Amnesty Hearings

CHAIRPERSON: Gentlemen, I'm afraid that your sudden ending yesterday took us rather by surprise and that since then various things have arisen which we wish to refer to and consider, and perhaps we can deal with them separately. The one is the question of recalling Mr de Kock, to put certain passages of the book to him.

The second is of calling the witness Mbane, whom you have a copy of his statement, and it appears to us quite clear that in the light of what is contained in that statement, his evidence is relevant to, considering the events of the day in question.

We understand that all efforts were made to find him so that he could be called as a witness and yesterday when I raise enquiries it was discovered that he was in fact available. He has been brought here this morning and I gather he has given evidence in various other matters.

We would have liked also to have called the other person whom he refers to in his statement, but we are told that that - sorry, I can give you the name, whom he says would have confirmed his evidence ...(intervention)

ADV STEENKAMP: That's Mr Mbanda, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Ja, Steve Mbanda, Steven Mbanda, but we understand that he is not available. Perhaps when Mr Mbane gives evidence he may disclose where he is.

And a third matter has just come to my attention. I'm afraid I thought these matters would have been sorted out beforehand. We been handed an extract from a judgment. I don't know at whose request this has been prepared.

MR HATTINGH: This is at our request, Mr Chairman. I'm going to refer to it during the course of my argument.

CHAIRPERSON: Well I am going to ask for more of the judgment, because it starts at page - the second portion, it's in two portions, 12694. I would like to know what was said just before that.

MR HATTINGH: Yes. Mr Chairman, unfortunately I, for purposes of my argument I only considered those pages relevant and I didn't bring the rest of the judgment with me, but I also noticed in going through the judgment last night, that there are some three to four pages missing from our copy as well. There are some pages, one or two more pages immediately before - prior to those pages that you have, Mr Chairman, but the commencement of the judgment on count 121 is for some reason ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Is this count 121?

MR HATTINGH: It's count 121, Mr Chairman. I think, Mr Chairman, if I'm not mistaken, that the TRC has got a copy of the whole judgment, because extracts ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: They should have.

MR HATTINGH: ... extracts were made from it in some of the other matters, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: And I've got a bundle at home, I've been picking up de Kock bundles for some time, I may have it there, I didn't know. But the reason why I mention it is, there are quotations from Mr van Heerden and it appears a summary of his evidence and I would like to check the whole of that and if necessary look at - get a transcript of Mr van Heerden's evidence itself. I was given this a few minutes ago. My recollection is that he implicated Mr Bellingan didn't he?

MR HATTINGH: I think so, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Didn't he?

MR CORNELIUS: That is correct, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Isn't he the gentlemen Mr Bellingan spoke about "a personal vendetta"?

MR BOOYENS: Yes, Mr Chairman. Yes, he's the one that said Bellingan took part - well he initially said he took part in the tubing and that ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: That he fetched the tube and took - because I have not read his evidence, but from the portion of the judgment put before us there is no mention of Bellingan and this may be something that we would like to clarify and if necessary question Mr van Heerden about the differences, if there are such differences.

So it may that when we have dealt with - if we could dispose of the question of Mr de Kock and this other witness now, maybe we should then adjourn and get papers I think, facts - I don't know what the best way is in finding them. It may well be that the papers are available in the Attorney-General's office here, which would be easier to get hold of, but that's a matter we can enquire into. If you agree with me, gentlemen, could we then deal with the question of recalling Mr de Kock first.

MR HATTINGH: Yes, certainly, Mr Chairman.

MR BOOYENS: Mr Chairman, ...(indistinct - no microphone).

CHAIRPERSON: I notice Mr de Kock is warmly dressed, if he would like to remove his sweater there would be no objection.

MACHINE SWITCHED OFF

MACHINE SWITCHED ON

CHAIRPERSON: Mr de Kock, I would remind you that you're still under your former oath.

EUGENE DE KOCK: (s.u.o.)

CHAIRPERSON: Do you have any problem if I put questions to you in English?

MR DE KOCK: No, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: Sit down. Mr de Kock, I regret that after you've given your evidence, in fact after the proceedings closed yesterday, my attention was drawn to your - well I say "your" book, the book, "A Long Night's Damage", which was as I understand it, dictated to you and written by Jeremy Gordon. Dictated by you.

MR DE KOCK: That's correct.

CHAIRPERSON: You dictated to Gordon and he wrote down the ...

MR DE KOCK: Chairperson no, Mr Gordon had my entire amnesty application and upon various occasions he visited me, I think there were four or five occasions, for approximately 40 minutes to an hour at a time and there were certain points that he clarified, in general and also personal aspects.

CHAIRPERSON: Because the copy I have is at page 164. I think your counsel has a similar copy in front of him, if you want to look at the book, but then also you have been given a photostat copy of the relevant pages.

MR DE KOCK: Yes, that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Now starting at page 164 you talk about this operation and the return where you ate and drank on the way back.

MR DE KOCK: That is correct, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: And then at page 165 you talk of your return to Vlakplaas when almost all of the members were under the influence of alcohol.

MR DE KOCK: That is correct, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: You then deal with the fact that there were a number of askaris living on the farm, most of them were former members of the ANC and PAC, who had been trained overseas and had then joined you to act against their former comrades.

MR DE KOCK: That is correct, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: You make the point that the askaris could never be trusted completely and some of them disappeared from the farm to rejoin the ANC and the PAC.

MR DE KOCK: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: And that you were very alert about this because they could then carry out actions against the Security Police and specifically against the unit station at Vlakplaas.

MR DE KOCK: That is correct, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: And you then explain, and I quote

"For this reason I was very careful about issuing weapons to the askaris, mainly because they could use then at any time in a reckless manner, especially if they had been drinking. I was also very strict when it came to the handling of weapons by askaris.

On a number of occasions, askaris went out on their own, joined up with a smuggling ring and lost the weapons or sold them. The weapons would often be used later in attacks on the SAP or on citizens."

MR DE KOCK: That is correct, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: And you go on.

"After we had returned from Badplaas and arrived at the canteen, one of the askaris who lived on the farm came into the canteen and said he had been robbed of his weapon in a shebeen. It was clear that this askari, Pumela Moses Ntehelang, known as Bruce, was drunk. He was also being quite cocky. When he told me that he had been at a shebeen and that he had been robbed of his weapon, I immediately suspected that he had given or sold his weapon to somebody else."

Is that correct?

MR DE KOCK: Chairperson no, if I may refer to my affidavit which was - or ought to have been in Mr Gordon's possession, I did not mention anything about him having sold the weapon. I did not have the opportunity to edit this book according to the stipulations of the contract and I believe that if I'd had the opportunity for editing, I would have amended this aspect.

CHAIRPERSON: So this was an invention of Mr Gordon's?

MR DE KOCK: Chairperson, I wouldn't say that it was an invention, Mr Gordon also attended the criminal trial and he attended it on a regular basis and I found this on a previous occasion, where I believe that he read the evidence that he heard there along with my application which I submitted.

CHAIRPERSON: So you say we should have reference to the evidence you gave at the criminal trial?

MR DE KOCK: Well I didn't give evidence there regarding this portion, but Messrs Bosch and the other persons who have been here gave evidence and I think that it is a combination of his journalistic image that he formulated there and what he obtained from my amnesty application.

CHAIRPERSON: It goes on to say

"I was almost beside myself with anger, I hit him on the forehead with a snooker cue that was in my hand, the front point of the cue broke off and I hit him with the open hand. All the other members began to assault him and I walked out of the canteen to regain my self control."

MR DE KOCK: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON

"As a result of my actions the other members of C1, who were in the canteen, including Andries van Heerden, Leon Flores, Hugh Lugg, Piet Snyders, assaulted Ntehelang. Brood van Heerden came to call me and said the man was dead."

MR DE KOCK: That is correct, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: So is it correct that Hugh Lugg was a member of C1?

MR DE KOCK: He was a white askari and upon that basis he was a member of C1.

CHAIRPERSON: And did he take part in the assault? You haven't told us of that.

MR DE KOCK: I didn't see him myself, that is an inference that I drew later as a result of a discussion and for the sake of completion I mentioned it.

CHAIRPERSON: So you mentioned this. The only passage so far that you say you didn't mention was the one about suspecting that the deceased had sold his weapon.

MR DE KOCK: That is correct, Chairperson. As I have stated it here is the way he handed it over.

ADV SANDI: But is it correct that Leon Flores also assaulted the deceased?

MR DE KOCK: Yes, Chairperson, that is one of the pieces of information that came to me at a stage, from discussions. As I have told you, when I gave evidence and when I was examined I still said that I didn't ask at the scene who had struck him, it was about the man who had died. But this is part of the information that I received.

CHAIRPERSON: Right. Thank you, Mr de Kock. Any questions?

EXAMINATION BY MR HATTINGH: Yes, thank you, Mr Chairman. Mr Chairman, I will deal with your leave, with the matters raised by yourself and then with your leave, I would like to lead him on some other aspects as well, Mr Chairman.

Mr de Kock, this Mr Gordon who wrote the book, I understand that he is an Israeli citizen.

MR DE KOCK: That is correct.

MR HATTINGH: Therefore he does not speak Afrikaans at all.

MR DE KOCK: That is correct.

MR HATTINGH: And did he obtain the services of anyone in assisting him with the translation of your application for amnesty which was submitted in Afrikaans?

MR DE KOCK: Yes, I think so.

