--------------------------------------------------------------------------CHAIRPERSON: Good afternoon. We want to start the proceedings. Just for the record it is Monday the 9th of October 2000. It is a sitting of the Amnesty Committee held at Nelspruit. The Panel consists of myself, Denzil Potgieter. With me is Mr Wynand Malan and Adv Ntsiki Sandi. The Leader of Evidence for this session is Ms Coleridge. Ms Coleridge, which is the first matter that we need to attend to?

MS COLERIDGE: Chairperson if you look at the roll, the first matter we will attend to is number 6 on the roll and that is the arson at Witbank Church, Chairperson. We will then do the petrol bomb attack in Nelspruit, followed by the attempted murder of an ANC member known as Mdo in Swaziland, Chairperson. Those are the matters that we will do now, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Coleridge, before we actually start with the matters that we are going to hear, the Eugene Fourie matter, what is the position there?

MS COLERIDGE: Chairperson, the Eugene Fourie matter has been set down for today. The incident is the search of premises of Thami Zulu and the assault of his wife Thabazile Ngade. I have been informed by Mr Rossouw that his client will not be able to attend the proceedings, Chairperson. Mr Ngobe is the legal representative for Ms Ngade.

I'd like to place on record, Chairperson, that we have been in contact with Mr Lamey regarding this incident since September month. We have informed and notified his office regarding the date for this incident. Up until Friday, Chairperson, I had spoken to Mr Lamey and he had informed me that his client would be here today and requested that I start with the matter first thing today and I agreed Chairperson and this morning we were informed that he's unable to attend the hearings.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Rossouw, what is the position with Mr Fourie?

MR ROSSOUW: Mr Chairman, let me first say that I'm not aware of what arrangements were made with Mr Lamey as far back as September, my apologies for that. I know that endeavours were made by applicant Fourie to be here, to arrange for a bus ticket to come through to Nelspruit today, to testify here. He phoned me this morning and informed me that he was not able to do that. Apparently the problem is that he is involved in a year-end audit at his place of employ and that's the reason why he could not get away.

Mr Chairman and I've also been informed that apparently that was due to the short notice of the hearing. I do not know when notice was given to him. The only aspect that I can place on record as far as that is concerned, is that these matters and the roll was provided to me on the 2nd of October.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Coleridge, when was Mr Fourie notified of the hearing?

MS COLERIDGE: Chairperson, according to my records, he was notified beginning of October, which - probably by the 2nd of October, but that was the formal notice, Chairperson, but we had contact with Mr Lamey's office and he was aware that we're setting down the matter accordingly, Chairperson, so their offices were fully aware of this matter being set down, Chairperson.

MR MALAN: Just for the record, if my memory serves me right, this matter was also set down, I think, for somewhere in July, where at the pre-trial it was also not sure whether Mr Fourie would be able to attend and it subsequently turned out that he did not attend. I don't know what the reason was.

MR ROSSOUW: Mr Chairman, I do not have any instructions in that regard. I was not personally involved. I can't help you with that. Mr Fourie has informed me that he is willing to testify and as far as your decision on this matter is concerned today, acting in the best interest of the client, notice must be given to him in terms of the Act and that timeous notice was not done. Whether it was done on an informal basis might be so Mr Chairman, but as far as his position is concerned, he was not formally notified within the specified period, so my request would be to your Committee to adjourn this matter from the roll and to enrol it again on a later date.

MS COLERIDGE: Chairperson, I'd also like to place on record that no objections have been tendered by the firm Rooth and Wessels to date. I have always been in contact with Mr Lamey regarding Mr Fourie, because we were aware that he had travel arrangements - the explanation was given to us that it was difficult for him to get away from work and that was the explanation tendered to me and no formal objections were delivered to the Commission regarding any notification and so forth, Chairperson, so regarding the facts of the matter, it appears that Mr Fourie is giving us two stories, firstly saying he's unable to get away from work and now today we're hearing that he's unable to get transport to come to the Hearing. I believe that Mr Fourie is in Pretoria, Chairperson, which is also not too far from here and arrangements could have been made also to get him - to secure his presence, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Are there matters on the roll here in this session until Friday?

MS COLERIDGE: Chairperson, we have 12 incidents on the roll. I don't know how quickly we'll go through the roll, but we have 12 incidents set down for the week.

CHAIRPERSON: So we're not sure whether we are sitting until Friday?

MS COLERIDGE: Correct, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Rossouw, what is Mr Fourie's position? I mean, why can't he come here? What is the problem, now why can't he come here in the course of this week?

MR ROSSOUW: Mr Chairman, if any stage you think that there are two stories before you, or that there's some misleading - let me make this very clear, my instructions are that he can't get away from work, there's a year-end audit being carried out by auditors and he's got to be there.

CHAIRPERSON: For this whole week, or how long will that occupy him, because we're sitting here ...(intervention)

MR ROSSOUW: I can't give you an answer on that Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Obviously we want to dispose of these things, we can't have them hanging in the air for ever.

MR ROSSOUW: Those are my instructions Mr Chairman. As far as the travel arrangements are concerned, we have requested him to make the necessary arrangements to come. In any event, Mr Chairman, it's not because he can't get transport to here, that he's not here, that is not the situation. The fact of the matter is that because he can't get away from work, the arrangements were not made for him to travel here. Those are my instructions. I can't - Mr Chairman, I'll phone and try and get instructions how long this audit is going to be carried out, but apparently he will not be able to attend this meeting. He did inform me that he will testify and he's not withdrawing his application, it's just a matter of him not being available right now.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I'm going to stand the matter down and allow you an opportunity to ascertain from Mr Fourie when in this week he can be here before us. Tell him we want to dispose of this matter, we don't have unlimited time to deal with these things and it's his application, he came voluntarily to the Committee, so we want to give him every opportunity to present his case to us. Will you please explain to him the seriousness of the matter and as soon as you have instructions, won't you report back to us? I'll allow you an opportunity, even if we're busy with something else, just to indicate to us what his position is because I want to help Mr Ngobe as well.

MR ROSSOUW: Yes, I'll do that Mr Chairman. May I just take this opportunity as well, as far as the formal objection is concerned. Mr Chairman, I'm acting in the interests of the client and whether there's a gentlemen's agreement between the TRC and the firm of attorneys, Mr Chairman, cannot impeach on the client's rights. That's all I'm placing on record.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, yes. I don't want to decide anything now. I want to give you an opportunity so that we know what your client's situation is and you're quite sure that he is as keen as we are to dispose of the matter and I'm quite sure it must be possible to find some way of dealing with it whilst we are here.

MR ROSSOUW: Mr Chairman, will you excuse me for a couple of minutes?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Mr Rossouw, can you just indicate to us Mr Fourie's position, where he's employed, what does he do there?

MR ROSSOUW: Can I come back to you when I've taken instruction? I'm not sure.

CHAIRPERSON: And won't you also just ascertain what his role is in the audit that is being done? We'll appreciate that.

MR ROSSOUW: I'll do that Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, we'll stand the matter down briefly, just to allow you an opportunity and as soon as you're ready, indicate to us and I'll give you an opportunity to deal with that.

MR ROSSOUW: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Alright, Ms Coleridge, which is the first of the matters that are ready for hearing?

MS COLERIDGE: Chairperson, we call on the applicant Mr Flores.

MR CORNELIUS: Thank you Mr Chair. For the record, Wim Cornelius, from Cornelius Incorporated, I act on behalf of Mr Flores and I call him.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Cornelius. There are no other appearances in this matter?

MS COLERIDGE: Chairperson, I'm appearing on behalf of the Witbank Church. We have Father Rodrigues here today, Chairperson, so I will be acting on behalf of the Church, Chairperson, today. I've taken instructions, Chairperson and we're not opposing the application, but I've been requested to put certain questions to the applicant. Thank you Chairperson.

LEON WILLIAM JOHN FLORES: (states under oath)

MR FLORES: Mr Cornelius.

MR CORNELIUS: Thank you Chairperson.

EXAMINATION BY MR CORNELIUS: Mr Flores, you drew a proper application in terms of Section 18 of the Act which is reflected in the bundle before the Commissioners present on page 1, is that correct?

MR FLORES: That's correct, Mr Chairperson.

MR CORNELIUS: Mr Chair, I wish to apply for a formal amendment of paragraph 7(a) and (b) on page 1, to reflect on 7(a), National Party and 7(b) supporter. I understand from my colleague, the Evidence Leader, there would be no objection to that, Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, under those circumstances, the amendment is granted.

MR CORNELIUS: Thank you Chair. Now Mr Flores, you confirm your political objectives as fully amplified from folio 5, up until folio 13, is that correct?

MR FLORES: That's correct, Mr Chairperson.

MR CORNELIUS: In all times you acted as a supporter of the National Party?

MR FLORES: That's correct, Mr Chairperson.

MR CORNELIUS: On Folio 14 you reflect your personal particulars, stating where you were born and your progress through to the C Section, Vlakplaas Unit of the police.

MR FLORES: That's correct.

MR CORNELIUS: You also confirm your personal particulars as reflected in Folio 14, 15, 16, up until 17, is that correct?

MR FLORES: That's correct, Mr Chairperson.

MR CORNELIUS: Now we're applying for two applications for amnesty which are reflected on Folio 23, the attempted assassination in Swaziland and then on Folio 26, the operation of the Church in Witbank which was subject to an arson attack, is that correct?

MR FLORES: That's correct.

MR CORNELIUS: Fine. We shall now begin with the arson attack on the Witbank Church, which is reflected on Folio 26. Mr Flores, you were an employee in the service of the South African Police as envisaged in Section 20(2)(b) and Section 20(2)(f) of the Act, is that correct?

MR FLORES: That's correct, Mr Chairperson.

MR CORNELIUS: You were part of the notorious and well-known unit called Vlakplaas, of which evidence has been tendered before this Commission on various occasions and there is also a full document made available to the Commission in the possession of the Commission, setting out the operation of Vlakplaas Unit?

MR FLORES: That's correct.

MR CORNELIUS: What I want - at the time when this offence was committed, on page 26, what was your rank?

MR FLORES: I was a Sergeant, Mr Chairperson.

MR CORNELIUS: Who was the Commander at that time of Vlakplaas?

MR FLORES: Major Eugene de Kock at that stage.

MR CORNELIUS: I see. And Mr Piet Snyders, reflected in this application, was he also at that time at Vlakplaas?

MR FLORES: He was, Mr Chairperson.

MR CORNELIUS: Could you explain to the Commission, and I think it's important for the fact that the Church is present here today, how did the Security Branch and Vlakplaas operate? Were there certain requests made?

Explain it please.

MR FLORES: Yes, Mr Chairperson. The units of Vlakplaas, Mr Chairperson, would usually operate on the information received from various security branches in the various provinces at that stage, like for instance this case which came from the Eastern Transvaal Security Branch in Witbank.

MR CORNELIUS: Yes. So am I correct to say that the Security Branch of a particular area, directs a request to Vlakplaas and then it is passed by the Commander of Vlakplaas unit, is that correct?

MR FLORES: That's correct, Mr Chairperson.

MR CORNELIUS: Now in this specific instance, was such a request made?

MR FLORES: I presume there was, Mr Chairperson, because I was sent to the Witbank area.

MR CORNELIUS: I see. From whom did you receive your instructions to go to the Witbank area?

MR FLORES: From Major Eugene de Kock.

MR CORNELIUS: And did you contact any specific person on Witbank Security?

MR FLORES: Yes, on arriving in Witbank, I had to report to the Branch Commander which at that point in time was Lieut Chris Rorich.

MR CORNELIUS: When you're in a specific Security area, under whose command do you fall then?

MR FLORES: That area would be under the Middelburg Security Branch and direct under Lieut Chris Rorich.

MR CORNELIUS: What were your instructions?

