Amnesty Hearings

ON RESUMPTION

MR VISSER: Would you rise please.

ADV DE JAGER: Your full names please?

MR PRETORIUS: Anton Pretorius, Mr Chairperson.

ANTON PRETORIUS: (sworn states)

ADV DE JAGER: Thank you.

EXAMINATION BY MR VISSER: Mr Pretorius, you are also an applicant with this application and we can find your application in the Bundle, from page 97 to page 127. You deal with this incident from page 113 to page 126?

MR PRETORIUS: That is correct.

MR VISSER: You have had the opportunity to study Exhibit A and you confirmed this, do you once again confirm this document Mr Pretorius?

MR PRETORIUS: Yes, that is correct.

MR VISSER: And you request that your evidence, which is embodied therein and also with reference to any other evidence in that exhibit, be incorporated with your current evidence today?

MR PRETORIUS: That is correct.

MR VISSER: You have also previously given evidence in amnesty applications with regard to the assault of one Nokuthula Simelane, is that correct?

MR PRETORIUS: That is correct.

MR VISSER: And that application is still pending, it has not been completed?

MR PRETORIUS: That is correct.

MR VISSER: Would you begin on page 2 and briefly address the Committee regarding your share in the incident?

MR PRETORIUS: Paragraph 1? Very well, introduction, during 1986 I was a Lieutenant and I was attached to the Intelligence Unit of the Security Branch, Soweto. General, the then Brig Ignatius Coetzee, was then the Divisional Commander and the Head of our Unit was Col Louis de Jager. I closely cooperated with my immediate senior, Colonel, then Capt Willem Coetzee. As such I had knowledge of the information to which he has referred in his evidence before this Committee and I am able to confirm it. As such I confirm the evidence of Col Coetzee with regard to paragraph 3 to paragraph 13 of the summary of his evidence which has been submitted to the Committee, that is Exhibit C.

MR VISSER: Very well, proceed.

MR PRETORIUS: The facts - I have been informed that the date upon which the incident took place, was on or approximately the 13th to the 14th of December 1986. Apparently I was mistaken in my application for amnesty with the date which I stated there, namely the 14th to the 16th of December 1986. Furthermore I confirm the information contained within paragraph 15 to 35 of Col W. Coetzee's statement of evidence.

MR VISSER: Exhibit C, very well, proceed.

MR PRETORIUS: Final planning was executed by me, Lt-Col Coetzee and Col de Jager. I would enter Swaziland with Col de Jager via the Nersden border post, while Lt-Col Coetzee would ensure that SWT180 would safely enter Swaziland via Oshoek. Sgt Mkhonza would assist Lt-Col Coetzee with SWT180 in this regard. I cannot recall precisely what his role and function would have been, but refer to the evidence of Col Coetzee in this regard.

MR VISSER: You are now referring to the role and function of Sgt Mkhonza?

MR PRETORIUS: Yes, that is correct.

MR VISSER: Very well, proceed.

MR PRETORIUS: I must just state that a vehicle was made available by us to SWT180 which he himself would drive in Swaziland. After the operation, the vehicle would be left in Swaziland to be picked up later. On Saturday ...

MR VISSER: Please proceed somewhat slower.

MR PRETORIUS: On Saturday ...

ADV DE JAGER: Mr Visser, the witness has just confirmed that he confirms what Mr Coetzee has stated and what he is submitting to us here, is precisely what Mr Coetzee has stated already. Is there anything new that he is going to add and if so, can we deal with that? Is it necessary for us to reiterate everything?

MR VISSER: From paragraph 7 onwards, he submits his own share in the matter and from that perspective, it is different to the evidence of Col Coetzee, with regard to his perspective.

MR PRETORIUS: I proceed with paragraph 7. On Saturday, 13th of December 1986, Col de Jager and I entered Swaziland via Nersden in the Unit's minibus. The reason why Col de Jager and I entered via Nersden border post, was in order to avoid unnecessary attention, seeing as most of the other members would move through the Oshoek border post. I had my issued service pistol with me and I took it over the border without declaring the weapon and the ammunition.

MR VISSER: Would that constitute an offence?

MR PRETORIUS: Definitely.

MR VISSER: Very well, proceed.

