. Mr Chairperson, I'll have to go and look for documents if I have to give them all names.

CHAIRPERSON: You may proceed, Ms Cambanis.

MS CAMBANIS: Thank you.

Mr McIntyre, do you accept that there is a distinction between a violent and non-violent opposition to apartheid?

MR McINTYRE: Yes.

MS CAMBANIS: And are your views different relating to the different parties? Those who condemned apartheid, or fought against apartheid in a non-violent way, in your mind, is that the same as the soldiers of Umkhonto weSizwe?

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, no, there is a difference.

MS CAMBANIS: Yes, what is the difference?

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, the way in which you put it, the Umkhonto weSizwe soldiers were actively involved in the violent struggle and the non-violent struggle was in opposition, mass action, the intimidation of people, the asking for sanctions, etcetera.

MS CAMBANIS: But Sir, being against apartheid, in your mind, would that threaten the State? Simply being against apartheid.

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, I do not believe that it was a question of just being against apartheid, in my opinion the previous government of the day attempted to govern the country and the opposition against this plan to govern the country and also then to stabilise the situation and the actions that were targeted against that, and although the problem was the apartheid policy, we in the Police and especially in the Security Police, had to not only protect the government but also stabilise the situation. So I do not want to say that because myself - or we acted against people who were opposed to apartheid.

MS CAMBANIS: Yes. Isn't it what you had to stabilise was the violence being experienced in the country, isn't that correct?

MR McINTYRE: That is correct, yes.

MS CAMBANIS: And people who were of the same mind, that violence was not acceptable, would be on the same side as you so to speak, not the enemy.

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, I cannot quite hear, if I can just get the device ready.

CHAIRPERSON: Could the Logistics engineers assist Mr McIntyre with the device?

MR McINTYRE: Thank you, Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: You may proceed, Ms Cambanis. Could you repeat your question to Mr McIntyre.

MS CAMBANIS: Thank you, Chair.

Mr McIntyre, isn't it correct that what you considered a threat was the violent opposition to apartheid?

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, maybe in the '80s, yes, but since my connection with the Security Police in the '60s, all information that the government of the day, that was threatening to the government of the day or harmed the government of the day 'or the policies of the government since 1966, I was intent on collection information so that in the '80s, yes, the opposition was to stabilise the violence.

MS CAMBANIS: Yes. Now unfortunately I don't have copies, Chair, I will make this available from the South African Catholic Bishops Conference, a statement as church leaders made prior to the bombing - I beg your pardon, the burning of Khanya House

"As leader of the church in South Africa, we object in the strongest possible terms to the recent spate of bombings in shopping areas and public areas. Innocent people are killed, maimed and injured, families and individuals are struck by untold and unjustified suffering. They cannot be held responsible for the system we labour under in our country."

What is your comment on a statement like that, issued by the Catholic Church?

MR McINTYRE: The church's opinion, I've got no problem with that statement.

ADV SANDI: Sorry, Ms Cambanis.

At the time in question, were you aware of this statement?

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, no, I cannot recall that I ever heard this statement or have seen it or had insight into it.

ADV SANDI: Yes, but were you aware of the fact that the SACBC would issue statements like this condemning the killing of innocent people in the streets with bombs?

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, yes, they would have made such statements, but I am not aware of that statement. I could have read it maybe, I could have seen it, but I cannot immediately say yes, it sounds familiar.

ADV SANDI: Is it the position here that such a statement would never have made any difference to you?

MR McINTYRE: A difference in what sense?

ADV SANDI: In terms of whatever action you deem appropriate to be taken against the SACBC.

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, the action against the SACBC was based on information - as I said, with my arrival in 1971 at the Security Branch in Pretoria, information was collected with regards to the SACBC, concerning, or up and to the incident in 1988. In other words, it was a process that come over a very long period of time. So I do not believe that would have had such a big influence on the incident itself.

ADV SANDI: Thank you.

MS CAMBANIS: Yes, but at the time that you took your decision you were aware of the fact that the Catholic Church had throughout the years condemned violence as a means of change and had condemned bombings and killing of innocent people.

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, the Catholic Church opposed apartheid and the Security Police's actions opposed all of these elements, they criticised them publicly, so I cannot say that I was aware of the fact that the Catholic Church was against violence, but I do accept that they were against government violence or State violence.

MS CAMBANIS: Now Mr McIntyre, you've just told, in answer to the Chair, they refer here to a recent spate of bombings in shopping areas and public places, who do you think they're referring to in this statement?

"... recent spate of bombings in shopping areas and public places."

Do you think they refer to State violence?

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, no, I do not know, I do not know what they're referring to.

MS CAMBANIS: Mr McIntyre, please try. Are you suggesting tot his Committee that when they condemn in the strongest possible terms, the recent spate of bombings in shopping areas and public areas, they're referring to State sponsored violence?

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, there were various bomb explosions in shopping centres etcetera, the Catholic Church could have, or I believed that they opposed all types of violence. If they are there referring to State violence or the violence of the liberation movements, I'm not quite sure.

MS CAMBANIS: Mr McIntyre, is it correct, yesterday you said this is the only application, the only event for which you seek amnesty?

MR McINTYRE: That is correct, yes.

MS CAMBANIS: And during cross-examination today you've given the evidence that at the time of making this decision you were not aware of who was involved in the Khotso House bomb attack.

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, once again I would like to repeat that in an intelligence community we did not go and tell each other what was done or who did it, my inference was that I suspected that it was some of my colleagues, but nobody came specifically to me and told me who was responsible and I never asked questions.

MS CAMBANIS: Who did you think was responsible of your colleagues, which division?

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, no, I do not know, I've got no idea. My instruction concerning Khanya House was for Mr Hattingh, but I do not know who was involved in the Khotso House incident and I did not know afterwards either.

MS CAMBANIS: And at that time that you made your decision in relation to Khanya House, did you have knowledge of where orders had come from in relation to Khotso House?

MR McINTYRE: No, Mr Chairperson.

MS CAMBANIS: You were not aware of ministerial involvement, Commissioners of Police involvement?