MR FLORES: My instructions were from Lieut Chris Rorich that a Church hall in one of the black community areas had to be demolished, or burned down, as there was going to be a political rally the following day.

MR CORNELIUS: When you were employed in the Vlakplaas unit, did you work on the so-called need to know basis?

MR FLORES: Yes, we did, Mr Chairperson.

MR CORNELIUS: What does that imply?

MR FLORES: Mr Chairperson, as I could read it, if I received an order like that, that was the need to know basis and I wouldn't ask why and how and where.

MR CORNELIUS: So would you have questioned the information you received from Lieut Chris Rorich?

MR FLORES: Not at all Mr Chairperson.

MR CORNELIUS: You accepted it?

MR FLORES: That's correct.

MR CORNELIUS: Did you understand that this was against the so-called political enemy?

MR FLORES: I did, Mr Chairperson.

MR CORNELIUS: What did you do in preparation to raise the Church?

MR FLORES: Myself and ...(intervention)

MR MALAN: Just before you proceed, you simply say in your application that it was a political rally.

MR FLORES: That's correct.

MR MALAN: What political rally was that?

MR FLORES: As I could understand, if I recall correctly, Mr Chairperson, it was the ANC Youth meeting, something to that effect. I can't recall exactly.

MR CORNELIUS: You didn't understand it to be a National Party rally, or existing legal party rally?

MR FLORES: That's correct.

MR CORNELIUS: You didn't expect it to be existing legal party?

MR FLORES: That's correct.

MR CORNELIUS: What did you do in preparation?

MR FLORES: Myself and my team of askaris purchased a whole lot of ingredients to make Russian cocktails, which was petrol, washing powder etc. and cloth.

MR CORNELIUS: Can I just interrupt? Just for the sake of the Church, an askari, where are they employed?

MR FLORES: At C1, Vlakplaas.

MR CORNELIUS: Are they people that converted to work for the Vlakplaas Unit?

MR FLORES: Yes, more or less known as rehabilitated ANC terrorists, or Freedom Fighters, who were rehabilitated.

MR CORNELIUS: Fine. Were you also assisted by members of another Security Branch, or not?

MR FLORES: Yes, there were members of Witbank Security Branch who assisted us.

MR CORNELIUS: Can you recall their names?

MR FLORES: Not at all, Mr Chairman.

MR CORNELIUS: Can you explain to the Committee what is a Russian Cocktail?

MR FLORES: A Russian Cocktail, Mr Chairperson, in layman's terms, is a petrol bomb, it was just nicknamed a Russian Cocktail. That's when you fill empty glass bottles with a certain amount of petrol and you add some washing powder, you even add some grated soap in, which makes it more into a paste and you put a cloth fuse in at the top and when lit, you throw that at the specific target and on breaking, that starts a fire.

MR CORNELIUS: I see. How many did you prepare, can you remember?

MR FLORES: I can't recall, but at least about 3 to 4.

MR CORNELIUS: Was there any form of surveillance exercised over this property?

MR FLORES: Yes, prior to performing this operation, myself, the askaris, with the help from the people of Witbank Security Branch, we did do surveillance on the target area.

MR CORNELIUS: What did you find?

MR FLORES: At that point in time, we only found the empty church hall, no movement whatsoever, or any people or any people inside, I think the time must have been around about after midnight the evening.

MR CORNELIUS: Was this surveillance done to also determine if there were people living on the property?

MR FLORES: That's correct, Mr Chairperson. The main aim was just to destroy the building and not to harm anyone.

MR CORNELIUS: Can you recall the construction of the building, what type of building was it?

MR FLORES: Mr Chairperson, if I can recall correctly, I don't know if the exterior was from bricks, I can't recall that.

MR CORNELIUS: I see one of the applicants say it was a zinc constructed building.

MR FLORES: It could be possible, I can't recall that.

MR CORNELIUS: When you arrived at the Church, can you elaborate what you did there?

MR FLORES: Yes, Mr Chairperson. I parked my vehicle about two blocks away from the specific target and sent two of my askaris in. The one I recall was Chris Mosiane and as I believed afterwards, they entered through a window and found furniture inside, tables and chairs, which they stack-piled and then threw the Russian Cocktails onto that which ignited and started burning.

MR CORNELIUS: Were there any other residential homes close to this building?

MR FLORES: Yes, Mr Chairperson.

MR CORNELIUS: But they weren't in danger of being ...

MR FLORES: Not at all, no, it was quite some distance.

MR CORNELIUS: In paragraph 2 on page 26, I see you say they entered the wall, but that's a typing error, it should be they entered hall through a window.

MR FLORES: The hall, that's correct. That's correct.

MR CORNELIUS: After the arson attack, was the Church in fact raised?

MR FLORES: Yes, it was, Mr Chairperson.

MR CORNELIUS: And the last paragraph on page 26, I see there's a little gremlin that crept in there, it's raised with a z, which means it was obviously totally destroyed.

MR FLORES: That's correct, Mr Chairperson.

MR CORNELIUS: Did you stay there to see this total destruction of the church?

MR FLORES: No, Mr Chairperson, as soon as my people came back, we evacuated the area and left.

MR CORNELIUS: Who did you report to then?

MR FLORES: We then reported the success of the mission to Lieut Chris Rorich.

MR CORNELIUS: And that report, was that reflected to High Commanding Officers as well, according to your knowledge?

MR FLORES: Yes, I recall that this was reported back by Lieut Rorich to Major Eugene de Kock, that everything went successfully.

MR CORNELIUS: I notice on page 27 you say in your application:

but you got instructions directly from de Kock?

MR FLORES: On this incident, no I got no instruction, I was sent to Witbank area on the instructions of Maj de Kock, but the Church incident of demolishing the building was from Lieut Chris Rorich who I presume got authorisation from Major de Kock.

MR CORNELIUS: Oh, I understand. But there was no disciplinary action ever taken against you for raising this Church?

MR FLORES: Nothing whatsoever, Mr Chairperson.

MR CORNELIUS: You, at all times, carried out the instructions of Eugene de Kock within the course and scope of your duties?

MR FLORES: That's correct.

MR CORNELIUS: Did you believe you were acting in the interests of the country from a political view?

MR FLORES: I did, Mr Chairperson.

MR CORNELIUS: Bar your salary in terms of Section 20(3)(f) of the Act, did you receive any bonus or type of financial incentive for this deed?

MR FLORES: Nothing whatsoever, Mr Chairperson.

MR CORNELIUS: Did you have any personal hate against the Church, or the specific building, or the people?

MR FLORES: Nothing whatsoever, Mr Chairperson.

MR CORNELIUS: According to your knowledge you've made a full disclosure of all facts you know of?

MR FLORES: That's correct, Mr Chairperson.

MR CORNELIUS: And you request this Committee to consider granting you amnesty for arson and for malicious damage to property.

MR FLORES: That's correct, Mr Chairperson.

MR CORNELIUS: Is there anything you wish to add?

MR FLORES: Nothing Mr Chairperson.

MR CORNELIUS: Thank you Mr Chair.

MR MALAN: Mr Flores, on page 26, as I read it, just to get it clear, you were deployed in a normal Vlakplaas deployment to the Eastern Transvaal at Witbank. This is the three weeks working with the Security Branch Witbank?

MR FLORES: That's correct, Mr Chairperson.

MR MALAN: And then Rorich wanted the Church if not destroyed, at least made unusable?

MR FLORES: That's correct, Mr Chairperson.

MR MALAN: Now you say he approached you and he asked you to do this because a political rally was to be held the following day.

MR FLORES: That's correct Mr Chairperson.

MR MALAN: Now when did you do the surveillance?

MR FLORES: That evening, Mr Chairperson.

MR MALAN: And when did you make the bombs?

MR FLORES: The afternoon, Mr Chairperson.

MR MALAN: So everything happened on the same day?

MR FLORES: On the same day.

MR MALAN: I just wanted to get clarity because on the fourth paragraph you say there "one afternoon", but it's that same afternoon?

MR FLORES: Same afternoon, yes.

MR MALAN: Alright. Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Cornelius, what is the position with the second incident that you referred to?

MR CORNELIUS: Thank you, Mr Chair.

ADV SANDI: Just before that, Mr Cornelius, just one question. This Witbank Church incident, are you able to tell us the date? When did it happen?

MS COLERIDGE: I can assist you there. It's the 21st of May 1988.

MR CORNELIUS: I'm indebted to the Evidence Leader, thank you. Now Mr Flores, there was also a second application, the attempted assassination in Swaziland on Folio 23, is that correct?

MR FLORES: That's correct, Mr Chairperson.

MR CORNELIUS: I'm not going to elaborate. You've testified and everything as far as your operation. You were still stationed at Vlakplaas at that time?

MR FLORES: That's correct.

MR CORNELIUS: Under the command of Eugene de Kock?

MR FLORES: That's correct, Chairperson.

MR CORNELIUS: Was there also a request made from the Security Division to Vlakplaas for this operation?

MR FLORES: That's correct, Mr Chairperson. From the Middelburg/Nelspruit branch.

MR CORNELIUS: From whom did this request come?

MR FLORES: At that stage Mr Chairperson, W/O Dan Greyling.

MR CORNELIUS: And he was affiliated to the Security Branch in?

MR FLORES: Nelspruit, Mr Chairperson.

MR CORNELIUS: I see. What were your instructions there?

MR FLORES: The instructions we received was to enter Swaziland, Mr Chairperson and meet W/O Greyling there with reference to tracking down a highly trained ANC cadre. At that point in time I didn't know, I couldn't recall his name. I believe it's Mdo now what I heard and to eliminate him, Mr Chairperson.

MR CORNELIUS: When you say to eliminate him, it was to murder him?

MR FLORES: That's correct.

MR CORNELIUS: Now all this planning and the conspiracy was committed within the Republic?

MR FLORES: That is correct, Mr Chairperson.

MR CORNELIUS: Fine. Did you go to Swaziland?

MR FLORES: Yes, Mr Chairperson, we did go to Swaziland and we stayed in a hotel on the Manzini/Mbabane Road, I can't recall the hotel's name.

MR CORNELIUS: Fine. Did you enter Swaziland legally under your passports, or illegally?

MR FLORES: Legally via Oshoek border post, Mr Chairperson.

MR CORNELIUS: I see. You then convened in this hotel. What happened then?

MR FLORES: There we got all the necessary information from W/O Greyling, Mr Chairperson, regarding the person, the type of vehicle he's driving, etc.

MR CORNELIUS: According to the information you got from Greyling, was it a highly trained ANC member?

MR FLORES: Yes, it was Mr Chairperson.

MR CORNELIUS: Your group in Swaziland, who did that consist of?

MR FLORES: Our group consisted out of myself, Maj de Kock at that stage, who was a Major, Lieut Paul van Dyk, Lieut Piet Snyders and W/O David Britz and we entered Swaziland in two vehicles, Mr Chairperson.

MR CORNELIUS: I see you mention a kombi and a Golf motor vehicle.

MR FLORES: That's correct.

MR CORNELIUS: Which vehicle were you in?

MR FLORES: I was in the kombi.

MR CORNELIUS: Then the planning, did that take the whole night? How many days? What happened? Can you tell us?

MR FLORES: If I can recall correctly, that would have been just an hour or two the afternoon, a briefing, we would have received from W/O Dan Greyling as to the identification of the person and his vehicle.

MR CORNELIUS: Did Greyling then return to Nelspruit or did he stay there?

MR FLORES: The following - he did stay the night over and the following day he left back from Nelspruit, where we continued doing mobile - how can you put it, Mr Chairperson?

CHAIRPERSON: Reconnaissance.

MR FLORES: Reconnaissance, to see if we could see this vehicle travelling.

MR CORNELIUS: Did you see the vehicle of the chap you were going to eliminate?

MR FLORES: During the day Mr Chairperson, not at all and during the day we did meet up with a sergeant that time, Labuschagne from the Middelburg Branch.

