CHAIRPERSON: Which language do you prefer to speak, Mr Rorich?
MR RORICH: Afrikaans.
CHAIRPERSON: Do you have any objection to taking the oath?
C S RORICH: (sworn states)
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, you may be seated.
EXAMINATION BY MS VAN DER WALT: Mr Rorich, you are the second applicant in this application before the Honourable Committee. Your application is embodied from page 12 to 14, which is the formal application form and the incident for which you apply is from page 15 to 16, thereafter from page 16 to 24 we have your political motivation, is that correct?
MR RORICH: Yes, that is correct.
MS VAN DER WALT: You've heard the evidence given by Mr van Rensburg. I would then like to take you directly to the incident itself, and a statement has also been made by you. This morning before this session reference was made to the date and it was determined that this incident took place shortly after the SASOL incident in Secunda. As you have stated in your application that you placed it at May or June 1978, do you
agree, or isn't it correct that it could possibly have been June 1980?
MR RORICH: I would request an amendment, Chairperson, to June 1980.
MS VAN DER WALT: Thank you.
You have heard now that there were two houses which were identified and that you and three other members received an order to blow up these houses with explosives.
MR RORICH: That is correct.
MS VAN DER WALT: Were you in any way involved with the preparation or the identification of the houses and any monitoring, to determine how many people would be inside the houses?
MR RORICH: No.
MS VAN DER WALT: What was your order?
MR RORICH: To blow up the place.
MS VAN DER WALT: And who occupied the houses?
MR RORICH: They were transit houses which were supposedly occupied by trained ANC persons who were on their way to infiltrate the RSA.
MS VAN DER WALT: At that stage you were a demolitions expert, is that correct?
MR RORICH: Yes, that is correct.
MS VAN DER WALT: Was it your order to manufacture the explosive devices?
MR RORICH: My colleague, Mr Hattingh, and I were both trained demolitions experts and each of us manufactured an explosive device.
MS VAN DER WALT: And what was the intention with these two houses, how would the explosions have taken place, can you tell the Honourable Committee?
MR RORICH: Chairperson, what took place is that we manufactured the explosive devices before we entered Swaziland, and when we arrived to a place near the targets we activated the time switch, meaning that both devices were set simultaneously to explode at more-or-less the same time.
MS VAN DER WALT: Yes, Chairperson.
MR RORICH: We did this. We activated the devices. My colleague, Mr Hattingh then admitted that he could not continue and I took the device from him and handed it to my other colleague, Mr van Dyk, with the order that he had to go to the wooden house. I took my device and placed it against the wall of the white house, where it later activated after we had departed from that place.
MS VAN DER WALT: So you were not in the immediate vicinity of the houses when the bombs were detonated?
MR RORICH: No, we were quite some distance away, approximately a kilometre.
MS VAN DER WALT: And did the two explosive devices detonate approximately the same time?
MR RORICH: That is correct.
MS VAN DER WALT: You have just heard that it was said to you that you had to attempt not to damage neighbouring property or houses, can you tell the Honourable Committee what you did in order to prevent this? If it was at all possible.
MR RORICH: Chairperson, all that I can say is that the detonation direction of the device was aimed as such that it had to take place in the direction of the white house itself, but given the power of an explosion which is always unpredictable, I later heard from the Commander that apparently a neighbouring house had also been damaged.
MS VAN DER WALT: But did you try your best to aim the explosion only at the white house?
MR RORICH: Yes, that is correct.
MS VAN DER WALT: Did you ever return to the houses subsequent to the incident?
MR RORICH: No.
MS VAN DER WALT: And did you also hear subsequent to the incident, as you have stated in your application, that a person was killed in the one house and that a young child was killed in the white house?
MR RORICH: Yes, that is what I heard from my Commander.
MS VAN DER WALT: And you reported back to Mr van Rensburg.
MR RORICH: Yes, I reported back to him that the two targets had been struck.
MS VAN DER WALT: You then apply before the Honourable Committee for amnesty for the conspiracy to murder.
MR RORICH: That is correct.
MS VAN DER WALT: And then also an application for two persons who were killed during the explosion.
MR RORICH: That is correct.
MS VAN DER WALT: Two charges of malicious damage to property.
MR RORICH: That is correct.
MS VAN DER WALT: Defeating the ends of justice.
MR RORICH: That is correct.
