EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: (s.u.o.)
EXAMINATION BY MR HATTINGH: Thank you, Mr Chairman, Hattingh on record. Mr de Kock, yesterday you heard of the fact that extracts from the record of the Japie Maponya hearing were submitted to the Committee.
MR DE KOCK: That is correct.
MR HATTINGH: ...(inaudible)
INTERPRETER: The speaker's microphone is not on.
MR HATTINGH: And I have given you the extract which was provided to us for study.
MR DE KOCK: Yes.
MR HATTINGH: And have you studied the document since your departure from here yesterday?
MR DE KOCK: Yes.
MR HATTINGH: And you informed me this morning that you wish to make certain comments regarding the evidence in this relation.
MR DE KOCK: Yes.
MR HATTINGH: Will you then proceed in your own words and tell us what you wish to say.
MR DE KOCK: Thank you, Chairperson.
I would like to say that where it comes to the deception of Gen Engelbrecht, I would like to state clearly that I did not tell him where the man was killed, where he was placed, where we had killed him, how he was killed, whether he was shot and all accompanying factors, such as the blows with the spade and so forth. However, as the investigation progressed at head office, Gen Engelbrecht wanted to know where the danger levels were where we could anticipate problems from another investigation, if someone else were to launch another investigation. And I have made the following notes among others. Mr Nofomela stated that I shot the man dead at Vlakplaas, by the river, with a 9mm Baretta pistol with a silencer. I told the General that we had a Baretta with a silencer, he told me that the police did not issue such weapons, that we didn't have one.
MR HATTINGH: Could you elaborate on that, what did he mean by that?
MR DE KOCK: What he meant was that we deny that we had a Baretta pistol with a silencer. It was an illegal weapon, it was not a police issue weapon. I mentioned to him that Maponya did not die at Vlakplaas, which is a very ambivalent answer, he could have taken it further, he could have asked me where he had been killed then, but he never asked me this.
Mr Nofomela was taken to Vlakplaas in order to identify a vehicle in which Mr Nofomela(sic) would have been loaded after he had been wrapped in black plastic bags, after I had shot him at Vlakplaas. Mr Nofomela pointed out a Datsun Safari station wagon. I told Gen Engelbrecht that it was not the Safari, but a Toyota station wagon. He told me, even better so then. I told him that we had been in Krugersdorp ...(intervention)
MR HATTINGH: I beg your pardon, just before you proceed to your next point, let us just conclude this. What did he mean when he said "even better still"?
MR DE KOCK: Because Nofomela was identifying the wrong vehicle. If any forensic tests had to be undertaken there would be no proof whatsoever and that would just substantiate the lack of credibility of Mr Nofomela.
MR HATTINGH: Did he then tell you not to amend it officially?
MR DE KOCK: Yes, it was a further cover-up.
MR HATTINGH: The following point that you wish to make?
MR DE KOCK: I told him that we had been in Krugersdorp, that it was about the travel and accommodation claims. Gen Engelbrecht withdrew the travel and accommodation claims, it then indicated that we had only in Josini, there was no reference to Krugersdorp. This aspect of Krugersdorp could very easily have been discovered by going from one floor to the other in the Security Head Office, from the sixth to the seventh floor and obtaining a statement from Gen le Roux regarding Vlakplaas in 1985 or '86, as to whether they were in Krugersdorp at that time or not.
MR HATTINGH: Did he do so?
MR DE KOCK: No, he didn't.
At that stage at Section C1, there were work charts on which the amounts were indicated, along with the area in which the people had worked, with the exception of the travel and accommodation costs. This was removed by Gen Engelbrecht, I never saw it again.
I refer to a bag of books, books which were kept by the police in police vehicles, which gave a reflection on a monthly basis of where petrol had been purchased, so that it could be reconciled at the end of every month. This indicated that some of the vehicles had been in Krugersdorp. As far as I recall those books were handed in, and if I recall correctly it was Mr Nortje who handed these books in to Gen Engelbrecht.
MR HATTINGH: Was it ever offered as evidence before the Harms Commission?
MR DE KOCK: No.