MR PRETORIUS: Late that afternoon of Saturday, 13th of December 1986, Col de Jager and I joined among others Col de Kock, Col Deetlefs, Capt Paul van Dyk, Warrant Officer Freek Pienaar and Sgt Douw Willemse at the kwaLoseni - I have mistakenly stated kwaLoseni Hotel here, but I cannot recall which one of the Holiday Inn hotels it was where we met them.

MR VISSER: Later the previous witness, Col Coetzee, joined you there, is that correct?

MR PRETORIUS: Yes, that is correct.

MR VISSER: And do you then confirm the meeting that you had with SWT180 along with Col Coetzee?

MR PRETORIUS: That is correct Chairperson.

MR VISSER: And the information that he conveyed to you?

MR PRETORIUS: That is correct.

MR VISSER: And was it then arranged that there would be another rendezvous with him later on that evening?

MR PRETORIUS: That is correct.

MR VISSER: Very well, proceed, paragraph 10.

MR PRETORIUS: SWT180 was once again questioned regarding the precise location of the safehouse and it was put to him that he should possibly point out the house to us later on that evening. A later rendezvous point was arranged with SWT180.

MR VISSER: Now, did you and Coetzee then return to the hotel and as he has already testified, report back to those who were waiting at the hotel?

MR PRETORIUS: That is correct.

MR VISSER: Would you proceed, paragraph 12?

MR PRETORIUS: While we were waiting for the following rendezvous with SWT180, the team at the hotel discussed the operation and among others, our withdrawal after the operation. Col de Kock stated that we should follow him to a point near Oshoek where we would take a detour which would take us through the border fence itself. General security measures were also discussed on this occasion and it was suggested that we should move around as little as possible, so as not to draw unnecessary attention.

MR VISSER: Did you also come to the conclusion that there was a possibility that other members of the Security Police were present in Swaziland and that this emanated from what was said during the discussion?

MR PRETORIUS: That is correct.

MR VISSER: And is it correct that you and Col Coetzee later left that group at the hotel to meet SWT180?

MR PRETORIUS: That is correct.

MR VISSER: And is it correct, according to his evidence, that you had to wait for quite some time for him to arrive?

MR PRETORIUS: That is correct.

MR VISSER: Please proceed with paragraph 15.

MR PRETORIUS: SWT180 arrived much later and reported to us that the September Machinery members had kept him very busy, but that he had dropped them off. He also stated that MK Ben had also been in the vehicle when he drove passed us. SWT180 reported that he had dropped off the group consisting of MK Mzala, MK Pantsu and MK Sipho at the safehouse in Fountains. Furthermore he stated that he had been instructed by the September Machinery to return to the house early the following morning so that he could personally discuss operational matters with MK September. From this we deduced that MK September would possibly spend the night at the safehouse.

ADV DE JAGER: Here I would just like to know if you could clarify this, what happened to MK Ben?

MR PRETORIUS: Chairperson, he also dropped him off at the house that night and we suspected that he must have walked from there to the second house, to which Mr Coetzee has referred in his statement.

ADV DE JAGER: But in this statement you say that he dropped only three persons off at that house? That is why I want to know whether Ben's name shouldn't be incorporated with that? "The group consisting of Mzala, Pantsu and Sipho were dropped off at the safehouse."

MR PRETORIUS: Yes, that is correct Chairperson, I really cannot recall precisely what SWT180 told us that evening with regard to what happened to MK Ben.

MR VISSER: Just to attempt to clarify this, who was MK Mzala?

MR PRETORIUS: Chairperson, he was one of the Machinery members of the September Machinery.

MR VISSER: Yes, but as it later appeared, he was not there that evening.

MR PRETORIUS: He was also not there.

MR VISSER: But it was reported to you by SWT180 that he was indeed dropped off at that safehouse?

MR PRETORIUS: Yes, that is what I recall.

MR VISSER: Very well, is that the best that you can recall regarding these persons?

MR PRETORIUS: Yes, that is correct.

MR VISSER: Now you accepted that MK September would possibly be there and I think that it has already been stated by Col Coetzee in his evidence that you then went with SWT180 so that he could point out the safehouse in Fountains to you, is that correct?

MR PRETORIUS: Yes, that is correct.

MR VISSER: And that a sketch plan of the house was also drawn up?

MR PRETORIUS: That is correct.

MR VISSER: Who was the person who drew up the sketch plan with SWT180?

MR PRETORIUS: It was I personally.

