Amnesty Hearings

ON RESUMPTION

MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, Visser on record. The next matter that we intend to proceed with is the incident concerning Mr Nat Serache. In that matter, I appear for all the applicants, they are Crause, Loots, Schoon, Steyn, Smit and Schutte.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Visser, can you direct us to the application in respect of this incident of Mr Schutte please?

MR VISSER: Yes, Chairperson, if you look at your so-called Botswana Bundle ...

CHAIRPERSON: ... 14 June 1995?

MR VISSER: Yes, but this application has incorrectly been included in that Bundle at page 224 to 232.

CHAIRPERSON: So what you are saying is that Schutte should not be an applicant in the Bundle that you refer to now, but should actually be in the Bundle that we are busy with now?

MR VISSER: Correct Chairperson. I was going to address you briefly on that, he is not an applicant in the Botswana raid matter, he is only an applicant in the Nat Serache application.

CHAIRPERSON: In any case, I am happy to go with that, except, can you just show us where the application in regard to this Nut Serache incident, where that appears in Schutte's application?

MR VISSER: Well Chairperson, to start with, it is the only incident for which he applies for amnesty. I will immediately concede that the incident hasn't been properly been identified by him. The name of Serache is not mentioned but there are other pointers.

CHAIRPERSON: Let's deal with that and let's establish whether he is a proper applicant first.

MR VISSER: You could take it as read that this is the only application for which he applies for amnesty, so there can be no issue of any confusion with any other application.

CHAIRPERSON: Were would I find his application?

MR VISSER: Chairperson, it is to be found at page 226 and he refers, to start with, Chairperson, at the bottom of that page to the applications of Steyn, Loots, du Preez Smit and then Chairperson, as we go along, you will see that he refers to a meeting that took place over two days and all the other witnesses, or the other witnesses will tell you of a meeting that took place over two days at Ottoshoop and Schutte will testify that he couldn't make it on the first day, he only arrived on the second day and there are two witnesses that I can recall off hand, who confirm that as well.

It is clearly this particular incident that he refers to.

MR MALAN: Mr Visser, I also see that he refers to the application of Smit, who is not an applicant in the Botswana raid?

MR VISSER: Yes, correct, yes. Chairperson, I don't know whether my learned friend wants to place him on record, and then we can kick off.

MR KOOPEDI: Well, if I am allowed to Chairperson, I will put my name on the record. My name is Brian Koopedi, I appear here on behalf of the two victims in the matter, Mr Nat Serache who is not here, and Mr William Moadira, who is here.

MR VISSER: Sorry Chairperson, I didn't realise that there was another victim. Who is the other victim and what is his status?

MR KOOPEDI: Mr Moadira, the gentleman sitting next to me. (Microphone not on) I was saying his name appears on the first page of the bundle, where you have a brief summary of the incident. Perhaps Chairperson, whilst I am still on the floor, I should mention that we were able to track down the other victim, who is Mr Serache. You might remember this morning we had a problem in finding him, and that is why we didn't begin with this matter. The agreement I have had with him, and his colleague here, is that we will listen to the evidence, having looked at the application forms and spoken to my learned friends on the other side, we would not put any questions, we have no problem with the matter being finalised, but we would like to be given an opportunity to, when we have the transcript, sit with the other victim and be able then to write a proper submission at that stage, if any submission should be coming from us.

MR VISSER: Thank you Mr Chairman, we call the first witness, Gen Steyn.

J A STEYN: (sworn states)

EXAMINATION BY MR VISSER: Mr Steyn, you are an applicant in this matter?

MR STEYN: Yes, that is correct.

MR VISSER: This matter deals with an attack which was executed on the residence or the place where Mr Nat Serache resided, and there are indications that injuries were incurred by Mr Serache and another person.

MR STEYN: That is correct Chairperson.

MR VISSER: You have already confirmed Exhibits A and B?

MR STEYN: That is correct.

MR VISSER: And you refer in your application on page 100 to an annexure JAS1?

MR STEYN: Yes.

MR VISSER: What documents are that?

MR STEYN: It is Exhibit B.

MR VISSER: Yes, it is identical to Exhibit B, isn't that so?

MR STEYN: That is correct.