MR McINTYRE: No, Mr Chairperson, I heard that at a later stage or I read about it in the newspaper, concerning the involvement of the higher officials.

MS CAMBANIS: At the time that you made the decision relating to Khanya House, you based your authority on the letter you referred to yesterday.

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, yes, in broader terms the letter to which I referred to that came from the State Security Council, but also as in my position as a unit Commander of the Stratcom unit, and with the information that I had and seen in the struggle, I took that decision or I made that decision.

MS CAMBANIS: I don't understand, are you saying even without the letter you would have had the authority to make that decision? Is that what you mean to say?

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, I believe that without the letter I could have made that decision.

MS CAMBANIS: Based on what, Mr McIntyre?

MR McINTYRE: Based on information gathered and in an attempt to remove a serious thorn in the side of the government and to stabilise the internal circumstances, if I thought it was necessary to attack Khanya House in the broader spectrum or framework of the situation at that stage.

ADV BOSMAN: Ms Cambanis, may I just interrupt you for one moment.

Mr McIntyre, it isn't quite clear to me, did you see it as illegal or legal when you gave this instruction?

MR McINTYRE: It was definitely illegal.

ADV BOSMAN: And you yourself say that even without the letter you would have again issued such an illegal instruction.

MR McINTYRE: Can I just mention that the unit of which I was the Commander, was responsible strategic communication for covert operations, covert operations consist of, I would say approximately a hundred percent illegal activities or operations.

ADV BOSMAN: Thank you. Please continue, Ms Cambanis.

MS CAMBANIS: It wasn't necessary for you to get authority from someone above you, your superior?

CHAIRPERSON: He's the Head of Stratcom.

MR McINTYRE: Chairperson, no ...(intervention)

MS CAMBANIS: Is he?

CHAIRPERSON: Ja, he's Head of Stratcom.

MS CAMBANIS: Thank you, Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Or he was. I'm sorry.

MR McINTYRE: I was.

MS CAMBANIS: Did you discuss this decision with anyone other than Mr Hattingh?

MR McINTYRE: No, Mr Chairperson.

MS CAMBANIS: And Mr Hattingh, is it correct he was at that time the Head of Explosives in the Bomb Squad?

MR McINTYRE: That is correct, yes.

MS CAMBANIS: Why did you go to Mr Hattingh?

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, I know Mr Hattingh since 1962, we were stationed at Durban at the uniform branch. He was Umbilo, I was at ...(indistinct). I know him for many years and because I knew him very well, I still trust him to this day and I knew that I could approach him with this.

MS CAMBANIS: And you say you don't remember what the order was?

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, I cannot recall the specific wording of it, but I believe that I had to, or should have said, "Damage the building", but I cannot really tell you what my specific words were.

MS CAMBANIS: But if you go to the explosives and bomb people, can we, is it reasonable to think that you would have wanted something a little bit more than arson?

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, I gave Mr Hattingh the instruction, I believed that I did discuss it with him and I left it in his hands. It was the first time that I issued such an instruction and also the last time that I issued such an instruction. I did not tell him exactly what he must do, who must do it and how he must do it. I cannot really think what I expected or what I said, it's impossible.

MS CAMBANIS: If he had have bombed the building, would that have fallen within your instruction then?

MR McINTYRE: Yes, Mr Chairperson.

MS CAMBANIS: Would you have expected a unit like Vlakplaas to have been involved in the destruction of a building?

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, at that stage when I gave this instruction I did not expect anybody, or I did not know who was going to be involved, so I cannot speculate and say that I expected Vlakplaas to be involved or not.

MS CAMBANIS: What did you know, what was Vlakplaas' instructions, what was their task at the time of this incident? What was their job?

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, when this incident occurred, and maybe I should, maybe I'm going to repeat about what the instructions were, but I did know that they did covert work.

MS CAMBANIS: Yes. Did you know that it was in relation to members of Umkhonto weSizwe or other liberation armies?

MR McINTYRE: Could you just repeat please.

MS CAMBANIS: That they were tasked mainly in relation to the liberation armies.

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, yes, I knew this.

MS CAMBANIS: Do you agree that it wasn't really their job to get involved with non-governmental organisations or civil society?

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, no, I cannot agree with that. At this late stage I do not want to say what they could have been involved in.

MS CAMBANIS: Sir, earlier you said that you would have given instructions that people should not be injured or killed. You think that's what you would have said.

MR JOUBERT: Sorry Mr Chair, if I may come in here. I don't think that was the evidence as such, the evidence was that no innocent people must be injured in this. Not specifically any people at all, no innocent people and no property adjacent to the building to be damaged.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, that's correct.

MS CAMBANIS: I beg your pardon. Sorry, Mr McIntyre.

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, I believe I would have used such words, yes. I do repeat I cannot recall what my specific words were when I gave this instruction.

MS CAMBANIS: Yes, no I understand, but it would have been that injury or death of civilians should be avoided, would you have said something like that?

MR McINTYRE: I believe so and I hope I did.

MS CAMBANIS: Sir, if the applicants before this Committee would give evidence that they were instructed to shoot anyone they encountered on the premises, clearly that doesn't fall within the order that you gave.

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, no.

MS CAMBANIS: Mr McIntyre, you collected all this information, are you aware of the raid at Khanya House by Security Police on the 1st of September, five weeks before this incident? At noon, to be exact.

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, if you say a raid, can you just explain what happened there, because I also went to go and arrest an activist there, I'm not quite sure if you're referring to that.

MS CAMBANIS: Yes, you're quite right, Mr McIntyre, I refer to car loads of policemen arriving at Khanya House, entering the premises and systematically searching office to office.

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, no, the incident in which I was involved, we didn't enter the building, so I do not have any knowledge of this incident to which you are referring now.

MS CAMBANIS: My instructions are that such a raid, as previously described, took place on the 1st of September, and that not one piece of so-called subversive literature, pamphlet, banner or anything else was retrieved by Security Police during that raid a mere five weeks before this attack.

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, I do not know anything about that raid.

