DECISION
The Applicant has applied for amnesty in respect of a number of incidents most of which had been finalised at public hearings of the Amnesty Committee. The present matters are being dealt with in chambers. Applicant's personal circumstances and background as a member of the Security Branch of the former South African Police have been fully canvassed at the said hearings and will not be repeated herein. The specific incidents will be dealt with separately.
FALSE CLAIMS
According to Applicant's written amnesty application he submitted fraudulent claims on some occasions, although he indicates that this was not for personal gain. The money was apparently used to facilitate the work of the Security Police. Some of the money was, for example, applied to purchase tyres for vehicles utilised by the Security Police. On other occasions the money was used to entertain themselves. In addition, their commander, Colonel De Kock, also gave them small of money from time to time. Applicant also used some of the money to go out dining with his wife.
Having considered the matter, it is clear that the funds in question raised through fraudulent claims were not used for any activities directly associated with a political struggle. As such, the application does not comply with the requirements of the Act and amnesty is accordingly REFUSED.
WEAPONS
In the course of Applicant's activities while he was stationed at Vlakplaas during the period 1986 - 1991, he was involved in transporting arms and explosives from Ovamboland in Namibia to Vlakplaas. This happened on two occasions when all of the items were placed in the weapons store at Vlakplaas. On another occasion, Applicant assisted with testing home-made shotguns, on the instructions of his commander, Colonel Eugene de Kock. Apart from the fact that the weapons in question were moved on one occasion from Vlakplaas to another farm in the vicinity, Applicant has no knowledge of the eventual fate of the arms and explosives.
Having considered the matter, it is clear that the activities in question were not unlawful. The application accordingly does not disclose any offence and in the result amnesty is REFUSED.
DATED AT CAPE TOWN THIS 31ST DAY OF MAY 2001
??
2
/...
/...
