MR POLSEN: May it please you Mr Chairman, my name is Graham Polsen of the firm Ruth & Wessels and I appear on behalf of the applicant. May I ask that the applicant be sworn in if that is the custom here?

ADV DE JAGER: Mr Kendall, are you English or Afrikaans speaking?

MR KENDALL: Abraham Christoffel Kendall.

ABRAHAM CHRISTOFFEL KENDALL: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, please proceed.

EXAMINATION BY MR POLSEN: As it pleases you Chairperson. You will find that the application for amnesty is in Bundle 5, numbers 1, 2 and 3 and the supplementary application is a very important application.

Excuse me, it has been pointed out that this is the Bundle that is concerned with the KwaNdebele 9, so it should be Bundle 7. The applications you will find, are duplicated because my client has applied in a previous case, he has applied for amnesty with regard to the Cry Freedom matter. If you look at Bundle 7, the applications are numbered 5, 6 and supplementary is 7.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR POLSEN: In my reading of the documents I found that in one of the applications, a number of pages were missing and I have copied them, in case they are needed. I beg leave to hand them up. They are pages 3 - 9, both pages inclusive, and they deal mainly with the evidence, with the KwaNdebele 9, but it also deals with the Ntuli matter.

I therefore beg leave to hand them in to supplement the papers.

CHAIRPERSON: Please hand them in.

MR POLSEN: Thank you Mr Chair. Colonel, you have given evidence here before and you set out certain background evidence and you were present when Gen Joubert gave evidence and you were present when Gen Van der Merwe and Minister Vlok had given evidence, is that correct?

MR KENDALL: That is correct Chairperson.

MR POLSEN: Have you since read through that evidence, specifically that of Gen Van der Merwe?

MR KENDALL: Yes, I have Chairperson.

MR POLSEN: And you had the opportunity to read the Mortimer report, is that correct?

MR KENDALL: That is correct Chairperson.

MR POLSEN: And in your application dealing with the Piet Ntuli incident, on page 8, the hand-written 8, I am dealing with the wrong one, please excuse me Chairperson.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Mr Polsen, there are two applications which look identical to me, I tried to go through some of them word by word. I would request that you deal with the second application, because it is more legible. The other one is illegible.

MR POLSEN: In which Bundle?

CHAIRPERSON: Bundle 7.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Bundle 7.

MR POLSEN: Would you like me to deal with Bundle 7?

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Yes, if you could use that particular application and the paginated number in my Bundle, is 65. I don't know if you have the same Bundle and similarly paginated.

The pages that you have given us, are the pages that are contained in that particular application. There is no pages which is missing.

MR POLSEN: Yes, I would also like to refer you to the supplementary application, which actually deals with the matter more fully.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Yes.

MR POLSEN: I have Bundle 7 before me and I am at page 65. It doesn't seem as if our Bundles are numbered the same, although that is supplementary application, let me take you through to the typed portion, it is the same as the one that I have.

If you turn to page 70, the written 70, then you will have Piet Ntuli, KwaNdebele.

CHAIRPERSON: Right, we've got that.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: That is right.

MR POLSEN: I would like to start there.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes please.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Yes.

MR POLSEN: And I do not wish to belabour the record by referring to any other evidence which will deal with motive and the political condition and the order that was received - it is actually brought out here, so what we will basically be dealing with, will be the facts surrounding the Piet Ntuli matter.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Yes.

MR POLSEN: Otherwise I will be wasting a lot of your time.

Colonel, since 1982 you were the Branch Commander of the South African Police, the Security Branch of the South African Police at Bronkhorstspruit, is that correct?

MR KENDALL: That is correct Chairperson.

MR POLSEN: And in that capacity you rendered a service to the State of KwaNdebele, if I may call it that?

MR KENDALL: That is correct Chairperson.

MR POLSEN: Were you up to date with the political circumstances and the activities in that area at that time?

MR KENDALL: That is correct Chairperson.

MR POLSEN: Can you please explain to us in your own words what the struggles were, what were the viewpoints, the opposing viewpoints surrounding the existence of KwaNdebele since 1982, if you could just develop it as it had there?

MR KENDALL: Yes Chairperson, during 1984, 1985 there was much if I should say, development in the State of KwaNdebele, where Ekangala in Bronkhorstspruit was built up in the veld, and during 1984, 1985 it came to the fore that KwaNdebele would be an independent State.

I worked at grassroots level with the Ndebele's in KwaNdebele and I knew there was opposition to the idea of independence for KwaNdebele.

MR POLSEN: From whom was the opposition?

MR KENDALL: This was largely from the traditional leaders who felt that KwaNdebele, or the area that was set out for KwaNdebele, was not forefather property and the area that was appointed to them, could not be developed.

Along with that, it was evident from the struggle that the fact that the area which consisted of Sotho speakers, would be joined with the area of KwaNdebele or the independent State of KwaNdebele.

Many meetings were held in the Nutzi area against the incorporation of KwaNdebele.

MR POLSEN: Who was the Chief Minister at that time?

MR KENDALL: The Chief Minister was Mr Simon Skosana.

MR POLSEN: Did he have a cabinet?

MR KENDALL: Yes, he had a cabinet.

MR POLSEN: Did you know the members of the cabinet?

MR KENDALL: All the members of the cabinet were well known to me. At some stage, I met with them at a shooting range in Bronkhorstspruit, I attended meetings with them, I was at social functions with them.

MR POLSEN: Mr Piet Ntuli, was he one of those ministers?

MR KENDALL: Yes Chairperson, Piet Ntuli was the Minister of Interior Affairs.

MR POLSEN: Was he a leadership figure in the cabinet of KwaNdebele?

MR KENDALL: For the time period that I knew Mr Piet Ntuli, it was clear that he was a strong person in the cabinet. Some of the cabinet members spelt this out to me that Mr Ntuli was too strong for them. He was the power behind Skosana himself.

MR POLSEN: Can you explain what was the movement known as Mbukoto?

MR KENDALL: Chairperson, before the unrest started, I had known of the existence of the movement, Mbukoto. At that stage they focused on criminal matters that was not reported to the Police. They took the law into their own hands. Mbukoto means the stone that grinds? But they came to the fore after the unrest broke out.

MR POLSEN: Did Piet Ntuli play any part in Mbukoto?

MR KENDALL: Chairperson, it was clear to me that the strong man in the Mbukoto was Mr Piet Ntuli.

MR POLSEN: Would you then say that Piet Ntuli was the leader of a group of people who had taken to crime in their area, do you know of any offences committed by Mr Piet Ntuli?

MR KENDALL: I was aware of offences committed but I was not involved with the investigations itself.

MR POLSEN: What was the nature of these offences or crimes?

MR KENDALL: Chairperson, if I can recall correctly, at some stage there was a raid by the Security Police at his house, it was not his house at Siyabuswa, it was one of his farm houses, where stolen vehicles, and if I can recall correctly, mention was made of stolen weapons that was found in his ceiling.

MR POLSEN: Do you know if he had committed any murders or assaulted any people?

MR KENDALL: Much talk was heard of this. I was for example at Vlaklaagte where there was a shooting incident, where Mbukoto - or the information that was given to me, that it was a number of men who broke up a youth gathering and the shooting took place and some of the youths were killed, but I was not appointed to this investigation. A special investigation task team was appointed, but I could just mention that Mbukoto had without authorisation or co-operation from the Security Police, had their own roadblocks at night, they launched their own investigations.

It was really a movement that used intimidation and wanted to drive fear into the community.

MR POLSEN: Do you know what Mr Ntuli's attitude was towards the Nutzi area?

MR KENDALL: I can remember it was the Day of the Vow, where there was a large meeting at the Loskop Dam area against the incorporation of KwaNdebele. We were tasked to monitor this from a distance.

During this meeting, it broke up and the unrest started in the Nutzi area and the same evening, if I can recall correctly, it was a Sunday, the same evening the whole KwaNdebele cabinet were at the scene and were driving around in Nutzi. Piet Ntuli's brother, Sam, was armed. All their people were with them.

It seemed as if they were part of the Security Forces as they drove the crowd away. I know the Monday morning, when I arrived at the scene, there was about 30 persons who were arrested with Mbukoto and they had been assaulted badly. I arrived at a certain incident or scene where Piet Ntuli's brother, Sam, was sitting on one of the Nutzi people, and sitting with a gun against his head.

I think it was a member of the Army that pulled him off the person. So they really went out to victimise the inhabitants of Nutzi.

And they tried to intimidate them with their actions.

MR POLSEN: Did they want to incorporate Nutzi, what was their attitude, the Mbukoto?

MR KENDALL: They were for the incorporation of Nutzi, Nutzi was far more developed, it had its own hospital, Philadelphia, there were farms and if I recall correctly, Nutzi was a prosperous area.

MR POLSEN: How did the inhabitants act against the actions of Mbukoto?

MR KENDALL: There was opposition to this independence and against this incorporation of Nutzi from the traditional leaders, to such an extent that two meetings were called at what we would call the King's house, Mapot's house and the second meeting took place on the 14th of May 1986 if I can recall correctly.

There were plus minus 10 000 people, if not more.

ADV DE JAGER: Mr Kendall, is it correct if we should summarise that he had a reign of terror in the area and the local inhabitants, he was hated by the inhabitants and the liberation movements?

MR KENDALL: That is correct Chairperson.

MR POLSEN: Thank you Chairperson, let us take it from there. This was the situation in KwaNdebele when you were in charge, did you have any plans to stabilise this area?

MR KENDALL: That was my task Chairperson. In my statement you will also see that I believed in exploring all avenues. I discussed this with the cabinet, I discussed it with the traditional leaders, I had a good relationship with Prince James Mahlangu.

At some stage, I called in the help of a Catholic Priest. They had a mission at Tweefontein and I knew that the youth met there in the evenings. Prince James addressed them there, this was during the school boycotts and this Priest, Shaun O'Leary was also detained at Groblersdal by the Security Police. I immediately realised when I saw the papers that there was no case against this man.

I called Headquarters. We could not release people ourselves, we had to get permission. I put my case to Headquarters, I received my letter of release and I built up a good relationship with him. Through him I had contact with the youth and the comrades and as well with Prince James, who was seen as the leader of the comrades.

And then with the traditionalists who sat in the cabinet, I had contact from the traditional side and even at cabinet meetings, at some stage Piet Ntuli swore at me before all the people at the meeting, because I did not put my whole weight behind the cabinet and their ideology of independence.

MR POLSEN: Did you report this to the line of command, to the top, to whom did you report?

MR KENDALL: My immediate Commander in Pretoria was Brigadier Jack Cronje.

MR POLSEN: At any stage did you attend a meeting or were you aware of a meeting that was held by Brigadier Jack Cronje and other persons in Pretoria?

MR KENDALL: I was not, I did not attend such meetings.

MR POLSEN: But were you aware that such meetings were held?

MR KENDALL: I am aware of it now, but at that time, I could not say that I attended any of them, or I was aware of this, but we were under a Joint Management Board.

CHAIRPERSON: When you talk about such meetings, what meetings are we talking about?

MR KENDALL: Chairperson, there was a Joint Management Centre, a JMC, that we called it. It was divided into mini JMC's.

At this JMC it was the Security Forces, the Army, the Police, National Intelligence, I think the Department of Education and Training was also part of the JMC.

MR POLSEN: Were you at any stage aware of the fact that Piet Ntuli was identified as a target?

MR KENDALL: No Chairperson.

MR POLSEN: Can you explain to us, explain what you handed in as a report to Brigadier Jack Cronje?

MR KENDALL: I can just mention that at some stage I arranged with Brigadier Jack Cronje that I met with the traditional leaders, or there were members of the legislature and Cornelius was a member of the cabinet, that I took them in secrecy to Voortrekkerhoogte, to meet with Brigadier Jack Cronje and I think Cornelius and Andries were well known to me, and five or six others that we had a meeting with, where Brigadier Hans Moller, he is a Major General today, he was the Chairperson of the JMC and those traditional leaders spelt out the reign of terror that Piet Ntuli had in the area and spelt out the criminal activities that he was busying himself with and nobody was acting against him.

Brigadier Moller said that he would pay attention to this incident and the same evening, I went to Mr Nico Prinsloo, who was then the Chairperson of the National Party at Bronkhorstspruit. He said he would send a memorandum to Min Chris Heunis. I helped him with the drawing up of this memorandum, and I know it was sent to the Central Government, I don't know what happened to it.

MR POLSEN: Very well, if we could return to - or explain to us what was your involvement in the death of Piet Ntuli and how did it come about that you were involved there? You say that you are aware that he was, you were not aware that he was targeted?

MR KENDALL: With Brigadier Cronje, my point of view was that Piet Ntuli had to be removed from the scene and I can put it that I did not say that he had to be killed. I believed that Piet Ntuli had to be removed from the scene, because there were many criminal complaints against him and if proper investigation was launched, we would have had another amnesty application.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: May I interpose Mr Polsen. What do you mean when you say, you stated that Piet Ntuli had to be removed from the scene?

