ON RESUMPTION
MS LOCKHAT: The next amnesty applicant is Mr Cornelius Botha.
CORNELIUS JOHANNES BOTHA: (sworn states)
MR MALAN: You may be seated.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Ms Van der Walt?
EXAMINATION BY MS VAN DER WALT: Mr Botha, you are applying for amnesty and your application can be found in Volume 1, from page 249 to page 251, that would be the official amnesty application form and the content is in page 252, the motivation and political background, from page 256 to 263, do you confirm the content thereof?
MR BOTHA: That is correct, yes.
MS VAN DER WALT: During the incident which took place on the 12th of June 1988 in Swaziland, where were you stationed at that time?
MR BOTHA: At Piet Retief Security Branch.
MS VAN DER WALT: How long were you stationed there?
MR BOTHA: From 1981 to 1994.
MS VAN DER WALT: Under whose command were you?
MR BOTHA: Warrant Officer Freek Pienaar.
MS VAN DER WALT: Piet Retief was part of which region?
MR BOTHA: It was in the Eastern Transvaal region, below Ermelo.
MS VAN DER WALT: You were involved in the incident regarding Mr Ras, Tait and Van Dyk gave evidence during which a person was shot dead in Swaziland, is that correct?
MR BOTHA: Yes, that is correct.
MS VAN DER WALT: In paragraph 1, on page 252 you state that you received instructions to arrest the persons who were assisting the MK members in infiltrating the RSA?
MR BOTHA: Yes, that is correct.
MS VAN DER WALT: Can you explain that please?
MR BOTHA: Chairperson, on that day we were requested or at least we received the instruction from Colonel Van Dyk, and because I worked under Freek Pienaar, to cross the border and to then attempt to arrest those persons who were going to infiltrate the RSA and to eliminate them, to shoot them.
MS VAN DER WALT: Was there a specific reason why they requested you to accompany?
MR BOTHA: Chairperson, I knew the area and I also knew where we would be able to leave the vehicle on the RSA side of the border, at a point where it would be most easy to enter.
MS VAN DER WALT: Did you know where these persons were going to cross the border?
MR BOTHA: Yes, that is correct, I knew.
MS VAN DER WALT: How did you know and where would they cross the border?
MR BOTHA: The place was indicated to me by Warrant Officer Pienaar when he indicated to the persons who had to pick up as a result of the information that we received.
MS VAN DER WALT: Was this at a normal border post or where was it?
MR BOTHA: It was an illegal crossing, it was over the border fence.
MS VAN DER WALT: This specific place, was it a singular place where persons had crossed, or was it more frequently used?
MR BOTHA: This was the first time that I recall somebody crossing the border at that point.
MS VAN DER WALT: You state in the second paragraph that you and Captain Paul van Dyk and Martiens Ras entered Swaziland, you do not state anything about Mr Tait, is there any reason for that?
MR BOTHA: Chairperson, I wasn't very familiar with all the members from C1 and during the time when I made the statement, I could not recall what the fourth person's name was.
MS VAN DER WALT: You also state and this is in paragraph 2, that there was an attempt to arrest the persons, do you wish to explain that?
MR BOTHA: Yes Chairperson, there wasn't an actual attempt, I meant it more in the sense that we would have wanted to make an attempt to arrest these persons.
MS VAN DER WALT: What was your instruction when you arrived there at the scene?
MR BOTHA: At the scene it was dark and if I describe the scene, it would be after we took up positions.
MS VAN DER WALT: Yes?
MR BOTHA: The instruction there was that we would shoot when they arrived because arrest was completely out of the question. There would be no opportunity for an arrest, that was too dangerous.
MS VAN DER WALT: Under whose instruction did you act there at the scene?
MR BOTHA: Under Warrant Officer Van Dyk.
MS VAN DER WALT: What took place?
MR BOTHA: We took up positions, we lay down and waited for quite a while for these persons and we heard them returning, we could hear them speaking, they moved around the vehicle. I had a light which I had to switch on as soon as the shooting commenced and for a moment, the persons were quiet and then the shooting ensued. I, myself, am not certain whether the shooting originated from our side or from the other side, I just know that the shooting commenced, it began and everybody started shooting.