MR HATTINGH: If one studies the application and compares it with the sequence of events as described within the book, it is clear that he has translated your version as it appears in your application.

MR DE KOCK: That is correct.

MR HATTINGH: And you say one of the stipulations of the contract was that before the book was released for publication you would have the opportunity to study it for errors and so forth.

MR DE KOCK: That is correct.

MR HATTINGH: However, that opportunity was never afforded to you.

MR DE KOCK: That is correct.

MR HATTINGH: And upon other occasions you have given evidence here about errors which appear in the book.

MR DE KOCK: That is correct.

MR HATTINGH: Very well. Would you bear with me a moment, Mr Chairman. Sorry, Mr Chairman, I would just like to discuss this matter with my attorney if you don't mind.

CHAIRPERSON: Certainly. Do you want an adjournment?

MR HATTINGH: No, it's not necessary, thank you Mr Chairman.

In your application on page 3, Mr de Kock, you say about this aspect:

"When the askari told me that he had been at a shebeen and had been robbed of his weapon, I immediately suspected that he had purposefully conveyed the weapon to someone else and that there was a substantial possibility that this weapon would be used against the police during an attack, or the possibility also existed that this weapon would merely be used in a general attack on the public."

Therefore there is no mention of a sale or a transaction, is that correct?

MR DE KOCK: That is correct.

MR HATTINGH: And he also does not mention in the book the rest of the paragraph, during which you state that the possibility existed that the weapon could be used against the police or against the public during a general attack?

MR DE KOCK: That's correct, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, what ...(indistinct - no microphone)?

MR HATTINGH: Unless I misread it, Mr Chairman, I don't see reference in the book to the rest of that paragraph which starts at the foot of page 3 of the application.

CHAIRPERSON: Well it says ...(indistinct - no microphone)

"... specifically against the unit at Vlakplaas and ...(indistinct) weapons often made to be used in attacks on the SAP or on citizens."

MR HATTINGH: Yes, but that's in a general paragraph, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR HATTINGH: But the rest of the paragraph 3 - sorry, the paragraph on page 3, it starts at the foot, he stops at where that paragraph says "oorhandig het".

"I immediately suspected that he had given or sold his weapon to somebody else."

And then he stops, he doesn't deal with the rest of that paragraph.

CHAIRPERSON: No.

MR HATTINGH: Mr de Kock, inasfar as it affects your reference to members who would have been involved, when you hit Mr Ntehelang and he collapsed, did you immediately leave the canteen?

MR DE KOCK: Yes, Chairperson.

MR HATTINGH: And if I recall correctly, you stated that you went to your office.

MR DE KOCK: That is correct.

MR HATTINGH: And later on you returned.

MR DE KOCK: That is correct.

MR HATTINGH: And upon your return, what was the position?

MR DE KOCK: That is when van Heerden found me, when he came to call me and he told me that there were problems.

MR HATTINGH: That was Mr Ntehelang was already dead?

MR DE KOCK: Yes, Chairperson.

MR HATTINGH: Therefore, you do not know yourself who participated in the assault?

MR DE KOCK: No, Chairperson.

MR HATTINGH: And this which appears in your affidavit and in the book, would an inference you drew as result of information that you received?

MR DE KOCK: Yes, at a later stage, but not at that moment at the scene of the incident.

MR HATTINGH: And you have stated in your application and in the book, most of the members were severely inebriated?

MR DE KOCK: Yes, they were severely inebriated.

MR HATTINGH: And with your leave, Mr Chairman, may I just deal with one further aspect, which doesn't arise from the matter for which he was recalled.

Mr de Kock, at that time, did you consider what would happen if persons had to be charged for this action?

MR DE KOCK: Yes, at the scene it was already clear that we could not go public with this. If some of the members under my command were charged, such as among others, Mr van Heerden and any of the others, by nature of the circumstances they would have spoken out about other operations.

MR HATTINGH: Would they have spoken of the true or actual purpose behind Vlakplaas?

MR DE KOCK: Yes, Chairperson. At that stage there had already been a myriad of internal and external operations, most of these operations had involved State sanctioned terrorism or murder then, and I would also have been charged with the same objective and the same situation would probably have emerged, where these aspects would also have come to light.

MR HATTINGH: Were some of these members involved in, let's use an example, the explosion of Khotso House?

MR DE KOCK: Yes, all of them were involved.

MR HATTINGH: Was Mr van Heerden involved in this?

MR DE KOCK: Yes, Chairperson.

MR HATTINGH: And Mr Snyders?

MR DE KOCK: Yes, Chairperson.

MR HATTINGH: And we also know that Khotso House was sanctioned by the former Minister of Safety and Security, or Police.

MR DE KOCK: Yes, that is correct.

MR HATTINGH: And was it the same with Cosatu House?

MR DE KOCK: That is correct.

MR HATTINGH: And the members were aware of the fact that these operations for Khotso House and Cosatu House were sanctioned by the Minister?

MR DE KOCK: That is correct.

MR HATTINGH: And you then were even more so aware of it?

MR DE KOCK: Yes, on the contrary, with Cosatu House it went as far as the President.

MR HATTINGH: And you had also been involved in cross-border operations.

MR DE KOCK: That is correct.

MR HATTINGH: With the authorisation from above?

MR DE KOCK: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Well the fact that you say it went as high as the President, is pure hearsay isn't it? You did not hear the President say anything?

MR DE KOCK: That is correct, Chairperson, but it was evidence of the spoken word which came from the Brigadier, my direct commander, but I did not hear the President himself say so.

MR HATTINGH: Yes, but the ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: It has been denied hasn't it, by those senior to you?

MR DE KOCK: Yes, they would deny it, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: I don't see the relevance of it, Mr Hattingh.

MR HATTINGH: Mr Chairman, this is for purposes of the argument at a later stage. I think it will become clear to you what we have in mind with this.

And later it also appeared that those who had been charged threatened to expose the existence and activities of Vlakplaas.

MR DE KOCK: That is correct.

MR HATTINGH: Such as for example, those persons who had been involved in the Motherwell incident, who had been killed eventually.

MR DE KOCK: That is correct.

MR HATTINGH: Therefore you foresaw the possibility that these persons, if they were to be charged, would expose Vlakplaas and its operations for their own self-preservation?

MR DE KOCK: That's correct, Chairperson.

MR HATTINGH: What would that have led to, Mr de Kock?

MR DE KOCK: Well it would not only have meant the end of my career or the members who served below me, it would also have meant that a variety of Generals and Brigadiers, as well as the Minister, would be affected and I had no doubt that this would have brought the State and the regime to a collapse.

MR HATTINGH: Thank you, Chairperson, nothing further.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR HATTINGH

CHAIRPERSON: Just on that point. We've heard evidence from some of the applicants and others of the applications have dealt with it in their affidavits or applications, that it would appear that everybody - I can't say everybody, but a great many people at Vlakplaas, were extremely frightened of you and would not have said anything involving you because they feared for their own lives.

MR DE KOCK: Chairperson, this is something that I noted and I'm pleased that we can address this. Everyone who was approached during 1994, for an affidavit, all of a sudden displayed this fear. At that stage when we were operating people would fight tooth and nail to be in the front of the line to participate in an operation, but in '94 all they wanted was to be in the back of the queue and they made it appear as if they went out to the shop to buy a loaf of bread and the next thing they knew they were at Vlakplaas.

Not one of the askaris' family members were ever threatened, with the exception of the possibility of the PAC or the ANC determining where we lived and launching an attack. There was an unspoken rule which I also adhered to, because in my mind the idea also emerged from time to time that if people were unhappy with me or if they felt that the circle had to be completed for the purposes of certainty or safety, whether I would fall or whether I would be shot or killed in some manner.

The idea that people were so scared that they wouldn't speak out, was something that was fabricated for self-defence in 1994, Chairperson. There is no way in which one of the could not have gone to the Generals' head office and arranged for me to be arrested and locked up, it would have been as simple as that. They could have done so with the Harms Commission as well.

CHAIRPERSON: Right. Further cross-examination?

MR SIBANYONI: Excuse me, Mr Chairperson.

Just on that point, Mr de Kock. On page 277, we've got the statement of Frank Zole Mbane, who will be testifying now. He said after you called Steven Nobela to you - I just quote here, he says:

"Steven ran up to him ..."

... and then apparently thereafter you sent him to call for Ntehelang, the deceased. And then he further says:

"He spoke to Steven, after which the latter-mentioned ran to the living quarters."

MR DE KOCK: No, Chairperson, I did not call this Steven person, on the contrary, I did not know that Ntehelang was on the farm at that stage. This is not true.

MR SIBANYONI: This failure of the members who didn't agree with what was happening on the day, their failure to intervene, would you say it was the fear of your position or the fear of you as a person?

MR DE KOCK: Chairperson, neither one of the two, these people wanted information and it sounds acceptable now, it sounds like the right thing to say that "We were very scared of him, that's why we never intervened", but these are the same people who on various previous occasions had tackled people with the same tubing method and who had been involved in operations where people were killed. It's not that it was a case of my position or my personality, this is one of the myths which has been created by the media and the Attorney-General's staff, who during 1994 wanted to exonerate themselves. There is no other reason for it.

MR SIBANYONI: Thank you, Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: ...(indistinct) would you say the Attorney-General's staff and the media wanted to exonerate themselves in 1994?

MR DE KOCK: No, Chairperson, that's not what I meant. The impression which was created in the media was that I was such a dangerous person that I could walk through walls and so forth, and that is something which was never true, otherwise these people would never have worked with me, they never would have lived on the farm and head office would have removed me, I wouldn't have had any form of staff.