MR VISSER: Did you also indicate on Exhibit B which was served before the Committee today, did you also indicate how it was supposed to be drawn up?

MR PRETORIUS: Yes.

MR VISSER: Is that what the interior of the house resembled, according to your recollection?

MR PRETORIUS: Yes.

MR VISSER: Then you state that after SWT180 had pointed out the safehouse to you, you returned to the hotel immediately, that is paragraph 18.

MR PRETORIUS: Yes, that is correct.

MR VISSER: And you agree that the safehouse was approximately 20 kilometres from the hotel where the other members were waiting, is that correct?

MR PRETORIUS: Yes, that is correct.

MR VISSER: And the sketch plan was then discussed there, is that correct?

MR PRETORIUS: Yes, that is correct.

MR VISSER: And furthermore it was discussed whether or not you would continue that very same evening or whether you should postpone the matter to the following day?

MR PRETORIUS: That is correct.

MR VISSER: You also mentioned the same considerations in your statement, Exhibit D that Mr Coetzee mentioned in his statement for motivating why you decided to act that very same night?

MR PRETORIUS: That is correct.

MR VISSER: And then finally, do you also agree with Col Coetzee regarding the orders and instructions which Col de Kock issued, that it had to be determined that MK Pantsu at least was in the house otherwise the operation could not continue?

MR PRETORIUS: That is correct.

MR VISSER: Very well, proceed with paragraph 23 then, I beg your pardon, paragraph 24.

MR PRETORIUS: We drove from the hotel to Fountains in a convoy. As far as I can recall, there were approximately five vehicles who were all driving in a convoy, it was already late night, early morning. On the way to the house Lt-Col Coetzee and I explained the situation to SWT180 and discussed the plan of action with him. He was informed that he was to knock on the door and what he was supposed to do. It would be highly improbable that MK Pantsu would not be there, seeing as he and the others had been dropped off there late at night by SWT180, they didn't have transport and the house was situated far from the town. Approximately 500 metres from the safehouse, we stopped. All of us climbed out, upon which I received a sub-machine gun with a silencer.

MR VISSER: Yes, and you repeat the evidence of Col Coetzee?

MR PRETORIUS: Yes.

MR VISSER: That these weapons were concealed in a blueish minibus which Col de Kock had apparently travelled with?

MR PRETORIUS: That is correct.

MR VISSER: That these weapons were concealed in a minibus?

MR PRETORIUS: That is correct.

MR VISSER: How were they concealed in the minibus?

MR PRETORIUS: Chairperson, it was only after the withdrawal from Swaziland that I noticed where the false compartment was, it was above with the roof. If one climbed into the minibus, there was a false panel which was in the roofing over the driving area of the minibus. We approached the safehouse on foot. I took up position with Sgt Willemse next to one of the walls near the front door, with Col de Kock, Col Coetzee, Col de Jager and SWT180 and waited for SWT180 to knock. Col Coetzee, Deetlefs, Warrant Officer Pienaar and SWT180 would move to a side door of the house in order to secure it during the entry.

MR VISSER: What would you have done?

MR PRETORIUS: Chairperson, there is a paragraph here which is important here, Sgt Willemse and I were instructed by Mr Coetzee to secure the bathroom in the house, that was my order.

MR VISSER: That is paragraph 21?

MR PRETORIUS: Yes, that is correct.

MR VISSER: Is the bathroom indicated on Exhibit B, approximately according to its location?

MR PRETORIUS: Yes.

MR VISSER: Please proceed with paragraph 29.

MR PRETORIUS: After SWT180 had knocked, someone spoke to him from within the house. I could hear how the key was being turned in the lock. The next moment Colonels de Kock and de Jager, followed by Capt van Dyk, entered the house and immediately opened fire. The entry of the house took place within seconds. There were no lights which were switched on within the house and we created light with torches which had been attached to our firearms with tape. Col de Kock immediately shot dead the person who had opened the door and he fell down there. It later appeared to be MK Sipho. Various shots were fired in the house during the action. Willemse and I followed shortly on their heels and we found that there was no one in the bathroom. When I turned around, I saw a figure running in the direction of the glass door, on the side of the house, where Col Willem Coetzee and the others whom I have mentioned, were.

MR VISSER: Would you pause for a moment and look at Exhibit B, under the heading "After Entry", that would be the second diagram. There you see a name at the door of the bathroom, it is your name and Willemse's name, is that your recollection of how things took place?