MS VAN DER WALT: What did you do after that?
MR BOTHA: Shortly after the shooting, I switched on the light, we moved closer, I looked for the other person, whether we could see him. Next to the car was a deceased person who lay there. I shot the petrol tank of the vehicle to pieces and to tell the truth, I heard Mr Ras' evidence now, I thought that I was the one who set the vehicle alight, but it was him. It may be that he had matches and approached the vehicle and set it alight with the matches.
MS VAN DER WALT: Because you state in paragraph 3 that you set the vehicle alight, is that the way you recall it?
MR BOTHA: Yes, that is how I recalled it.
MS VAN DER WALT: Did you hear when the persons arrived there at the scene when you lay there, before the persons were taken over the border, whether any firearms were cocked as the vehicle stopped there?
MR BOTHA: Yes, that is correct. My evidence differs from the others in that regard, but I heard four firearms being cocked, I counted them specifically.
MS VAN DER WALT: Did you have a good knowledge of firearms, can you tell the Committee what knowledge of firearms you have and what enabled you to determine this?
MR BOTHA: I cannot say that these were AK's, we just assumed that they were AK47's, but the gun that was being cocked was definitely a gun, I knew that there were five guns. They were successively cocked, not simultaneously.
MS VAN DER WALT: And there is a definite difference between a gun and the usual hand firearm, one could hear the difference when a firearm is being cocked?
MR BOTHA: At that distance I could hear that it was definitely a firearm.
ADV GCABASHE: Could I just get a bit of clarity, the Interpreter said that I knew that there were five firearms and yet, just a few minutes before that, what I heard was that four firearms had been cocked. I am not sure if we are talking of four or five now?
MR BOTHA: Yes Chairperson, I know the others said that they heard four, but when I counted, I counted five. It may be that I may be incorrect, but I recall it as such.
ADV GCABASHE: You have to take me along with you, you heard four being cocked, you counted five. When did you count the five?
MR BOTHA: When they were being cocked.
ADV GCABASHE: You heard five being cocked?
CHAIRPERSON: I had the same note as Adv Gcabashe, that it was first of all mentioned four and then five, but it seems that it was five that you heard?
MR BOTHA: Five that I counted being cocked, yes.
INTERPRETER: I beg your pardon Chairperson, it was actually my mistake, I misheard the applicant, I thought it was four initially.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
MS VAN DER WALT: And after the incident, you said that you switched on a light, were any firearms found next to the vehicle?
MR BOTHA: Next to the person who had been shot dead, there was a firearm, a Makarov which lay next to him.
MS VAN DER WALT: And did you then depart from the scene?
MR BOTHA: After the vehicle had been set alight, we left the scene.
MS VAN DER WALT: Were you in any way involved in the shooting incident which took place on that same night on the South African side of the border?
MR BOTHA: No Chairperson. While it may have been a simultaneous incident, there was separate planning and execution.
MS VAN DER WALT: But you knew that there would be a shooting incident on the other side?
MR BOTHA: Yes, that is correct Chairperson.
MS VAN DER WALT: And you are then requesting amnesty for the murder of this one person?
MR BOTHA: Yes, that is correct.
MS VAN DER WALT: And any other judgement emanating from that?
MR BOTHA: Yes, that is correct.
MS VAN DER WALT: As well as for any illegal act which may emanate from the incident?
MR BOTHA: Yes, that is correct.
MS VAN DER WALT: No further questions, thank you Chairperson.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS VAN DER WALT
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Prinsloo, any questions?
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR PRINSLOO: Thank you Mr Chairperson. Mr Botha, during your period of service at the Security Branch in Piet Retief, were you involved in investigations during which members of the ANC or MK were involved in various acts of violence?
MR BOTHA: Yes, that is correct.
MR PRINSLOO: Before these events?
MR BOTHA: That is correct.
