TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION COMMISSION AMNESTY HEARINGS
DATE: 3 OCTOBER 1997
HELD AT: PORT ELIZABETH
NAME: JACOBUS KOK
CASE NO: 5184/97 DAY 4 _______________________________________________________
MR KEMP: Chairperson, the next applicant is applicant number 5, Jacobus Kok.
JACOBUS KOK: (Duly sworn, states).
EXAMINATION BY MR KEMP: Mr Chairperson, before I proceed with the evidence in this matter, as in the case with Mr Du Toit, an amendment was placed before you after the tea break. Similarly amending paragraph 8 of the application for amnesty to include the possibilities or the sub-crimes indicated in that notice. I merely want to point that out, that it has been handed to the Commission. I will be referring to the application of Mr Kok as set out ...
ADV DE JAGER: And are you formally applying for the amendment?
MR KEMP: Yes. Yes, indeed. I do not know procedurally whether it is necessary to apply for an amendment. It is merely an addition to the present application, but in so far as it is necessary, I will seek such an amendment of the application, both in the case of Mr Du Toit and Mr Kok.
CHAIRPERSON: It is actually an amendment, even if it is an addition. So anyway, the amendment is granted.
MR KEMP: Thank you, Mr Chairman. I will be referring to Volume 1 of the documentation before the Committee and in particular, to the application of Jacobus Kok, as it appears from page 92 onwards.
Mr Kok, would you please look at page 92. You will there see that this is an application for amnesty in terms of Section 18 of the Act. The names which appear there, the address, identity number, et cetera, is that correct, is this your application?
MR KOK: Yes.
MR KEMP: The application goes as far as page 114 of the document. So it is 23 pages long, the application itself and it was drawn up by you.
MR KOK: That's correct.
MR KEMP: Do you confirm the correctness of what appears in that application?
MR KOK: Yes, I do.
MR KEMP: You were also a member of the South African Police and attached to the technical section of the security branch during 1989. Is that correct?
MR KOK: Yes.
MR KEMP: Who was your commanding officer?
MR KOK: My commander at that stage was Lieut-Col Du Toit.
MR KEMP: It is common cause that during 1989 and in particular, on the 13th of December 1989, certain events took place at the technical section, and in which you were involved on that day. Is that correct?
MR KOK: That is correct.
MR KEMP: These events related to what later became known as the Motherwell matter. Is that correct?
MR KOK: Yes.
MR KEMP: How did you become involved in that?
MR KOK: It was during December 1989. I don't have any independent recollection of the precise date, but I now know that it must have been about the 13th of December. During the morning, Col Du Toit called me to his office and told me that there was to be a very important operation in Port Elizabeth. He briefly explained to me that it turned on the matter of askaris that had or were about to defect to the ANC. He further ordered me to prepare certain explosives and the manufacture of an explosive device. Since the people had to be eliminated by means of an explosive device.
MR KEMP: Was it conveyed to you that it had to take place by way of a motorcar bomb?
MR KOK: Yes.
MR KEMP: Were you told in what way the explosion had to take place? In other words did it have to take place by means of a limpet mine or commercial explosives or what?
MR KOK: It would take place by means of a remote control device.
MR KEMP: And the explosives to be used?
MR KOK: I prepared - I wasn't informed exactly what the circumstances would be, and I didn't know who the targets were to be. So I prepared for any circumstances underground and I used a commercial and a military type of explosive and I packed these and came down to Port Elizabeth.
MR KEMP: What was the relationship between yourself and Du Toit at that stage?
MR KOK: I was attached to the mechanical section and Col Du Toit was the commander of that section. We carried out certain covert actions and these actions were done on a need-to-know basis. We had a very good understanding. We trusted each other completely and if information was conveyed by one person to the other, it was dealt with on that basis.
MR KEMP: How long had you and Du Toit been working together at that stage?
MR KOK: I joined in May 1982, that is the technical section that I joined. So it was approximately seven years.
MR KEMP: It is common cause that Du Toit and yourself later travelled to Port Elizabeth. How did you get there?