CHAIRPERSON: I draw your attention to the fact that when they gave that evidence I don't think it was challenged.

Right, cross-examination?

MR BOOYENS: No thank you, Mr Chairman.

NO FURTHER CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR BOOYENS

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR ROSSOUW: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

Mr de Kock, perhaps just on this final aspect a few questions. Would you concede that you are the type of person who had quite a temper?

MR DE KOCK: Well yes, Chairperson, at times I had a temper, by nature of the circumstances of one's profession and working conditions.

MR ROSSOUW: And in this case you gave evidence that you were beside yourself with rage and that you went outside in order to regain your self-control, is that correct?

MR DE KOCK: Yes, Chairperson, any person loses their temper at some or other point in time depending upon the tension and pressure which one experiences, it might be more or less so the case.

MR ROSSOUW: So if one of your subordinates on the farm had formulated the subjective opinion that as a result of your temper they were afraid of you, would you say that that would be completely unfounded?

MR DE KOCK: Yes, he could have requested a transfer at any time and left the farm.

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

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR ROSSOUW

MR BOTHA: Botha, Mr Chairman, I've got no questions.

NO QUESTIONS BY MR BOTHA

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR CORNELIUS: Cornelius, Mr Chairman.

Mr de Kock, after the time - after the incident you left the canteen.

MR DE KOCK: That is correct.

MR CORNELIUS: And then you had to reconstruct the incident from a jumble of drunken evidence, is that correct?

MR DE KOCK: No, I did not ask him who had hit him to death at that stage, it was the day after or in the period that ensued after the incident that it came to light that it would not have helped to hold recriminations to anyone because the man was already dead.

MR CORNELIUS: Yes, but you would not dispute it if Mr Flores on page 164 of his amnesty application, stated

"At that stage I did not lift a finger against Mr Ntehelang."

MR DE KOCK: Well I cannot dispute that.

MR CORNELIUS: Thank you, Chairperson.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR CORNELIUS

MR JANSEN: Thank you, Mr Chair, Jansen, no questions.

NO QUESTIONS BY MR JANSEN

ADV STEENKAMP: No questions, thank you, Mr Chairman.

NO QUESTIONS BY ADV STEENKAMP

MR SIBANYONI: A last thing, Mr de Kock. Talking about you being a person of short temper, on previous applications we were told that you assaulted a Security Policeman at Vlakplaas, Mr Klopper, on two occasions and on the last occasion you even went towards placing a gun on his head, is that so?

MR DE KOCK: Well not against his head, but in his direction, yes.

MR SIBANYONI: But you assaulted him on two occasions?

MR DE KOCK: Two separate occasions, yes.

MR SIBANYONI: And he ended up asking for a transfer away from Vlakplaas to SANAB.

MR DE KOCK: That is correct, Chairperson. I did not draw any distinction between a white and black if it came to certain circumstances.

MR SIBANYONI: Thank you, Mr Chairperson.

ADV SANDI: Thank you. Just one thing concerning the money issue, Mr de Kock. Are you able to tell us what happened about the money that was found in his possession?

MR DE KOCK: Chairperson, no money was found in his possession. I was not informed about any money which was found in his possession. And I listened to the evidence of Mr Snyders, no money was left on a counter. If there had been money and if I had known about it, I would have mentioned this in my amnesty application, I would not have omitted it.

ADV SANDI: If I recall, the evidence here was that - now this is on an issue which has got nothing to do with the money, the deceased was found in a shebeen by other askaris.

MR DE KOCK: Yes, Chairperson, I have a recollection of that.

ADV SANDI: And they brought him along, they took him back to Vlakplaas.

MR DE KOCK: Yes, Chairperson, there is something - I cannot give evidence about it personally because I was not present, but there was something about that.

ADV SANDI: Ja but those who said they had found him at this shebeen and that they had brought him back to Vlakplaas, did you ask them where exactly was this and in whose company was he when they found him?

MR DE KOCK: No, Chairperson. As I've said, there wasn't a run-up to this incident which took place. As I have stated, I was busy playing snooker when the man entered the room, so there wasn't any long run-up to this event. The questions were put to him, the discussion took place with him.

ADV SANDI: Ja but I thought part of your evidence was that you were concerned that the deceased, whilst he was away from Vlakplaas, he may have socialised with hostile elements who could come and launch an attack on members of the Security Police.

MR DE KOCK: Yes, Chairperson. As I've stated, that information was already available regarding the black group leaders and the askaris who had performed a counter-insurgency service to us regarding the sentiments of this person and the fact that he was busy defecting back to the ANC, or moving back in that direction. However, at that moment, at the scene where it was, such details were not discussed, there was no meeting that was called, the questions were put directly by me to him, the assault took place and the situation ensued during which he died.

ADV SANDI: Ja but are you able to tell us how far was he with his attempt of going back to the ANC, how far had he progressed on that?

MR DE KOCK: Chairperson, as far as I know the situation was not as such that we could go to head office and say "Look, we have a defection on our hands". However, the indications were already of such a nature that he was under strong, immensely strong suspicion. But I must just mention that the situation which developed there that evening did not develop with the purpose of killing this man, it was never even foreseen, it was not even an idea.

ADV SANDI: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: ...(indistinct) again, I'm afraid I'm still confused. I have been looking at pages 3 and 4 of your application, the passages your counsel read to you, and it appears there that, as I understand it, that on your return to Vlakplaas one of the askaris told you he was robbed of his gun, you immediately decided that he had intentionally handed the gun over to somebody else and that there was a possibility that it might be used against the police.

MR DE KOCK: That is correct, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Or on the public.

MR DE KOCK: That is correct, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: And that you then were beside yourself with rage about his offence and you assaulted him with a snooker stick.

MR DE KOCK: That is correct, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: There is no mention as far as I can see it there, of a suspicion that he had reverted back to the ANC, that he had been away for a month, that he had now been brought back, that isn't mentioned in your application there is it, Mr de Kock? - nor in your book.

MR DE KOCK: No, Chairperson, but that is what led to my reaction at that stage, which was of such a nature.

CHAIRPERSON: Why didn't you say so in your application of amnesty, why did you say that what led to your anger was the handing over of his firearm?

MR DE KOCK: Chairperson, with the composition of my amnesty application, and this has happened with previous applications or previous times that I've given evidence, and perhaps also still in the future, is that the volume of my application and the nature of my application in its comprehensiveness and the attempt to sketch every incident as thoroughly as possible within a short period of time, has meant that we could not always deal as extensively with every situation or incident. I did not attempt to ply the information to make it appear politically correct, I have just given evidence about what took place and the judgments will have to be given as such.

CHAIRPERSON: But surely the important thing here was that this was an askari who had disappeared for a month and had now been found again.

MR DE KOCK: Chairperson, I ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: And that is what you questioned him about, as you told us in your evidence.

MR DE KOCK: That is correct, Chairperson. I did not sit with the Act next to me and compile every fact according to this ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Mr de Kock, we're not talking about the Act, we're talking about the facts, about what in fact caused you to lose your temper and hit a man over the head with a snooker stick, billiard cue. And the version given here is completely different from the version you gave us.

MR DE KOCK: No, Chairperson, it is in line and I've explained to you what took place there and why.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that your answer. Thank you.

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

NO RE-EXAMINATION BY MR HATTINGH

CHAIRPERSON: Right. Thank you, Mr de Kock.

WITNESS EXCUSED

CHAIRPERSON: Before we start with this witness, can I ask if anybody has made any enquiries - I'm afraid I left it all very much in the air, about the existence of copies of this judgment and the evidence in the de Kock trial being available up here in Pretoria?

MR BOOYENS: Mr Chairman, I was going to mention it in any case at a later stage, Mr Hugo has got it available, the record. Not the judgment, but the evidence in any case and I will find myself in the position in the light of your earlier remark about the third point, about van Heerden, I will have to go and check that some time this afternoon.

CHAIRPERSON: You will check the evidence?

MR BOOYENS: Well I'll try to check the evidence, Chairperson. I understand my learned friend, Mr Hattingh, was very enthusiastic when he cross-examined him, he did so for a number or weeks, but ...

CHAIRPERSON: Well put it this way, I can leave it to you, I don't have to look at it.

MR BOOYENS: It's counsel's please, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: But what about the copy of the judgment?

MR HATTINGH: Mr Chairman, I have the only copy of the judgment that we have between ourselves here, at home unfortunately ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Do you know if the - what I'm really looking for I think, is probably pages 12690, 1, 2 and 3.

MR HATTINGH: As I say, Mr Chairman, I may have pages 12693 and maybe 92, but there are two or three pages missing.

CHAIRPERSON: In that section?

MR HATTINGH: In that section unfortunately. I will check it again, maybe it's been incorrectly filed, Mr Chairman, the judgment is that thick.

CHAIRPERSON: So I shouldn't get my secretary to fax Cape Town to see if they have copies of it?

MR HATTINGH: Perhaps you should, just to find those pages, Mr Chairman, because I doubt whether I will find them.

CHAIRPERSON: 90 I think would be - 90, 1, 2 and 3 would be sufficient for this purpose.

MR HATTINGH: I think so, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Are you happy with that, Mr Booyens?

MR BOOYENS: Yes, quite happy, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: It looks as if it's towards the beginning of the judgment.

MR HATTINGH: Yes, Mr Chairman, indeed.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, beginning of dealing with that section.