MR HATTINGH: Did you ever see these books again afterwards?
MR DE KOCK: No.
Then I refer to a transfer of Sgt Johannes Mbelo, who during the Harms Commission was stationed in Bloemfontein. He was no longer with the Security Police. He was involved in the Maponya situation. I was asked whether Mbelo could be a problem should he talk and I said yes, that may be so.
MR HATTINGH: You said you were asked, who asked you?
MR DE KOCK: It was Gen Krappies Engelbrecht who asked me. I was not present when those arrangements were made, but Johannes Mbelo was once again transferred from Bloemfontein to Vlakplaas, so that it would boil down to a questions of damage control. In other words, the man was under control.
Furthermore, no statement was obtained from Capt Kleynhans, along with whom Nortje and the others had worked and with whom I had worked, whether Vlakplaas had been in Krugersdorp or not. For submission during the post-mortem inquest.
Gen Krappies Engelbrecht's attitude was in so many words that if a man wants to make allegations he would need proof. In this case it was Almond Nofomela. And that this evidence be removed and then the man has to try and prove it. He would have to try to substantiate his allegations.
And then regarding the refreshment of my recollection and the evidence of Mr Nortje, the petrol books that he went to fetch in Krugersdorp, were fetched under the order of Gen Engelbrecht. That is all, Chairperson.
MR HATTINGH: Very well, Mr de Kock. Where do the pages begin, the pages that were given to you?
MR DE KOCK: 337, Chairperson, page 337 to page 342.
MR HATTINGH: Very well. I have the complete record before me. May I refer you to page 335 thereof, which does not form part of the section which was handed up to the Chairperson. Perhaps I should begin at the bottom of page 334. Mr Wagener says the following to you
"Mr de Kock, my statement that I put to you was that upon this occasion, that would be the 26th of October 1989, Brig Engelbrecht heard for the first time a version from you regarding Maponya and he heard this in the presence of McNally and Conradie, and your version is one of denial, as contained within this affidavit."
He asks you about the occasion when the McNally and Conradie investigation was ongoing. Initially they were first appointed to investigate the allegations of Mr Nofomela, before Judge Harms was appointed, is that correct?
MR DE KOCK: Yes, that is correct.
MR HATTINGH: And after they launched their investigation, the Harms Commission was appointed and Mr McNally was appointed to offer the evidence before the Commission.
MR DE KOCK: Yes, that is correct.
MR HATTINGH: And it's this occasion - did you appear before them to give a version?
MR DE KOCK: That is correct, Chairperson.
MR HATTINGH: Now on page 335 you say thereafter, with regard to what I just read to you
"That is correct, Chairperson. I just want to mention that I answered the Chairperson's question, I did not mean to evade your question. Yes, it would be one of denial as the whole Vlakplaas situation was a question of denial. I sat there with a Brigadier, an Attorney-General - sorry, a General and an Attorney-General and even though I wanted to tell them what I had done, I certainly would not have told them in that office."
MR DE KOCK: That's correct, Chairperson.
MR HATTINGH: What did you want to convey with that, Mr de Kock?
MR DE KOCK: Chairperson, the whole essence of the Security Police was one of denial, similarly to the Biko situation and all the other situations. Here it was before we went in, in those offices it was generally decided right from the bottom to the top that we will deny, we don't know anything. And I think I mentioned it in my testimony here, so much so that a tapping device or listening device was placed in the office where Mr McNally and these people were and where Conradie was and the others who were all together in an office, from there could listen to the reception device. So the transmitter was in the office, we listened to the receiver in the other office and whatever was said there we could plan our situation from that.
MR HATTINGH: And who was aware of this listening device which was attached to a receiver, where you sat and listened to it? Who was aware of it?
MR DE KOCK: Chairperson, we who listened to it, but I did not arrange it.
MR HATTINGH: Do you know who arranged it?
MR DE KOCK: No, I don't know, but the Technical Division came to install it.
MR HATTINGH: So there you were before the Attorney-General, is that correct?
MR DE KOCK: That is correct.
MR HATTINGH: Were you prepared to tell him the correct version?