MR KOK: Du Toit informed me that De Kock would arrange for a vehicle along with cash to buy our food and fuel expenses and we left for Port Elizabeth in a black Jetta.
MR KEMP: When did you start the journey and when did you arrive?
MR KOK: It was the afternoon after De Kock had been to Waal du Toit, with the request for technical support and we left at about eight or nine that evening and arrived at Port Elizabeth the next morning, the 14th of December.
MR KEMP: After your arrival in Port Elizabeth, what happened then?
MR KOK: I don't know Port Elizabeth at all. I didn't at that stage. We stopped at a garage along the Marine Road, Beach Road and it was early morning, it was sunrise when we arrived at Port Elizabeth, and Du Toit phoned Nieuwoudt from a coin phone and he was to meet us at a specific point. I also didn't know Nieuwoudt at all and I met him there for the first time.
MR KEMP: Did he take you to a place in Port Elizabeth thereafter?
MR KOK: Yes, Nieuwoudt drove in front of us and he took us to safe premises. I don't know where these premises are, I wouldn't be able to tell you at all in what suburb it was, because I wasn't familiar with Port Elizabeth.
MR KEMP: When you arrived at this place, whom did you find there?
MR KOK: I can't remember what time we arrived there, but when we did, two members of Vlakplaas, Snor Vermeulen and Lionel Snyman were already there. Then there was also a person, a stranger present. I didn't know him at all. Deon Nieuwoudt was there as well.
MR KEMP: Did you see Martiens Ras there?
MR KOK: No, I didn't even know at that stage that Martiens Ras was in Port Elizabeth.
MR KEMP: What happened at that house on that morning?
MR KOK: There was a short meeting, which was led by this person, and during that meeting it was confirmed that we were part of this order operation to prepare the explosives and to place it in a vehicle which would be provided to us by Nieuwoudt, and that's what was discussed.
MR KEMP: Did you later leave this place and go somewhere else?
MR KOK: Yes. The meeting didn't take place for very long. I am not sure how long. Waal and I then left those premises, that was in convoy. Whether we drove with somebody I can't recall, but we went to a certain point in the city where we waited. At some point Deon Nieuwoudt joined us and we followed him.
MR KEMP: Was he driving the same car in which you had gone to the house?
MR KOK: I can't recall.
MR KEMP: He left you somewhere along the road and what did he go and do then?
MR KOK: I really am not certain, I am not sure what the arrangements were.
After the meeting we withdrew, or I personally withdrew so in retrospect I can say that perhaps he went to fetch the car, but I am speculating.
MR KEMP: You have no independent recollection of that?
MR KOK: No, I don't.
MR KEMP: After his return were you waiting for him in the city?
MR KOK: That's correct.
MR KEMP: Did you then depart for some other place? Where did you go?
MR KOK: Yes, he took us along various routes, I don't know what these were, and we eventually arrived on the outskirts of Port Elizabeth at an isolated spot, and we stopped there.
MR KEMP: Were there any houses nearby?
MR KOK: No, no, there were no houses.
MR KEMP: What happened at this place?
MR KOK: We prepared the vehicle, and placed the explosive device in the car and we complied with our technical responsibilities.
MR KEMP: Who were present?
MR KOK: At that stage I also saw Martiens Ras, there were three Vlakplaas members, myself, Waal du Toit and Deon Nieuwoudt.
MR KEMP: You say the three Vlakplaas members, apart from Martiens, who were the other two?
MR KOK: It was Snor Vermeulen and Lionel Snyman.
MR KEMP: What were their roles at this place where you arrived?
MR KOK: I found out there, and it was confirmed to me, that their main purpose was protection.
MR KEMP: In preparing the vehicle, did you receive any help from anybody other than Du Toit?
MR KOK: The technical responsibility was basically that of Du Toit and myself, and it might be that somebody else gave us a hand, but I can't say for sure.
MR KEMP: The explosives were placed in the vehicle, what was the vehicle?
MR KOK: It was a white Jetta.
MR KEMP: Where did you place the explosives?
MR KOK: There were charges under the four seats and especially under the mats.