MR HATTINGH: With that section, indeed Mr Chairman, because on the last page that I have, just before the pages go missing, he still deals with one of the previous counts. So I think at most there are only about two or three pages of the Ntehelang judgment that I do not have, but I will bring whatever further pages I still have in case you don't get yours in Cape Town.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, thank you. And we can rely on a very tired Mr Booyens to tell us tomorrow what ...

MACHINE SWITCHED OFF

ADV STEENKAMP: Mr Chairman, the witness that was requested, Mr Frank Zole Mbane, also known as Mr Jimmy Mbane, is available today. I am informed that he will be - although his statement in the bundle is in Afrikaans, he is willing to testify in English. That is actually his request, that the evidence be led in English and he will answer questions on that. So I ask that the witness be sworn in, Mr Chairman.

MR SIBANYONI: For record purposes can you just say your full names.

FRANK ZOLE MBANE: (sworn states)

MR SIBANYONI: Thank you, you may be seated. Sworn in, Mr Chairperson.

ADV STEENKAMP: Mr Chairman, maybe before I start leading the evidence, I want to request - I understand Mr Mbane has testified, I think at least twice, once in the Guguletu matter and once I think, in Durban as well, so for that reason I'm going to request that I don't lead his whole personal background information but just briefly refer to it and then get to this specific incident, if that is allowed.

CHAIRPERSON: When did he testify in Durban?

ADV STEENKAMP: I'm not quite sure, Mr Chairman, the witness was not able to tell me exactly, but he testified just recently there.

CHAIRPERSON: So it's very recently, in the recent hearing?

MR BOOYENS: My attorney who was there last week says Mr Mbane was in Durban last week, but he didn't testify, he was just in Durban. But he testified before your ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: One of the interpreters I think recognised him.

INTERPRETER: Chairperson no, he was there, but he did not give evidence according to my recollection.

MR BOOYENS: He testified before you in the Guguletu matter, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well. A completely different request, before he gives his evidence, is it possible for someone to swivel that lamp immediately behind him because looking at him I'm

looking straight into the light and I can't see his face or make any observations as to domina. If it could just be swivelled round a bit. That's it, fine, thank you.

EXAMINATION BY ADV STEENKAMP: Thank you, Mr Chairman. Mr Chairman, I'm just going to refer briefly to his background information, but before doing that I just want the witness to confirm certain things.

Mr Mbane, - sorry, Mr Chairman, his statement appears in the bundle on page 276, continuing up until page 279, in Afrikaans.

Mr Mbane, is it right, can you confirm whether or not I translated this statement to you this morning in English to the best of my ability and you confirm the contents of this statement? Can you just speak up a bit if you don't mind.

MR MBANE: That's right.

ADV STEENKAMP: Can you also confirm that you didn't have any objection whatsoever to testify in this hearing and being subjected to cross-examination?

MR MBANE: That's right.

ADV STEENKAMP: And also that you are willing to testify freely and voluntarily in this hearing, and to assist the Committee?

MR MBANE: That's right.

ADV STEENKAMP: Would you speak up again.

MR MBANE: That's right.

ADV STEENKAMP: The matter ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, one more point which I think you told me you had raised with him.

You have been told of your right to legal advice and you don't wish to do so at the present time?

MR MBANE: I was told, Sir.

ADV STEENKAMP: Sorry, Mr Chairman, my mistake.

Can you just briefly tell us, am I right in saying at one stage you were also a member or an askari at Vlakplaas?

MR MBANE: That's right, Sir.

ADV STEENKAMP: During which time, during which era were you a member? When did you arrive at Vlakplaas?

MR MBANE: I arrived at Vlakplaas in 1983.

ADV STEENKAMP: Sorry?

MR MBANE: 1983.

ADV STEENKAMP: 1983. Until when were you stationed at Vlakplaas?

MR MBANE: Until 1990.

ADV STEENKAMP: 1990. And what were your responsibilities at Vlakplaas?

MR MBANE: I was in the Anti-Terrorist Unit.

ADV STEENKAMP: Anti-Terrorist Unit.

MR MBANE: That's right.

ADV STEENKAMP: And what were your responsibilities in the Anti-Terrorist Unit?

MR MBANE: We were going around the country pointing out the terrorists, we were arresting them or infiltrating the people who helped the terrorists.

ADV STEENKAMP: Who was your direct commander at Vlakplaas?

MR MBANE: It was Col Eugene de Kock.

ADV STEENKAMP: Was he directly in charge of you or was there somebody between you and Col de Kock?

MR MBANE: He was in charge of us.

ADV STEENKAMP: Was he in charge of you. At the time of this incident you were also stationed at Vlakplaas, am I right?

MR MBANE: That's right.

ADV STEENKAMP: Am I right in also saying that you knew a person called Bruce, or his real name is Moses Ntehelang?

MR MBANE: I knew him.

ADV STEENKAMP: How did you know him?

MR MBANE: I knew him from - we recruited him from Soweto up to Vlakplaas.

ADV STEENKAMP: Am I right in saying that you and Bruce, or Moses Ntehelang actually stayed physically at Vlakplaas?

MR MBANE: That's right, Sir. Actually I had my own house by then.

ADV STEENKAMP: Okay. This other person we're going to refer to today, just for the record purposes, Steven Mbanda, did you know him?

MR MBANE: Yes, I knew him.

ADV STEENKAMP: What was his responsibility at Vlakplaas?

MR MBANE: He was also an askari.

ADV STEENKAMP: Also an askari. Are you aware or do you know where he is today, or where he can be traced?

MR MBANE: No, I don't know where he is. He used to stay at Soshanguve.

ADV STEENKAMP: But you can't assist the Committee to tell us where he is today?

MR MBANE: I really don't know now where he stays.

ADV STEENKAMP: Do you - before I go there, can you remember an incident where Moses Ntehelang - wherein Moses Ntehelang was involved in at Vlakplaas?

MR MBANE: Yes, I still remember it.

ADV STEENKAMP: Can you just briefly start explaining to the Committee, as far as you know and your memory serves you, what exactly occurred and what happened to Moses Ntehelang.

MR MBANE: Moses came there at Vlakplaas, I was doing my guard duty, it was me, Steven Nobela and Steven Mbanda ...(intervention)

ADV STEENKAMP: Just a moment.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, who was the first one, Steven?

MR MBANE: Nobela.

ADV STEENKAMP: Steven Nobela, Mr Chairman. Thank you, you may continue.

MR MBANE: As we were doing guard duties he came to us, he was drunk. He told us that he'd lost his firearm.

ADV STEENKAMP: Who told you - who came to you and told you that he lost his firearm?

MR MBANE: Bruce.

ADV STEENKAMP: Did Bruce tell you that?

MR MBANE: Yes, he told us that.

ADV STEENKAMP: Did he tell you that personally?

MR MBANE: He told us personally that he lost his firearm.

ADV STEENKAMP: When exactly did this happen?

MR MBANE: What happened is he lost the firearm the previous evening and then he came the following day, he told us that thing, then we said we cannot help, it's better if he just tells it to the C2, our commander, which means it's Eugene de Kock.

ADV STEENKAMP: Just a moment. Did he tell you how it came about that he lost his firearm?

MR MBANE: Actually when he came he was already - he was still drunk and then we didn't ask him a lot of things because he was drunk, we just left him like that. It wasn't long before he left to another farm next to our farm, it's called Hoogland. He went back there, I think he went to drink.

ADV STEENKAMP: Can you remember the specific day of the incident?

MR MBANE: No, I cannot remember the specific day, the date.

ADV STEENKAMP: And what happened then?

MR MBANE: Then the following day he came back and then he was still drunk. It was late in the evening. Some of the white leaders were there at the farm and Col de Kock wasn't there. He came in sometimes during the early evening.

ADV STEENKAMP: Okay, just give them time to write down. Do I understand you correctly, saying that during this night, this specific evening of the incident you and Steven Mbanda were also on guard?

MR MBANE: We were on guard, the three of us. We were three ...

ADV STEENKAMP: Three of you? I'm sorry. What happened then?

MR MBANE: And then when Col de Kock came he called Steven Nobela, he talked to him and then Steven went to the bungalows where we were staying. I accompanied him, then he came back, we picked up this guy, we used to call him Pioneer(?).

ADV STEENKAMP: So you're saying - am I understanding you correctly as saying Col de Kock came and asked or spoke to ...(intervention)

MR MBANE: To Nobela.

ADV STEENKAMP: To Nobela.

MR MBANE: Then we came back with him, we dropped him at the bar, we left him at the bar.

ADV STEENKAMP: Where did you find Bruce or Pioneer as you call him, where did you find him?

MR MBANE: At our sleeping place.

ADV STEENKAMP: And how far was this now from the bar at Vlakplaas?

MR MBANE: It can be about 80 to 100 metres, 80 to 100 metres from the bar.

ADV STEENKAMP: And who spoke to the deceased, Bruce or Pioneer? Was it you?

MR MBANE: What I did with Nobela was to fetch him from the Bungalows to the bar, then we went back to our guardhouse.

ADV STEENKAMP: And then what happened then?

MR MBANE: Then a few minutes we heard some screams, he was crying and we were a bit far from - not that far, we could hear the screams, actually of which we knew that he was already being beaten because that was always the case of being beaten whenever you lose your weapon or you do something wrong, you were punished by being beaten or you do some ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Could you speak up please.