MR DE KOCK: No, Chairperson.
MR HATTINGH: You then, initially in your explanation you said that you did not explain or give Gen Engelbrecht the complete detail. Will you however be able to tell us, according to you, whether he knew that there was something amiss in the death Mr, or the disappearance of Mr Maponya at that stage?
MR DE KOCK: Yes, Chairperson, because Nofomela made such a statement and it had to be investigated, and the man had been missing for approximately five years.
MR HATTINGH: But did he know that there were problems from your side?
MR DE KOCK: Yes, Chairperson, because the discussion he had with me was that where should we expect problems, where should we stop, where should we block?
MR HATTINGH: And then you later say in that piece that after the post-mortem inquest you told Gen Engelbrecht in detail, "when I say in detail", you told him what happened to Mr Maponya.
MR DE KOCK: That's correct, Chairperson.
MR HATTINGH: What did you tell him on that occasion?
MR DE KOCK: There I said to him where Maponya had been killed and how he had been killed.
MR HATTINGH: And you mention it and you don't mention the name, but you say that there were witnesses present. Who was that?
MR DE KOCK: It was Mr Klopper, Chairperson.
MR HATTINGH: Mr Chairman, may I with your leave, also deal with one or two other aspects that emerge from cross-examination of other witnesses?
CHAIRPERSON: Well if it's something new, we can't just have second bites at the cherry.
MR HATTINGH: Very well, Mr Chairman, then I'll rather leave it. I have no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR HATTINGH
CHAIRPERSON: Any questions arising from the evidence that has just been led?
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR WAGENER: Jan Wagener, Mr Chairman.
Mr de Kock, I have sat here with great interest listening to you as you try to save yourself from your previous dilemma of the Japie Maponya evidence. Indeed, and I will argue this, the one thing that you still testify is that you misled Gen Engelbrecht at least up to after the post-mortem inquest which took place. I don't have the documents here, but if I recall correctly, in 1991. Is that correct?
MR DE KOCK: Chairperson, yes, and I would like to qualify that. If I did not tell him that the man had been killed in Swaziland, on that side of the border, I did not tell him how we murdered him and where we murdered him, it was misleading.
MR WAGENER: Mr de Kock, would you like to comment any further, because later I do not want to hear that you will try to correct it again? Would you like to comment any further on this cross-examination of mine during the Japie Maponya matter?
MR DE KOCK: No, Chairperson, this was a matter of enlightening and it was for broader information to the Commission.
MR WAGENER: So if we ask for the record of what you have testified here this afternoon, you will stick to that?
MR DE KOCK: Yes, Chairperson.
MR WAGENER: Then Mr Chairman, in those circumstances I've got no questions, thank you.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR WAGENER
CHAIRPERSON: Any questions? Thank you.
MR DE KOCK: Thank you, Chairperson.
WITNESS EXCUSED
CHAIRPERSON: Anybody else going to call, recall? We come to you, Mr van der Walt.
MR VAN DER WALT: Thank you, Mr Chairman. With leave of the Committee, I would like to call the widow of the late Mr Ngqulunga, Mrs Catherine Ngqulunga.
TOLAGELE CATHERINE NGQULUNGA: (sworn states)
MR SIBANYONI: She has been sworn in, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
EXAMINATION BY MR VAN DER WALT: Thank you, Mr Chairman.
Mrs Ngqulunga, is it correct that you are the widow of the later Mr Brian Elliot Ngqulunga, about whom this inquiry is now proceeding?
MS NGQULUNGA: Yes, that is correct.
MR VAN DER WALT: Is it correct that you were married to him on the 29th day of September 198 ...(inaudible - machine switched off)
INTERPRETER: May the question please be repeated.
MR VAN DER WALT: Is it correct that you were married to him on the 29th day of September 1984?
MS NGQULUNGA: That is correct.
MR VAN DER WALT: From the marriage between you and the deceased, were there any children born?
MS NGQULUNGA: Yes.
MR VAN DER WALT: How many children were born?
MS NGQULUNGA: Two children.
MR VAN DER WALT: How old are they currently?
