Amnesty Hearings

HENDRIK CHRISTOFFEL DU PLESSIS: (sworn states)

ADV BOSMAN: The applicant has been duly sworn in.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. You may be seated, Mr du Plessis. Yes, Mr Wagener.

EXAMINATION BY MR WAGENER: Mr du Plessis, during November 1996, you completed an amnesty application which can be found in the bundle from page 208 to 219, is that correct?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, that is correct.

MR WAGENER: I see on page 208 you state that you are still in service of the South African Police. This was at the time that you signed your application, what is your position today?

MR DU PLESSIS: At the end of October 1997, I was discharged from the police due to medical reasons.

MR WAGENER: Very well. Pertaining to the matter that we are here for today, you deal with this from page 217 to 218 of the bundle, and I will request Mr van der Merwe just to place this before you.

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct.

MR WAGENER: Firstly, Mr du Plessis, in the first paragraph you refer to a church building, namely Khanya House, which is in the first paragraph, can you see it?

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct.

MR WAGENER: And then in the following paragraph you refer to a group which entered the church building and that you yourself also entered the church building and that you doused the place with petrol. Which church building are you referring to?

MR DU PLESSIS: I am referring to Khanya House.

MR WAGENER: Just to be completely certain whether or not you were involved in the same incident as the other applicants, if you look at Exhibit E, on the cover page there is a photo and then on page 2 there is also a photo, is that the place where you were?

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct.

MR WAGENER: And then in the first paragraph on page 217 you state that you think that the incident took place during 1989, we now know that Khanya House was burnt down on the 12th of October 1988. Would you agree with that?

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct.

MR WAGENER: Furthermore, in the first paragraph you refer that you were told that there was an earlier attempt to burn this place, namely Khanya House, that you had been informed of this, how certain are you of that?

MR DU PLESSIS: I think my memory has failed somewhat, I may have confused this matter with another.

MR WAGENER: Indeed, Mr du Plessis, we have heard evidence indicating that it was with either Khotso House or Cosatu House where there was a previous abortive attempt to attack the place, before the final attack took place. Would you dispute this?

MR DU PLESSIS: No, I would agree with it.

MR WAGENER: Then in the second paragraph on page 217 you state, or perhaps I should just take a step back. At the time of this incident you were also a member of the Vlakplaas unit.

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct.

MR WAGENER: What was your rank at that stage?

MR DU PLESSIS: I was a Captain.

MR WAGENER: And you also served under the command of Mr de Kock.

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct.

MR WAGENER: We heard of an occasion upon which you gathered together at Vlakplaas and received an order with regard to the current incident, were you involved or present during that?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, I was.

MR WAGENER: What was the order that you received?

MR DU PLESSIS: We had to destroy Khanya House by means of arson.

MR WAGENER: Can you recall the reason?

MR DU PLESSIS: Because it was being used for revolutionary objectives by the ANC and the enemy.

MR WAGENER: In the second paragraph you state

"We conducted thorough observation of the place"

Were you involved in that observation?

MR DU PLESSIS: We were informed during the briefing that observation had been conducted. I cannot recall whether it was the day before or that same morning upon which I drove past the place by myself. I stopped and walked up and down on the pavement, that was my share.

MR WAGENER: What was the purpose with that?

MR DU PLESSIS: I wanted to see what the place looked like.

MR WAGENER: During the operation itself, what was your task?

MR DU PLESSIS: I was part of the group that penetrated the main building and doused the interior with petrol.

MR WAGENER: Did you yourself also carry petrol?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, I did.

MR WAGENER: Where in the building were you?

MR DU PLESSIS: I was on the ground level and the first level.

MR WAGENER: Was that where you doused the area with petrol?

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct.

MR WAGENER: Are you aware of any explosives which were taken with that evening?

MR DU PLESSIS: No, I do not know about that.

MR WAGENER: There is apparent evidence of explosives which were found in a section of the building which was known as the documentation centre and apparently this is on the ground floor, do you know anything about this?

MR DU PLESSIS: I heard about it after the incident, but I don't have any further knowledge pertaining to that.

MR WAGENER: Furthermore, you heard the initial allegation of Mr Flores in his application that you and he were outside the building together, what is your commentary regarding that?

MR DU PLESSIS: No, he was not with me, I was a member of the group that entered the main building.

MR WAGENER: And then on page 218 of the bundle you mention the names of the persons who were present according to you, during the operation. Are you certain of these names?