MR MBANE: We already knew that he was already being beaten because he had lost his weapon, of which we knew that that was the punishment we usually get when you lose your weapon or you get drunk on duty, you get beaten up.

ADV STEENKAMP: Okay, just hold it.

CHAIRPERSON: Had you ever had that punishment?

MR MBANE: Many times, Sir.

ADV STEENKAMP: So do I understand you correctly, you -did you go into the bar yourself, physically?

MR MBANE: No, I didn't go in, by the door that's when we left him there, then he went inside.

ADV STEENKAMP: Right. Then you heard the screams, what happened then?

MR MBANE: Then after some times he was quiet, then one car pulled over next to the bar.

ADV STEENKAMP: Can you describe this vehicle?

MR MBANE: It was a red Sierra. And then another one pulled up again, a black Golf Jetta CLI, if I'm not mistaken.

ADV STEENKAMP: So you're saying there were two vehicles then ...(intervention)

MR MBANE: Two vehicles.

ADV STEENKAMP: ... at the bar.

MR MBANE: Yes. If I'm standing outside there, guardhouse, I can see what is happening there from the bar to the cars. Then they were loading something in the boot of a car.

ADV STEENKAMP: Okay. Before we get there, could you recognise any people there outside the bar? First of all, driving the vehicles?

MR MBANE: I saw Brood and this guy, Flores.

ADV STEENKAMP: What was Brood doing?

MR MBANE: They were - they opened the boot and then they were loading something which was wrapped in a blanket, which I took it that that is the body of person being loaded in the boot of a car.

ADV STEENKAMP: And was Brood alone?

MR MBANE: No, he was with Flores.

ADV STEENKAMP: And what was Flores doing?

MR MBANE: They were helping each other in loading this thing which was wrapped on a blanket.

ADV STEENKAMP: And in which car did they load this body in the ...(indistinct)?

MR MBANE: If I'm not mistaken it's a Sierra.

ADV STEENKAMP: A Sierra.

MR MBANE: Yes, I'm not 100% sure whether it's a Sierra or a Jetta, but I think it's a Sierra.

ADV STEENKAMP: And at that stage, what was your impression or who do you - as far as you know, what was in the blanket?

MR MBANE: As far as I know I - it's a body of a human being which was loaded in the boot of the car.

ADV STEENKAMP: Yes, and then what happened then?

MR MBANE: Then as they were going out Banda was at the gate, so inside, we were just outside the guardhouse, we could see what is happening. The car passed us, then Banda opened the gate for them.

ADV STEENKAMP: Did only this one vehicle leave or did both ...(intervention)

MR MBANE: No, both of them left.

ADV STEENKAMP: Both vehicles left.

MR MBANE: Both vehicles left.

ADV STEENKAMP: Can you remember who was driving the red, or the first vehicle?

MR MBANE: No, I cannot remember now.

ADV STEENKAMP: And the second vehicle?

MR MBANE: It also left.

ADV STEENKAMP: And then what happened then?

MR MBANE: That was the last time to see this guy, because after that the drinking continued with the whites, they were drinking there.

ADV STEENKAMP: At the night of the incident, as far as you know, was any of the members at Vlakplaas or any of the white leaders as you call then, were they drinking as far as you know?

MR MBANE: Yes, they were drinking.

ADV STEENKAMP: How do you know this?

MR MBANE: I know because it's a bar there, everybody drinks.

ADV STEENKAMP: And that was the last you know of what - this is the only thing you know to happen?

MR MBANE: That is the only think I knew about.

ADV STEENKAMP: Did you hear anything afterwards, what's happened, did you enquire what happened to Pioneer or Bruce?

MR MBANE: Now well we were just talking with my guard, the guys who were on duty, that this guy is gone. Say no he's gone, I say no, he's dead that one. That was all.

ADV STEENKAMP: And didn't you ask anybody at the farm what happened to him, didn't you go to Col de Kock or somebody else and say "Listen what happened to this man"?

MR MBANE: Well, I don't know how can I approach Col de Kock about such a thing, maybe I wouldn't be standing here if I had approached him.

ADV STEENKAMP: So what was the rest of the views of the askaris?

MR MBANE: Well there were rumours that he's gone back to ANC. Those were the rumours which we just heard around the farm, that he's gone back to the ANC and all those things.

ADV STEENKAMP: And can you remember for how long did this screaming continue, can you take a guess? Was it an hour, two hours, whole night, five minutes?

MR MBANE: I didn't take it - it's less than 10 minutes, it was quiet.

ADV STEENKAMP: And as far as you know, the whole question of the losing of the weapon, did you believe this story or what was your idea, what happened to the weapon, firearm?

MR MBANE: Well I believe what he said to me, because he said he lost his weapon. So whether he sold it or gave it to someone, I don't know about that thing, I'm just saying something which he said to us at the guardhouse, that he lost his weapon.

ADV STEENKAMP: Is there anything else, except maybe what's not contained in your statement, is there anything else you can remember today that you want to add to your evidence?

MR MBANE: No, I've got nothing - in connection with this ...(intervention)

ADV STEENKAMP: Yes, in connection with this incident.

MR MBANE: No, Sir, I don't have anything to add.

ADV STEENKAMP: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY ADV STEENKAMP

MR HATTINGH: Mr Chairman, may I request a brief adjournment just to take instructions on some of the aspects?

CHAIRPERSON: Certainly.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

ON RESUMPTION

FRANK ZOLE MBANE: (s.u.o.)

CHAIRPERSON: Right.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR HATTINGH: Thank you for the opportunity to consult, Mr Chairman.

Mr Mbane, if I understood your evidence correctly you were at the farm on the day before the day on which Mr Ntehelang was assaulted, is that correct?

MR MBANE: That's correct.

MR HATTINGH: And that is the day on which he arrived at the farm in an intoxicated condition, is that correct?

MR MBANE: That's correct.

MR HATTINGH: Do you know where he had come from?

MR MBANE: The nearest place where we used to drink it was at Hoogland or Erasmia, one of the two. So where he was from I don't know.

MR HATTINGH: And what time did he get to the farm on the day before the incident?

MR MBANE: Sir, I cannot remember exactly time or time what, it was something of many years ago.

MR HATTINGH: Was it during the morning, afternoon, evening?

MR MBANE: It was during the evening.

MR HATTINGH: Was it already dark?

MR MBANE: Not that dark.

MR HATTINGH: Not that dark. And did he then inform you that he'd lost his firearm?

MR MBANE: Actually he talked to Steven Nobela because Steven Nobela was our senior.

MR HATTINGH: You were?

MR MBANE: He talked to Steven Nobela because Steven Nobela was our senior.

MR HATTINGH: But were you present when he spoke to Steven Nobela?

MR MBANE: Yes, we were there.

MR HATTINGH: Did you hear what he was saying?

MR MBANE: He talked to Nobela, from there he ...(intervention)

MR HATTINGH: Yes, but could you hear what he was telling Mr Nobela?

MR MBANE: Actually because he was drunk I didn't even mind to, didn't even listen, it's Nobela whom I asked after what was this drunken somebody saying. That's when he told me that he lost his firearm.

MR HATTINGH: So Mr Nobela told you that Mr Ntehelang had lost his firearm?

MR MBANE: That's right.

MR HATTINGH: You didn't hear him saying that to Mr Nobela?

MR MBANE: Actually he did talk when I was there, but I didn't listen to what he was saying.

MR HATTINGH: Yes. Very well, and you say that you -a after that you saw him leave the farm again, is that correct?

MR MBANE: That's right.

MR HATTINGH: Did he leave through the gate?

MR MBANE: There is no other ways through the gate.

MR HATTINGH: And how do you know where he went to?

MR MBANE: I didn't say I know where he went to. There are two places where we usually drink, it's Hoogland and Erasmia.

MR HATTINGH: I see. So on the same evening that he arrived there and made the report to Mr Nobela, he left again.

MR MBANE: That's right.

MR HATTINGH: And when did you see him for the first time again after that?

MR MBANE: The following day.

MR HATTINGH: Were you not at the farm during the following day?

MR MBANE: I was at the farm.

MR HATTINGH: The whole day?

MR MBANE: That's right.

MR HATTINGH: Yes. And ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, before you go on, can I just clarify something.

You told us earlier:

"I had my own house ..."

Was that on the farm?

MR MBANE: No, not at the farm, I had my own house at Britz.

CHAIRPERSON: Oh, so at the farm you lived with the other askaris in the ...(intervention)

MR MBANE: Actually when I do guard duties I stay at the farm.

CHAIRPERSON: Oh, thank you.

MR HATTINGH: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

So were you on guard duty for that whole day, the day of the incident?

MR MBANE: Actually for the whole month, not the whole day.

MR HATTINGH: Yes, but now when you had to do guard duty, did you have to do it throughout the day or only during the night?

MR MBANE: Day and night ...(intervention)

MR HATTINGH: Day and night.

MR MBANE: ... we change.

MR HATTINGH: So were you on duty that particular day, the day of the incident?

MR MBANE: That's right, Sir.

MR HATTINGH: So you did guard duty the whole day?

MR MBANE: I did guard duty.

MR HATTINGH: Are you certain about that?

MR MBANE: That's what I think.

MR HATTINGH: Why do you say that's what you think?

MR MBANE: Because we change the duties. You do the duties during the day, you do the duties during the night.

CHAIRPERSON: What time do you change?

MR MBANE: Excuse me, Sir?

CHAIRPERSON: What time do you change, eight in the morning or six in the morning or six at night or what?