MR CORNELIUS: Middelburg Security Branch?

MR FLORES: That's correct and he was purely there to advise us on where the hang-out spots were of ANC cadres in the Manzini/Mbabane area.

MR CORNELIUS: I see. Did he know the victim?

MR FLORES: Yes, he did know of his whereabouts etc.

MR CORNELIUS: Were you successful in tracing him?

MR FLORES: During the day, not at all Mr Chairperson.

MR CORNELIUS: I see on page 24 and paragraph 3, you say that he was seen and the car registration number was taken, is that correct? Oh, it wasn't taken. During the course of the raid, you say, Sgt Labuschagne would have joined the company. When did you then see this target for the first time?

MR FLORES: It was that same evening, Mr Chairperson. If I recall correctly it was Lieut Snyders driving the kombi, Mr Labuschagne sitting in the passenger side, that's if I can recall correctly. Myself and W/O Britz were in the kombi and we were travelling in the main road of Mbabane when we spotted the vehicle outside the pub. We then stopped across the road from the pub where the ANC member was identified sitting on the pavement talking to people.

MR CORNELIUS: Who did this identification of the victim and the motor vehicle, just to clear up my own impression.

MR FLORES: That came from Sgt Labuschagne.

MR CORNELIUS: I see. So he identified the vehicle and the suspect?

MR FLORES: That's correct, Mr Chairperson.

MR CORNELIUS: I see. So if I look at paragraph 3 on page 24, you say that you were surveilling in order to obtain the registration.

MR FLORES: That's correct.

MR CORNELIUS: You did not obtain the registration number that time.

MR FLORES: We did have the registration in our possession, if I recall correctly.

MR CORNELIUS: I understand. What did you do then?

MR FLORES: We then stopped our - the kombi's window Mr Chairperson, was slightly tinted. I opened one of the side windows just a brief, and I had a 9mm beretta pistol with me which was fitted with a silencer. I was then going to ...(intervention)

MR CORNELIUS: Did you aim at the target?

MR FLORES: I did aim at the target and ...(intervention)

MR CORNELIUS: What happened then?

MR FLORES: Just prior to, if I could say just prior to firing a shot off, I was told to abandon this section or mission by Mr Labuschagne, because there were too many eye witnesses by the pub. We then withdrew - I then withdrew the weapon and during that point in time, the suspect got back in his vehicle and drove.

MR CORNELIUS: Did you follow him?

MR FLORES: We did follow him. He drove up about two to three blocks, if I remember correctly. By that time we had to also turn around and three blocks later we found them on a side road talking to a black man by his vehicle.

MR CORNELIUS: Were you still in the kombi?

MR FLORES: We were still in the kombi Mr Chairman.

MR CORNELIUS: Who was with you in the kombi?

MR FLORES: Still the same people as mentioned.

MR CORNELIUS: Who were they?

MR FLORES: It was myself, Mr Brits, Mr Snyders, Mr Labuschagne.

MR CORNELIUS: Where was Col Eugene de Kock?

MR FLORES: Him and Mr van Dyk were in the Golf. We were in radio communication with them.

MR CORNELIUS: I understand. Fine. You now approach the target for a second time. What happened then?

MR FLORES: When we spotted the man standing, this Mdo standing outside the vehicle, we decided that we're going to do a drive-by shooting, as we couldn't just stop because we were on the same side of the road at that stage and on approaching the target, we once again, I was delayed and had to withdraw due to Mr Labuschagne.

MR CORNELIUS: What did he say? Don't shoot. What did he say?

MR FLORES: Basically he said we mustn't shoot now. I don't know who radioed in to Maj de Kock at that stage, but he was contacted on the radio where we received instructions to withdraw and meet back at the hotel.

MR CORNELIUS: Who gave instructions for you to withdraw?

MR FLORES: Maj de Kock.

MR CORNELIUS: Did you do it?

MR FLORES: We did. The whole thing was then abandoned, as such.

MR CORNELIUS: Now was this whole futile operation, was it ever debated?

MR FLORES: Yes, Mr Chairperson, once everyone was meeting back at the hotel, Maj de Kock was quite upset at two stages. Why did we withdraw from the operation and then as I was notified later, or as it came to me, what happened to be that this Mdo was actually a source of the Middelburg Branch, in particular of Mr Labuschagne, being his handler.

MR CORNELIUS: You say Mr Labuschagne was the handler of the victim and he was his informant?

MR FLORES: That's correct. And at that point in time, Mr Greyling at the Nelspruit Branch was not in good terms with Mr Labuschagne, who was at Middelburg Branch and there was a certain dispute between the two persons and it looked as if Mr Greyling wanted Mr Labuschagne’s source eliminated.

MR CORNELIUS: A childish stupid play with somebody's life.

MR FLORES: If that is so, that's correct Mr Chairperson.

MR CORNELIUS: At all times you carried out the instructions of de Kock and you would have eliminated him if you were instructed to, is that correct?

MR FLORES: That's correct, Mr Chairperson.

MR CORNELIUS: Was the whole operation then abandoned?

MR FLORES: The whole operation was abandoned and we left the following morning.

MR CORNELIUS: Do you know if this operation was cleared higher up than de Kock, or not?

MR FLORES: I wouldn't know, Mr Chairperson.

MR CORNELIUS: Did you receive any form of compensation for your acts and your deeds?

MR FLORES: Nothing whatsoever.

MR CORNELIUS: Did you have any personal vengeance against the victim?

MR FLORES: Nothing whatsoever.

MR CORNELIUS: And you request that this Committee considers granting you amnesty for your conspiracy to commit murder and all possible delicts which, I doubt if there's any, which might have flowed from this?

MR FLORES: That's correct, Mr Chairperson.

MR CORNELIUS: Thank you Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Cornelius.

MR MALAN: Just before you continue. You were on a mission to eliminate a certain person, whose name you then knew, but you cannot remember it now?

MR FLORES: That's correct.

MR MALAN: To complete this mission, Sgt Labuschagne joined you?

MR FLORES: That is correct.

MR MALAN: I assume that he also knew this person?

MR FLORES: That is correct.

MR MALAN: So he knew who is going to be killed?

MR FLORES: That is correct.

MR MALAN: Why didn't he say to you: "But it's one of my informants"?

MR FLORES: If I can just correct that, Mr Chairperson, if I recall correctly, he did not know this was the person. We only had the registration number that we received from W/O Greyling and when we found the vehicle at the bar that evening and when we saw the person, I assume that's where he learned that this was the informant.

MR MALAN: Then you tried to shoot him again. Why didn't he realise it the first time? Why did you continue to attempt the second time?

MR FLORES: I assume that what I'm saying now is that he possible thought that we did not find the right person when he left.

MR MALAN: But he did not tell you that this was his informer, he just said: "Do not shoot"?

MR FLORES: That is correct.

MR MALAN: It sounds very strange to me. Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Ms Coleridge, cross-examination?

MS COLERIDGE: Thank you Chairperson.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS COLERIDGE: Mr Flores, I want to take you back to the Witbank incident. You stated that you used teams in this matter. How many teams did you have to conduct this operation?

MR FLORES: Mr Chairperson, I only had my team, my askari team and I had two or three people from the Witbank branch with me and we split up into three groups. It was my vehicle plus my askari team's vehicle, plus the Witbank branch's, if I recall correctly.

MS COLERIDGE; Can you roughly tell us how many people there were?

MR FLORES: In the petrol bombing of the hall itself, we were only two people, but in the whole operation we must have been about, I could be rectified, about 12 to 13 people.

MS COLERIDGE: So only the askaris went into the building?

MR FLORES: That is correct, Mr Chairperson.

MS COLERIDGE: And the rest of the people?

MR FLORES: We were about two blocks away in that perimeter area.

MS COLERIDGE: I got instructions from the Witbank Church that there were numerous telephone threats made to that Church. Do you know of any telephone threats?

MR FLORES: That's the first word I hear of it, Mr Chairperson.

MS COLERIDGE: Excuse me?

MR FLORES: It's the first time I hear of it, Mr Chairperson.

MS COLERIDGE: The threats were that they'll kill them and that they'll burn them.

MR FLORES: The first time I hear of this Mr Chairperson.

MS COLERIDGE: And that a search was also conducted, the Security Force in Witbank thought that they were hiding terrorists or ANC comrades in the Church, do you know of that?

MR FLORES: I don't know of that, Mr Chairperson.

MS COLERIDGE: Do you know that on a previous occasion, on the 14th of March 86, there was also an arson attack at that hall?

MR FLORES: I didn't know, Mr Chairperson.

MS COLERIDGE: That this was actually the second incident that occurred at the Church?

MR FLORES: Didn't know about that Mr Chairperson.

MS COLERIDGE: I just want to place on record, Chairperson, that I was informed that there was some form of coincidence in relation to COSAS members being detained. The first incident occurred on the 14th of May, March, sorry, March 86 and COSAS members were detained in Witbank on that particular day and that they were having a hearing or a court trial on that particular day, do you know of that?

MR FLORES: Do not know about that Mr Chairperson.

MS COLERIDGE: And therefore on the 14th of March, that's actually how the Security Force then attacked the Church. They could just relate it to that incident and that on the 14th a second incident, the 21st of May 86, that the very same COSAS members were actually acquitted on that day. Do you have any knowledge of that?

MR FLORES: I wasn't aware of that, Mr Chairperson.

MS COLERIDGE: Now back to the incident. You said that Mr Rorich reported back to Mr de Kock. Do you know whether he reported back to him?

MR FLORES: If I recall correctly, I was in the office that following morning, Mr Chairperson, when he had made the call.

MS COLERIDGE: And do you know what he had stated to Mr de Kock.

MR FLORES: I can't recall what was said, I know it was reported to him.

MS COLERIDGE: Did you - Mr de Kock was actually your Commander, is that right?

MR FLORES: That's correct, Mr Chairperson.

MS COLERIDGE; Did you and Mr de Kock discuss this matter after the incident had occurred?

MR FLORES: If I recall correctly, when I returned back to the base which was Vlakplaas, I must have reported it because I had to make a report on our three week - I can't get to the word now - deployment, thank you.

MS COLERIDGE: And how many petrol bombs did you throw into the Church Hall?

MR FLORES: Well, Mr Chairperson, I didn't throw it, I sent two askaris and I think what I stated, we made between three and four and I presume everything - all of them were used.

MS COLERIDGE: And these petrol bombs obviously had the capacity to actually lower the building to the ground, is that right?

MR FLORES: With the way they stacked the furniture inside, I believe so, yes.

MS COLERIDGE: Was that your initial instruction, to destroy the entire building?

MR FLORES: Just to destroy the hall, that's correct, Mr Chairperson.

MS COLERIDGE: Because the first incident, they only damaged the front part of the hall.

MR FLORES: I'm not aware of that, Mr Chairperson.

MS COLERIDGE: Did your members think you were told that the Church Hall was used by ANC members having meetings and so forth, is that right?

MR FLORES: That's correct. That's the information that was carried over to me from Lieut Chris Rorich.

MS COLERIDGE: What was the idea of actually destroying the building? Surely these members could have then just moved to another venue? Surely that wouldn't deter them. What was the reason for ...?

MR FLORES: At that point in time, Mr Chairperson, the main objective was, once he's destroyed it, was the time, if I could understand correctly, was the time for them to obtain other premises, so this was just basically like a delay tactic.

MS COLERIDGE: But that doesn't make sense, Mr Flores.

MR FLORES: Mr Chairperson, I can't comment on that. I was from the operation unit. We didn't do information gathering, we only worked on branches' information, on what they requested, so ...

MS COLERIDGE: Because you can understand that surely these members could use another venue to just have meetings.

MR FLORES: I would presume so, Mr Chairperson, yes.

MS COLERIDGE: And that wouldn't really deter them by you destroying the building?