MR VISSER: And you also confirm with regard to this incident, the contents of your affidavit which you submitted with your amnesty application?

MR STEYN: That is correct.

MR VISSER: What is your knowledge of the incident regarding Mr Nat Serache's residence?

MR STEYN: Chairperson, the information regarding Mr Serache's home was that it was a transit facility which was used for ANC members, armed ANC members who would infiltrate the RSA via this house, and their aim was to commit acts of terrorism.

MR VISSER: As such he was surveilled by members of the Western Transvaal Security Branch?

MR STEYN: That is correct.

MR VISSER: And also by means of informers and reconnoitres?

MR STEYN: Yes, that is correct.

MR VISSER: Was he regarded by you as a target during the struggle of the past?

MR STEYN: That is correct.

MR VISSER: Previously, during a previous application, you testified regarding the co-operation which existed between among others, the Security Branch and Special Forces regarding the exchange of information?

MR STEYN: That is correct.

MR VISSER: You also testified that that information, according to your knowledge and your suspicion and expectation, would have been applied by Special Forces?

MR STEYN: That is correct.

MR VISSER: In order to destroy facilities?

MR STEYN: Yes, that is correct.

MR VISSER: Can you just tell us, in this case, was any planning meeting or session conducted?

MR STEYN: Yes, that is correct, there was a planning meeting near Ottoshoop in the North West province.

MR VISSER: This Ottoshoop, precisely where is this place situated?

MR STEYN: Chairperson, it is between Zeerust and Mafikeng.

MR VISSER: And what will one find at this place?

MR STEYN: It was a safehouse which was used by the Security Branch.

MR VISSER: Is this in a town or on a farm?

MR STEYN: It is a farm.

MR VISSER: And you say that a meeting was held there?

MR STEYN: That is correct.

MR VISSER: When was this?

MR STEYN: I beg your pardon Chair?

CHAIRPERSON: What was the date of that meeting?

MR STEYN: Chairperson, upon the compilation of my document, I wasn't certain of the date. Later I determined that it was during February 1985.

MR VISSER: Chairperson, I do beg your pardon, I should have started there. We established the date from a book entitled June 14 Raid, written by Lebero Nyelele and Ellen Drake and in that book, on page 5 of that book, reference is made to this incident and it is specified to have occurred on the 13th of February.

CHAIRPERSON: Does that sound right to you?

MR STEYN: I would be prepared to accept that, yes Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: I am not asking whether or not you are prepared to accept it, does it sound correct according to your recollection?

MR STEYN: Yes, it may be so.

MR VISSER: You say that prior to the incident, there was a meeting at Ottoshoop at your safehouse?

MR STEYN: That is correct Chairperson.

MR VISSER: Can you recall approximately and if you cannot, please say so, how long before the occurrence of the incident itself, before the explosion or the bombing of this safehouse, would the meeting have occurred?

MR STEYN: Chairperson, when I submitted my application, I really wasn't certain, however later I attempted to refresh my recollection among others, through discussions with my former colleagues, and it would appear that it may have been either the day before or on the very same day of the incident which took place that evening.

MR VISSER: So you recall that the meeting took place and that the action was executed shortly thereafter?

MR STEYN: Yes, very shortly thereafter.

MR VISSER: Very well. And during this meeting, who can you recall having been present there?

CHAIRPERSON: Were any of your fellow applicants present?

MR STEYN: Yes, that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: All of them or some of them?

MR STEYN: All of them, Chairperson.

MR MALAN: Do you recall them, or are you relying on their allegations?

MR STEYN: No, I recall the applicants.

MR MALAN: Thank you.

MR STEYN: There was Gen Erasmus, Brig Schoon, Brig A. Oosthuizen, Commandant Charl Naude and I do not want to exclude that there were more persons whom I cannot recall.

MR VISSER: You also state that a Mr McPherson was present?

MR STEYN: Yes, I beg your pardon, I recall Mr McPherson as well.

MR VISSER: Who was he?

MR STEYN: He was from the Pretoria Security Branch Head Office.

MR VISSER: Was he a policeman?

MR STEYN: Yes, he was a policeman.

MR VISSER: What was his rank?