MS CAMBANIS: Sir, inter alia you were collecting information regarding the Catholic Church and specifically the South African Bishops Conference and specifically Khanya House, were you not?

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, yes, to an extent it is correct, it was not just myself who gathered this information, some of the field workers gathered information concerning the SACBC and this was channelised to the headquarters or head office and this done nationally. So it wasn't just myself as an individual or my unit who focused on the Khanya House or the Catholic Church as such.

MS CAMBANIS: Mr McIntyre, an attack on Khanya House in whatever form, one could have expected that it would have national and international repercussions, an attack on the Catholic Church building, do you agree?

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, yes, the results would have been, or I saw the SACBC as an administrative headquarters of the church in Pretoria and the larger Pretoria area, so I do agree that it would have had national and international results or media coverage.

MS CAMBANIS: And so you would have been careful and considered before making a decision to give an order like that, would you not?

MR McINTYRE: I believe so, yes.

MS CAMBANIS: And yet you're unaware that five weeks before this attack, the Security Police had raided and not found one single piece of evidence of a subversive nature.

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, I repeat, I'm surprised, this is the first time that I've heard about this raid.

MS CAMBANIS: Had you known about it on the 1st of September, before the attack, would you still have made that order?

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, it's difficult to say, I had to consider then all options and the fact that nothing was found in the house on the 1st of September, I do not know if I would have then accepted that nothing happened there after all the indications that we had. So it's very difficult to say, I would have to consider the whole situation again.

MS CAMBANIS: But Mr McIntyre, there were repeated raids of the nature I've described previously on Khanya House, this was not the first time, it was just the most recent one before the incident.

MR McINTYRE: Well Mr Chairperson, I've never been involved in a raid at Khanya House, I was at the Security Branch in Pretoria since 1971 and I was at the Security Branch on and off up until '82, and I never took part in a raid at Khanya House.

MS CAMBANIS: Mr McIntyre, it's my instructions that the Security Police were frequent visitors to Khanya House over the years, and that on not one such occasion did they find any illegal literature or any illegal substance or material, did you not know this?

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, I am surprised to hear that the Security Branch were regular visitors to Khanya House and never found any pamphlets or whatever, I do not have any knowledge of that. The only visit, the only time I went to Khanya House was on the Saturday afternoon when I went to go and arrest an activist.

MS CAMBANIS: My colleague is sabotaging me, Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Please, Mr Cornelius, don't derail her thought of cross-examination.

MS CAMBANIS: ...(indistinct - no microphone)

CHAIRPERSON: Is it a convenient time to break for tea? We will adjourn for tea, we'll take fifteen minutes.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

ON RESUMPTION

ROBERT PETER McINTYRE: (s.u.o)

CHAIRPERSON: ... proceed with your cross-examination, I just want to ask Ms Patel something. We were waiting for a document that had to be faxed from Cape Town. I forgot to ask this morning, what is the position about that document?

MS PATEL: Unfortunately they faxed the wrong document through to me now, Honourable Chairperson, and it's just come in, so during the tea break I'll call the office again ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: No, we've had the tea break.

MS PATEL: I mean during the lunch break I'll call the office back and make sure that they send the right one. I've informed my learned colleague, Ms Cambanis about it.

CHAIRPERSON: Please bear with us, Cape Town is not near. You may proceed, Ms Cambanis.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS CAMBANIS: (Cont)

Thank you, Chair.

Mr McIntyre, in an operation such as this, would you have made the effort to acquaint yourself with the place Khanya House, the building Khanya House? Would you have had that information?

MR McINTYRE: Chairperson, I don't follow the question, could you repeat it please.

MS CAMBANIS: Mr McIntyre, ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: He has been to Khanya House, when he says he had gone to arrest somebody.

MS CAMBANIS: Yes. As a matter of interest, Mr McIntyre, when was that?

MR McINTYRE: Chairperson, I think it was during the late '70s, I'm not certain of the precise month or day. I was familiar with the building, I knew where it was situated. I had not entered the building, but I had an idea of how it looked.

MS CAMBANIS: Sorry, the only experience of activists being ... was in the '70s, at least eight/nine years before this plan? That is your experience of Khanya House?

MR McINTYRE: No, Chairperson, what I meant was that it was the only occasion upon which I visited the premises to arrest an activist. The indication was activism and the opposition, the political set-up surrounding Khanya House and the government, I'd been aware of this since my attachment to the Security Branch in Pretoria, but I only visited the premises once and that was to execute an arrest.

MS CAMBANIS: And that was in the '70s?

MR McINTYRE: Chairperson, as far as I can recall it was during the late '70s.

MS CAMBANIS: And do you know of any other arrests that were carried out at Khanya House?

MR McINTYRE: No, Chairperson.

MS CAMBANIS: Where were you at Khanya House? You say you didn't enter the premises, where was the arrest carried out?

MR McINTYRE: Chairperson, the arrest was executed at the entrance to Khanya House, on the premises at the entrance. If I recall the old Khanya house correctly, the entrance wasn't very far from the pavement.

MS CAMBANIS: Yes. What happened to this person that was arrested, were they charged?

MR McINTYRE: Chairperson, this person was handed over to the Security Branch, I think it was Springs or Benoni, I'm not entirely certain. They came to fetch the person that very same afternoon. On the contrary, they were present at the time of the arrest.

MS CAMBANIS: Yes, Mr McIntyre, what happened to them, were they charged? It was a woman wasn't it?

MR McINTYRE: I don't know, I cannot recall.

MS CAMBANIS: You do not know if they were charged, she was charged?

MR McINTYRE: No, Chairperson.

MS CAMBANIS: But this you give as an example of the activities at Khanya House, a so-called activist.

MR McINTYRE: Chairperson, I merely mentioned it as one example. I refer in my statement to the information, the informer reports which dealt with the informers that reported that activists had access to Khanya House, that they have free movement inside the house. This was simply one example that I was aware of that I was involved with, I'm not saying that that was the only time when an activist was in Khanya House or on the premises.

MS CAMBANIS: Mr McIntyre, did you request any information about the layout or structure of Khanya House?

