ON RESUMPTION
MR VISSER: Chairperson, the evidence of Brigadier Schoon as you know, is in Volume 1. The specific incident is dealt with from page 90 onwards. It is very brief in fact, Chairperson, and his evidence will probably also be very brief. May he be considered to still be bound by his previous oath Chairperson?
WILLEM FREDERIK SCHOON: (sworn states)
EXAMINATION BY MR VISSER: Brigadier Schoon, you have already given evidence previously and you have already requested the Committee to incorporate certain evidence in your evidence, is that correct?
MR SCHOON: That is correct Chairperson.
MR VISSER: If we could arrive at the incident, it is the incident which is known as the Take Five and Sadie Pule incident in Ramotswe, Botswana. Did you - you dealt with this on page 90 of Bundle 1, under incident 17. You have given the date there as the 31st of October 1986. Did you find this date from somebody else?
MR SCHOON: I received this date from Brigadier Loots.
MR VISSER: He is incorrect and therefore you are also incorrect?
MR SCHOON: Yes.
MR VISSER: So do you accept that it is the 31st of December?
MR SCHOON: Yes, I do.
MR VISSER: What do you recall of this incident Brigadier?
MR SCHOON: Chairperson, on that specific day if I recall correctly, it was during the afternoon after lunch, I received a telephone call from Brigadier Loots. He informed me that they had fresh information that two terrorists who were active in Botswana and maintained quite a high profile there, would be at a specific house that evening and would overnight there. He did mention there names and they were Take Five and Sadie Pule who at that stage were well known to the Security Branch. Their names frequently presented itself in reports and they were active in Botswana and were of assistance to terrorists and other recruits.
MR VISSER: Have you heard the evidence of Brigadier Loots this morning with regard to the profile of Take Five and Sadie Pule?
MR SCHOON: Indeed Chairperson.
MR VISSER: Does this concur with the information that you had at Head Office?
MR SCHOON: That is correct Chairperson.
MR VISSER: He also said that they regarded them as targets?
MR SCHOON: That is correct Chairperson.
MR VISSER: What did Brigadier Loots tell you?
MR SCHOON: He suggested that the information which is available to him, he had regarded it as very reliable and I think it was then Major Charl Naude of Special Forces, he conveyed this information to them, and he requested him to launch an operation at this specific house where these persons would overnight.
MR VISSER: Which would mean that they would attack this house?
MR SCHOON: That is correct.
MR VISSER: With the purpose of killing the people inside the house?
MR SCHOON: That is correct Chairperson.
MR VISSER: What did you do then?
MR SCHOON: He convinced me that the information which was available to him, was very reliable and that they had to act that same evening if they wanted to use this information. I told him that I had no problem, he could convey the information to Major Naude and then request him to launch an operation.
MR VISSER: When you say that you had no problem, do you in the light of your knowledge from the Security Branch, did you have knowledge, according to your knowledge of these two persons, did you regard them as such persons that they could be targeted?
MR SCHOON: Yes.
MR VISSER: In this decision that you had taken, you have heard Brigadier Loots' evidence this morning with regard to the situation which the Western Transvaal Security Branch found themselves in, meaning that they had all these insurgents and weapon smuggling and there were explosions all over the country and that the Botswana government was not very anxious to be of assistance in arresting such persons, you have heard that?
MR SCHOON: I did Chairperson.
MR VISSER: And we know during those years and I would like to ask you whether it played a role, during the middle 1980's there was a great amount of pressure in the Security Branch to normalise the situation?
MR SCHOON: That is so indeed, Chairperson.
MR VISSER: The pressure and the speeches of politicians, where they spoke about the elimination of terrorists, how did you interpret that?
MR SCHOON: Chairperson, I understood that all necessary methods and sources had to be used to combat this problem. In other words to stop the terrorists in their tracks.
MR VISSER: Did you understand that what was expected of you, was to kill terrorists?
MR SCHOON: That is correct Chairperson.
MR VISSER: That is the evidence Chairperson.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VISSER
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mohlaba, any questions?
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR MOHLABA: Yes, thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Schoon, can you, you have mentioned that you were telephoned by Mr Loots and advising you that he had some information about terrorists, why was he phoning you, were you his senior, was he your subordinate at that time?
MR SCHOON: I was his senior Chairperson and I was attached to Security Head Office.
MR MOHLABA: And the reason he phoned you, was it because procedurally he was supposed to seek sanction from you before such operations can be carried out?
MR SCHOON: That is correct Chairperson.
