MR VISSER: ... Members of the Committee. Chairperson, we have taken the liberty of placing before you a document which is an affidavit signed by Brigadier Wikus Johannes Loots. Have you found it?
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, we have.
MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, may I say immediately that you will find, perhaps not surprisingly, that the affidavit of Brigadier Loots is virtually a carbon copy of what you've heard in the evidence of Rudi Crause, particularly as far as this incident is concerned and particularly with a view of their slight role in the whole of the incident. We don't therefore propose to deal with Brigadier Loots in any detail.
CHAIRPERSON: Well it's all before us in any case.
MR VISSER: It is all before you now in any case Mr Chairman, and I will go very swiftly, with your permission.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much. ...(intervention)
ADV DE JAGER: Your full names?
CHAIRPERSON: ... Exhibit C.
MR VISSER: Exhibit C.
ADV DE JAGER: Your full names?
WIKUS JOHANNES LOOTS: (sworn states)
EXAMINATION BY MR VISSER: Brigadier, you apply before this Amnesty Committee for three incidents for which we will deal with the Nietverdiendt incident only, is that correct?
MR LOOTS: That is correct.
MR VISSER: Your application you attach at page 2, in the middle of the page. And it is indeed so that in bundle 2(i) you have an affidavit from pages 130 to 133. Mr Chairperson, I have noted that before you entered that it is pages 130 to 132. It's just a little technical fault with the numbering of the pages there. Mr Loots, like Mr Crause you have referred to Exhibits P45, 45 and 47, the evidence of General van der Merwe which was heard on the 21st of October, as well as his evidence on the 9th of February and the references as given in Exhibit C and you are up to date with his evidence in the Stanza Bopape and Khotso and Cosatu House and Cry Freedom instances, is that correct?
MR LOOTS: That is correct, Chairperson.
MR VISSER: You confirm that the evidence as given by General van der Merwe and as the original Amnesty Committee in the judgment of Brigadier JH Cronje according to your insights and judgement would be the correct facts and as far as you are concerned this is applicable to your position?
MR LOOTS: That is correct, Chairperson.
MR VISSER: And as far as you are concerned this is applicable to your position?
MR LOOTS: That is correct, Chairperson.
MR VISSER: And you request on page 3 that those amnesty judgments as far as it concerns you it has to be kept in mind with the consideration of your amnesty application?
MR LOOTS: That is correct.
MR VISSER: You born at Prieska on the 9th of January 1940, you are 59 years old. You have heard when I read an extract, which is on page 4 at the bottom of the page, of the typical situation of the members of the Security Forces vis à vis the National Party and the government, do you confirm that this is applicable to you as well?
MR LOOTS: That is correct, Chairperson.
MR VISSER: On page 5 you have a short summary Brigadier, on pages 5 and 6, of your career in the Police Force highlighting that you started your career as far back as 1959. And you were in the Northern Eastern Cape - excuse me, the North Western Cape and that from 1963 you were transferred to the Security Branch, is that correct?
MR LOOTS: That is correct.
MR VISSER: And then when this incident took place you were a Divisional Commander of Western Transvaal Security Branch in Potchefstroom?
MR LOOTS: That is correct.
MR VISSER: And later you were transferred to Northern Transvaal, as Divisional Commander in Pretoria and you were Regional Commander of Crime Prevention of the Northern Transvaal, is that correct? ...(intervention)
ADV DE JAGER: Mr Visser, I do not want to interrupt you, but this is all under oath, this is background and I don't think there is anybody who will argue this. If you could get to page 35 as quickly as possible and if there's any argument as to the information, then it should be put later.
MR VISSER: It was my intention to refer you to page 7, how the struggle seemed and so forth. As it was said by Mr Crause this morning and as it is in Exhibit C, you affidavit, do you confirm that?
MR LOOTS: Yes, I do.
MR VISSER: With regard to your own political motives as well as other aspects, do you confirm the correctness and truth thereof as far as it is concerned with your application?
MR LOOTS: That is correct, Chairperson.
MR VISSER: If we could move to page - and Commissioner de Jager will forgive me this one aspect, but I have to refer to it before I get to page 35. If I could move on to where you addressed the matter of Botswana and the importance of Botswana. I would like to refer you to the bundle which is bundle 2(j) and I would refer you to page 2 thereof - or excuse me, I mean page 5 up to page, I think it's 39 Chairperson, up to page 39. This is a statement if I have it correct, that was drawn up by you.