MS NGQULUNGA: One is 16, the other one is 14 years old.
MR VAN DER WALT: Is it correct that shortly after, or at some time after the death of your late husband, you submitted an affidavit to the police?
MS NGQULUNGA: That is correct.
MR VAN DER WALT: The document contained on pages 152 and 153 of the bundle, will you look at that document, is that the affidavit you submitted?
MS NGQULUNGA: Yes.
MR VAN DER WALT: Can you remember exactly when you were asked to give an affidavit or a statement about this whole incident?
MS NGQULUNGA: I cannot recall which year it was, but we were in Court with de Kock.
MR VAN DER WALT: Is it correct that before you were called to testify today, you had the opportunity to go through this statement with me and with an interpreter in the employ of this Commission?
MS NGQULUNGA: That is correct.
MR VAN DER WALT: Are you in a position to confirm that the statement is in essence correct and you are satisfied with it?
MS NGQULUNGA: Yes.
MR VAN DER WALT: I want to take you to the statement, or rather what happened around the 20th of July 1990. At that stage your husband was in the employ of the South African Police, is that correct?
MS NGQULUNGA: That is correct.
MR VAN DER WALT: Where did he work then?
MS NGQULUNGA: At the Police Headquarters.
MR VAN DER WALT: Was he at a certain stage employed at Vlaklaas?
MS NGQULUNGA: Yes.
MR VAN DER WALT: At the time of his death, did he still work at Vlakplaas or was he at Police Headquarters?
MS NGQULUNGA: He was then working at the headquarters.
MR VAN DER WALT: On Friday the 20th of July 1990, the deceased went to work as far as you knew, is that correct?
MS NGQULUNGA: That is correct.
MR VAN DER WALT: He didn't return and you subsequently learnt that he was killed.
MS NGQULUNGA: That is correct.
MR VAN DER WALT: Now on the Saturday, the 21st of July, when he did not return home, what did you do?
MS NGQULUNGA: I went out looking for him.
MR VAN DER WALT: And did you do certain enquiries at some of his colleagues?
MS NGQULUNGA: Yes.
MR VAN DER WALT: Did you also make telephone calls?
MS NGQULUNGA: Yes.
MR VAN DER WALT: Can you remember who you called?
MS NGQULUNGA: I called Mamasela and he gave me le Roux's telephone number and he said should he not come back home in the evening, I should phone le Roux and enquire as to Brian's whereabouts. And le Roux said I should wait because he wanted to enquire from the others as to what happened to Brian. I then waited for a response from le Roux, but then I was not at home at that time, I was at a neighbour's house where I had gone to ask for the use of the telephone.
MR VAN DER WALT: Now this le Roux you're referring to, is it - did you know his rank, was he at that stage Brigadier le Roux?
MS NGQULUNGA: No, I don't know his rank, he could have been a Brigadier.
MR VAN DER WALT: Did he return to you, did he phone you back there where you waited for him for a response? Or what happened then, whilst you were waiting for him to give you information?
MS NGQULUNGA: I was still waiting for him to call me. Before he called, van Dyk and Engelbrecht came and informed me that Brian is dead and he is in the mortuary and when I enquired as to what killed him, they said he was killed by the ANC and they left me where they found me and my neighbours took me home.
MR VAN DER WALT: The person you are referring to as Engelbrecht, did you know him before this particular day, the 21st of July?
MS NGQULUNGA: I was seeing him for the first time, I didn't even know he was van Dyk.
MR VAN DER WALT: And the other person, Engelbrecht, did you know him before?
MS NGQULUNGA: No.
MR VAN DER WALT: How do you know that person's surname is Engelbrecht?
MS NGQULUNGA: They identified themselves.
MR VAN DER WALT: You requested to see the deceased at the mortuary, is that correct?
MS NGQULUNGA: That is correct.
MR VAN DER WALT: Now you were taken there, is it on the Monday the 23rd of July, where you identified the deceased as your late husband? Is that correct?
MS NGQULUNGA: That is correct.
MR VAN DER WALT: You also saw that he was wounded, particularly in his face and at his back and you thought it was gunshot wounds, is that correct?
