WYBRAND ANDREAS LODEWIKUS DU TOIT: (sworn states)
ADV BOSMAN: The applicant is duly sworn, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr van der Merwe?
MR VAN DER MERWE: Mr Chairman, just before we proceed with this witness, I have had a consultation with my other client, Mr Kok, which is Mr Jakobus Kok, and I must correct a statement that I put to Mr Vermeulen yesterday, which was in error. I put to Mr Vermeulen on behalf of Mr Jakobus Kok, that he switched the electricity off on all the floors of this building, my instructions from Mr Kok is, who I have spoken to in the lunch adjournment, that he only switched off the electricity on the floor where he worked and which was the first floor. So it was my mistake to assume that he switched it off on all the floors. He was not on the other floors, he switched it off on the first floor where he worked.
CHAIRPERSON: Wouldn't it be appropriate that you make that when Mr Kok takes the stand?
MR VAN DER MERWE: I just wanted, because this is entwined, just to place it on record, it can be taken up with him at a later stage.
CHAIRPERSON: I hear you.
EXAMINATION BY MR VAN DER MERWE: Thank you, Mr Chair.
Mr du Toit, your application appears in the bundle from page 306 up until page 319 of this bundle, is that correct?
MR DU TOIT: That is correct, yes.
MR VAN DER MERWE: During the - when you submitted your application you were not represented by any attorney and you compiled these applications yourself.
MR DU TOIT: That is correct, yes.
MR VAN DER MERWE: For that purpose you then worked with personnel of the TRC, in the preparation of your application for amnesty.
MR DU TOIT: That is correct.
MR VAN DER MERWE: It is a person Chris McAdam?
MR DU TOIT: That is correct.
MR VAN DER MERWE: The position that you held during this incident was the Commander of the Mechanical Unit or the Technical that fell under the Head Office of the Security Police.
MR DU TOIT: That is correct.
MR VAN DER MERWE: At the stage of the Khanya House incident, both the Kok brothers, Japie and Kobus Kok resorted under you and worked directly under your command, is that correct?
MR DU TOIT: That is correct.
MR VAN DER MERWE: And just to clarify it, Mr Paul Hattingh who already testified, worked in a different section or leg of the Technical Unit and you stood opposing each other and not under each other?
MR DU TOIT: No, Mr Chairperson, Mr Hattingh was not part of the Technical Unit, he was part of the Bomb Disposal Unit.
MR VAN DER MERWE: I'm sorry. But you were not under his command structure?
MR DU TOIT: No, I wasn't.
MR VAN DER MERWE: Your application then appears on page 313 of the documents. In this application I would like to make it very clear that you yourself dealt with the technical aspects in the police and did not deal with information gathering or operation authorisation or verifications, is that correct?
MR DU TOIT: Yes.
MR VAN DER MERWE: In this regard, your unit was mainly applied as a support unit that assisted some of the other units who operated in the field.
MR DU TOIT: That is correct.
MR VAN DER MERWE: You mention in this application that you were then approached, that you tasked Japie and Kobus Kok to assist with this specific operation for which you apply for amnesty.
MR DU TOIT: That is correct.
MR VAN DER MERWE: You yourself were not involved, as I said, in the planning or preparation of this operation, is that correct?
MR DU TOIT: Also not with the physical execution thereof, that's correct.
MR VAN DER MERWE: So your involvement in the operation was the fact that you tasked the two members working under you to assist in this operation.
MR DU TOIT: That is correct.
MR VAN DER MERWE: Did you at any stage know about Khanya House before this incident?
MR DU TOIT: Very superficially, yes, in terms of possible political involvement. If I could just correct myself, in terms of a possible threat that can come from that side, I was not kept up to date with the finer details or particulars of what occurred there.
MR VAN DER MERWE: In this matter, after you received the request from Mr de Kock that they had to assist, you verified that this was an instruction that was authorised on a higher level and that this was a command that was given, is that correct?
MR DU TOIT: That is correct.
MR VAN DER MERWE: And in your application you do not mention who you spoke to, but Mr Hattingh already testified that he was of the opinion that he discussed it with you. Will you agree with that?
MR DU TOIT: Mr Chairperson, I will agree with that, but at that stage when I compiled this document I was not kept up to date about the Commander of the Bomb Disposal Unit, I didn't know who he was at that stage, but I do agree that it could have been Mr Hattingh.
MR VAN DER MERWE: Mr McIntyre has already testified here that he gave the instruction for this operation, and you do not have a problem with this because you do not know who gave the instruction when you took part in it, is that correct?
MR DU TOIT: Yes, at that stage somebody could have mentioned it to me, but I have no recollection of it.
