CHAIRPERSON: Mr van der Merwe, are you in a position to commence?
MR VAN DER MERWE: I am, thank you very much. I have placed before you an additional statement by Mr du Toit, which is just to supplement his statement which was not bound in bundle 3. I think for practical purposes we will have to - the application of Mr du Toit which starts with the paginated page 240, you indicated yesterday you would be marking as and exhibit. Would that be ...?
CHAIRPERSON: F.
MR VAN DER MERWE: F then. And then his subsequent statement, would that be Exhibit G? I've placed it in front of you. I think it's right under your arms now.
CHAIRPERSON: I'm checking mine, I don't seem to be having anything additional ...
MR VAN DER MERWE: I placed it right there where you are. You must have picked it up when you came in. It's a thin document and it is the signed copy as well.
CHAIRPERSON: Somebody must have tampered with the documents subsequent to you having placed them because there is nothing in front of me. I think my colleague has tampered with my documents.
MR VAN DER MERWE: I apologise. I put three copies down on the table. First there's a bundle which will be Exhibit F.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, no I definitely do not have Mr du Toit's further supplementary affidavit.
MR VAN DER MERWE: It would be G then.
DISCUSSION RE DOCUMENTS
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr van der Merwe.
MR VAN DER MERWE: Thank you, Madam Chair. I think Mr du Toit would prefer to give his evidence in Afrikaans. I think he should be sworn in, thank you.
MR MALAN: Mr du Toit, you have previously applied, if I recall you have no objection to taking the oath.
WYBRAND ANDREAS LODEWIKUS DU TOIT: (sworn states)
MR MALAN: Thank you, you may be seated.
EXAMINATION BY MR VAN DER MERWE: Thank you, Chairperson.
Mr du Toit, you have applied for amnesty here today for any deed or delict which was committed before, during or after the incident which led to the death of the three deceased, Mr Nceba, Mr Khumalo and Mr Ngwenya, is that correct?
MR DU TOIT: Yes, that is correct.
MR VAN DER MERWE: Just to provide the Committee with the necessary background, initially in 1996 you had already applied for amnesty and one of the incidents which you listed at that stage is then embodied in Exhibit F as it has been placed before the Committee at this stage. Exhibit F then has also been compiled by yourself without the assistance of an attorney. This was before you approached any attorney to assist you in these matters, is that correct?
MR DU TOIT: Yes, that is correct.
MR VAN DER MERWE: During the compilation and composition of your application you then stated it clearly in this document that upon various occasions you were involved in the adjustment of limpet mines and handgrenades, with regard to the detonators of such items, which could then be used operationally.
MR DU TOIT: That is correct.
MR VAN DER MERWE: At that stage you also indicated that you were not aware of the ultimate result of all this apparatus and that is why you attempted to compile your application as generally as possible, as it is reflected in the exhibit.
MR DU TOIT: That is correct.
MR VAN DER MERWE: Then at this stage you confirm that Exhibit F is true and correct and you request that the Amnesty Committee would consider the entire exhibit as paginated from 240 to 284, when considering your amnesty application.
MR DU TOIT: That is correct.
MR VAN DER MERWE: If we can then go to Exhibit G. At this stage Chairperson we would just request, as my learned colleague Mr Visser has previous done with regard to Exhibit F, Mr du Toit initially with paragraphs 7(a) and (b) indicated that these were not applicable and I think that this is in Exhibit F on page 272, the paginated 272, we then request at this stage an amendment simply to indicate that Mr du Toit was then a supporter of the National Party at that stage. That would then be paragraphs 7(a) and (b).
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, your application succeeds for such an amendment.
MR VAN DER MERWE: Thank you, Chairperson.
Then Mr du Toit, you have already testified in a similar application in which reference was made to the so-called Zero-Zero application, is that correct?
MR DU TOIT: That is correct.
MR VAN DER MERWE: And this application briefly, was about the detonators of handgrenades which were also adjusted to a zero delay and as a result, various persons were killed and injured in action on the East Rand.
MR DU TOIT: That is correct.
MR VAN DER MERWE: If you could then proceed for us with Exhibit G. You may begin at "Additional Information" to you amnesty application. Please just read the facts into the record for us.
MR DU TOIT: Thank you, Chairperson.
"My amnesty application states it clearly that we in the Security Branch, operated on a need-to-know basis. As members of the Technical Unit of the Security Branch, we received regular requests to assist operatives on ground level with approved operations and specifically with regard to technical assistance.
We as members of the Technical Unit, had previously been involved with the adjustment of the detonators for handgrenades and a limpet mine, upon the direct instructions of Gen van der Merwe, the former Commissioner of the SA Police Services, during the so-called Zero Zero incident during 1985.
After I had been notified by my legal representative on the 20th of October 1999, that Lt-Col Anton Pretorius stated in his amnesty application that J F Kok and J Kok were involved in the provision of three zero time delay detonators, I recalled the incident after I had also discussed the matter with both, J F Kok and J Kok.
I confirm that on an unknown date I was approached by Lt-Col J F Kok. He informed me that he and Lt-Col J Kok had previously been approached by Anton Pretorius in my absence. They were requested to assist with the preparation of three VZD1M detonators, with a zero delay time.
