CHAIRPERSON: ... he comes, then we can then take a short adjournment and as soon as the interpreter arrives ...(intervention)
ADV PRIOR: Yes, I apologise. I was told as you were virtually coming into the hall.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes. I think also we can use this opportunity, the people in the gallery would then perhaps need these devices to follow the proceedings which will be simultaneously interpreted. They are available from the sound technician in the front here, so if you wish to follow the proceedings, please, during this break, get one of these. Thank you. We'll then take an adjournment until the interpreter arrives.
ADV PRIOR: Thank you, Mr Chairman.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
ON RESUMPTION
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Interpreter, did you get ...
INTERPRETER: Yes, I did Chair. He seems to be having a
problem with his headphones.
CHAIRPERSON: Did you hear that last comment, Mr Berger?
MR BERGER: Yes, I did, but there's going to be some assistance now.
CHAIRPERSON: Is he on Channel 4?
MR BERGER: Yes, he is.
CHAIRPERSON: We'll just wait while Mr Pule gets another set of head phones. Mr Berger could you please repeat your question?
MR BERGER: I will, Chairperson.
ERNEST LEKOTE PULE: (sworn states)
EXAMINATION BY MR BERGER: Is it correct Mr Pule that you were born in 1955 in Newclare, Johannesburg and that you went to school at Naledi High?
MR PULE: Yes, that's correct.
MR BERGER: There's an error in paragraph 2 of your statement, in that you left school during standard 9 and not standard 8, is that correct?
MR PULE: That's correct, that I did standard 8. I was busy with standard 9, that's when I went to exile.
MR BERGER: You talk in paragraph 5 of your statement about what happened on the 16th of June 1976 and that you were in fact present in Soweto on the 16th of June 1976, is that right?
MR PULE: That's correct.
MR BERGER: Is that while you were in Standard 9, during 1976?
MR PULE: Yes, in 1976 I was doing Standard 9.
MR BERGER: As a result of what you experienced, witnessed, on that day and the days subsequent to the 16th of June, you then decided to go into exile and you left the country in August of 1976?
MR PULE: That's correct.
MR BERGER: Now you've detailed in your statement and we're not going to go through it in detail, about what you did when you left the country, how you went to Tanzania, went to Moscow, the training that you received, and ultimately returning to Kashito camp, where you remained until 1981. You confirm the contents of those paragraphs, is that right?
MR PULE: That's correct.
MR BERGER: Now I'd like to move to 1981 when you were recruited by comrade Rashid as part of Special Operations. You talk about working in Swaziland from 1981 until 1984, in Special Operations and then from after April 1984, because of the signing of the Nkomati Accord, you were withdrawn from Swaziland and redeployed to Botswana. Now, you speak about working with Mr Dumakude, comrade Chris, both in Swaziland and in Botswana. Could you briefly tell the Committee what work you were doing as part of Special Operations, particularly in Botswana after you left Swaziland? What was the nature of your work?
MR PULE: Can you please explain and say whether I should only explain my duties in Botswana only?
MR BERGER: If you could start off with your duties in Swaziland, what you did in Swaziland, but then give a little more detail on what you were doing in Botswana from 1984 onwards.
MR PULE: I arrived in Swaziland in 1981. I was sent there by comrade Ismail. My duties there were to be at the border to reconnoitre the situation.
MR BERGER: Yes, if you'll just speak a little slower so that the interpreter can translate. Please continue.
MR PULE: I was there reconnoitring and also waiting for the soldiers who were coming over to Swaziland for training.
MR BERGER: These were soldiers of Umkhonto weSizwe?
MR PULE: That's correct.
MR BERGER: You were also a soldier of Umkhonto weSizwe?
MR PULE: Yes, at that time I had already completed my training, that is why comrade Aboobaker recruited me and sent me in Swaziland, so that I could accept soldiers who wanted to join Umkhonto weSizwe.
MR BERGER: What did you do with the soldiers when they came into the country, or they came out of the country and into Swaziland?
MR PULE: My duty in Swaziland was that when they finished their training, was to arrange accommodation for them in Swaziland, where they could stay, to arrange accommodation and protection, before they were sent back into the country to fight. Apart from accepting them in Swaziland, it was also to make sure when they are sent into the country to fight, that the way is well prepared for them.
MR BERGER: What does that mean, that the way is well prepared for them? What did you have to do?
MR PULE: My job was to make sure that when they cross the borders from Swaziland into South Africa, there were no soldiers that will stop them. Apart from that, we had to make sure that there were people from South Africa, who were based in different cells in South Africa, who would accept them.
MR BERGER: When - sorry please continue.
MR PULE: Another duty was to accept the arms from Maputo. Those were sent from Maputo, so that if one soldier needed something, I could be able to give it to him. I was also arranging money. I would receive money from Aboobaker and I would decide how much money I would give to each one of them.
MR BERGER: You mentioned, I'm sorry to interrupt, but you mentioned arms that you would receive from Maputo and furnish these to the soldiers, is that correct?
MR PULE: That is correct.
MR BERGER: What sort of weapons would you pass on from Maputo to the soldiers of MK?
MR PULE: That would depend what their operations at that time would be, when they are sent into the country. Apart from that, comrade Aboobaker told us before that that the people who would come, would need certain weapons and then we would prepare those weapons before they arrived at our place. After that, we would keep contact with the people who were inside the country. We would check the way for us so that the people that we sent back into the country will be well-protected when they come into the country.
MR BERGER: So is it your evidence that comrade Rashid would inform you that there are soldiers coming, they need certain weapons and ammunition and then it would be your task to make sure that those weapons and ammunition were ready when the soldiers arrived, so that they could be furnished with them?
MR PULE: Yes, that's correct, even though it was not at all times.
MR BERGER: Please continue.
MR PULE: The reason why I say this, was that we had people who would bring weapons for us, so we'd give those weapons to the people who would arrive and it was not all times that they would use those weapons when they arrive.
Sometimes those would be weapons that would help them to protect themselves when they come across the police or the soldiers. Those weapons I'm referring to were AK47s, pistols and grenades. Sometimes we'd give them the bombs, to use them.
MR BERGER: Those bombs that you would give them to use, those would be for the purposes of carrying out attacks inside South Africa, is that right?
MR PULE: That is correct.
MR BERGER: Did you know what each particular operation was when you gave the bombs, for example, did you know what those bombs were going to be used for?
MR PULE: When the soldiers arrived from Mozambique, they had already been in contact with comrade Aboobaker in Maputo. When he came in Swaziland, he would tell them what they should do when they cross over. It was not our duty to tell them that. My duty was to give them what they required.
MR BERGER: Whilst you may not have known of the exact operation in which they were going to use the bombs, for example, would it be correct to say that you knew that the bombs were going to be used either to blow up installations, or to kill Security Forces, or both?
MR PULE: I did not know, but I was just thinking about that.
MR BERGER: You accepted that that is what the bombs could be used for?
MR PULE: I do not understand the question.
MR BERGER: When you provided those materials ...(intervention)
JUDGE PILLAY: Did you know they were going to bring it to South Africa to use it?
MR PULE: Yes, I did know that.
MR BERGER: Now you've spoken about providing material to soldiers for use in South Africa. You've spoken about making sure that they are housed in Swaziland when they arrive and infiltrated back into the country and making sure that they are safely infiltrated back into the country. Besides that, what else were you involved in?
MR PULE: Apart from that, my duties in Swaziland and Botswana were to recruit people inside the country and to train them.
MR BERGER: What ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, I didn't quite catch that Mr Berger. You said "One of my duties was to recruit people inside the country and to train them." To recruit people inside Botswana and Swaziland, or did you come across to South Africa to recruit people and then take them for training, what was the position?