MR KENDALL: As a political leader he had to be removed from the scene.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: And how would that have affected his participation within Mbukoto? If he had been removed from his position as a political leader, would that have had any impact at all on his participation within Mbukoto?

MR KENDALL: I believe so Chairperson. If one had to look from a legal vantage point to the investigation of his criminal activities, he would have been removed from Mbukoto or his influence would have been removed from Mbukoto.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Are you saying there was a link between the cabinet, are you saying there was a link between the cabinet in KwaNdebele and Mbukoto as an organisation?

MR KENDALL: Chairperson, except for a few exceptions, the KwaNdebele cabinet was Mbukoto.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Thank you.

MR POLSEN: Colonel, will you please get to the 29th of July.

ADV DE JAGER: I think that is paragraph 8, if you could just follow the application reasonably, it will facilitate our following of the application. You can also simply confirm certain paragraphs, it is not necessary for you to give a verbal rendition of everything.

MR POLSEN: Will you please look at paragraph 8, the 29th of July 1986, describe to us how that day began for you and what you had on your agenda and how things took their course?

MR KENDALL: On that specific day, a Security Branch had been established in Siyabuswa, but it did not have any staff yet. Lieutenant Flip de Beer would have been the Commander of the Security Branch.

He was stationed in Soweto and on that particular day, I went with him through the area and introduced him to the people. In Nutzi for example, Chief Matebe and the others, we went to the government offices that morning, we drove in and out a few times that day, because we couldn't find any ministers.

That afternoon we had lunch at the Bundu Inn Hotel.

ADV DE JAGER: Colonel, we would like to get to the event and what this has to do with the murder. Where you had lunch that afternoon, is of no relevance for your amnesty application.

MR KENDALL: I understand. We drove around in the KwaNdebele and Nutzi area that day. At approximately four o'clock that afternoon, I took Lieutenant De Beer back to the Siyabuswa police station, to his vehicle.

Opposite the government offices, I saw a white kombi, a Hi-Ace. People were braaiing meat, I recognised them as Jack Cronje, Jacques Hechter and Jaap van Jaarsveld. We stopped there by them, there were two other people who were unknown to me at that stage. They were introduced to me as Andries Oosthuizen and Deon Gouws from the Murder and Robbery Unit.

Enquiries were made about Piet Ntuli and I assumed that he was being sought after a criminal charge, because these were members of the Murder and Robbery Unit that were present.

At that stage I did not know where Ntuli was. Someone then mentioned that Ntuli had been at Siyabuswa earlier that day, because they had seen him at a petrol station. De Beer and I departed a little while later and I took him to the government offices.

We went back to the government offices and I checked to see if Ntuli's motor vehicle would be there. According to my knowledge, all cabinet members drove silver grey Mercedes Benz government cars.

However, there was no vehicle on his official parking spot, and I took De Beer back to the Police Headquarters in Siyabuswa.

I then decided to return to Cronje and the others, but first went back to the government offices to see if Ntuli had not returned to his office in the meantime. Upon my arrival at Cronje and the others, I was informed that Ntuli was at the Chief Minister's house.

I must just mention that on this particular day I was also looking for the Chief Minister, but was told at his office that he was in Johannesburg for a medical examination. I decided to go to the Chief Minister's residence because it was not far from where we had found these persons.

I wanted to discuss the issue of unrest in KwaNdebele, the school boycotts and the traditional leaders, that we wanted to get together with the cabinet members in order to achieve stability in KwaNdebele.

Cronje accompanied me, seeing as he proposed that I should introduce him to the Chief Minister, because he had not met him before. We climbed into our vehicle. I must also mention that I spent quite some time chatting to them, we had a few drinks.

On the way to the residence, I saw Hechter laying in the back of the vehicle, on the floor. I did not see him climb into the vehicle, it was only the three of us in the vehicle, on the way to the Chief Minister, me, Cronje and Hechter.

In front of the Chief Minister's house, there were a number of vehicles parked. Cronje indicated a brownish coloured Toyota Cressida to me as Ntuli's vehicle and instructed me to park as close to the vehicle as possible.

I parked next to the vehicle and climbed out.

MR POLSEN: Was Cronje your immediate superior?

MR KENDALL: He was my immediate Commander in Pretoria. When I climbed out there was a security guard at the vehicles. I walked through the gate of the house and I saw another security guard in the shadow of the trees and the shrubbery, who greeted me.

I went into the house and Brigadier Cronje waited at the gate. I do not know what Hechter was doing at that stage. I went in to the Chief Minister, we had a conversation and we had tea. After a while, he got up and we walked out and Brigadier Cronje, when he saw both of us approaching, moved through the gate and I introduced him to the Chief Minister.

They chatted for a while and after that Cronje and I left. Directly after that, we departed to where the others were waiting. Under way, just after we had left the fenced area of the Minister's residence, Cronje asked Hechter if he had managed, upon which the latter mentioned, answered in the affirmative.

I suspected that a bomb may have been involved at that stage, but I wasn't certain. All the time while Hechter was in the back of the vehicle, I suspected that dirty tricks may have been involved.

Yes, I mean Hechter that was in the back of the vehicle, I had a suspicion that they were busy with dirty tricks, but I definitely didn't know that it was a bomb. When we returned to the group of people that remained behind, that is Oosthuizen, Van Jaarsveld and Gouws, for the first time, it was told to me that it was a bomb which had been specially manufactured for a Toyota Cressida.

I was not informed who had manufactured it or where on the vehicle, it had been placed. I can only remember that Oosthuizen and Gouws, one of them had a switch in their hands. I am trained in demolitions, one of them had a switch and I wouldn't say that they were arguing, I said in my application that they were arguing, but they had an exchange of words regarding who would activate the bomb. That is the last that I heard.

MR POLSEN: At that stage you were next to a kombi outside the fence of the Minister's residence?

MR KENDALL: That is correct.

MR POLSEN: And after you heard this discussion, did you remain there or did you depart?

MR KENDALL: No, I departed for Bronkhorstspruit.

MR POLSEN: Were you alone or was anybody with you?

MR KENDALL: I was alone.

MR POLSEN: What happened next?

MR KENDALL: On the way I wasn't very far out of Siyabuswa, I received a radio message that a bomb had exploded at the Siyabuswa Police station. I immediately realised that this had something to do with the car bomb.

My fear was that it was indeed the Siyabuswa Police station.

MR POLSEN: What did you do then?

MR KENDALL: I turned around and went back. When I arrived upon the scene, there were already members from the Security Forces that had cordoned off the area. Brigadier Daan van Wyk, who was at that stage in control of Special Investigations in KwaNdebele, came to me and asked me if I knew Ntuli, because they suspected that he had been killed in an explosion.

CHAIRPERSON: Can you just stop there a little bit. You talk about Hechter being up to some dirty tricks and you suspected that he might be busy with a bomb. You haven't told us whose vehicle he was going to put that bomb on, or you haven't told us whether he had succeeded in putting a bomb under any vehicle. What had happened?

MR POLSEN: Mr Chairman, I think that the evidence was that at the time, he wasn't aware of the fact that a bomb would be planted. When he returned and came to the kombi, he only realised that there was a bomb, because there was a discussion relating to who would activate that particular bomb.

CHAIRPERSON: Planted where?

MR POLSEN: I don't think the witness testified that he knew where, but he only suspected then, at that particular point in time, his suspicion arose.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, in other words, up to that stage, he did not know that the bomb was being planted under Ntuli's car?

MR POLSEN: That is correct.

MR KENDALL: That is correct Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, proceed.

MR POLSEN: After you received the report on the radio, did you then turn around and return to the Police station?

MR KENDALL: That is correct. When I arrived upon the scene of the explosion, Brigadier Daan van Wyk asked if I knew Ntuli and I said yes. He said that he suspected that it was Ntuli that had been killed in a car bomb explosion.

He then took me to the remainder of a very mutilated corps, only the person's head and left shoulder was unharmed but I immediately recognised it as Ntuli.

At that stage, someone came to me with a number plate, it was KNA555 and he said that this was definitely Ntuli, that he knew Ntuli's car. I undertook the necessary investigation, it was dark that night, between thorn bushes and shrubbery. I took over the scene because I was also the Demolitions Expert in the area.

I asked that the area be cordoned off until the following morning, upon which we would be able to undertake a proper investigation. From the scene, I went to the Police Headquarters in Siyabuswa, where I found Brigadier Chris van Niekerk, the then Commissioner of the KwaNdebele Police as well as Gerrie van der Merwe, the Commissioner General of KwaNdebele, and Cronje, Van Wyk and many other Officers and persons.

MR POLSEN: And the investigation took its usual course after that, by means of the South African Police, is that correct?

MR KENDALL: No, I will just explain there as well. I told the Officers that the area had been cordoned off for the evening, until the following morning.

But that following morning early, I was at home in Bronkhorstspruit, I received a call from Cronje, that the KwaNdebele cabinet, that very same evening, had contacted the Central Government and said that I was responsible for the bomb explosion, and that according to Brigadier Cronje, I had received an instruction from Gen Van der Merwe that I should not enter KwaNdebele.

MR POLSEN: So you were suspected of the murder that very same evening? Did you return to the KwaNdebele area?

MR KENDALL: Yes. Two days later Gen Stan Schutte contacted me and told me to come out and investigate the matter. The following day, he found me in the office, it was early that morning. He and two members of the Brixton Murder and Robbery Unit went with me to Siyabuswa.

I showed them everywhere where I had moved about in the Siyabuswa complex that day, where I had been that day, that evening. Where I had disembarked from my vehicle, where my vehicle had been parked, where I had - I went with Schutte to the Minister's front door. The same black woman who had opened the door for us on that day, opened the door for us that morning, took us to the scene of the explosion.

MR POLSEN: But since then, have you returned to Siyabuswa?

MR KENDALL: No, never again.

MR POLSEN: And according to the general, or the popular opinion, were you the murderer of Ntuli or are you suspected thereof?

MR KENDALL: Yes, for the past ten years until it became known to the Commission who was also responsible for the incident, throughout the entire Bronkhorstspruit and KwaNdebele area, I was the prime suspect.

MR POLSEN: And if you will just refer to the other paragraphs of your application, on page 75, I will like to refer you to paragraph 18, do you confirm the correctness thereof?

MR KENDALL: Yes, I confirm this as correct.

MR POLSEN: And so also paragraph 19 until the end of your application, paragraph 22, everything that has to do with the Ntuli incident?

MR KENDALL: Yes, I confirm that.

MR POLSEN: Have you also read the judgement of the Amnesty Committee with regard to the application of Hechter and Cronje?

MR KENDALL: Yes, I have.

MR POLSEN: And do you agree with that decision?

MR KENDALL: Yes, I do.

MR POLSEN: Do you confirm it?

MR KENDALL: Yes, I do.

MR POLSEN: Would you like this to be read along with your own application?

MR KENDALL: Yes.

MR POLSEN: Is there anything else that you wish to tell us with regard to this application of yours?

MR KENDALL: No.

MR POLSEN: With regard to your sentiments? I know that it is not entirely relevant, but it has become custom to express one's sentiments.

MR KENDALL: As I have said before, for those few years I was the prime suspect, to such an extent that this entire matter has resulted that I have been medically discharged from the South African Defence Force as a result of stress. I have undergone psychiatric treatment in clinics.

In 1997 I underwent electro shock therapy. That was not my nature, when I said that somebody should be removed from the scene, that he be removed in such a manner from the scene. Not only the corpse that I saw that evening and the consequences thereof, but also many other things which I saw in KwaNdebele, and subsequently, have changed me from a loyal policeman to - I wouldn't say a wreck, but a man who cannot even be a Constable in the Police today.

MR POLSEN: Thank you Mr Chairman, that is the evidence.

ADV DE JAGER: Mr Polsen, it does not appear from the application specifically which deeds he is applying for amnesty for.

It is stated see Annexure and it is not specific enough. Is he applying for murder or defeating the ends of justice, what exactly is he applying for? You can submit this to us later so we are aware. You can include this with your Heads of argument.

MR POLSEN: Might I refer you to page 77 of the application, where he states paragraph 22, which begins on page 76. It is about being an accomplice and an accessory to the fact that he maintained silence about the event.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: That appears on page 77 Mr Polsen.

MR POLSEN: Thank you. Mr Chairman, that is the application for the applicant.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much. Is there anybody who wishes to put questions to this applicant?

MR WESSELS: Mr Chairman, might I be allowed to ask one question?

CHAIRPERSON: Certainly.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR WESSELS: Mr Kendal, the Defence Force member that you saw there who picked up the number plate, was that a member of the South African Defence Force or the KwaNdebele Defence Force?

MR KENDALL: Chairperson, I cannot think that far back, but I know that it was someone in a brown uniform.

MR WESSELS: Were Defence Force members deployed to that area as a rule?

MR KENDALL: Yes, at that stage, they had been deployed there.

MR WESSELS: So his presence was not strange?

MR KENDALL: No, it wasn't strange at all.

MR WESSELS: Thank you Chairperson.