MS VAN DER WALT: And then also that you conspired to cause an explosion in a neighbouring State.
MR RORICH: Yes, that is correct.
MS VAN DER WALT: As well as the possession of illegal explosives.
MR RORICH: That is correct.
MS VAN DER WALT: Or any other offence which may emanate from your actions.
MR RORICH: That is correct.
MS VAN DER WALT: As well as any delictual liability.
MR RORICH: That is correct.
MS VAN DER WALT: Thank you, Chair.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS VAN DER WALT
CHAIRPERSON: Is the explosion in another State, a charge?
MS VAN DER WALT: Well I think conspiracy to cause an explosion in another State, yes. Because the conspiracy took place in South Africa.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR VICTOR: Thank you, Chairperson.
Mr Rorich, with this sort of operation that you executed there, would it have been at all possible to determine whether or not there were so-called innocent persons in the places that you blew up?
MR RORICH: No, Chairperson, not according to my opinion.
MR VICTOR: Can you give us the reasons why you say this?
MR RORICH: These were definitely identified targets of the ANC, which we attacked at that stage and that is that. Unfortunately the time in which one has to execute such an operation is of cardinal importance, in order to be able to return safely oneself if possible.
MR VICTOR: Thank you, I have nothing further.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VICTOR
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR VAN DER MERWE: Thank you, Chairperson.
Mr Rorich, just one small question. The time switch mechanisms that you used, what were they?
MR RORICH: It was a watch.
MR VAN DER MERWE: Which was adapted?
MR RORICH: Yes, Chairperson.
MR VAN DER MERWE: Thank you.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VAN DER MERWE
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR PRINSLOO: Thank you, Chairperson.
Mr Rorich, just one question. At point Mr Hattingh withdrew and you gave an order to Mr van Dyk.
MR RORICH: Yes, Chairperson.
MR PRINSLOO: Thank you, Chair.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR PRINSLOO
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS MAKHUBELE: Thank you, Chairperson.
Did you see these places before you manufactured the explosives, in order to determine - rather, to control or to minimise damage to neighbouring properties?
MR RORICH: Yes, Chairperson.
MS MAKHUBELE: Would you still recall the distances between the neighbouring houses?
MR RORICH: No, Chairperson.
MS MAKHUBELE: My instructions are that these are cluster houses, actually the distance is about 10 metres from one house to the next.
MR RORICH: It is possible, Chairperson, I cannot dispute that.
MS MAKHUBELE: If I understood your evidence correctly, you are the one who planted this explosive in the white house.
MR RORICH: That is correct.
MS MAKHUBELE: If I were to - did you satisfy yourself that it's actually - rather let me first start here, when you say white house, is it because of the paint or that's the name of the house?
MR RORICH: Coincidentally the house was also white, Chairperson, but that was the name which was circulated by the ANC in Swaziland.
MS MAKHUBELE: If I were to tell you that the house where the ANC activists were staying was actually painted cream/white and the white painted one is the neighbour's, that's Mrs Hlubi's, would I be correct to infer that you planted the explosive in a wrong house?
MR RORICH: No, Chair, I did not place the device at the wrong house, I placed it at the white house, which was coincidentally painted white at that stage.
MS MAKHUBELE: With leave of the Chairman, can I just show you this picture? What paint is that? If you can see from the picture.
MR RORICH: This is a very old photograph, so it's very difficult for me to say whether this is the correct colour, it may have changed over the years. It's very difficult to say.
MR MALAN: Mrs Makhubele, may I ask you, in your question you refer to the wrong house, but from your earlier questioning I assumed that your instructions are that they indeed did target the right house. It wasn't the white house, it was the cream house but it was the correct target, the ANC house. Is that so?
MS MAKHUBELE: If one looks at the statement of Dirk Coetzee, my impression is that there is controversy about this white house, whether it's the white house that was the correct target or not, because when one looks at - it's page 64, the bottom paragraph or the last paragraph, where he says the new transit house, not the white house that Leon ...(indistinct) had photographed during his heroic excursion into Swaziland. So I really do not - that's why I'm saying I don't know whether there were two - these two explosives were in the white house and another house next to it, or whether two explosives were planted in the white and the cream/white house. So my question is really that ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: No, but the problem is, your instructions as I understood it a little while ago, is that yes, the cream/white house was in fact a transit house and your client's house was a white house which was a neighbouring house, and the explosion took place at the cream/white house, but in addition your client's house was damaged in that explosion. That's how I understood it. Did I misunderstand it?