MR PULE: That would depend on the situation. What I'm saying is that sometimes it would happen that the people that you knew in Swaziland, we would send them into the country and they would come, we would send them to certain people and that was the way that we used to recruit people inside the country. Sometimes there were people inside the country, those that we knew and then we would keep contact with them through telephones and that would enable us to recruit them and make way for them to come into Swaziland or Botswana. For example, my brother. I phoned my brother and then he came over to Botswana and then he decided himself what kind of job that he would do and then he went on with that job.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Berger.
MR BERGER: Thank you, Chairperson. You spoke about training of people. What did your training of them entail?
MR PULE: That would depend on whether, that time when we talked to that people, what kind of job he was prepared to do. If he wanted to transport the weapons into the country, then we would give him that job. If he wanted some training, so that he comes back into the country to come and fight, then we'll give him that training. That would depend on the individual person.
MR BERGER: Besides training people to fight in the country or to bring arms and ammunition into the country, was there any other training that you were involved in?
MR PULE: That was the only job I was doing.
MR BERGER: Now you left Swaziland in 1984 and you were then redeployed to Botswana. Would it be correct to say that you then continued in Botswana, the work that you were doing in Swaziland?
MR PULE: That's correct.
MR BERGER: You say in your application at page 89, if you would have a look there, bundle A1 page 89, paragraph 9(a)(i), do you have it? Page 89.
MR PULE: Yes, I do see it.
MR BERGER: You say
"During my time in exile, I was active in Special Operations and I ensured that weapons were brought into the country. I participated in training cadres who were to be infiltrated into the country."
Now the bringing of weapons into the country and the training of cadres, that was done in Swaziland and Botswana, is that right?
MR PULE: That's correct. The nature of the job that we were doing forced us to train the people in Swaziland and Botswana.
MR BERGER: Then you say
"I also trained people specifically in the preparation of car bombs and assisted in the procurement and preparation of materials to this end."
Now the training of people in the preparation of car bombs, was that done in Swaziland or Botswana, or both?
MR PULE: In training the people to make car bombs, we gave them that training in Botswana.
MR BERGER: When you speak about the procurement and preparation of materials for car bombs, would that be in Botswana?
MR PULE: That's correct.
MR BERGER: When was the first time, if you can remember, when was the first time that you met comrade Gordon and comrade Robert? If you can't remember the year, then can you remember where it was that you met them?
MR PULE: To tell the honest truth, I would say it was in 1985 when I met them.
MR BERGER: Would that have been in Botswana?
MR PULE: That is correct.
MR BERGER: Now, if you'd look at your statement, B4, paragraph 15, you say there
"On a number of occasions, I provided comrade Robert with materials. I also gave him political education as well as theoretical training in respect of the materials with which he was provided."
This would have been during the period 1985 to 1986, am I correct?
MR PULE: Yes, that's correct.
MR BERGER: Can you recall what sort of material you provided comrade Robert with, on these various occasions?
MR PULE: Although I would not be certain about that because my job in Swaziland, I worked with quite a number of people there and I gave different materials to different individuals while I was there.
MR BERGER: That was in Swaziland. And what about in Botswana, was the situation the same?
MR PULE: Yes, that was the same even in Botswana. I would not be able to tell what type of material that I gave to him. Like I've already said that I gave different material to different individuals.
MR BERGER: Can you recall what sort of theoretical training you gave Mr McBride?
MR PULE: What I remember is that I trained him how to use the AK47 and the pistol, the grenades, the limpet mines and also how to make the car bomb and how to prepare oneself when you are going to use the car bomb. As far as the political education was concerned, the emphasis was on making sure that when you gave him the material, he won't use that material the way he wanted to, but he would follow the policy of the ANC in as far as using that material, so I told him that he should that material the way he was supposed to do, in line with the policy of the ANC.
MR BERGER: When you say that you gave comrade Robert instruction on how to use the materials in line with the policies of the ANC and so that he didn't use it the way that he wanted to, are you saying that he wanted to use it differently, or are you saying that so that he would not use it according to his own dictates, but that he would use it according to the principles and policies of the ANC, it's not clear what you meant by that.
MR PULE: May you please repeat the question? I did not understand the question.
JUDGE PILLAY: When you provided those materials, that you accepted that those to whom you gave it would use it in a disciplined fashion in terms of the policies of the ANC and its arms struggle.
MR PULE: That is correct.
MR BERGER: Did comrade Robert ever indicate to you that he would use the materials in any way other than in accordance with the principles of the ANC?
MR PULE: What I asked him was only to ensure that he was carrying out what I had told him. That was not only happening to comrade McBride, it also happened to other people that I had trained.
MR BERGER: Please continue.
MR PULE: I will explain why I say that because what happened in South Africa at that time was very hurting because most of the people who were killed at that time, were especially black people, because we differ as people, somebody would use that material and use it in the way that he liked, so you would not know what the person was thinking at that time, so my task was to ensure that the person that I gave the material or the weapons, he would use the weapons in line with the instructions that he is given.
MR BERGER: If I understand your evidence correctly, you're saying this was a general approach that you followed in respect of all cadres of MK, it wasn't something that was specific to comrade Robert?
MR PULE: That is correct. More especially in as far as the soldiers who were coming from South African into Botswana, people like comrade Webster, were people who had already received the training and they were always in line with the ANC policy, so when we were addressing them about the ANC guidelines, it was easy for them to understand, because they had already learned about that.
MR BERGER: Now, Mr Pule, you say that, in paragraph 16, that you don't really know or you can't recall specifically what you were doing around June 1986 and you cannot say whether you provided comrade Robert with the materials that were in fact used in the Why Not explosion, but you say it is quite possible that this is so. Can you elaborate on that for the Committee, why do you say that?
MR PULE: I would not remember everything that I was doing at that time because this happened many years ago. If somebody says to me that I did that, if he says that I gave comrade McBride weapons at that time when we went to bomb at that place, I would not be able to dispute that. Like I've already said that I gave different weapons to different individuals.
MR BERGER: Thank you, Chairperson, I have no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR BERGER
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Berger. Mr Dehal, do you have any questions that you would like to put to the witness?
MR DEHAL: Thank you, Mr Chairperson, I do. I see some notes are being handed to me by Mr McBride. Would the Committee please bear with me, for me to go through them?
Thank you, Mr Chairperson.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR DEHAL: Mr Pule, you've known Robert as Duggie, is that correct? That was his code name?
MR PULE: That's correct.
MR DEHAL: And your code name was Oupa, is that correct?
MR PULE: That's correct.
MR DEHAL: Were you present in these proceedings when Mr Ismail testified?
MR PULE: Yes, I was present.
MR DEHAL: You've heard his testimony, you must have heard that he supported Mr McBride's application and took political responsibility for the acts referred to in Mr McBride's application for amnesty, do you remember that?
MR PULE: Yes, I do.
MR DEHAL: Now to the extent that you participated in any of these activities, relative to Mr McBride, either directly or indirectly, do you support Mr McBride's application for amnesty in that regard?
MR PULE: Yes, I do support his application.
MR DEHAL: For that matter, I see that in your application which is contained in A1, the bundle A1, beginning at page 88, you refer to Mr Ismail's application for amnesty and reiterate same in so far as it relates to you in support thereof, correct?
MR PULE: Yes, I do.
MR DEHAL: In educating Mr McBride, you said you sought to bring him within the guidelines of the ANC and at some stage you mentioned that Gordon Webster had understood these guidelines and also that when you spoke to these comrades, they had by then known of the guidelines, so it was easy for them to understand. Do you recall?
MR PULE: That's correct.
MR DEHAL: Now in so far as Mr McBride himself is concerned, when you came to educate him, you said you met in 1985 and 1986, would you say that he was already politicised, if you'll pardon that term?