MR GOOSEN: Mr Chairman, Pieter Goosen, if I might, from Kemp, De Beer and Goosen Attorneys on behalf of the Ntuli family. I would just like to state a couple of questions to Mr Kendall.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, certainly.

MR ROSSOUW: Sorry Mr Chairman, perhaps before my learned colleague go, I have only got one question on behalf of two of the applicants.

CHAIRPERSON: All right, perhaps you should ask the questions first then.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR ROSSOUW: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Kendall, just one question on behalf of Mr Gouws, who is also an applicant in this incident.

When you drove in from the place where the braai was being held to the Minister's residence, you mentioned that you saw Captain Hechter in the back of the vehicle. Did you see anybody else in the vehicle?

MR KENDALL: No Chairperson.

MR ROSSOUW: Just to be fair, Mr Gouws will testify that he was with you and that he held guard outside while you were visiting the Chief Minister in his home, can you recall that?

MR KENDALL: Not in the same vehicle, not in my vehicle. It was only me and Cronje and Hechter. That he held watch, that he moved closer, I cannot tell you whether or not that was true.

MR ROSSOUW: Very well.

ADV DE JAGER: Put it to him, did Gouws drive the vehicle, was he in the back of the vehicle, was he in the boot, where was he?

MR ROSSOUW: Chairperson, there is unclarity regarding this piece of evidence.

ADV DE JAGER: But Gouws will know Mr Rossouw.

MR ROSSOUW: Mr Kendall, the evidence is that there was one vehicle that moved in and Gouws' evidence will be that he was in the vehicle and that he did not sit in front?

MR KENDALL: From the people that was sitting there, I only saw that there was a kombi. According to my recollection, we used my vehicle, a white Nissan Skyline, you will also see in my application that I have stated that this brother of Piet Ntuli, Sam, after I arrived at the Police office, stormed at me in the vehicle and said this is the person that was moving around the area the whole day long, and that had visited the Minister at his residence and that I was responsible for the death of his brother.

According to my recollection it was only me and Hechter who was in the back of the vehicle, and Brigadier Cronje, who was in my vehicle. There was nobody else.

MR ROSSOUW: Thank you Mr Chairman.

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, may I be afforded just two questions?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. On behalf of?

MR DU PLESSIS: On behalf of Brigadier Cronje and Captain Hechter.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Kendall, did you study the evidence of Brigadier Cronje as set out in Exhibit D from page 554 right until the end, page 569?

MR POLSEN: Mr Chairman, the documentation was not made available to us, and my client has not read that document.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well.

MR DU PLESSIS: Very well, might I just explain very briefly what Cronje's evidence was? He testified that ...

CHAIRPERSON: Is that evidence going to be contrary to what he has said, what the applicant has said?

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, I am not a hundred percent sure out of the evidence of Mr Kendall, if it accords with Brigadier Cronje and that is all that I want to make sure of.

CHAIRPERSON: But is it really relevant at this stage?

MR DU PLESSIS: Then I will leave the question Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you very much.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Mr Du Plessis, are you not trying to get to the reason why Mr Ntuli was targeted by Mr Cronje in the first place, which I think is quite relevant?

That particular evidence has not definitely come out, or has not been born so far, by the evidence presented to us by Mr Kendall.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Kendall, does he know about it?

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: And I may proceed, that according to Mr Cronje, this information came from the people who were on the ground, the likes of Mr Kendall, is it not so?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes Mr Chairman, it is just the one point that I want to make sure of, and that is that Brigadier Cronje testified and maybe I can elaborate a little bit on the question and then you can decide if you want to allow me to ask it.

CHAIRPERSON: All right.

MR DU PLESSIS: Brigadier Cronje testified that what Mbukoto did was to destabilise KwaNdebele, which eventually practically had the same result as what the ANC intended and that was the political motivation, to eliminate Mr Ntuli and I just wanted to know if Mr Kendall agrees with that.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Yes.

MR KENDALL: Chairperson, I agree one hundred percent with that statement.

MR DU PLESSIS: Thank you. And then could I just ask you, when you drove in, in your vehicle with Hechter next to you, and you were asked to park next to Ntuli's vehicle, and you noticed what you gave evidence about, did you at that stage think that something strange was about to happen and that somebody was about to be killed as a result of that?

MR KENDALL: Chairperson, as I have said, it was a sudden decision to go in. In my application I said that I suspected that as Hechter was laying in the back of the vehicle, there would be dirty tricks. If I have to think back 13 years, I cannot think that I thought that somebody was going to die.

I wasn't part of that Security Branch, within the Security Branch plan, if we have to put it that way, I had never been a member of such activity. I was a small man, who carried small secrets around with me at that stage.

MR DU PLESSIS: But you would agree with me that under those circumstances, there would certainly have been the possibility or can you not recall it specifically at this moment?

MR KENDALL: At that stage there was the possibility, that is correct.

MR DU PLESSIS: Thank you Mr Chairman, I have no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: A possibility, a suspicion that it might occur, he can't go any further than that. Yes, thank you very much.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR VAN DEN BERG: Mr Kendall, you have said that a number of cases against Mr Ntuli were being investigated, were there ever any arrests, did you ever attempt to arrest him?

MR KENDALL: I know that there were charges. I don't know what it was about, because there was special investigative teams. I don't know whether an in depth investigation was ever lodged into the matters, I don't know.

MR VAN DEN BERG: At the stage when you and Cronje and Hechter went in, did you think that something was going to happen?

MR KENDALL: I beg your pardon?

MR VAN DEN BERG: What I mean is, you drove there, you saw Hechter in the back of the vehicle, you started becoming suspicious that something was about to happen, did you think that he was going to be arrested or did you expect something worse?

MR KENDALL: Earlier that afternoon, I have expected, as I said in my application, when I saw the two members of Murder and Robbery with Brigadier Cronje and the others, I thought that there were real criminal charges and that is why they were looking for Piet Ntuli.

I didn't think that they were going to get rid of him.

MR VAN DEN BERG: Thank you very much.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS LOCKHAT: Chairperson, I have just two questions to ask. Mr Kendall, on the 26th of July, was it just by accident, on the 29th, excuse me, was it just by accident that you actually bumped into Cronje and the likes?

MR KENDALL: That is correct.

MS LOCKHAT: Is it true that you were at previous meetings regarding the Piet Ntuli, where you actually briefed Cronje and others regarding Piet Ntuli?

MR KENDALL: Chairperson, every Friday at the Divisional Branch Northern Transvaal, all the Officers who were in control of desks as we called it, and the Branch Commanders, would all participate in meetings, with Cronje as the Divisional Commander.

Every member or Officer had to make a contribution on such a morning. I knew much about the unrest situation in KwaNdebele and Piet Ntuli.

MS LOCKHAT: So at this meeting, they did not discuss the elimination or as you said, the removal of Mr Piet Ntuli?

MR KENDALL: No Chairperson.

MS LOCKHAT: I find that a bit strange to believe that you didn't know about these incidents. It just seems unlikely that you could have just gone there and bumped into these men on that particular day, seeing that you briefed them previously?

MR KENDALL: Chairperson, sometimes the improbable becomes the truth, but I didn't know that Brigadier Cronje and the others would be in Siyabuswa on that particular day.

I ran into them that afternoon, half past three and I went to them, he was my Commander. By nature of the situation, he should have briefed me that he was coming through to Siyabuswa, which never took place.

MS LOCKHAT: Thank you Chairperson, no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Mr Kendall, just emanating from the questions put to you by Ms Lockhat, Brigadier Cronje has referred to a body called the Joint Information Centre and you have referred to a body called the Joint Management Centre, would those two bodies be the same?

MR KENDALL: No Chairperson.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: How different are they?

MR KENDALL: I am not sure if Brigadier Cronje would have referred to Trevits and I to the JMC. I am not sure, but this was two different bodies Chairperson.

Excuse me, if Brigadier Cronje referred to the JMC, that would be the same JMC meeting that I referred to in my application.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Yes. Now in his evidence he stated that he had several meetings with you at the Joint Information Centre, that is the body that he referred to.

That is why I wanted to know whether it was the same body as the JMC, because you have only referred to the body called the JMC? Would he have been therefore mistaken if he said you briefed him about the activities of Piet Ntuli and Mbukoto at the Joint Information Centre meetings?

MR KENDALL: Chairperson, this was the meeting that I sketched to you, the Friday morning meetings. Except for the meeting that I attended with Brigadier Cronje, this was the only meeting that I attended with Brigadier Cronje, where KwaNdebele and Piet Ntuli was discussed.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: And that meeting was not a Joint Information Centre meeting? It was not convened under the auspices of the Joint Information Centre?

MR KENDALL: No Chairperson, not at such a meeting.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Yes, you may proceed.

ADV DE JAGER: Do you know if there was a body that existed known as the Joint Information Centre, or is it possible that it is an incorrect reference, is it the same body or was there such another body?

MR KENDALL: Chairperson, yes, I was aware of Joint Information Centre, but as far as I can recall, I had never attended such meetings.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Would I be correct in saying that you as the Branch Commander in that area, would have been the only person who would have been authorised to give briefings to Brigadier Cronje about the activities in KwaNdebele, in particular about the activities of Mbukoto and Mr Piet Ntuli?

MR KENDALL: That is correct Chairperson.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: And therefore that if Brigadier Cronje refers to the Joint Information Centre, he might be mistaken, he should be referring to the meeting that you have referred to as the JMC meeting, wherein such briefings were given to him?

MR KENDALL: That is correct, yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Any re-examination?

RE-EXAMINATION BY MR POLSEN: Two questions Mr Chairman. Colonel, emanating from a question that was asked by my colleague Mr Du Plessis and my colleague Rossouw, with regards to the person who were in the vehicle when you moved in with your vehicle to the Chief Minister's house, you said that Hechter was on the floor of the vehicle and you only became aware of this later, is that correct?

MR KENDALL: That is correct.

MR POLSEN: Hechter did not sit next to you?

MR KENDALL: That is correct.

MR POLSEN: And except for Hechter who was laying behind you on the floor, Brigadier Cronje sat next to you?

MR KENDALL: That is correct.

MR POLSEN: And were there any other persons in the vehicle?

MR KENDALL: No Chairperson.

MR POLSEN: With regard, or were you part of the hit-squad?

MR KENDALL: No Chairperson.

MR POLSEN: How did that hit-squad operate?

MR KENDALL: As I have said Chairperson, I was not part of this hit-squad, so I cannot tell you how they operated.

For the first time I really became aware that as I put it earlier, that there was a Security Branch within the Security Branch, this hit-squad, with this incident of Mr Piet Ntuli.

MR POLSEN: Very well, and the fact that you met with them the day they were busy with this, is just coincidence?

MR KENDALL: Yes, it is pure coincidence Chairperson.

MR POLSEN: Thank you, I have no further questions, thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Thank you very much, you are excused.

MR KENDALL: Thank you Mr Chairman.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------MS LOCKHAT: The next amnesty applicant is Mr S.A. Oosthuizen.

MR POLSEN: Mr Chairman, might I just say one thing, we have been referred to Exhibit D by I think my learned friend, Mr Du Plessis.

These documents have not formally been admitted as part of these proceedings. I believe everybody now has copies of it. Perhaps I should just inform everybody where it comes from. We found a part of the record on Internet which is not contained in the Bundles before you and we made these extracts from that, and I must emphasise that these are only extracts which I at the time when I made them, thought to be relevant. It is not the complete record, but other than that, if everybody is satisfied to accept those extracts, then of course it might be admitted, but it hasn't been formally admitted.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you wish to make use of it as part of the evidence or to refer to it during the argument?

MR POLSEN: I was going to yes, Mr Chairman, but it has already been referred to by my learned friend, Mr Du Plessis.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR POLSEN: And it hasn't got any status before you at the moment, really.

CHAIRPERSON: Well now, shall we designate it as an Exhibit? This document will be received as Exhibit D.

MR POLSEN: As it pleases you, Mr Chairman.

STEFANUS ADRIAAN OOSTHUIZEN: (sworn states)

EXAMINATION BY MR ROSSOUW: Thank you Mr Chairman, Mr Rossouw on record on behalf of Mr Oosthuizen.

Mr Chairman, you will find the application of Mr Oosthuizen, on pages 92 in Bundle 7 and onwards.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you.

MR ROSSOUW: Mr Oosthuizen, you have a copy of your amnesty application before you?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: That is correct Chairperson.

MR ROSSOUW: You apply for amnesty in this incident for an accomplice in this incident.

MR OOSTHUIZEN: That is correct.

MR ROSSOUW: Have you read the previous pages or would you like to make any amendments?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: I would just like to make an amendment in terms of the identity number. The 9 thereof should be a 5 Chairperson.

MR ROSSOUW: You refer to the last 9?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: The last 9 where?

MR ROSSOUW: Mr Chairman, the identity number of the applicant.

CHAIRPERSON: I am sorry, yes thank you.

MR ROSSOUW: Mr Oosthuizen, can I take you to page 103, it is an annexure to your amnesty application. Under paragraph 7(a) you set out the general background, is that correct?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: That is correct Chairperson.

