CHAIRPERSON: Yes, can we proceed? Who is next on the list? Who is going to give evidence next?
MR JANSEN: Mr Chair, Jansen on behalf of Ras. Ras is the next applicant that will be testifying. With your permission however, Mr Chair, I need on behalf of Ras to put certain issues to Mr de Kock which relate to the herd boy. These were issues that were really canvassed after I had cross-examined yesterday. If I can have your permission. I won't be long.
CHAIRPERSON: Are you suggesting that there were issues that arose after you cross-examined, that you couldn't foresee?
MR JANSEN: Well, the controversy relating to the herd boy was certainly accentuated to a far greater extent after I cross-examined. Maybe it was an omission from my part, Mr Chairman, maybe I should have dealt with it.
CHAIRPERSON: Well I'm going to allow you to put certain questions to Mr de Kock, but strictly on the basis that it's narrowed down to that aspect.
MR JANSEN: Yes, thank you, Mr Chair.
CHAIRPERSON: Proceed.
EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: (s.u.o.)
FURTHER CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR JANSEN: Mr de Kock, Mr Ras says that the person who was shot at the scene, the person who was 15 years old, this herd boy that was referred to, was ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: Before we carry on with that, we're referring to this person, or two people at least, as "beeswagters", is it common cause that they were "beeswagters"?
MR JANSEN: Well they have ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: There's a suggestion at best at this stage that they were.
MR JANSEN: Okay, maybe I should then start one step before that.
Mr de Kock, Mr Ras says that he knew of the presence of a young person who by just looking at him seems to have been a herd boy and he reported this in his report at that stage, can you remember something like that?
MR DE KOCK: Chairperson, yes, there would have been a situation like that. As I mentioned before, there was a young man who acted as a herd boy and did surveillance of the border. That is my memory of it today. I cannot really elaborate on that because I cannot remember.
MR JANSEN: Mr Ras also adds that this person was indeed this young boy that was shot that evening of the operation.
MR DE KOCK: Chairperson, I'll have to accept his word for it, I cannot really take it further.
MR JANSEN: Furthermore, Mr Ras says that at a certain stage while they were busy with the surveillance he arrested this boy when he came or walked across to the South African side and that he interrogated this child for a period of time, and Mr Ras says that the contents of this interrogation would have been part of his report. Can you remember something like that?
MR DE KOCK: Yes, it would have been part of his report. It was afterwards that I can remember that a person was caught on the South African side, but I cannot testify about it because it became ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: Do you agree that it was part of the pre-report?
MR DE KOCK: Yes, I agree with that. Or let me put it this way, it would have been part of the report but we cannot know how complete it was.
CHAIRPERSON: But can you remember that it was part of a report?
MR DE KOCK: No, I cannot remember.
CHAIRPERSON: I think this is how I understand the question. Can you comment on it, if there was a report and the contents of it mentioned the crossing of the border of this person and that he was arrested and as a result of the interrogation that ensued, certain information was gathered?
MR DE KOCK: No, I cannot remember that report, but I do accept that that information was incorporated.
CHAIRPERSON: Do you yourself have knowledge of the fact that there was a transgression of the border at that stage?
MR DE KOCK: No, only afterwards did I find that out. CHAIRPERSON: Did it come under your attention?
MR DE KOCK: Yes, it was yesterday that I heard about it.
CHAIRPERSON: Not then?
MR DE KOCK: No. That is why I cannot testify about it today.
MR JANSEN: Thank you, Chair, that's all.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR JANSEN
CHAIRPERSON: Mr de Kock, with that new evidence - I do not want to open a very long discussion on this, but it is very important now because the evidence changes a bit, not yours but the image. Yesterday I was under the impression that these two people were killed outside the house, now it seems as if one of them had time after you started the attack, to go over the border and there was time to catch him and arrest him and to interrogate him. How long did the attack last at that stage, from the time that you arrived there and planted the bomb, acted, took photos and retreated? ...(transcriber's interpretation)
MR JANSEN: Sorry Mr Chairman, could I - I apologise for interrupting, but I think you understand the context completely wrong. The incident that I was referring to, the arrest of this boy, happened long before the actual incident. That was part of the observation, it was during the process of observation.
CHAIRPERSON: Oh okay, so it's not the same person?
MR JANSEN: No, it is the same person, but he was arrested a while before. During the period of observation he was arrested, interrogated and then released again.
CHAIRPERSON: And then found again on the night of the incident?
MR JANSEN: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: Okay, I misunderstood you then, I'm sorry. Thank you, Mr de Kock.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: With your permission, Chair.
Mr de Kock, to your recollection would this be the person that you have referred to in your written application, as well as having touched upon yesterday during your viva voce evidence?
MNR DE KOCK: "Voorsitter, ek aanvaar dis dieselfde persoon, want in die tyd wat ek daar by die dam was, wat ons vir hierdie operasie nou voorberei het, was die persoon nie gevang gewees nie, of was die persoon nie aan ons kant gevang gewees nie."
CHAIRPERSON: Just to get a complete answer on that, when you sat there and did surveillance did you see or observe a person that looked like a herd boy?
MR DE KOCK: No, I was never at the surveillance point myself, certain members did that.
CHAIRPERSON: At what stage did you realise that there could be a person who was a herd boy?
MR DE KOCK: That came out of the information reports that were given to me by Lt Ras.
CHAIRPERSON: Was that after the incident?
MR DE KOCK: Well before we launched the attack.
CHAIRPERSON: Although you did not see it you did know that there's possibly a person who was a herd boy.
MR DE KOCK: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: Can you remember if it was mentioned to you "Look, that guy that we now see there, the guy who is keeping watch, is a guy who was arrested a while ago and we know him"?
MR DE KOCK: Chairperson, I do not have any independent memory of it. I really do not have an independent recollection of it.
CHAIRPERSON: But wouldn't it have been an important fact, "We do know this person, why did we release him if he's possibly an informant? Must we kill him?"
MR DE KOCK: Chairperson, I would like to help you, I would like to help Mr Ras' attorney, but I cannot help you in this.
CHAIRPERSON: But if it was mentioned to you at that stage, wouldn't you expect that you would have asked him about it? "What is the status of this person? This herd boy that you arrested and then released, what is his status in the operation?"
MR DE KOCK: Chairperson, in terms of the interrogation that took place and the attempts that followed on that concerning this person, I believe it would have been incorporated in the written report. In other words it would have been there. I cannot unfortunately give you the hard facts concerning this, although I would like to.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, you are excused.
MR DE KOCK: Do you have further questions?
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: No.
WITNESS EXCUSED
MACHINE SWITCHED OFF