MR PRETORIUS: Yes, that is correct.

MR VISSER: And you stated that you then saw someone running?

MR PRETORIUS: That is correct.

MR VISSER: From where did you see this person run?

MR PRETORIUS: On the plan which indicates "bedroom 1", from the door of bedroom 1, this person ran in the direction of the glass door on the right side of Annexure B.

MR VISSER: Did you enter bedroom 1 yourself?

MR PRETORIUS: Yes.

MR VISSER: Was anyone with you in bedroom 1 as far as you can recall?

MR PRETORIUS: Yes.

MR VISSER: Who was there?

MR PRETORIUS: Mr de Kock was with me at that stage.

MR VISSER: Did you find anyone there?

MR PRETORIUS: Yes.

MR VISSER: Who was it?

MR PRETORIUS: After the incident SWT180 indicated that it had been MK Pantsu who was in bedroom 1.

MR VISSER: What took place there with Pantsu?

MR PRETORIUS: Chairperson, if I may explain. After the first person ran out of the door, I was very close to the door and I noticed that there was another person in bedroom 1, if I may refer to it as such, and at that stage, Mr de Kock was right next to me. We shot the person who was on the bed, who was getting up.

MR VISSER: Mr de Kock also states that you and he opened fire simultaneously at this person, and that he was shot dead there?

MR PRETORIUS: Yes.

MR VISSER: But you deal with this is paragraph 33, is that correct?

MR PRETORIUS: Yes.

MR VISSER: You state as Mr Coetzee has stated, that subsequently the three persons who had been killed there, were positively identified as Pantsu, Sipho and Buzi, is that correct?

MR PRETORIUS: That is correct.

MR VISSER: And by the way, I don't know if you stated this, but what happened to the person who ran out of the door of bedroom 1 in the direction of the glass door, what happened to him?

MR PRETORIUS: It was the lady, Buzi, Chairperson. Where "lounge" is indicated on Exhibit B she collapsed.

MR VISSER: Do you know who shot her?

MR PRETORIUS: Chairperson, from the corner of my eye I noticed that Col de Jager, Louis de Jager, fired shots at this person. That is what I saw.

MR VISSER: Very well. And the rest of your statement, Exhibit D consists of paragraph 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41 and then to an extent 42, 43, 44, 45 which is in agreement?

MR PRETORIUS: Yes.

MR VISSER: Do you confirm that the evidence to which you have referred, is true and correct and a reflection of the true facts?

MR PRETORIUS: That is correct.

MR VISSER: Do you also confirm that with regard to paragraph 46, you were acting in a situation of warfare where the rules of normal warfare were not of application, that your action was aimed against supporters of a liberation movement who were the enemy of the government and wanted to destroy the State dispensation by means of a revolutionary onslaught?

MR PRETORIUS: That is correct.

MR VISSER: And that what you did, you regarded as part of your duties as a policeman in protection of human life and the constitutional dispensation and that you believed that what you did, you did in execution of your express or implied authorisations and duties as a policeman?

MR PRETORIUS: That is correct.

MR VISSER: And then you request amnesty for any offence or delict committed by you during this incident which has been summarised by your evidence?

MR PRETORIUS: That is correct.

MR VISSER: Thank you Chairperson.

ADV DE JAGER: Mr Visser, in this regard, attempted murder of one Glory Sidibe, was there an attempt to murder this person or simply a conspiracy?

MR VISSER: Chairperson, it is a problematic question. The whole idea of the action as I have understood it with respect, regarding this meeting was that action had to be taken against Glory Sidibe and if we get to the evidence of Gen van der Merwe and Brig Schoon, you will hear from them, that the authorisation which was granted was to kill any member of Glory Sidibe's group, whoever may be found. One could argue theoretically about it in terms of when it is an attempt and when it is a conspiracy. It is clearly a conspiracy, but they went there, they had information that Glory Sidibe would possibly be there.

CHAIRPERSON: They had no information he was there?

MR PRETORIUS: We had.

MR VISSER: Well, Mr Chairman ...

CHAIRPERSON: They didn't go there with information, they thought he might be there, because he was going to be there early the next morning. That cannot possibly be an attempt, Mr Visser?

MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, that again brings us back to the argument which we had in Pietermaritzburg, with great respect Mr Chairman, once it is accepted that one cannot break up the various offences and delicts, Mr Chairman, this matter will take care of itself, with great respect. If amnesty is granted for any offence or delict with regard to this incident, Mr Chairman, then really the problem sorts itself out.

ADV DE JAGER: I just think that even though there was planning, there was never an actual attempt which was directed at that person to shoot him dead, there may have been a conspiracy?

MR VISSER: No, it is probably so. Whether the AG would later agree with this, is of course another question. We don't know. That is why we are putting it in the most general possible terms, that is why amnesty is requested in the most general possible terms, because if you are satisfied that the requirements of the Act have been met with, amnesty will be granted and while Commissioner de Jager was absent, we conducted an argument with regard to this in Pietermaritzburg, which we submitted to the Honourable Chairperson. I believe that Commissioner Sibanyoni was also present, where we discussed exactly the problems that one experiences with the respective amnesties which have been granted.

ADV DE JAGER: Yes, well, I don't think that we should begin to argue this point, I have simply mentioned it and I think we can leave this for argument.

MR VISSER: Chairperson, at the end when we argue, I would briefly like to address the chief points of the argument from Pietermaritzburg, because we are very well aware that Commissioner de Jager has previously entered into a debate with us regarding the specificity of the offences and delicts and we would like to deal with that once again, very briefly in argument. I did say that that is the evidence that I wish to present, Mr Chairman. I am not sure whether you are waiting for me.

CHAIRPERSON: I was.

MR VISSER: I do apologise, Mr Chairman.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VISSER

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR HATTINGH: Thank you Mr Chairman, Hattingh on record. Mr Pretorius, were you also in the vehicle in which SWT180 travelled when you were on your way to the house to execute the operation?

MR PRETORIUS: That is correct.

MR HATTINGH: You have heard what I put to Mr Coetzee regarding Mr de Kock's recollection of the events in the vehicle, just before you left the vehicle, do you have an independent recollection thereof?

MR PRETORIUS: Chairperson, I cannot recall that I was in the vehicle when Mr de Kock entered the vehicle as he put it, but what I say is that it is possible that he entered the vehicle.

MR HATTINGH: Very well, and that you were not present when the discussion took place in the vehicle?

MR PRETORIUS: That is correct.

MR HATTINGH: You also mention the fact that Mr de Kock would have proposed after the operation, that SWT180 be eliminated, is it possible that this discussion may have taken place earlier, not that Mr de Kock recalls ever having made such a suggestion, but he definitely questioned the reliability of SWT180?

MR PRETORIUS: Yes, that is correct, his reliability, but I was present when Mr de Kock said at the scene that SWT180 should be taken out.

MR HATTINGH: What was the reaction to this?

MR PRETORIUS: Mr Coetzee said no, he was not going to do it, his precise words according to my recollection were "we will be able to handle 180".

MR HATTINGH: You say that this was at the scene immediately after the incident?

MR PRETORIUS: During and after the time. I cannot recall the precise period, I wouldn't want to say that it was during the penetration aspect of the operation, it was shortly after the penetration.

MR HATTINGH: And if Mr de Kock had made the suggestion which he cannot recall, no execution was ever given to it?

MR PRETORIUS: No, it was not.

MR HATTINGH: Thank you Chairperson, nothing further.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR HATTINGH

MR ROSSOUW: Rossouw, Mr Chairman, I have no questions.

NO CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR ROSSOUW

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR PRINSLOO: Chairperson, Prinsloo on record. Mr Pretorius, you refer in paragraph 8 of your statement to the kwaLoseni hotel?

MR PRETORIUS: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: According to my clients, Mr Deetlefs and Mr Pienaar, this hotel was known to them as the Royal Swazi?

MR PRETORIUS: Yes, I would concede to that.

MR PRINSLOO: Thank you Chairperson, nothing further.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR PRINSLOO

MS VAN DER WALT: No questions, thank you Chairperson.

NO CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS VAN DER WALT

ADV STEENKAMP: No questions, thank you Mr Chairman.

NO CROSS-EXAMINATION BY ADV STEENKAMP

MR SIBANYONI: I've got no questions Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: No questions, thank you.

MR VISSER: May the witness then be excused Chairperson, and may I call the next witness, Col de Jager, his statement is Exhibit E.

WITNESS EXCUSED