MS MAKHUBELE: You're not, Mr Chairperson, but what my instructions are is that the white house is my client's, the cream house is the ANC, plot 123, but then what we are not saying is that actually whether the house was damaged as a result of the explosion that started at the cream house and affected her property, or whether the bomb was actually planted in her property. Because she doesn't know that. That is what I'm trying to establish. That is the applicant definite that he planted the explosive in the white house.
CHAIRPERSON: I just want to get something clear in my mind, because it has been confirmed by the present witness. That there is a house in this area, known as the white house. It's not the house that Mr Clinton got up to tricks, but there's a name called the white house. Now which house is it, is it your client's house or the neighbour's house that is known as the white house? Let us get that clear first.
MS MAKHUBELE: My client doesn't know how the name "white house" comes about, but what she knows is that in relation to the ANC house, her house is painted white.
CHAIRPERSON: So your client doesn't know of a specific house named the "white house"?
MS MAKHUBELE: No, she doesn't.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Rorich, under these circumstances I must ask you on which plot, and can you describe the house on that plot where the bomb which you planted was planted?
MR RORICH: Chairperson, at that stage I was one hundred percent sure that I had the correct house and I placed my explosive device next to the correct house, although I cannot remember exactly how it looked today.
CHAIRPERSON: That's not the question. The question is, can you describe to us the house next to which you planted the bomb? I'm not asking whether or not it was the correct or the incorrect house, I just want a description of the house where you planted the bomb.
MR RORICH: Chairperson, that is somewhat difficult, I cannot tell you with certainty how many bedrooms the house had, but it was a normal house as one found in that environment. It wasn't unnaturally large or anything, it had a reasonably flat roof if I recall correctly. My bomb was placed next to the wall on the oblong side of the house.
CHAIRPERSON: You gave me the impression during your evidence that you knew of a house by the name of "the white house", am I correct with that impression?
MR RORICH: Yes, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: The name of the house is "the white house."
MR RORICH: That is how we knew it, yes.
CHAIRPERSON: No, no, no, I don't want you to misunderstand me. There are certain people also in this country who for some or other reason give names to their homes, are we referring to such a type of name, or was it the white house according to your plans?
MR RORICH: It was the white house according to the information that we possessed. This was the white house that the ANC used.
CHAIRPERSON: So you don't know whether or not the name of the house was actually "the white house"?
MR RORICH: No, Chairperson, I cannot tell you who gave the house that name.
CHAIRPERSON: You are referring to the colour of the house, the white house?
MR RORICH: The place itself.
CHAIRPERSON: It was coloured as such?
MR RORICH: Not necessarily.
CHAIRPERSON: Then how would you have known where the house was situated?
CHAIRPERSON: Chairperson, that is how information was channelled to us by the informers. This specific house was identified as the white house.
CHAIRPERSON: Very well. And when you planted the bomb there, how did you identify that house as the correct house?
MR RORICH: Chairperson as I have already stated, before the explosion took place I had previously, based upon information that we had, paid a visit to go and see where both houses were situated.
CHAIRPERSON: On that same day?
MR RORICH: No.
CHAIRPERSON: On a previous day, a few days before?
MR RORICH: A few days before. Yes, it may have been a week or two weeks, I cannot recall.
CHAIRPERSON: Were these houses pointed out to you or did you go and have a look for yourself?
MR RORICH: As I have stated, Chairperson, the information provided to us by the informers, based upon that information we went to the plot.
CHAIRPERSON: I accept that, but was the house pointed out to you by somebody or did you have to rely upon information to identify the house?
MR RORICH: Chairperson, I can recall that one of my Swazi informers upon occasion also identified the place to me, and this confirmed according to the information that we had.
CHAIRPERSON: So it was identified as the house?
MR RORICH: Yes, that is correct.
CHAIRPERSON: And the day when you planted the bomb there, it had already been clarified to you as the house?
MR RORICH: Yes, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: And you relied upon that information.
MR RORICH: Yes, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Did you tell this to Mr van Rensburg?
MR RORICH: After we were finished I told him that the targets...
CHAIRPERSON: What did you tell him?