CHAIRPERSON: What date was it?
MR VAN DER WALT: On the 23rd day of July 1990, the Tuesday, Mr Chairman. That is at the end, Mr Chairman, of page 152 going over to 153. May I proceed, Mr Chairman?
CHAIRPERSON: Yes.
MR VAN DER WALT: Mrs Ngqulunga, do you know a person by the name of Geoffrey Bosigo?
MS NGQULUNGA: Yes, I know him.
MR VAN DER WALT: Was he a colleague of your husband?
MS NGQULUNGA: Yes.
MR VAN DER WALT: A person by the name of Simon Radebe, who gave evidence here today, was he also a colleague of your husband?
MS NGQULUNGA: Yes.
MR VAN DER WALT: In paragraph 5, on page 153, you make mention of a discussion which took place between yourself and a certain Busi Bosigo, the spouse of Mr Geoffrey Bosigo. Can you recall that incident?
MS NGQULUNGA: Yes.
MR VAN DER WALT: What happened there?
MS NGQULUNGA: Busi came to me in the morning to inform me that I should not worry because my husband was killed by Geoff and Simon, together with their white colleagues, not the ANC, as purported.
MR VAN DER WALT: Yes, and what did you think of that? Did you believe her?
MS NGQULUNGA: Initially I did not believe that it could be his white colleagues, only later I believed that it was indeed true.
MR VAN DER WALT: Now because of this that was conveyed to you by Busi Bosigo, I see you state in your statement you went to a certain Sam Magage, is that also a colleague of your late husband?
MS NGQULUNGA: Yes.
MR VAN DER WALT: And what happened then? Did you ask him about this information you gained?
MS NGQULUNGA: I asked him, wondering how it could be that they were working together and yet they were killing one another and he said he did not know anything about that. And the following day Simon and Sam came to wake me up in the morning, saying they wanted to verify the information that I had received and I said "Yes, indeed, Busi told me so that you together with your white colleagues are the ones responsible for the death of my husband" and I indicated to them that the truth will ultimately surface one day.
MR VAN DER WALT: And you left it there, you didn't do anything further about that?
MS NGQULUNGA: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: What was their reaction to what you told them?
MS NGQULUNGA: Simon stood up and left and he said he could not have killed Brian and have the guts of coming into his house.
MR VAN DER WALT: Did you at any further or later stage again discuss the matter with Simon Radebe or not?
MS NGQULUNGA: No, I saw Simon Radebe for the last time that day until I saw him today.
MR VAN DER WALT: Now Mrs Ngqulunga, at the time of your husband's death, was he the only breadwinner in the family or did you also work?
MS NGQULUNGA: He was the only breadwinner.
MR VAN DER WALT: Can you perhaps tell this Commission what your feelings and emotions are today regarding this incident?
MS NGQULUNGA: I'm very pleased today to know what killed my husband, even though they're not telling the whole truth as it should be. I'm just thankful that I know who was responsible for the death of my husband, not the ANC, as it was claimed earlier. I had started developing hatred towards the ANC, but later on I heard the truth and I would not even look at his office during my rounds in town.
MR VAN DER WALT: Is it possible at all for you to forgive the people, persons who were responsible?
MS NGQULUNGA: No.
MR VAN DER WALT: Not any one of the applicants, or anyone in particular that you cannot forgive?
MS NGQULUNGA: It's hard to say, not now.
MR VAN DER WALT: Thank you, Mr Chairman, I have nothing further for the witness.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VAN DER WALT
EXAMINATION BY MR HATTINGH: Thank you, Mr Chairman, Hattingh on record. Mrs Ngqulunga, did I understand you to say that the statement which forms part of the bundle, was only taken from you, obtained from you during the course of the de Kock criminal trial?
MS NGQULUNGA: Yes, I think so, if I'm not mistaken.
MR HATTINGH: Was that the first time that you were asked to make a statement about the death of your husband?
MS NGQULUNGA: No, the Department of Justice came to my house.
MR HATTINGH: Yes, very well, that was in connection with the claim for pension or for maintenance, is that correct?