MR VAN DER MERWE: Did they mention to you what the aspects of this operation would be?
MR DU TOIT: It came down to the damaging of an infrastructure, the planning and the logistics around it was not known to me.
MR VAN DER MERWE: You do however confirm that you regarded this instruction and your participation as an instruction from Head Office, and that it was carried out as part of the struggle, as you set out on page 315 and 316, which is your political motivation. ...(transcriber's interpretation)
MR DU TOIT: That is correct, yes.
MR VAN DER MERWE: You yourself were never involved in the verification or the collection of information surrounding the decision to execute this operation, is that correct?
MR DU TOIT: That is correct.
MR VAN DER MERWE: You then also confirm the contents of your application as correct and truthful.
MR DU TOIT: I confirm it, Chairperson.
MR VAN DER MERWE: Thank you, Mr Chair.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VAN DER MERWE
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr van der Merwe. Mr Hattingh?
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR HATTINGH: Thank you, Mr Chairman.
Mr du Toit, can I refer you to page 313 of your application. Under the heading Khanya House you say that:
"In the above-mentioned operations members of my personnel were tasked to assist in a covert offensive operation launched against a press and living quarters of a Catholic church in Pretoria central. Information indicated that both facilities were used in the promotion of the objectives of the liberation movements and in the struggle against the government and the people of the Republic."
Then I would also like to refer you to page 316 of your statement. Once again under (b), the third paragraph you say that:
"Khanya House consisted of living quarters and a press that were both used to promote the liberation organisations in their struggle against the Republic, by providing accommodation to exiles as well as the printing of pamphlets, banners and other literature in the undermining of the government and its supporters."
Where did you get that information from?
MR DU TOIT: Mr Chairperson, I cannot specifically say where I got this information from, but what I know is that it was a general perception that I had with regard to the living quarters and the press. At this stage and even then when I compiled this document, I was not up to date with what the buildings were on that premises. It could be that I was influenced by the reports in the media and the information that you heard and that may have influenced me to make this statement, but there was the perception that there was negative activities at that premises.
MR HATTINGH: Did you know that during the operation in which this building was set alight, that there were people sleeping in the building? Did you hear about that after the operation?
MR DU TOIT: Yes, I did, I think it was also mentioned in the media.
MR HATTINGH: And before the operation when they came to ask you for assistance, were you given any information concerning activists, or maybe if I can use your words, that accommodation was provided to exiles, as you call them? Was that information made known to you?
MR DU TOIT: Mr Chairperson, no I cannot place it or that I heard it from a specific individual or some authority, I'm not quite sure about that aspect. I do accept that what happened afterwards, that this could have influenced me, what was mentioned in the press or media.
MR HATTINGH: Is this now the statement concerning the living quarters?
MR DU TOIT: Yes.
MR HATTINGH: Did they tell you when you were approached for assistance, that the instructions were to damage to destroy this building?
MR DU TOIT: Yes, definite instructions were given that the building and especially the press had to be damaged. ...(transcriber's interpretation)
MR HATTINGH: Was there a possibility, or did they mention to you that there is a possibility that people will be in the building when they attacked this house?
MR DU TOIT: Mr Chairperson, no, I think at that stage the information that I cannot verify at this stage and that also came from a different source, I was not an information or intelligence person, and the information indicated that at that stage there will not be people in that building.
MR HATTINGH: Can I just ask you, were you an applicant in the Khotso House incident?
MR DU TOIT: Yes, I was.
MR HATTINGH: And in the Cosatu House incident?
MR DU TOIT: No, Mr Chairperson.
MR HATTINGH: At the Khotso House incident, were there any people in the building when it was blown up?
MR DU TOIT: No, Mr Chairperson, the information that I had at that stage, and in both cases I do mention it in my application, was that all preparations were made that there would be no loss of life or trauma as a result of the attack.
MR HATTINGH: Do you also say it with regards to Khanya House?
MR DU TOIT: Yes, in both cases.
MR HATTINGH: And you just focused my attention to it.
MR DU TOIT: I'm referring to page 314, the top paragraph
"I was therefore sure that it was not done in our own interests, but it was done to prevent any personal trauma."
MR HATTINGH: Was this mentioned to you before?
MR DU TOIT: Yes.
MR HATTINGH: And in Khotso House it also then seemed to be the case.
MR DU TOIT: That is correct.
MR HATTINGH: Was that, according to you, an attack on a building and not an attack directed at people? ...(transcriber's interpretation)
MR DU TOIT: Yes, definitely not directed to the people.
MR HATTINGH: Thank you, Mr Chairperson, I've got no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR HATTINGH
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Hattingh.
MR NEL: Thank you, Chairperson, Nel on record, I have no questions.