MR McINTYRE: Do you mean before the incident?

MS CAMBANIS: Yes, before you took the decision.

MR McINTYRE: No, Chairperson.

MS CAMBANIS: You said in paragraph 8.2 of your statement, on page 9, that you were concerned about the printer, printing, "drukkery op hierdie perseel".

MR McINTYRE: Chairperson, I will read it to you

"The information indicated that there was a printing press on the premises which was being used to generate mass propaganda."

Yes, that is correct, there was such information available.

MS CAMBANIS: And what was the information, what equipment was there?

MR McINTYRE: A printing press. I cannot recall in detail, but the information indicated that there was a printing press.

MS CAMBANIS: And if it was only a photocopy machine, would that surprise you?

MR McINTYRE: Chairperson, I must state that a photocopying machine or a photostat machine would have been part of a printing set-up.

MS CAMBANIS: And if you knew that that was housed in the building adjacent to Khanya House, would that surprise you?

MR McINTYRE: Well Chairperson, if I had known it I don't know if I would have been surprised, but my information indicated that it was inside Khanya House.

MS CAMBANIS: Excuse me, that was your information?

MR McINTYRE: That was the information on the table.

MS CAMBANIS: And as a result of that information, Khanya House was burnt, or on your orders, to be damaged. I beg your pardon, Mr McIntyre.

MR McINTYRE: Chairperson, my decision or order or whatever you would like to call it, was not based entirely on the printing press or the printing set-up, it was about the assortment of "undermining activities" which emanated from Khanya House. My plan or my order was not only based upon the knowledge of the printing press.

MS CAMBANIS: Yes, but Mr McIntyre, you refer to it and it is certainly a major component that went towards your decision to give this order, the printing of material.

MR McINTYRE: Yes, it was part of my conviction or my consideration in issuing the order.

MS CAMBANIS: You have read the bundle and the other applicants' applications, you gave that evidence yesterday, you have read the bundle.

MR McINTYRE: Yes, I read it.

MS CAMBANIS: And many of them give the reason that they were told of why they carried this out was because of the printing of subversive material. Did you read that?

MR McINTYRE: Yes, Chairperson, that is also correct, it was part of the consideration.

MS CAMBANIS: And you wouldn't be able to explain how only that part of the instruction was given to them, obviously? That it had to do with the printing, you can't explain that.

MR McINTYRE: No, Chairperson, I cannot say how thorough the operatives were informed. Personally, as I've already testified, I did not brief them.

MS CAMBANIS: Mr McIntyre, if an applicant was under the impression that the object of this exercise was to destroy the printing facility, then in that regard I want to just show you a photograph relating to Khanya House, showing that the printing was kept housed in a separate building away from Khanya House. Chair, again I don't have copies, I'll ...

CHAIRPERSON: Hold it for a while in your hand because I want to ask you something. What is written on the cover of that magazine we have?

MR McINTYRE

"After the fire the attack on Khanya House."

CHAIRPERSON: Oh, thank you. Hold it, apparently Ms Cambanis wants to ask you questions whilst it's still in your hands, I don't know.

MS CAMBANIS: Chairperson, if everyone can please put off their cellphones in my vicinity, please Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Oh, he's sabotaging you again.

MS CAMBANIS: Yes.

Mr McIntyre, you agree that that's a separate building?

MR McINTYRE: Chairperson, according to the photograph, yes, it would appear that there is a main building and then a separate seemingly temporary building adjacent to it. However, Chairperson, if I may ask, it would appear to be on the same premises.

MS CAMBANIS: That is correct, it is. Now Mr McIntyre, also in that publication is a photograph of Khanya House at the time, if you page through it you'll see that it's a four storey building.

MR McINTYRE: Yes.

MS CAMBANIS: Ground and three storeys.

MR McINTYRE: On the front page it would appear to me that there is a photograph indicating this.

ADV BOSMAN: Is there a date on the publication? Could we just have that please.

MS CAMBANIS: Chair, there's an extra copy by client, if I can hand that up to the Committee.

CHAIRPERSON: We would be most grateful, Ms Cambanis.

MR McINTYRE: Chairperson, I don't see a date anywhere.

ADV BOSMAN: You may leave it at that, we can discuss it later.

MS CAMBANIS: Mr McIntyre, only the ground floor was used for offices, those are my instructions. There were sleeping quarters on the first, second and third.

MR McINTYRE: Chairperson, I would not dispute that.

MS CAMBANIS: I've just been indicated that it's actually the second and third floors were sleeping quarters. Did you not know that?

MR McINTYRE: Chairperson, may I just state that I am aware that during the '70s, Rev Makatchwa resided in Khanya House. I don't know whether it was permanent. But in answer to your question, no I'm not aware of the fact that the second and the third floors were utilised as residential spaces or permanent dwellings, I was not aware of that.

MS CAMBANIS: And also, Mr McIntyre, I am instructed that they were clearly bedrooms, anyone who had gone into them would see that they were bedrooms and not offices.

...(end of side B of tape) In the bundle there's reference by certain of the applicants who refer to Khanya House as a residential building. Do you recall seeing that in the bundle? I'm sorry, I can't find the reference now.

MR McINTYRE: No, Chairperson, I do not recall having read something like that.

MS CAMBANIS: Alright, I will find my reference. At page 331 of the bundle, sorry, 313 under paragraph (b), Khanya House, the third line

"launched against printing press and residential quarters of a Catholic Church in Pretoria central."

MR McINTYRE: What page is that, Chairperson?

MS CAMBANIS: 313, under paragraph (b), the third line, reading

"launched against a printing press"

MR McINTYRE: Chairperson, I cannot explain the presence of the word "residential quarters", I cannot comment on that.

MS CAMBANIS: Well then comment on page - turn to page 316, again under paragraph (b), the second paragraph. What does this mean in the third line

"Provision of accommodation to exiles"

MR McINTYRE: Provision of accommodation to exiles. Chairperson, once again the presence of the word "residential quarters" indicates that the applicant knew more than I did, because I was not aware of the fact that they were storeys which were used as permanent residential quarters or living quarters.