MR MOHLABA: What were you expected to do, that is did you have a responsibility to verify the information before you give a "go ahead" to them?
MR SCHOON: Chairperson he convinced me that the information was very reliable and he also said that we had to act on it.
MR MOHLABA: Was it your responsibility then to ensure that the information is in fact reliable? Was it your responsibility, were you the last person to be satisfied that the information given to me, is reliable before you give instructions to go ahead with the operation?
MR SCHOON: Chairperson, yes, I believe that he did see it so, although it was standing practice during those years that if the Security Branch had any information then it was our duty to share it with the South African Defence Force if they also had an interest there. In other words this was the policy.
MR MOHLABA: Other than approving or giving them a "go ahead" to proceed with the operation, did you contribute anything, that is the logistics, planning or suggesting to them?
MR SCHOON: No Chairperson.
MR MOHLABA: You have mentioned the surname Naude, it escapes my comprehension what role did he play there and what was he?
MR SCHOON: Chairperson, at that stage he was a Major, I think he was a Major in the South African Defence Force and he was attached to Special Forces, Special Operations.
MR MOHLABA: Did you yourself have any contact with Naude or was it only Brigadier Loots who communicated with him?
MR SCHOON: With this specific instance, I had no contact with him, Chairperson.
MR MOHLABA: Did you obtain a report after this operation was carried out, and if so, from who?
MR SCHOON: Chairperson, if I recall correctly, a few days afterwards reports did come in which had said that there was indeed an explosion and persons were killed.
MR MOHLABA: Can you remember who gave you the report?
MR SCHOON: I do not recall Chairperson. It would have been written reports in the form of a print telegram or in some form of crypt.
MR MOHLABA: Thank you Chairperson.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MOHLABA
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Mohlaba. Ms Thabethe, questions?
MS THABETHE: No questions, Mr Chairperson.
NO CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS THABETHE
CHAIRPERSON: Which persons did you give permission for to be killed?
MR SCHOON: Not for any specific persons, they only asked approval to convey the information to Special Forces and a request to launch the operation.
CHAIRPERSON: Did Mr Loots not ask you if he could kill people?
MR SCHOON: No Chairperson. He just asked if he could convey the information to Special Forces and request them to launch the necessary operation.
CHAIRPERSON: Is this that the information, that these two persons would be in a specific house?
MR SCHOON: That is correct Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: And you gave him permission to convey this to Naude and to have Naude launch an operation?
MR SCHOON: That is correct Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Did you know whether people would be killed?
MR SCHOON: Chairperson, I believed that it was a great possibility.
CHAIRPERSON: Did you not ask him specifically about targets?
MR SCHOON: No Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Did you know who these persons were that were discussed here?
MR SCHOON: Yes Chairperson, I did because at that stage they were prominent figures in Botswana, in the ANC network there.
CHAIRPERSON: Did Loots not tell you what he planned?
MR SCHOON: Chairperson, no he did not tell me, he said that they would plan an operation.
CHAIRPERSON: But he did not give you any particulars?
MR SCHOON: No Chairperson. At that stage I believed that the killing of these persons would be one of the possibilities.
CHAIRPERSON: But you yourself were not involved with any planning of the specific operation?
MR SCHOON: Not at all Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
ADV GCABASHE : Thank you Chair. One question, I hope. You are saying that you did not authorise these particular people to be killed, is this what you are saying?
MR SCHOON: Chairperson, no. I said that he could give the information to Naude and ask Naude to act upon this information or plan any steps that he would deem necessary because we could not tell Special Forces what to do. We could give them the information and that was then for them to decide what they would do with the information.
ADV GCABASHE : If you had instead wanted to have them abducted and brought to South Africa, you know, there are different possibilities, would you then have said "we want you to abduct them?" I am just trying to understand what you were communicating to the Defence Force?
MR SCHOON: Chairperson, yes, then if I was in Loots' position, I would have said "first see if you can't bring these people out before you make any other plans."
ADV GCABASHE : I am trying to understand what exactly you authorised. Did you simply authorise a communication with Naude and the execution, the steps would be left to Naude, is this what you are saying?
MR SCHOON: Exactly like that Chairperson.
ADV GCABASHE : Are you saying it is the Special Forces chaps who took the decision to kill these people or are you saying it was Mr Loots' decision, whose decision was it?
MR SCHOON: I don't believe that Loots could have done that, he could only have conveyed the information and possibly he could have suggested something, but he could not have said "you must go and kill those people."