MR PULE: What I knew at that time was that the political education that he had received, he had received that education from comrade Gordon Webster.
MR DEHAL: And you gathered that when you discussed discipline, guidelines of the ANC etc. with him, him meaning McBride?
MR PULE: I do not understand the question, may you repeat the question please?
MR DEHAL: Yes, when you met McBride and discussed or educated him in guidelines of the ANC, I'm sure it was evident to you that McBride was by then already aware of these, having been educated by his then Commander in the unit, in South Africa, namely Gordon Webster?
MR PULE: I was certain at that time, because I knew that he was recruited by comrade Gordon Webster and I knew that he would not recruit him and educate him about the use of weapons beside educate, giving him political education.
MR DEHAL: You've heard Mr Ismail in his testimony refer to his satisfaction of Mr McBride and indeed of Mr Gordon Webster, in the way McBride in particular carried out his operations. Remember that?
MR PULE: Yes, I do.
MR DEHAL: Do you also recall Mr Ismail referring to Mr McBride as a hero, as one who is held in high esteem by the ANC and the MK?
MR PULE: Yes, I do remember.
MR DEHAL: Would you confirm that? Would you agree with that view?
MR PULE: Yes, I would agree with that view because that is how I viewed comrade McBride at that time.
MR DEHAL: In so far as the operations that McBride carried out and the ammunition that you had given him to carry out such operations, would you say that you are happy with the way Mr McBride carried out these operations?
CHAIRPERSON: Shouldn't you ask him if he knows how he carried them out and what operations?
MR DEHAL: Thank you, Mr Chairperson. Mr Pule, you've supplied Mr McBride with lots of ammunition from time to time. You mentioned that you did not know precisely for what purpose you would have used this ammunition. Did you get any report back from Mr McBride on operations that he carried out?
MR PULE: I would explain this in as far as reports are concerned, that I've already said that my task was to train the people. What they were going to do at different times, that was the task of comrade Ismail, because he was our overall Commander at that time.
MR DEHAL: Thank you. Now you mentioned in paragraph 16 of the document B4 that you do not have a specific recollection of the period around June 1986 and cannot positively say whether you provided comrade Robert with materials which were used in the Why Not explosion and it is quite possible that you did so. You remember that?
MR PULE: Yes, I do remember.
MR DEHAL: Now you've heard much evidence here and presumably you are familiar from your knowledge obtained otherwise, of how the Why Not operation was carried out by comrade Robert and the others?
MR PULE: That's correct.
MR DEHAL: Would it be correct to say that that whole operation, loosely termed the Why Not operation, where the car bomb exploded, accords with your understanding of the ANC guidelines and falls within the parameters thereof?
MR PULE: Yes, that's correct.
MR DEHAL: Thank you. In paragraph 14, you mention that McBride had called with a lady who was introduced to you. You saw her in his company, you could not recall her name, but that you subsequently learned that she is Greta Apelgren, do you see that?
MR PULE: Yes, I do.
MR DEHAL: Now I understand your evidence as being that whenever you supplied ammunition, limpet mines, grenades, AK47s, pistols etc., you would have handed these to either Gordon Webster or McBride, correct?
MR PULE: May you please repeat that question?
MR DEHAL: Whenever you met with McBride and/or Gordon Webster, even if Ms Apelgren was in their company, is it correct that your handing over of the arms and ammunition for the carrying out of the various operations, would have been done directly by you to McBride or Gordon Webster, not to Apelgren, that Apelgren was in fact a decoy?
MR PULE: When I was with comrade Duggie and comrade Webster, most of the time, comrade Greta wasn't present. We would send her to the hotel. After giving over the weapons, it was then that we'd go and meet her and greet her.
MR DEHAL: Thank you. Did you understand that Greta Apelgren was in fact a decoy? That in circumstances like these, crossing the borders between South Africa, Botswana, Swaziland and the neighbouring countries, it was wise, prudent, advisable, to have a lady in the company of a man for it to appear like it was a couple moving across and suspicions would then not be raised. Did you have that understanding of Greta's role play in this matter?
MR PULE: Yes, I did understand that, In as far as my job at that time, it was necessary that we had a person like comrade Greta.
MR DEHAL: Thank you. Mr Pule, may I just get back to the education you gave to Mr McBride? Did you also, when educating Mr McBride and indeed Gordon Webster, give them ANC literature and literature of other liberation movements based in Africa?
MR PULE: That is correct. I remember one time, we gave him the material and it was packed in his car. We gave him a lot of literature including the Seshaba document and many other ANC materials, so that he could read at home, so that he could understand the policies of the ANC.
MR DEHAL: And when educating him and discussing possible targets, did you discuss with Gordon Webster and Robert McBride and indeed other comrades then in their presence, the possibility of attacking Security Force personnel, places that Security Forces frequent for example pubs, etc?
MR PULE: I do not understand. Can you please explain what you mean by the Security Personnel?
MR DEHAL: In the different operations that Mr McBride would have carried out and in your educating him on the operations that he had to carry out, did you educate him in regard to the need for Security Force personnel to be attacked?
MR PULE: Yes, that's correct.
MR DEHAL: And in the execution of such operations, did you also educate him about places that Security Force personnel frequent, for example pubs, drinking places?
MR PULE: To attack the Security ...(indistinct), it did not matter where they were, as long as you knew where they would always gather, then you would attack them.
MR DEHAL: Yes. Now Mr Pule, if I may just by example deal with this, when dealing with substations, the planting of limpet mines, is it correct that in educating McBride, you would talk about different substations in different areas and perhaps areas where substations are more further away from residential areas, so as to have minimal civilian casualties, correct?
MR PULE: That is correct.
MR DEHAL: And by the same token, when dealing with Security Force personnel, policemen in uniform and not in uniform, you would have discussed different places in South Africa, which would have been more opportune to attack, so as to achieve your objective of attacking Security Force personnel, correct?
MR RICHARD: Chairperson, while I understand we're not in a trial, I would submit, my learned colleague is over leading the witness.
CHAIRPERSON: Well, that is cross-examination as well, cross-examination in inverted commas, yes. I think perhaps if you can ask questions, rather than just making statements and calling for an answer to whether it's correct or not.
MR DEHAL: Thank you, Mr Chairperson. Would pubs, frequented by Security Force Personnel, be a legitimate target?
MR PULE: That is correct.
MR DEHAL: Did Mr McBride and Mr Webster tell you that they had reconnoitred a few places in South Africa for the carrying out of car bombs?
MR PULE: Do you mean that they had already prepared their car bombs and they already knew where the place, they would attack?
MR DEHAL: No, I'm asking you this question in line with paragraph 16 of the 4, which deals with comrade Robert and the materials that you supplied him and that you said that these materials were possibly used by him in the Why Not? explosion. Do you see that?
MR PULE: Yes, I do see that, but I do not understand your original question.
MR DEHAL: The question is this, at the time you gave them the material, which would possibly have been used in the Why Not? explosion, and perhaps before, did McBride and you discuss, indeed with Gordon Webster as well, that they, meaning McBride and Gordon Webster, had already reconnoitred a few places.
MR BERGER: Chairperson if I can just jump in there. My learned friend is referring to paragraph 16. At that time comrade Gordon had been injured and was long since out of the country.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I think that was in April, wasn't it.
MR BERGER: May 1986.
JUDGE PILLAY: Mr Berger, the question relates to reconnaissance, not the commission of any act.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, but he referred to paragraph 16. I think what Mr Berger is saying, is during June or 1986, he discussed - the question was that he had discussed with Mr McBride and Mr Webster, what Mr Berger is pointing out is that in June 1986, Mr Webster was not ...
MR BERGER: In the picture anymore.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes.