MR MBANE: We do guard duties from six to six, during the day and during the night.

MR HATTINGH: So were you on duty on that particular day from six to six, six in the morning till six in the evening?

MR MBANE: I can't say it's from six in the morning till six in the evening or six in the evening until six in the morning, I can't ...(intervention)

MR HATTINGH: Well don't you recall when you commenced duty on that particular day?

MR MBANE: No, I don't recall which duty I was doing.

MR HATTINGH: You see, Mr de Kock tells me you weren't doing guard duty that day at all.

MR MBANE: Well I'm telling you what is, what happened that day I was at the ...(indistinct - intervention)

MR HATTINGH: Can I refer you to your statement at page 277, paragraph 4. There you say

"During that same year, I cannot recall the precise date, I was picked up by Peggy Radebe at home. This was during the afternoon. I recall that members of Natal were to visit me with regard to the Maj Mandla case.

Upon our arrival at the farm I was surprised to see many of my white colleagues on the farm. I went to put my clothes in my room and went to the guardroom, where I found Steven Mbanda and Steven Nobela. Steven Nobela was on duty while Mbanda was resting on his bed. I went to sit next to Steven Nobela outside the guardroom and spoke to him. I asked Steven Nobela what all the whites were doing on the farm. He told me that Bruce was in big trouble, he had apparently lost his weapon. I knew that he was indeed in very big trouble. Experience had taught me that the loss of one's firearm at Vlakplaas could possibly also mean the loss of one's life.

While we were sitting at the gate, Col de Kock arrived at Vlakplaas in his vehicle. He parked his vehicle and went to the bar where all the members were."

Now according to this statement you weren't at the farm on that particular day, you arrived there shortly before Mr de Kock arrived there and you'd come there for a specific reason, namely to consult with people who were coming to discuss the Maj Mandla case with you.

MR MBANE: Sir, I think there must be a mistake somewhere because the case of Mandla I still have it in my diary, if I'm not mistaken. It was in 1987.

MR HATTINGH: But how could the person who took this statement from you have made that mistake? He couldn't have been aware of that fact.

MR MBANE: Maybe he mixed up, I don't know what happened.

MR HATTINGH: But here you state quite clearly ...(intervention)

MR MBANE: That time I was on duty, that's what I know.

MR HATTINGH: Yes. And Mr de Kock tells me that you weren't doing guard duty at all, you were living at your house in Britz at the time.

MR MBANE: I had my house in Britz and that time I was doing my guard duties.

MR HATTINGH: And in fact, according to him - alright, who were the people who were doing guard duty, yourself? On that particular day.

MR MBANE: Steven Mbanda and Steven - Steven Mbanda ...

MR HATTINGH: Yes.

MR MBANE: ... and Steven also.

MR HATTINGH: Steven Nobela?

MR MBANE: Nobela.

MR HATTINGH: Steven Mbanda, Steven Nobela and you yourself?

MR MBANE: That's right.

MR HATTINGH: Were you the only three people who were doing guard duty?

MR MBANE: That's right, Sir.

MR HATTINGH: Did you know a person by the name of Thabo Makgage?

MR MBANE: I know Thabo ...(indistinct)

MR HATTINGH: Was he also living on the farm at the time?

MR MBANE: No, he wasn't living on the farm.

MR HATTINGH: Was he - did he also sometimes have to do guard duty?

MR MBANE: Yes, he had to do guard duty.

MR HATTINGH: Was he on guard duty on that particular occasion?

MR MBANE: I don't recall, Sir.

MR HATTINGH: Well if he was you would have remember it, because you've just stated quite explicitly that there were only three of you and you mentioned the names.

MR MBANE: I don't remember, Sir, whether he was on guard duty or not.

MR HATTINGH: Yes. You see, Mr de Kock tells me that the people who were on guard duty that particular evening were Steven Nobela and Thabo Makgage.

MR MBANE: I don't know about that thing, Sir.

MR HATTINGH: And not Mr Steven Mbanda.

MR MBANE: Steven Mbanda was there, Sir.

MR HATTINGH: But in this statement of yours you say that you found him lying on his bed in his room. If he was on guard duty, that's not where you would have expected to find him, not so?

MR MBANE: So we do change, others work night shift, others work day shift.

MR HATTINGH: Yes. Now you see, Mr Mbanda - Mr Mbane, sorry, Mr Thabo Makgage actually gave evidence against Mr de Kock at his criminal trial. Are you aware of that fact?

MR MBANE: I don't know about that, Sir.

MR HATTINGH: And he testified that he was on duty on that particular evening.

MR MBANE: I don't know about that thing, Sir.

MR HATTINGH: Now how is it possible that you were not aware of, that you are not aware of the fact that he was on duty on that particular evening?

MR MBANE: I'm not aware of that also.

MR HATTINGH: But I'm asking you how do you explain the fact that you are not aware of it.

MR MBANE: I don't have any explanations.

MR HATTINGH: Mr de Kock has in fact denied that he called for Mr Ntehelang, that he asked somebody to bring Mr Ntehelang to the canteen as you testified.

MR MBANE: I don't understand you.

MR HATTINGH: You've said that Mr de Kock came out of the canteen ...(intervention)

MR MBANE: That's right.

MR HATTINGH: ... and he called out to who? To Steven Nobela?

MR MBANE: That's right.

MR HATTINGH: ... and asked him to bring Mr Ntehelang to the canteen.

MR MBANE: That's right.

MR HATTINGH: Mr de Kock denied that. Mr de Kock's evidence was that when he arrived at Vlakplaas he went into the canteen, he was busy playing snooker or pool when Mr Ntehelang was brought into the canteen.

MR MBANE: I really don't know about that thing. What I know is, Nobela went to pick him up at the quarters, sleeping quarters.

MR HATTINGH: Yes. You - is it correct, Mr Mbane, that there was a disciplinary committee appointed at Vlakplaas to deal with disciplinary matters relating to the askaris?

MR MBANE: I don't have any knowledge about that thing, Sir.

MR HATTINGH: And that this committee, on this committee the following people served - let me just find my note - Freddie Khoza.

MR MBANE: I know him, but I don't ...(intervention)

MR HATTINGH: You know him. ... Capt Moss.

MR MBANE: I know him.

MR HATTINGH: Capt Moss before he became a policeman was a member of the ANC, is that correct?

MR MBANE: I know him.

MR HATTINGH: Yes. And then Capt - sometimes, Capt Letsatse.

MR MBANE: I know him.

MR HATTINGH: And then as a representative of the PAC, Mr Eric Sefade.

MR MBANE: I know him also.

MR HATTINGH: And these people were supposed to deal with disciplinary matters as far as the askaris were concerned. Are you saying that you were not aware of that fact?

MR MBANE: Sir, let me just answer you a little bit, Sir. Sir, there was only one discipline there, when you do something wrong the only discipline you get is being beaten by de Kock and his other white gang. That was the only discipline I know in Vlakplaas.

MR HATTINGH: Mr de Kock ...(intervention)

MR MBANE: So this thing you are telling me now, it's new to me.

MR HATTINGH: Yes. Mr de Kock tells me that that committee dealt with disciplinary matters and that you appeared before them on several occasions.

MR MBANE: That's new to me, Sir.

MR HATTINGH: Were you charged with the crime of - I'm not sure exactly what the charge was, but that it had to do with the fact that you sexually molested a 16 to 16 year old daughter of one of your neighbours? Were you charged with such an offence?

MR MBANE: Sir, I was plotted in that thing, that's why I came out of court in that thing. I was even suspended from my job. This thing had nothing to do with ...(intervention)

MR HATTINGH: Were you charged with such an offence?

MR MBANE: I wasn't charged, Sir.

MR HATTINGH: Was a docket opened against you?

MR MBANE: It was opened and then it was closed again.

MR SIBANYONI: Yes. Yes, because Mr ...(intervention)

MR MBANE: ... (indistinct) wasn't true.

MR HATTINGH: ... Mr de Kock used his influence to get the matter squashed, is that not so?

MR MBANE: There's nothing like that, Sir.

MR HATTINGH: Yes. And you appeared before the committee and you were found guilty and they imposed the sentence.

MR MBANE: There's nothing like that, Sir.

MR HATTINGH: And it was something - it usually consisted of cuts with a cane.

MR MBANE: Oh, that's news to me, Sir.

MR HATTINGH: Yes. Were you also involved in several incidents of assault?

MR MBANE: Well I did have some assault charges.

MR HATTINGH: When you - shortly after you arrived on the farm you told all and sundry on the farm that you were the lightweight boxing champion of South Africa or something to that effect.

MR MBANE: Not of South African, in my division I was a boxer before.

MR HATTINGH: Heavyweight division?

MR MBANE: Not heavyweight.

MR HATTINGH: Light-heavyweight?

MR MBANE: That's right.

MR HATTINGH: Where?

MR MBANE: In Port Elizabeth. I was a boxer in Port Elizabeth, not a champion boxer.

MR HATTINGH: Yes. But Mr de Kock tells me you told them that you were a champion.

MR MBANE: I wasn't a champion, I was a boxer.

MR HATTINGH: Yes, and in fact you on one occasion challenged him, shortly after your arrival on the farm and you and he then became involved in a fight.

MR MBANE: Sir, with due respect Sir, we are busy asking about my past, does it have anything to do with the case which I'm testifying here for?

MR HATTINGH: Well I'm asking you because I'm dealing with your allegation that you were on numerous occasions assaulted. Now what I'm putting to you is that you behaved in such a way that disciplinary action was necessary, steps had to be taken against you.