MR KEMP: These charges were connected to cortex?
MR KOK: That's correct.
MR KEMP: And this cortex was linked with another device?
MR KOK: In the final configuration it would have been like that, but we left this for the last operative, the one who would be responsible for using this device. It would be safe to drive this vehicle.
MR KEMP: I just want to refer you to page 106 of the documentation. You see in paragraph 6.3.1, the second line, the third last word refers to (springdoppies) pellets. Is that correct?
MR KOK: No, it is a typing error, it should be pellet (springdoppie).
MR KEMP: After you put these explosives in the vehicle, whose responsibility was it for eventually activating this device?
MR KOK: I don't have the information who was finally responsible but I left it to Deon Nieuwoudt who was responsible for this operation. I explained to him how to activate this pellet initially.
MR KEMP: And how to arm it?
MR KOK: I call it a link-up but it has to do with the arming of this device.
MR KEMP: Did you know for whom this bomb was intended?
MR KOK: Not at all.
MR KEMP: Later you heard the names of the people who were killed? Did you know any of them?
MR KOK: Not at all.
MR KEMP: After you had prepared the vehicle, can you give an indication what time it was when you finished?
MR KOK: I can't remember an exact time, but it was during the afternoon round about three, four o'clock that afternoon, I am not sure.
MR KEMP: What did you do then?
MR KOK: We withdrew and went back to Pretoria. Meaning us, I and Waal du Toit.
MR KEMP: Did you drive directly to Pretoria or did you sleep over?
MR KOK: We went straight to Pretoria, that's correct.
MR KEMP: And the next morning you were back at work?
MR KOK: That's correct.
MR KEMP: When did you hear whether the bomb was successful?
MR KOK: I can't remember a specific day, it might have been the next day, when we came back to our office, I heard over the radio that there had been a bomb explosion in which four people were killed.
MR KEMP: Did you at any stage doubt the instruction to ask for your co- operation, that it was not a lawful instruction?
MR KOK: I did not doubt it, that it was an unlawful instruction. I never thought that people would be killed.
MR KEMP: Mr Chairman, if you can just grant me an indulgence.
ADV DE JAGER: I don't think that was the question posed to you. It was not whether it was lawful that you were justified in killing people. The question was whether you doubted whether you should do it or where the instruction came from.
MR KOK: I trusted Waal du Toit implicitly and I was convinced and up till today, I am convinced he would not have given me an instruction if he knew that was an instruction cleared by head office.
ADV DE JAGER: Did he indicate to you that that was an instruction, an order?
MR KOK: Yes.
ADV DE JAGER: What did he tell you?
MR KOK: He said there was a certain operation, I had to get all things together to prepare such an explosive device.
ADV DE JAGER: Did he tell you where this order came from?
MR KOK: I didn't ask him. He did mention that it was a supportive function we had to do for the Port Elizabeth security branch in co-operation with Vlakplaas members.
ADV DE JAGER: You see, it is strange that you are saying this, but in your application on page 102 you say that he told you that it was a direct order from the security head office.
MR KOK: That is correct.
ADV DE JAGER: This is exactly why I am asking you, and you give a different kind of answer, that you trusted him and he didn't tell you.
MR KOK: I can't specifically remember what I have written here.
ADV DE JAGER: It is not what is written there, it is what is the truth.
MR KOK: I'm telling you the truth.
ADV POTGIETER: Mr Kok, were you ever charged?
MR KOK: Yes, I was.
ADV POTGIETER: How did you plead?
MR KOK: I pleaded not guilty.
ADV POTGIETER: What was your version?
MR KOK: I gave no version, I refused to say anything. I did not give evidence.
ADV POTGIETER: How was your case presented during your trial regarding this alleged participation?
MR KOK: I was charged as an accused in the murder trial.
ADV POTGIETER: What was your version, was there any version put by the State witnesses regarding your participation?
MR KOK: Basically what is presented to the Committee, that was what was said by Snyman and Vermeulen.
ADV POTGIETER: Were there allegations that you were involved?
MR KOK: Yes, there were.
ADV POTGIETER: What was your reaction?
