MR LAMEY: Mr Chairman, my colleague Mr Rossouw will now proceed with his applicants, we're just going to move chairs.
MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, Visser on record, I'm sorry to interpose. I see Mr Raditapole has arrived, no doubt in the expectation of a hearing what the witness or the applicant Greyling will have to say. Mr Chairman, I will have to Committee and my learned friend that I am unable to call the witness Greyling and I'm very sorry that my learned friend has had to come here for nothing. I do apologise for that but it's something which arose last night, Mr Chairman, and it's something completely out of my control.
CHAIRPERSON: Well Mr Visser, I sympathise with you in that but if we put my feelings on record, is if you are not able to call him I do not, if we finish the rest of this hearing, propose to adjourn the whole of this hearing for his convenience. It seems to me it would be a more proper course if he can't be called at this hearing to remove his application from the role of this hearing.
MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, you are quite correct and I would ask you to do that because he will not be able to be called during this hearing in any event.
CHAIRPERSON: I don't want everybody else to have to be inconvenienced by that and it seems to me that if he is not available to be called here, he must be removed, his name, his application must be removed from this hearing. His application remains a valid application but it is no longer part of this bundle, it is removed from it.
MR VISSER: Well we would appreciate it if you would so order, Mr Chairman.
CHAIRPERSON: Very well.
MR RADITAPOLE: Mr Chairman, just to express my indebtedness to Advocate Visser for having advised me through the Commission that Mr Greyling was coming to testify and ....[indistinct] interest but I do understand the position and I understand where we are. Thank you.
CHAIRPERSON: I'm sorry we've had to waste your time this morning but in the light of the interest you had shown in other applicants we felt yesterday that when our attention yesterday was drawn to this application that your attention should perhaps be drawn to it.
MR RADITAPOLE: I'm indebted to the Commissioner, it's good to see you all again. Thank you.
MR ROSSOUW: My first witness that I call is Mr Isak Daniel Bosch. You will find ...[intervention]
CHAIRPERSON: I wish members when they're referring to applicants would refer to them as applicants and not witnesses. I tend to get confused when they say witness and think it is somebody who is a witness and not an applicant.
MR ROSSOUW: Sorry, Mr Chairman, indeed applicant Bosch, you will find his application in Volume 1, page 180 to 186. Can the applicant be sworn in Mr Chairman?
ISAK DANIEL BOSCH: (sworn states)
MR ROSSOUW: Mr Chairman, at the outset may I just indicate to the Committee that the form 1, the form for the application was not bound into the bundle that is Volume 1, only the affidavit by Mr Bosch appears which is annexed to his application form appears as from page 180. Mr Chairman, then I've also handed to you another annexure to his Amnesty Application which I've also handed to all my learned colleagues and this annexure deals with the bombing of Cosatu House which you will note is not included in the bundle Volume 1 from page 180 which is only for Khotso House.
Mr Chairman, this is not a new application, a fresh application for the incident at Cosatu House and the evidence leader Advocate Mpshe will confirm that the application for Cosatu House was included in the applicant's initial application and the affidavit that he made in support thereof at the Attorney General.
MR MPSHE: Mr Chairman, I wish to set the record straight first and say that the applicant in his initial application made mention only of Cosatu House, no detailed affidavit was submitted but in his official application he makes mention of Cosatu so the detailed application Cosatu was drawn I think sometime during the course of this hearing but mention was only made of it in the initial application that is why it is not included in the bundle by myself but I do confirm he did mention it in his application.
CHAIRPERSON: Well without seeing it are we able to determine whether it is an application that was properly lodged within the time limits?
MR MPSHE: Mr Chairman, I have an insight in all the applications, I read all the applications, it was submitted timeously.
CHAIRPERSON: But did it comply with the Act? Did it set out the necessary details? Was it set out in the form required by the act, you've told us that it was just a mention of Cosatu House?
MR MPSHE: Yes, Mr Chairman, the required application form in terms of the Act was filed by them ...[intervention]
CHAIRPERSON: The application form was but what about the details as regard Cosatu House, how much detail was in that?
MR MPSHE: Mr Chairman, in so far as the details are concerned on Cosatu House there were no details it was just mention thereof.
CHAIRPERSON: Is that compliance with provisions of the Act merely to mention something?
MR MPSHE: It is not, Mr Chairman.