MS NGQULUNGA: No.
MR HATTINGH: What was that about?
MS NGQULUNGA: They were investigating.
MR HATTINGH: When was this?
MS NGQULUNGA: I think it was in 1994, if I'm not mistaken.
MR HATTINGH: Some years after the death of your husband?
MS NGQULUNGA: Yes.
MR HATTINGH: Now shortly after his death, were you approached by any member of either the South African Police or the Bophuthatswana Police, with the view to obtain a statement from you in connection with the death of your husband?
MS NGQULUNGA: No.
MR HATTINGH: Thank you, Mr Chairman, we have no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR HATTINGH
MR BOOYENS: No questions, Mr Chairman.
NO QUESTIONS BY MR BOOYENS
MR LAMEY: No questions, Chairperson.
NO QUESTIONS BY MR LAMEY
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR WAGENER: Jan Wagener, Mr Chairman. Before I commence, and with your leave Mr Chairman, I would wish to put certain issues on record if I'm allowed to.
CHAIRPERSON: Depends what it is.
MR WAGENER: Gen J H le Roux, as you will recall, is a client of mine for purposes of other matters. I've spoken to him during the lunch hour regarding this statement of Mrs Ngqulunga, and he said to me that during 1990, he was a Brigadier at Security Head Office, as far as he can remember he was the only le Roux there, the postal section where Mr Ngqulunga was apparently working did fall under his overall command. So in that sense he would have been high up in the echelon, he would have been in a command position ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: I'm not trying to stop you ...(indistinct - no microphone)
MR WAGENER: Yes, I do.
CHAIRPERSON: Oh. Carry on.
MR WAGENER: This is merely for your assistance, Mr Chairman. He said to me - in other words, it is quite possible that Mrs Ngqulunga did make contact with him on that day, the 21st of July. He can't remember anything, but he said it is quite possible and that he would then have taken steps to try and find out, as is said in this affidavit, where Mr Ngqulunga was or where he had been the previous day. So I don't think it takes the matter here any further, but for your assistance, that seems to be Gen J H le Roux that's referred to there.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
ADV SANDI: Are you going to give a similar explanation about Mr Engelbrecht? Because I thought she said one of the persons who came to see her was a Mr Engelbrecht.
MR WAGENER: Mr Chairman, I think the proper way to do that would be by way of questions. So I do intend asking a few questions on that score, Mr Sandi.
Mrs Ngqulunga, you heard what I've just told the Commission, that I've been informed that there was a Brig le Roux, who was apparently high up in a command position over your late husband. You heard that?
MS NGQULUNGA: Yes, I did.
MR WAGENER: And that he says that it's quite possible that you could have spoken to him on that day, the 21st of July. Have you heard that?
MS NGQULUNGA: Yes.
MR WAGENER: We have heard evidence here that your late husband had certain contact with Vlakplaas right until the time of his death, are you aware of that?
MS NGQULUNGA: I do not quite understand, would you please repeat that.
MR WAGENER: We have heard evidence here that your husband, right till the time of his death, visited Vlakplaas at times, he had certain contact with Vlakplaas and the people of Vlakplaas. Are you aware of that?
MS NGQULUNGA: I don't know anything about that. They used to throw braais during December, but he never attended such braais.
MR WAGENER: Do you know who at that time of your husband's death, was the overall commander of Vlakplaas?
MS NGQULUNGA: Yes.
MR WAGENER: Who was that?
MS NGQULUNGA: De Kock.
MR WAGENER: And do you know who was Mr de Kock's commander in turn in the police structures?
MS NGQULUNGA: I have no idea, because Brian always spoke about de Kock and I cannot know the names of the people above him.
MR WAGENER: We now know that at the time of your husband's death, de Kock's commander was a person called Brig van Rensburg, are you aware of that?
MS NGQULUNGA: I only heard about this during evidence here.
MR WAGENER: We have evidence before us that this Brig van Rensburg, that he visited your house at some stage, can you remember that?
MS NGQULUNGA: Yes, I do.
MR WAGENER: When was that?
MS NGQULUNGA: In 1990, when I was sick.