MR KOK: I denied that.
ADV POTGIETER: So ... (intervention).
MR KOK: To the contrary, I refused to say anything and I pleaded not guilty.
ADV POTGIETER: Why did you deny it? Why didn't you just say that I followed a direct order from security head office, I did not doubt it at any time; I will not doubt Waal du Toit.
MR KOK: I was accused of murder and I was part of the system in which I believed. I was part of the group who rendered technical assistance. I was definitely not going to protect myself, not testify against my other colleagues.
On three occasions the Attorney-General told me to that they were kind of going to crucify Waal du Toit.
ADV POTGIETER: But you did not plan it, you were just a person, a link in the chain, connecting all the various elements. You were probably shocked when they charged you? Really, you acted according to a direct instruction.
MR KOK: Yes, I also say that ... (intervention).
ADV POTGIETER: Or did you know this was a big problem, this is a problem from A to Z?
MR KOK: No, not at all.
ADV POTGIETER: And that's why you just denied everything?
MR KOK: In the way I acted, I believed that when we are approached for assistance, the evaluation or the determination of the merits have already been done. The research had been done and the necessary investigation also. At that stage I was loyal to my commanding officer.
MR KOK: And later when Mr De Kock came there and it seems that Mr De Kock is going to tell the truth, he is going to disclose the whole matter, what did you do then?
MR KOK: What can I do? I am a victim of circumstances.
ADV POTGIETER: And you go on with a lie?
MR KOK: I never told lies. I kept quiet, I denied to say anything.
ADV POTGIETER: You refused to tell the truth?
MR KOK: That is why I am applying for amnesty.
ADV POTGIETER: Thank you.
MR KOK: I am sorry, this is why I am applying for defeating the ends of justice.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR KEMP
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Hugo?
MR HUGO: I am Hugo on behalf of De Kock, I have no questions.
NO QUESTIONS BY MR HUGO
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Booyens?
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR BOOYENS: Thank you, Mr Chairperson. Mr Kok, I just want to ask you one question regarding the Motherwell incident itself. Can you remember at what stage Col De Kock testified? Can you remember something in this regard, after the evidence of Mr Snyman, after the re-opening of the State case ...
MR KOK: Please repeat your question?
MR BOOYENS: During the proceedings in the Motherwell trial, where you were an accused, can you remember that Mr De Kock only later during the proceedings, gave evidence after Snyman's evidence?
MR KOK: Yes, that is correct.
MR BOOYENS: Can you remember that order?
MR KOK: The State reopened its case and that is correct.
MR BOOYENS: And you say the State reopened its case and then De Kock's evidence was presented.
MR KOK: Mr Snyman was a witness right from the start.
MR BOOYENS: Thank you, I have no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR BOOYENS
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Jansen?
MR JANSEN: No questions on behalf of Mr Ras, Mr Chairman.
NO QUESTIONS BY MR JANSEN
MR CORNELIUS: Cornelius for the seventh applicant, Vermeulen, I have no questions, thank you, Mr Chairman.
NO QUESTIONS BY MR CORNELIUS
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR FORD: Thank you, Mr Chairman. Mr Kok, briefly at page 95 of the record, page 4 of your application, it appears that in 1980 you decided to go and study theology at the University of Pretoria. Is that right?
MR KOK: That is correct.
MR FORD: Do you regard yourself as a religious person?
MR KOK: I regard myself as a Christian, not a religious person. (Laughter).
MR FORD: Well, then obviously it was Christianity which you were to study at the University of Pretoria?
MR KOK: That is correct.
MR FORD: Do you know the tenth Commandment says "thou shalt not kill"?
MR KOK: Yes, I know that.
MR FORD: At some stage, notwithstanding your religious convictions, Mr Kok, you made, it appears, an election that you were not to abide by that Commandment? What made you decide that?
MR KOK: The circumstances allowed that I could not study any further.
MR FORD: No, I think you know what my question is. When did you decide that you were not going to abide by the Commandment which says "thou shalt not kill"?
MR KOK: It was not a question of a specific time when I made that decision, it was a conviction I had that I was serving my country and my people.