MR DU PLESSIS: It took place a long time ago and my memory may have failed me, I may have accidentally mentioned persons in this list who in actual fact were not part of the operation. I would be prepared to conceded to that.

MR WAGENER: It would appear to me that you've actually omitted the names of other persons who were in actual fact there, as we now know.

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, that is correct.

MR WAGENER: As qualified by your evidence, do you then confirm the correctness of your written application as truthful and correct?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, that is correct.

MR WAGENER: Thank you, Chair, that is the evidence-in-chief.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR WAGENER

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Wagener. Mr Hattingh?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR HATTINGH: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

Mr du Plessis, among the names that you have mentioned on page 218, the names of Paul van Dyk and Piet Snyders appear, were you here when Mr de Kock testified?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, I was present.

MR HATTINGH: And can you recall that he said that he recalled that these two persons were indeed present?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, I recall that.

MR HATTINGH: So according to your evidence, is it possible that they may have been there?

MR DU PLESSIS: I spoke to Mr Snyders upon my arrival here in Pretoria and he told me that at the time of the incident he was on study leave, but Mr van Dyk, I don't know, he may have been there.

MR DU PLESSIS: Then I just want to know from you, how much petrol did you have that you were planning to douse the inside of the building with?

MR DU PLESSIS: Every one of us carried a can, I think it was 20 litres that we carried in.

MR HATTINGH: How many of you were there that carried petrol in?

MR DU PLESSIS: It was about eight or nine of us who entered the building and every person carried a can.

MR HATTINGH: And the Kok brothers were the ones who unlocked the doors for you?

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct.

MR HATTINGH: Can you recall the position with regard to lighting in the building, when you first entered the building?

MR DU PLESSIS: I cannot think or recall that there was light, but as far as I recall no lights were on.

MR HATTINGH: The only light came from the street lamps which shone in through the windows from the outside.

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes.

MR HATTINGH: Did that provide sufficient light for you to be able to see what you were doing?

MR DU PLESSIS: We walked around in the dark there, along with the light that came from the street lamps.

MR HATTINGH: Did you have any precautions in order to render the operation as quiet as possible, or did you move about comfortably, safe in the knowledge that no-one was in the building?

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct.

MR HATTINGH: Is it the latter-mentioned?

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct.

MR HATTINGH: You accepted that were not people in the building.

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct.

MR HATTINGH: And therefore you didn't take any measures to soften your voices or to avoid any noise as such?

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct.

MR HATTINGH: Did you communicate with one another from long distances, such as 10 to 15 metres from one another?

MR DU PLESSIS: Not that I can recall.

MR HATTINGH: Do you recall that you went to the first floor?

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct.

MR HATTINGH: Can you recall whether there were any persons higher up in the building, according to what you can remember seeing?

MR DU PLESSIS: No, I don't know about any other persons who moved higher up in the building.

MR HATTINGH: And after the operation at any stage, did you hear that there had indeed been persons in the building at the time of the incident?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, that is correct.

MR HATTINGH: Were you surprised at this knowledge?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, I was.

MR HATTINGH: Thank you, Chairperson, I have nothing further.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR HATTINGH

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Hattingh. Mr van der Merwe?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR VAN DER MERWE: Thank you, Mr Chair.

Mr du Plessis, just one statement that I would like to put. You have already conceded, and I'm also appearing on behalf of Dave Baker, my instructions in this regard are that he was not involved in this incident, but that he was involved in another similar incident but not this one precisely, and you are not certain whether or not he was there.

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Thank you, Chairperson.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VAN DER MERWE

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr van der Merwe. Mr Nel?

MR NEL: Chairperson, I have no questions, thank you.

NO QUESTIONS BY MR NEL

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Sir?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR BUNN: Mr du Plessis, just one question relating to page 218, obviously my client, Mr Ras isn't there, you'd concede that you might very well be incorrect and he was involved?

MR DU PLESSIS: That's correct, Chairperson. As I've already stated, there are persons who have testified before the Committee, who were indeed there, whom I could not recall when I compiled my application, so I would concede that my memory has indeed failed me.

MR BUNN: Thank you, Mr Chairman, no further questions.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR BUNN

CHAIRPERSON: Thanks a lot. Mr Joubert?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR JOUBERT: Thank you, Chairperson, only one aspect.

Mr du Plessis, you have already stated on page 217 of your evidence-in-chief that there was a previous abortive attempt to burn the place down. I just want to confirm with you, it is my instruction from Mr McIntyre that there was no such previous attempt by Stratcom on Khanya House.