MR LOOTS: That is correct, Chairperson.
MR VISSER: And the contents of this statement deals basically with Botswana, is that correct?
MR LOOTS: That is correct, Chairperson.
MR VISSER: It deals with weapons and infiltrations from and to Botswana between South Africa and Botswana, is that correct?
MR LOOTS: That is correct.
MR VISSER: The information contained herein, did you receive this from existing information from reliable sources?
MR LOOTS: My own sources as well as sources from Western Cape, Durban, Eastern Cape, who had sources in Botswana.
MR VISSER: It is also stipulated here and it also refers to your personal knowledge and the gathering of information and your experiences?
MR LOOTS: That is correct.
MR VISSER: I would just like to draw your attention to this, Chairperson, and there is a statement from Brigadier Loots in there.
Can we move to page 35. We know Brigadier, that we deal with the killing of 10 unknown persons who were on their way from Mamelodi in Pretoria to Botswana, and this included the burning of their bodies and the burning of a kombi and you apply for any other offences in conjunction with this.
On page or paragraph 99, on page 35, would you address the document there and explain to the Committee what your role and part in this incident was.
MR LOOTS: Chairperson, according to the best of my recollection, Colonel Rudi Crause called me on the 25th of June 1986, at ...(intervention)
MR VISSER: Could I interrupt you there. The 25th of June, might that be wrong?
MR LOOTS: It may have been the 26th, I'm not sure.
MR VISSER: You're not sure?
MR LOOTS: No, I'm not sure, it could be.
He informed me about this action. He informed me that Brigadier Jack Cronje and Commandant Charl Naude from Special Forces were involved with the planning of the elimination of a number of black activists from Mamelodi - this was Brigadier's area of command, who were on their way to leave the RSA to Botswana with the objective of gaining military training.
After this discussion the two of us, this is Brigadier Crause, Brigadier Cronje and Commandant Naude, on the 26th of June we met them at Zeerust. Brigadier Cronje informed us that he was looking for a safe place where Special Forces operators could meet the kombi with ANC recruits who were on their way from Pretoria, under the control of Joe Mamasela.
Brigadier Cronje also informed us that he and Commandant Naude decided to eliminate the group and it would happen in such a manner that it would seem that it was armed persons who infiltrated the country with weapons and explosives.
MR VISSER: To interrupt you there, do you have any knowledge of any - we have heard of an AK47 and a limpet mine which was planted in the kombi, do you have any personal knowledge thereof?
MR LOOTS: No.
MR VISSER: But in the light thereof it does not surprise you?
MR LOOTS: No, it does not.
MR VISSER: Very well.
MR LOOTS: Point 1: I was convinced that the persons had to be stopped before they left the country to receive military training because experience has taught that if an activist decided to receive military training there was not possibility to change his mind. And since such persons after they've received their training would return back to the Republic where they endangered lives and property and the Security Branch would not be able to stop them when they return, I gave them my co-operation.
MR VISSER: The question might be asked why you were involved in this, what is your comment thereof, why were you asked?
MR LOOTS: Because the usual practise was that in Western Transvaal - and this is applicable to the previous commanders who were responsible for the control of MK activities in Botswana and it was a gentleman's agreement that the we would know the persons before they acted in our area.
MR VISSER: Very well. And in paragraph 103 you said a kombi with black men as occupants that stopped at a cafe. Joe Mamasela was the driver. Brigadier Cronje, Commandant Naude, Crause and yourself drove with the kombi to a place close to Nietverdiendt, where the persons would be intercepted and that Mamasela then followed behind you.
MR LOOTS: That is correct.
MR VISSER: And with your arrival at the farm, what did you do there?
MR LOOTS: There was a team of Special Forces operators. consisting of persons unknown to me
MR VISSER: We know who this was. You don't have to worry about that, we know who these persons were. What did you see happening there?
MR LOOTS: The black passengers were fetched from Joe Mamasela's kombi. Some of them were made to lay on the ground and Commandant Naude injected them. It might be that other persons also administered injections, but I cannot clearly recall that now. I was not aware what the substance was with which they were injected. I was about 50 metres away from them, but I know that after the injection, very soon after the injection they seemed unstable on their feet and some of them became unconscious.
MR VISSER: Or you say "dead" there, but you don't know what the effect of the substance was?
MR LOOTS: No, I don't. They were loaded into another kombi one by one and members of Special Forces left with the activists kombi thereafter.
MR VISSER: Colonel Naude told us that what had happened is that you drove on drove on because you knew the road, they followed. The kombi with the activists was drive by Mr Vorster and the kombi was driven right up against a tree. Do you have a problem with accepting that evidence?
MR LOOTS: No, that is a correct version as I recall it.
MR VISSER: And in your application you mention that you heard several explosions and you also say that you don't know what the kombi was lit with, whether petrol or explosives were used, but today you have heard that it was lit with gasoline and later on the limpet mine might have exploded. Would this concur with your recollection of what had happened?
MR LOOTS: That is correct, Chairperson.
MR VISSER: And where you say in your application that the explosion would probably be handgrenades, but you would accept that it is as Naude and Vorster had said here?
MR LOOTS: That is correct, Chairperson.
MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, that's the evidence which we wish to present, thank you.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VISSER
CHAIRPERSON: You mention that the kombi in which they came was Joe Mamasela's kombi, was Joe Mamasela known to you at that time?
MR LOOTS: I knew him, Mr Chairman.
CHAIRPERSON: You knew him?
MR LOOTS: Yes, I knew him.
CHAIRPERSON: And was he there at the scene at the time?
MR LOOTS: If I recall correctly, after they arrived and after they were injected, he left immediately.
CHAIRPERSON: Did he leave alone or in the company of somebody?
MR LOOTS: As far as I can recall he was alone. Paragraph 112 on page 38 is where I mention it.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you very much. Yes, cross-examination?
MR VAN DEN BERG: Chairperson, possibly just one aspect.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR VAN DEN BERG: You appear reasonably certain about the dates, you said the 25th of the 26th of June, how did you arrive at that date?
MR LOOTS: Chairperson, it was after the application for amnesty. This was a long time ago. That is the only explanation that I can give at this stage.
MR VAN DEN BERG: You didn't make a note of it somewhere, at the time?
MR LOOTS: Many things happened and I cannot recall everything.
MR VAN DEN BERG: Thank you, Mr Chairman.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VAN DEN BERG
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS LOCKHAT: Mr Loots, when Mr Crause contacted you per telephone, what did he brief you, what did he inform you of?
MR LOOTS: Chairperson, if I recall correctly Colonel Crause reported to me that Brigadier Cronje and Commandant Charl Naude wanted to speak to us at Zeerust and because of incidents that happened over the years, that when the names Cronje and Naude was heard you would accept this had something to do with infiltrators or people who part of the struggle.
MS LOCKHAT: And indeed also inform you as in paragraph 99 of your statement, that they were planning to eliminate a number of black activists? - as per your statement.
MR LOOTS: ...(no audible reply)
MS LOCKHAT: And when you met with Cronje and Naude, what did they inform you of, what was the operation about?
INTERPRETER: The speaker's microphone is not on.
MR LOOTS: They mentioned the 10 persons who were on their way out, but the manner in which it would be acted was not discussed with us at that stage.
MS LOCKHAT: Did you not ask them?
MR LOOTS: We operated with Special Forces quite often in the past and I had never questioned their capability. I also did not ask what would happen and how it would take place.
MS LOCKHAT: So you knew you were going to eliminate people, but the details of that were not important to you at the stage?
MR LOOTS: Not at that stage.
MS LOCKHAT: You just previously stated that you operated with Jack Cronje previously and that you knew that if he contacted you that the task would obviously be eliminating, what other ...(intervention)
MR LOOTS: ...(inaudible). Chairperson, the name Charl Naude - when I heard the name Charl Naude, I accepted that it had something to do with the training of people or it had to do with people who went from training.
MS LOCKHAT: But surely a person in your position, isn't there an onus just to ask exactly what you're going to get involved in?
MR LOOTS: At that stage this was done telephonically. It was difficult, and that is why I drove all the way to Zeerust.
MS LOCKHAT: Thank you, Chairperson, no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS LOCKHAT
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
ADV DE JAGER: You mention - and I cannot say that I was not listening, that somebody else mentioned that the persons after they received the injections were transferred to another kombi.
MR LOOTS: Chairperson, if I recall correctly they arrived in a kombi that was driven by Joe Mamasela. In paragraph 112 I say that Joe Mamasela from that point departed, so I am almost convinced that they were transferred to another kombi that was driven by Mr Vorster and where the accident would then take place. That is how I recall it.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Can you advise us what other operations you were involved in, in which Mr Charl Naude as a member of Special Forces was also involved in?
MR LOOTS: ...(no audible reply)
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Was that the only matter?
MR LOOTS: The McKenzie incident is one, the Gaberone attack in '85. I'm depending on my memory now, but there was more than that but I cannot recall.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: And these happened obviously prior to this Nietverdiendt incident? All these incidents happened prior to the Nietverdient incident?
MR LOOTS: That is correct, Chairperson.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Now when you met with Brigadier Cronje after you had been telephoned by Mr Crause, did Brigadier Cronje advise you of the method he intended to use in carrying out the elimination of these young activists?
MR LOOTS: Chairperson, I cannot recall the details of what Cronje discussed with me. I accepted that Special Forces would do the work. As I have said previously I trusted the manner in which they acted as professionals.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: But was there no mention why Brigadier Cronje that Special Forces would do the elimination?
MR LOOTS: That is correct, Chairperson, but the manner in which it would be done was not mentioned to us, or it was not discussed with us.
CHAIRPERSON: Precisely what was required of you to do?
MR LOOTS: Chairperson, I think as I have explained, at that stage I was in command of the Western Transvaal and it was practice that when persons from elsewhere like Northern Transvaal, would act in the Northern Transvaal, that they inform you ...
CHAIRPERSON: I understand that but was there anything that you were required personally to do?
MR LOOTS: The only request from their side was to find a secluded spot where these persons could be intercepted.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: But that had been done by your underling, Mr Crause. The spot had already been identified by Mr Crause, is it not so?
MR LOOTS: ...(no audible reply)
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Yes. Now why was your presence required?
INTERPRETER: The speaker's microphone is not activated.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Your microphone is off.
MR LOOTS: The only answer that I can give was that it indicates to the manner that I had to be, had knowledge of what happened there as a commander of the area.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: You could have approved of Mr Crause proceeding with the request that had been relayed to him by Brigadier Cronje telephonically, couldn't you have done that?
MR LOOTS: As I have explained, telephonically it was difficult to discuss such sensitive matters on the telephone and that is why I drove to Zeerust.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: But I was under the impression that Mr Crause had discussed the matter with you telephonically and it was as a result of that telephonic discussion that you came down to Zeerust.
MR LOOTS: If I recall correctly, Crause told me that Cronje had contacted him and that he and Naude needed some assistance to help with people who were on their way out and therefore because detail could not be discussed over the telephone, I decided to drive through.
CHAIRPERSON: What was the limit of your participation in this whole thing actually, what actually did you do?
MR LOOTS: I will agree with Major Vorster, that God does not make this happen to me again, to be involved. I was just here as an observer. I had no part in the catching of people or whatever.
CHAIRPERSON: Were you there right up to the time that this vehicle burnt down or exploded?
MR LOOTS: That's correct, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: And after that, did you have to report to anybody?
MR LOOTS: Brigadier was my superior and I assumed that he would do the necessary.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thanks. Mr Visser, any questions in re-examination?
MR VISSER: No re-examination thank you, Mr Chairman.
NO RE-EXAMINATION BY MR VISSER
CHAIRPERSON: Yes.
MR VISSER: May the witness be excused?
CHAIRPERSON: You are excused.
WITNESS EXCUSED
MR VISSER: I only have the two applicants in this incident, Mr Chairman.
CHAIRPERSON: I understand.
PIETER JOHAN VERSTER - AM 5471/97
MS LOCKHAT: We call the next applicant, Mr P J Verster.
MR WESSELS: Mr Chairman, the application of Mr Verster appears on page 25 of bundle 3. I will also make reference to a document that he handed in with his application, which forms part of bundle 4. That document starts on page 27 of bundle 4.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Mr Wessels, before you proceed, is Mr Verster applying for amnesty in respect of the Nietverdiendt incident?
MR WESSELS: Yes, he does indeed.
CHAIRPERSON: What did he do?
MR VERSTER: He did not take actively part in anything and therefore he's not guilty of a gross human rights violation in terms of the Act although he became aware of what had happened and therefore in common law he would be technically guilty as an accomplice, and on that basis he had to apply also for amnesty because he could be held liable on that basis.
I did suggest to my learned friend, the prosecutor leader, that this is actually a matter that does not need to be heard in a hearing and that it can be dealt with by way of administrative decisions in chambers, but I was told that ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: Well, I think all the documentation had been prepared and a great deal of trouble had been gone through and perhaps it was thought that it would be convenient to dispose of the matter.