MR ROSSOUW: Sorry, Mr Chairman, as far as I recollect the affidavit that was made in support of that application, it also refers to the incidents which was referred in the affidavit was under command and it was also with a political objective, that was stated. What I've now submitted to you in fact supplementing and setting out the detail of that application.
CHAIRPERSON: The point I am raising is how can this Committee without seeing those application decide whether it is a legitimate application? We haven't got it before us, have we?
MR ROSSOUW: No, Mr Chairman. In that event then we, I will endeavour to obtain the affidavit which was filed.
ADV DE JAGER: Haven't you got a copy of the application?
MR ROSSOUW: Mr Chairman, I've only got a copy of the handwritten application. The affidavit to that I haven't got.
ADV DE JAGER: Was there an affidavit next to the application at that stage?
MR ROSSOUW: That is indeed so Mr Chairman.
ADV DE JAGER: Isn't it the procedure if offence have been mentioned and insufficient details have been supplied that the evidence leaders would request further information about it in order to enable the Committee to come to a conclusion?
MR MPSHE: That is so, Mr Chairman, but in regard of this hearing Mr Chairman, due to time constraints that I had in my hands I was not able to write letters to everybody but to some members I did write letters and with some members I communicated by telephone.
CHAIRPERSON: The question was not what you did in preparation for this hearing but when applications are received before they are filed they are read are they not and it's not the practice that if there is insufficient information before the application is filed the applicant or his attorney are notified that they have not complied with this or that provision and that they are given an opportunity to do so.
MR MPSHE: That is correct, Mr Chairman.
CHAIRPERSON: Was that done in this case?
MR MPSHE: Mr Chairman, I wouldn't know whether it was done when it was received because it is not done by myself.
CHAIRPERSON: I think we hear the application subject to us obtaining the papers and then deciding. It seems to me the most sensible proposal would be for us to hear the evidence now subject to the constraint that we are not by doing that indicating that we consider it a legitimate application. We will then obtain the necessary documents, ascertain what the position is and we can then communicate with you if there are any further problems.
MR ROSSOUW: Thank you Mr Chairman. Can I just also place on record that I have received no indication from the TRC to supplement the initial application and I can just mention that a copy of that handwritten application, I will make available to the Committee during the course of the day.
CHAIRPERSON: We will get - after the hearing we will get the other, we'll get the whole file and see precisely what was done but rather than waste time, we go on and hear his evidence now and as I say subject to the restraint that if we decide that there is no valid application we will not consider the value of it.
EXAMINATION BY MR ROSSOUW: Thank you Mr Chairman.
Mr Bosch, I refer you to page 180 of Volume 1, just briefly for the purposes of background ...[intervention]
ADV DE JAGER: Have you been sworn in?
MR BOSCH: Yes.
MR ROSSOUW: Mr Bosch, on page 180 you state that you are applying for amnesty for your involvement in bomb explosion at Khotso House as well as Cosatu House and any other offence arising from that which you are going to testify about?
MR BOSCH: That is correct.
MR ROSSOUW: Just to begin, your background, you say on page 180 that you went to school in Pretoria and after you completed your schooling you joined the South African Police?
ADV DE JAGER: Mr Rossouw, that information has been made available under oath, he could just confirm that this is evidence which has been submitted to us under oath, I really don't think that it matters where he went to school.
MR ROSSOUW: As it pleases the Committee.
Mr Bosch, at the bottom of page 180 to the top of page 181 for background, do you confirm that?
MR BOOYENS: Yes I do.
MR ROSSOUW: In 1993 or least in 1990 you resigned from the Police?
MR BOSCH: That is correct.
MR ROSSOUW: Regarding the annexure which was submitted to the Committee with relation to Cosatu House, do you have that before you?
MR BOSCH: Yes.
MR ROSSOUW: You are also applying for amnesty for your involvement in the bomb explosion and damage to property in the Cosatu House incident?
MR BOSCH: Yes, that is correct.
MR ROSSOUW: Do you confirm the date and place where this took place?
MR BOSCH: Yes.
MR ROSSOUW: And regarding your involvement you state that your recollection is that observation was undertaken before the time by yourself and Colonel de Kock on Cosatu House?
MR BOSCH: Yes that is correct.
CHAIRPERSON: That is 180(a).
MR ROSSOUW: Thank you Mr Chairman.
Mr Bosch, you state further that you can recall that you flew in a Police helicopter over Cosatu House with Colonel de Kock and made a video recording of the premises?
MR BOSCH: That is correct.
MR ROSSOUW: You also recall that Mr de Kock testified that a video recording was made of the premises from the street with a camera in a bag?
MR BOSCH: That is correct.
MR ROSSOUW: Where did the camera come from, can you inform the Committee regarding this?
MR BOSCH: The camera was purchased by the Police, we used it at Vlakplaas. It wasn't specifically purchased for this particular operation, we had it beforehand.
MR ROSSOUW: Is it correct that you inserted the camera into the bag?
MR BOSCH: That is correct.
MR ROSSOUW: You were connected to the technical division at Vlakplaas?
MR BOSCH: Amongst others.
MR ROSSOUW: You said that during preparation you also had knowledge that there was a printing press in the building and that the operation amongst others would be directed at destroying the printing press?
MR BOSCH: That is correct.
MR ROSSOUW: You also knew that COSATU was an alliance or an ally of the ANC?
MR BOSCH: That is correct.
MR ROSSOUW: Do you confirm the rest of the contents of your statement?
MR BOSCH: That is correct.
MR ROSSOUW: And regarding paragraph three thereof you say that on the evening of the operation your task was to observe?
MR BOSCH: Yes that is correct.
MR ROSSOUW: And you were in a vehicle with Mr Dave Baker?
MR BOSCH: That is correct.
MR ROSSOUW: Did you ever leave the vehicle?
MR BOSCH: No.
MR ROSSOUW: Were you armed?
MR BOSCH: Yes, I was armed.
MR ROSSOUW: At any point did you find yourself in a situation where you had to confront people or possibly use your weapon?
MR BOSCH: No.
MR ROSSOUW: After the explosion you state that you returned back to Vlakplaas with Mr Baker?
MR BOSCH: That is correct.
MR ROSSOUW: You then state that damage was done to Cosatu House but as far as you know nobody was seriously injured or killed?
MR BOSCH: Yes that is correct.
MR ROSSOUW: Did you draw any financial benefit from your involvement in this action?
MR BOSCH: No.
MR ROSSOUW: Regarding the political objective of this operation did you listen to the evidence of Colonel de Kock, Minister Vlok and General van der Merwe?
MR BOSCH: That is correct.
MR ROSSOUW: Do you reconcile yourself with the political objective which would have been obtained through the action on Cosatu House?
MR BOSCH: That is correct.
MR ROSSOUW: You also knew that COSATU was an ally of the ANC and that it acted as a front organisation on the labour front for the ANC?
MR BOSCH: That is correct.
MR ROSSOUW: You also heard the evidence about the daily, weekly and monthly security reports which were also circulated at Vlakplaas. Did you also have insight into those documents?
MR BOSCH: From time to time.
MR ROSSOUW: Your knowledge regarding the involvement of COSATU in the ANC, would that have emanated from reading those reports?
MR BOSCH: Yes that is correct.
MR ROSSOUW: You state that your involvement in this operation was due to an order and that you received this order from Colonel de Kock?
MR BOSCH: Yes that is correct.
MR ROSSOUW: Were you in a position to question his orders?
MR BOSCH: No.
MR ROSSOUW: Were you in a position in any way to doubt his orders with regard to the authorisation which he possibly may have received from head office?
MR BOSCH: No.
MR ROSSOUW: Mr Bosch, with regard to your involvement in Cosatu House, I refer you to page 182 in Volume A. You are also applying for your involvement in the bomb explosion at Khotso House, I beg your pardon, this is Khotso House and any other offences arising from the incident? It is a common fact that the explosion occurred in August 1988?
MR BOSCH: Yes that is correct.
MR ROSSOUW: Just to begin with, in your statement you said that you are referring to the application of Andries van Heerden?
MR BOSCH: That is correct.
MR ROSSOUW: You request extends as far as your involvement and your personal knowledge of the incident goes?
MR BOSCH: Yes that is correct.
MR ROSSOUW: Mr Chairman, you will find the application by Mr van Heerden in Volume 1 at page 159 and further.
In so far as Khotso House is involved is it also your evidence that you were not involved or knew about the first unsuccessful attempt?
MR BOSCH: That is correct.
MR ROSSOUW: At that stage you were stationed at Vlakplaas and you were solely involved in the second successful attempt which was led by Colonel de Kock?
MR BOSCH: That is correct.
MR ROSSOUW: Then, Mr Bosch, you state in your statement that on the evening of the operation you were with Dave Baker in his vehicle. Is it correct that you are confusing this with your involvement in the Cosatu House incident?
MR BOSCH: That is correct.
MR ROSSOUW: On that particular evening am I correct in saying that you were in Colonel de Kock's BMW vehicle, you drove in that vehicle to Honeydew and after that to Khotso House?
MR BOSCH: Yes that is correct.
MR ROSSOUW: Can you recall in any way that you were involved in monitoring Khotso House before your involvement with Vlakplaas?
MR BOSCH: I can't recall that we flew in a helicopter but as far as I can recall I know that we took a number of photos and also made a video recording from street level.
MR ROSSOUW: Your task on that particular evening of the operation on Khotso House was similar to the Cosatu House incident because you also undertook observation from the vehicle in which you travelled?
MR BOSCH: That is correct.
MR ROSSOUW: At that stage did you leave the vehicle?
MR BOSCH: No.
MR ROSSOUW: And you were not involved in the placing of the explosives and you did not enter the premises?
MR BOSCH: That is correct.
MR ROSSOUW: You also state that after the explosion took place you went back or you can't recall whether you went to Honeydew or directly to Vlakplaas?
MR BOSCH: That is correct.
MR ROSSOUW: Mr Bosch, in the application of Mr van Heerden he states that he saw General Piet du Toit at the safe house in Honeydew before the operation at Khotso House. Can you recall that?
MR BOSCH: Not at all.
MR ROSSOUW: Regarding your involvement with the Khotso House incident you state that damage was done to Khotso House but you don't know anything about anybody being injured or killed?
MR BOSCH: That is correct.
MR ROSSOUW: You did not draw any financial benefit or any other remuneration from this incident?
MR BOSCH: No.
MR ROSSOUW: Regarding the political objective for this incident, you listened to the evidence of General van der Merwe, ex-Minister Vlok as well as Colonel de Kock. Do you reconcile yourself with this and do you agree with it?
MR BOSCH: Yes that is correct.
MR ROSSOUW: Did you know that the South African Council of Churches offices were seated in Khotso House and that financial assistance was being given to ANC members by the South African Council of Churches?
MR BOSCH: That is correct.
MR ROSSOUW: Then you regarded this action against Khotso House as necessary in the struggle by the security forces to maintain the government of the day?
MR BOSCH: That is correct.
MR ROSSOUW: Your involvement in this operation emanates from an order which was given by Colonel de Kock?
MR BOSCH: Yes that is correct.
MR ROSSOUW: And in this case you were in no position to question his orders?
MR BOSCH: That is correct.
MR ROSSOUW: And you were also not in a position to verify
the origin of these orders?
MR BOSCH: That is correct.
MR ROSSOUW: Mr Chairman, that is the evidence. I might just mention that I have supplied to all my learned colleagues as well as the Committee an affidavit by Mr Bosch prior to the starting of the hearing in which he explains the confusion as far as his involvement in the two incidents are concerned. You will note that his role that he played was exactly the same in both instances and that led to the confusion. I don't think that it will be necessary, it's just ...[intervention]
CHAIRPERSON: Well we've got it, shall we call it 180(b) and put it in with the application?
MR ROSSOUW: Thank you Mr Chairman, 180 (b).
Mr Chairman, the affidavit that I referred to is just headed "Affidavit" and it's dated the 14th July.
CHAIRPERSON: Have you finished?
MR ROSSOUW: That's my evidence.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR ROSSOUW
MR VISSER: No questions thank you, Mr Chairman.
NO QUESTIONS BY MR VISSER
MR BOOYENS: Booyens, no questions Mr Chairman.
NO QUESTIONS BY MR BOOYENS
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mpshe?
ADV MPSHE: Sorry, Mr Chairman, no questions thank you.
NO QUESTIONS BY ADV MPSHE
ADV GCABASHE: Can you just clarify one small point for me, page 184: You have knowledge, and it's the second sentence really, that the South African Council of Churches financed the ANC leaders. Is this personal knowledge or were you so informed.
MR BOSCH: We were so informed, Mr Chairman.
ADV GCABASHE: By whom?
MR BOSCH: During my career as a security policeman.
ADV GCABASHE: Documentary evidence or you were told this in meetings?
MR BOSCH: As far as I can remember it was told in meetings.
ADV GCABASHE: Was this told to you just before the operation as well?
MR BOSCH: No, ma'm.
ADV GCABASHE: This was the information you had in your background information?
MR BOSCH: That's right yes. That is correct, Mr Chairman.
ADV GCABASHE: Thank you.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
WITNESS EXCUSED