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct, I concede that I have perhaps made a mistake.

MR JOUBERT: Than you, Chairperson, nothing further.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR JOUBERT

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr du Plessis?

ADV DU PLESSIS: Thank you Mr Chairman, I have no questions and insofar as I'm looking after the interests of my learned friend, Mr Lamey, there are no questions in that regard either.

NO QUESTIONS BY ADV DU PLESSIS

NO QUESTIONS BY MR LAMEY

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much. Mr Cornelius?

MR CORNELIUS: I have no questions, thank you Mr Chair.

NO QUESTIONS BY MR CORNELIUS

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Ms Cambanis?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS CAMBANIS: Thank you, Chair.

Mr du Plessis, the amount of petrol that was taken into Khanya House that evening by yourself and your colleagues, do you have any idea how much that was?

MR DU PLESSIS: I think that every person carried a 20 litre can.

MS CAMBANIS: And were there instructions to pour petrol on each and every floor of the building?

MR DU PLESSIS: If I recall correctly, yes.

MS CAMBANIS: And how was this going to be set alight?

MR DU PLESSIS: I heard that it would be done by means of an ignition cord.

MS CAMBANIS: And that would be from each floor?

MR DU PLESSIS: No, not as far as I can recall. I cannot testify about that, I don't know how it would have been done.

MS CAMBANIS: You see, unfortunately we don't have the police docket but apparently the fire brigade reports would be that there was this from the outside of the building up unto second floor.

MR DU PLESSIS: It may have been like that, Chairperson, I cannot testify about it, I simply poured the petrol out, I didn't have anything to do with the ignition itself.

MS CAMBANIS: It would be - and if there was in fact petrol on all the floors with this ignition tape, once it was lit, what would you expect to have happened to that building? Isn't it that within minutes it would be ...

MR DU PLESSIS: It is possible that it could have burnt down like that, Chairperson.

MS CAMBANIS: And were you aware that there was a fire brigade just one or two blocks away from Khanya House?

MR DU PLESSIS: No, I did not know about that.

MS CAMBANIS: Subsequently, did you hear that the fire brigade was on the scene, very shortly after the fire was reported?

MR DU PLESSIS: I heard that, I don't know if it was the same evening or the day after the incident, but I heard that they were present there.

MS CAMBANIS: In your experience would you have expected that building to burn out in a very short period of time, with the amount of petrol and preparation that had gone into setting the fire?

MR DU PLESSIS: I think so, Chairperson, I would not be able to say how quickly, but it would have been like that.

MS CAMBANIS: Quickly, meaning minutes?

MR DU PLESSIS: No, such a large building would not burn down in a question of minutes.

MS CAMBANIS: We understand from the reports that we don't have, that it's the opinion of the fire brigade that it would have actually have been burnt out very rapidly. Can you disagree with that?

MR DU PLESSIS: I would not be able to make any statements on that, but it certainly is possible.

MS CAMBANIS: And similarly that had the fire brigade not been on the scene as quickly as it was, due to its location, people would have been trapped and died in the building.

MR DU PLESSIS: It could have been that way, yes Chairperson.

MS CAMBANIS: Now you say that you think you attended some of the surveillance. Did you say that?

MR DU PLESSIS: No.

MS CAMBANIS: No. You did your own surveillance?

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct.

MS CAMBANIS: What did you observe when you walked past Khanya House?

MR DU PLESSIS: I only saw the building, I didn't see any movement or anything else, there was nothing else that I observed on the premises, it was simply the building standing there.

MS CAMBANIS: I think this happened on a Wednesday, it was a week day.

MR DU PLESSIS: I cannot recall, it must be.

MS CAMBANIS: It definitely wasn't over the weekend.

MR DU PLESSIS: No.

MS CAMBANIS: And what did you do, you walked on the pavement outside Khanya House?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, I simply walked past so that I could see what the building looked like, that was the extent of my observation.

MS CAMBANIS: Morning, afternoon, when was that?

MR DU PLESSIS: I cannot recall, I really don't know.

MS CAMBANIS: But during daylight?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes.

MS CAMBANIS: And you didn't see anybody in that building?

MR DU PLESSIS: No, I did not observe anything.

MS CAMBANIS: You will recall that there were open balconies at that time at Khanya House?

MR DU PLESSIS: I cannot recall.

MS CAMBANIS: Look at page 2 of Exhibit E, please. Do you see the second floor?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, I see it.