MR PRINSLOO: Thank you Chairperson.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR PRINSLOO
MR CORNELIUS: I have no questions, thank you Mr Chair.
NO CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR CORNELIUS
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Cornelius. Mr Hattingh?
MR HATTINGH: No questions, thank you Mr Chairman.
NO CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR HATTINGH
MR JANSEN: No questions Mr Chairman.
NO CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR JANSEN
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Knight?
MR KNIGHT: No questions, thank you.
NO CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR KNIGHT
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lamey?
MR LAMEY: No questions, thank you Chair.
NO CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR LAMEY
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Moerane?
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR MOERANE: Mr Chairperson, I have a slight problem.
CHAIRPERSON: Is it the quality of the photocopying, with that
line across the middle?
MR MOERANE: If somebody can just tell me what is under the, what the words are under that?
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, my copy is the same as yours Mr Moerane, it appears it is the same with all three of ours. Ms Van der Walt, is there an unblemished statement?
MS VAN DER WALT: I've just got the one that my client's got, but he has written a sentence at the top, but he testified as to what he ...
CHAIRPERSON: No, all Mr Moerane wants to know, if you take a look at paragraph 2.
MS VAN DER WALT: I can just read it to him.
CHAIRPERSON: Paragraph 2, yes, and perhaps if you can just read it slow enough for Mr Moerane and others to write it down, the obliterated part. It says ...
MS VAN DER WALT: I know what it is, I will read it.
"... after they had taken the MK members over the RSA border ...",
have you got that Mr Moerane?
MR MOERANE: Yes, if you can just proceed slowly thereafter.
MS VAN DER WALT: "... we made an attempt to arrest them."
MR MOERANE: Is that the end of the sentence?
MS VAN DER WALT: Yes.
MR MOERANE: Thank you very much.
MS VAN DER WALT: Have you got
"... however, they had firearms."
Have you got that?
"... shots were fired in the dark and we also fired."
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, yes, we've got that section.
MR MOERANE: Thank you. Mr Botha, one of the rules that a policeman follows is taking instructions from his superiors, not so?
MR BOTHA: That is correct.
MR MOERANE: And those instructions have to be in very clear terms so that you know precisely what is expected of you?
MR BOTHA: That is correct.
MR MOERANE: What were your instructions with regard to this mission?
MR BOTHA: Chairperson, it was to go over and according to my opinion, as I understood it, if there was an opportunity to arrest, we would arrest the person primarily to prevent that we do not endanger the rest of the operation while the persons were still under way to the border. And if the option presented itself on the other side, we would also shoot these persons.
MR MOERANE: It is not quite clear to me what your instructions were, just tell us in very simple language what your instructions were. Were your instructions to kill these people or were your instructions to arrest them because the two differ totally?
MR BOTHA: Yes, there wasn't one single instruction according to my opinion, there were two. We could arrest them if the circumstances allowed, and if the circumstances did not allow it, we would shoot to kill.
MR MOERANE: Is there any reason why you did not mention that part, shoot to kill, in your statement?
MR BOTHA: No.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Moerane, if I could just ask a question, I can't, are you saying Mr Botha and I gather this also from the evidence of Mr Ras and Mr Tait and Mr Van Dyk, that if they had left a guard at the vehicle while the other two went off with the people who were to infiltrate, you would have arrested that guard because you couldn't have shot him because the noise would have alerted the people on their way to the border and that would have affected the whole operation, is that what you are saying?
MR BOTHA: Yes, that is correct, we would try to arrest if it was possible.
CHAIRPERSON: Let's take the scene, they do leave a guard and they go off and you arrest a person there, what are you going to do with this arrested person?
MR BOTHA: We couldn't arrest him, we would have to abduct him to the RSA for further interrogation.
CHAIRPERSON: But you might also have to kill him because he would just have to open his mouth while he is in your control and that would also give away your position when the others came back?
MR BOTHA: Chairperson, we did not discuss this issue under those circumstances there, but I don't believe we would have killed him, that wasn't part of our instruction.
CHAIRPERSON: It would seem unlikely that you would have, you would say to him "keep quiet" and just rely on him keeping quiet while the others returned?