MR WAGENER: Was that before your husband's death?
MS NGQULUNGA: No, he was still alive.
MR WAGENER: Ja. And did he visit your house after his death, or can't you remember?
MS NGQULUNGA: No, he never ever came to my house thereafter.
MR WAGENER: He, that is Mr van Rensburg, he says that he was in your house at the time of the funeral. Do you remember that?
MS NGQULUNGA: Yes, there were whites, but I cannot say who they were.
MR WAGENER: So Brig van Rensburg could have been there?
MS NGQULUNGA: As I have indicated yes, there were whites, but I could not see them quite well.
MR WAGENER: Do you know what Brig van Rensburg looks like, his physique?
MS NGQULUNGA: Even though it's been a long time, but yes, I know him.
MR WAGENER: Can you describe to us what he looks like?
MS NGQULUNGA: Briefly yes, he's tall, bald head and he's hefty.
MR WAGENER: Mr Chairman, I think you've seen Mr van Rensburg, it seems to me rather accurate I would say, although I don't think he's that tall.
CHAIRPERSON: He's a big man.
MR WAGENER: Yes.
Mrs Ngqulunga, you say that the day after your husband disappeared two people visited your house, a Mr van Dyk and a Mr Engelbrecht.
MS NGQULUNGA: Yes.
MR WAGENER: Now I represent Mr Engelbrecht and that's why I'm asking you these questions. Are you sure it was Mr Engelbrecht who visited your house? - that day, the 21st of July, the day after your husband disappeared.
MS NGQULUNGA: I have already indicated that I do not know him quite well. The one person that I know fully well is van Dyk.
MR WAGENER: You see why I ask you is that Mr Engelbrecht has told me that he's never ever been to your house and it wasn't him that you're referring to here, you must be confused with someone else. What do you say to that?
MS NGQULUNGA: I cannot say because when they came - when they came to inform me about the death of Brian, I started crying, but I heard his name be called out to be Engelbrecht and van Dyk. As I have explained earlier on that I did not know him. The one person that I knew well was van Dyk. I could be mistaken.
MR WAGENER: And then lastly, why did they visit you on that night, what was the conversation about? Or was this merely to show their condolences?
MS NGQULUNGA: They had come to inform me about the death of my husband and that he was in the mortuary.
MR WAGENER: Very lastly, can you perhaps remember what this person looked like, the person that you referred to as Engelbrecht?
MS NGQULUNGA: I cannot because when they entered the house I was not there, I had gone to my friend's place to ask them to use the phone, so that I could call le Roux. That's where they found me. Van Dyk was in fact the one who called me outside at my friend's place and he informed me and the other gentleman remained inside the house. And the people started, or should I say, they heard me screaming and crying from outside and they came out of the house. But the one that I'm talking about is not tall, he's short.
MR WAGENER: Well then I have to put it to you that Mr Engelbrecht is a tall, tall person and I once again put it to you that you may be mistaken with his identity.
CHAIRPERSON: Isn't there a possibility it could be another Engelbrecht? She hasn't attempted to identify him as the person concerned. She didn't give rank at the time.
MR WAGENER: Mr Chairman, the affidavit refers to a Brig Engelbrecht.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, yes.
MR WAGENER: And there was no other Brig Engelbrecht.
CHAIRPERSON: Ja, but she hasn't - you didn't say it was a Brigadier who came, did you?
MS NGQULUNGA: They came to my house and I was not there, I had gone out looking for Brian and they took my child along to where I was, where I wanted to make a phone call.
MR WAGENER: Thank you, Mr Chairman, I'll leave it there. Thank you.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR WAGENER
MR VAN DER WALT: Thank you, Mr Chairman, I have no re-examination.
NO RE-EXAMINATION BY MR VAN DER WALT
MR SIBANYONI: Mrs Ngqulunga, I heard you mentioning Joe Mamasela, did he visit your house very often?
MS NGQULUNGA: Not often, but yes he did pay us visits.
MR SIBANYONI: When did you first meet your husband, was it at that stage when he was working at Vlakplaas, or was it before that?