MR ROSSOUW: You confirm this?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: Yes, I do.

MR ROSSOUW: And paragraph 8(a) and (b)?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: That is correct.

MR ROSSOUW: And then as part of your amnesty application, you had been referred to the evidence of Gen Van der Merwe in the Cronje 5 incident and with regards to the broad background in that situation, do you want this to be incorporated into your amnesty application?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: That is correct.

MR ROSSOUW: Mr Chairman, this is in Bundle 2(A), pages 58 - 117.

Mr Oosthuizen, you have also been referred and you have knowledge of the submission of Gen Van der Merwe to the TRC, and you wish that to be incorporated as part of your background of your application?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: That is correct.

MR ROSSOUW: Mr Chairman, you will find this in Bundle 2(I), pages 1 - 29. Mr Oosthuizen, you had been referred to the evidence of Mr Vlok in the Khotso House incident and the evidence that was rendered there, about the onslaught of communism and the combating thereof by the Security Forces?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: That is correct.

MR ROSSOUW: And you would like your amnesty application to be read in conjunction with that? Mr Chairman, you will find this evidence on pages 41 - 57.

CHAIRPERSON: Just give me that again.

MR ROSSOUW: Mr Chairman, this is the evidence of Min Vlok, pages 41 - page 87 on the first day hearing of the Khotso House record. I have a copy thereof available with me, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, do carry on.

MR ROSSOUW: Mr Oosthuizen, then you were referred to the evidence of Brigadier Cronje in the Cronje 5 hearing, with regards to the general background of the Cronje 5, and you would like this to be read with your application?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: That is correct Chairperson.

MR ROSSOUW: Mr Chairman, this you will find in Bundle 2(A), pages 123 - 180.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR ROSSOUW: Mr Oosthuizen, you were also referred to the decision of the Amnesty Committee with regards to the Cronje 5, and specifically the background, that was a summary of the evidence to which we have referred to now.

MR OOSTHUIZEN: That is correct.

MR ROSSOUW: And more specifically you request that the part of the judgement of the Amnesty Committee by read along with your amnesty application?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: That is correct Chairperson.

MR ROSSOUW: Mr Oosthuizen, at the incident where Mr Piet Ntuli died in this bomb explosion, could you just tell the Committee, at that stage you were with the Special Investigation Team in KwaNdebele, what did you do there and what was the purpose of your investigation there?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: Chairperson, I was part of an investigation group that was established at Police Headquarters. The investigation team were all Detectives. We were led by Brigadier Daantjie van Wyk, and we had to report to Gen Bert Wandrag at that stage.

We worked throughout the country and at all places in the country where there were unrest, this is where we concentrated. We were assisting the local Investigation Teams with their investigations. We worked with the uniform unit, Unit 19, that is today known as a Stabilising Unit, Internal Stability Unit, at that stage they did not have that name.

We became aware of unrests in KwaNdebele, but we never paid any attention to it, up to a stage when Gen Wandrag gave instruction that this Investigation Team along with Unit 19, had to visit that area and us as an Investigation Team, had the instruction to investigate approximately 300 murders and emanating from the unrest, the Unit 19 members acted in a more visible policing aspect.

MR ROSSOUW: Mr Oosthuizen, who was at the Head of this Investigative Unit in KwaNdebele?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: It was Brigadier Daantjie van Wyk.

MR ROSSOUW: Can you please tell the Committee briefly where your basis was, where did you launch your investigations from?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: We worked from a house where we lived, it served as a house and office, in the Waterworks camp in Siyabuswa.

MR ROSSOUW: With regards to the general political situation in KwaNdebele, the incidents of murders were being investigated by you. During your investigation, did you have information where Minister Piet Ntuli was involved with murders and other unrest related incidents?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: That is correct Chairperson, with our arrival we did not have a good background as to where these murders had emanated from. We learnt quickly that it was politically orientated.

We received statements from people who confirmed under oath that Mr Piet Ntuli was involved with certain murders and other intimidations as well as assaults and as Colonel Kendall had said, he was involved with illegal arms as well as stolen vehicles.

Although we did not concentrate thereon, at a stage we got as far that we had certainty, reasonable certainty where Mr Piet Ntuli was involved with, and we could prove it, although we did not, could not get the witnesses to give evidence, because they had been exposed to intimidation.

MR ROSSOUW: Mr Oosthuizen, my next question is with the witnesses that you had had, could you charge him successfully?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: There was no possibility that we could bring the matter before Court, because it was an absolute, there was violent intimidation in the area and some of our witnesses had after we had taken statements from them, they had disappeared.

We suspect that they fled because we could not contact them again. Therefore Chairperson, we could not bring the matter before Court.

MR ROSSOUW: Is it correct that some of these people's houses and businesses were burnt down?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: Yes, KwaNdebele at that stage looked like a place of war, there were several houses and businesses that were burnt down to the ground.

MR ROSSOUW: Against this background, you mention on page 105 that you were approached by Captain Hechter to assist himself and members of the Northern Transvaal Security Branch. What led to this and where did this happen?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: Chairperson, I could say that there was a position of trust between myself, Deon Gouws, Jacques Hechter and Brigadier Jack Cronje.

At that stage, we were dealing with this investigations in KwaNdebele, therefore we had first hand experience as to what Piet Ntuli was involved in and Hechter approached me at a stage, or Gouws and myself, and told us that an operation was to be launched.

Piet Ntuli was identified that he had to be eliminated. I cannot say today where this meeting had taken place or where this decision was conveyed, whether it was in Pretoria or in Siyabuswa itself.

MR ROSSOUW: Let's ask you the following question, when you became aware that such a plan had existed, was it your impression that the plan had been authorised at a higher level?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: I had accepted that if such an instruction had come, it would have come from a higher level than Jacques Hechter or Jack Cronje, but I cannot today say who or at what level such a decision was taken.

MR ROSSOUW: During these procedures evidence was heard that a decision was taken at a high, a very high level that had identified this target, you had no knowledge thereof?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: No, I did not and I was not part of any discussion.

MR ROSSOUW: Were you aware that Mr Ntuli was identified as a target, did you accept that it was necessary and why?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: I had absolutely accepted that it was necessary, firstly because I knew that the Security Branch would have done their homework, and on the other hand, I knew exactly or I had reasonable knowledge what Piet Ntuli was involved with.

The only solution would have been, because the intimidation at that area was at such a stage that we could not take him into custody.

MR ROSSOUW: Mr Oosthuizen, let us proceed to the day of the operation. Can you tell the Committee what had happened there?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: Chairperson, I must just mention that a certain vague incidents, or parts. I can recall the particular day when Brigadier Jack Cronje and Captain Jacques Hechter were at the camp and office, at the Waterworks camp where we had stayed. I can recall that they were in discussion with Brigadier Daantjie van Wyk.

I did not participate in the discussion, I don't know what was discussed there. I cannot recall. But later during that day, on an open field opposite the government offices, we were together. If Deon Gouws and I drove with them to this open field, I am not certain thereof, but we did have a braai there.

If I can recall correctly, I was aware that a bomb would be placed under Piet Ntuli's vehicle. Mr Jaap van Jaarsveld was also present. I would just like to correct myself, Mr Jaap van Jaarsveld was present as well.

MR ROSSOUW: Excuse me Mr Oosthuizen, did you know where the bomb came from?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: I don't know where the bomb was manufactured or where it came from. That was handled by Jacques Hechter, but during the braai it became known that it was a bomb that was custom made for a Cressida and that it would be placed under the vehicle if the opportunity had arisen.

I can also recall that Mr Chris Kendall at some stage arrived there. I can recall that Mr Jaap van Jaarsveld and myself remained with the vehicle in the open field, that Deon Gouws, Jacques Hechter, Mr Kendall and Brigadier Jack Cronje went into the government grounds.

MR ROSSOUW: Can you please explain this set-up, this complex and the open field that you have mentioned, what does it look like there?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: The open field is not too far from Siyabuswa Police station, one could see the Police station, it was right opposite the gate where the vehicles would exit from the government grounds. I cannot say today whether there was a high wall or a high fence around the government grounds.

We were in such a position that if we saw Piet Ntuli's vehicle, we would have identified it.

MR ROSSOUW: The members whom you identified went into the grounds, did you know what they were to do there, that they would place the bomb?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: I was aware of that.

MR ROSSOUW: Did you know who would place the bomb?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: I knew Jacques Hechter would place the bomb under the vehicle because I could understand that he was informed as to how to mount this bomb.

MR ROSSOUW: Can you continue, what was your further role in this incident?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: I waited outside with Mr Van Jaarsveld at the vehicle. The members returned, Jacques Hechter explained that there was a device that would activate the bomb.

I said that I would handle the device.

MR ROSSOUW: But you have heard in the statement of Mr Kendall that you and Mr Van Jaarsveld had an argument as to who would detonate the device?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: Can I explain in this manner, I don't think that there was a reason as to who would activate the bomb, but there were two devices and both would have had the same effect, Gouws had one and I had one.

The one would have served as a backup if the technological equipment did not work. I offered to activate the bomb.

MR ROSSOUW: Is there any reason why you offered to activate the device?

ADV DE JAGER: Did you activate it?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: Yes, I did Chairperson.

MR ROSSOUW: And together with this, you devised certain plans as to where and when the bomb would be activated?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: We were informed that after the activation took place, there would be a ten second delay built therein, and we knew that if he was driving at 30 or 40 kilometres per hour, I can't recall what we said then, but when one waits, if the car would disappear behind Siyabuswa Police station, and then 10 seconds thereafter, he would be in an area where there were no houses on both sides of the road, and that was part of the planning.

MR ROSSOUW: Can you tell the Committee about the execution of the explosion? How did you observe it?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: The vehicle disappeared behind Siyabuswa Police station, the button was pressed and the vehicle disappeared around a corner in this quiet area that we had in mind, and the bomb exploded.

I cannot tell you Mr Chairperson, whether I drove passed there directly or either directly thereafter or at some stage, I drove passed the wreckage. I can also not tell you whether I went back to Pretoria that evening or whether I slept in Siyabuswa.

MR ROSSOUW: Very well, after this operation, can you give the Committee an indication whether there was a depletion in the unrest in KwaNdebele, did it have an influence?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: Yes, there was definitely a change. It could be largely attributed to the shock that went through the community as well as the uncertainty as to who was responsible for the bomb.

Not long thereafter, we were withdrawn from the area and the investigation had continued. We had to leave the investigation in the hands of Brigadier Lerm who was involved with the KwaNdebele Police at that stage.

MR ROSSOUW: Then on page 107 you deal with the political objective behind this operation. You refer to the political background in KwaNdebele at that stage, and you also refer to the application of Colonel Kendall, which you have also studied. Do you confirm that?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: Yes, that is correct.

MR ROSSOUW: Do you confirm that aspect of your application?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: Yes, I do.

MR ROSSOUW: And then with regard to the necessity of the operation, onto page 108, do you confirm that?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: Yes, I do.

MR ROSSOUW: During this operation, is it correct that you were under the command of Captain Cronje, or Brigadier Cronje?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: That is correct.

MR ROSSOUW: And you executed his orders?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: Yes.

MR ROSSOUW: And those of Captain Hechter?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: Yes, that is correct.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Did I understand him to have referred to one Gen Wandrag?

MR ROSSOUW: Indeed Mr Chairman.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Yes, in what respect was this reference made? What position did he hold within your Unit?

What position did Gen Wandrag hold in your Unit?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: Gen Wandrag was Head of the Unrest Counter Insurgency Unit at Head Office in Pretoria. All the Unrest Units resided below him and he was also in control of Brigadier Daantjie van Wyk, under whose control I was.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Would I be correct in saying that the chain of command would be, would report to Mr Van Wyk and Mr Van Wyk would report to Gen Wandrag?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: That is correct as far as it concerned the investigations, the investigations on ground level.

We were an Investigative Unit or a Special Investigative Unit which was allocated to the Unrest Units, which were uniform branches to launch investigations, and that is how we arrived in KwaNdebele.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Yes. And you would have been, Gen Wandrag would have been the person to have given you instructions to participate in any operation whilst you were in KwaNdebele, is it not so?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: I can't agree with that Chairperson.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Why not?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: He was in charge of the uniform division, and we were part of the uniform division at that stage, with regard to unrest.

But the order came from him to investigate the murders in KwaNdebele, but the report back while the investigations were under way, was not directly to him. I would rather not make any statements regarding that, in terms of who Brigadier Daantjie van Wyk reported to. I would rather not say anything, because we were never involved with that.

However, I was never aware of his knowledge or his involvement in the Ntuli matter. If that would be of assistance to you.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: It is of assistance, and it causes me problems. I am sure it will be taken up by Mr Rossouw in due course.

CHAIRPERSON: The Committee will take an adjournment and resume in 15 minutes.

ON RESUMPTION:

STEFANUS ADRIAAN OOSTHUIZEN: (still under oath)

ADV DE JAGER: My honourable colleague has already fixed your attention on that, your applicant did not fall under the command in the line of command, he did not fall below Brigadier Jack Cronje, why did he receive orders from him?