MR DEHAL: I accept that. My apologies, I agree with you. The question perhaps more rightly put would be the following, it's dealing with reconnaissance basically, before Easter 1986 and during general discussions, did you and McBride and indeed Gordon Webster discuss their having already reconnoitred a few places in South Africa to carry out those car bombs?
MR PULE: I already knew that he had discussed that with comrade Ismail who was our Commander. The question of whether they were going to attack and when, that did not concern me, because that concerned only our Commander. They would decide which places and at what time they would attack because they were the people who were inside the country then.
MR DEHAL: Thank you, Mr Pule, I accept that. I'm not saying that Mr McBride expressively discussed any given spots, but that in general discussions with you, both during education and at the time you gave him arms for a car bomb, sorry arms generally, was it discussed that McBride and Webster had already reconnoitred legitimate targets in South Africa?
MR PULE: I do not remember clearly because most of the time when they arrived at Botswana, we would make sure that comrade Ismail was present so that he could hold discussions with them, because he was our overall Commander then.
MR DEHAL: Okay, to the extent that you don't remember, I don't want to sound unfair to you, could you say that there is a possibility that such discussions did take place, but because of the length of time you can't remember it now?
MR PULE: There is that possibility because we would discuss targets that they wanted to attack. There is a possibility that we did have a discussion about the targets at that time, although I do not remember.
MR DEHAL: And to the extent that you may have discussed targets, do you recall whether you discussed that such targets might have been in line with Kabwe and that they could go ahead with such targets?
MR PULE: I do remember. In our discussions of targets, we would always consider the agreements, the Kabwe agreements.
MR DEHAL: Mr Chairperson, might I just confer with my client to see if there's anything more? Thank you.
CHAIRPERSON: Perhaps this would be a convenient stage at which to take the tea adjournment. I see it's quarter past eleven. We'll take a short tea adjournment.
MR DEHAL: Thank you.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
ON RESUMPTION
ERNEST LEKOTE PULE
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR DEHAL: (cont.)
Will you please tell this Committee how a car bomb is made?
JUDGE PILLAY: How relevant is that Mr Dehal? You run the risk of doing your client a dis-service. Don't we have all this evidence already from Mr Ismail?
MR DEHAL: Sorry Judge, my client was also talking to me at the time.
JUDGE PILLAY: I'm just suggesting, I'm not saying you must stop, but I'm pointing out to you that you have all these answers, you run the risk of doing your client a dis-service by getting a wrong answer.
MR DEHAL: I accept that. I have no further questions. Thank you. I'm indebted to you.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR DEHAL
CHAIRPERSON: Ms Kooverjee, do you have any questions you'd like to put to the applicant?
MS KOOVERJEE: None, thank you, Mr Chairperson.
NO CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS KOOVERJEE
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Richard, would you like to put some questions to the applicant?
MR RICHARD: I believe I do, thank you, Chair.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR RICHARD: Mr Pule, my first question is, how many code names did you have, did you have one or more?
MR PULE: I had many code names and that would depend on the place where I am at that particular time.
MR RICHARD: Now you've already, in answer to one of Mr Dehal's questions, indicated that one of them was Oupa, is that correct?
MR PULE: That's correct.
MR RICHARD: Where you ever called Chris?
MR PULE: Chris was my fellow comrade. He used to work with me.
CHAIRPERSON: The question was, were you ever called Chris, as a code name?
MR PULE: No, I was never called that way.
MR RICHARD: So that means where I read in here the name Chris, there is no possibility of confusion?
MR PULE: That would be a mistake.
MR RICHARD: Thank you. Now, Victor, whose code name was Victor?
MR PULE: That was Mnisi's code name.
MR RICHARD: And by the same token, Mr Mnisi never, for the sake of confusion or misleading people, used the name Oupa or Chris?
MR PULE: As far as I remember, no.
MR RICHARD: So that means, there's only one other code name that I need to clarify here. Who was Tommy, Tommy Masinga?
MR PULE: That was Chris.
CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, that's the next question. Who was Chris?
MR PULE: His real name was Lester Dumakude.
MR PULE: I'm sorry, I know that code names were meant to do exactly this. I just have to be careful. So that means where I read Tommy or Chris, they always mean Mr Dumakude?
MR PULE: When there is reference to Chris and to Tommy Masinga, that refers to Lester Dumakude.
MR RICHARD: And also when I read in this context here, Oupa, were there any other Oupas?
MR PULE: In my unit I was the only person referred to as Oupa.
MR RICHARD: Thank you. Now we go back to Annexure B1. On the 16th of June 1976 ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: That would be B4, I think.
MR RICHARD: B4, paragraph 5. On the 16th of June 1976, where exactly were you, can you recall? Chair, I haven't heard an answer.
CHAIRPERSON: I haven't either. The question, Mr Pule, was where were you on the 16th of June 1976? Can you remember? If so can you tell us please?
MR PULE: Yes, I do remember, I was in Soweto that day.
MR RICHARD: Where in Soweto and what were you doing that day?
MR PULE: On the day of the 16th June 1976, I participated in the demonstrations launched by the students.
MR BERGER: I'm sorry, could I just interrupt for a moment? It's got nothing to do with my learned friend's questions. Apparently there's a problem with the head phones again, could we try another set of head phones?
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, certainly, Mr Berger. Sometimes it's the connection into this little box that's faulty and there must also preferably be a clear run from these little lights to the machine there, that makes it clearer. Yes, the last answer, Mr Richard, was that he participated in the demonstrations that took place in Soweto on the 16th of June.
MR RICHARD: Thank you. That's correct, that is what I heard. Now what do you mean by participated?
MR BERGER: Chairperson, is this really relevant to any inquiry that this Committee is seized with?
MR RICHARD: It's relevant in the sense that, with regard to some matters, the witness has a less than clear recollection, but the 16th of June was a particularly noteworthy date in history and if he can remember what he did on the 16th if may be of some value in argument later, when I've finished the line of questions.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, as long as we don't have to find out what he did every minute of the whole day of the 16th and be here for 24 hours listening to it. I think the question, Mr Pule is, how did you participate in those demonstrations that took place? What sort of role did you play?
MR PULE: I was a member of the SRC at school, so we had already met before that day. In our meeting we discussed how we would help the young kids at primary in Pefene. They were demonstrating against the education that was rendered in Afrikaans and they were against that and they were also objecting to the beatings by the police.
MR RICHARD: Thank you. Now that resulted in you going into exile that August and you've already outlined your career, first in Swaziland, via the USSR to Botswana. Now when did you return from exile?
MR PULE: I returned from exile in September 1989.
CHAIRPERSON: No, that's incorrect.
MR DEHAL: He said September the 1st, 1991.
MR RICHARD: I confirm that's also what I heard.
MR PULE: I returned from exile in September 1991.
MR RICHARD: Thank you. That was your first answer, for the sake of clarity. Now during that period between August 1996 and September 1991...(intervention).
CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, I think you mean 1976.
MR RICHARD: 1976, correct, did you ever cross the border back into the Republic of South Africa for any reason or at any time?
MR PULE: I would cross the border, more especially when I was helping the soldiers who were coming into the country.
MR RICHARD: And once you had crossed into the Republic, were you ever part of any action or operation, other than helping the soldiers get back into either Swaziland or Botswana, as the case might have been?
MR PULE: Can you explain that question further?
MR RICHARD: My question is, from your evidence so far, we understand that you recruited people, you trained people and now we hear that you crossed into the South African Republic and your statement was, to help soldiers returning. Is that all you ever did while in South Africa, during that period between August 1976 and September 1991, while in South Africa?
MR PULE: If I understand your question well, my coming to South Africa, that was when I was helping the soldiers who were crossing into the country and then I would return back. Sometimes it would happen that I also come into the country for a particular mission.