MR STEYN: Chairperson, I would have to guess, I think he was a lieutenant at that stage.

CHAIRPERSON: Naude, what was his rank?

MR STEYN: He was a commandant.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well.

MR VISSER: Your recollection, if you could just assist us, if you were to think back, approximately how many persons were present during this meeting? Was it a meeting involving only these persons or were there any other persons whose names you cannot recall?

MR STEYN: Chairperson, I would like to say that there were more persons. I don't think that there were many more persons.

MR VISSER: Could you give us an estimate?

MR STEYN: There may have been four or five others who were also present.

CHAIRPERSON: Who was in the room when the meeting took place? How many were there, 10, 20, 15, 30?

MR STEYN: If I study my affidavit, I would be referring to approximately eight, it could have been 15 to 20.

CHAIRPERSON: Between 15 and 20?

MR STEYN: Yes, that is correct.

MR VISSER: The point, Mr Steyn, is that it wasn't a very small meeting?

MR STEYN: No, it wasn't a small meeting.

MR VISSER: And could members of Special Forces also have been present, but that you cannot recall them?

MR STEYN: That is possible.

MR VISSER: How long did the meeting last?

CHAIRPERSON: Wasn't Naude from that Division?

MR VISSER: Yes, but I was referring to other members, apart from Naude. How long did the meeting last, this planning session?

MR STEYN: Chairperson, if I recall correctly, it began during the late afternoon and preceded until about ten o'clock or eleven o'clock that night.

MR VISSER: And then did you go home?

MR STEYN: No, we stayed over.

MR VISSER: What happened the next day?

MR STEYN: Chairperson, the following morning, this was before midday, Gen Liebenberg from the South African Defence Force ...

CHAIRPERSON: In other words by ten or eleven o'clock the previous evening, nothing relevant had taken place?

MR STEYN: Chairperson, we were waiting for Gen Liebenberg from the South African Defence Force as well as Gen Schutte from the South African Police.

MR VISSER: That would be Kat Liebenberg?

MR STEYN: Yes, that would Gen Kat Liebenberg.

CHAIRPERSON: What were their ranks?

MR STEYN: I beg your pardon?

CHAIRPERSON: What were their ranks?

MR STEYN: One was a General, that was Gen Kat Liebenberg and Lt-Gen Schutte.

MR VISSER: Gen Schutte, is he one of your fellow applicants?

MR STEYN: Yes, that is correct.

MR VISSER: What was his position in 1985?

MR STEYN: If I recall correctly, he was the Head of the Security Branch of the South African Police.

MR VISSER: Schutte?

MR STEYN: Yes, Gen Schutte.

MR VISSER: And Kat Liebenberg?

MR STEYN: I think he was the Head of Special Forces in the South African Defence Force, yes, that is correct.

MR VISSER: What did you discuss during this planning session, can you recall in general terms?

MR STEYN: Chairperson, ideas were exchanged with a view on the facility of Nat Serache, information was shared among those present regarding his position and his factual involvement and everything that involved him with a view on handling him as a target.

MR VISSER: What made this action so urgent, you say that the action followed quite shortly after the meeting. What made this action so urgent?

MR STEYN: Among others Chairperson, there was information at that particular stage, that there were trained MK members who were on the verge of infiltrating South Africa.

MR VISSER: And was the idea then to prevent them from entering the country?

MR STEYN: Yes, that is correct.

MR VISSER: Now, if I understand your evidence, Mr Steyn, there was actually a group of persons that were targeted, and that is what the planning was about?

MR STEYN: That is correct.

MR VISSER: Among others, Mr Nat Serache?

MR STEYN: Yes, that is correct.

MR VISSER: And were any decisions taken on that first evening, before the two Generals arrived?

MR STEYN: That is correct. The decision was taken that the premises and by implication then, the habitation thereof, would be attacked by the South African Defence Force.

MR VISSER: And what you knew thereof subsequently, you told me that you were at the border post when the Special Forces went in?

MR STEYN: Yes, Chairperson, that is entirely correct. The particular evening of the attack, I was with Commandant Charl Naude approximately 15 to 20 kilometres away from the border, there was a premises from where the planning was conducted. I beg your pardon, not the planning, but from where the attack would be launched.