MR BOTHA: We might possibly have to do that if we arrested him.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Mr Moerane?
MR MOERANE: Mr Botha, Were your instructions not very clear that you had to eliminate these people?
MR BOTHA: According to my understanding it was very clear, if we could not arrest, we had to take them out. We had to shoot.
MR MOERANE: Just for the record, your statement is one of those that was made at Delmas?
MR BOTHA: That is correct.
MR MOERANE: On the 12th of December?
MR BOTHA: It may have been the 12th Chairperson.
MR MOERANE: On page 251 it says the 12th of December, Delmas.
MR BOTHA: Chairperson, yes, if it is the 12th, I cannot recall whether I signed it on the 12th or whether I made the statement on the 12th. I visited Delmas twice, the first time when I made the statement, to consult with my legal representatives and then two or three days later, I returned to sign the statement.
MR MOERANE: Is it correct that you did not try to arrest any of these people?
MR BOTHA: No, we did not attempt to arrest them.
MR MOERANE: Why did you say that you made an attempt to arrest them?
MR BOTHA: It was presented incorrectly, I remember that I wrote something there because no attempt was made to arrest, it was more to the effect that we would make an attempt if we could, or if we had to.
MR MOERANE: How long have you been a member of the South African Police Force?
MR BOTHA: 26 years.
MR MOERANE: And I take it you have made many statements, many affidavits in the course of your ...
MR BOTHA: Yes, I made many.
MR MOERANE: Yes, and I take it you read them carefully before you sign them or attest them?
MR BOTHA: Usually, yes.
MR MOERANE: And I assume that in this instance, you actually did that because you first consulted and then a statement was taken from you, it was presented to you to confirm its correctness?
MR BOTHA: Yes, I believe that I did study it thoroughly.
MR MOERANE: Just give this Honourable Committee an idea of how the shooting came about, where were you, where was the other person or the other persons?
MR BOTHA: Chairperson, we were in a straight line of four persons. If I recall correctly, I was on the right point above, I cannot recall who was on my left, I don't know whether it was Mr Van Dyk or one of the other persons, I know that there was another person further on to the left. I don't have the correct sequence of the persons.
CHAIRPERSON: Were you laying in touching distance from each other or were you spread out over a far greater distance between, the person on the extreme right ...
MR BOTHA: I would say about two to three metres.
CHAIRPERSON: From the extreme right person to the extreme left, or two to three metres between each person?
MR BOTHA: Between each person.
MR MOERANE: How far was the motor vehicle from you?
MR BOTHA: Approximately as far as the chairs behind you.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Moerane, that would be about five paces, would you say? The chairs behind Mr Moerane?
MR BOTHA: I would say 15, that would be my estimation.
CHAIRPERSON: Oh, 15?
MR BOTHA: From there to there, yes.
MR MOERANE: Yes, that sounds about right. How was this motor vehicle positioned, what position was it facing in relation to your position?
MR BOTHA: Facing to my side.
CHAIRPERSON: Was it side on or was the headlights pointing towards you or the taillights, side on?
MR BOTHA: No, it was the side, the right side was towards me.
CHAIRPERSON: That is the driver's side?
MR BOTHA: Yes, that is correct.
MR MOERANE: Yes, and what did you see?
MR BOTHA: It was dark, I couldn't see much. We heard the persons approaching and the one person walked on the one side of the motor vehicle as I could see, and the other, walked on my side of the vehicle. They were speaking as they arrived, but for a short while, just before they climbed back into the car, there was silence as if they had noticed something. That is when the shots went off, that is when we began shooting.
MR MOERANE: Were you able to see the person on the driver's side of the motor vehicle?
MR BOTHA: That is correct.
MR MOERANE: What about the other person, were you able to see him?
MR BOTHA: Yes, I saw him.
MR MOERANE: Well, you see, my instructions are that the second person who was not near the car, instructed that he had actually gone to attend to a call of nature.
MR BOTHA: That may be so, then I may have seen him where he answered the call of nature.