NO QUESTIONS BY MR NEL
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Wagener.
MR WAGENER: Jan Wagener, Mr Chairman, no questions.
NO QUESTIONS BY MR WAGENER
MR BUNN: Steven Bunn, Mr Chairman, no questions thank you.
NO QUESTIONS BY MR BUNN
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Joubert?
MR JOUBERT: I have no questions, thank you Mr Chair.
NO QUESTIONS BY MR JOUBERT
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Are you starting with yourself or Mr Lamey?
MR DU PLESSIS: I'm not sure which one, Mr Chair. I have no questions on behalf of either or us, thank you Mr Chairperson.
NO QUESTIONS BY MR DU PLESSIS
NO QUESTIONS BY MR LAMEY
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Cornelius?
MR CORNELIUS: I've got no questions, thank you Mr Chair.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Ms Cambanis?
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS CAMBANIS: Thank you, Chair.
Sir, did I understand that the instruction was not given to you by Mr Hattingh?
MR DU TOIT: That is correct, yes.
MS CAMBANIS: And it was that he needed assistance from your department, is that correct?
MR DU TOIT: That's correct, Chairperson.
MS CAMBANIS: To do what?
MR DU TOIT: Mr Chairperson, there were certain - we had certain expertise at this unit where I worked and in this case and in many others, it was around the access or the penetration of a building, that it was done in such a way that nobody would find out afterwards that there would be - if people were in the surrounding area. We had the expertise to pick certain locks, if I may use the English, to do it also on a professional way and it was specially for this then that we were tasked for.
MS CAMBANIS: And this kind of expertise, the chaps at Vlakplaas would have this kind of expertise?
MR DU TOIT: Mr Chairperson, some of the people there also underwent certain training. But if you allow me the following statement, I think most of the expertise fell under the Technical Unit.
MS CAMBANIS: Sorry, but they did have amongst their members, certain people who had undergone the courses and were capable of performing this task.
MR DU TOIT: Yes, with limited knowledge.
MS CAMBANIS: And then Sir, was it your decision to instruct the Kok brothers?
MR DU TOIT: That is correct, I was approached to assist in this regard and then they also indicated to me, or explained to me that this was an authorised operation that was sanctioned from Head Office. I approached these members to support this operation.
MS CAMBANIS: Sorry, that's Mr Hattingh that explained to you that this is an authorised operation?
MR DU TOIT: That is correct.
MS CAMBANIS: No-one else was there during this instruction to you?
MR DU TOIT: Mr Chairperson, as I testified earlier on, I could not even recall who the person was, I just made the assumption and if Mr Hattingh says he was with me or there with me, I'd agree with him.
MS CAMBANIS: Thank you. Amongst your staff, were there more people than the Kok bothers that could have carried out this task? Did you have several people that could have done this?
MR DU TOIT: No, Mr Chairperson, I did not, they were the only two.
MS CAMBANIS: That was the two specialists in this area available?
MR DU TOIT: They were the two best men I had, yes.
MS CAMBANIS: And after the operation, did they report back to you?
MR DU TOIT: I think the next day they did inform me about what happened there.
MS CAMBANIS: Do you know what task they had been given for that evening? Not the evening, the incident.
MR DU TOIT: Mr Chairperson, no, I was not present at this reconnaissance or observation or the tasking thereof, I only made them available for the operation, I do not have any other knowledge concerning it.
MS CAMBANIS: You made them available to who? To Mr Hattingh?
MR DU TOIT: To Mr Hattingh, yes.
MS CAMBANIS: What did they report to you the next day, or whenever it was?
MR DU TOIT: Mr Chairperson, I now have to make use of the recollection that I have of that time, I've got limited recollection of it. They just told me that they penetrated this place, that they used petrol to set alight this place and the press was damaged and the building next door, whatever that may have been.
MS CAMBANIS: They said they had used petrol, the Kok brothers?
MR DU TOIT: No, they did not say that they used it, they just said that petrol was used there at the scene.
MS CAMBANIS: And at that time did you know that people had been trapped in the building during the incident?
MR DU TOIT: No, Mr Chairperson, I think we read about it in the media. I did not know about it.
MS CAMBANIS: And did you have any discussion about that? With the brothers Kok?
MR DU TOIT: I do not have a recollection, no. Possibly we did talk about it, but I cannot specifically recall it.
MS CAMBANIS: And what were your thoughts when you read in the press that people had been trapped inside?
MR DU TOIT: Well Mr Chairperson, it was not the intention and I do accept that the information was not correct concerning this aspect. As I said, our task was from the beginning that nobody had to be injured in the process.
MS CAMBANIS: Yes. Sir, when you completed your application form you were quite clear in your own mind, isn't it, that it was the residence of a Catholic Church in Pretoria central?