CHAIRPERSON: For the record, that is du Toit's application.

MS CAMBANIS: Thank you, Chair.

Well Mr McIntyre, I don't think so, because originally your evidence was that Khanya House was used to harbour, in the sense of give accommodation, do you recall?

MR McINTYRE: Activists.

MS CAMBANIS: Yes.

MR McINTYRE: Chairperson, I stated that activists had free access and the information indicated that they also stayed overnight upon occasion, but I was not aware that there were persons who were residing permanently on the premises.

MS CAMBANIS: That is alright, Mr McIntyre, but you did know that people stayed there on occasion.

MR McINTYRE: Yes, that is correct.

MS CAMBANIS: And knowing that, what would your instructions have been regarding loss of life?

MR McINTYRE: Chairperson, as testified previously, I believe that I would have said, "be careful and reconnoitre the place thoroughly, determine whether or not there are people living there, so that we do not injure innocent people." I believe that I would have said that, or at least something to that effect.

MS CAMBANIS: Precisely, because you knew that there was a possibility, you knew that there was a possibility that people may be in the building at the time of the incident.

MR McINTYRE: Chairperson, yes, I was aware of the possibility that people may be in the building.

MS CAMBANIS: Thank you. Mr McIntyre, you'll recall after the incident the press reports, you've referred to The Citizen, you will recall the headlines that came out relating to arms caches found at Khanya House. Do you recall that?

MR McINTYRE: Yes, Chairperson.

MS CAMBANIS: And do you recall that there was concern about two limpet mines that had been found in a cupboard on the premises?

MR McINTYRE: Chairperson, I read about the limpet mines, yes, but I don't know about the concern surrounding it. I know that there was mention in the report of the limpet mines.

MS CAMBANIS: And do you remember that there was allegedly also found handgrenades and AK47 magazines at Khanya House?

MR McINTYRE: Chairperson, yes, that was all part of the report.

MS CAMBANIS: Chairperson, can I just have one minute, I have to find a reference please?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, certainly.

ADV SANDI: Can I just ask a question in the meantime? Mr McIntyre, I understood you to say Stratcom operations were covert operations, please correct me if I misunderstood you.

MR McINTYRE: Chairperson, the Stratcom operations in which I was involved were cover by nature.

ADV SANDI: I further understood you to say that cover operations are essentially illegal operations, is that correct?

MR McINTYRE: Those that I were involved with, yes, Chairperson.

ADV SANDI: And you also said such operations were hundred percent illegal, did I misunderstand you?

MR McINTYRE: Chairperson, no, you are correct, the Stratcom covert operations in which I was involved were practically all of them unlawful, in my opinion.

ADV SANDI: Now as I understand the position before the Committee, you have only applied for amnesty in respect of this particular incident only.

MR McINTYRE: That is correct, Chairperson.

ADV SANDI: Now can I ask you to explain that in the light of the questions I've just asked you concerning the covert operations of Stratcom?

MR McINTYRE: Chairperson, the covert operations in which I was involved, in light of the letter that I mentioned yesterday, the Security Police was tasked with the labour sector and the tertiary sector. In the two years that I spent with Stratcom, my unit and I specialised in projects which were aimed against Cosatu.

In other words, Chairperson, we support UWUSA for example. We supported the National Students forum, which was a student organisation which was established on various campuses. In the two years that I spent with Stratcom, we were completely involved with labour projects and with projects which were aimed against left-wing radical student elements on certain campuses. That is why I have not applied for amnesty for any other covert action, because the projects which were launched, were launched by front organisations.

ADV SANDI: Is it then the position here that this is the only illegal action in which you were involved during the time you were in the Stratcom operation?

MR McINTYRE: Chairperson, if one operated covert operations as one did in my case, there was a very fine line of division between illegal and legal. I wrote letters to the press under a false name and address for example, so that opponents of the government could be criticised. Whether that is illegal or not, I cannot say. It is very difficult to define. If I request funds from the Secret Fund to have T-shirts printed for UWUSA or to arrange a meeting on behalf of UWUSA, would that be illegal? What I'm trying to say is that it is very difficult to draw the line between what was legal and what was illegal, but this incident at Khanya House was the only incident for which I gave an order where damage was brought, or was to be brought to a building. The other actions involved paperwork so to speak.

ADV SANDI: Thank you. Yes, I'm aware that there's a very thin line sometimes between what is legal and what is illegal, please don't understand me to be inviting you to implicate yourself. Thank you.

MR McINTYRE: I understand, Chairperson.

MS CAMBANIS: Mr McIntyre, you'll see at page 20 of the bundle, paragraph 3, you said

"I did not regard the attack as a success"

Incidentally, this morning did you change that to say that it was a success? Is it not, Mr McIntyre?

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, on page 20 I personally - it made me uncomfortable because AK47 magazines were found. The success in the operation was in the fact that the infrastructure of the building was destroyed and that was the main purpose of the operation. But the limpet mines and the AKs did make me a bit uncomfortable at that stage. So maybe I put it a bit strongly if I say I did not regard the attack as successful.

MS CAMBANIS: I understand that today you're explaining that it was successful because the building was damaged, but what does this mean

"It was clear that the AKs and the limpet mines which were found at Khanya House, had been planted."

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, I made this statement in 1998 and with hindsight, 10 years after the incident, it was very clear when I made this statement that the inference that I could draw was that these AKs or limpet mines were planted there and I made that inference in 1998.

MS CAMBANIS: Mr McIntyre, at the time of the incident, did you believe that the AKs and the limpet mines were the property of someone residing at Khanya House, is that your evidence?

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, no, I cannot say that I believed it, but it was a possibility because in my opinion it was a possibility, but in 1998 after all the Commissions and the evidence that was led, I came to the conclusion that I believed that it was planted there, but the morning after the incident I couldn't say if it was planted or not, if it was possible or not.

MS CAMBANIS: No, Mr McIntyre, I put it to you that you knew that in October 1988.