Chairperson, I was present with Commandant Naude when...

MR VISSER: Could you repeat?

MR STEYN: When he sent four of his members in from there, to go and launch the attack.

MR VISSER: Can you recall who they were and what their names were?

MR STEYN: Unfortunately I cannot recall the names of these persons.

MR VISSER: Were they known to you?

MR STEYN: I don't think that I had known them at any stage prior, to my best knowledge I saw them for the first time that evening.

MR VISSER: And did you wait there until they returned?

MR STEYN: Yes, I waited there Chairperson.

MR VISSER: And when did they return?

MR STEYN: They returned the following morning, as it was becoming light.

CHAIRPERSON: Was this the second day or when was this?

MR STEYN: Chairperson, they went in that night and on the same morning ...

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, but with regard to the planning session, when did they leave, when did they receive the order?

MR STEYN: Sorry, I didn't really understand that?

CHAIRPERSON: You have mentioned a meeting which lasted over two days, and in relation to the meeting, when was the instruction given to these four persons?

MR STEYN: Commandant Charl Naude handled them, but I think that that same evening, after ...

CHAIRPERSON: Were you present when they gave the instructions?

MR STEYN: What I am saying Mr Chairperson, is that I was there when they were sent in to Botswana.

CHAIRPERSON: When did this happen in relation to the meeting?

MR STEYN: I think it was the same evening.

CHAIRPERSON: Was it the second day of the meeting?

MR STEYN: Yes.

MR MALAN: I just want to make sure, you say that you think it was the same evening, or the evening after that?

MR STEYN: It was very quickly, yes.

MR VISSER: Did the four persons come back?

MR STEYN: Yes, all four of them came back.

MR VISSER: Did they make a report?

MR STEYN: Yes, they did.

MR VISSER: Do you know what the contents of that report was?

MR STEYN: The report was that the house of Serache was destroyed.

MR VISSER: Did they say anything about people who were injured or killed?

MR STEYN: They couldn't say if somebody was killed or injured.

MR VISSER: On page 102 of your written application you say that as far as you know nobody was injured in the attack or the explosion?

MR STEYN: Yes, that was our information.

MR VISSER: And is that still your knowledge?

MR STEYN: Yes, up until the present I haven't had any other information.

MR VISSER: But now apparently the Investigative Unit says that Mr Serache and Moadira were injured in this attack. Did you know anything about this?

MR STEYN: No, I truly did not know anything about this.

MR VISSER: But you did foresee that people could be injured or killed?

MR STEYN: Yes, definitely.

MR VISSER: Thank you Mr Chairman. You then apply for amnesty for you part in this action and it will then include - I am sorry there is just some other point which we have forgotten and that would then include conspiracy to murder, damage to property and defeating the ends of justice, is that correct?

MR STEYN: Yes, that is.

MR VISSER: He wasn't in control of it Chairperson, it is really a bit of a moot question, he wasn't in control ever of the ...

CHAIRPERSON: What was the last aspect?

MR VISSER: Defeating the ends of justice. That would also apply to the crossing of the border Chairperson. We have had this argument before, and ...

CHAIRPERSON: Whoever, I am prepared to grant it, if a suitable case is made out, I am happy to grant amnesty.

MR VISSER: Yes, but if we believe that it is a border line case where he should also ask for amnesty for illegal crossing and illegal transportation of firearms, we will alert you to that Chairperson, but in this particular case, it is not, it is not applicable. He didn't, no, he didn't.

Mr Steyn, there is one thing that I forgot and my Attorney pointed it out to me, afterwards you heard that as you said, some of the people who reported back that the facility was damaged or destroyed, did you get information from the Botswana authority?

MR STEYN: Yes, that is correct. I had regular contact with people from the Special Branch in Botswana and I heard from them, that in the clearing up of the property, they found AK47's.

MR VISSER: Can you remember who told you this?

MR STEYN: Mr Chairperson, I am not quite sure, but with my liaison with the Special Branch in Botswana, it was Mr Hershveld and Mogadi.

MR VISSER: Was it one of them?

MR STEYN: Yes, it could have been one of them.