MR RICHARD: Now, what were those missions?
MR PULE: For example, the attack in Braklaagte, in North West.
MR RICHARD: Was anyone injured in the Braklaagte attack?
MR BERGER: Chairperson, the Braklaagte attack is the subject of another incident, which is not before this Committee and I submit the details of that attack are not relevant.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, there is reference made to it in the application form in which the witness says he's not sure whether people were injured, but he learned from reports later that in fact people were killed.
MR RICHARD: Nothing turns on it, I will without conceding the point proceed. Now ...(indistinct)
JUDGE PILLAY: Why was the question then asked, if nothing turns on it?
MR RICHARD: I accept that if it's the subject matter of another hearing, it will be explored somewhere else. There is no reason for me to carry on on that point. Now, other than the Braklaagte attack, were there any other incidents?
MR PULE: There are no other incidents where I was directly involved. Other attacks that concerned me, my involvement was in as far as supplying the weapons to those people who were going to attack those places.
MR RICHARD: So, for the purposes of this line of questioning, all I needed to know was that there was only one incident within the Republic of South Africa, during that period 1976 to 1991 and I leave it there.
INTERPRETER: It seems the applicant has a problem with his receiver.
MR RICHARD: I'll repeat.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Richard, yes please, I was just going to ask if you could repeat your question.
MR RICHARD: What I'm trying to establish, and I'll outline it in full, we've now established that there was one incident at Braklaagte which you've referred to during the period 1976 to September 1991, which took place within the borders of the Republic of South Africa. I'm now asking you this question. Can you confirm that there were no other incidents within the Republic of South Africa, besides that incident?
MR BERGER: Chairperson, the witness has already explained that on numerous occasions. He entered into the Republic of South Africa to assist soldiers entering South Africa on their way to carry out certain missions.
CHAIRPERSON: I think what Mr Richard is getting at is whether the Braklaagte incident was the only mission, I think we use the word mission or operation in which the applicant participated in the action.
MR BERGER: And he's already said so, yes.
CHAIRPERSON: That's what my understanding was, it was the only one inside the Republic.
MR RICHARD: I take it as then confirmed. So then with regard to the subject matter of the current hearing, please confirm that all and everything that you did, took place outside the Republic of South Africa.
MR PULE: Yes, I would agree with you. Like I've already said that in other incidents I was indirectly involved.
MR RICHARD: But in relation to this particular sequence of incidents that we're discussing during these hearings, as you've said, other incidents you were involved, but not these.
JUDGE PILLAY: His answer was that he wasn't directly involved.
MR RICHARD: And the indirect involvement was indirectly while you were outside the Republic of South Africa?
MR PULE: That's correct.
MR RICHARD: Thank you. Now I take it then that you'd never on any one occasion helped Mr McBride or Mr Webster, or any one of the applicants in this hearing while on the South African side of the border, to either exit or enter the Republic or Botswana as the case might have been?
MR PULE: Can you please explain that question further?
CHAIRPERSON: The question asked is, did you at any stage assist or help any of the applicants at this hearing in South Africa? Is that the question?
MR RICHARD: Correct.
MR BERGER: There was none, but just for clarity, is the question whether this witness ever helped Mr McBride or Mr Webster or any of the other applicants in this hearing, on the South African side of the border as they were coming in or going out from operations?
MR RICHARD: Yes, that is correct, thank you.
MR PULE: I have never helped them.
MR RICHARD: And I take the statement, "I've never helped them", to mean on the South African side of the border. You helped them on the other side of the border?
MR PULE: You question was that whether I helped the people who are my co-applicants here, particularly Mr Robert McBride, so my answer was that I never helped Mr McBride.
MR RICHARD: My next question then is, if you say you never helped Mr McBride, that answer means you never helped him either on the South African side of the border or on any other side of the border in any other country.
MR BERGER: No Chairperson, it clearly doesn't mean that at all.
MR DEHAL: My submissions would be the same.
CHAIRPERSON: I think if you can go back to the original question and put it again, Mr Richard, because there seems to be a bit of confusion here.
MR RICHARD: I understand the confusion. Did you ever help Mr McBride, or Mr Webster or any of those mentioned as applicants in this hearing?
JUDGE PILLAY: To commit the crimes?
CHAIRPERSON: I think there might be difficulty or confusion relating to the word help, because we've heard evidence quite clearly that he supplied materials, he performed political education, he did some training, certainly with Mr McBride and with Mr Webster. I think perhaps if you can just be a little bit more precise, that might be the problem.
MR BERGER: And also now, Chairperson, there's now residual confusion and my learned friend somehow needs to clear the slate and start again with this line of ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: I think so. Let's start again.
MR RICHARD: The essence of what I am trying to establish, and I will explain it, from what you've said earlier this morning, you did assist Mr McBride and Mr Webster at various points in time, to do various things and I will ask you what you did later, while in Botswana. However, you did nothing to assist or help them once they left Botswana and that's the proposition that I'm asking you to confirm. The next question would be ...(intervention)
JUDGE PILLAY: Mr Richard, just let us stop there. Helping a person could be financial or any other way. Let us get to the crux of the matter. How are you saying, or asking, did this applicant help Mr McBride?
MR RICHARD: The next proposition is quite simple. If everything that he did was outside the border, whatever it was, the question is, what did he do outside the border, because from his evidence-in-chief, I'm less than clear what he did.
CHAIRPERSON: Did you have any dealings with Mr McBride or any of the other applicants in South Africa, when you were physically present in South Africa, is that what you're trying to ...
MR RICHARD: Correct, I'm happy with that as a proposition.
MR PULE: I've never helped Mr McBride in South Africa.
MR RICHARD: Thank you. I'll proceed then. Now, please refer to paragraph 17 or Exhibit B4. At the second sentence of that paragraph, you state,
"I cannot now recall what was provided to whom, when and under what circumstances."
Do you see the sentence I have just read?
MR PULE: Yes, I do.
MR RICHARD: Now, from what you said in your evidence-in-chief, it means, and I asked you, can you recall whether you provided anything at all, any material at all to either Mr McBride or to Mr Webster.
MR BERGER: Chairperson, with respect, my learned friend is quoting one sentence out of a statement. He doesn't quote paragraph 15 and the witness has given specific evidence in relation to 15 as well.
CHAIRPERSON: I don't think the question's unfair, because the question was simply whether he can recall whether he provided any material at all. He can answer it. The question was, can you recall whether you provided any material at all to Mr McBride or Mr Webster. That is the question.
MR PULE: Yes.
MR RICHARD: So then, can you recall what you provided in the form of material to Mr McBride or his unit, or to Mr Webster?
MR PULE: Yes, there is a material that I remember.
MR RICHARD: What material was it?
MR PULE: That's a limpet, AK47s, grenades and bullets.
MR RICHARD: Did you supply any explosive devices as well, besides limpets?
MR PULE: Yes.
MR RICHARD: Now, you were present when Mr Ismail gave the evidence that Mr McBride attended to the fetching and collection and transporting of his own materials. Is that in accordance with your memory as well?
MR PULE: Yes, I do.
MR RICHARD: Now, in your evidence-in-chief, it was said and I gained the impression and I'm now clarifying, that when Mr McBride or Mr Webster, either jointly or severally, collected material, you did not know what the material was intended for, other than the general purpose of what the material was used for?
MR PULE: That's correct.
MR RICHARD: Now to be specific, did anyone ever tell you that specifically a car bomb attack was being planned in and during the period between March 86 to June 86?
MR PULE: No one told me about that.
MR RICHARD: Would there ...(intervention).
JUDGE PILLAY: Why did you train Mr McBride in creating car bombs?
MR PULE: When I trained somebody about the making of bombs, that does not necessarily mean that he's going to make that car bomb the following day or the next week. That would depend on my Commander, his plans, so my task was only to train the person the way it was required from me.
JUDGE PILLAY: Right, I just want to find out then, when you train him, when you're satisfied that he's able to do that, you expect him to use that knowledge at some time or other in the future, not so? You're not going to train him for nothing.
MR PULE: That's correct.
JUDGE PILLAY: Yes. Yes, Mr Richard.
MR RICHARD: How many people did you train to make car bombs?
MR PULE: I cannot remember the number.
CHAIRPERSON: Could you give us an approximation, perhaps, more or less? Was it a great number of people? More than 10, more than 100, just one?
MR PULE: It can be about 7, between 4 and 7, but I am not sure about the number, but that can be between 4 and 7.
MR RICHARD: Now it's true to say that you not only supplied Mr McBride with material, that you supplied other people as well, isn't that correct?
MR PULE: That's correct.
MR RICHARD: Now, I know you can't give me a precise answer, out of the material you supplied during the first half of 1986, how many car bombs approximately could have been made?
MR PULE: There is no number of kilograms that you use when making the car bombs, it depends on the person who has reconnoitred the place, who knows the target, that's the person who knows how many or how much kilograms will be needed for that particular target, I cannot precisely say.
MR RICHARD: So, I understand from your answer that of the equipment you supplied to various operatives during the first half of 1986, many car bombs could have been made.
MR PULE: Can you please repeat the question?
MR RICHARD: You supplied various people with ordnance, materials, explosives, hand grenades, etc. during the first half of 1986. If you take the total quantity of materials you supplied to the various people you did supply during the first half of that year, say till the end of June that year, my proposition which I put to you is, is it not true that many car bombs could have been constructed out of that material?
MR PULE: I have thought that I have already explained that. I said you cannot precisely say how many kilograms are going to be used for that car bomb, it will depend on the person who has reconnoitred the target, how many kilograms he wants for that particular target.
MR RICHARD: Now, would you know when people or a person, or a group came and drew equipment from you, whether they were going to make a car bomb, or go and blow up a bridge, or blow up a building?
MR PULE: I can give you the material that you use for the car bomb, but you're the person who's going to use that material. When you find yourself in that particular situation, if you realise that it will not be necessary to make a car bomb, you can also use that material in other targets, on numerous occasions, so when a person comes to collect material, that does not mean that when he comes to collect that material he's going to use it for the making of a car bomb.
MR RICHARD: And it also means that when you give material to a particular operative, you've got no particular way of knowing what he's going to use it for, you've already said, it's not your part of the actions, it's our Commander's.
MR PULE: Yes, that's correct. As far as my knowledge, at least I would know that he may use that material for a particular, for making a particular thing, but I would not precisely know what he's going to make.
MR RICHARD: Mow, did anyone ever report to you what either Mr Webster or Mr McBride or any one of their unit's members did while in South Africa?
MR PULE: In our discussions with our Commander, Aboobaker Ismail, there were things that he would discuss with us. He would tell us that certain things had happened, like for example when the transformers were made at substations, he would discuss such things.
MR RICHARD: Does that mean that you were told that Mr Webster's unit, to which Mr McBride belonged, had blown up a transformer?
MR PULE: Yes, our Commander discussed that with us.
MR RICHARD: Thank you. Now for the sake of clarity, you say you trained various people and now I want to know, did you train Mr Webster, Gordon Webster?
MR PULE: Like I've already said, Gordon Webster was already trained, so my training in Botswana, I cannot say that was training as such, it was just to remind him of certain things that he already knew at that time.
MR RICHARD: Now I'm going to put it very simply. Did you or did you not know that Mr Webster had trained Mr McBride?
MR PULE: I did know.
MR RICHARD: Then my next question is, was there any need for you to train Mr McBride?
MR PULE: Yes, there was a need.
MR RICHARD: Why was there a need?
MR PULE: I have already explained that Gordon Webster already had the knowledge, he was already trained, so I had to ensure that he remembered certain things, so when he came to bring comrade McBride in Botswana, I had to ensure that comrade McBride understood everything that he was told by him, so that I could be satisfied that he was told everything.
MR RICHARD: Now how did you go about that task of finding out whether Mr Webster had properly trained Mr McBride?
MR PULE: I would ask him questions concerning matters that I was supposed to train him in. That was just to ensure that he understood everything that he was told.
MR RICHARD: And what opinion did you form of Mr McBride's training by Mr Webster?
MR PULE: I was satisfied.
MR RICHARD: So to go back to the beginning of the sequence, did you teach Mr McBride how to do anything, if you were satisfied that Mr Webster had trained Mr McBride?
INTERPRETER: The applicant does not understand the question.
MR RICHARD: After you had questioned Mr McBride, so as to check that he had been properly trained by Mr Webster, I understand you were satisfied that Mr Webster had done his job well and Mr McBride was properly trained. Is my understanding correct?
MR PULE: That's correct.
MR RICHARD: It then follows that there was no need particularly for you to train Mr McBride.
MR PULE: That was not so.
MR RICHARD: That is why I asked you, what, after you had satisfied yourself as to the quality of Mr McBride's training, if anything, did you teach Mr McBride?
MR PULE: That's correct.
CHAIRPERSON: I think, what Mr Richard is getting at, Mr Pule, is you said that Mr Webster had trained Mr McBride and you then asked Mr McBride certain questions, just to satisfy yourself and to ensure that Mr McBride had been properly trained by Mr Webster and you asked these questions, and then you arrived at the conclusion, yes, he was properly trained. Now, what Mr Richard is asking you is, once you had done that, once you had satisfied yourself that he had been properly trained by Mr Webster, did you yourself teach him anything new? Did you teach him any new skills at all, yourself, teach Mr McBride any new skills?
MR PULE: I would explain it this way, although I will deviate from this point. For example when you play soccer, playing for a first division team and then you are recruited by another team in the first division, when you arrive at that team, that does not mean because you come from another team, you'll just be given a jersey and be allowed to play. The trainer in that team will ensure that this person receives training according to his own methods. That does not mean that he was never trained where he comes from. Even his present coach will realise that this guy has been trained, it is just to ensure that this person will be according to the standards required by that particular coach, so coming back to the question, because I realised that comrade McBride was already trained and I was satisfied about that, I was just ensuring that he understood everything to my satisfaction.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Richard.
MR RICHARD: So, while I understand from your analogy that you improved Mr McBride's game, to use the analogy, and tactics and techniques, you didn't in fact teach him anything basic or new?
MR PULE: That is not so.
MR RICHARD: Then I ask the question again, what new matter do you remember teaching Mr McBride?
JUDGE PILLAY: Or easier, how did you improve on the training?
MR PULE: The knowledge that he received from Mr McBride inside the country, concerning certain things, he was able to train him, so I was unable to train him because I was based in Botswana and the conditions in Botswana were different from conditions in South Africa then. If I remember well, it's not everything that he was trained in by Gordon Webster, that they had in the country, so when he arrived in Botswana, I was just ensuring that he understood everything that he was told by Mr Gordon Webster.
MR RICHARD: Now when it came to training, there were two parts. There was practical and theoretical. Now matters such as, as you said before, the Kabwe directives, would be theoretical. Do you understand my proposition in that regard? Do you understand that the Kabwe directives were theoretical?
MR PULE: Do you mean as far as training comrade Gordon?
CHAIRPERSON: I think just ask the question, you don't have to get into whether Kabwe was theoretical or not, just get to the question about what was practical and theoretical, what he did, I think.
MR RICHARD: When you trained people, you would do a number of things. Amongst the things that you would do, is teach them how to use hand grenades, AK47s, limpet mines and so on and you would also teach them what was expected of them in terms of policy. Is that correct?
MR PULE: That's correct.
MR RICHARD: Now, I also go then from your evidence-in-chief to say it was your particular responsibility that they complied with policy, was it not?
MR BERGER: Chairperson, is that a question, or is that a summary of the witness's evidence-in-chief?
MR RICHARD: Was it your particular responsibility to ensure that people you trained, complied with policy?
MR PULE: That's correct.
ADV SIGODI: Sorry, can I just come in here? How did you ensure that the people you trained complied with policy?
MR PULE: When you train them, like I've already explained, even though there was a confusion inside the country then, concerning the killing of innocent people in the country, we as Commanders, we were able to think that a person who is inside the country can think that he's fed up about what was happening in the country, so when we give that particular person the weapons, he will use those weapons the way he wants to use them, for example, at that time the Boers would just kill the kids the way they wished. Any person would take a limpet mine and put it in a crèche and kill the kids, so those were the things that we would discuss with the person before we give him the material, to ensure that he's always within the policies of the ANC.
ADV SIGODI: But the question is, was it possible for you being outside of the country, to ensure that whoever you gave the weapon, would use the weapons in the way in which you had instructed him to do so? Was it possible for you to have control over those people, whilst they are inside the country?
MR PULE: It would be difficult for me to answer that question because the person on his own would have his own thinking. Like I've already stated in my example, you can sometimes explain everything to the person but when he arrived in the country, he would do what he sees necessary for him to do, so we would help them by explaining the policies of the ANC in as far as missions are concerned.
ADV SIGODI: So do I understand you correctly, that what you are saying is that all you could do was to teach people what the policy was and how to use the arms, but it was not possible for you to ensure that the person would carry out that policy if that person was inside the country, in so far as your mandate was concerned. Do I understand you correctly?
MR PULE: That's correct.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Richard.
MR RICHARD: Thank you. Now, when, in your evidence-in-chief, you said it was your responsibility to recruit people in South Africa, how did you go about doing that? You gave the example of your brother, he phoned you, but other than that example, how did you go about recruiting people?
MR PULE: I'll give you an example. If I wanted to train a person, I would use somebody that I knew that he was regularly coming into Botswana and then I will send that person to a particular person that I want to meet and I'll give him the message to tell that person that I want to meet him. So that is how I would bring in people into Botswana, then I would discuss everything with him and when he agrees, I'll give him training.
MR RICHARD: Now how would you identify a person to communicate with, to send a message to come and see you?
MR PULE: There were many people that I knew in Botswana. From time to time they would come into South Africa and in South Africa as well, there were people who were going to Botswana from time to time, so in that way I was able to talk to them and send them, give them the message.
MR RICHARD: I'm sorry I've lost half my ...
CHAIRPERSON: Did you get that answer, Mr Richard?
MR RICHARD: I understood the answer. Now, so that means in effect that you would have a method of taking the message to somebody. Now how would you select who to send the message to? How would you know who would be receptive to the message?
MR PULE: I don't understand your question, would you please repeat?
MR RICHARD: You want to recruit somebody in South Africa. You've said there were people you knew in Botswana, people in South Africa who went in and out of Botswana, now you want to recruit, to use an example, somebody in South Africa. On what basis and how would you know who in South Africa should be recruited? How would you get the information as to who in South Africa would be receptive to the suggestion of recruitment?
MR PULE: I was using people that I knew, that they were coming into South Africa on a regular basis and I would send him to the people that I knew in South Africa. The person that I would send, I would give him full information concerning the person that I want, and then he would bring the phone numbers of that particular person and then I would keep contact with that person.
MR RICHARD: So it was based, who you recruited was based on your memory of who was in South Africa and you were out of South Africa from 1976 to 1991?
MR BERGER: Chairperson, this is very interesting, but with respect, it's really got no relevance.
CHAIRPERSON: Is it going to be denied that he was recruiting people? What is the relevance of this, in respect of your clients?
MR RICHARD: The relevance is that as far as I can understand, everything that this applicant did as far as this particular transaction and these particular events that we're considering, was outside the South African border and in fact there's no amnesty ...(indistinct)
CHAIRPERSON: I think that's what you've established already.
MR RICHARD: Having said that, I'm not quite sure how much further to go, except in relation to what might be useful when it comes to questioning Mr McBride.
CHAIRPERSON: Well I don't know if that's recruiting, if, how he recruited people and why and how he did it, telephone calls and sending messages, it's not going to really take us much further.
MR RICHARD: Chair, I accept it was an overkill, I've established the extra-territorial activity.
JUDGE PILLAY: You almost revived it.
MR RICHARD: To end before one, I simply go to paragraph 16 of B4, do you confirm what you say there?
"I do not have a specific recollection of the period around June 1986 and cannot positively say whether I provided comrade Robert with materials which were used in the Why Not? explosive."
Is that what you confirm?
MR BERGER: No Chairperson, it goes a little further than that.
CHAIRPERSON: It's quite possible that this is so.
MR RICHARD: My next question is...
CHAIRPERSON: I mean, that's the question, do you confirm that paragraph?
MR PULE: That is correct.
MR RICHARD: And it's equally possible that you did not?
CHAIRPERSON: I think that's, isn't that a natural conclusion, if it's possible that it's so, then it's possible that it's not so as well, because possibility's got a meaning.
MR RICHARD: Before I conclude, may I confirm with the applicant, the respondents that ...
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR RICHARD
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, perhaps Mr Prior wants to ask a couple of questions. Do you mind...
ADV PRIOR: Thank you, Mr Chairman. I was going to suggest that in order to save some time, I've only got one or two points to canvass and possibly if Mr Richard needs to come back to anything, he can do that after I've, unless there's an objection.
CHAIRPERSON: Well you can do it, it doesn't really matter.
ADV PRIOR: Thank you.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY ADV PRIOR: Mr Pule, from the information which was collated and put before the Committee, we understand that Mr McBride was in Botswana from the 6th to the 11th of June 1986. Are you aware of that or have you seen any information, have you read any of the documents that were prepared in this matter which may jog, or not, your memory?
MR PULE: Yes, I did see that in the papers.
ADV PRIOR: And it would seem that three days after that, he returned to the Republic on the 11th of June and on the 14th of June the car bomb exploded at the Parade Hotel, that's on the information that we have. Were you, there's also information that you were arrested on the 11th of June 1986, can you remember that event?
MR PULE: You mean the 11th of June?
ADV PRIOR: If that's not the correct date, then you can say so, but were you arrested at about that time?
MR PULE: Who arrested me? Are you referring to Botswana police or South African police?
CHAIRPERSON: The question was, were you arrested by anybody on or about the 11th of June?
MR PULE: Yes, I was arrested in Botswana, but I do not remember the exact date.
ADV PRIOR: I just refer to the Committee to paragraph 13, or page 13 of A1, which was information put together by our investigative unit. It's basically for background. I want to just try and get the witness to, maybe he recalls that particular period. If it was the 11th of June, it would seem that you were in Botswana at the time when Mr McBride was taking instruction from Mr Ismail and a final briefing about what was to happen when he returned to the Republic. If you can't remember that, sorry I ...
CHAIRPERSON: What is the question?
MR PULE: I do not remember.
ADV PRIOR: I stopped because I see Mr Pule seems to be conferring with people to his left, I don't want to ...
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Pule if you could just concentrate on what Mr Prior's asking you.
MR DEHAL: Sorry, may I just correct for the record. Mr Pule was not conferring with me at all. Mr McBride was talking to me, sorry and my volume is being used by Mr Pule and I just thought out of courtesy I should ...
ADV PRIOR: Yes, I simply raised it, that's why I stopped, because I saw he was...
CHAIRPERSON: If you could just put the question.