MS NGQULUNGA: I met him when he was working at Vlakplaas.
MR SIBANYONI: Did his colleague - at that stage where did you stay, at Soshanguve?
MS NGQULUNGA: I was staying in Piet Retief.
MR SIBANYONI: And when did you start to stay in Soshanguve?
MS NGQULUNGA: In 1996(sic).
MR SIBANYONI: Now did his colleagues from Vlakplaas visit him in Soshanguve?
MS NGQULUNGA: Some of them stayed in Soshanguve.
MR SIBANYONI: Were they staying openly, in other words you know Joe is working at Vlakplaas, your husband is working at Vlakplaas, as well as Sam Radebe, did that circle of people know one another and visit one another as well?
MS NGQULUNGA: They knew one another. Mamasela used to pay us visits, but Simon was not quite used to us, or we had not got to know him very well. He came to my house for the first time on the death of Brian.
MR SIBANYONI: Did you know what type of work they were doing in Vlakplaas?
MS NGQULUNGA: I knew that they were looking for the ANC.
MR SIBANYONI: Thank you, Mr Chairperson, no further questions.
ADV SANDI: Just one or two. ...(intervention)
MR SIBANYONI: I'm sorry, just one last question. We heard that your husband could not be buried in Vlakplaas, I mean in Soshanguve, because there were some riots and the like and as a result he was buried at Vlakplaas or next to Vlakplaas. Is he still there in Vlakplaas?
MS NGQULUNGA: No, he was exhumed last year.
MR SIBANYONI: Thank you, Mrs Ngqulunga.
ADV SANDI: Thank you. Did your husband ever say anything to you about the ANC?
MS NGQULUNGA: No, nothing.
ADV SANDI: You heard the evidence here that he was suspected of co-operating with the ANC, would you like to make any comment on that?
MS NGQULUNGA: Yes.
ADV SANDI: What do you say?
MS NGQULUNGA: It surprises me when they say they suspected him of working with the ANC, or intending to go back to the ANC. He could not have done that without informing me because he was informing me about what they were doing at work. That is what surprises me.
ADV SANDI: You have said one of the names your husband used to mention was the name of de Kock, what would he say about Mr de Kock?
MS NGQULUNGA: He said he's working relationship with de Kock was not good because de Kock was beating them up. That is why he decided to leave Vlakplaas for the head office or the headquarters and I asked him as to whether there was not any other job that he could leave the security job for if this was happening.
ADV SANDI: At the head office where he used to work, that is at the time he was killed, what did he say about his working conditions there, was everything well? What did he say was the situation?
MS NGQULUNGA: ...(no English interpretation)
ADV SANDI: What was the translation?
MS NGQULUNGA: There was no problem with him at the head office. The problem started when he started going to the Harms Commission and he pointed out that things were no longer the same at the office.
ADV SANDI: Did he explain what he meant when he said to you things were no longer the same at the head office?
MS NGQULUNGA: He meant that the whites were no longer treating him well.
ADV SANDI: Thank you. Thank you, Mr Chairman.
CHAIRPERSON: Two matters, one very trifling. Is the head quarters at Polly's Arcade?
MS NGQULUNGA: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: And after your husband's death, were you paid anything from the Police Force or by any member of the Police Force?
MS NGQULUNGA: I got his work pension.
CHAIRPERSON: And have you still got that?
MS NGQULUNGA: Yes, they do give it to me at the end of the month.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much. I think I speak on behalf of everybody here when we say how much we sympathise with you and how much we admire your courage for coming here.
WITNESS EXCUSED
MR VAN DER WALT: Thank you, Mr Chairman, I do not intend calling any further witnesses on behalf of the family.
ADV STEENKAMP: Mr Chairman, maybe just for the record. All the details of the next-of-kin and the family were already submitted to the R&R Committee, to be declared victims in accordance with the Act. Just for the record purposes. Thank you, Mr Chairman.
CHAIRPERSON: I don't think I will ask you gentlemen to start arguing the matter now, will you be ready tomorrow morning? What time, 10 o'clock?
Right, we will now adjourn until 10 o'clock tomorrow morning.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