EXAMINATION BY MR ROSSOUW: (continued) As it pleases you Chairperson. Mr Oosthuizen, you have heard the Committee's question, you received your orders from Brigadier Cronje and Captain Hechter, could you tell the Committee in relation to this, what co-operation existed between the Investigative Team and the Security Branch which operated in that area?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: Chairperson, it was so in the light of the fact that we worked in that area, and that we conducted investigations there, that there was narrow liaison between us and the Security Branch of the Northern Transvaal and more specifically with Jacques Hechter and Brigadier Jack Cronje.

We had to consult certain things by their orders and handled certain matters, so there was very close liaison between our Investigative Team and the Security Branch of the Northern Transvaal. With regard to the execution of this elimination of Piet Ntuli, we fell directly below Jacques Hechter and Brigadier Jack Cronje.

In so far as it regarded the execution of that operation, as well as the exchange of information beforehand and afterwards.

ADV DE JAGER: Did you not have to obtain permission from your Commander to serve below the command of another Commander?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: Chairperson, at that stage and under those circumstances in the country, it happened frequently that there would be an overlapping between Units as far as it concerned work and the execution of investigations, and more specifically with regard to this case, I accept - I don't know which discussions took place between Cronje and Van Wyk. I accepted that they had approached me and Gouws and that there was a confidential system among us and that this took place upon a need to know basis, also with regard to my Commander.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: But did you speak to Mr Van Wyk to find out if this had been cleared with him?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: No Chairperson.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Why did you not, in your evidence, let me remind you, you have stated that Captain Hechter approached you in a position of trust?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: That is correct. There was a narrow position of confidence between the two of us, and because at that stage, we had already worked for quite some time, on the same problem, he gave me the order as well as to Gouws, to assist them with this action and also to provide support should anything happen, which could possibly - we were to support them should something go wrong.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: When he approached you, he obviously made no suggestion that he had obtain authority for you to assist him from your immediate superior? Your evidence also does not suggest that?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: Chairperson, it was so within the Police and with regard to that case, it was so that if a member of the Force or a junior member of the Force such as I was at that stage, I was obliged to carry out the orders of any Officer and especially with regard to these members that I worked with, if he was my senior.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: When that person was not the person to whom you reported? I would find that very strange?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: Actually it was so that we also reported to him with regard to many aspects of what happened, and people that were involved, as well as the information that we could gather from that area, with special significance for the political aspect to the matter.

We reported to Jacques Hechter and Brigadier Cronje.

CHAIRPERSON: Could it have ever occurred to you not to carry out the orders of Hechter? Could that have been possible?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: Chairperson, would you repeat the question please?

CHAIRPERSON: Could it ever have been possible for you to turn around and tell Mr Hechter that you are not carrying out his orders?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: I did not see it in that light, I also did not consider it. I accepted that he was my senior and that Brigadier Jack Cronje was my senior, and that they were competent to issue such orders.

MR ROSSOUW: Mr Oosthuizen, perhaps just at this point, we know that Brigadier Cronje was a Brigadier, what was your rank?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: I was a Warrant Officer.

MR ROSSOUW: So you were a junior officer, a subordinate officer?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: That is correct.

MR ROSSOUW: Could you tell the Committee, you have said that you did not consider it, but would there have been any consequences for you if you were to disobey a senior officer and not carry out his orders?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: That would mean contempt of order.

MR ROSSOUW: Mr Oosthuizen, you have also referred to the co-operation in KwaNdebele between your Investigative Unit and the Security Branch there. Did your team have access to the information of the Security Police, was information ever exchanged, did you cooperate in these investigations and were you also given orders to study certain aspects with regard to the investigation?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: That is correct, we were in that position and we also did so. With regard to KwaNdebele, we would study Security reports, we were also give orders from time to time, to look at ... (tape ends) ... and to convey this to the Security Branch of the Northern Transvaal.

CHAIRPERSON: Who was your immediate superior?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: Brigadier Daantjie van Wyk, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Was he aware of the fact that you were accepting and carrying out orders given by Hechter or Cronje?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: Not as far as I know.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: May I be correct in saying that you never were given any orders by Brigadier Cronje, particularly in this instance, you only were given orders by Captain Hechter and not Brigadier Cronje?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: Captain Hechter did inform me that his orders came from Brigadier Cronje. And also on the day of the action against Ntuli, Brigadier Jack Cronje acted as the Commander of this operation, and the decision making resided exclusively with him regarding who would do what. That is as far as I know.

MR ROSSOUW: Sorry Mr Chairman, can I just - one further aspect in this regard. Mr Oosthuizen, we know that at that stage there was a state of emergency in the country, could you tell the Committee whether within the Security Forces, let us first refer to the Police and the various units which existed, was there a rigid line of command or would there be more co-operation exactly in light of the security situation and the co-operation, or would there necessarily have been more co-operation between the various units?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: That is absolutely the case. Because everything was about a mutual goal, with regard to the investigation and the management of the security situation in the country, I remember many cases in which we as junior members of the Investigative Unit served under the command of wherever we were busy with an investigation. We would serve directly under the command and the orders of who was in control there.

Especially in cases where Brigadier Daantjie van Wyk could not always be available, because he was not always present.

ADV DE JAGER: You answered the question of the Chairperson that you did not receive any other orders than I think he asked whether Daantjie van Wyk gave any orders in this regard? I have not phrased this question very clearly - your answer was that you did not receive orders from anybody else than Jack Cronje or Daantjie van Wyk.

I can't remember the question very well, but I think you may have misunderstood the question. Did you not with regard to the killing of Ntuli, on any other level, did you ever receive orders from Hechter and Cronje?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: Over and above the Piet Ntuli incident, I also received orders from Cronje and Hechter with regard to which persons we needed to gather information about, and also about obtaining information about certain areas and studying documents.

It was not the only instance where I received orders from Jack Cronje.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: This was the only instance where you received an order to participate in the elimination of a person and the orders that you received seems to suggest that they were in relation to some investigative work. In this case it was an operation that involved an elimination of a person. You have never received such orders from any of the two persons you have mentioned, before, this was the first time, is that not so?

MR ROSSOUW: Mr Chairman, before my client answers the question, can I just for perhaps caution sake, state that the applicant is also applying for the KwaNdebele 9 incident. We are not aware which of the two was first, whether it was Piet Ntuli or KwaNdebele 9. We are not entirely clear about that ourselves, so I am just worried that he is going to give an answer and referring to the dates, it might be correct or incorrect.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: I thought that the dates were common cause Mr Rossouw, that the Piet Ntuli matter happened before the KwaNdebele 9 matter?

MR ROSSOUW: Mr Chairman, unfortunately my clients had to rely on the evidence, we were not provided with the evidence of these two incidents, given by Brigadier Cronje and we were uncertain about that.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Yes, but I think in order to safeguard your clients' interest, it will be probably in his interest not to respond then not to the comment from the Chair, if he is not clear on that aspect. I thought it was common cause that this incident occurred before the KwaNdebele 9?

May I just clear something whilst we are busy with Mr Oosthuizen. When did you become aware of Captain Hechter's intention to eliminate Mr Ntuli, are you in a position to give us an indication?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: Chairperson, my memory fails me in that regard, whether it was a day or two before the incident that he informed me that Mr Ntuli had been identified and that there was a plan to do something about him.

At that stage, whether it happened in KwaNdebele or in his office in the Northern Transvaal, in Pretoria, is uncertain to me. At that stage I did not know how he had planned it.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: So you are unable to tell us where you were informed of his intention to eliminate Mr Ntuli and when?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: That is correct Chairperson, my memory fails me. There were too many things, I cannot recall it. But I was informed about it beforehand.

I received the order that I should offer assistance.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Why did you not discuss this particular instructions with Mr Van Wyk?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: I accepted that the entire matter was to be kept secret.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Including from your own Brigadier who had seconded you to KwaNdebele?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: That is correct Chairperson. It wasn't strange to me, because it was a high profile matter and it was conveyed to me confidentially as well as the issue or the order which was issued to me confidentially, it wasn't strange to me that I should keep this from my immediate Commander.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Was any suggestion made by Captain Hechter that it had to be kept secret, even from your own Commander?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: It was definitely put to me that it was a secret. My memory fails me whether specific mention was made of Brigadier Van Wyk.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR POLSEN: Mr Chairperson, I've got three questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Please proceed.

MR POLSEN: Mr Oosthuizen - let me rephrase my question.

ADV DE JAGER: Could you please move a little closer to the microphone, it is difficult to hear you.

MR POLSEN: When you and the other persons had a meeting, could you tell me once again who was involved in that meeting, a day or two before the incident?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: I cannot remember that Mr Chairman.

MR POLSEN: Was Mr Kendall present?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: That is unlikely.

MR POLSEN: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Is there anything to be cleared up under further re-examination?

MR ROSSOUW: I've got no further questions, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------CHAIRPERSON: Who is the next applicant?

MS LOCKHAT: The next amnesty applicant is Mr D. Gouws.

ADV DE JAGER: Your full names?

MR GOUWS: Deon Gouws.

DEON GOUWS: (sworn states)

EXAMINATION BY MR ROSSOUW: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Chairman you will find the application of Mr Gouws, on page 52 and further in Bundle 7.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Please proceed.

MR ROSSOUW: Thank you. Mr Gouws, as Mr Oosthuizen, you have been referred to the evidence which I referred to initially.

ADV DE JAGER: Mr Rossouw, you can simply ask him whether or not he confirms this, you don't have to go through everything, we are interested in his share and his role. He has heard the background evidence, if he agrees with it, let him confirm it, and let us get to the events as quickly as possible.

MR ROSSOUW: As the Chair pleases. Mr Chairman, that was my intention.

Mr Gouws, you have listened to the evidence which was presented in previous matters to Mr Oosthuizen, you have been informed thereof and you know thereof, is that correct?

MR GOUWS: Yes, that is correct.

MR ROSSOUW: You also request that this be read with your amnesty application?

MR GOUWS: That is correct.

MR ROSSOUW: You are also applying for amnesty for murder and your involvement in the murder of Piet Ntuli?

MR GOUWS: That is correct.

MR ROSSOUW: And any other offences arising from your involvement there?

MR GOUWS: That is correct.

MR ROSSOUW: You have a copy of your application before you?

MR GOUWS: That is correct.

MR ROSSOUW: Do you confirm your application, is it correct?

MR GOUWS: Yes, that is correct.

MR ROSSOUW: Then I ask you to proceed to page 57. Do you confirm the background with regard to your involvement in the South African Police and your career there?

MR GOUWS: That is correct.

MR ROSSOUW: To begin with, with this operation on Piet Ntuli, were you a member of the Investigative Unit in KwaNdebele about which Mr Oosthuizen has given evidence?

MR GOUWS: That is correct.

MR ROSSOUW: And you also had intimate knowledge of the political unrest and the events in KwaNdebele at that stage?

MR GOUWS: That is correct.

MR ROSSOUW: Can you then explain to the Committee how you became involved with the incident?

MR GOUWS: Chairperson, on a specific day Brigadier Cronje, Captain Hechter came to our camp in Siyabuswa at the Waterworks. From there, we went to an open field opposite the government offices in Siyabuswa where we had a braai.

ADV DE JAGER: Were you previously informed that there would be an operation and that you would accompany them?

MR GOUWS: Yes.

ADV DE JAGER: By who were you informed?

MR GOUWS: By Captain Hechter.

ADV DE JAGER: How long before the time?

MR GOUWS: On that very same day.

ADV DE JAGER: That same day? So he arrived at the camp and you went with him to this open field?

MR GOUWS: Yes, that is correct.

ADV DE JAGER: And you knew that there would be an attempt on Ntuli's life?

MR GOUWS: Yes, that is correct.

ADV DE JAGER: Now tell us what happened.

MR GOUWS: From there, I can't remember at which stage Mr Kendall joined us, but we went in a vehicle to the fence around the government offices as well as the residences in which the Ministers resided.

We went in one vehicle, that would be Brigadier Cronje, Captain Hechter, Captain Kendall as well as myself. We parked next to the vehicle of Mr Ntuli.

MR ROSSOUW: What role did you play at that stage, what would you have done there, what was your function?

MR GOUWS: I was only there for security.

MR ROSSOUW: Can you explain to the Committee where you would have performed your security role?

MR GOUWS: Outside the vehicle where the bomb was supposed to be placed below the vehicle.

Brigadier Cronje and Kendall went into the residence of the Minister, upon which Hechter and I remained behind. Hechter took a device out of something that looked like a cake tin, and placed it below the vehicle.

MR ROSSOUW: Can you indicate to the Committee on which place below the vehicle, on the position on the vehicle?

MR GOUWS: It was under the driver's seat of the vehicle.

There were guards in the vicinity but they weren't bothered by us. After a while Brigadier and Kendall came out and we left. If I remember correctly, I climbed into the kombi and I received an apparatus and after the Minister's vehicle drove passed us, approximately ten seconds thereafter, I pressed the switch - or as the vehicle went passed, I pressed the switch and ten seconds later, I heard the explosion.