MR FLORES: Maybe just delay it by an hour or two, but they'd carry on, yes.

MS COLERIDGE: So it is possible, as my instructions, that it could have been related to these COSAS members being detained and being acquitted on that particular day?

MR FLORES: I presume so, yes, Mr Chairperson.

MS COLERIDGE: Because it also happened very late in the evening, so obviously they were released during the day. Do you agree with me?

MR FLORES: That's correct, yes.

MS COLERIDGE: Did you go back into the area after the incident had occurred?

MR FLORES: Not at all, Mr Chairperson.

MS COLERIDGE: Chairperson, it is my instructions that no one was injured. I just want to refer - may I just have one second, just if I've left out anything? Mr Flores I've had a request from the community ...(end of tape) they have now rebuilt the Church and they are having a ceremony where they're going to bless the building and so forth, and I've had a request from Father Rodrigues that he's just wanting to know whether, in the spirit of reconciliation, whether you are able or willing, to actually on that particular day, come to the community to the venue and just reconcile with the members or the community members, obviously it's just a question put to you, Mr Flores.

MR FLORES: I will make a great effort to be there, yes.

MS COLERIDGE: So you are willing to do that?

MR FLORES: Yes, I am.

ADV SANDI: When is this particular day?

MS COLERIDGE: Chairperson, no date has been established yet.

ADV SANDI: Can I also ask this, what are the full names of the Church? You keep on referring to Witbank Church.

MS COLERIDGE: It's the Sacred Heart Church and Chairperson, it's not actually the church that's been destroyed, but actually the Church hall and the attacks were all on the Church hall.

CHAIRPERSON: What denomination is that?

MS COLERIDGE: Roman Catholic, Chairperson. Do you know of any - also in relation to this, do you know of any police members also involved, that probably belong to the congregation and so forth in this incident?

MR FLORES: Just repeat again please.

MS COLERIDGE: Do you know of any police members or any police involvement from any members of that particular church in this operation?

MR FLORES: No. No, Mr Chairperson.

MS COLERIDGE: Chairperson, why I've asked the question is just that we want to, just for police members that are part of the congregation, there was a lot of suspicion regarding probably their involvement and so forth and I just wanted to clear that with the applicant. I want to move on to the next incident.

MR ROSSOUW: Sorry, Mr Chairman, sorry to interrupt here. I was not given an opportunity to cross-examine the witness on this incident where I'm also representing another applicant in this matter. Maybe it would be appropriate to deal with my cross-examination at this stage, relating to this incident.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, are you appearing for an interested party here?

MR ROSSOUW: No, Mr Chairman, I'm appearing for Mr Mosiane, who's an applicant.

CHAIRPERSON: In the same incident?

MR ROSSOUW: In the same incident.

CHAIRPERSON: The Church incident?

MR ROSSOUW: Indeed, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I assume his application will follow soon?

MR ROSSOUW: His application will follow, yes Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, we'll bear that in mind. We'll give you an opportunity once Ms Coleridge has completed her cross-examination.

MS COLERIDGE: Chairperson, I've completed my cross-examination in relation to the Witbank incident.

CHAIRPERSON: Carry on and finish whatever you want to do.

MS COLERIDGE: Can I go on to the next incident?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MS COLERIDGE: Thank you Chairperson. Just in relation to Comrade Mdo, did you have any photographs of the target?

MR FLORES: Yes. Yes, Mr Chairperson.

MS COLERIDGE: And who provided you with that?

MR FLORES: That would be a section called C2 at Head Office. They were responsible for all identification of cadres etc.

ADV SANDI: Just explain this. So that means when you entered Swaziland, you already had this photograph or photographs of this person?

MR FLORES: That's correct, Mr Chairperson.

ADV SANDI: And you were in the company of Mr Labuschagne, if I understood you correctly?

MR FLORES: That is correct.

ADV SANDI: But couldn't he see from this photograph that this was his informer?

MR FLORES: Mr Chairperson, if - let me restate, we would have gone through the photo album which was known as the photo album of people who left in 1976 during the riots for training abroad, etc., etc., then the photo album was compiled. I we had the photo with us, I can't say we did, but we must have looked at the photo prior to the operation.

ADV SANDI: When did you get this photo for the first time during this incident?

MR FLORES: As I just explained now, Mr Chairperson, I can't recall if it was prior to entering Swaziland, or if it was the hotel with Mr Greyling that he had the photo with him, but I'm sure we must have had a look at the photo.

ADV SANDI: What I sort of find a bit strange is why Mr Labuschagne could not identify this person on the photo as his informer.

MR FLORES: Mr Chairperson, if you do recall, Mr Labuschagne only rejoined us the following day. I can't recall if he also had a look at the photos.

ADV SANDI: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry. What was Labuschagne supposed to do? What was his actual role? You say he was supposed to point out hide outs, or whatever it might be, but what - how did he feature in this whole thing?

MR FLORES: Mr Chairperson, prior to Mr Labuschagne, if I can just give a background, prior to Mr Labuschagne joining the Security Branch, he was part of the Narcotics Bureau and worked in Swaziland for something like four to five years and he knew the areas where people hung out etc., etc and then when he joined the Security Branch, Swaziland was his target area which he worked and he operated in and he was very familiar with the Swazi people themselves, he had a lot of friends there, etc. and the main purpose was he would accompany and help us and assist us.

CHAIRPERSON: How did he become involved? Did de Kock ask him, or what happened?

MR FLORES: Yes, if I can recall, I can't speak out of turn now, but it must have been. I mean he wouldn't just pop up there by himself.

CHAIRPERSON: But were he and Greyling present at the same time with you in Swaziland?

MR FLORES: No. No, Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: He and Greyling never met in Swaziland?

MR FLORES: No.

CHAIRPERSON: During the course of this operation?

MR FLORES: No, Mr Chairperson, Mr Greyling spent the night with us and the following morning he left. That day Mr Labuschagne only joined us.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Sorry, Ms Coleridge.

MS COLERIDGE: Thank you Chairperson. You stated in your amnesty application, on page 24, you stated:

Now was Labuschagne with you at that stage?

MR FLORES: Yes, he was in the vehicle with us Mr Chairperson.

MS COLERIDGE: But then you stated that he said to stop because there were witnesses and lots of people around there.

MR FLORES: That is correct.

MS COLERIDGE: So at that stage he didn't tell you: "Look, I know this."

MR FLORES: No, he didn't.

MS COLERIDGE: And then, what happened?

MR FLORES: Then, as I stated Mr Chairperson, then after some time, it could be a minute or two, I can't recall the time span, the suspect, if we can put it as such, climbed into his vehicle and drove off.

MS COLERIDGE: And you could clearly see him?

MR FLORES: Yes. Yes we could clearly see him.

MS COLERIDGE: And Mr Labuschagne as well?

MR FLORES: Yes.

MS COLERIDGE: Continue. And then?

MR FLORES: And we had to make like a U-turn because it was a double road and we followed him and met up with the same person and same vehicle about two to three blocks further, where he was outside his vehicle taking to another black male at that point in time.

MS COLERIDGE: And was that the time when you wanted to then eliminate him?

MR FLORES: Where I said we must do a drive-by shooting, yes.

MS COLERIDGE: And what weapons did you have on you?

MR FLORES: I had a 9mm beretta fitted with a silencer.

MS COLERIDGE: So did you all - was it just one person tasked to eliminate him, or who was going to do the actual shooting?

MR FLORES: The weapon wasn't mine. The weapon was allocated to W/O Britz, but the job of the elimination was handed over to me.

MS COLERIDGE: And then at that stage, Labuschagne informed you that he was his informant.

MR FLORES: Not at that stage, Mr Chairperson, he just said we must withdraw from that. That's when we reported in by radio to Mr de Kock, who then abandoned the whole mission.

MS COLERIDGE: And then at which stage did he actually inform you?

MR FLORES: Back at the hotel.

MS COLERIDGE: And who was all at the hotel?

MR FLORES: The same group here including Mr de Kock and Mr van Dyk, who were in the other vehicle.

MS COLERIDGE: And did you discuss the matter?

MR FLORES: If I recall correctly, Mr Chairperson, I wasn't part of the discussion. They were senior officers and they would sit and discuss. It's only afterwards we heard that there was a dispute between the two members from the various branches.

MS COLERIDGE: And do you know if any follow-ups were made in relation to this?

MR FLORES: I wouldn't know whatsoever. Nothing whatsoever.

MS COLERIDGE: Thank you Chairperson.

MR MALAN: Ms Coleridge, was notice given to any of the implicated persons?

MS COLERIDGE: Yes, Chairperson, I can - shall I place it on record now?

MR MALAN: Please do. We have Rorich...

MS COLERIDGE: It is de Kock, Dan Greyling, David Britz and Mr Labuschagne. In relation to the victim, we have contacted the ANC offices and requested whether they know of this MK Mdo, because we discovered that it was MK Mdo and then they'd given us the name George Mdo and we contacted him and he informed us that it wasn't him, or that, he probably wouldn't know if an attempt was made, but in relation to him and Labuschagne, he said he didn't know him, so that's as far as we got in terms of the investigation, Chairperson.

MR MALAN: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Ms Coleridge. Yes, we'll just give Mr Rossouw an opportunity to take up his position. He was still trying to clarify the other matter for us as well.

MR ROSSOUW: Thank you Mr Chairman. My apologies. Due to the modern technology, I'm in the position to inform you Mr Chairperson, that Mr Eugene Fourie, let me first answer your question, Mr Chairman. He's employed by the City Council of Johannesburg and his position there is an Asset Control Manager and it is that respect that he's involved in the audit and the figures for his department need to be lodged by Wednesday. However, Mr Chairman, I've specifically asked him to again request or make the necessary arrangements to be here and he's just phoned me back and left a message that he will leave tomorrow morning at 7 o'clock on a bus and he'll be here at 10 past 12 tomorrow afternoon so that we can finish his application tomorrow. Those are my instructions, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Thank you for your trouble Mr Rossouw. Can you just give me a second, I just want to see if we can dispose of that aspect. Oh, Mr Ngobe, has he disappeared?

MS COLERIDGE: I have his details and his cell number, but he must be in the building here, oh, there we go.

CHAIRPERSON: We'll just give him an opportunity to take up his position as well. Yes, Mr Ngobe, Mr Rossouw has managed to make contact with Mr Fourie and Mr Fourie would be able to be here tomorrow afternoon. Would it suit you if we were to deal with the matter at 2 o'clock tomorrow afternoon?

MR NGOBE: Thank you Chairman. I'd like to establish with my secretary to get on my diary if 2 o'clock will be suitable. I'll request just two seconds to do...

CHAIRPERSON: Please do that. We can carry on with something else in the meantime. We'll appreciate it if you can assist us Mr Ngobe.

MR NGOBE: Thank you Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Alright Mr Rossouw, have you got questions for the applicant, Mr Flores?

MR ROSSOUW: Thank you Mr Chairman. Yes, I do.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR ROSSOUW: Mr Flores, first of all, I represent Mr Chris Mosiane, who was an askari at that time at Vlakplaas, is that correct?

MR FLORES: That's correct, Mr Chairperson.

MR ROSSOUW: And he received his instructions directly from you?

MR FLORES: That's correct, Mr Chairperson.

MR ROSSOUW: Now a person as an askari, we all know what his description is. Would he be in a position to question your authority or your orders?

MR FLORES: Not at all, Mr Chairperson.

MR ROSSOUW: He would accept them and carried it out?

MR FLORES: That is correct, Mr Chairperson.

MR ROSSOUW: You would expect that of him?

MR FLORES: That's correct, Mr Chairperson.

MR ROSSOUW: You would also expect that of him?

MR FLORES: That's correct, Mr Chairperson.