MR VISSER: Chairperson, in an attempt to be of assistance, we went through the list provided by the ANC and there does not seem to be any reference in the structures during the relevant period, in Botswana, to Mr Nat Serache.

And obviously he won't be included in the list of people deceased, because he didn't die. They just make no reference to him. Thank you Chairperson. That is the evidence from this witness, thank you Chairperson.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VISSER

MR KOOPEDI: As indicated Chairperson, we won't put any questions to the applicant, thank you.

NO CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR KOOPEDI

ADV STEENKAMP: No questions, Mr Chairman.

NO CROSS-EXAMINATION BY ADV STEENKAMP

ADV SIGODI: These people who crossed the border, do you know how they crossed the border, were they using a private motor vehicle or not?

MR STEYN: Mr Chairperson, how they physically crossed the border, I do not know, but from where we were or from where they left, they left on foot.

ADV SIGODI: So you do not know if they went through the border gate or if they used some other means of getting across, into the country? You wouldn't know that?

MR STEYN: That is correct Chair, I was not physically there when they crossed the border.

ADV SIGODI: And the weapons which they carried, did you see them?

MR STEYN: They did have weapons with them, yes.

ADV SIGODI: How were they carried?

MR STEYN: Some of the weapons they hid on them.

ADV SIGODI: If they went on foot, I just want some more information as to how they crossed the border with all those weapons and not being detected by the people at the border gate and how possible it could be for them to cross the border like that? Did they not report back to you as to how they crossed the border?

MR STEYN: No Mr Chairperson, I do not know how they crossed the border, as I have said, and the weapons that they had was normal weapons, that is easy to carry. They went with it and they came back with it. I cannot say how they crossed the border between South Africa and Botswana.

MR MALAN: I am not quite sure that I understood you correctly, you said the place from where they launched their attack, do you think was about 18 to 20 kilometres from the border or is my recollection wrong? You said 15 to 20 kilometres from the border, that is from where they launched the attack?

MR STEYN: Yes Mr Chairperson, on the side of the Republic. Yes, that is where the four members were sent from, that is correct.

MR MALAN: And from there you said that they left on foot?

MR STEYN: Yes.

MR MALAN: Where did they leave you on foot, was it from the room or from the farm or from that building?

MR STEYN: Yes, from the building.

MR MALAN: Did you presume then that they would walk 15 to 20 kilometres?

MR STEYN: Yes, they had to walk from us to the border and then to Serache.

MR MALAN: Or they had to have a vehicle to get to the border?

MR STEYN: Yes, that I do not know of.

MR MALAN: Yes, but do you think it is possible for them to walk 30 to 40 kilometres the evening and then be back the next day to launch the attack and to carry explosives, etc, they had to use a vehicle somewhere?

MR STEYN: It is possible, but I would just like to say that the people who were used for that job, were very fit. It wasn't that long a distance for them.

MR MALAN: Even though they had explosives with t hem?

MR STEYN: I didn't see any explosives with them.

MR MALAN: Very well, but you didn't see them making use of a vehicle?

MR STEYN: No, I didn't.

MR MALAN: Thank you very much. Sorry, can I also just ask the following, then it is also not likely that they would have gone through the border post, if you talk about that type of soldier or person?

MR STEYN: Yes, definitely, they wouldn't have. I would accept that.

MR MALAN: Thank you.

RE-EXAMINATION BY MR VISSER: Perhaps if I may just be allowed to ask the General just two questions, just to, for possible clarity. When you refer to the 15 to 20 kilometres, are you referring to the border or the border post?

MR STEYN: No, I am referring to the closest border.

MR VISSER: So they would have moved 15 kilometres from where you were, towards the border?

MR STEYN: Yes.

MR VISSER: And then to add to Mr Malan's question, this departure of them, was it during the day or the evening?

MR STEYN: No, it was the evening.

MR VISSER: Was that after the border post was closed?

MR STEYN: Yes, I assume it would have been.

MR VISSER: Thank you Mr Chairman.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VISSER

WITNESS EXCUSED

MR VISSER: The next witness is Mr Loots, Brig Loots. Chairperson, his evidence, his application is to be found at page 26 to 47. He deals with this matter at page 29 of the Bundle.