MR BERGER: Chairperson, but before Mr Prior puts the question, we don't know where this information comes from, but if one reads that whole paragraph, it seems that the information is a little faulty. It talks about Mr Pule now being the Ambassador to Botswana.
JUDGE PILLAY: He's allegedly.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I think just get to the crux of it.
ADV PRIOR: He can deny it with respect, I don't, you know, if we can just get on with it. He says he was arrested, he can't remember if it was at that time and I've invited him, if it wasn't the 11th of June, then he can say so. Are you saying you can't remember being arrested on the 11th of June?
MR PULE: I do not dispute that because I was arrested on a number of occasions in Botswana.
ADV PRIOR: Alright, do you have any recollection of seeing Mr McBride in Botswana between the 16th and the 11th of June 1986? I know your statement has said you have no ...
CHAIRPERSON: Between the 6th and the 11th.
ADV PRIOR: Between the 6th and the 11th, yes.
MR PULE: I do not remember the date, but I am sure that that was before the 16th when I met him.
ADV PRIOR: And we heard yesterday from Mr Ismail that on that occasion, or over that period, before he returned to the Republic, he had been shown how to construct a car bomb. Were you present on those occasions?
MR PULE: Even though I was in Botswana then, when Mr Ismail gave instructions to comrade McBride, I wasn't present.
ADV PRIOR: So, if I may put it at this level, if it is correct that shortly before his return to the Republic, that is before the 14th of June when the bomb was detonated, would there have likely been any discussion regarding the reason for exploding or detonating such a bomb? In other words a symbolic reason, for example the commemoration of June 16th? Would that have likely have been the motivation for sending someone in to detonate a car bomb?
MR PULE: I would ask you to repeat the question, it was very long.
ADV PRIOR: I'll leave it.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Richard, do you want to confer with you client?
MR RICHARD: What I do need to say, there are bundles of documents which I have in my possession, which do refer to Mr Pule, but in the light of what's happened, I don't intend to traverse those documents one by one with him. As long as my failure to do it with Mr Pule doesn't prejudice me later, I'll leave it.
ADV PRIOR: Sorry, I haven't finished Mr Chairman.
CHAIRPERSON: Oh, sorry, I thought you had.
ADV PRIOR: I said I'd leave that aspect, I wasn't getting anywhere with the witness.
CHAIRPERSON: Okay, sorry.
ADV PRIOR: There's just one other aspect. In the bundle that was put up at page, that's A1 Mr Chairman, if I can just get the reference, page 152, paginated bundle A1, reference is ...(intervention).
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Prior, if you could just quote that reference again, I missed it.
ADV PRIOR: Mr Chairman, yes, it's bundle A1 at paginated page 152. Reference is made to an unsigned statement of Mr McBride, at paragraph 168. There's some suggestion there that Oupa, someone Oupa, had emphasised that the car bomb should be set off on or before the 14th of June 1986. The question is, do you have any recollection of that, if you are Oupa?
MR PULE: I do not remember me saying that.
MR DEHAL: Sorry, may I just come in at this stage Mr Chairman? I don't think Mr Prior is intending to be misleading, but he used the words "Mr McBride's unsigned statement". It will later be contested that this, it will be placed on record through Mr McBride that this is not his statement, signed or unsigned. He's neither the author of the document, nor was anything therein extracted from him.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Dehal. Yes, Mr Prior.
ADV PRIOR: I really have nothing further. May I just simply put a remark on record, that this was the type of situation that we sought to avoid, by holding a pre-hearing consultation. I've indicated to other of my colleagues that a lot of the confusion would have been sorted out, if we had been able to all attend such a hearing, because the bundles were prepared and obviously it would seem from yesterday's proceedings and today, there is a lot of the information has been put up that is not accepted, so now we're sitting with a situation with a whole lot of information that we don't really know the status of and if we're going to have to be put to the proof thereof, we're going to possibly take more time than has been allocated. Thank you Mr Chairman.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY ADV PRIOR
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Prior.
MR RICHARD: The statement to which Mr Dehal and Mr Prior have now referred, is going to be the subject matter of hot debate. I will insist that it be proved, because it is peppered with corroboratable evidence and factual allegations and I don't believe it can be left in the status that it be simply withdrawn.
CHAIRPERSON: Well I think Mr Prior's now heard what you've said and has been forewarned.
MR RICHARD: And neither do I want to be prejudiced by the same token, by not putting references to this witness in this document, to him, but subject to that I close my cross-examination.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you. Mr Berger, do you have any re-examination?
MR BERGER: Very briefly, Chairperson.
RE-EXAMINATION BY MR BERGER: Mr Pule, you were asked by Mr Richard, how did you ensure that people complied with policy, with ANC policy and your answer was: "We as Commanders were able to do certain things." I beg your pardon, it wasn't Mr Richard, it was Adv Sigodi who asked the question. Do I understand by your answer that ensuring that cadres received proper training with regards ANC policy and guidelines was not your responsibility alone, it was the responsibility of all the Commanders in Botswana?
MR PULE: That is correct.
MR BERGER: And would it follow from that that it was also the responsibility of your Commanders? In other words, that it fell within the responsibility of you, Chris, Rashid, all the Commanders to ensure that cadres understood ANC policy and guidelines?
MR PULE: That is correct.
MR BERGER: Now, I'd like to refer you to page 13 of A1. This is a document apparently compiled by some investigators of the TRC. In relation to you, the information there is that Oupa could be L E Pule, who was allegedly responsible for despatching three consignments of arms to the Republic of South Africa during March 1986 and who resided at 13 000, Extension 46, Gaberone, perhaps with Webster and McBride. Now up to that point. Did you reside at number 13 000, Extension 46, Gaberone?
MR PULE: I do not remember where, I don't know where the origin of this information, because I stayed in different places in Botswana. I was changing places from time to time. I cannot specifically say that I resided in a particular place in Botswana, so I really don't know where this information comes from, I do not understand it.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Berger, we as a Committee won't be making any findings of facts based on that particular document, on the report, if that's what you concern is, I mean, we'll only make a finding that Mr Pule was arrested on the 11th of June, if we have evidence to that effect, we won't rely on that document or the same with any address that he may have been at or any other allegation contained in that document.
MR BERGER: Chairperson, I understand that, I just want to place this whole paragraph in context for Mr Pule himself as well, because the next sentence is perhaps more relevant. It says Mr Pule, and perhaps you can, this will jog your memory or not, it says
"He was arrested on the 11th of June 1986 with limpet detonators and electric detonators."
Now do you recall ever being arrested with limpet detonators and electric detonators?
MR PULE: That is not true.
MR BERGER: And you say you were arrested a number of times, but you can't recall the specific dates.
MR PULE: That is correct.
MR BERGER: "He was deported on the 24th of August 1986 without being charged and returned to Botswana allegedly in October 1986." Is there any truth in that?
MR PULE: I do not understand and I don't know this information written here.
MR BERGER: And unless you've not told me something, we know you are not the Ambassador to Botswana, is that correct?
MR PULE: That's true, I've never been an Ambassador.
MR BERGER: Thank you Chairperson, no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR BERGER
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Adv Sigodi, do you have any questions you'd like to ask? Right we'll take the lunch adjournment at this stage. I see it's ten past one now and then I'll give an opportunity to Panel Members to ask Mr Pule questions. We'll take the lunch adjournment now.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
ON RESUMPTION
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you. Adv Sigodi, do you have any questions that you would like to put to Mr Pule?
ADV SIGODI: I have no questions Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Judge Pillay?
JUDGE PILLAY: None.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Pule, that concludes your testimony, you may stand down.
WITNESS EXCUSED
MR PULE: Thank you, Chair.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Berger.
MR BERGER: Chairperson the next witness is Mr Mnisi.