MR MBANE: Actually let me tell you, I never challenged him, there's no-one at Vlakplaas who could challenge Eugene de Kock.

MR HATTINGH: And he in fact beat you.

MR MBANE: He beat me up. I can even tell you where. It wasn't at Vlakplaas, it was at Ladybrand, that's when he broke my false, my dentures.

MR HATTINGH: Yes, he told me that that is what you would say. His version is that you lost your teeth because you refused ...(intervention)

MR MBANE: I didn't lose them, he beat me up.

MR HATTINGH: Just give me a chance to finish my question please, Mr Mbane. His version is that you lost your teeth because you refused to fight against UNITA and the Cubans assaulted you and as a result of which you lost your teeth.

MACHINE SWITCHED OFF

MR HATTINGH: ... yourself. At the expense of Vlakplaas.

MR MBANE: Sir, I was beaten up by de Kock because I was drunk with the other guys. We were beaten at Ladybrand. That's when he broke my teeth. He sent Lt Adams to take my dentures to Bloemfontein to be repaired. For your own information.

MR HATTINGH: I don't want to be side-tracked too much, Mr Mbane, but you were also involved in fisticuffs with a Mr Joe Coetzer, is that not correct?

MR MBANE: That's ...(inaudible)

MR HATTINGH: And that is when you lost your - when you broke your dentures.

MR MBANE: That's not true, Sir.

MR HATTINGH: Yes. In any event ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, I thought you said the Cubans broke them.

MR HATTINGH: His dentures, Mr Chairman, he lost his teeth. He lost his teeth when he was assaulted by the Cubans, lost his original teeth and he then got dentures and he became involved in a fight with Mr Coetzer, as a result of which his dentures were broken and had to be replaced.

Mr Coetzer was also an ex-police champion boxer, not so?

MR MBANE: I don't know about his background.

MR HATTINGH: You don't know. Is it also correct that on one occasion whilst you were travelling in one of the kombis that belonged to Vlakplaas with some other members of Vlakplaas, you became involved in an argument with one or more of the members, as a result of which you discharged your firearm in the vehicle and the shot went through the roof?

MR MBANE: That's new to me, Sir.

MR HATTINGH: You deny that?

MR MBANE: I deny it. That's new to me.

MR HATTINGH: Yes. I want to put it to you, Mr Nobela - ag, Mr Mbane, sorry, that you weren't even on the farm at the time, or rather that you weren't doing guard duty at the time when this incident occurred, if you were there at all.

MR MBANE: Sir, I'm telling you I was there and I was doing guard duties.

MR HATTINGH: Thank you, Mr Chairman, we ...(intervention)

MR MBANE: So I don't know what you're going to say now.

MR HATTINGH: Would you bear with me a moment, Mr Chairman. Thank you, Mr Chairman, we have no further questions.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR HATTINGH

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, could I clear up something, or I don't know if one can.

How long - you say you did guard duty for a month at a time.

MR MBANE: That's right, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: For how long had you been on guard duty when this incident took place? I know it's along time ago, I don't expect you to say 11 days or the exact - had it been a week, two weeks, was it the end of the month, the beginning of the month?

MR MBANE: Sir, what usually happened is when you are on guard duty, the people they go out to work for maybe 21 days, they come back, you are still on guard duty, then they get their off for about 10 days and they come back. That's when you are relieved from a guard duty.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes

MR MBANE: So it can be about 30, 32 days.

CHAIRPERSON: Well can you estimate how long you had been on guard duty on this occasion? We know the date on which the deceased was killed.

MR MBANE: It could be about two to three weeks.

CHAIRPERSON: You'd been on guard duty for two to three weeks.

MR MBANE: That's right, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: And can you help me with something else. You were all paid a salary, wages, at Vlakplaas were you?

MR MBANE: Yes, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: When during the month were you paid?

MR MBANE: Month-end, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: You were paid at month-end.

ADV SANDI: Ja, but had you seen - sorry, Chair.

Had you seen the deceased there at the Vlakplaas camp? Whilst you were there for two to three weeks, did you see him around there?

MR MBANE: No, I used to see him, Sir, during that time.

CHAIRPERSON: So he hadn't disappeared?

MR MBANE: He did disappear before and he came back again.

CHAIRPERSON: How long before?

MR MBANE: It can be three weeks to a month.

CHAIRPERSON: Before he came back?

MR MBANE: That's right, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: So he was there at the end of June? Three, four before he'd been there?

MR MBANE: That's right.

CHAIRPERSON: And that will appear in the records.

MR BOOYENS: No questions, thank you, Mr Chair.

NO QUESTIONS BY MR BOOYENS

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR ROSSOUW: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

Mr Mbane, at this time in 1989 you were a member of the South African Police, you weren't an askari.

MR MBANE: I was a full member.

MR ROSSOUW: Yes. When you heard the screams inside the canteen, why didn't you go up to the canteen to stop it?

MR MBANE: Actually if I wanted to cry like that person was crying there, I should have gone there and asked them what is going on here, Sir, then I was going to join him in crying.

MR ROSSOUW: So you didn't even consider to do that?

MR MBANE: I didn't.

MR ROSSOUW: Afterwards - you said your affidavit on page 278, you said that you knew instinctively that it was the body of Bruce that was loaded into the vehicle. So you knew he was dead.

MR MBANE: That's right, Sir. You don't look - a person who is alive, you don't wrap him with a blanket and put in the boot of a car.

MR ROSSOUW: Yes. Now did you consider reporting this to anybody?

MR MBANE: If I had reported that thing, Sir, I shouldn't be standing here in front of you now.

MR ROSSOUW: Are you saying you feared for your own life?

MR MBANE: That's right, Sir.

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

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR ROSSOUW

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR BOTHA: Thank you, Mr Chairman, Botha appearing on behalf of Snyders.

Mr Mbane, it's common cause that Mr Ntehelang died on this particular day and Mr Snyders in his application testified to the effect that he drove the vehicle that removed the body of the deceased, from Vlakplaas. Can you remember what kind of vehicle he drove during that period?

MR MBANE: There are only two cars which left, it was a Sierra and a black Jetta.

MR BOTHA: Can you remember whose cars were those, the Sierra and the black Jetta?

MR MBANE: No, Sir, I cannot say whose car was it.

MR BOTHA: Mr Snyders told me that the car that was used was a car, a Toyota Corolla Sprinter, green of colour, is it possible that you may make a mistake regarding the cars due to the long period that elapsed since that time?

MR MBANE: There might be a possibility of mistakes here, of identity of cars.

MR BOTHA: Okay. And he will - he also instructed me that only one car was use to remove the body to Zeerust, is it possible that you may be confused in the sense that two cars left perhaps at one stage, but that two cars weren't used to remove the body?

MR MBANE: Ja, but I saw two cars leaving, Sir.

MR BOTHA: Thank you, Mr Chairperson, I've got no further questions.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR BOTHA

MR CORNELIUS: Cornelius for the record, I have no questions, thank you, Mr Chair.

NO QUESTIONS BY MR CORNELIUS

MR JANSEN: Jansen for the record, Mr Chairman, no questions.

NO QUESTIONS BY MR JANSEN

MR SIBANYONI: Mr Mbane, on page 277, at the beginning of paragraph 4 mentioned is made of the name of Peggy Radebe, was Peggy Radebe on the farm?

MR MBANE: No, he wasn't there on the farm.

MR SIBANYONI: What is the other name of Peggy Radebe?

MR MBANE: It's is name, Peggy Radebe.

MR SIBANYONI: Is he not the same person as Simon Radebe?

MR MBANE: No he's the elder brother of Simon Radebe.

MR SIBANYONI: Apart from the three of you, the two Stevens and yourself, were any other, either policemen, black policemen or askaris on the farm?

MR MBANE: There were some of the askaris who used to stay there at the farm.

MR SIBANYONI: Were they there on that evening?

MR MBANE: I can't recall, Sir.

MR SIBANYONI: As you were on the farm, why were you not part of the people who were at the canteen?

MR MBANE: As I was doing the guard duty, by then you were not allowed to sit with the whites at the canteen, it only came after some time that we were allowed to go and have some drinks at the canteen. Otherwise the canteen was only for whites.

MR SIBANYONI: Thank you, Mr Chairperson, no further questions.

ADV SANDI: Thank you. These rumours that Mr Ntehelang had gone back to join the ANC, where did you get them from?

MR MBANE: Actually those were the rumours which happened after he was killed, that he had gone to rejoin the ANC. Because sometimes he did disappear for about three to four weeks without us knowing, then when he was killed the same rumours did come up that he's gone to join the ANC.

ADV SANDI: Where were these rumours coming from?

MR MBANE: At Vlakplaas, Sir.

ADV SANDI: Amongst the askaris, from who?

MR MBANE: Amongst us askaris.

ADV SANDI: Did you get the rumours before or after the incident, the rumours that he had gone back to join the ANC? When was that?

MR MBANE: After the accident, Sir.

ADV SANDI: Should one understand that to say you had not heard such rumours before the incident?

MR MBANE: Not before the accident, Sir, but he did disappear from some time. But even for me, I sometimes disappear when I'm in another mission. So I took it as if he's gone out for a mission.

ADV SANDI: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: When you say "disappear", do you simply mean he was not at Vlakplaas?

MR MBANE: Yes, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: And that we have heard, as I understand it, that all of you askaris were sent out from time to time to go to the cities to look around to see if you could recognise anybody.

MR MBANE: That's right, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: And is that the sort of thing you're talking about?

MR MBANE: That's right, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: But were any enquiries made amongst you at Vlakplaas before he died, to find out if he had gone back to the ANC?

MR MBANE: No, Sir.

ADV SANDI: Ja, but did you personally even have any suspicion that he had defected to the ANC? I'm talking about you personally, Before he was killed, did you ever entertain such a suspicion?

MR MBANE: No, Sir, I took it that he's on a mission.

ADV SANDI: So you know of anyone amongst the askaris who had become suspicious that the deceased was trying to play a double agenda, he had gone back to the ANC?

MR MBANE: Sir, at Vlakplaas we didn't trust each other you see, so if you want to do something you don't tell the next person that what you are planning, you are planning to defect or what, you just keep quiet and do whatever you want to do. So I never suspected him that he wanted to rejoin the ANC.

ADV SANDI: Should I understand you to mean that you don't know of anyone amongst the askaris who was suspicious of the moves and activities of the deceased specifically? I'm talking about the deceased, not generally.

MR MBANE: No, Sir, I don't have any information about that.

ADV SANDI: If we are told today - if someone says today some askaris were suspicious of this man, would that come as a surprise to you?

MR MBANE: That would be a surprise, Sir.

ADV SANDI: Thank you.

ADV STEENKAMP: No re-examination, thank you, Mr Chairman.

NO RE-EXAMINATION BY ADV STEENKAMP

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MR HATTINGH: Mr Chairman, may I be permitted to ask one question arising out of a question that you put to the witness?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

FURTHER CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR HATTINGH: Thank you.

Mr Mbane, when you were sent out into certain areas to go and see if you could find or identify so-called terrorists, you always had a group leader, not so?

MR MBANE: That's right, Sir.

MR HATTINGH: And you were supposed to report to that group leader on a regular basis?

MR MBANE: That's right, Sir.

MR HATTINGH: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR HATTINGH

MR SIBANYONI: Now when you say the deceased did disappear as you also disappeared when you were on a mission, which mission were you referring to?

MR MBANE: Sir, sometimes you are called to go and do some identification or you are called by another, other people out of C1 Section, let's say in Soweto or in Durban, to do an identification parade there, so those are the missions of which you don't tell anybody that I'm going to Durban to do the identification, you just go.

MR SIBANYONI: In other words, no-one knows at Vlakplaas that you are gone?

MR MBANE: No-one knows at Vlakplaas that you are gone, except the commanders.

MR SIBANYONI: By commanders you are referring to Eugene de Kock?

MR MBANE: Eugene de Kock and the other white leaders, that's all.

MR SIBANYONI: But you wouldn't be just away from Vlakplaas without the commanders knowing your whereabouts?

MR MBANE: No, Sir.

MR SIBANYONI: Thank you.

ADV SANDI: Ja, but would I be correct to understand that to mean that if a particular askari is not present at Vlakplaas, that is not necessarily a matter of concern amongst askaris, because you assumed that he may have gone out to carry out some duties? Is that what you are saying?

MR MBANE: That's what I'm saying, Sir.

ADV SANDI: Did it ever happen at any stage that the deceased was not around there and you as askaris became concerned about him not being around at Vlakplaas? Did such a thing ever happen?

MR MBANE: As I have said before Sir, when someone - when one of us is not around we take it that he's gone out on a mission, that's how we take it. So we don't go around asking where is he. And I cannot go to Eugene de Kock and ask him where is Pioneer, why is he not around.

ADV SANDI: Thank you.

MR SIBANYONI: You said Steven Nobela ran to call Ntehelang, why did he run, why had he to run?

MR MBANE: When you are give a command of which you - not necessarily running, but you've got to move a bit fast.

MR SIBANYONI: Thank you.

ADV SANDI: Sorry. Sorry, Chair.

This part of your statement which is in Afrikaans, which I understand Mr Steenkamp translated for you, Mr Hattingh was asking you questions on this statement, paragraph 4, why did you not point out to Mr Steenkamp that that particular portion of the statement to which Mr Hattingh was asking you questions on, why did you not tell Mr Steenkamp that that was incorrect?

MR MBANE: I did show him some of the - actually, we didn't have enough time because I just, I was taken from ...(indistinct) this morning, so it's my fist time to meet him. Even another place somewhere it says I was a Lieutenant Colonel, of which I was just a mere Constable. In this statement there's a place which says I was a Lieutenant Colonel, of which I've never been a Colonel, I was just a Constable.

ADV SANDI: Did you point that one out to Mr Steenkamp?

MR MBANE: I did show him some of the things.

ADV SANDI: Thank you. Thank you, Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

ADV STEENKAMP: Mr Chairman, may the witness be excused?

CHAIRPERSON: ...(inaudible - no microphone)

ADV STEENKAMP: Returned then.

CHAIRPERSON: ...(inaudible)

WITNESS EXCUSED

MACHINE SWITCHED OFF

CHAIRPERSON NOT USING MICROPHONE AT ALL DURING FOLLOWING DISCUSSION

CHAIRPERSON: ... want some more enquiries to be made. Can you find out from somebody - it may be because she's no longer a Sergeant, a person who was a woman Sergeant van Vuuren, who gave evidence at the de Kock trial as to the payment made to the deceased and that he was - monies due to be paid to him in July and August were not paid, as to when the monies due to be paid to him in June were paid. If you look at it, it's page 12692 of the record and it's Exhibit 121. That apparently, Exhibit 121 is a record of the people there and it's also the pay sheets, and it may show if people are there or thought to be absent.

ADV STEENKAMP: Mr Chairman, as far as I can see there's no Force number here, but we have to check the original records and see where this Sgt van Vuuren is stationed now. It will mean that this person has to be searched, or I have ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Well it's the exhibits which would have been handed in at the trial.

ADV STEENKAMP: Mr Chairman, personally I've checked the original record of de Kock, just prior to this hearing, the original record is available with a company called Vic and Dup, although that record is not fully complete, but unfortunately there's no original records, original exhibits still attached to the record at all, it's been removed. I've asked Vic and Dup as well as the Attorney-General's office.

Some of those exhibits, to be fair, have been removed by the Attorney-General himself because there's still currently running - he is still busy with certain investigations. But the other exhibits, as far as the Registrar is concerned as well, he can't recall what happened to them. Probably they were removed by some other police section, some other unit. The exhibits are, all of them have been removed, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Well it appears fairly clear that he was paid for the month of June and that she says he was not paid for the month of July and August. If steps could be taken to ascertain when payments were made.

ADV STEENKAMP: Mr Chairman, I would gladly do ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: ...(indistinct) normal practice.

ADV STEENKAMP: I can just add, Mr Chairman, as far as I remember we had a similar difficulty in the previous hearing and the difficulty is that some of those records are not being kept for longer than five years. Maybe my colleagues can help me there, but I'm sure these documents were destroyed by now. It's about 13 years down the line. I would gladly do some investigation to find it, but I'm quite sure that they've been destroyed by now. Specifically the askari records. I think there was evidence led before this Committee previously that a lot of documentation, including certain records of the askaris, were actually destroyed, Mr Chairman. Unfortunately.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, is it paid at the end of the month, is it paid on the 30th of the last Friday of the month?

ADV STEENKAMP: Mr Chairman, as I understand the normal practice was the closest date to the end of the month, otherwise say it was a Sunday, it would probably be paid on the Friday and vice-versa as well.

CHAIRPERSON: What day was July the 3rd? ...(indistinct)

ADV STEENKAMP: I'm not quite sure, Mr Chairman, I think it was probably - I can be mistaken, I think it was on a Thursday, but I can be mistaken. I can check it again. Unfortunately I don't have a diary of 1986 with me, but I'm sure that was the position. I can maybe just add, I'm not giving any evidence, but there was also evidence led before this Committee that in certain cases certain people were not paid directly through official channels, certain of the askaris, some of them were paid by hand.

CHAIRPERSON: ...(indistinct) if you look at this evidence you will see that it says ...(intervention)

INTERPRETER: The speaker's microphone is not on.

CHAIRPERSON

"According to Exhibit 121X, monies which were supposed to be paid over for July and August were not paid over to him and they were redeposited."

I am prepared to accept on that, that the record showed that he was paid for the month of June, not that there was some varying thing. They are - she's looking at the records and saying these are the records of payment.

ADV STEENKAMP: Yes, thank you, Mr Chairman.

MACHINE SWITCHED OFF

ADV STEENKAMP: ... yes, Mr Chairman.

MACHINE SWITCHED OFF

MR BOOYENS: Mr Chairman, you did indicate yesterday that if we need more time and due the direction by the Court, I do need more time now. 10 o'clock tomorrow morning, Mr Chairman?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, you can go and look into ...(intervention)

MR BOOYENS: I'll endeavour to ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Something that is, may be extremely relevant as to credibility. ...(indistinct)

MR BOOYENS: Yes, I'll see how far I can get, Mr Chairman. And I undertake, if there is anything, I will ask my attorney to stay in touch with the attorney appearing on behalf of Mr van Heerden.

CHAIRPERSON: Alright. My secretary I have no doubt will do everything she can ...(indistinct) our Cape Town office. I don't know if ...(indistinct)

MR BOOYENS: Ja, I'll just go to Mr Hugo.

CHAIRPERSON: Gentlemen, 10 o'clock tomorrow morning. And I hope we ...(indistinct) sort out the ...(indistinct).

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS