ADV DE JAGER: Your full names please?
PHILIP RUDOLPH CRAUSE: (sworn states)
EXAMINATION BY MR VISSER: Chairperson, Exhibit A will now also be necessary. We have one copy apparently available if you don't have your copies with you.
Mr Crause, you've testified earlier in front of this Committee, is that correct?
COL CRAUSE: Yes, that is correct.
MR VISSER: You have Exhibit A as your evidence, handed in, and you have confirmed it as correct. Could you please page to page 33 of Exhibit A.
COL CRAUSE: Yes, I have the page.
MR VISSER: Could you perhaps just say what you know of this McKenzie operation, Colonel.
MR CRAUSE: That is paragraph 103, Chairperson. During March/April '87 with Loots I had a meeting at Pienaarsrivier. I just want to put it correctly, I wasn't quite sure at which river, but it must have been the Hennops Pride River.
MR VISSER: So it's the Hennops River?
MR CRAUSE: Hennops River. That was at Pretoria. During this meeting the following people were present, it was myself, Brigadier Cronje, Colonel Loots, Goosen, Momberg and possibly other people.
MR VISSER: Well we know that Commandant Charl Naude was also present.
MR CRAUSE: I just omitted him. We were informed that McKenzie had been bringing weapons and ammunition for the ANC from Botswana and McKenzie was requested by Lester Dumakude to take or get weapons in Botswana over the Easter weekend to transport that to South Africa ...(intervention)
MR VISSER: Just to put that in the right perspective, I think the evidence of Mr Momberg was that it wasn't said over the telephone, but that was the inference that was made.
MR CRAUSE: Yes, that is correct, that is how I understood it. It was planned to use this false compartment which was built into McKenzie's vehicle for the transportation of weapons so that they would then be killed or could then be killed by this compartment, or the bomb there.
It was discussed that an operative of Special Forces, stationed in Botswana, would activate the bomb after the MK took the vehicle from McKenzie. McKenzie was introduced to us at some stage. He was informed - that was what was told to me, I was not personally present, that the plan was to have a tracking device built into his kombi and apparently he was not opposed to that.
Colonel Loots and myself saw McKenzie's kombi when it went to Kopfontein border post when it left South Africa.
MR VISSER: Now what you have forgotten and what you now remember, you had a specific task, can you remember what that was?
MR CRAUSE: Yes, that is correct. The members who did the search at that stage were under my control. I was staff officer in Potchefstroom and I prevented them to search the vehicle and I also kept the dogs away from the vehicle.
MR VISSER: There is evidence of Mr Momberg and Goosen that McKenzie was not aware of the explosive device in his kombi and you have no reason to contest that?
MR CRAUSE: No.
MR VISSER: And you also later heard of the explosion and that people had been killed?
MR CRAUSE: Yes, that's correct.
MR VISSER: And you received your instructions from - from whom did you receive your, or on whose instruction did you act?
MR CRAUSE: That was Brigadier Cronje and Brigadier Loots.
MR VISSER: So in paragraph 114 you want to add Brigadier Loots, Brigadier Cronje and Loots as well?
MR CRAUSE: That's correct.
MR VISSER: Did you anticipate that things could perhaps possibly go awry and that other people besides ANC people or supporters could be killed or injured?
MR CRAUSE: Yes, I did foresee that.
MR VISSER: Now in the light of the objective, the targets who had to be eliminated, did you accept that risk?
MR CRAUSE: Yes, I accepted that.
MR VISSER: And the result of that was that you now apply for amnesty in respect of the death and the damage of the property of the people in Botswana?
MR CRAUSE: That is correct.
MR VISSER: Did you reconcile yourself with the aim to kill Dumakude and Mnisi and Pule?
MR CRAUSE: Yes, I did.
MR VISSER: Why was that?
MR CRAUSE: They were all involved in Special Operations, they were responsible for the Church Street bomb as well as many other serious bomb attacks in the Republic of South Africa.
MR VISSER: And paragraph 16, can you perhaps just read that?
MR CRAUSE: Is that 116?
MR VISSER: Yes.
MR CRAUSE
"The problems that were caused countrywide because of the smuggling of weapons, ammunition and explosives in the RSA, killed many people, damaged lots of property. And in this regard I refer to the evidence of General van der Merwe and Colonel Loots."
MR VISSER: Now that is evidence that has already been led and it is also part of the argument with regard to the Nietverdiendt case.
Chairperson, that is the evidence-in-chief, thank you.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Visser, won't you enlighten us, we see that in paragraph 115 there is some mention of one, Lambert Moloi.
MR VISSER: Yes.
Perhaps I have to ask you ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: Before you proceed to do so, no evidence has been led whatsoever about this by the other applicants.
MR VISSER: Yes, I believe, yes ...
Perhaps I just have to ask you, in paragraph 115 you say that:
"I agreed with the aim of the operation and that was to, in terms of the people from the MK of the ANC be eliminated, especially if they are well-known informers such as Dumakude, Mnisi, Pule and Lambert Moloi."
Did you mean to say that that was the aim of this operation, that Lambert Moloi had to be targeted?
MR CRAUSE: No, the idea was that he would have been one of the targets even if it is in another operation, but he wasn't a target of this operation.
MR VISSER: So you here pay attention to the most important people acting in Botswana.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VISSER
CHAIRPERSON: Now was the name of Lambert Moloi ever canvassed at the meeting that you attended?
MR CRAUSE: No, he was never discussed, I included it because he was also involved in the infiltration of people into the RSA and smuggling of weapons although it was not for Special Operations.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, but when the planning of this operation took place at, you say Hennops Pride, is that a river?
MR CRAUSE: Hennops Pride, yes.
CHAIRPERSON: You initially said Pienaarsrivier.
MR CRAUSE: That's correct, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: But you are willing to concede that it could have been at Hennops Pride?
MR CRAUSE: That is correct.
CHAIRPERSON: Is that a river, is Hennops Pride a river as well?
MR CRAUSE: I think it is a river, I don't really know the areas that well.
CHAIRPERSON: Because evidence was led that it was a picnic spot.
MR CRAUSE: It was a picnic spot, but they call it Hennops Pride. That is what I heard today.
ADV DE JAGER: The Hennops River is a river and there are various picnic spots along the river. Usually people go and have a picnic next to the river.
MR CRAUSE: Now I don't Pretoria that well, I accept that.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, but his name did not feature at all at that meeting that you've alluded to?
MR CRAUSE: No, it did not.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you. Mr Alberts, do you have any questions?
MR ALBERTS: Thank you, Chairperson, I have no questions.
NO QUESTIONS BY MR ALBERTS
CHAIRPERSON: Mr du Plessis?
MR DU PLESSIS: This time I have no questions, Chairperson.
NO QUESTIONS BY MR DU PLESSIS
CHAIRPERSON: For which we are grateful. Ms Lockhat?
MS LOCKHAT: No questions, Chairperson.
NO QUESTIONS BY MS LOCKHAT
MR VISSER: Chairperson, may I just, just to explain the name of Lambert Moloi, where it is and in that context. If you look at Exhibit A, page 15, paragraph 37.1, it really is a repetition of what was stated there, not to intend to say that Lambert Moloi was one of the targeted persons at that time, but it was in the context of what 37.1 says, where it says that
"From time to time the following people played an active role ..."
And Lambert Moloi was mentioned there and it was more in that sense, it wasn't to indicate that he was at all discussed or proposed as a target.
CHAIRPERSON: We have to blame you for that, Mr Visser, shouldn't we?
MR VISSER: And again my attorney has just point out ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Visser, we have to blame you for that?
MR VISSER: Absolutely, you know I'm just getting so tired of apologising, but I must say, Chairperson, that in defence of myself, that it was a very short time and I had to type it myself, but it is clearly my fault. I'm sorry about that.
CHAIRPERSON: Do you have any re-examination to do on Mr Crause?
MR VISSER: No thank you, Chairperson. This came across badly, I meant to say, I didn't mean to say that I'm getting tired of apologising to you, I intended to say I'm sure you're getting tired of my apologies. So I didn't express that correctly. I didn't intend any offence.
NO RE-EXAMINATION BY MR VISSER
CHAIRPERSON: Either way it's been well taken.
MR VISSER: Thank you, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lax?
MR LAX: Mr Crause, just one small point that worried me. In an effort to explain and almost in a sense to make your evidence fit in with the evidence already given you were asked a question about the nature of the information that had come to you about what McKenzie was going to do and a distinction was made which is different from what is in your affidavit here and the distinction was well, you people inferred that he was going to go and pick up arms. You personally didn't have any knowledge of the telephone conversation?
MR CRAUSE: That is correct. I think I mentioned that it was explained to me that that is what he was going to do, Chairperson.
MR LAX: I'm just not wanting the wrong impression to be created, that you had personal knowledge of that telephone.
MR CRAUSE: No, no.
MR LAX: You simply were told at the meeting that this is what they thought was going to happen and you accepted it as such?
MR CRAUSE: That is correct.
MR VISSER: That's paragraph 106 I think you're referring to?
MR LAX: Correct.
MR VISSER: Yes, he says apparently, yes.
CHAIRPERSON: I take it that Mr Visser wouldn't like to put any questions flowing from what Mr Lax has just stated to Mr Crause.
MR VISSER: Thank you, no, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Crause, you are excused.
MR CRAUSE: Thank you, Chairperson.
WITNESS EXCUSED
MR VISSER: Well then we've finished in time, half a minute past four ...
MACHINE SWITCHED OFF
CHAIRPERSON: Are we starting tomorrow with the evidence of General van der Merwe, Mr Visser, on the understanding that after completing his evidence we will be in a position to proceed
to give argument?
MR VISSER: Yes, indeed, Chairperson. Argument from my side will be very brief in fact.
CHAIRPERSON: Is that the situation with Mr Alberts as well? You would be in a position to argue tomorrow?
MR ALBERTS: I will get myself ready to argue tomorrow, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: We'd appreciate if you could definitely get yourself ready to argue tomorrow.
MR ALBERTS: As it pleases you.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr du Plessis as well?
MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, I'm going to be very short, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, you don't have to indicate whether you're going to be short or not, as long as you are ready to argue.
So we will then adjourn for today and reconvene tomorrow morning at 10 o'clock.
MS LOCKHAT: Please stand.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