MR ROSSOUW: Just on that point, did you and Mr Oosthuizen have any discussion or planning about when the bomb was to be activated and where it was supposed to explode?

MR GOUWS: Yes, that is correct. We knew the environment quite well at that stage, we had spent two months there, it was just after the Siyabuswa Police station, there was an S-turn. As Mr Oosthuizen has testified, it was - there was a speed limit of 30 - 40 kilometres per hour, and it was on that S-turn that the bomb was to explode. That is how we did it.

CHAIRPERSON: Who gave you this device?

MR GOUWS: Captain Hechter, Chairperson.

MR ROSSOUW: Can you explain what happened further after the bomb was activated?

MR GOUWS: I am not entirely certain, but I think we went back to the camp where we were living, at Waterworks. That is the end of the story.

MR ROSSOUW: Did you ever visit the scene?

MR GOUWS: I cannot recall whether I visit the scene directly afterwards, but at a later stage, I was there.

MR ROSSOUW: Very well.

ADV DE JAGER: Mr Gouws, where in the car did you sit when you went in?

MR GOUWS: Behind.

ADV DE JAGER: Were you sitting in the car or were you laying in the car?

MR GOUWS: I can't recall exactly what my position was, whether I sat or lay.

MR ROSSOUW: Mr Gouws, may I refer you to page 59, the annexure to your amnesty application, paragraph 1, the second last sentence. There you say that Mr Kendall arrived at your camp, are you referring there to the Waterworks camp or the place where you were braaiing in the open field?

MR GOUWS: That would be in the open field where we were having a braai.

MR ROSSOUW: That is a faulty reference then?

MR GOUWS: That is correct.

MR ROSSOUW: Regarding your knowledge of the situation and the faction fighting that was taking place in KwaNdebele, as set out in paragraph 2, you confirm this?

MR GOUWS: Yes, that is correct.

MR ROSSOUW: In paragraph 3, the third and the fourth sentences, there is a bit of a leap. You refer to Brigadier Van Wyk, your direct Commander at camp, at Waterworks, who remained behind?

MR GOUWS: Yes, that is correct.

MR ROSSOUW: And then you say that you went with Cronje, Hechter and Oosthuizen when you departed. It would appear that you departed with Kendall from there to the Minister's house?

MR GOUWS: No, at that stage Kendall wasn't present.

MR ROSSOUW: So what you mean is that you left from the open field, to the Minister's house?

MR GOUWS: That is correct.

ADV DE JAGER: Your Commander, Van Wyk, was there and you left with Cronje from there, from the camp?

MR GOUWS: From where we lived? Yes, that is correct.

ADV DE JAGER: So he was aware that you were going with Cronje?

MR GOUWS: That is correct.

MR ROSSOUW: You heard that Mr Oosthuizen gave evidence that earlier that day, at the Waterworks camp, a discussion had taken place between Brigadier Cronje and Brigadier Van Wyk, do you know about that, were you present?

MR GOUWS: I was present, but what the extent thereof was, is not known to me.

MR ROSSOUW: You have also heard that there was evidence that you and Mr Oosthuizen argued about who ...

ADV DE JAGER: Mr Rossouw, really, I don't think it is necessary for you to discuss that. Whether or not they had an argument, both of them were involved, and it would appear that both of them set the apparatus off, and I don't think this is being disputed by anybody, so I don't know whether it is necessary for us to hear the details about it.

MR ROSSOUW: Mr Gouws, on page 62 of your application, you give your political objective as well as your personal conviction as to why this is related to a political action. Did you have any knowledge that this operation had been approved at a very high level?

MR GOUWS: I did not know.

MR ROSSOUW: And your involvement in this flowed from an order which you received from Captain Hechter and at the time of the order, you were under the command of Brigadier Cronje?

MR GOUWS: Yes, that is correct.

MR ROSSOUW: What was your rank at that stage?

MR GOUWS: I was a Sergeant.

MR ROSSOUW: So is it correct for me to say that you were the most junior officer during this operation?

MR GOUWS: That is correct.

MR ROSSOUW: Were you in any position to question the order of Captain Hechter as well as the command of Brigadier Cronje at that stage?

MR GOUWS: No.

MR ROSSOUW: Did you execute their orders, and why did you execute their orders because you were not a member of the Security Police?

MR GOUWS: Firstly I had a great deal of respect for both Officers, and I had personal knowledge of Piet Ntuli's activities.

MR ROSSOUW: There was also co-operation between your team and the Security Police in KwaNdebele?

MR GOUWS: Yes, very close co-operation.

MR ROSSOUW: Did you also share information?

MR GOUWS: Yes, that is correct.

MR ROSSOUW: Did you have access to the information of the Security Police at Head Office?

MR GOUWS: Yes.

MR ROSSOUW: Did you also receive orders with regard to the investigations of the Security Police and more specifically Hechter and Cronje?

MR GOUWS: Yes.

MR ROSSOUW: Also with regard to this operation, you would have been under the command of Warrant Officer Oosthuizen in as far as the line of command was concerned?

MR GOUWS: Yes, that is correct.

MR ROSSOUW: Thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Mr Gouws, did I understand you correctly in response to my colleague's question about whether Brigadier Van Wyk was aware of your involvement in this operation, to have said yes, he was aware?

MR GOUWS: I did not mean that he knew about it, he and Brigadier Cronje did have a discussion at the camp where we lived, but what the content of that discussion was, is unknown to me.

Whether he knew about it or not, is unknown to me.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: When you left him behind with Brigadier Cronje, Hechter and Oosthuizen, do you think he knew where you were going to?

MR GOUWS: I don't know.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: So to your knowledge, he was not aware of the operation?

MR GOUWS: As far as I know, he was not aware of it.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Would you also share the same opinion given by Mr Oosthuizen, that the operation was supposed to be kept secret?

MR GOUWS: That is correct.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: And that is why he did not advise Brigadier Van Wyk of his involvement?

MR GOUWS: That is correct.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: And would you also share his opinion that it was secret even to Brigadier Van Wyk, even though there was this agreement of co-operation between the two units?

MR GOUWS: That is correct.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Isn't that strange that there should be co-operation between the two units, yet there is this cloth of secrecy even at a high command, such as that enjoyed by Brigadier Van Wyk?

MR GOUWS: Chairperson, I was a young subordinate Officer at that stage, I didn't ask too many questions, I simply carried out my orders, and got the job done.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: But you were given an impression by Captain Hechter, that you were to keep your involvement in this operation, secret from your Commander, Brigadier Van Wyk?

MR GOUWS: He didn't say it in so many words directly.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Yes, that is why I am saying you were given an impression?

MR GOUWS: That is correct.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: That it was to be kept secret, even from your Commander?

MR GOUWS: That is correct.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: But you were not to know what the conversation was between Hechter and Cronje on the one hand, and your Commander?

MR GOUWS: Can you please repeat the question.

CHAIRPERSON: You don't know what the conversation was between your Commander on the one hand, and Cronje and Hechter on the other?

MR GOUWS: No, I didn't know what the discussion was about.

CHAIRPERSON: It cannot be too surprising if they may have told him about what they intended doing, that is a possibility, isn't it?

MR GOUWS: That is a possibility, yes Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Can you see any reason why they might not have told him this?

MR GOUWS: I can't see any reason why.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR MEINTJIES: Mr Chairman, Meintjies on behalf of Captain Van Jaarsveld, a question please.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes please.

MR MEINTJIES: Mr Gouws, just for clarification, was Captain Van Jaarsveld involved in any way in this incident, Captain Jaap van Jaarsveld?

MR GOUWS: I can recall him at the kombi before the incident.

MR MEINTJIES: What do you mean before the incident?

MR GOUWS: When we were braaiing in the field in front of the Minister's residence.

MR MEINTJIES: So he was present?

MR GOUWS: Yes, that is correct.

MR MEINTJIES: No further questions, thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Any further questions?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS LOCKHAT: Just one question Mr Chairperson. Mr Gouws, did you get paid for operations whenever you were involved in operations?

MR GOUWS: Not at all, no.

MS LOCKHAT: I refer you to page 55 of your amnesty application, on Bundle 7 where you said you received R1 000 from Basie Smit for a Nelspruit incident, is that correct?

MR GOUWS: Yes, that was in Nelspruit, that was not in regard to this incident.

MR ROSSOUW: Mr Chairman, can I ask what the relevance of this is with relation to the Ntuli incident?

CHAIRPERSON: Just let her ask the question, maybe we will get the answer.

MS LOCKHAT: The relevance is, did you receive any remuneration for this, did you benefit financially from this operation, as in another operation which you said, you previously said you did not really receive any remuneration?

MR GOUWS: I received no remuneration for this specific operation.

MS LOCKHAT: No further questions, thank you Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Any re-examination?

MR ROSSOUW: None, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: The next applicant?

MS LOCKHAT: The next applicant is Mr T.I. Floyd.

MR WESSELS: Mr Chairman, I appear for the applicant, the application appears on page 88 of Bundle 7. The witness will speak English.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Floyd, what are your full names?

MR FLOYD: Trevor Ian Floyd.

TREVOR IAN FLOYD: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, you may be seated.

EXAMINATION BY MR WESSELS: Mr Floyd, your application appears on page 88 of the Bundle. Do you confirm the correctness of the particulars therein?

MR FLOYD: I do.

MR WESSELS: Mr Floyd, is it correct that during 1986 you were in Special Forces?

MR FLOYD: That is correct Mr Chairman.

MR WESSELS: What was your rank?

MR FLOYD: I was a WO1, Warrant Officer Class 1.

MR WESSELS: Is it further correct that at a certain stage, Gen Joubert came to you and told you that you had to assist Brigadier Cronje and Captain Hechter in a certain project?

MR FLOYD: That is correct, Gen Joubert summonsed me to his office and requested me to go and see I think at that stage he was still Colonel Cronje and Captain Hechter in their office in Pretoria, to assist them with an operation that they were busy with.

MR WESSELS: Yes. Did you then go to Cronje?

MR FLOYD: I had never met these people before, I did not know where they were. I then asked Colonel Joe Verster, he directed me to where their offices were.

I went down and was met by Captain Hechter, who took me up to see Brigadier Cronje. There Brigadier Cronje briefed me about an operation that they had intention of taking place in KwaNdebele, basically the elimination of one Peter Ntuli.

I had never been to KwaNdebele or I did not know anything about Peter Ntuli and they briefed me further about his activities and background. I was under the impression that he was a member of the ANC and responsible for terrorist deeds in the KwaNdebele area.

Although I was told as well that he was a Minister I think, of Interior of KwaNdebele.

MR WESSELS: What did you do as a result of your discussion with Cronje?

MR FLOYD: I was then taken, I had to first go and do a reconnaissance of the area, where the target was, to make sure that a feasible plan could be made. I was taken by Captain Hechter and one other person, who I do not know, it is also a member of their staff, through to KwaNdebele.

I was taken, the area or the town, I do not know. I was taken to at one stage, the government offices where Peter Ntuli's car which was a Cressida was parked in the, under a carport and they pointed this out to me and also pointed out more or less where the entrances were to the offices, the gate, unguarded.

They also pointed out to me an open piece of ground opposite the government buildings, pointed out the Police station and we then made a basic plan at that stage, or I made a basic plan at that stage, and thought the best method of doing the job, was to place an explosive device under the seat of the car, which could be controlled by radio from a distance away, to ascertain that the vehicle, or whenever the explosive was detonated, that nobody else in the vicinity would get injured.

And also that it would not look like it had been done directly at his place of work.

MR WESSELS: Continue.

MR FLOYD: We returned back to Pretoria, then I went back to go see Gen Joubert, to report to him. I told him what the basic plan was, not totally final plan, we would have had to do another reconnaissance after that to make sure that everything was hundred percent as we had seen it before.

But I told him basically what the plan was and the requirement for a mine or explosive in a form which could be placed under the seat, under the floorboard of a car, directly under the seat of a specific model car, the Cressida.

I also requested two arming devices in case we had a problem with the one, the other basically as a backup.

Gen Joubert said I had to leave it in his hands. I then went back to my unit and we carried on with my work. I was then notified when the explosive was ready, I came up to see Gen Joubert. He told me take the explosive, take the arming devices, take it through to Captain Hechter and Brigadier Cronje, show them how it works, how to operate the equipment, but no further - I must not get further involved with the operation.

He said the reason was, or as I remember at that stage, was that he was not sure if they had got the authority to do the operation. He wanted no further involvement from our side.

MR WESSELS: Did you then take the mine and give it to Hechter?

MR FLOYD: I then took the equipment, gave it to Jacques Hechter and explained to him exactly how the equipment operated, where the mine had to be placed or the explosive had to be placed and how it had to be armed, as well as how the firing devices worked Mr Chairman.

MR WESSELS: Did you have any further involvement in this matter?

MR FLOYD: I had no further involvement in that matter, I only read about it at a later stage in the paper, about the explosion and then I knew automatically who was involved with that operation, at that stage.