MR DU TOIT: That is correct, yes.
MS CAMBANIS: And that is the same certainty that you had at the time that you instructed the Kok brothers to assist Mr Hattingh?
MR DU TOIT: No, Mr Chairperson, that is not what I testified. I think I mentioned earlier on that it could have influenced me when I compiled this document, that the reports or articles in the media refreshed my memory about ... corrections ... and I tried to explain it as best as possible.
MS CAMBANIS: If at the time that you gave the instruction you thought it was the residence of the Catholic Church, would you still have assisted Mr Hattingh?
MR DU TOIT: Definitely not if there were people's lives in danger.
MS CAMBANIS: Mr du Toit, where in your application does it say that "I did not know at the time that I gave the instructions that it was not occupied", or anything like that? Where does it say in your application that you didn't know it was a residence?
MR DU TOIT: Mr Chairperson, it does not appear in my application, but if you see what I'm applying for amnesty for, you will see that it was for the damaging of property and not for attempt to murder. I was under the impression that during the execution of this incident, that it was not directed towards people but against the infrastructure.
MS CAMBANIS: But why do you not mention that in your application? You use the word specifically, "resident".
MR DU TOIT: That is correct.
MS CAMBANIS: And your application is quite lengthy.
MR DU TOIT: My whole application is very long, but concerning this specific incident it's actually very short. I do not think it's very long, I think it's about a page and a half and as I mentioned to you earlier on, I attempted to give as thorough as possible explanation of what happened.
MS CAMBANIS: When Sir, did you decide that your perception that it was the residence of the Catholic Church, had been informed by the subsequent press reports? When did you make that decision?
MR DU TOIT: I did not make such a decision, I just mentioned that it is a possibility. I cannot say with certainty that it is so.
MS CAMBANIS: Thank you, Sir. Thanks, Chair.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS CAMBANIS
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Ms Patel?
MS PATEL: Thank you, Honourable Chairperson, I have no questions for this witness.
NO QUESTIONS BY MS PATEL
CHAIRPERSON: Advocate Bosman?
ADV BOSMAN: I have no questions, thank you Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Advocate Sandi?
ADV SANDI: Thank you, Chair.
Mr du Toit, I understood you - this is in your evidence-in-chief now, I understood you to say that all preparations were made to ensure that there would be no loss of life, but if your information was that there were no people in this building, then the possibility of endangering any person's life does not even begin to arise.
MR DU TOIT: Mr Chairperson, I just referred to it as an umbrella concept, as it was in the case of some of the other incidents where some of my staff were involved. It was a prerequisite that they had to do everything possible and it was not just for them, but it was also the overall command of the operation, that it was not accompanied by any personal trauma or loss of life. In this specific incident I cannot tell you that it was different, it is a general rule.
ADV SANDI: And before the execution of this operation, did you know of any surveillance that was conducted?
MR DU TOIT: Mr Chairperson, I personally was not involved in it, I cannot testify about it, I do not know anything about it.
ADV SANDI: Now when you say "information indicated that there would be no people in the building", what information are you referring to? Who did this information come from?
MR DU TOIT: The briefing that I received, whether it was from Mr Hattingh or members of his staff, it was probably contained in that and that is the reason why I mentioned it.
ADV SANDI: Before you drew up your application, did you have any opportunity to discuss the incident with one of the applicants or any person who was involved in the incident?
MR DU TOIT: Mr Chairperson, no, it is a bit difficult to explain it on a technical level, but I can just mention that my specific application was submitted a week or ten days before the cut-off date and the instructions of the Commission were that I must not do it with the assistance of a legal representative, that I must not liaise with anybody else, so I compiled this by myself and this is my own input done only by myself.
ADV SANDI: Yes, and after compiling and submitting your application to the Amnesty Committee, did you ever have an opportunity to discuss the matter with your co-applicants, by way of refreshing your memory as to what could have happened at the time?
MR DU TOIT: Mr Chairperson, the people I could have discussed it with were probably people of my staff, it couldn't have really helped me a lot, I do not thin that we could really add anything more than what I've already put down on paper, concerning my involvement in this.
ADV SANDI: Thank you, Mr du Toit. Thank you, Chair.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Advocate Sandi? Any re-examination?
MR VAN DER MERWE: No re-examination, thank you Mr Chair.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr du Toit, you are excused.
WITNESS EXCUSED
MR VAN DER MERWE: Thank you, Mr Chairman, that is the evidence on behalf of Mr du Toit. I do not envisage to lead any further evidence. The next witness in this matter will then be Jakob Francois Kok who will be testifying in Afrikaans, he will take the oath.