MR FORD: Did you realise that as your career in the police progressed, that you were going to be required to participate in the killing of people?
MR KOK: I served on the border where people were killed and the struggle in which we were involved, against the previous enemy, the ANC/SACP Alliance, would cause this in the end.
MR FORD: And you were prepared to continue with that work notwithstanding the fact that you would be required to kill people?
MR KOK: Yes, I did, yes.
MR FORD: And when the order was given to go with Mr Du Toit to Port Elizabeth, you were under no illusions, as you have said, but that you were going to prepare for the killing of people?
MR KOK: That is correct.
MR FORD: And I think we have already heard, it would, as a more junior member of the police force, it would have been difficult for you to refuse that order at that stage?
MR KOK: It was not a question of refusing to follow an order. It was a question of loyalty.
MR FORD: But your, what I am putting to you, Mr Kock, is that your choice came much earlier. There must have come a stage when you realised that you were being driven into a position where you were going to be committing acts, which were not only illegal, but which were irreconcilable with your religious convictions?
MR KOK: It is difficult to justify, as a Christian to justify that lives are taken.
MR FORD: You see we are not only talking of a war situation where they are shooting at you and you are shooting back at them, this is prepared execution.
MR KOK: With a purpose, yes.
MR FORD: And you didn't have a problem with that?
MR KOK: I didn't have a problem with that at that stage, because in the light of the struggle against us - perhaps you were not exposed to all the circumstances and to the methods and techniques used by the opposition.
MR FORD: May I have a moment, Mr Chairman? I have no further questions, Mr Chairman.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR FORD
ADV DE JAGER: Just to place it in perspective, in the same Bible where it is stated you may not kill, there are many stories of people who are being killed.
So it is not strange to the religion that there were also religious battles and that people were killed in battles.
MR KOK: The most intense wars are waged because of religion.
ADV POTGIETER: Did you know you had to kill your colleagues?
MR KOK: I did not know who the targets were. They were not known. As I have already said, at the stage when it comes to my level, I accepted the motivation and I had no grounds to question that.
ADV POTGIETER: It did not matter who they were, women or children?
MR KOK: I trusted the integrity of the people who gave the order, that we are not waging a war against women and children. You are not interested in whom they were, this was just purely technical support. I was not involved in the elimination. I just prepared the device. I was not involved in the elimination.
ADV POTGIETER: What device?
MR KOK: I just prepared the explosive device.
ADV POTGIETER: But that was the device which killed the people?
MR KOK: That is correct. My part in the operation was only to prepare the device.
ADV POTGIETER: But it did not bother you against whom that would be used?
MR KOK: I absolutely trusted Waal du Toit, and there was no reason to doubt that he will involve me without any reason.
ADV POTGIETER: It did not matter whether innocent people were killed, you did not care, you just prepared the device. You only believed in Du Toit.
MR KOK: No, I believed in principles. I never acted against innocent people.
ADV POTGIETER: Would it have made a difference if you know you prepare this deadly explosive, to kill colleagues?
MR KOK: I would still have tried - it would have made a difference, but I would have tried to view it objectively. Different people - at the stage that it came to my level, we had no control concerning the execution of the order.
ADV POTGIETER: You are referring to the methods of the so-called enemy, how horrible they were and that was your motivation, if I understand it correctly. That was why you to a certain degree you felt that it was justified to be involved.
MR KOK: No, Mr Chairman, the ANC/SACP Alliance waged war against us, and I can read a part of my application if me want to.
ADV POTGIETER: It is not necessary, I have read through all of it.
MR KOK: No, the methods they used, not so much that, but they manned all those structures and they tried to destroy them.
ADV POTGIETER: In this case it was not the ANC, they were colleagues in the security police.
MR KOK: I am repeating. It was merely a technical support action. One feels sorry about the loss of life.
ADV POTGIETER: Precisely.
MR KOK: Because I view it as something given to us by God.
It is a pity and it is tragic that the lives of people have so little value, and I am not referring to only us in South Africa, but the whole of the world. What happened in the past is a great pity and everyone of us must decide what we did with the past and what contribution we will make for the future.