MR MOERANE: That is why he escaped, because he was not right there where you were shooting?
MR BOTHA: That is possible because he was on the other side of the vehicle. The distance between him and the vehicle, I cannot say how great that distance was.
MR MOERANE: How come is it that you do not know who fired first?
MR BOTHA: Chairperson, I didn't see a flash from the other side and naturally as I was positioned, or where I was positioned the grass was tall and I wasn't watching the people on our side, I simply heard the shots.
MR MOERANE: Was it dark there?
MR BOTHA: It was dark, yes.
MR MOERANE: Is it correct that if you fire a firearm in the dark, you can see the flash of light?
MR BOTHA: Yes, with certain firearms you can see the flash, others have extinguishers which enables you not to see the flame.
MR MOERANE: Well, let's assume that it was a Makarov being fired there, Makarov without a silencer, an ordinary Makarov, would you have been able to see the flash?
MR BOTHA: Yes, I believe I would have seen it then.
MR MOERANE: And you did not see it?
MR BOTHA: No, I didn't see it.
MR MOERANE: That area was quiet and dark, not so?
MR BOTHA: That is correct.
MR MOERANE: Would it be reasonable to infer from what you observed therefore that no shot was fired by the person who was on the driver's side?
MR BOTHA: That may be.
MR MOERANE: Why did you set this motor vehicle on fire?
MR BOTHA: Chairperson, it was used by the enemy and we would do everything in our power to disable their logistics.
MR MOERANE: The intention was to disable the ANC as you perceived the situation, by destroying their transport?
MR BOTHA: That is correct.
MR MOERANE: Was it necessary to have this person set on fire or to find himself in a position where he would be burnt?
MR BOTHA: It probably wasn't necessary.
MR MOERANE: Why was it done?
MR BOTHA: I don't think that that person was our primary interest at that stage, we did what we had to do, we wanted to finish the job and we wanted to get away.
MR MOERANE: Wasn't the whole intention to burn him so that he could not be identified?
MR BOTHA: No Chairperson.
MR MOERANE: My instructions are that when he was burnt, he was actually in the car?
MR BOTHA: No Chairperson.
MR MOERANE: I have no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MOERANE
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Moerane. Ms Lockhat, do you
have any questions?
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS LOCKHAT: Just one question, thank you Chairperson. Mr Botha, just the one aspect regarding the issue that you said, the attempt to arrest them on page 252 of your amnesty application form, you said that statement is incorrect?
MR BOTHA: That is correct, no attempt was made to arrest.
MS LOCKHAT: At which stage did you realise that this was an incorrect statement?
MR BOTHA: When I read it here.
MS LOCKHAT: Because none of the other applicants said that there was an attempt to arrest per se, it was that it was an ambush, clearly to them it was an ambush. Is it because theirs is conflicting with yours and therefore you are now changing your version?
MR BOTHA: No Chairperson, I think that we have made different inferences. I work on the supposition that there will be arrests and that there will be information about activities. It may be that we regarded the instruction differently or understood it differently. In my mind the idea was that if we could undertake an arrest, we would do so.
MS LOCKHAT: It just seems strange that all this time from 1997 when you handed in this application to the Commission, this statement of yours was perfectly correct until the stage of this hearing today?
MR BOTHA: I didn't have any copy of the statement at my disposal, I never kept it at my home. From the time that I read it there and the time that I signed it, until today, I have not seen it again.
MS LOCKHAT: Is it correct that you only applied for two incidents, the Nesden and this incident?
MR BOTHA: That is correct, yes.
MS LOCKHAT: So didn't you regard this as an important issue, these two applications that you actually didn't even have a copy with you?
MR BOTHA: No, to tell you the truth, I may have underestimated the Amnesty Committee, I saw myself as a member of a war situation, I did not see any problems. I was always working in the execution of my duties, with no other thoughts than that.
MS LOCKHAT: Who was your Commander at this time, was it Mr Pienaar?
MR BOTHA: That is correct.
MS LOCKHAT: After this incident, did you report every detail of the incident to your Commander?