MR McINTYRE: No, I would like to say to you, no, I did not in October 1988 know for a fact that that what was found on that terrain or scene, the weapons and limpet mines, were planted or not. Nobody came to me to tell me about it, I had no information, no knowledge that it was left there or planted, definitely not.

MS CAMBANIS: Today do you accept that it was planted there?

MR McINTYRE: In 1998, I accepted that it was planted there, yes.

MS CAMBANIS: And you've been through the bundle ...(intervention)

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, I read through it and I cannot recall everything that it is contained in it, but I do have the bundle in front of me.

MS CAMBANIS: You understand that that arms and ammunition was planted, Mr McIntyre?

MR McINTYRE: Yes, I do understand it. Many years after the incident I do understand it and I can see it here.

MS CAMBANIS: And we know from the bundle that no-one's applied for that part of the operation.

MR McINTYRE: I am not aware of it.

MS CAMBANIS: Mr McIntyre, why you knew this in 1988 is because this incident enjoyed a lot of news coverage, it was clear that the two limpet mines had been found after Brother Jude had called the police in to examine a package. Do you recall that?

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, no, I cannot recall.

MS CAMBANIS: I will just then put it to you, Mr McIntyre, two limpet mines were found at the request of Brother Jude, after investigation by the police. No mention was made of any other weapons and it's only in a subsequent statement that the police revealed that they'd allegedly found grenades and AK47s. And that was in the newspaper, each and every newspaper every day for days and days after that. You don't recall that?

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, no, I read the article in The Citizen after the incident, I cannot say that I looked at all the newspapers to gather all the information.

MS CAMBANIS: Mr McIntyre, this was your operation, this was your order.

MR McINTYRE: That is correct, yes.

MS CAMBANIS: And you did not follow even the news reports subsequent to the attack.

MR McINTYRE: I testified here that the building was damaged intensively and I left it there. The instruction was, "damage the building".

MS CAMBANIS: Mr McIntyre, is it your evidence that you did not follow any of the press after that incident and you are not aware of these allegations and the contradictions thereafter?

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, I could have read the articles, but I cannot specifically recall those incidents.

MS CAMBANIS: Mr McIntyre, do you remember what was the attitude of the then Minister of Law and Order, following this attack, publicly?

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, I can't recollect that he had a specific attitude, no Chairperson.

MS CAMBANIS: That's officially. Unofficially, do you know?

MR McINTYRE: No, Mr Chairperson.

MS CAMBANIS: The Minister of Law and Order at the time was Mr Adrian Vlok, was it not?

MR McINTYRE: Yes, as far as I know.

MS CAMBANIS: To the best of your knowledge did he know who was responsible for this attack?

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, no, I reported to no-one and definitely not to the Minister.

MS CAMBANIS: Mr McIntyre, if you can explain to us what was touched on by the Committee earlier. You give an order, serious damage is done, national and international repercussions, and you don't follow up.

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, as I also said, I doubt if there was an information system who would execute covert operations and then report to people what was done. It didn't work like that.

MS CAMBANIS: I know, Sir, but when you gave the instruction you gave it to Mr Hattingh.

MR McINTYRE: Yes.

MS CAMBANIS: And at no time did you feel it necessary to ever discuss the matter at least with Mr Hattingh, who you trusted you said?

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, I must mention that a day or two after the incident I was transferred to another unit at Headquarters, I then went on leave, and I think I also testified that there was really no opportunity to talk to Mr Hattingh, and I doubt if I would have. I read in the newspaper that the building was damaged, I do not think I would have gone to Mr Hattingh to find out more, I would have been made to have done it.

MS CAMBANIS: Mr McIntyre, you're changing a little bit, you said earlier that it was a few weeks later that you were ... but even if it was one day, is this not a significant event to you?

MR McINTYRE: Can I just come back, I cannot really follow the weeks or the days that you now mentioned.

MS CAMBANIS: I think that you said in your application that you held that position until the 1st of November. This incident happened on the 12th of October, that's a two-week period.

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, what I can recall, and if my statement is different in this regard, I - well a few days after the incident I was transferred to another unit and I took leave up until January or December of 1989, I then went on a senior training course. So when I went on leave, I think at the end of October, beginning of November, I had nothing more to do with Stratcom.

MS CAMBANIS: Yes. Mr McIntyre, it's actually at page 11, 8.6, where you say that

"Shortly after the incident during November"

MR McINTYRE: That is correct, yes.

MS CAMBANIS: That is why I say you still held that position for at least two weeks before you left with "verlof".

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, it is possible, I cannot specifically recall when I got the instruction to report to another unit, but I am not going to deny or argue that it was two weeks.

MS CAMBANIS: Okay, Mr McIntyre, let's say it was one day or two days, what would you - let's just even say that your statement is wrong and now you're changing paragraph 8.6, say it was one day, an incident of this magnitude, how is it possible that you did not speak with Mr Hattingh after the event?

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, I can just repeat what I said, a need-to-know basis. The building was damaged, I read it in the main article of The Citizen the next day, what must I go and ask Mr Hattingh, I do not care who did it or how it was done. There was no purpose to go and do follow-up work, I saw in the media that it was extensively damaged.

MS CAMBANIS: Mr McIntyre, when you refer to the pamphlets and the printing, can you please just tell the Committee to what you are referring. You spoke about banners, what banners were these that were so objectionable?

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, there were reports, information from sources, not my sources or my unit's sources, that there were various anti-government, or pamphlets were printed to incite the masses, there were anti-governmental propaganda, etcetera. That is what I'm referring to you.

MS CAMBANIS: Yes, that's - but what, just give us one example from Khanya House, one example. What banner, what pamphlet or what other written matter that was so objectionable to make you decide to attack Khanya House, just give us one example.

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, it was not an attack just because of this press and the printing of banners and pamphlets, Khanya House was attacked as I said earlier on, seen against the broader background of the Catholic Church, seen in that they harboured activists, that activists came and went and the press was one of the reasons, and if I had to in some way get hold of these pamphlets or printed media. I cannot recall what specific organisations or whatever.

MS CAMBANIS: I understand what you say, Mr McIntyre, but not even one example can you give the Committee.