MR WESSELS: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: But before you call him, I just thought I wanted some clarity from you as to precisely what he did to associate himself with this offence.
MR WESSELS: Well the evidence was already that Vorster came to him and reported to him that he didn't want to be involved again. He thereafter knew about the incident and he did not disclose this information to any person outside the Defence Force and to that extent it can be possibly said on a technical basis, that he did associate himself with the action.
CHAIRPERSON: Well's let's dispose of his evidence as quickly as we can.
MR WESSELS: We will, I will do so.
CHAIRPERSON: We have other matters that are of a far weightier nature.
MR WESSELS: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: So will you call him please.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: That being so, do you still want to traverse the bundle that you have referred to?
MR WESSELS: I'm just going to refer to it, I'm not going to read it out or anything like.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: ...(inaudible)
ADV DE JAGER: Mr Verster, your full names please?
PIETER JOHAN VERSTER: (sworn states)
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, please proceed.
EXAMINATION BY MR WESSELS: Mr Verster, is it correct that you have applied for amnesty, and your application appears in the papers as I've read it out, and do you confirm the correctness thereof?
MR VERSTER: Yes.
MR WESSELS: Is it also correct that your personal profile appears from page 28 to page 31 in bundle B, do you confirm that?
MR VERSTER: Yes, that's correct.
MR WESSELS: Is it correct that during 1986, you were deployed to the Wits Command under the instructions of General Joubert to assist the police?
MR VERSTER: Yes, that's correct.
MR WESSELS: At this stage you still occupied certain other posts, is that correct?
MR VERSTER: Yes.
MR WESSELS: What were those positions?
MR VERSTER: Chairperson, I was the senior staff officer for covert operations. That was the staff officer of General Joubert. We were also in a transition period during which we were busy establishing the CCB.
MR WESSELS: Mr Verster, you were not involved in the planning or execution of the Nietverdiendt operation, is that correct?
MR VERSTER: No, except for the initial negotiations with General Joubert and Commandant Naude I was not involved at all.
MR WESSELS: Were you aware that these operations were to take place before they actually took place?
MR VERSTER: I can't say with certainty, however from my position as staff officer, it may have been that there were negotiations or telephone conversations regarding co-ordination, however I was not aware of the specific planning.
MR WESSELS: After the operation had been executed, is it correct that Mr Vorster approached you?
MR VERSTER: Yes, that's correct. Mr Vorster came to me the following day and told me that he didn't believe that this was the sort of work which soldiers were to be part of and that he did not want to be involved at all in the future.
MR WESSELS: Were you then made aware of what happened there?
MR VERSTER: Yes, I was then made aware of the circumstance.
MR WESSELS: Did you convey this to anybody else?
MR VERSTER: At a later stage I discussed this with the chairperson, General Joubert.
MR WESSELS: I have no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR WESSELS
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, there can't be any cross-examination surely?
MR VISSER: I have no questions, thank you Mr Chairman.
NO QUESTIONS BY MR VISSER
ADV DE JAGER: I beg your pardon. You were made aware of it the following day, you knew that people had died and you did not report this or convey it to anybody else except to General Joubert?
MR VERSTER: Yes, that's correct, Chairperson. By nature of my appointment I was not at liberty to discuss it, I kept it within the military system.
ADV DE JAGER: So that was your reconciliation or knowledge of the deed?
MR VERSTER: Yes, that's correct.
CHAIRPERSON: So all you knew is what you were told?
MR VERSTER: Yes, that's correct.
CHAIRPERSON: Thanks very much, you are excused.
MR VERSTER: Thank you, Chairperson. I'd just like to say a few words if you would grant me a moment or two.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, certainly.
MR VERSTER: Yesterday when we began Chairperson, we saw that from the police's side General van der Merwe was present and he supported his people. I would just like to put it a bit stronger than previous members of the forces.
We were part of a system. General Joubert explained what the channels were. I was also very well aware of what the channels were and I feel that it is very poor that our direct head of whom I have direct knowledge, that General Geldenhuys was not present here.
I would also like to say that we have come over a period of 10 years where we have had these problems. It began in 1989, and from the very first day the attempt has been to make it appear as if people acted independently according to their role. And if I look at General Joubert, I would like to put it very strongly that he is the only General who had the will and the perseverance to stand by the decisions which he made, and perhaps this is part of the problems that the General is experiencing today with his health. I would just like to emphasise that we support him loyally. I thank you.
CHAIRPERSON: Right, that will be recorded. Thank you very much.
WITNESS EXCUSED
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, we move onto another incident altogether now, do we?
MR VAN DEN BERG: Mr Chairperson, I've been requested to call one of the mothers. I know that one of them testified previously at Cronje's hearing. There's been really an amplification of the evidence that was given at Cronje's application and one of the mothers would like to respond to that. May I do so?
CHAIRPERSON: Certainly.
MR VAN DEN BERG: We call Mrs Phiri please.
CHAIRPERSON: Can you spell that name?
MR VAN DEN BERG: P-H-I-R-I.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Mr van den Berg, what language does shoe speak?
MR VAN DEN BERG: Sesotho.
MS PHIRI: (sworn states)
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Yes, please proceed.
EXAMINATION BY MR VAN DEN BERG: Previously Mrs Makualane testified at the Cronje hearings, and that's at page 55 and following, bundle 2(c).
Today, Mrs Phiri, you've heard evidence of what happened with your son. Who was your son?
MS PHIRI: Thomas Phiri was my son. He is the last born in our family.
MR VAN DEN BERG: When was he born?
MS PHIRI: He was born on the 25th of December 1964.
MR VAN DEN BERG: Today you heard evidence that they were injected with a narcotic substance which rendered them unconscious, do you want to respond on your behalf and on behalf of the families to that evidence?
MS PHIRI: Yes. We have heard the evidence regarding the injection, but it differs from what Cronje told us. And the policeman from Daggarsberg told us that it was not Nietverdient. This incident did not happen at Nietverdiendt. We asked then where Nietverdiendt was. They told us it was 65 kilometres from where we were. They are not telling us the truth here. They don't tell us what they did to them.
CHAIRPERSON: In what way are they not telling the truth? What is the truth?
MS PHIRI: The truth is that they should tell the Committee the truth. They have sworn that they will tell the truth. Cronje said there were handgrenades in the kombi, more than 25. They say there was a limpet mine. Now the policeman who found the children in the kombi said the kombi had bullet holes all round and the sliding door was open and one child was at the driver's seat. Let them tell us the full story so that we can - we are deeply hurt. If they tell the story we will be okay.
MR VAN DEN BERG: You've then also heard evidence that the bodies were burnt at the scene of the sham accident, for want of a better word, do you want to comment on that?
MS PHIRI: Yes, we were told that the bodies were burnt and the door was open and the there were footsteps, those of the soldier's boots and they disappeared into the veld. Only the intestines of the children were left behind, the bodes were burnt.
We want to know where these children were buried because we were never told the truth of where they were buried.
MR VAN DEN BERG: Chairperson, those are the aspects that we wish to canvass. I have no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VAN DEN BERG
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Mr van den Berg, Mrs Phiri has made certain allegations. She has received some information from a policeman. Is she aware of who that policeman is? And from your side, have you done anything as her legal representative, to take these issues up and investigate them further with a view assisting this Committee to come to an equitable decision?
MR VAN DEN BERG: Judge Khampepe, I've been given details of a policeman at the Madikwe Police Station, an Inspector Modisane. I was given this information during the course of yesterday afternoon. I've made various attempts to contact him. He's apparently off duty at present. I will continue to try and get hold of him to ascertain what the position is, because there does seem to be quite a large discrepancy between what Mrs Phiri has described and what the applicants have testified to. I will continue to follow that up. I'm afraid, as I said, this information was only given to me during the course of yesterday afternoon by one of the, a Mr Moyeme, who I understand is linked to the TRC and one of the Investigators, but I'm not 100% certain of that, what his status is and whether he is in fact linked to the TRC, but he is the person who gave me the information.
CHAIRPERSON: To your knowledge, is there any evidence as to where the remains of these people were buried?
MR VAN DEN BERG: No, Mr Chairperson. We've been given portions of what appears to be an inquest record or post-mortem reports, but we've not been able to ascertain, despite enquiries both at Madikwe and at the magistrates court. We made those enquiries during the Cronje hearing and we've not been able to determine whether you tie the post-mortems to specific burial places. It would appear that you can't.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Now if I can recall well, whether you can even rely on the post-mortems which are in your possession. Is it that not where the problem is?
MR VAN DEN BERG: That's also indeed a problem because from those post-mortems they appear to be considerably older than the children that we're talking about here.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, but those were merely estimates, isn't it?
MR VAN DEN BERG: That is so, Mr Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes. It seems that this matter is not capable of being cleared, either due to a passage of time or a failure on the part of anybody to record where the remains of these people were buried and that will remain one of these unanswered questions.
If during the course of these proceedings tomorrow or the day after, you are in a position to get any further information, will you please come and see me in chambers so we can decide how to deal further with this matter?
MR VAN DEN BERG: I will do so, Mr Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
ADV DE JAGER: Mr Visser, I know that the police did not solve or pursue the matter further at that time, but Mr Crause was later involved in Boputhatswana, can there not be any assistance from their side, so that the parents can be determine where their children have been buried?
MR VISSER: Mr Chair, yes we will attempt, I will make a few enquiries. I have thought that perhaps we should enquire as to who the person is that led the post-mortem inquiry. And even though the record may not be available, we could contact him in order to determine what he may remember thereof. However, I will consult Brigadier Loots and Mr Crause to see if they could not consult their old contacts and make certain arrangements.
This is of course subject to the fact that those who appear before you nowadays, who are no longer in the police force, don't really have much access to information and there are certain problems and resistance with regard to such enquiries. However, we will attempt to do so by assuring whoever we contact, that we are doing so with the authorisation of the Commission.
ADV DE JAGER: I cannot think that in this case it could not be possible to determine what happened to the bodies. There was no secrecy in the sense that it appeared to be an accident or was supposed to look like an accident and there was no reason to cover up the whole story in terms of the burial and so forth.
MR VISSER: More than that we know that a case was made with the Boputhatswana authorities and an investigation was conducted, so there should be no reason why there should be secrecy surrounding what happened to the bodies.
ADV DE JAGER: Mr van den Berg, I'm rather surprised that it's almost, well maybe longer than a year since the Cronje hearing, that this information only comes to hand yesterday. Was there any consultation previously, or didn't they know about it and you only heard that from Mr Moyeme? Is he present here?
MR VAN DEN BERG: No, he's not, Mr Chairperson. I do have a contact number for him. After the Cronje applications arrangements were made for the mothers to go out to what was believed to be the scene. And I didn't keep track of it post to that I'm afraid. We made enquiries during the Cronje application, in an attempt to ascertain the, or to get better information, but I'm afraid that we didn't in my office follow it up thereafter.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Do you say Mr Moyeme might be attached to our Investigative Unit?
MR VAN DEN BERG: Judge Khampepe, that was the impression that I was brought under. I may be completely incorrect.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Are you able to clear that with ...(indistinct).
MS LOCKHAT: Chairperson, this is the first time this has been brought to my knowledge. I can take up the matter further if he does work for the Commission and if it is clarified I can that upon myself to get that information, but this is the first time that I've heard of it.
CHAIRPERSON: Mrs Phiri, you have heard all that is being said now by counsel in this matter. Attempts will be made to try and find out if it is at all possible to do so, where these people were buried, the remains of these 10 people were buried and if any reliable information comes forward it will be communicated to you and to the parents of the other deceased. Do you understand?
MS PHIRI: I do understand.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
MS PHIRI: Can I have two more words to say?
CHAIRPERSON: Yes.
MS PHIRI: I want to enquire from the killers, yes they told us that they killed them, they told us that they injected them with drugs and they are buried, but I want them to know that their graves are open and even in heaven they will not get forgiveness at all because they killed minor children. Had these children killed people before we would have understood that yes, it was their turn to be killed, but I want to tell them today that they will never get forgiveness from God at all, their graves are waiting for them, waiting open.
CHAIRPERSON: Right you are. If this matter can be taken further we should do so.
MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, something that has just occurred to me that might be a fruitful enquiry into is, it surprises one to know that there was an inquest and that none of, where apparently there was some identification of some of these people with their addresses, it surprises one to learn that the next-of-kin were not told of an inquest and one wonders whether my learned friend couldn't just discover from these clients or from the relations whether they ever attended, because that might shed light on the situation.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, only the inquest occurred in the form of Boputhatswana and whether one would be able to trace the necessary documentation in that part of the world at this stage is another problem.
MR VISSER: One would just have expected the next-of-kin to have been informed of an inquest.
CHAIRPERSON: Right, thanks very much.
WITNESS EXCUSED