MR BOTHA: I don't know whether I reported every detail, but I gave him the overview of what took place and that would be everything, that would be the overview.
MS LOCKHAT: Did you inform him when you did report back to him, that you killed a person?
MR BOTHA: That is correct.
MS LOCKHAT: And what was his response?
MR BOTHA: I think he congratulated me, we did what we were supposed to do.
MS LOCKHAT: Thank you Chairperson, I have no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS LOCKHAT
CHAIRPERSON: Ms Van der Walt, do you have any re-examination?
MS VAN DER WALT: No questions, thank you.
NO RE-EXAMINATION BY MS VAN DER WALT
CHAIRPERSON: Adv Gcabashe, do you have any questions?
ADV GCABASHE: Yes, thank you Chair. On the same point of Commanders, for this particular operation, Mr De Kock was your Commander?
MR BOTHA: That is correct.
ADV GCABASHE: And he gave you instruction as to what to do
once you got to Swaziland?
MR BOTHA: That is correct, he and Warrant Officer Pienaar assisted with the instructions.
ADV GCABASHE: You were physically there when he gave the instruction?
MR BOTHA: That is correct.
ADV GCABASHE: Did he explain who the persons were who he was expecting you to encounter on the other side, in terms of their status?
MR BOTHA: Yes, that is correct.
ADV GCABASHE: What did he say?
MR BOTHA: He said that these were MK members from Swaziland, who were busy infiltrating other members into the Republic.
ADV GCABASHE: And the impression that you were left with was that they were possibly senior to the people who were coming in?
MR BOTHA: That is possible.
ADV GCABASHE: You see, he says in his evidence, if I have recorded it correctly, that the instruction to you was to eliminate these people, I actually looked for the spot. What I have here is he says "I agreed to send C1 members in to kill Commanders", and he mentioned Ndaba who was one of the more senior people there and "anyone with him, they were to be killed." That was his instruction to you, yes?
MR BOTHA: Chairperson, if I recalled it as clearly as that, I would have said that, but I know that there was a question of arrest because it would make sense. We worked with it, we worked with information.
ADV GCABASHE: You see, the reason it wouldn't make sense was because the more junior people who were killed by the same group where Mr De Kock was, who were killed, deliberately killed, eliminated, that was the plan. So it makes sense for those people to be killed as he says, and their superiors to be killed. So you eliminate and you eliminate, otherwise you arrest and you arrest, or do I not understand how the mindset and the workings of the Security Branch was at the time?
MR BOTHA: With respect, I don't think you understand it completely, the senior members would have been able to convey much more information if we could bring them back, but the idea was to kill them. However, the order was dual in nature, if we could arrest them, we would and if we were going to place the other operation in jeopardy, then we would also arrest, but there wasn't any chance for arrest because it wouldn't have been viable for the operation.
ADV GCABASHE: Of course my understanding is in the context of what Mr De Kock has already told us, that the instruction was to kill?
MR BOTHA: We killed, yes, and we were there to kill. The instruction was to kill, but with me, there was always the idea or that I understood the instruction as such that arrest was a possibility, if it was possible to execute an arrest.
ADV GCABASHE: Yes, but this is where my difficulty is, you didn't get that from him. He is the Commander, you do as he tells you to do, because he has a reason for instructing you to do particular things in a particular way? He gives you an instruction and you think otherwise and you do things differently, is that what you say?
MR BOTHA: It may be so.
ADV GCABASHE: Whereas at the end of the day, you did exactly as he had told you, you killed?
MR BOTHA: That is correct Chairperson.
ADV GCABASHE: I still don't see where the arrest fits in. It is not the instruction, it is not what happened, where does the arrest fit in?
MR BOTHA: That is how I understood it, I don't know how to answer that. To me the arrest, according to my opinion, the arrest was mentioned if there was a possibility to arrest, then we had to do so, but the information that we had and if it would jeopardise the operation, if it would jeopardise the operation and they were not far enough, then we had to shoot, we would not have shot. We would try and arrest then. I know it sounds complicated, but that is how I understood it.