Furthermore, they were informed that these detonators were needed for an approved operation. I ratified their action and the provision of the detonators ex post facto. I understood and accepted that these detonators would be applied against the liberation organisations and that persons would most probably be killed.
I associated myself with this and felt that it was part of the struggle that we in the South African Police, waged against the liberation movements which wished to topple the government with violence.
During this action I realised that I was liable for certain misdeed and delicts, including conspiracy to murder and murder and illegal possession of explosives and/or devices."
MR VAN DER MERWE: Just for the information of the Committee, at the stage when this incident took place, could you just briefly describe to the Committee what position you occupied, what your position in the South African Police was.
MR DU TOIT: I think I was a Lt-Col. I was in control of the mechanical division of the Technical Division. It was primarily the unit which was involved with the adjustment of relevant apparatus during this time.
MR VAN DER MERWE: I think that you have dealt quite thoroughly with this in your application, the original application, which is Exhibit F on page 250 and further on, in which you describe what the duties of your unit were at that stage. The persons to whom you refer, Lt-Cols J F Kock and J Kok, what were their positions?
MR DU TOIT: Under correction I would say that at that stage they were both Captains, who served below me. They were confidants and persons whom we would ordinarily have supported in the execution of covert operations.
MR VAN DER MERWE: But they resorted directly under your command?
MR DU TOIT: That is correct.
MR VAN DER MERWE: Furthermore, I would like to ask you, the capacity, did your unit have the necessary capacity to deal with requests which came your way, such as in this case, from Pretorius?
MR DU TOIT: Yes, I think that during the previous hearing which dealt with the same aspect, the former Commissioner, Gen Johan van der Merwe, expressed that we had the necessary capacity and that I as the Commander, could make certain decisions in this regard due to my capacity. Although the capacity to give orders did not resort within us, we could deal with requests from outside.
MR VAN DER MERWE: Very well. We have used the term "request" up to this point, but in reality, would you say that it was a request or what was it really?
MR DU TOIT: This request was essentially an order, but because all operations of this nature, according to the best of my knowledge, had received approval from a higher level, by the time that it reached me the merits of the operation had already been determined and authorised.
MR VAN DER MERWE: And then in this specific case, as you have already testified, you were informed that this was an already approved operation when your unit received the request, is that correct?
MR DU TOIT: Yes, that is what I was informed.
MR VAN DER MERWE: You do not have any specific knowledge of the date of this incident or when exactly it took place, but you do not have a problem with the fact that it is stated that it took place before the 29th of July, because that was the date upon which the deceased passed away.
MR DU TOIT: That is correct. I do not have a clear recollection of the period in which it took place, but I would agree with the dates that have been provided to the Committee.
MR VAN DER MERWE: Furthermore, on page 3 of Exhibit G, you confirm the motives as set out there on that page, in paragraphs 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12, is that correct?
MR DU TOIT: Yes, that is correct, Chairperson.
MR VAN DER MERWE: And you then also request that the Committee at this stage consider your amnesty application on the basis of which you have presented it to them at this stage.
MR DU TOIT: That is correct.
MR VAN DER MERWE: Thank you, Madam Chair, I have no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VAN DER MERWE
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Does that conclude his evidence-in-chief, Mr van der Merwe?
MR VAN DER MERWE: Yes, thank you, Madam Chair.
MR VISSER: Visser on record, Chairperson, I have no questions.
NO QUESTIONS BY MR VISSER
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Loader?
MR LOADER: I have no questions, Madam Chair.
NO QUESTIONS BY MR LOADER
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lamey?
MR LAMEY: No questions, Chairperson.
NO QUESTIONS BY MR LAMEY
CHAIRPERSON: Mr van Heerden?
MR VAN HEERDEN: No questions, Madam Chair.
NO QUESTIONS BY MR VAN HEERDEN
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Malan?
MR MALAN: I have no questions, thank you.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Motata?
ADV MOTATA: I've got none, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr du Toit, is it your evidence that you were authorised, or there were standing orders given to you by Gen van der Merwe, to accede to request or comply with orders of this nature?
MR DU TOIT: Yes, Chairperson. As I have explained - I think that evidence has already been given that I possessed deployed capacity, that I could not go into the merits of the situation but that I could offer support to operations which had already been authorised by a higher authority.
CHAIRPERSON: And that's the evidence you say has been already been led before another Committee.
MR DU TOIT: That is correct, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Which has been touched upon in your affidavit as contained in Annexure F.
MR DU TOIT: That is correct, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. You are excused as a witness.
MR DU TOIT: Thank you, Chairperson.
WITNESS EXCUSED
CHAIRPERSON: Mr van der Merwe, I didn't go back to you to find out if you wanted to re-examine, there was nothing for you to re-examine upon.
MR VAN DER MERWE: I confirm, Madam Chair, I have no further questions, thank you.
NO RE-EXAMINATION BY MR VAN DER MERWE
CHAIRPERSON: Will you proceed to call your next witness.
MR VAN DER MERWE: It will be Mr Jakob Francois Kok.