MR ROSSOUW: You've testified that you've handled these matters on a need to know basis. Would you have divulged all the necessary information relating to where the instruction came from and the identification of the target to a person like Mr Mosiane?

MR FLORES: No, Mr Chairperson.

MR ROSSOUW: Mr Flores then my instructions are just to put to you on two aspects, now first of all Mr Mosiane will testify that he was not personally involved in the preparation of these Russian Cocktails. You've testified that there were about 12 people involved. Could it be that some other people were involved?

MR FLORES: Yes, he could be quite correct, Mr Chairperson.

MR ROSSOUW: Now also, Mr Mosiane will testify that he was not involved or present when the surveillance was carried out.

MR FLORES: That is also possible.

MR ROSSOUW: Right. Mr Flores then, I don't know if you will be able to explain this, Mr Mosiane will testify that he went with another Askari to the church and they were taken there by black security policemen from the Witbank Branch and he will testify that when they got to the Church or the Church hall, a black plastic container, containing petrol was taken out and that was actually used to spread inside on the furniture and it was then set alight, which differs from the Russian Cocktails, as you've mentioned. Could it be that another means was provided for the arson?

MR FLORES: That is possible, as I wasn't with them entering the building, so it is possible, Mr Chairperson, yes.

MR ROSSOUW: Mr Mosiane will say that he definitely didn't throw a petrol bomb, as you've described.

MR FLORES: It is possible, Mr Chairperson.

MR ROSSOUW: And is it also correct that after the incident Mr Mosiane reported back to you?

MR FLORES: That's correct.

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

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Rossouw. Has the Panel got any other questions before Mr Cornelius re-examines?

ADV SANDI: No questions from me thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Mr Cornelius, re-examination?

MR CORNELIUS: Thank you Mr Chair, I've got no re-examination.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Flores, you're excused. Thank you.

MR CORNELIUS: Thank you Chair, I've got no further witnesses.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that the case for the applicant?

MR CORNELIUS: That is the case for the applicant.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Ms Coleridge are you presenting any evidence in this application?

MS COLERIDGE: No thank you, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Cornelius, have you got any submissions on the merits of this?

MS COLERIDGE: Chairperson, I don't know, but Mr Mosiane must still testify in relation to this incident. Mr Mosiane must still give evidence in relation to the Witbank incident.

CHAIRPERSON: Is he the only other one?

MS COLERIDGE: He's the only other applicant.

CHAIRPERSON: Alright. Yes, well, very well. Let's then take his testimony. Is he just testifying on the attack on the Church?

MS COLERIDGE: Chairperson, there's also an attack in Nelspruit that he's also applied for amnesty for, an arson attack.

CHAIRPERSON: Is he applying on this and some other incident?

MS COLERIDGE: That's right, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Well very well, perhaps we should proceed and hear both, it's probably expedient to also deal with his case in regard to the church matter before we hear you Mr Cornelius. Very well.

MR ROSSOUW: Thank you Mr Chairperson. I then call Mr Mosiane. He's prepared to give testimony in English, but his mother tongue is Tswana. He'll testify in Tswana, I believe, Mr Chairman.

GABUKLELWE CHRISTOPHER MOSIANE: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Rossouw.

MR ROSSOUW: Thank you Mr Chairman.

EXAMINATION BY MR ROSSOUW: Mr Mosiane the first incident relating to the attack on the Church hall in Witbank.

MR MOSIANE: Correct, Chairperson.

MR ROSSOUW: Can you inform the Committee at the time, where were you employed and what were your functions?

MR MOSIANE: At that time Chairperson, I was employed as an askari in C1 Section at the Police Head Quarters.

MR ROSSOUW: That would be Vlakplaas.

MR MOSIANE: Correct Chairperson.

MR ROSSOUW: Now we've heard testimony that you were deployed in Witbank area. Who was your Commander at that time?

MR MOSIANE: It was Mr Flores.

MR ROSSOUW: And with regard to this incident, the bombing or the arson at the church hall, where did you receive your instruction from and what were those instructions?

MR MOSIANE: The instructions were from the Security Branch in Witbank but I was under Sgt Flores at that time.

MR ROSSOUW: So is it correct that nobody from the Security Branch at Witbank spoke to you personally, it was relayed to you from Capt Flores?

MR MOSIANE: That is correct, Chairperson.

MR ROSSOUW: Now can you just tell the Committee what did Capt Flores instruct you to do?

MR MOSIANE: Flores was a Sergeant not a Captain. He informed us that there was a Church in the township and that again we should go and burn that church. I together with Nicholas Dube, we were to be taken to that particular church and that we were the people who were supposed to again burn that Church.

MR ROSSOUW: Sorry, Mr Mosiane, I don't know if the translation came through correctly, but it was translated in my ears that your instructions were to again go and burn the church, were you ever involved in a previous arson attack on this church?

INTERPRETER: He is actually saying that he was supposed to be taken by other people to that Church and again there would be other people who were supposed to be at the church, so it's a repetition of what he was saying.

MR ROSSOUW: Thank you Mr Chairman, I just wanted to make sure that we're not talking about a previous incident.

ADV SANDI: Interesting, my note is different here. I understood the interpreter to say: "I and Dube were taken to that church to burn it."

INTERPRETER: Yes.

ADV SANDI: Did you say that? Did you talk about Dube?

MR MOSIANE: That is correct, I did.

MR ROSSOUW: Mr Mosiane, were you involved in preparation of Russian Cocktails or petrol bombs, or surveillance of this church? Did you know where it was situated?

MR MOSIANE: No, Chairperson.

MR ROSSOUW: And when you got the instruction, was it on the same day as when the attack was carried out?

MR MOSIANE: We received instructions on the same day of the burning of the Church.

MR ROSSOUW: Now can you explain to the Committee, you say that the people were supposed to take you and Dube to the Church. Can you tell the Committee what happened that night?

MR MOSIANE: As I've already earlier, is that we were to leave with members of the local Security Branch, that is to say black members of the Security Branch, so that they would be able to show us the target and then we should burn that target on the very same night.

MR ROSSOUW: When you arrived at the Church hall, what did you do there?

MR MOSIANE: When we arrived at that Church, we burned it immediately.

MR ROSSOUW: How did you enter - or did you burn it, set light to it from the outside, or did you enter the building?

MR MOSIANE: We set alight whilst we were inside.

MR ROSSOUW: How did you gain entry to the premises?

MR MOSIANE: We used the window Chairperson.

MR ROSSOUW: Now inside, can you describe to the Committee what steps did you take and how did you set it alight inside?

MR MOSIANE: When we arrived inside together with Dube, we had a plastic container, a petrol plastic container, approximately 20, 25 litres, Chairperson. When we arrived inside, we found plastic chairs. We assembled the chairs. If I recall well, the floor was made of wood, that is a wooden floor. After we'd assembled the plastic chairs, we sprinkled petrol on those chairs. After that we used the kitchen to exit the Church, so therefore we made a trail of petrol to the kitchen, then we went, we left the church building with the kitchen window and from there we set the church alight, from that window.

MR ROSSOUW: Mr Mosiane, did you look inside the hall if there were any people inside, or people sleeping there? Were there any people there?

MR MALAN: That's common cause Mr Rossouw, I think we can leave it.

MR ROSSOUW: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Mosiane and afterwards when you went back to your group, to whom did you report?

MR MOSIANE: We reported back to Sgt Flores.

MR ROSSOUW: Now Mr Mosiane, you are applying for amnesty in respect of arson and malicious damage to property or any other delict that might flow from your evidence and the facts that you've placed here before the Committee, is that correct?

MR MOSIANE: That is correct, Chairperson.

MR ROSSOUW: Did you receive any reward, other than your normal salary, any remuneration for your participation in this arson attack?

MR MOSIANE: No, Chairperson.

MR ROSSOUW: Now you've listened to the testimony of Mr Flores in respect of the political objective aimed to be achieved here. Do you confirm that? Do you agree with that?

MR MOSIANE: I do, Chairperson.

MR ROSSOUW: Then if you can have a look at page 82 of the bundle before the Committee, the portion dealing with the political objective and over on page 83.

MR MOSIANE: I do see that Chairperson.

MR ROSSOUW: Do you confirm that?

MR MOSIANE: I do, Chairperson.

MR ROSSOUW: Mr Mosiane, we've already heard that you received your orders from Mr Flores. Were you in a position to question those orders?

MR MOSIANE: No Chairperson.

MR ROSSOUW: Thank you Mr Chairman, that's the evidence in respect of this incident. If I may continue with the next incident?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, please Mr Rossouw, then we'll - hopefully we'll be able to conclude all of the matters that these applicants are applying for in one go.

MR MALAN: Just before you proceed, Nicholas Dube, Mr Mosiane, who is that?

MR MOSIANE: Nicholas Dube was one of the askaris.

MR MALAN: Is he still alive?

MR MOSIANE: I have no information as to whether he's still alive but it seems I learned that he was killed.

MR MALAN: Thank you.

MR ROSSOUW: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Mosiane, I want you to turn to page 83 of the bundle, dealing with the petrol bomb attack in Nelspruit area.

MR NGOBE: Sorry, Chairman, to interrupt. I want just to confirm that 2 o'clock tomorrow afternoon will be suitable for us to proceed.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you for your assistance, Mr Ngobe. We will then stand the matter down until 2 o'clock tomorrow afternoon and we'll excuse you in the meantime.

MR NGOBE: Thank you Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Yes.

MR ROSSOUW: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Mosiane in respect of your application for the petrol bomb attack on a vehicle and a house in Nelspruit, in the Nelspruit area, can you give the Committee an indication, at that time were you working in the Nelspruit area?

MR MOSIANE: That is correct, Chairperson, we were deployed around Nelspruit area.

MR ROSSOUW: And you were part of a group. Who was the Commander of that group?

MR MOSIANE: In the application as I've already testified, the Senior Commander here was Capt David Baker.

MR ROSSOUW: Now you say in your application that the instructions to petrol bomb this house of the Trade Unionists came from the Nelspruit Security Police. Again, were you personally instructed by personnel from the Security Branch or did you receive it through Capt Baker?

MR MOSIANE: As a member of Vlakplaas, we received our instructions from our Commanders who were immediate Commander at that time, therefore in this case I received instructions from Capt Baker.

MR ROSSOUW: And you say that your instructions were quite clear that you were to gut the car, to totally burn it out, is that correct?

MR MOSIANE: That is correct, Chairperson.

MR ROSSOUW: Can you tell the Committee how did you carry out the operation and who was involved?

MR MOSIANE: In this operation we were instructed that a certain person who is owning a green Nissan Langley and the instruction was that if we find that car at a particular place, we should burn that car and when we arrived at a particular place, we did not find that green Nissan Langley. We returned to Capt Baker and reported back to him that the car is not present there, but Paul Van Dyk who was the second in command of that unit, informed Baker that if the car is not present, therefore the house should be burned and then Capt Baker agreed with him and we started to go back and burn the house. I and Nicholas Dube returned and executed that order.

MR ROSSOUW: Who provided you with the means to carry out the order, the petrol bombs?

MR MOSIANE: We got those petrol bombs from Nelspruit.

MR ROSSOUW: Would that be the Nelspruit Security Branch?

MR MOSIANE: That is correct, Chairperson.

MR ROSSOUW: Now can you describe to the Committee, what happened when you then attacked the house?

MR MALAN: Just before you proceed for clarity in my mind. Did you have the petrol bombs with you in order to, as you say, to gut the car? Were they intended for the car originally?

MR MOSIANE: That is correct, Chairperson, we had them in our possession.

MR MALAN: So you didn't go back to Head Quarters and then came back to the house again? Thank you. You may proceed Mr Rossouw.

MR ROSSOUW: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Mosiane, then in your amnesty application you say that you went to the house and you petrol bombed it. Did you determine beforehand if there were people inside the house?

MR MOSIANE: No, Chairperson, we did not.