ADV GCABASHE: Okay, thank you.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Malan?
MR MALAN: Just for the record, you speak of an arrest, but there was no arrest, executing an arrest in Swaziland? That is an abduction, a kidnapping?
MR BOTHA: That is true it is abduction in the true sense of the word.
MR MALAN: And you would have only done so if the opportunity was there on a platter because there was very little chance of catching or abducting people who came across the border with weapons?
MR BOTHA: That is correct.
MR MALAN: So it could not have been a primary objective or have been an important consideration?
MR BOTHA: No, it was a small point thereof, but it was a point.
MR MALAN: Thank you.
CHAIRPERSON: You say that you picked up the Makarov and then gave it to Mr Ras?
MR BOTHA: No, I did not pick it up, I don't know who picked it up.
CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, it must have been Mr Van Dyk.
MR BOTHA: I just know that the Makarov was with the C1 people, but I did not pick it up or deal with it.
CHAIRPERSON: What were you armed with?
MR BOTHA: An R1 rifle.
CHAIRPERSON: And your colleagues?
MR BOTHA: I cannot remember.
CHAIRPERSON: Did they have automatic rifles or handguns?
MR BOTHA: No, they had automatic rifles if I am correct.
CHAIRPERSON: Any questions arising out of questions put by members of the panel?
MS VAN DER WALT: Just a single aspect.
MR MOERANE: Maybe I should go first so that my learned friend has a chance of re-examining.
MS VAN DER WALT: Sorry, I did not see.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR MOERANE: This question of obtaining information as a result of arrests, that was in particular Warrant Officer Pienaar's field, not so, he is the person who gathered information, he is the person who ran sources, not so?
MR BOTHA: It was also mine, I was second in command from the establishment of the Branch.
MR MOERANE: I see. You were second in command?
MR BOTHA: That is correct.
MR MOERANE: Did you also run sources?
MR BOTHA: That is correct.
MR MOERANE: In Swaziland?
MR BOTHA: Yes, in Swaziland.
MR MOERANE: Mr Theron also ran sources?
MR BOTHA: That is correct.
MR MOERANE: Now if your superior Warrant Officer Pienaar says go over and kill the person, he says nothing about arresting, doesn't it imply to you that he does not need that particular person as a source of information?
MR BOTHA: No, you always need all information, all information that is available. We were an Information Branch, that was the primary objective, to obtain information.
MR MOERANE: Well, look at the first incident, we have been told that the intention was to kill those people, not to arrest them.
MR BOTHA: Yes Chairperson, I have heard it, I did not know of the intent there.
MR MOERANE: You see Mr Pienaar and Mr Theron had a very good source, a very well placed source, so they did not need that particular information, do you go along with that?
MR BOTHA: I don't know, however good this source was, would not have had all the information, it would have been limited to her information.
MR MOERANE: You see, that is the normal function of a Security Branch office or any policeman concerned with collection of information or Intelligence.
MR BOTHA: That is correct. That is the primary function, yes.
MR MOERANE: But here you were involved in a different mission, it was not a question of collection of information, it was a specific mission of elimination?
MR BOTHA: Yes Chairperson, sometimes there are instances where one has to act on information.
MR MOERANE: No further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MOERANE
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
RE-EXAMINATION BY MS VAN DER WALT: Just a single issue Mr Botha. You were here when Mr De Kock gave evidence about this incident, is that correct?
MR BOTHA: That is correct.
MS VAN DER WALT: And if I recall the words of Mr De Kock as such, I want to know whether you understood it as such. When he gave evidence about this incident, he said there was the idea of to catch these people, he used the word catch. He testified that but the primary purpose was to eliminate them, did you hear that?
MR BOTHA: My Lord, it could be, I cannot recall his evidence to that extent, but that is how I understood his evidence.
MS VAN DER WALT: Thank you, no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS VAN DER WALT
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, that concludes your evidence Mr Botha, you may now stand down.
MR BOTHA: Thank you Chairperson.
WITNESS EXCUSED