MR RORICH: When we returned after the attack I reported to my Commander that the two houses were blown up as the plan had stipulated.
CHAIRPERSON: After it was identified for you, before it was blown up, did you inform your senior that it was confirmed that those houses had been identified to you?
MR RORICH: Yes, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Was van Dyk with you?
MR RORICH: No, Chairperson, not with the identification.
CHAIRPERSON: Were you alone?
MR RORICH: It was my informer and I.
CHAIRPERSON: Very well. Did you make any attempt to determine who was inside the house when the house was identified to you?
MR RORICH: At the time when it was identified to me I was told that these were the transit houses of the ANC.
CHAIRPERSON: And that was all?
MR RORICH: Yes, that's all.
CHAIRPERSON: I assume according to your evidence, that the same happened with the wooden house.
MR RORICH: Yes, that is correct.
CHAIRPERSON: Are you the one who was told that in the near future fourteen trained persons would arrive there?
MR RORICH: No.
CHAIRPERSON: Now it has been put to you that the house which was identified to you - and you say that this is the house next to which you planted the bomb, was not a house where trained ANC persons lived.
MR RORICH: No, I would not agree with that.
CHAIRPERSON: Why not? Isn't it possible that your information was incorrect?
MR RORICH: No, I don't believe so.
CHAIRPERSON: Why not?
MR RORICH: Chairperson, to confirm the trained person who died in the explosion was a trained person, as my former colleague has previously testified.
CHAIRPERSON: Is it possible that at that time the house was indeed painted white?
MR RORICH: If I recall correctly it was painted white. What happened to the place afterwards, I don't know.
CHAIRPERSON: I will determine later, but I want to ask you now, is it possible that the bomb which you planted may also have damaged the home of the person next door?
MR RORICH: Yes, that is possible.
CHAIRPERSON: To such an extent that people could think that the bomb was actually planted next to that house?
MR RORICH: No, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: There would have been less damage to the other house?
MR RORICH: Let me put it as such, Chairperson. The bomb was planted next to the target house, if this front of this house had somewhat of a skew door - it had windows and it is possible that during the explosion the walls could have been cracked or the windows may have been damaged. The white house was damaged during the explosion. The intention was not to damage other property.
CHAIRPERSON: No I can understand that. Let us abandon your motivation for the while, I want to know what could possibly actually have taken place. As a result of the fact that you placed the bomb, and we'll assume that the bomb was placed in the right place, I just want to determine to what extent the neighbouring house may have been damaged. In that regard I then ask whether it is possible that it could have been damaged to such an extent that any person could have thought that the bomb was planted at the neighbour's house? Would there have been less damage to the neighbour's house?
MR RORICH: Yes, that is correct.
CHAIRPERSON: Ms Makhubele.
MS MAKHUBELE: Thanks Chairperson.
I was only showing you the photograph to show that that's actually plot 123, the cream house which housed the ANC activists. If I may proceed. How much explosives did you use?
MR RORICH: Chairperson, if I recall correctly it was approximately two kilograms.
MS MAKHUBELE: What type?
MR RORICH: Plastic explosives, PI4.
MS MAKHUBELE: I've got nothing further.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS MAKHUBELE
MR MALAN: I just want to be certain, I cannot find my note. Either you or Mr van Rensburg said that the white house was how you referred to it, but also how the ANC referred to the transit house. Did you say that or was it Mr van Rensburg? Oh, Mr van Rensburg has indicated that it was him. Did you ever hear the ANC use that name for the house?
MR RORICH: Yes, some of the informers.
MR MALAN: So they referred to the white house as one of the transit houses?
MR RORICH: That is correct.
MR MALAN: But it wasn't a name of the house, which was on the gate or something, it was simply a description for the identification of the house?
MR RORICH: Yes, Chairperson.
MR MALAN: Because I think that is how I understood it. That is still Mr van Rensburg's evidence.
MR RORICH: Yes, that is completely correct.
FURTHER CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR VAN DER MERWE: Mr Chairman, I neglected to ask one question, it will only be one, with your permission please.
Mr Rorich, I omitted to ask you from whom the mechanisms, the time switch mechanisms and detonators came from.
MR RORICH: It may have been Mr Coetzee who brought us these items.
MR VAN DER MERWE: Thank you.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VAN DER MERWE
MACHINE SWITCHED OFF
WITNESS EXCUSED