MR ROSSOUW: And from your actions afterwards, were you able to say whether there were people in the house?

MR MOSIANE: Yes, Chairperson.

MR ROSSOUW: What did you hear?

MR MOSIANE: There were people inside because whilst the house was burning, I heard people screaming and my observations were that they were female.

MR ROSSOUW: Afterwards, did you report that to Capt Baker or Lieut Paul van Dyk?

MR MOSIANE: That is correct Chairperson, we did.

MR ROSSOUW: Now Mr Mosiane, you are applying for your participation in this incident, arson, malicious damage to property and then also the attempted murder of the inhabitants of this house, as well as any delict flowing from your evidence here, the facts that you've placed before the Committee, is that correct?

MR MOSIANE: That is correct, Chairperson.

MR ROSSOUW: Did you receive any reward for your participation in this petrol bomb attack, other than your normal salary?

MR MOSIANE: No, Chairperson.

MR ROSSOUW: Did you know this Trade Unionist and did you in any instance act in personal malice towards this person?

MR MOSIANE: No, Chairperson.

MR ROSSOUW: And you've already testified where you got your instructions from. Now if you can have a look at page 85 of the application, with respect of the political objectives to be achieved here, do you confirm that?

MR MOSIANE: I do, Chairperson.

MR ROSSOUW: Then just one formal aspect, Mr Mosiane. You've submitted a written submission as an attachment to your amnesty application. It's contained on page 52 to 70, do you confirm that as well?

MR MOSIANE: That is correct, Chairperson.

MR ROSSOUW: Thank you Mr Chairman, I have nothing further.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Rossouw.

MR MALAN: Mr Rossouw, just before you - you've put it to the applicant and he confirmed that he was applying for an attempted murder. There's no evidence that I heard that he was even aware of people or that he considered and decided to continue disregarding the possible presence of individuals in the house at the time of the bombing. The evidence as I heard it, was that they assumed the house to be empty.

MR ROSSOUW: Sorry Mr Chairman, I didn't read the evidence as such. Because the car was not there the instructions were and because the Trade Unionist himself was not found there, Mr Chairman, the instructions were then to attack the house. Mr Chairman, under those circumstances it would be reasonable to foresee that there might be other people inside, not necessarily the Trade Unionist.

MR MALAN: Mr Rossouw, the test is not whether it's reasonable, but whether he did foresee the possibility and continued regardless. Maybe I should put it to you. Mr Mosiane, did you consider the possible presence of individuals in that house when you bombed it?

MR MOSIANE: Chairperson, before we gutted the house, I did not have the perception that there would be people inside the house. I only realised when the house was on fire and when I heard people screaming inside that house.

MR MALAN: Now do you know whether anybody was injured there?

MR MOSIANE: No, Chairperson.

MR MALAN: Did you see anybody running from the house?

MR MOSIANE: No, Chairperson.

MR MALAN: Why are you so sure that the screaming came from inside the house? Couldn't it have been from the back of the house, from a neighbour?

MR MOSIANE: Because I was not far from the house and I could hear that the screaming was from that house which was on fire.

MR MALAN: And you have no information whether anybody was injured?

MR MOSIANE: No, Chairperson, I have no information.

MR MALAN: Thank you.

ADV SANDI: Just tell us, where exactly is this house? You say in Mpumalanga in the district of Nelspruit. Where exactly is this?

MR MOSIANE: I'm unable to give you that information.

ADV SANDI: Do you know the name of the township?

MR MOSIANE: No, Chairperson, I do not know.

ADV SANDI: I further notice in your application at page 83 you say: "I cannot recall his name", meaning the Trade Unionist. Do you mean at that time you knew his name, but you've now forgotten?

MR MOSIANE: At the time when I was preparing my application, I did not know his identity.

ADV SANDI: No, I'm talking about the time when you carried out this attack on this house. Did you know the name of the Trade Unionist whose house you were attacking?

MR MOSIANE: No, Chairperson, I did not know his name.

ADV SANDI: Thank you.

MR MALAN: Can you describe the house to us? What did the house look like?

MR MOSIANE: It's not a township house, but a house built in a tribal trust. It's a mud house with corrugated irons.

MR MALAN: Was it a single-roomed house?

MR MOSIANE: It was not a one-roomed house Chairperson.

MR MALAN: Can you describe it for us? How big was the house?

MR MOSIANE: Approximately 4 to 5 rooms, Chairperson.

MR MALAN: And do you know into which room you threw the bombs?

MR MOSIANE: We threw the petrol bombs on the front rooms.

MR MALAN: Into more than one room?

MR MOSIANE: I recall that I saw two windows and a door.

MR MALAN: Did you put a bomb through both of the windows?

MR MOSIANE: That is correct, Chairperson.

MR MALAN: Thank you.

ADV SANDI: If you say this house consisted of four to five rooms, why then did you not think that there might be some people inside there who stayed with the Trade Unionist?

MR MOSIANE: I said I did not think there were not people in that house, I said there were people in that house that when the house caught fire I heard people screaming from inside.

ADV SANDI: But before the time you threw the petrol bombs there, what did you think? I thought you said you didn't think there were people who stayed with the Trade Unionist.

MR MOSIANE: Before we threw the petrol bombs, you would understand that it was at dawn and people were asleep, therefore we would not be able, because it was dark, we would not be able to observe whether there are people or there are no people.

ADV SANDI: Thank you.

MR MALAN: Mr Mosiane, if I understood you correctly, you responded to a question that I put to you that you did not think that there were people in the house when you threw the bombs. You did not think that there were people in the house. Now which is correct, or is that the situation?

MR MOSIANE: It is possible that before we threw the bombs, I thought there were no people.

MR MALAN: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Coleridge, any questions?

MS COLERIDGE: Thank you Chairperson.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS COLERIDGE: Mr Mosiane, I want to take you back to the Witbank Church incident. With whom was Dube stationed? Where was he? Was he with Vlakplaas, or what?

MR MALAN: Yes, he did say he was an askari with Vlakplaas.

MS COLERIDGE: I'm indebted to you, Mr Malan. You said that there was petrol in a plastic bag. Just explain that to me. You had a petrol plastic container, 25 litres. Is that all you had when you went in to burn the hall?

MR MOSIANE: When we attacked the Church, we used the petrol from a plastic container, a black plastic container.

MS COLERIDGE: And so there were no petrol bombs involved, that you were involved with, when you set the hall alight. Can you explain that to us?

MR MOSIANE: We did not use petrol bombs, we only used petrol.

MS COLERIDGE: Did other members throw any petrol bombs into the hall at any stage?

MR MOSIANE: No, Chairperson.

MS COLERIDGE: And who did you get the container from?

MR MOSIANE: We took it from the car boot from the car we used to travel.

MS COLERIDGE: But the person who gave you those litres of petrol, who gave it to you, which person?

MR MOSIANE: Members of the Witbank Security Branch gave us the petrol.

MS COLERIDGE: Did Mr Flores give you the petrol at any stage?

MR MOSIANE: I'm not able to recall, Chairperson.

MS COLERIDGE: Why I'm asking you this, is because Mr Flores' evidence was that petrol bombs were used in the attack and obviously the petrol bombs and the litres of petrol, it's two different substances, am I right?

MR MOSIANE: Flores was not present when we were actually attacking the Church hall and I know that we used petrol to do that.

ADV SANDI: Were the windows open when you came there, when you came to the Church Hall, were the windows open?

MR MOSIANE: No, Chairperson, the windows were not open.

ADV SANDI: I assume that you broke them. Did you break the windows? I didn't hear you talking about breaking windows. I thought maybe they were open when you came there.

MR MOSIANE: We broke the window and then we used that as an exit and entry.

ADV SANDI: Thank you.

MS COLERIDGE: And after the incident, who did you report back to?

MR MOSIANE: I reported back to Sgt Flores.

MS COLERIDGE: And where was Mr Flores when this incident occurred, when you went into the building?

MR MOSIANE: Flores was never somewhere near the Church whilst we were attacking the Church.

MS COLERIDGE: And then I want to go to the next incident ...(intervention)

MR MALAN: Just before you do, Mr Flores gave evidence, Mr Mosiane, that they were about two blocks away, if I remember correctly. Could that be?

MR MOSIANE: I did not see him, Chairperson.

MR MALAN: Yes, but you made a statement that he was nowhere near the Church, in response to a question by Ms Coleridge. Now I'm simply putting it to you, he gave evidence that he was near the Church. He was indeed near the Church. He was two blocks away. Could that be?

MR MOSIANE: That is what he is saying, Chairperson, I would not dispute that.

MR MALAN: Thank you, Ms Coleridge.

MS COLERIDGE: The next incident, the Nelspruit incident, did you get - you said that the Trade Unionist had a Langley car, did you get a registration number for the car when you received your instructions?

MR MOSIANE: No, Chairperson, we did not have the car registration number. We were only given the car description that it is a green Nissan Langley, we were not given the car registration.

MS COLERIDGE: And when you went to go and gut the car, who was with you at that stage?

MR MOSIANE: I was with Nicholas Dube, Chairperson.

MS COLERIDGE: And when you went to the house, did you have an address for the house which you had to attack?

MR MOSIANE: No, Chairperson, we did not.

MS COLERIDGE: So how did you know which house to attack, if you never had any details regarding the house?

MR MOSIANE: We were accompanied by Nelspruit Security Branch Members because they knew the area. We went with them and then planted out that house which we were supposed to attack.

MS COLERIDGE: And did they tell you that that was the Trade Unionist's house?

MR MOSIANE: The members of the Nelspruit Security Branch informed us that - gave us that information.

MS COLERIDGE: And when you went to go and gut the car, were any of Nelspruit Security Branch members with you?

MR MOSIANE: They stayed behind in the car whilst we were going to attack that house.

MS COLERIDGE: Yes, but I'm referring to the first time you went. You first went to go and look to see if you could find the car. Was any of the Nelspruit Security Branch members with you at the time? I know you said Mr Dube was with you, but were the other members with as well?

MR MOSIANE: I now understand. Initially we were supposed to go there and burn the car. The decision to burn the house was made on the spot once we realised that the car was not there. After we went there for the first time and reported to them that the car is not there, then they gave us the information that we should go back and burn the house.

MR MALAN: Ms Coleridge, it's dealt with in paragraph 2, at the bottom of 83. They were transported in the kombi. Everybody was in the kombi including Nofomela, Dube and some Black Security Policemen. They left from the kombi to gut the car. The car wasn't there. They returned to the kombi and they were then told to burn the house.

MS COLERIDGE: Thank you Mr Malan. I just - just on his evidence, I was just - he was just not being very clear as to who was with him at the time, but obviously, probably over time-period his memory's not that good. And then just when you went to the house, were there any lights on in the house when you attacked the house?

MR MOSIANE: No, Chairperson.

MS COLERIDGE: And Mr Nofomela’s role, what was his role in the operation?

MR MOSIANE: Nofomela was a driver whilst we were going to execute this operation.

MS COLERIDGE: Did you see the house burning?

MR MOSIANE: I did, Chairperson.

MS COLERIDGE: And then to petrol bomb the house, where did you get the petrol bombs from, who gave it to you?

MR MOSIANE: We came with them from Nelspruit.

MS COLERIDGE: Did you make the petrol bombs yourself, or did someone else make it?

MR MOSIANE: I'm not able to recall Chairperson.

MS COLERIDGE: Thank you Chairperson, I have no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Ms Coleridge. Yes, Adv Sandi.

ADV SANDI: Are you able to remember the date of the occurrence of this incident?

MR MOSIANE: No, Chairperson.

ADV SANDI: The first incident which occurred at that park, we were told it was on the 21st May 1988, the attack on this house at Nelspruit, would that have been before that Church incident, or after?

MR MOSIANE: We started with the house and the operation on the ...(indistinct) was the second one.

ADV SANDI: This must have been in 1988. Both incidents happened in 1988?

MR MOSIANE: I would not dispute that Chairperson, if you say so.

ADV SANDI: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Cornelius, have you got any questions?

MR CORNELIUS: No thank you, Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Has the Panel got anything else before Mr Rossouw re-examines.

ADV SANDI: Nothing from me Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Rossouw.

MR ROSSOUW: I won't re-examine Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes Mr Mosiane, thank you. You're excused.

MR MOSIANE: Thank you Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, before we go, Mr Botha before we go to Mr Snyders, we'll take a short adjournment just to allow everybody to refresh themselves.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes Mr Botha.

MR BOTHA: Thank you Mr Chairperson. For the record, Botha appearing on behalf of Snyders. Mr Chairperson, may I respectfully submit that it may be convenient to deal with all three of the applications of Snyders. Thank you Mr Chairperson. I call Mr Snyders then.

PETRUS CASPARIS SNYDERS: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Botha.

MR BOTHA: Thank you Mr Chairperson.

EXAMINATION BY MR BOTHA: Mr Snyders, you are the applicant in this matter. You have also submitted your application and compiled it yourself.

MR SNYDERS: That is correct.

MR BOTHA: I refer you to the bundle which is also available to the Committee and that is on page 30 to 35. Do you confirm that this is your Amnesty application with regards to the incident, the attempted murder of Mdo?

MR SNYDERS: That is correct, yes.

MR BOTHA: Can I refer you to page 31 there, the last sentence on the page and can I just ask you, the actions that you had, was this in line of service, was it on an instruction, or was it independent action?

MR SNYDERS: It was an instruction that I executed Mr Chairperson.

MR BOTHA: At that time you were in the service of the police and you were stationed at Vlakplaas.

MR SNYDERS: That is correct, yes.

MR BOTHA: What was the reason why you participated in this type of action?

MR SNYDERS: I saw it as my duty, Mr Chairperson. In that time we wanted to resist the onslaught against South Africa and I saw it as my duty as a citizen of this country and also as a police officer of that time, that I had to execute all these instructions.

MR BOTHA: Then I would also like to take you to the last sentence on page 32 of the second paragraph, where you mention your memory.

MR SNYDERS: Mr Chairperson, I was treated for post-traumatic stress after I was released or resigned from the police and after this long period of time and I compiled my application, it may be that some of the details I cannot recall or may be confusing some of them and also those people who were involved, I may be confusing them with others.

MR BOTHA: Then I would like immediately to take you to the incident, the attempted murder of Mdo where you make mention of it. Can you maybe in your own words explain what you can recall of this incident?

MR SNYDERS: Mr Chairperson, I can recall that we were given instructions by Col de Kock who was then a Major in the police, to accompany him to Swaziland. In Swaziland we did the planning in an hotel room to eliminate Mdo because he planned operations from Swaziland and planted bombs in South Africa and also sent certain members across the border to commit crimes against the South African community.

MR BOTHA: If you could just stop there for a moment. Is this the same incident on which Mr Flores testified today?

MR SNYDERS: Yes, that is correct.

MR BOTHA: While we're dealing with that, do you agree with his evidence in so far your collection goes?

MR SNYDERS: Yes, I do agree with him.

MR BOTHA: You can continue.

MR SNYDERS: Thank you. What I can recall is that he was very late that evening. We drove around in one of the towns in Swaziland. I can recall that it was Manzini. At a later stage we saw a man corresponding with a photo from a photograph album as Mdo. Col de Kock did not want us to act at that stage. We drove back to the hotel and at a later stage we returned to the centre of town. There we saw this man again on the corner of a street next to a vehicle. Flores was ready to eliminate the person, but de Kock suspended the whole operation. We returned to the hotel.

MR BOTHA: Is that what you can recall from the incident?

MR SNYDERS: Yes.

MR MALAN: Just before you continue, were you with de Kock in the vehicle? You were not with Flores in the vehicle?

MR SNYDERS: As far as I can recall, I may be wrong Mr Chairperson, it was myself and Flores in the vehicle.

MR MALAN: Was de Kock in the same vehicle?

MR SNYDERS: What I can recall is that in the first incident before we returned, we saw Mdo first in the street and then we returned to the hotel. De Kock was with me then and I think it was Paul van Dyk as well. The second time, when we drove in to go and look for him, de Kock was in our vehicle.

MR MALAN: It does not correspond with the evidence of the previous applicant.

MR SNYDERS: I may be wrong Mr Chairperson.

MR MALAN: Very well.

ADV SANDI: Where was Mr Labuschagne at that stage?

MR SNYDERS: I did not see Lappies Labuschagne that evening. I saw him the next day and it was also very briefly. Lappies Labuschagne never mingled with us in Swaziland. We never had any connections with him in Swaziland.

MR BOTHA: Then you also stated in your amnesty application...(intervention)

MR MALAN: I'm sorry. I do not know how material this is but Mr Flores said that Labuschagne was with them in the vehicle, do you deny that or dispute that?

MR SNYDERS: I cannot recall that Mr Chairperson.

MR MALAN: Did you tell Mr Botha before that he was not with you in the vehicle, because he did not ask questions to Mr Flores concerning this.

MR SNYDERS: I cannot recall that Labuschagne accompanied us and was in the vehicle.

MR BOTHA: If I can just correct the record here, my instructions are that: "I can recall it so, but it is possible that I can be wrong." I do not want to make an applicant a liar, where my instructions are not very definite.

MR MALAN: Thank you, Mr Botha. You may continue.

MR BOTHA: Thank you Mr Chairperson. You also mentioned that as far as you can recall, you had a specific reason why this elimination would take place and you make mention of jealousy because this is also an aspect that Mr Flores mentioned in his application, what the reason was for the elimination and the suspension of the elimination.

MR SNYDERS: There was a lot of jealousy between the branches. Our group at Vlakplaas experienced jealousy from operators in Easter Transvaal and also from the various branches and there was a certain degree of jealousy. After I heard that the operation was halted, I heard that there was jealousy between the certain branches in the Eastern Transvaal in that the one group wanted to eliminate the others' informant to put them in a bad light and it seems as if a lot of good information came from Lappies Labuschagne, that Dan Greyling did not want it that way and that he wanted to eliminate the informer of Lappies Labuschagne.

MR BOTHA: Apart from the normal remuneration or salary that you received from the police, is there anything else that you received for this action?

MR SNYDERS: No, none at all.

MR BOTHA: You also then ask for amnesty for the conspiracy of murder as well as your involvement in an attempted murder on the so-called Mdo.

MR SNYDERS: That is correct, yes.

MR BOTHA: If I can refer you to the second bundle. Mr Chairperson I do not know if I'm correct and I'd like to find out what your attitude is concerning this, because of the nature of this application I would like him to confirm it. I do not know if you want him to confirm it or repeat it again. He's willing to do it. It will maybe save some time if we do it differently.

CHAIRPERSON: What incident are you referring to now?

MR BOTHA: Number 8 on the roll, it is the conspiracy to murder on ANC members in Swaziland as well as attempted murder and a possible incident at the Oshoek border post and this is on the Petrus Snyman application page 1 to 12.

CHAIRPERSON: I cannot see the necessity that you now must repeat all the details. Maybe you can just lay the groundwork for these incidents.

MR BOTHA: As it pleases. If we look at these two incidents that you've mentioned in the second bundle, do you confirm that what you've said concerning the first incident, the action, as well as the motive, that this is the same as the first applicants?

MR SNYDERS: That is correct, yes.

MR BOTHA: Apart from your normal remuneration, you did not receive any other remuneration for this?

MR SNYDERS: That is correct, yes.

MR BOTHA: And you also compiled it yourself and you also signed it. Do you confirm the contents thereof?

MR SNYDERS: Yes, I do.

MR BOTHA: Concerning the incident itself, conspiracy to murder in Swaziland, do you apply for amnesty concerning conspiracy to murder, is that correct?

MR SNYDERS: That is correct, yes.

MR BOTHA: As well as the incident where the ambush was established, do you also apply for amnesty concerning the offence, conspiracy to murder, in this incident?

MR SNYDERS: That is correct.

MR BOTHA: Thank you Mr Chairperson, this is all. I can just place on record once again that Mr Snyders is willing to answer any questions if there are certain unclarities.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Botha. Ms Coleridge any questions?

MS COLERIDGE: Yes thank you Chairperson.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS COLERIDGE: I want to refer to the Mdo incident. You state that the planning was done in the hotel. Can you tell us who was in the hotel when this operation was planned.

MR SNYDERS: There was never a formal planning it was only, what I can recall, it was me and de Kock and I think at some

stage Flores was in the room, but I can't remember if he was, the whole time if he was present.

MS COLERIDGE: And then you stated that at one stage Mdo was standing against his car. In your amnesty application you stated that. Now I want to know, can you remember what kind of car he drove?

MR SNYDERS: No, Chairperson, I cannot.

MS COLERIDGE: Okay and then just the next incident. The ANC members in Swaziland. You stated that van der Merwe and Schoon and de Kock later discussed that matter. Were you present when they discussed that matter?

MR SNYDERS: No we were never present after any of the operations when they discussed it, it was at higher level.

MS COLERIDGE: So how did you know that they discussed that incident?

MR SNYDERS: They came to Vlakplaas and de Kock, only afterwards, said to us that they discussed the matter ...(indistinct)

MS COLERIDGE: And the second incident as well, the ambush. You stated that Schoon and van der Merwe also knew about that incident. How do you know that?

MR SNYDERS: De Kock told us so, Chairperson.

MR MALAN: Do you know the need to know principle?

MR SNYDERS: I beg your pardon Chairperson?

MR MALAN: The need to know principle, do you know of that?

MR SNYDERS: Yes.

MR MALAN: Why was it necessary for de Kock to tell you that he discussed it with Schoon and van der Merwe afterwards?

MR SNYDERS: It was in the discussion that it came out. It's not very often that Schoon and van der Merwe visited Vlakplaas. When he was there, when we spoke to de Kock because we did not know if there were new instructions given or if it was concerning previous discussions or instructions, then he would just mention what they discussed. He did not give us the details, but he would just say that the operations were discussed.

MR MALAN: What operations were discussed, as far as you can recall that de Kock told you he discussed it with Schoon and van der Merwe?

MR SNYDERS: Applicable for the cases today he discussed the operations in Swaziland, the Oshoek operation and afterwards he told us about it and then also he mentioned Mdo and that it was discussed with Brig Schoon.

MR MALAN: Thank you. I'd actually like to ask you this. How can you recall that so clearly if you can say that you've got a bad memory because of your post traumatic stress? Here you can recall things which are not very connected to the incident. Why are you saying this, because you are implying people directly or implicating people directly?

MR SNYDERS: Mr Chairperson, at that stage there was friction between myself and de Kock and afterwards I left Vlakplaas and I wanted to ensure that things in which I was involved in, the instructions came from the top.

MR MALAN: Afterwards, or ...?

MR SNYDERS: No at that stage, while I was still there, I wanted to ascertain that because the last few months there was some friction between myself and de Kock.

MR MALAN: But you do not say in here that the instructions came from the top, you said that this was discussed afterwards?

MR SNYDERS: Yes, it was discussed afterwards when Schoon or van der Merwe visited the farm.

MR MALAN: But when I asked you why did you recall that, you said you wanted to ensure that the instructions came from the top.

MR SNYDERS: What I'm saying Mr Chairperson is that I wanted to reconcile myself when Senior Members of Vlakplaas arrived at Vlakplaas, I wanted to find out why they visited Vlakplaas, was it to give me instructions or to receive a report-back.

MR MALAN: And de Kock will then still convey to you what the discussions were about?

MR SNYDERS: Yes, he did and he also took us with concerning certain instructions and he discussed it with us.

MR MALAN: Ms Coleridge, you can continue.