MR WESSELS: No further questions Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Any questions to put to this witness?

MR GROBLER: Mr Chairman, might I just be given a moment?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR GROBLER: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Floyd, if I may sum up the instructions from Gen Joubert, they seem to have been very clear that he wanted no involvement of Special Forces operators in the actual performance of the operation itself?

MR FLOYD: That is correct Mr Chairman. I was specifically in charge of carrying out the operation from a Special Forces side at that stage.

If I was tasked not to carry on any further, I would have obeyed that command and seen to it that nobody else got involved.

MR GROBLER: And other than making the device available to Cronje and Hechter, there was no further Special Forces involvement?

MR FLOYD: That is affirmative Mr Chairman.

MR GROBLER: Just for the sake of the record Mr Floyd, at the moment as we sit here, Gen Joubert has no recollection of having told you that he's got doubt about their authority. I am not saying that what you are saying is wrong, or incorrect, at the moment he simply has no recollection. I don't think you have to comment on that unless you wish to.

MR FLOYD: It is possible Mr Chairman.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: But to your knowledge, did Gen Joubert ever explain to you why he thought Brigadier Cronje and Captain Hechter had no authority to carry out this operation?

MR FLOYD: Mr Chairperson, Gen Joubert did not even give me the name of the target before. I was tasked to go and help Brigadier Cronje and Captain Jacques Hechter, they would brief me further on what the target was.

Mr Chairman, I seem to have lost your question there.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Yes. My question is, in your evidence you stated that you were advised by Gen Joubert not to be involved in the performance of the elimination, that is in the detonation of the bomb simply because he was not sure if Brigadier Cronje and Captain Hechter had any authority to carry out that operation.

MR FLOYD: That was my understanding Mr Chairperson.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Yes, now my question is, did Gen Joubert ever give you any reason why he thought they had no authority to carry out such an operation?

MR FLOYD: No Mr Chairman, I don't think he would have given me, I was in a position of trust where I could be told that type of thing.

CHAIRPERSON: Nor did you ask him?

MR FLOYD: I did not ask him at all.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: You may proceed Mr Grobler.

MR GROBLER: I have no further questions, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Any other questions of this witness? None? Ms Lockhat, any questions?

MS LOCKHAT: No questions Mr Chairperson, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Yes, thank you very much, you are excused.

MR FLOYD: Thank you Mr Chairman.

MS LOCKHAT: We call on Mr P.J. Verster.

MR WESSELS: Mr Chairperson, the application of Mr Verster, appears on page 11 of Bundle 7. His involvement is again very peripheral as in the previous cases, or even more so and I will lead his evidence very quickly.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

PIETER JOHANNES VERSTER: (sworn states)

EXAMINATION BY MR WESSELS: Mr Verster, at this stage we have heard that you were the Senior Staff Officer of Special Forces, is that correct?

MR VERSTER: That is correct Mr Chairperson.

MR WESSELS: Evidence was also led that Captain Hechter received the bomb from you with which Mr Piet Ntuli was blown up?

MR VERSTER: That is not so Chairperson.

MR WESSELS: And that you were involved with this operation?

MR VERSTER: My involvement with this operation was administrative and co-ordination, as Senior Staff Officer as I received it from Gen Joubert.

MR WESSELS: Is it then so that you would have received the instruction to make a bomb available to a person from Special Forces?

MR VERSTER: No, I had contact with Captain Hechter, if I recall correctly, but my function as Staff Officer was that I sent many bombs by aeroplane to the operational area, so I will accept that it might be so.

MR WESSELS: Do you have any independent recollection of this bomb and the making available thereof?

MR VERSTER: I can recall that there was such a bomb and as the previous applicant had given evidence.

MR WESSELS: Did you know what the bomb was to be used for?

MR VERSTER: I knew it would go to the Police, but the specific target was not known to us.

MR WESSELS: I have no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you in fact assemble the bomb?

MR VERSTER: No Mr Chairperson. We used the normal system at Special Forces and this was the Technical Division, the Logistics Division of the structure. Therefore I just conveyed the instructions as received from Gen Joubert and referred them administratively to those divisions.

CHAIRPERSON: So you had no hand in the, no part in the actual handling of the actual explosive?

MR VERSTER: No Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: What are you applying for?

MR WESSELS: Mr Chairman, may I come in there, Mr Verster is applying for amnesty in that he may be an accomplice in regard to this incident.

CHAIRPERSON: Is there anybody who wishes to put questions to this applicant?

ADV DE JAGER: Mr Verster, if you had to be an accomplice, you had to know that somebody was to be killed?

MR VERSTER: Chairperson I accepted that a bomb was to be manufactured, and I knew that eventually if it went to the Police, it would be used for some or other target, which they knew better than I and whether it was suited.

ADV DE JAGER: Therefore you knew that it would be used on an unidentified person to injure or kill an unidentified person?

MR VERSTER: That is correct Mr Chairperson.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, may I be afforded one question please.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Verster, will I be correct with the following statement, and that is that the contact that Captain Hechter had with Special Forces, was through you?

MR VERSTER: That is not necessarily so Chairperson. This type of thing was handled exclusively and it may be that Captain Hechter or any outside person that used Special Forces directly, liaised with the Commanding General, but thereafter it would come to me, who did the administration or co-ordination of any work to be done.

But we contacted each other telephonically and thereafter, there was direct contact from them to me.

MR DU PLESSIS: But can I ask you, do you know whether Captain Hechter had contact with anybody else at Special Forces with regard to any other operation, including this operation except for the contact which he had with Gen Joubert of which we heard now?

MR VERSTER: I just know of those aspects for which we have applied for, or what has happened the last few days and Mr Floyd in this instance and Gen Joubert.

ADV DE JAGER: Wasn't there evidence that he had contact with Mr Naude?

MR VERSTER: Excuse me, I had to correct that, that is what I mean.

MR DU PLESSIS: Thank you Mr Chairman, I have no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. No questions? Ms Lockhat, do you have any questions?

MS LOCKHAT: No questions, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, very well. Thank you, you are excused.

MR VERSTER: Thank you Mr Chairperson.

WITNESS EXCUSED

MS LOCKHAT: We call on Mr Joubert.

MR GROBLER: Mr Chairman, I am sorry, I misunderstood which Joubert it would be, is it Gen Joubert?

MS LOCKHAT: That is correct, he is the other applicant, the last applicant.

MR GROBLER: Mr Chairman, I appear for Gen Joubert in this application as well. You will find his application in Bundle 7, pages 1 - 10 and 10.1 - 10.28.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

ABRAHAM JOHANNES MOUTON JOUBERT: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, please proceed.

EXAMINATION BY MR GROBLER: Gen Joubert, I wish to ask of you to have regard for your amnesty application, and with special reference to 4.4.2, that is just so that we can pick up the thread of the story.

ADV DE JAGER: Which page?

MR GROBLER: It would be the hand-written page number, sub-page 22, Mr Chairperson, 10,21.

Gen Joubert, I would just like to return to some point in your evidence, just to pick up the thread again. You have made this statement repeatedly. There was this meeting when you started implementing the Joubert plan, whereby the Ribeiro's, Ntuli and the so-called persons for instant training, had to be identified as targets. Do you recall that?

MR JOUBERT: I confirm Chairperson.

MR GROBLER: And then would you please page further on in your application, and go to paragraph 4.4.1, which you will find on page 10.23, where you start dealing with the Ntuli and Ribeiro's.

Before you start reading General, in the extent of your application before the Committee, you had dealt with the Ntuli's and the Ribeiro's in the same breath and you saw Ntuli as part of the Mamelodi problem?

MR JOUBERT: That is correct Chairperson.

MR GROBLER: If one analyses the evidence now, and read sections of the evidence of Hechter and Cronje, then it is clear that Ntuli was a problem in KwaNdebele and not in Mamelodi, as you have said previously?

MR JOUBERT: That is correct.

ADV DE JAGER: Just for clarity, if persons do not know the area, KwaNdebele is adjacent to Mamelodi.

MR GROBLER: Thank you Chairperson. But with this in mind, do you accept that your impression of him was specifically in Mamelodi, would have been wrong then?

MR JOUBERT: That is positive Mr Chairperson.

MR GROBLER: Gen Joubert, the question regarding the identification was completed, but you had the impression of Ntuli as a member of the ANC and as an activist in the ANC, is that correct?

MR JOUBERT: That is positive Chairperson.

MR GROBLER: Then General, you have heard the evidence here this morning, with regard to what Ntuli had done in KwaNdebele. You have also seen extracts from Brigadier Cronje and Captain Hechter's evidence which serves as Exhibit D before this Committee.

Previously such extracts were read to you, would this information in Exhibit D and as it was placed here this morning, would this be in line with the picture that you had of Mr Ntuli when he was identified as an activist or as a person who was a target?

MR JOUBERT: Chairperson, I worked only with the information that I received from the Commandment and the Security Police. I did not have it in the detail that was put forward here this morning, I accepted that he was an activist and that he was working for the ANC.

Therefore he was a target.

MR GROBLER: The point being that what you have heard here this morning, is not different from the image that you had had at that stage from Mr Piet Ntuli?

MR JOUBERT: No, it does not Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: What was there to suggest that he was an ANC activist?

MR GROBLER: Mr Chairman, I am sorry, I did not quite hear you full question.

CHAIRPERSON: What was there to suggest that he was an ANC activist?

MR GROBLER: Mr Chairman, the picture that Gen Joubert had was that he was an ANC activist, that picture from the evidence as we have it now, appears to have been not entirely correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Right, I understand now.

MR GROBLER: But the evidence is in the nature of what Gen Joubert, what his picture was.

JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Mr Grobler, we already have had evidence with regard to the meeting that Gen Joubert attended with Brigadier Moller and Brigadier Cronje, wherein amongst others Ntuli was targeted for elimination.

His impression must have been informed by the discussion that took place at that meeting?

MR GROBLER: That is indeed so Mr Chairman, and that is also his evidence, but may I perhaps refer you to a part of Gen Cronje's evidence.

Mr Chairman, perhaps I should not read all of this back into the record.

CHAIRPERSON: No, don't do that, just refer us to that.

MR GROBLER: On Exhibit D, pages 558 and 559 and again on 569, you will find the evidence of Brigadier Cronje where he said very clearly that Ntuli was in effect doing everything which the ANC wanted to be done. I will at a later stage, the moment that part has not been flagged, show you where he says he believed Ntuli was working for the ANC.

The reason why this evidence is presented at this stage, it is just simply to show you that when Gen Joubert says my impression was that he was a member of the ANC, that he was an activist, there is a basis for me coming to that conclusion, although it may have been wrong.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, in other words, he is not saying that the evidence he had was that this man was an activist, he is saying the impression he had was he was an ANC activist?

MR GROBLER: Yes indeed Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: That is an important difference. Carry on.

MR GROBLER: Gen Joubert, Piet Ntuli was identified as a target at that meeting already, but he was not acted against immediately, to take him out, it took some time?

MR JOUBERT: That is correct Chairperson.

MR GROBLER: And then would you please go to your affidavit, paragraph 4.4.5 and from there you deal in your application with how it happened that Mr Ntuli was eliminated.

MR JOUBERT: Mr Chairperson, right from the start of my application, the operation started flowing. I took note of the Nietverdiendt 10, but besides the incidents here, we were also tasked with other operations, mainly abroad so my attention, I could not focus all of my attention on these operations. I had other operations which I had to co-ordinate and already at this stage, we were busy with a large planning operation.

At some stage of which I cannot recall the date, I was approached by a person whose name I cannot remember, with a request that Special Forces supplies an explosive device to blow up Mr Ntuli.

The request was put to me as a SAP request and because I was under the impression that I had to support the Police, I felt satisfied that the Police, that it would be a South African Police operation and I knew that Ntuli was a key figure in the ANC struggle, and I was satisfied that this would disrupt the ANC and I gave permission that an explosive device would be given to the SAP. I did not want any person of Special Forces involved in this operation, because I was of the opinion that this would be a simple operation that did not need any special abilities. It was not necessary to involve or expose any members of Special Forces.

I did not want any of my persons be involved with the execution of the operation, I did indeed give permission that a member of the South African Police be trained in the use of the device and you did indeed hear during previous evidence about this. I later read in the paper that Ntuli died because of a car bomb. I even heard that Brigadier Cronje had the bomb explode which I heard this morning, was not correct.

Until recently I thought that Ntuli was killed by the explosive device which I gave to the Police, but my attention was drawn to the report of the Harms Commission and it was just by the way that we received this information on page 65, where it would seem that Mr Chris Hani was held responsible for Mr Ntuli's death. I don't know where this comes from.

ADV DE JAGER: But it would seem that this information was wrong, it was wrongly accepted that they had killed him?

MR JOUBERT: And it is clear from this morning as to who killed him.

MR GROBLER: Could I draw your attention to paragraph 4.4.5 if you would page back. The first sentence that you say that somebody approached you with a request that Special Forces had to supply the explosive device, did anything emanate from the evidence this morning to juggle your memory as to who was the person who approached you?