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, I do not have an example, but the information reports, the documentation concerning the literature, there was a lot of it at the Head Office of Security.

MS CAMBANIS: That came from Khanya House?

MR McINTYRE: That was submitted by informers together with source reports concerning activities in Khanya House. I'm not saying that the officials of Khanya House printed it, but activists who had access to Khanya House printed it there or copied it there.

MS CAMBANIS: And yet it was never found during the visits by the Security Police.

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, I mentioned earlier on that the Security Police visited so often, or went to Khanya House so often, if there were banners and pamphlets, with all respect towards the officials of the church, I do not think if they would have shown it to the Security Police. The Catholic Church said that they were against the actions of the State and the Security Police, why would they display these pamphlets and banners?

MR McINTYRE: Mr McIntyre, can we agree that prior to you making a decision, you had no information that arms and ammunitions were being kept at Khanya House?

MR McINTYRE: That is correct, yes.

MS CAMBANIS: Can we agree that you had no information that members of Umkhonto weSizwe or what you referred to yesterday as terrorists, were staying there?

MR McINTYRE: That is correct. I would just like to say that yesterday I mentioned, I talked about activists and terrorists and there's a big difference, I did not have concrete information that yes, there were members of Umkhonto weSizwe at the house.

MS CAMBANIS: And then finally, Mr McIntyre, I just really want to understand in your original application, page 13 9A(4). I know that you have given this evidence, but can you explain to the Committee how it is possible to go from suggested, discussed, hinted, to your evidence yesterday to this Committee that it now becomes an authorised order?

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, during a visit of the Investigative team of the TRC, they visited me, I think I assisted them in certain matters and I received this form from a member of the Investigative team and I filled in this form in Umtata, as best I could, and when I decided to contact a lawyer concerning this application, I took the telephone directory of the Eastern Cape and I found I C Clark Attorneys, I then went to go and discuss this application with this attorney and also my later application.

And I want to say that where I said yesterday that my legal representative, I was very naive when I completed this, it is not correct, the suggested, discussed, hinted, proposed. At that stage - until I read this bundle, I was not sure who I gave the instruction to and who I discussed it with and after I read the documents at the end of the year, it was very clear that I spoke to Mr Hattingh. This application was, as far as I can say, was done by myself alone in Umtata, it was not an attempt to cover anything up or to hide anything.

MS CAMBANIS: Mr McIntyre, you had been a police at the time of filling this out, for how many years, 30 years?

MR McINTYRE: 30 years.

MS CAMBANIS: And you know that the Police Force functions via orders and lines of command.

MR McINTYRE: Yes.

MS CAMBANIS: You were the Head of Stratcom.

MR McINTYRE: That is correct.

MS CAMBANIS: Now you say you gave an order, but when you filled this form out you couldn't formulate, "I gave the order but I do not remember to whom". That you couldn't do. Is that correct, Mr McIntyre?

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, no, with all respect, I do not believe that you or the Honourable Committee must read into this paragraph that I don't want to specify that I gave an instruction, this incident happened 12 years ago and truly I completed this form the best I could and there's no reason why I now suddenly would say I gave an instruction.

MS CAMBANIS: Mr McIntyre, I put to you that if you had have given the order, you would have said so in paragraph 4, you would not have to use words like "hinted".

MR McINTYRE: Mr Chairperson, I did give the instruction and I apologise for the faulty wording in paragraph 4, page 13, I apologise for the faulty wording, I did give the instructions.

MS CAMBANIS: Chairperson, I have no further questions, but while the other questions are being taken, may I be excused just to confer with my clients in case there's anything further?

CHAIRPERSON: Whilst Ms Patel is asking questions?

MS CAMBANIS: If it's not too rude, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: No, no, it wouldn't.

MS CAMBANIS: Thank you. Sorry, Chair, with the understanding that if there's something further they wish me to put, I will be allowed to do so.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, certainly.

MS CAMBANIS: Yes, thank you.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS CAMBANIS

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Patel?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS PATEL: Thank you, Honourable Chairperson.

Mr McIntyre - sorry, Mr McIntyre are you ready to proceed?

MR McINTYRE: Certainly.

MS PATEL: There's just one thing that I want to understand that I'm not really clear on. You say that your instructions to Mr Hattingh was that everything possible should be done in order to ensure that innocent persons are not injured or killed, did I understand that correctly?

MR McINTYRE: Chairperson, I cannot recall the precise wording of the instruction that I issued, but I believe that I would have said it, yes.

MS PATEL: But that would have been the gist of what you would have said.

MR McINTYRE: The gist, yes.

MS PATEL: Alright. You've applied for attempted murder as well, would you have at that stage, considered the victims who are present here today, to be legitimate targets, in terms of your order at the time?

MR McINTYRE: No, definitely not.

MS PATEL: Thank you, Honourable Chairperson.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS PATEL

CHAIRPERSON: Advocate Bosman?

ADV BOSMAN: This is not really a question, I just want to put it on the record that the date of the publication to which you referred, was January 1989, so it was virtually almost immediately after the incident took place that this publication was issued, and would you accept it as such?

MR McINTYRE: Yes.

ADV BOSMAN: Thank you, Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Advocate Bosman. Advocate Sandi?

ADV SANDI: Just one question.

Mr McIntyre, I understood you to say that this was the first and the last order you had given for an operation of a similar nature, did I misunderstand you on that?

MR McINTYRE: Yes, that is correct.

ADV SANDI: Now the problem I have is, how does it happen then that there are so many issues and details which you cannot remember, pertaining to this incident? You could not even remember, for example, who you had given the order to. On would understand it if someone was involved in a number of similar operations, you know to make an example here of Mr de Kock, who's been involved in quite a number of operations which in many cases are very similar. One can understand it when such a person cannot remember the details pertaining to each and every particular incident, but I think I would have a difficulty where you're dealing with a person who was only involved in one incident, the first and the last of its kind. I don't know what you want to say on that.