ADV POTGIETER: Especially for you, who was interested in theology, this was important.
MR KOK: That is true.
ADV POTGIETER: Thank you very much.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Brink?
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR BRINK: Thank you, Mr Chairman, when you saw, when you were called into Du Toit's office, do I understand your evidence, it was then that he merely told you that you were to make preparations for explosives to be put in some motorcar.
MR KOK: He shortly explained to me what the circumstances were, not in any detail, and he told me that I had to prepare for a specific kind of device.
MR BRINK: At that stage then you weren't aware that it was to be used to kill people?
MR KOK: No, it was an explosive device to eliminate people.
MR BRINK: But you didn't know who those people were at that stage?
MR KOK: Not at all.
MR BRINK: When did you learn the identity of the people that you were prepare the explosive for?
MR KOK: I cannot remember a specific stage, it was after the explosion, and I only realised who they were during the trial.
MR BRINK: I want to be quite clear on this, because it may be of some importance. Do you say that you only knew of the identity of the people who were killed after the explosion took place?
MR KOK: Yes, I did not know them at all.
MR BRINK: You didn't know who these would be, they might not be political activists, they could have been bank robbers or common criminals or whatever?
MR KOK: I was shortly explained that they were Askaris. This was how I can remember that independently.
MR BRINK: Was that after the explosion?
MR KOK: That was during the short discussion I had with Du Toit in his office.
MR BRINK: So when you prepared the explosives and you were on your way to Port Elizabeth, you had no political objective?
MR KOK: I did, he explained to me in more detail that mentioned Askaris that had defected to the ANC or who were in the process of defecting, I can't remember specifically, and then we discussed the technical details.
MR BRINK: I understood you to say you were only told about the possibility of these being Askaris, shortly before the explosion?
MR KOK: No, I heard it during the short information session in Du Toit's office, where he told me what to do and gave me instructions.
MR BRINK: But you were to kill Askaris, that is in effect what he told you.
MR KOK: He said Askaris were involved.
MR BRINK: Did he say how they were involved?
MR KOK: I can remember that it was something concerning defecting to the ANC or something like that. I can't remember distinctly, because that was not my main motivation.
MR BRINK: You see, I get the impression from your evidence that you couldn't really have had a personal objective, you were merely following orders from your superiors, prepare explosives, we are going to Port Elizabeth, we are going to blow up people. That's all you knew. Isn't that the truth?
MR KOK: If you want to put it as simplistic as that, that was what it was like.
MR BRINK: Thank you, Mr Chairman.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR BRINK
CHAIRPERSON: Mention of askaris was made to you before you left for Port Elizabeth.
MR KOK: That is correct.
CHAIRPERSON: Were you not told of members of the security branch to be victims?
MR KOK: I don't have an independent recollection, I can only remember the word Askaris.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Kemp?
RE-EXAMINATION BY MR KEMP: As the Committee pleases. Just two aspects, Mr Kok. Is it correct that you never testified at the trial?
MR KOK: That is correct.
MR KEMP: And secondly, what I want to ask you; at any stage before you put the bomb in the vehicle, was it explained to you why the people who had to be eliminated like that, had to be killed?
MR KOK: No, never.
MR KEMP: No further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR KEMP
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Kok, you are excused.
WITNESS EXCUSED MR KEMP J KOK MR KEMP J KOK PORT ELIZABETH HEARINGS AMNESTY/EASTERN CAPE PORT ELIZABETH HEARINGS AMNESTY/EASTERN CAPE MR BOOYENS J KOK MR BOOYENS 482 J KOK PORT ELIZABETH HEARINGS AMNESTY/EASTERN CAPE PORT ELIZABETH HEARINGS AMNESTY/EASTERN CAPE MR FORD 490 J KOK MR FORD 485 J KOK PORT ELIZABETH HEARINGS AMNESTY/EASTERN CAPE MR BRINK 494 J KOK MR BRINK 487 J KOK PORT ELIZABETH HEARINGS AMNESTY/EASTERN CAPE