MS COLERIDGE: Thank you. The Komatipoort incident, who packed the explosives into the kombi?

MR SNYDERS: I was never present Mr Chairman, when the kombi was what we call rigged up for this incident, but I saw the kombi once at the technical department and I saw some photos of the kombi as well and then it was sent through to actually Mozambique, but it should have come back through Swaziland.

MS COLERIDGE: When did you see it at the technical department?

MR SNYDERS: Before the incident, before they sent it through to Mozambique.

MS COLERIDGE: And this Kellerman that you speak of, who is this Kellerman?

MR SNYDERS: I beg your pardon?

MS COLERIDGE: You speak of a Kellerman that knew of this incident. I just need to know from you, which Kellerman are you talking about?

MR SNYDERS: Kellerman, that was one of the offices involved in the, I don't know if he was present when the vehicle was packed with explosives, but he was the one who accompanied us to the border with ...(indistinct) and we came back later, on a later stage, to activate the explosives in the kombi. We didn't know if this kombi was still in Swaziland or if it was in Mozambique, so they were afraid that if the kombi comes back, there was a very faint chance that it might be activated with any radio signal, so they wanted to activate it while it was still outside of South Africa and we went back with him.

MS COLERIDGE: So could you activate the bomb from for instance from a distance, like for instance from Komatipoort?

MR SNYDERS: Ja. What happened Chairperson is that there was a receiver built into this kombi and it could have been activated from a distance, so that's why we took a chopper and late that night, we went up above Komatipoort onto a height that was suitable for us to have a clear view on Mozambique and Maputo and then they tried to activate this bomb and we would have been in a position to see if the bomb exploded in Maputo because we were very high and it was dark, so if there was an explosion, we could have seen it in the night, but nothing happened.

MS COLERIDGE: So according to your knowledge to date, you don't know whether the bomb had exploded?

MR SNYDERS: No, we never heard about the bomb ever again, Chairperson.

MS COLERIDGE: Thank you Chairperson, I have no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Ms Coleridge, Mr Cornelius have you got anything?

MR CORNELIUS: Only two matters, thank you Mr Chair.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR CORNELIUS: You will not dispute Mr Flores' evidence that Mr Labuschagne stopped him twice in carrying out the operation.

MR SNYDERS: I cannot dispute that, no.

MR CORNELIUS: And then the last aspect that I'd like to clarify and this is concerning the political motive, this whole issue concerning the jealousy between Greyling and Labuschagne, this only came out at a later stage, after the operation was suspended, so your motive when you planned to execute the operation, you believed that you were going to act against an active ANC member?

MR SNYDERS: That is correct.

MR CORNELIUS: And that was your whole motive?

MR SNYDERS: That is correct, yes.

MR CORNELIUS: Thank you Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Has the Panel got any other questions before Mr ...

ADV SANDI: No questions from me, thank you Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you.

MS COLERIDGE: Chairperson, I've just got one question for the applicant in relation to his post-traumatic stress syndrome.

CHAIRPERSON: Certainly Ms Coleridge.

FURTHER CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS COLERIDGE: Mr Snyders, when were you diagnosed with post-traumatic stress syndrome?

MR SNYDERS: I think the month was August 1993, Chairperson.

MS COLERIDGE: And do you recall your psychologist or psychiatrist's name?

MR SNYDERS: Yes, that was doctor Cheryl

MS COLERIDGE: Was he a psychiatrist or ...?

MR SNYDERS: Psychiatrist.

MS COLERIDGE: Then just a last question. Was your testing, was it done via testings, or was it done via consultation only?

MR SNYDERS: I visited my GP and he referred me to Dr Cheryl who did some tests on a three week period in the Sandton Clinic. They diagnosed it at first and then he put me on sleep therapy for about three weeks.

MS COLERIDGE: What I mean by testing is, there are certain forms that you complete, did you complete those forms or was it just via consultation that the analysis was ...

MR SNYDERS: I completed the forms, Chairperson.

MS COLERIDGE: And who is in possession of those forms?

MR SNYDERS: I think the Doctor might still have one of those and I think the police might also still have some of those forms.

MS COLERIDGE: Thank you Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Botha, re-examination?

MR BOTHA: No re-examination, thank you Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Snyders, thank you. You are excused.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that the case for the applicant, Mr Botha?

MR BOTHA: Indeed, Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. You're not presenting any evidence, Ms Coleridge?

MS COLERIDGE: No, thank you, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Mr Cornelius, then we'll come back to you. Will you deal with your matters?

MR CORNELIUS: Thank you, Chair.

MR CORNELIUS IN ARGUMENT: Chair, it is my submission that my client's application complies with Section 20(1)(a) of the Act in that it complied with all the formal requirements of the Act. Secondly, it is also my submission that he's an applicant in terms of Section 20(2)(b) and as far as any doubt that there might be regarding the Church arson, also an applicant in terms of Section 20(2)(f), for the implied authority.

He at all times acted as far as Section 20(2)(b) is concerned in the course and scope of his duties within his line of authority against a political struggle. There can be no doubt about that. He also acted bona fide as far as both incidents are concerned with the object of resisting the struggle, within his belief as a supporter of the National Party.

Furthermore it is clear that he did not act for personal gain, he only received his salary and there was no person malice, ill will, or spite.

There can be no doubt that he made a full disclosure as far as it was within his knowledge, so I submit that he's entitled to be granted amnesty as prayed in both incidents.

Just to elaborate on that, as far as the Mdo assassination amount, it would be a conspiracy to commit murder. I don't think I can take it further than that and as far as the Witbank Church is concerned, it will obviously be arson. It's quite clearly breaking and entering as well to a certain extent and then malicious damage to property and all delicts flowing from both instances out of the matters.

That is my full application. Is there anything specific Judge, Members, that you'd like to hear me on?

CHAIRPERSON: No, thank you Mr Cornelius. I'll go down the line. Mr Rossouw.

MR ROSSOUW IN ARGUMENT: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Chairman, as far as the application of Mr Mosiane is concerned, relating to the Witbank Church hall, I submit that he's complied with all requirements of the Act, formal requirements, Section 20(1) and then Section 20(2)(b) would cover him as an employee of the State. In the course and scope of his duties you've heard that he was not in a position to question the instructions given to him and Mr Chairman, from your experience, I would submit that you know the askaris were not ever in the position to question instructions given by their masters. Mr Chairman, and

that under the circumstances they carried out those instructions against a member or supporter of an organisation or movement who was in opposition to the State and they were bona fide in carrying that out, so I submit that he would be covered by Section 20(2)(b), Mr Chairman, in respect of both applications.

Then Mr Chairman, as far as his full disclosure is concerned, I submit that in the Witbank Church incident, he has told you everything in detail as to what he's done and his part in the actual attack that took place. Mr Chairman, the two aspects on which, or rather only one aspect on which there could be some conflict with the testimony by Mr Flores relating to the petrol bombs and the plastic container, Mr Chairman, I would submit that that's no real conflict, especially if you take into consideration that there was a huge group involved and Mr Flores conceded that an applicant, Mosiane, might not have been involved in the planning and also the surveillance that was done, so how it was actually carried out, Flores would not know, because he was not present, so I would submit there's scope for both versions in that respect.

Mr Chairman, then he obviously did not act in personal malice. You heard that he didn't even know where this premises was and he only followed the Security Branch people who showed it to them.

So Mr Chairman, I would respect of that incident, this Committee can be satisfied that he's complied with all the requirements of the Act and I would ask that amnesty be granted to him for arson and malicious damage to property in respect of the Witbank Church hall.

Mr Chairman, relating to the arson attack on the house of the Trade Unionist, Mr Chairman, the same goes as far as the formal requirements of the Act are concerned. The only aspect which I need to deal with, two aspects, are the full disclosure and secondly the offences that he's applying for.

As far as full disclosure is concerned, Mr Chairman, this applicant is not in a position to give you the name. He's told you that he was not informed of that at the time when the attack took place, at specific questions by Adv Sandi.

Mr Chairman, I would submit that various identification to the extent that it was pin-pointed to a Trade Unionist, who actually had a specific car, of which he gave you the description. So Mr Chairman, I would submit that in your decision, should you favourably consider granting him amnesty, it can be identified to the point of that Trade Unionist who had that specific motor vehicle, Mr Chairman. He was also not placed in possession of the registration number of that vehicle.

Mr Chairman, the offences for which he would be applying for amnesty would be arson and then malicious damage to property, also in respect of the house. Mr Chairman, I considered asking for attempted murder, but I would submit that there is no evidence to support that. I think that was cleared up sufficiently. It might have been negligent of him not to foresee that there might have been people in the house, but that's a different question Mr Chairman, so I would submit that those two instances, you can be satisfied that he's satisfied all the requirements of the Act and I would ask the Committee to grant him amnesty for those offences.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Rossouw. Mr Botha.

MR BOTHA IN ARGUMENT: Thank you Mr Chairperson. Regarding the formal requirements of the Act, I respectfully submit that the application of Snyders complies with those formal requirements. Regarding the Mdo incident, I can just agree with my Learned Friend Cornelius's argument presented to this Committee. Then regarding all three of the applications of Mr Snyders, I respectfully submit that it's clear that he acted while in the employ of the State within the course and scope of his duties and also the instructions of his Commander at all relevant times. It's also clear from the application that it was not for any personal benefit or gain.

Mr Chairperson, regarding full disclosure, I would just like to mention that there may be certain contradictions between the evidence of Snyders and also the evidence of Flores, but I would submit that that's an indication that to the best of his ability, he's disclosing what he can remember of this incident. I submit that if he wanted to tell lies to this Amnesty Committee, it would have been very easy for him knowing what Flores said and not the specific information contained in his application in writing, it would have been easy for him to lie in order to corroborate Flores's evidence. He however decided to testify to the best of his memory and even if it contradicted, to a certain extent, the evidence of Flores. I respectfully submit that the case is made out on which amnesty may be granted on all three applications for Snyders and I would like to ask the Committee to consider giving amnesty on number five, the Mdo incident, on the charge of a conspiracy to commit murder and also attempted murder and also on the second incident, conspiracy to murder in Swaziland. Nine, I would also like to request amnesty on a charge of conspiracy to murder and also attempted murder. That will be my argument.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Botha. Ms Coleridge, have you got any submissions?

MS COLERIDGE IN ARGUMENT: Thank you Chairperson. I was only mandated to act on behalf of the Witbank Church

through Mr Rodrigues, Chairperson. As we have submitted, that we do not oppose the application, just one submission to make is just actually thanking Mr Flores for his willingness, in a spirit of reconciliation in resolving issues with the community in Witbank, Chairperson. We wish to thank his willingness in that regard and the rest of the other applications, Chairperson, I shall leave the decision in the Honourable Committee's hands. Thank you Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Ms Coleridge. Yes, I can't see that you would have anything else you would want to add in the light of that submission.

MR CORNELIUS: I don't thank you Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. That concludes the applications before us. The Committee will take time to consider the applications and to formulate their decision on these matters and will endeavour to produce a decision as soon as the circumstances permit us to do so, but for the moment the decisions will be reserved. Once they are available we will notify all of the parties with an interest in the matter.

Mr Cornelius does that take care of your matters before us?

MR CORNELIUS: I have concluded, thank you Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. And Mr Botha?

MR BOTHA: The same applies to me.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Well we know Mr Rossouw is still around. Well we thank you for your assistance. We appreciate it and then you're excused.

MR CORNELIUS: Thank you Chair.

MS COLERIDGE: Chairperson, that concludes the matters for today. We will commence tomorrow with the applications of Eugene Fourie, Isak Bosch, Willem Nortje and possibly Moerdyk, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well. What time do you suggest we convene?

MS COLERIDGE: 9 o'clock or 9.30. I'm in your hands, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. We'll adjourn the proceedings at this stage and we will reconvene here tomorrow morning at 9 o'clock.