MR JOUBERT: It could have only been one of two persons, it could have been Colonel Verster or Floyd.

MR GROBLER: The long and short thereof is that you cannot recall today exactly who it was?

MR JOUBERT: I cannot be certain if I said who it was.

MR GROBLER: The request at that stage, would this have been a request that was in line with what we could identify as the Joubert plan?

MR JOUBERT: Positive.

MR GROBLER: Very well, so the request was not strange at that stage?

MR JOUBERT: No, it wasn't.

MR GROBLER: The following that you would have wanted to know was that does the Police have authorisation for this?

MR JOUBERT: I would have been much more satisfied if I knew that the Police had permission and I accepted that they did.

MR GROBLER: Mr Floyd has given evidence here that you made a statement to the effect that you were not sure if the Police had permission or authorisation to carry out this operation, do you recall saying anything to this nature?

MR JOUBERT: Right up until now, before the operation was carried out, the person who was involved had to come to me and give me the assurance that the Police did indeed have permission to continue with their operation. I have said here previously it had come to light that the authorisation or permission for operation by the Police, was not necessarily done at the highest level.

So at which level that permission was given, if such permission was indeed given, that I do not know, but it would seem this morning, that Brigadier Cronje and Brigadier Van Wyk were aware of the situation.

MR GROBLER: And then my question was, do you specifically recall that you had made such a statement to Sergeant Major Floyd?

MR JOUBERT: No, I cannot recall something to that nature.

MR GROBLER: And at this stage you cannot speculate as to why you would have made such a statement?

MR JOUBERT: No, I cannot.

MR GROBLER: Mr Chairman, may I again have some directions from you. At this stage, this concludes Gen Joubert's evidence regarding the Ntuli matter.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR GROBLER: I do have some further evidence which I would like him to deal with, which would then really conclude his application in total. Do you wish me now to continue with that, or do you wish me to stop at this stage?

CHAIRPERSON: What does it deal with?

MR GROBLER: This is general information Mr Chairman, it deals with all three the applications before you.

CHAIRPERSON: Is it not covered in the papers before us?

MR GROBLER: To a large extent it is Mr Chairman, and I can deal with it very briefly.

CHAIRPERSON: Just refer us to the relevant pages, refer him to it.

MR GROBLER: General, just to refer to the general aspects of your amnesty application. You have Annexure B, paragraph 1, that would be sub-number page 10, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR GROBLER: Gen Joubert, the entire Annexure B is actually a summary until page 12, of those things which motivated you and the factors, I will repeat myself, the whole paragraph 1, with heading Introduction, deals with these things which motivated you and which reflected your ideas when you devised this plan and when you had to give permission from time to time, for the various things that were done, is that correct?

ADV DE JAGER: Mr Grobler, this is a part of his application, he has confirmed Annexure B under oath. If you could just indicate to us which paragraphs are of relevance, because it has already been confirmed under oath and it won't be any better if he has to confirm it once again.

MR GROBLER: I wasn't certain whether you have it like that.

ADV DE JAGER: Is there anything that he does not want to confirm?

MR GROBLER: No. The rest thereof can be dealt with in argument because then it is evidence before you.

I would just like to refer to one further aspect. In Brigadier Cronje's evidence, one gained the very strong impression that he always fed the identification of targets back to Trevits, are you aware of that?

MR JOUBERT: Yes, I knew of that.

MR GROBLER: You know what Trevits was?

MR JOUBERT: I knew what Trevits was.

MR GROBLER: Chairperson, may I refer you to Bundle 2(I), page 156 - 163. General, I am showing you the documents with the heading The Counter Revolutionary, have you seen that document?

MR JOUBERT: Yes, I have.

MR GROBLER: Would that be a reasonable version of how Trevits operated?

MR JOUBERT: Yes.

MR GROBLER: General, in your identification of targets, did you in any way rely on Trevits?

MR JOUBERT: To a certain extent the information from Trevits was used because Trevits had all the information from all the Departments, they sent their information to Trevits where it was consolidated and then with regard to the usual distribution of information, Trevits distributed the information, according to the system to all Departments and then we, on our level, once again evaluated it and it was reconfirmed.

MR GROBLER: Can I put it to you like this, did you see any information from Trevits as an order regarding what was supposed to be done with that information?

MR JOUBERT: No, not at all. Trevits was in no position to issue orders regarding operations to be executed.

MR GROBLER: So, it was always the appropriate or applicable unit's decision as to what to do with this information?

MR JOUBERT: Yes. It was their responsibility to determine what would be done about this information.

MR GROBLER: I have no further questions, thank you Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Are there any questions to be put to Gen Joubert?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR COETZEE: If I may pose one or two questions?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR COETZEE: If I may refer the Committee to Bundle 2(K), it is the evidence that was given during the Armed Forces Hearing on the 8th of October 1997.

Gen Joubert, your evidence appears in this Bundle, on page 67 - 147. Your legal representative submitted a document regarding certain aspects of the Interpretation, which you did not agree with?

MR JOUBERT: Yes, that is correct.

MR COETZEE: With the exception of the singular extracts, do you accept the content of your evidence as represented on these pages, as a correct translation and reflection of what you have said?

MR JOUBERT: Yes, that is correct.

MR COETZEE: I have no further questions at this stage, I just wish to put the following on record. I have arranged with the Evidence Leader that the record of the evidence given during these hearings, is not complete. There are two affidavits that were handed up as an Exhibit during these hearings and I understand that she will make it available to the Committee at a later stage.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much.

MR COETZEE: Furthermore I would just like to put on record that I have advised my client for purposes of these proceedings, that any further cross-examination is not relevant and I have no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR CILLIERS: I am not formally on record, my name is Cilliers. I am appearing on behalf of Gen Hans Moller, whose name has appeared quite frequently on record. I have a brief examination with your permission.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR CILLIERS: You have confirmed the record of the proceedings which took place in Cape Town, that is Bundle 2(K) before the Commission, is that correct?

MR JOUBERT: Yes, that is correct.

MR CILLIERS: During those proceedings, it was specifically put to you that Gen Moller denied any knowledge of this identification of targets, and you confirmed that you could at least say that it was somebody from his Commandment and that you could not say specifically that it was Gen Moller specifically who identified these targets, is that correct?

MR JOUBERT: Yes, that is correct.

MR CILLIERS: Do you still confirm that as the truth today?

MR JOUBERT: I cannot say that I will confirm this as the truth. It could just as well be that Gen Moller and members of his staff may have been there, or it can be that members of his staff was there.

MR CILLIERS: Yes, that is correct but the point is that you cannot say that the General had any knowledge of your plan or the identification of targets, you can at least say that you spoke with someone from the Commandment as you said in Cape Town, probably with the Intelligence component of the Commandment.

MR JOUBERT: The point that I would just like to make Honourable Chair, is that Gen Moller was the Commanding General of the Commandment, so he would necessarily have known. What I mean is on a daily basis, he worked with the Security Police.

They held joint information or intelligence meetings. I will not be told that a man like Gen Moller did not know about what was going on.

MR CILLIERS: With all respect General, if you say that he would have known, you can then not say that he did know, you are simply drawing the inference that he should have known?

MR JOUBERT: Yes, that is correct.

MR CILLIERS: In Cape Town, and I can refer you Honourable Chairperson, for your convenience, to page 142 and 143 of his evidence, it was put explicitly to you that Gen Moller denied any knowledge of this, and you confirmed that it could be so and I could read your answer to you if you wished, it appears on page 143.

You give a very long answer, but in the third paragraph you say in other words, we had to obtain this information for the people who possessed that information, and whether it was from Gen Moller or whether it was from his Intelligence Staff, I can't confirm one hundred percent. But the Intelligence did come from his Commandment and from the SAP, that is the short and the long of his story.

That is at least what you could say.

ADV DE JAGER: Mr Cilliers, could I just have some clarity regarding that. I can understand that you are putting to him that Moller didn't know about certain things or whatsoever. Does Moller deny that he ever held a meeting along with Cronje and Joubert?

MR CILLIERS: Gen Moller denies that he ever attended any meeting with anybody during which this so-called plan of elimination of people was discussed.

With special significance for the Ribeiro's, the Ntuli's and the Nietverdiendt 10.

ADV DE JAGER: Does he also deny that he attended meetings during which co-operation between the Police and the Defence Force was discussed, and during which Cronje was present?

MR CILLIERS: Honourable Chair, the incident took place quite some time ago. Gen Moller can by nature of the situation then not remember specifically which meetings he attended and which not.

There were various meetings during which the Security Police was involved, but what he denies specifically is that he had any knowledge of any nature of any planning to murder Dr and Mrs Ribeiro, or the Nietverdiendt 10 or the matter of Ntuli.

He did not attend such a meeting and it is that statement which was made in Cape Town, which was confirmed, which indicates to that possibility.

General, you have heard the discussion between me and the Honourable Adv De Jager, is that correct?

MR JOUBERT: Yes, that is correct.

MR CILLIERS: Do you confirm that in Cape Town you did indeed concede that you could not be able to say that Moller had knowledge of this plan or the identification for that matter?

MR JOUBERT: In Cape Town I stated it expressly that I was not entirely certain.

CHAIRPERSON: I think he has answered the question.

MR CILLIERS: As it pleases you, I don't have any further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you.

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, may I be afforded the opportunity just to ask one or two questions on the Trevits issue?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR DU PLESSIS: You would have remembered that two of my clients, Brigadier Cronje and Colonel Venter testified about Trevits and there was specific testimony about the identification of targets.

Gen Joubert, do you know the date of the document in Bundle 2(I), page 156? I don't see the date of the document?

ADV DE JAGER: That is the document which according to both sides, is not a complete version and the correctness of which cannot be confirmed?

MR DU PLESSIS: No, I am referring to the document relating to the Counter Revolutionary Intelligence Task Force, that is in Bundle 2(I), do you know the date of this document? It does not appear here?

MR JOUBERT: It simply says Annexure A, relevant information.

MR DU PLESSIS: No, I am simply asking whether or not you know the date of this document?

MR JOUBERT: No.

MR GROBLER: Chairperson, I apologise, perhaps I was the source of this confusion. This document is an extract from a very long set of minutes from a meeting. When I requested it to be included, the rest appeared to be irrelevant to me.

ADV DE JAGER: I think you will have the opportunity over the weekend, to clear this up with Mr Du Plessis and then return to us and tell us what you want from it and what evidence you wish to lead regarding this document. We don't have the time to sort it out right away, if you don't know what you want from the document.

MR GROBLER: It is simply about the date, Chairperson, the content of the document is not really disputable between the two of us.

MR DU PLESSIS: I would just like to know what the source of this document is and at what meeting it emanated.

CHAIRPERSON: We are not concerned really, this is an amnesty application in which we are not concerned with that document really.

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes Mr Chairman, if I can perhaps just explain to you what the problem is what I have and if you feel that this is not the correct forum to address it, then please stop me, then I won't ask further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Let me hear you.

MR DU PLESSIS: The evidence of Brigadier Cronje in respect of various incidents and of Colonel Venter, was that at Trevits, certain targets were identified as part of the counter revolutionary strategy. That was not the evidence of Gen Joubert, and I wanted to ask Gen Joubert about that and about the functioning of Trevits because it seems that his evidence is directly, contradicts Colonel Venter and Brigadier Cronje's evidence, but that goes much wider than this amnesty applications, I am in your hands.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, it does. It does, you know. Is there not a possibility that what we have called the Joubert plan, was a loosely conceived plan which was in operation more or less at that time, among other plans and that it may not have supplemented Trevits or replaced Trevits, but that is hardly an issue that I have to decide here in considering the question whether amnesty should be granted or not.

MR DU PLESSIS: I am in your hands Mr Chairman. The only point I am trying to make is that should this issue perhaps, and I have other applicants who will appear before Amnesty Committees in future, should this issue arise in future, I don't want to be heard to not have said something.

CHAIRPERSON: Then you are on record here, now.

MR DU PLESSIS: As it pleases you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Are there any other relevant questions that may be put to this witness? Is there any re-examination of this witness?

MR GROBLER: None, thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Thanks very much. Very well, I think this might be a convenient stage to bring to a close the sittings of this week.

The Committee will adjourn now and resume on Monday morning. Sisi, what time on Monday morning? May we resume on half past nine on Monday morning. Very well, we adjourn now and resume at half past nine on Monday morning.

There was the question of your wishing to address us. Who was it that wanted to address us?

ADV DE JAGER: Mr Wessels.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Wessels?

ADV DE JAGER: Mr Wessels, the position is that we cannot allow you to address us now and argue before Mr Van Jaarsveld's evidence has been heard, because his evidence may also be relevant for your clients.

We are prepared to make an exception with regard to you, but this is not an exception for anybody else, that you may submit written argument please, before the end of next week.

MR WESSELS: I am indebted to you.

ADV DE JAGER: But it must be submitted before the end of next week.

MR WESSELS: Yes, we will endeavour to do so over the weekend. Perhaps even before Monday.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, we will now adjourn and resume on Monday morning, at half past nine.

MS LOCKHAT: All rise.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS