ADV PRIOR: It is the 16th of November. We proceed with the amnesty applications of last week and Mr Botha was still being cross-examined. I have a few questions for Mr Botha, with the leave of the Committee.
CHAIRPERSON: I have a request before we start, is it possible to twist those lights away a little?
HENDRIK JOHANNES PETRUS BOTHA: (still under oath)
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY ADV PRIOR: Mr Botha, I just have seven aspects that I want to canvass with you. The first being my understanding of your evidence as well as the evidence of Mr Wasserman et al, regarding Operation Butterfly.
Was it paramount with the Security Branch, that is your division or your office, to either dismantle those structures or destroy those structures by either prosecuting the members in those various structures or by eliminating those members? Sorry, the third possibility also, by turning those members?
MR BOTHA: Mr Chairperson, in 1985 with Operation Butterfly, exposure - the prosecution of the members of this movement, and this was the first option.
ADV PRIOR: And it would appear from the evidence and from the documents we have seen, there was great success with the investigation and prosecution of many of those MK members? Is that correct?
MR BOTHA: That is correct Mr Chairperson.
ADV PRIOR: Is my sense of what happened thereafter correct, that your Branch experienced a sense of frustration at the fact that the court process wasn't one hundred percent effective? In other words, due to problems that you either did foresee or did not foresee, certain of the accused, the MK cadres were in fact acquitted which gave rise to a sense of frustration within your unit?
MR BOTHA: Yes, there was a build up of frustration Mr Chairperson.
ADV PRIOR: As you testified last week, you, as well as possibly Colonel Taylor at some stage, came to the realisation that the only effective way to destroy those structures that you had been working on since 1985, Operation Butterfly, the Natal machinery, would be to eliminate those persons in key positions within that machinery?
MR BOTHA: No Mr Chairperson, it was not that the people who were left, had to be eliminated.
ADV PRIOR: Maybe let me qualify that, the personnel in key positions, for examples Ndwandwe, Portia Ndwandwe, to name an example?
MR BOTHA: Yes Mr Chairperson. After the arrest and the conviction, or successful conviction of these people, there was from those who were left over from Butterfly, who was not charged at all, they were used as witnesses. Some of them were not charged at all.
The monitoring of them was in the nature of the case, it was our responsibility and we would continue and we would then, or we decided then that people would continue. When she left the country to go to Swaziland, she became a primary target.
ADV PRIOR: Just to move on briefly on the preparation for the trial. Would it be correct to suggest that some, if not many of the State witnesses, were in fact coerced into making statements and into giving evidence against their colleagues?
MR BOTHA: All those who were detained according to the Act, made Article 29 statements. In the interviews of these people it was decided who would be willing to act as State witnesses.
ADV PRIOR: Would assaults have occasioned the making of those Section 29 statements or not? I am not suggesting that it was across the board, but what I am driving at is that a lot of those statements that those people made, were they made as a result of coercion or force being applied to them?
MR BOTHA: In terms of the Act, they had to make a statement, yes. There was pressure on the detainees to make a statement.
ADV PRIOR: But you say pressure because of the nature of the provision of the Act?
MR BOTHA: That is correct Mr Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: But you have told us as I understand your evidence, that practically everybody you questioned, was assaulted?
MR BOTHA: That is negative Mr Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Didn't you tell us you punched people, you slapped them?
MR BOTHA: Not all of them Mr Chairperson, it was a few incidents?
CHAIRPERSON: The majority?
MR BOTHA: No Mr Chairperson. I would say the majority of the people were not attacked or assaulted.
CHAIRPERSON: That wasn't the impression I got from your evidence last week. Ndwandwe I think, was about the only one you said, wasn't.
ADV PRIOR: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Botha, given your position within the Security Force structure in Durban, Port Natal at that stage, were you - let me put it this way, we heard evidence last week that Mr Bhila was eliminated, it would appear on the instructions of Mr Taylor.
MR BOTHA: That is correct Mr Chairperson.
ADV PRIOR: Am I correct in understanding that you had nothing to do with that episode?
MR BOTHA: That is correct Mr Chairperson.
ADV PRIOR: It never came to your attention that a decision to eliminate Bhila had been taken?
MR BOTHA: Negative.
ADV PRIOR: Had it come to your attention?
MR BOTHA: With the amnesty application process in 1996, I did take notice, yes.
ADV PRIOR: I am actually talking about at the time, 1987?
MR BOTHA: Negative, no, I did not have any knowledge of this.
ADV PRIOR: In retrospect, should that information have come to your attention, being the Head of Information gathering, or Intelligence as you were?
MR BOTHA: Negative. The fact that a decision was made by Taylor, did not have to be shared with me.
ADV PRIOR: Did that not lead to any friction between you and Mr Taylor?
MR BOTHA: Negative.
ADV PRIOR: You described your relationship with Mr Taylor as a good one?
MR BOTHA: That is correct Mr Chairperson.
ADV PRIOR: I just want to develop just briefly on that. Bhila was described to us last week as being a dangerous terrorist. He had been acquitted and that seems to have been the underlying motive or reason for killing him? Would you go along with that?
MR BOTHA: That is correct.
ADV PRIOR: On the same basis, Mr Nxiweni must have been equally dangerous?
MR BOTHA: That is correct.
ADV PRIOR: Yet, we have a situation that Mr Bhila is murdered three days after his acquittal and Mr Nxiweni is almost a year, if not longer after that acquittal, he is eliminated. Are you able to assist us in just understanding what went wrong, if anything?
MR BOTHA: Mr Chairperson, I do not know what Colonel Taylor's idea was at that stage and as I understood in his evidence, it was his decision. He did not share this decision with me and it was according to the Act that inspired him to do that.
ADV PRIOR: Is the name Pindele Mfeti known to you?
MR BOTHA: Could you please repeat the name and surname?
ADV PRIOR: Pindele Mfeti?
MR BOTHA: Negative Mr Chairperson, I cannot say that I remember this name.
ADV PRIOR: Our information is that Pindele Mfeti was also a medical student, I beg your pardon, a law student and was the cousin of Pumeso Nxiweni, and apparently was also a similar age, in his 40's.
MR BOTHA: I do not know him Mr Chairperson.
ADV PRIOR: He disappeared plus minus, more or less around the 25th of April of 1987 and has never been seen since? I am just asking whether you know or not. This is a request that has come from the family.
It would seem at least in the victims' minds, that if Bhila was assassinated for the reasons that have been given here, it would seem also logical that your unit would have been looking for Nxiweni at the same time and that possibly, quite possibly he was mistaken for Pindele Mfeti, who also went missing from the campus, from Allan Taylor.
MR BOTHA: Negative Mr Chairperson.
ADV PRIOR: We heard evidence from Mr Ramatala that bonuses were paid to askaris. I should imagine bonuses were also paid or rewards paid to informers?
MR BOTHA: That is correct Mr Chairperson.
ADV PRIOR: In the case of the Ndwandwe matter, and I am not asking you to at this stage to reveal the identity of your informers, are you able to tell the Committee whether in any of these operations, Ndwandwe or Nxiweni or the other kwaMashu 3, whether informers were paid?
MR BOTHA: Negative Mr Chairperson.
MR MALAN: Does that mean that you do not know?
MR BOTHA: No, I say in the case of these people, bonuses were not paid.
MR MALAN: And you are sure about this?
MR BOTHA: Yes, I am.
ADV PRIOR: Were rewards paid as opposed to bonuses?
MR BOTHA: The general term in the case of rewards for those who were trained outside of the country, as in the police, it was used as rewards.
ADV PRIOR: But in this case where Ndwandwe, the operation to obtain Ndwandwe, Portia Ndwandwe, are you able to say out of your own recollection whether rewards were paid?
MR BOTHA: No, no bonuses were paid, or another form of reward for her.
ADV PRIOR: So in other words no money was paid over?
MR BOTHA: Yes, in her case specifically for the abductions, no.
ADV PRIOR: And if we can just clarify with the other two incidents, Nxiweni and with the kwaMashu 3?
MR BOTHA: Yes, no money was paid for those specific incidents.
ADV PRIOR: Was there any reason for that? It seemed to be a departure from the usual practice?
MR BOTHA: Negative Mr Chairperson. I would just like to explain that Mr Ramatala's explanation concerning rewards for the askaris of Vlakplaas, is not as it was the normal practice.
If I can just get an opportunity to explain this. Informants or any person who gave information that led to the arrest or the elimination of a terrorist ...(recording stopped) ... became R2 500-00 per person. A certain amount was connected to for example a land mine or a Makarov and these information that we received, were rewarded. The askaris, if they were to operate here by the identification of a person, led to the arrest of a terrorist and these rewards were then paid to them in Pretoria, at the unit at Head Office.
In the activity that occurred in Natal, where one of our informants, information led to the arrest of a person, we then paid the person here. It was sent to Head Office and we then paid that person directly. We never paid out rewards as we thought fit, and that is concerning the physical identification of such a person and then the arrest of that person.
ADV PRIOR: In the case of Portia Ndwandwe, you knew where she was residing in Swaziland before the operation, is that correct?
MR BOTHA: That is correct Mr Chairperson.
ADV PRIOR: Did that information filter through via your information network, intelligence network that was already in place in Swaziland?
MR BOTHA: That is correct Mr Chairperson.
ADV PRIOR: If I may ask you this question, the two informers that assisted you in Swaziland on the day in question to bring Ms Ndwandwe out of Swaziland, they were not part, or they had not given you the information relating to her whereabouts?
MR BOTHA: Negative Mr Chairperson.
MR MALAN: I am sorry the use of your word negative, you say no, they were not part of the information structure or are you saying that the statement is wrong?
MR BOTHA: No, I agree with your first interpretation of the word negative.
MR VISSER: Perhaps I should just direct my learned friend's attention in case he wants to ask questions about it, on this issue, on page 86, the last paragraph of volume 2 Mr Chairman.
ADV PRIOR: Thank you Mr Chairman. I just want to ask about the actual, physical detention of Portia Ndwandwe in Swaziland. When you had put her into the kombi, did she acquiesced, did she struggle, did she put up a fight? Can you explain the position?
MR BOTHA: Yes Mr Chairman, she did resist.
ADV PRIOR: Was she subdued?
MR BOTHA: Yes, I would say that most of us, we could easily hold her, and we then tied her hands with a rope.
ADV PRIOR: It seems that she obviously, when she realised what was going on, she didn't want to go with you voluntarily and had to be physically restrained and subdued as you have indicated, she was held down and she was cuffed, is that correct?
MR BOTHA: That is correct Mr Chairperson.
ADV PRIOR: You indicated in your evidence that at some stage, she was at the back of a bakkie and you climbed in with her, and you were under a tarpaulin or a cover.
MR BOTHA: That is correct Mr Chairperson.
ADV PRIOR: Is that when you drove to the Onverwacht border post?
MR BOTHA: That is correct.
ADV PRIOR: Why was that?
MR BOTHA: It was the only place where we could sit and that was at the back of the bakkie. Laurie and Sam was in the front and because of the tarpaulin at the back of the bakkie that was to protect us from the weather, it was raining at that stage.
ADV PRIOR: The interrogation at the Onverwacht safe house, are you able just to give us an idea of how long that endured? Was it three or four hours, was it longer?
MR BOTHA: If I had to put together the uninterrupted times, I would say that it would have been a maximum of four hours.
ADV PRIOR: At Onverwacht, did it appear clear to you that she wasn't going to cooperate with the Security Branch?
MR BOTHA: Mr Chairperson, in terms of her cooperation and answering questions regarding information, there was cooperation, but in terms of her willingness as an informer, there was no cooperation.
ADV PRIOR: So she was prepared to give you crucial information regarding her unit and the Natal machinery, which you have said, she indicated who Nxiweni was and the operation that he had been involved in, but she wasn't prepared to give her full cooperation as an informer or as an askari, is that correct?
MR BOTHA: That is correct Mr Chairperson.
ADV PRIOR: That information just came out of a question and answer exercise?
MR BOTHA: Yes, that is correct Chairperson.
ADV PRIOR: No assaults with no torture whatsoever?
MR BOTHA: That is correct.
ADV PRIOR: Would you agree with me that even at that stage, your branch had virtually all the information that they required regarding the Natal machinery?
MR BOTHA: No Mr Chairperson, I wouldn't say that we had all the information, one would have wanted all the information.
ADV PRIOR: Were you interested in tying up who was responsible for what operation?
MR BOTHA: The structure in Swaziland, was one thing, and the structure within the RSA was another, and then we came to the individuals, and there were certain aspects of information in which we would have been interested.
ADV PRIOR: After Onverwacht, when you travelled to Pietermaritzburg, was there any, in your mind, was there any more information that you required from her, given what you knew already?
MR BOTHA: There was always the possibility of new information coming forth. She served as the acting Commander of Natal.
ADV PRIOR: But was there anything concrete or something specifically that you wanted to go for, that you needed to interrogate her about, or was it just that vague possibility that she may come up with something, you giving another interrogation session?
MR BOTHA: No, there was no specific information which I had, which I wanted her to share with me.
ADV PRIOR: Now, in the Pietermaritzburg safe house, that was on the farm Elandskop, is that correct?
MR BOTHA: That is correct Chairperson.
ADV PRIOR: How long would you say she was interrogated there?
MR BOTHA: Mr Chairperson, I worked with her for approximately two hours. If it was indeed that long.
ADV PRIOR: Are you the only person who interrogated her at Pietermaritzburg?
MR BOTHA: That is correct yes.
ADV PRIOR: No other person interrogated her whilst she was on the farm Elandskop?
MR BOTHA: As far as I worked with her, from Onverwacht on the farm, I worked with her.
ADV PRIOR: Did Taylor interrogate her?
MR BOTHA: Negative Mr Chairperson. He questioned her at Onverwacht, but not while I was working with her at Elandskop.
ADV PRIOR: There is some indication that a Mr Labuschagne from the Eastern Transvaal Branch, had questioned her. Are you aware of that?
MR BOTHA: Yes, I am aware of that.
ADV PRIOR: Where did that occur?
MR BOTHA: That occurred after I had already left with the informers. One of the other applicants will testify regarding that.
ADV PRIOR: Was that usual practice?
MR BOTHA: Yes Chairperson, there was nothing strange about that at all.
ADV PRIOR: The decision to eliminate her, had already been taken at the time, or just before you left Pietermaritzburg, is that correct?
MR BOTHA: Mr Chairperson, when I left the farm, I knew that she was going to be eliminated.
ADV PRIOR: But had you discussed that with Mr Taylor?
MR BOTHA: In the final phase, no I didn't.
ADV PRIOR: In principle?
MR BOTHA: Yes.
ADV PRIOR: And you had indicated to him, I think my understanding of your evidence is by the time that you left the farm, you were convinced that she wasn't going to be turned?
MR BOTHA: That is correct Chairperson.
ADV PRIOR: The two informers, the two persons that assisted you in Swaziland, they left with you from Pietermaritzburg to Durban I understand?
MR BOTHA: That is correct Mr Chairperson.
ADV PRIOR: Would they have been aware of the decision to eliminate Ms Ndwandwe?
MR BOTHA: Negative Mr Chairperson, they wouldn't have been aware of that.
ADV PRIOR: The longer she was out of circulation from Swaziland, wasn't the risk increasingly higher that the MK/ANC structures would be aware that something was wrong?
MR BOTHA: Absolutely. The longer the person remained out of circulation, the greater the risk.
ADV PRIOR: I need to ask you this question, is there any specific reason why you did not, having made the decision as you have told us about killing Ndwandwe, that you left just before she was to be executed? That you were not part of that execution?
MR BOTHA: Mr Chairperson, the informers were returned by me to Durban, that was the only reason.
ADV PRIOR: But you could have been there when she was executed, and then leave the farm?
MR BOTHA: Yes, but unfortunately I left before the time.
ADV PRIOR: So that wasn't part of a discussion or an agreement with Taylor, that they would do the execution, you would get away with the informers, or move away with the informers?
MR BOTHA: Negative. The informers were on the adjacent farm, they weren't on that farm.
ADV PRIOR: So if I understand your evidence, it just happened that way, there was no plan or there was no design?
MR BOTHA: No, there was nothing strange about that.
ADV PRIOR: You were taking the informers away and you knew that Taylor would then do the killing or oversee the killing?
MR BOTHA: Yes, that is correct Chairperson.
ADV PRIOR: I know you weren't there, but you obviously must have discussed the killing of Ndwandwe afterwards? We know from the exhumation that there was no clothing found in the grave. Would that have been usual to strip the body either after the killing or before the killing? I just need to know from you whether that would have been usual or common place or are you unable to comment?
MR BOTHA: I would not be able to comment regarding that.
ADV PRIOR: Because it would seem from the objective facts that when she was buried at that grave, or in that grave, she was naked, except for a plastic, it seems like a refuge bag that was placed around her pelvic area.
MR BOTHA: Yes, I was not present when they exhumed the body.
ADV PRIOR: Was there any discussion afterwards of how she was executed?
MR BOTHA: No, Mr Chairperson, it was not discussed.
ADV PRIOR: You never asked any questions of how they did it, or who pulled the trigger or whatever?
MR BOTHA: Negative, one never asked questions regarding that.
ADV PRIOR: The information you say you obtained, sorry before we move on, I have been requested to put certain things to you regarding Ms Ndwandwe. There will be evidence if necessary from various persons, to say that Ndwandwe, Portia Ndwandwe, did not leave the Durban area after her release and that she remained in attendance throughout the Ramlakan trial as part of the audience.
Are you able to comment on that?
MR BOTHA: Yes, the case was completed and she was released in January 1986, after the completion of the Section 29 hearing. She remained in Durban until the end of 1986/1987 when she left the country for military training.
ADV PRIOR: Can you deny that she was attending the proceedings of the Ramlakan trial? I should imagine right up until the end of the case in 1987?
MR BOTHA: I cannot comment regarding that, because I did not attend the hearing every day.
ADV PRIOR: Would it be likely that if she had attended, the Security Branch, were they not monitoring the audience or the supporters of the accused?
MR BOTHA: Once again Mr Chairperson, I wouldn't know what the conduct or decision of that hearing was.
ADV PRIOR: Just to get clarity on that last aspect, was it the policy of the Security Branch to monitor who the supporters of the accused were in such a trial? Would you have known who came to attend the trial or not?
MR BOTHA: Yes, one would know who was there and who wasn't.
ADV PRIOR: The APMC of the structure, is it correct that that did not include any internally trained cadres, but was formed by externally trained cadres?
MR BOTHA: The APMC consisted of internally and externally trained terrorists Mr Chairperson.
ADV PRIOR: Is it correct that in 1986, she could not have been in charge of any combat unit because it would seem on what I have heard thus far, she had not yet been trained?
MR BOTHA: She had already been trained internally during the Ramlakan period. If I am referring to that specific period, the APMC, the functioning of Butterfly, before the arrest on the 23rd of December 1985.
ADV PRIOR: Is it not close to the truth that she was arrested simply for being at the house where Ramlakan and others were arrested, that she had been assisted by Ramlakan in her studies and that he had also provided her with accommodation because of problems she had with her in-laws or family?
MR BOTHA: She was more than simply that. She lived there, that is correct.
ADV PRIOR: And that she may possibly have done secretarial functions, but she certainly wasn't a trained combatant.
MR BOTHA: She was Mr Chairperson. She along with another person by the name of Ricky Naidoo fulfilled a number of functions in the command of Ramlakan and the other people from the place where they worked.
ADV PRIOR: You indicated in your evidence that one Braso had made phone call to the Ramlakan home just before the arrest?
MR BOTHA: That is correct Mr Chairperson.
ADV PRIOR: Is it not, well, I have been requested to put this to you, that it wasn't Braso, but one Ralph Lawrence who had made that call, and he had spoken to Sibusiso Sithle Mbongwa also known as George Fukudi and that that conversation was recorded on tape?
MR BOTHA: That is correct, the conversation was recorded by us with monitoring.
ADV PRIOR: But with Ralph Lawrence made the call?
MR BOTHA: Negative, it was Braso, Raymond Lala. He made a number of calls to that address, his voice was familiar to us. His voice was that of an Indian.
ADV PRIOR: There is just one other aspect, it would appear from bundle 3 that there was a report that Portia Ndwandwe's home was burgled on the very day or the evening of the day she was kidnapped out of Swaziland. There was an allegation that an amount of about R20 000 or R25 000 was missing.
Do you know anything about that?
MR BOTHA: I am aware of the report which appeared in the newspaper.
ADV PRIOR: Well, were any of your operatives in the area, you had abducted her. Was any of the instructions to go and see what could be found at the home?
MR BOTHA: Negative Mr Chairperson, there was no order, I don't think that they were responsible.
ADV PRIOR: Do you agree that it certainly raises a suspicion?
MR BOTHA: Yes Mr Chairperson, but the circumstances could have been manipulated by someone within the ANC in order to steal that money.
ADV PRIOR: Du Preez and Wasserman?
MR BOTHA: That is correct.
ADV PRIOR: You say couldn't get through the border post because of the lateness of the hour?
MR BOTHA: That is correct.
ADV PRIOR: Do you know where they slept before they came through the border post the next day?
MR BOTHA: Negative Mr Chairperson.
ADV PRIOR: Did they know where Ndwandwe lived in Manzini?
MR BOTHA: They knew.
ADV PRIOR: Just finally on this aspect, your Intelligence network, was there any information regarding the burglary or the breaking in? I mean your Intelligence network was in place in Swaziland, was there any information forthcoming from that source?
MR BOTHA: The only report which there was about the burglary appeared coincidentally in a Swazi newspaper and through the South African media. That was the only reference made to that incident.
MR MALAN: I think Mr Botha, that the question is whether you from your information network, heard anything about the burglary?
MR BOTHA: I understood the question correctly. The only knowledge which we had regarding this burglary, was not by means of our information network, but by means of the media.
ADV PRIOR: I don't want to belabour this too much, but on what your answer is, no one within the ANC knew that she had been abducted or kidnapped on that day, they only came to realise that later. They would have no reason to have exploited that fact, not having known about it at that specific time?
MR BOTHA: That is correct Chairperson, we were not even aware of an amount of R25 000.
ADV PRIOR: Let's forget the amount, just the fact of the burglary at that time, the day that she was kidnapped by your unit, the ANC would not have known about it and therefore I am suggesting to you that it seems improbable that they would have exploited that fact.
MR BOTHA: No comment Mr Chairperson.
ADV PRIOR: I want to move on to Pumeso Nxiweni. You have had sight of Exhibit H?
MR BOTHA: That is correct Chairperson.
ADV PRIOR: That was the sort of consultation notes of the Investigative Unit of the Amnesty Committee. I don't intend going through the ...(indistinct) verba of everything here, but if you look at the fourth page, where under the title possible assistants Sithle Mbongwa, is there anything there that you wish to disagree with? I think you may have answered that a short while ago.
MR BOTHA: That is correct.
ADV PRIOR: Do you wish to add anything, that is regarding Ndwandwe being at Ramlakan's house and the reason why she was there? Do you want to add anything to what you have already answered?
MR BOTHA: All that I confirm here is that the facts are not correct, that she was at Ramlakan's house.
ADV PRIOR: If you can go to the next page, that is the fifth page, Naya Ngema, do you wish to comment on the notes there or the information there? Let me maybe ask you correctly, Naya Ngema who survived, he was the member that went to Swazi, he never turned up in the kwaMashu 3 at the meeting that was arranged with your informers?
MR BOTHA: That is correct Chairperson.
ADV PRIOR: Can you dispute or do you deny that it was his unit that carried out six of the bombings that you attributed to Nxiweni's unit, the Allan Taylor unit?
MR BOTHA: That is correct Chairperson.
ADV PRIOR: Sorry, do you challenge that?
MR BOTHA: No, I say that this unit was under the command of Nxiweni as Commander.
ADV PRIOR: He will give evidence and say that that wasn't the case.
MR BOTHA: That may be his evidence, but that was our knowledge.
ADV PRIOR: Further down the page, he says that his unit was responsible for the six attacks, Pinetown post office, Glenashley shopping centre, Westville post office and a blast in kwaMashu, the Bree railway station and the Red Hill post office. In other words, that was the swimmers' unit?
MR BOTHA: That is correct Chairperson.
ADV PRIOR: Is that correct, are you saying, did you know about the swimmers' unit?
MR BOTHA: They were all known to us as the kwaMashu unit.
ADV PRIOR: And you say Nxiweni was part of the Allan Taylor unit?
MR BOTHA: He had a unit with Allan Taylor which was known as the Allan Taylor unit.
ADV PRIOR: Were those two distinct units or did they fall under the umbrella of the kwaMashu unit, I don't quite understand?
MR BOTHA: Perhaps just to explain. If a person was a Commander in a determined area such as Durban, he could have up to five units under his command, and in this case Nxiweni was identified to us as Commander of a number of units.
ADV PRIOR: Is it correct that at the time of his kidnapping, if I may call it that, that is Nxiweni, that he was busy preparing for the year end party at the residence?
MR BOTHA: No, I am not aware of what he was busy with at the Allan Taylor.
ADV PRIOR: Your evidence was that weapons and ammunition were found at the Allan Taylor residence after Nxiweni had been detained, is that correct?
MR BOTHA: That is correct Chairperson.
ADV PRIOR: And they had been, well, it would not have been difficult to link him with those weapons and explosives, is that correct?
MR BOTHA: Well, he gave us the directions to the place.
ADV PRIOR: And if you had charged him for those weapons, he would in all likelihood have received a fairly substantial term of imprisonment?
MR BOTHA: If his fingerprints were to be found on those exhibits.
ADV PRIOR: Or other evidence, there could have been other evidence, that he pointed out the spot, that he knew where it was?
MR BOTHA: That is correct Chairperson.
ADV PRIOR: The fingerprints would have just been some additional evidence?
MR BOTHA: That is correct.
ADV PRIOR: But if he had been convicted for those articles, he would have received a substantial term of imprisonment?
MR BOTHA: That is correct.
ADV PRIOR: At least what, five, six years?
MR BOTHA: Minimum of five years.
ADV PRIOR: Minimum? And you could have effectively taken him out of circulation on that basis?
MR BOTHA: That is correct.
ADV PRIOR: Did you contemplate that?
MR BOTHA: Negative Mr Chairperson.
ADV PRIOR: Had the decision already been made at a different time that he was to be eliminated?
MR BOTHA: That is correct Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: So you weren't interested, I think you have told us already, in getting him before a Court and convicting him?
MR BOTHA: That is correct.
ADV PRIOR: On the fifth page at the bottom, one Siphiso Kunene, was he known to you?
MR BOTHA: Yes Mr Chairperson.
ADV PRIOR: Do you have any comment to make on his information that he will give?
MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, with respect, we all know that this is not a permissible way of asking questions of a witness. If my learned friend wants to ask a question, let him put the question.
We know that in procedure, one doesn't just place a document before a witness and say is there something that you disagree with and then take your cross-examination from there.
With respect, it doesn't lead anywhere Mr Chairman, and it is unfair to the witness because he doesn't know what the question is.
ADV PRIOR: Thank you Mr Chairman, I take note of that. I was trying to save some time, but I see that it is not going to assist. Siphiso Kunene states and that will be his evidence that his unit, which was the Chesterville unit, was reporting to Mapumulo in Swaziland and that they had no link to Nxiweni. Could you confirm that?
MR BOTHA: That is possible.
ADV PRIOR: And that it was his unit that were responsible for the two CNA bombs that went off and not Nxiweni's unit.
MR BOTHA: Once again, Chairperson, as I said units in Durban fell under the command of Nxiweni, whether or not they had direct command contact with him, is unknown to me.
But I would just like to indicate in paragraph 3 of Ngema's evidence on the same page, the question that you asked me about whether there was a liaison, I told you that Pila once instructed them to make contact with Nxiweni to obtain weapons in an emergency. He sent one of the unit members who did not know Nxiweni to the meeting. He does not know who this person met with.
That simply confirms what I said that there was contact between them.
ADV PRIOR: Yes, there was contact, but we will leave it at that. The suggestion that was put to you, is that after his acquittal Nxiweni played no active role in the combatant situation, the combat situation in Natal because of the very fact that he was known to you, that he had been acquitted, that he was obviously being observed or watched or whatever?
MR BOTHA: For a period of time after that, he became active again.
ADV PRIOR: I think you have agreed, during the interrogation of him, that you slapped him on a number of occasions?
MR BOTHA: That is correct.
ADV PRIOR: Did anybody else interrogate him from your own knowledge, any of the other applicants?
MR BOTHA: Yes Mr Chairman.
ADV PRIOR: Just mention them to us?
MR BOTHA: The only people present was Du Preez and Van der Westhuizen.
ADV PRIOR: Did Mr Du Preez assault him in your presence?
MR BOTHA: Yes Mr Chairman. Du Preez slapped him in my presence.
ADV PRIOR: With a fist? Also with a fist?
MR BOTHA: And he hit him as well.
ADV PRIOR: And Van der Westhuizen as well?
MR BOTHA: Yes.
ADV PRIOR: It never escalated to anything more than a slapping or a punching, there was no instruments used?
MR BOTHA: No, no instruments were used.
ADV PRIOR: Sorry, you were also not present at Nxiweni's execution?
MR BOTHA: That is correct. If Colonel Taylor had not arrived that afternoon, he and Wasserman, Du Preez and I would have eliminated Nxiweni.
ADV PRIOR: Is there any reason why Taylor who was the Head of the unit, hadn't been informed about Nxiweni?
MR BOTHA: He was not in Durban at the time of the decision.
ADV PRIOR: He just slotted in, he came suddenly at the farm or the safe house and he just took over?
MR BOTHA: That is correct, if my memory serves me correctly, he had arrived back from Swaziland that afternoon.
ADV PRIOR: The kwaMashu 3, I think you explained in quite a lot of detail how you got them to the meeting place and what happened. In this case there was no need to interrogate them, is that right, because the decision to execute them, had been made before their detention or their arrest?
MR BOTHA: That is correct Chairperson.
ADV PRIOR: The positioning of the bodies after they were shot, was that to destroy any evidence that they had been shot, in other words, they were placed with their heads onto the explosives, so that there would be no come back at any later stage?
MR BOTHA: That is correct Chairperson.
ADV PRIOR: Thank you, I have no further questions. Sorry, I have been asked to put this question, did your branch or did your unit clear the DLB in the kwaMashu area under the control of the kwaMashu unit?
MR BOTHA: There were only three limpet mines in their presence. The DLB's clearing was done by the Investigative Officer and if I remember correctly, a carrier bag and other forms of proof were found at a house which were tested positively for explosives.
There were such exhibits.
ADV PRIOR: Are you able to tell us which house it was that this bag was found?
MR BOTHA: Mr Chairperson, I can't remember, but I think that that information was given to the Investigative Team. There was a dossier with that information contained in it.
ADV PRIOR: Can you just tell us who maybe the Investigating Officer is so that we can follow this up?
MR BOTHA: It was Warrant Officer Petser.
ADV PRIOR: Thank you Mr Chairman.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY ADV PRIOR
MR NOLTE: Mr Chairman, no questions.
NO CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR NGUBANE
MR VISSER: No re-examination, thank you Mr Chairman.
NO RE-EXAMINATION BY MR VISSER
ADV SIGODI: There is just one aspect that I want to clarify with you. You mentioned that the reason why you eliminated these people was because there was pressure on you to solve the problem, that is the problem of terrorism in the region.
I want to find out who exerted this pressure on you?
MR BOTHA: Mr Chairperson, daily we had morning conferences under the Chairpersonship of Gen Steyn, his rank was then Colonel and then later Brigadier.
Apart from those morning conferences, there were special meetings held with the Officers' Corps whereby at various opportunities it was said that we must get this country out of this mess. We cannot allow terrorism to take over and Colonel Steyn was a very fiery person when it is about the activities. He places pressure on you to such an extent that it didn't matter for us how long we worked in a day.
That, and then certain statements by politicians, activity requests for cross border operations, if there would be acts of terror the SADF would then react in a counter attack. We had to react on all of this.
ADV SIGODI: Did this mean to you, that the only way was to kill people the only way that you could alleviate this pressure, was to kill people?
MR BOTHA: In some instances yes, Mr Chairperson. In my opinion it was the only solution for the problem.
ADV SIGODI: The fact that there was this cross border raids by the SADF, did that, how did that put pressure on you as members of the Security Branch? Was there some form of competition between the Security Branch and the SADF?
MR BOTHA: Negative, there was no competition who could succeed the most, but what I am trying to say there is that as with the politician statement, that we would follow them to wherever they go, and then there were certain cross border raids where we followed certain terrorists and I thought it right that when there were certain operations internally, in terms of elimination of people who were involved, or was in control of certain acts of terror.
ADV SIGODI: Did you feel that you were safe with your acts? In other words did you feel that you were safe with your acts of eliminating people with your illegal acts?
MR BOTHA: Yes Mr Chairperson, I knew that if it was executed in such a way that no one could point a finger, it would be safe.
ADV SIGODI: And what if somebody could point a finger at you?
MR BOTHA: Then we would have to carry the consequences. I then believed that I would receive assistance.
ADV SIGODI: From where?
MR BOTHA: From within the structures of the South African Police.
ADV SIGODI: In other words, there was a culture of covering up illegal acts, is that what you are saying?
MR BOTHA: No, that is not what I am saying. Chairperson what I am saying is that I believed that I would be assisted. I have never been in a position where there was a cover up and where people in our own department was misled concerning certain acts.
ADV SIGODI: What was the basis of your belief that you would be assisted?
MR BOTHA: I believed that if we were so manipulated, we would not be directly implicated in a matter.
ADV SIGODI: Thank you Chairperson.
MR MALAN: The investigation that followed after the kwaMashu 3, that you said Warrant Officer Petser led?
MR BOTHA: Yes, Mr Chairperson.
MR MALAN: Did he ever make contact with the Security Branch or firstly, was he in the Uniform Branch or which branch?
MR BOTHA: No, he was from the Investigative Personnel from the Security Branch.
MR MALAN: Did he ever ask you if the operatives under your control, had any involvement in it?
MR BOTHA: No, negative Mr Chairperson.
MR MALAN: Did he never consider that?
MR BOTHA: No, it was never considered. It was only dealt with as a purely terrorist investigation.
MR MALAN: And then just your answers on questions that Mr Prior put to you, specifically concerning Bhila.
You testified that the first time that you heard about Bhila's elimination and how it occurred, was with the amnesty application?
MR BOTHA: Yes, that is correct.
MR MALAN: The evidence that we heard earlier on, concerning the applications of Bosch and others and McCarter as well as Wasserman, and that is that he then continued with his activities and that Taylor put it to them?
MR BOTHA: Yes, I heard that evidence.
MR MALAN: In other words, he was an active member of one of the structures, otherwise he wouldn't have been charged in the first place?
MR BOTHA: Yes, that is correct.
MR MALAN: And you picked him up with your involvement in investigations in Amanzimtoti and as well as the Ramlakan case?
MR BOTHA: That is correct Mr Chairman.
MR MALAN: Did you have knowledge of the fact that he suddenly appeared out of circulation in the structures?
MR BOTHA: Yes Mr Chairperson. The information at that stage was that he left the country for further military training.
MR MALAN: Who gave you this information?
MR BOTHA: It came through the normal information structures. He was a prominent person. He was not the only person who at that stage, disappeared for training outside of the country.
MR MALAN: The people who went for training outside of the country, did you also try to follow them with the information structure, to find out what they were doing and where they were?
MR BOTHA: That is correct Mr Chairperson.
MR MALAN: Did you try to follow Bhila?
MR BOTHA: I believe so Mr Chairperson, there would be a dossier for him, concerning him leaving the country.
MR MALAN: You never asked Wasserman if he would know anything about Bhila?
MR BOTHA: No, it was not necessary for me to ask this.
MR MALAN: Why not?
MR BOTHA: There was nothing that made me suspicious that there was something else, that he just left the country for military training.
MR MALAN: Did you think that the elimination actions, that you were involved in, were the only ones that took place within your unit?
MR BOTHA: Yes, I believed it.
MR MALAN: You did not think that any of the other members were involved in acts like these except where you were in command and coordinated it?
MR BOTHA: Yes, that is correct Mr Chairperson.
MR MALAN: Thank you.
MR VISSER: May the witness be excused Mr Chairman?
CHAIRPERSON: No, I have a few questions.
MR VISSER: I am sorry.
CHAIRPERSON: You have just told us that the information you got from the normal channels was that Bhila had left the country for military training?
MR BOTHA: That is correct.
CHAIRPERSON: And we know that information is totally inaccurate and unreliable?
MR BOTHA: I agree with you there.
CHAIRPERSON: So your other similar information, may have been equally unreliable?
MR BOTHA: No Mr Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Why should just Bhila be inaccurate? Why should you be able that other information was accurate? You told us that the Bhila information came through your normal channels?
MR BOTHA: That is correct Mr Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: And we know that it was totally inaccurate, don't we? You have just agreed?
MR BOTHA: Mr Chairperson, I also heard from the evidence of Wasserman that it was created that this person just left the country.
CHAIRPERSON: And we know don't we, that he couldn't have gone back to any activities, because he was murdered three days after he was released?
MR BOTHA: I heard that in the evidence, yes.
CHAIRPERSON: I think in fact the instructions, the evidence was that the instructions were given a day or so after his release.
MR BOTHA: That is correct Mr Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: It would seem again false information was given?
MR BOTHA: Yes, if the legend was created, that had to be carried out, that was the information that we received.
CHAIRPERSON: Going back to Nxiweni. Do you know who I am talking about?
MR BOTHA: Yes, Mr Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: You had the opportunity as I understand it, to have charged him with the unlawful possession of firearms and explosives?
MR BOTHA: That is correct.
CHAIRPERSON: But you didn't bother to do anything further about that, because you had already decided to kill him?
MR BOTHA: That is correct, yes.
CHAIRPERSON: So, your interest wasn't seeing if you could lawfully take him out of circulation?
MR BOTHA: Mr Chairperson, the decision to eliminate Nxiweni, was taken already when we took him. The information concerning the ammunition or the trunk of ammunition, was only made that evening after I took the decision.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, why couldn't you have changed your mind? Why insist on going on with the murder of a man, when it was no longer necessary?
MR BOTHA: In my opinion it was still necessary. I just confirmed that he is involved, that he did receive ammunition and I just cleaned up around him.
CHAIRPERSON: So you weren't interested, you were more interested in killing people than in securing evidence and prosecuting them in the lawful manner?
MR BOTHA: In the instances where the activity of a person was of such prominence, that would be my decision, yes.
CHAIRPERSON: Does that make your job easier, is that why you were doing that?
MR BOTHA: In the case of where a person, Mr Chairperson, was responsible for acts of terror, in the execution and planning of it, yes it did make our task easier when we eliminated them, because we could then stop the process.
MR VISSER: May the witness be excused Mr Chairman?
CHAIRPERSON: Yes.
MR VISSER: Thank you.
WITNESS EXCUSED
