DECISION
This is an application for amnesty for the abduction, assault and killing of an unknown person, respectively at Mamelodi and near Pienaarsrivier, during or about January to April 1986 and the subsequent destruction of his body by the use of explosives. Brig Jan Hattingh Cronje (Cronje), who at the time was head of C-Section and overall commander of the Applicants, applied for and was granted amnesty for this incident by another Panel of the Committee (AC 0031/99). His testimony included that at all material times related to the incident as far as it relates to the present Applicants, he had been in command, that they had acted under his instructions and his presence.
The Committee does not deem it necessary to further dwell on the question of whether the Applicants had acted with a political objective, flowing from the decision of AC 0031/99 and the provisions of Section 20 of the Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act 34 of 1995, (the Act) more particularly the provisions of Section 20(2)(b) and Section 20(3)(e), and from the fact that each of the Applicants confirmed in their testimony that they had acted on the instructions and in the presence of Cronje, this requirement of the Act is satisfied.
The only question that the Committee therefore has to consider is that of Section 20(1)(c), that is, whether the Applicants have all made a full disclosure of all facts relevant and material to the incident.
The facts which are common cause to the Applicants can briefly be summarised as follows:
An unknown member of MK (the Deceased) had been abducted and detained at Compol Building, headquarters of the South African Police. None of the present Applicants had any involvement in nor knowledge of this abduction and unlawful detention prior to being instructed by Cronje to assist in an operation with him. The purpose of the operation was to take the Deceased to Mamelodi to point out specific MK safe houses where other MK members might be present. They were all armed in order to enter these houses to be pointed out and effect arrests.
The Deceased was loaded into a minibus at Compol Building from where they departed for Mamelodi. They drove through parts of the township as guided by the Deceased. On occasion he directed them to double back on the same roads but failed to point out any specific house, saying that he could not recognise the specific premises he was looking for. This continued for about 45 minutes, the pattern repeating itself. The 2nd and 5th Applicants, sitting in the back seat of the minibus with the Deceased between them, started to assault him, hitting him with fists and elbows, but without getting any results. They stopped in an open veld on the border of Mamelodi and the 5th Applicant started to intensify the assault. Cronje verbally threatened the Deceased. They still failed to secure the co-operation of the Deceased. It was decided to travel to a more open and deserted area where they could continue the interrogation with more aggression. They then departed from Mamelodi, followed the old Pretoria Warmbaths road towards Pienaarsrivier, turned in a Westerly direction on the Saagkuilsdift road to Lebomogomo road, approximately 15 kilometres from the turn-off. It was a gravel road, not frequently used and quiet at the time, approximately 23h00 at night. The road was straight in both directions and oncoming traffic would be spotted at quite a distance. The minibus was opened at the back and the Deceased further questioned and assaulted by the 5th Applicant, ending in his strangulation and collapse. None of the Applicants could say whether the Deceased at that stage was dead or merely unconscious. Cronje ordered the 1st and 2nd Applicants to prepare a landmine which had been in a sportsbag in the minibus, which none of the Applicants had been aware of until that moment, and to blow up the body of the Deceased, which they did, using a cap fuse as a delay mechanism. They all got into the minibus, saw the explosion and returned to Pretoria.
It was further common cause that there had been more persons in the minibus but different persons were implicated by various Applicants and the identity of those implicated by some, denied by others. The Committee did however not get the impression that any person was being wilfully wrongly implicated or protected.
The above then, as has already been said, is a brief summary of the testimony which is common cause to all the Applicants.
There were many discrepancies and contradictions which the Committee does not regard to be material. These include:
"That the 1st and 2nd Applicants remember that the minibus departed from Pretoria to Erasmia, some 20 kilometres to the West of Pretoria to the home of Cronje where Cronje and the 2nd Applicant boarded the vehicle, while the 3rd and 4th Applicants have no such recollection, being of the opinion that they departed directly to Mamelodi on the East of Pretoria, all having assembled at Compol Building.
There were conflicting memories as to whether the 5th Applicant had joined the group at a road house in Silverton or at the Police Station; as to whether the Deceased was taken out of the vehicle at Mamelodi or not; whether the explosion near Pienaarsrivier was at the front or the back of the minibus; the identity of others who accompanied the group etc.
As has been said, the Committee does not regard these as material issues and they can be explained by the lapse of time resulting in memory losses and faulty reconstructions. Another aspect the Committee had to consider is the fact that the 5th Applicant in his original application did not disclose his part in the strangulation of the Deceased. Only a few weeks before the hearing took place and responding the enquiries by the Amnesty Committee, did he file a supplementary affidavit disclosing these events.
The Committee is satisfied that the information so disclosed relates o the same incident amnesty was applied for without introducing any crime that amnesty had not been applied for.
Secondly, the Committee is satisfied that the amnesty has to be considered on the facts disclosed as at the time of the hearing and that the application should therefore not fail merely because a full disclosure was not made at the time of the original application.
A final observation i that the course of events strongly suggests the possibility that Cronje might all along have entertained or even decided the killing of the Deceased as the end result of the operation. This would explain the presence in the minibus of the sportsbag with the landmine as well as the matter of fact way in which he ordered the destruction of the body of the Deceased following his accidental, though foreseen, death. The 4th Applicant in fact testified that he at Mamelodi had already formed the distinct impression that the Deceased might be killed. The nature of the process of the Amnesty Committee's work will however leave this suggestion unanswered.
In the event the Committee is also satisfied that the Applicants have made a full disclosure as envisaged in the Act.
All the Applicants are accordingly GRANTED amnesty for their various acts related to abduction, assault and killing of the Deceased and the destruction of his body.
Since the identity of the Deceased could not be established, the Committee is unable to make a finding on the identity of the Deceased as a victim for referral to the Reparations and Rehabilitation Committee.
SIGNED AT CAPE TOWN ON THIS THE 28TH DAY OF MARCH 2001
JUDGE A WILSON
JUDGE R PILLAY
MR W MALAN
??
2
/...
/...