MR McINTYRE: Chairperson, that it was the first and the last order of this nature that I issued is definitely so. I agree with you when I completed my amnesty application it also bothered me, the fact that I could not recall specifically to whom I issued the order. Consequently I made enquiries with Maj Kendal, Capt Boily, Inspector Savage Reid, former colleagues of mine at the unit and I said to them, "Please can you recall to whom I gave the order or with whom I discussed the Khanya House incident?" With the exception of these three former colleagues, I also contacted other colleagues in an attempt to determine precisely to whom I issued the order. I agree with you, it might sound strange, but I tell you that it is the truth, there is no reason why I should try to obfuscate the truth or try to misrepresent the truth.

CHAIRPERSON: How would they have known to who you gave the order, because you had no interest in even finding out whether it was a success or not?

MR McINTYRE: Yes, that is correct, but we were a handful who served on this Stratcom unit and in an attempt to determine to whom I'd actually issued the order, I consulted them, I made telephonic enquiries in order to determine whether or not I may have mentioned something to them, because I saw that there was a vagueness here because I could not recall to whom I had issued the order and that created a space, an open space in my application.

CHAIRPERSON: I'm sorry, Advocate Sandi, to just interrupt.

ADV SANDI: That was all, Mr Chairman, I had to ask. "Ndiyabulela Mnumzana uMcIntyre".

MR McINTYRE: Thank you, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: It would appear both of you come from the Eastern Cape.

MR McINTYRE: "Qola ke Mhlekazi".

MS CAMBANIS: Chairperson, I'm sorry to say there is one question that I would like to ask, one last question.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, please go ahead.

FURTHER CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS CAMBANIS: Mr McIntyre, I've been instructed to ask you, you said that you were monitoring the labour movement at the time, would you have knowledge of the Catholic Church's Labour Committee, did you know about it?

MR McINTYRE: Chairperson, my unit and I didn't really monitor the labour market, but we instituted counter-actions. One of the covert operations was, for example, to establish other labour organisations as counter-organisations to COSATU and NACTO. So I cannot really say that I was aware of the Labour Committee of the Catholic Church as such.

MS CAMBANIS: Were you aware that such committees would have had conferences at Khanya House?

MR McINTYRE: Chairperson, there were many conferences in Khanya House, I cannot say that I was specifically aware of those conferences.

MS CAMBANIS: Yes, there were many conferences, they were generally two or three-day conferences, is that correct?

MR McINTYRE: Chairperson, there were many conferences according to informer reports, but I cannot say specifically what the duration of these conferences would have been, I really cannot recall that.

MS CAMBANIS: I put to you that they were on occasion, two days, and that the people attending the conferences from all over the country, would have slept at Khanya House, because that's what it was, a conference centre as well. Is that what your informers told you?

MR McINTYRE: I cannot recall whether informers told me this specifically, but I will accept that there were lengthy conferences on the premises and that persons slept on the premises. I do not have a problem with that statement.

MS CAMBANIS: Thank you very much, Chairperson.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS CAMBANIS

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Ms Cambanis. Mr Joubert, any re-examination?

RE-EXAMINATION BY MR JOUBERT: Thank you, Honourable Chair, just one or two singular aspects.

Mr McIntyre, you were referred to this letter by my learned colleague, Mr Wagener, it is a letter from the Bishops Council, which is Exhibit C as it has been marked in these proceedings, if I may just refer you to that and if you can have a look at paragraph 2, approximately in the middle of that paragraph you were cross-examined regarding certain aspects, but in the middle of the paragraph there is a sentence beginning with "we":

"We will continue the work that you have been doing and we will continue to give all the support we can to your friends and relatives."

That section, how do you interpret that?

MR McINTYRE: If the Catholic Church referred to continuing the work that they had been doing, it would mean that in other words, the detainees opposition, whether it was verbal or covert by nature, would continue, the opposition politics would continue. In broad terms that is my interpretation of it.

MR JOUBERT: And then you were further cross-examined regarding the distinction between violent and non-violent action against the government of the day.

MR McINTYRE: That is correct.

MR JOUBERT: And the point was made that the Catholic Church or the Bishops Conference then, were supporters or could be regarded as supporters who did not act violently, they acted non-violently.

MR McINTYRE: That is correct.

MR JOUBERT: How did you experience this Khanya House, even though you conceded that they did not participate in violent actions, how did you experience them, were they opposed to violent actions or did they support persons who were actually guilty of violent actions?

MR McINTYRE: The informer reports indicated that the Catholic Bishops Council, their support, whether it was by means of front organisations or not, their support was for the benefit of the ANC and the ANC was waging an armed struggle. I don't believe that I need to elaborate regarding that. So the support which was given to the front organisation or the umbrella organisation was given in order to promote the objectives of the ANC.

MR JOUBERT: Furthermore, you were cross-examined regarding the applicants who had referred to the necessity to shoot certain people if the situation justified it, you were not involved in any such orders, is that correct?

MR McINTYRE: That is correct.

MR JOUBERT: And am I correct in saying that the execution of the initial order was left to the operative on ground level, to his discretion, in executing the order, is that correct?

MR McINTYRE: That is correct.

MR JOUBERT: I have no further questions, thank you, Honourable Chairman.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR JOUBERT

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Joubert. Thank you, Mr McIntyre, you are excused.

MR McINTYRE: Thank you, Sir.

WITNESS EXCUSED

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Joubert, are you leading any further evidence in respect of Mr McIntyre?

MR JOUBERT: Mr Chair, at this stage no, we are still attempting to get the documentation from the Deputy Commissioner, that we have referred to in our application. We contacted him once again. I would like to attempt to get that documentation still, we are still endeavouring to do that. If that comes to hand I will obviously then provide that to the Committee, but at this stage I have no further evidence to present.

CHAIRPERSON: If it comes to hand, would Mr McIntyre be available, because questions might be asked around that document?

MR JOUBERT: Yes, Mr Chair, Mr McIntyre will be available for the rest of this hearing, he will stay available.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Thank you, Mr Chair, I think the next witness will then be Mr Hattingh.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MR VAN DER MERWE: He will give his evidence in Afrikaans.