ADV GCABASHE : He would have to get that authority from you if he said that?
MR SCHOON: No, because I could not give that authority to him because it was not within my possibilities.
ADV GCABASHE : So really, if we wanted further information about why these people were killed, we would have to talk to Mr Naude, essentially?
MR SCHOON: Absolutely Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: I just want to make sure, do you say that we know that there is at least one person killed there, do you say that you never gave an order that that person had to be killed?
MR SCHOON: No Chairperson, I did not.
ADV DE JAGER: Is the reason why you did not give that order, what is the reason why you did not give that order for the person to be killed or something had to be done to the person?
MR SCHOON: Chairperson, I did not have that authority and that is not why Loots contacted me.
ADV DE JAGER: Why did you not have the authority, is it because it was in a foreign country?
MR SCHOON: No, because it would have been an illegal act.
ADV DE JAGER: But you gave orders for other illegal acts?
MR SCHOON: I did Chairperson.
ADV DE JAGER: But why did you have the authority then and not in this case?
MR SCHOON: I did not have the authority to give an order for an illegal act to be carried out.
ADV DE JAGER: I don't know what meaning you give to authority, but in other cases you did give the orders that you gave testimony to.
MR SCHOON: But that was illegal.
ADV DE JAGER: Yes, that was illegal, but ... (tape ends) ... and in this case you also did it, why didn't you say in this case to Loots, "tell Naude, they must go and that those people are people who are fighting against us and that they should go and kill those people, eliminate those people?"
MR SCHOON: Chairperson, we were never prescriptive when it came to the Special Forces. They made their own decisions. ADV DE JAGER: If those people were inside South Africa, what would your attitude have been then?
MR SCHOON: In that case, we would have arrested them Chairperson.
ADV DE JAGER: Then you would have killed them?
MR SCHOON: Not necessarily Chairperson.
ADV DE JAGER: But you saw that there would be an operation against them?
MR SCHOON: Yes, I did see that.
ADV DE JAGER: What did you understand would happen to them, what did you expect would happen to them?
MR SCHOON: I expected that the Special Forces would be involved in a skirmish.
ADV DE JAGER: And that they would be killed?
MR SCHOON: Most probably Chairperson.
ADV DE JAGER: Special Forces did not capture people, did they?
MR SCHOON: Not as far as I know Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: I will maybe just ask you, do you know what happened to Charl Naude?
MR SCHOON: Chairperson, as far as I know he is still here. The other day, on the TV I saw that he was at one of the other hearings and that he was giving evidence at one of those hearings.
CHAIRPERSON: In front of one of the amnesty hearings?
MR SCHOON: Yes, that is true.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much.
MR VISSER: I did intend to address you and give you some background about the SA Defence Force.
CHAIRPERSON: Have you got any re-examination Mr Visser?
RE-EXAMINATION BY MR VISSER: Just one, perhaps just for clarity sake. Brigadier, I couldn't help but get the impression that you and the Committee leaders are speaking passed one another, could you just please try and listen to the question. The question here is when Brigadier Loots contacted you, did you know that the permission that you were giving, involved the killing of Sadie Pule and Take Five?
MR SCHOON: Chairperson, at that stage no.
MR VISSER: But you say that you cannot be prescriptive to the Special Forces, what do you mean by that?
MR SCHOON: We cannot prescribe to them go and kill so and so. That is a different Department and they have their own structure.
MR VISSER: All you could do to them is give them the information and they had to act?
MR SCHOON: They had to act, yes.
MR VISSER: If they were arrested, then you would have accepted it like that, if they had gone and arrested the people, then you would have accepted it like that?
MR SCHOON: Yes Chairperson.
MR VISSER: They went there and they tried to kill the people, do you accept it like that?
MR SCHOON: I accepted it like that Chairperson.
MR VISSER: Thank you Mr Chairman.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VISSER
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Visser. Can I just ask you something that I just thought of, it appears as if - your testimony - that there was someone killed in this process. What is your attitude at this moment about this incident?
MR SCHOON: Chairperson, I am sorry that this incident happened, it is very clear that the correct people were not targeted and I am very sorry about this.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Visser, is there anything else?
MR VISSER: Not from this witness, thank you Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, I interrupted you, but you wanted to ask for him to be excused. You are excused Mr Schoon, thank you.
WITNESS EXCUSED
MR VISSER: I neglected to say this morning that for the next witnesses, they are brief witnesses, Mr Chairperson, and I did not draw written statements, I hope you will forgive me, especially Commissioner De Jager.