MS CAMBANIS: The first and second floor's got open balconies and it's in fact on that second floor where people were sleeping that night, some on this side, on various side, but we'll get to that.

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, I see it on the photo.

MS CAMBANIS: You didn't see anyone moving around on the balconies?

MR DU PLESSIS: No, I didn't look that way.

MS CAMBANIS: Or in the yard?

MR DU PLESSIS: No, I did not see anybody in the yard.

MS CAMBANIS: Or in the offices on the ground floor?

MR DU PLESSIS: Not at all.

MS CAMBANIS: Sir, just explain more fully, at 217 where Mr Wagener has already asked you, your reference

"We conducted thorough surveillance of the place"

Now as an operative at Vlakplaas, that would be the modus operandi, before an operation there would be surveillance of the area? That's what one would expect.

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct.

MS CAMBANIS: Do you know of any operation where this procedure wasn't followed?

MR DU PLESSIS: I cannot imagine anything like that.

MS CAMBANIS: And in this case you were briefed that thorough observation had been done?

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct.

MS CAMBANIS: And that would include - sorry, would that include entering the building to check the layout of the building?

MR DU PLESSIS: From previous evidence before the Committee I've heard that such surveillance was conducted, but I was not involved with that, I wasn't part of that, Chairperson.

MS CAMBANIS: Because Mr du Plessis, what we still do not understand is the second and third floors were sleeping quarters and if anyone had have entered, they would have seen very clearly that there were bedrooms on the second and third floor.

MR DU PLESSIS: I would concede that it could have been that way, if someone entered the premises they would have seen that.

MS CAMBANIS: You've also explained that you were told it was a "kerk gebou'.

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, a church building, Khanya. I don't know precisely how to express it, but Khanya House is actually what I meant in my application.

MS CAMBANIS: But what you said at 215, which you've already been taken through

"Received an order"

fourth paragraph.

"Received an order to set a church building in Pretoria on fire"

And then you repeat that on page 217, relating to the second incident.

MR DU PLESSIS: What I actually mean is a building which belonged to the church, that is what I meant.

MS CAMBANIS: That is what you mean today?

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct.

MS CAMBANIS: Mr du Plessis, which of your colleagues went onto the second and third floor that evening?

MR DU PLESSIS: I would not be able to testify about that, I really don't know.

MS CAMBANIS: But the instructions were to go onto the second and third floor?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, Chairperson.

MS CAMBANIS: Did you see, even though you can't remember who, that people did move to the second and third floor? Or the second floor, at least.

MR DU PLESSIS: I didn't see anybody who went up there, Chairperson.

MS CAMBANIS: Mr Kok in his application says that his task was to open the doors, including on the first floor - Chairperson, I just want to get the reference.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MS CAMBANIS: Page 120, Mr du Plessis. Sorry, if you can just start at 119, page 119 at the bottom he says that his instructions were to open all the doors on the first floor so that the operatives from Vlakplaas could search the offices. Did Mr Kok carry out this instruction, did he open up the doors on the first floor? You were on the first floor, you said.

MR DU PLESSIS: I was there, he unlocked the doors.

MS CAMBANIS: Yes, and then the offices were searched?

MR DU PLESSIS: No, our order was to pour the petrol out, we did not search any rooms or offices, there wasn't any time for that anyway.

MS CAMBANIS: So what happened is that the doors were opened and then you and the other operatives would go into the offices, throw petrol and then go to the next one, is that correct?

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct.

MS CAMBANIS: And that was what your instructions were for the first floor, second floor and third floor?

MR DU PLESSIS: Correct.

MS CAMBANIS: Thank you Chair, that is all. Thank you, Mr du Plessis.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS CAMBANIS

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Ms Cambanis. Ms Patel?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS PATEL: Thank you, Honourable Chairperson.

Just one question, Mr du Plessis. Can you recall whether the igniting cord, Mr Kok says that was wound or it was put on the different levels including the place where the printing press was kept, do you have any recollection of this, can you confirm?

MR DU PLESSIS: I cannot answer that no, I do not know.

MS PATEL: Thank you, Honourable Chairperson.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS CAMBANIS

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Advocate Bosman?

ADV BOSMAN: I have no questions, thank you Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Advocate Sandi?

ADV SANDI: No questions, thank you Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Any re-examination?

MR WAGENER: Mr Chairman, no, I've got no re-examination, but I would request, on request of Mr du Plessis, he has business to attend to in Kimberly, whether he would be excused from further attendance, if there's no objection?

NO RE-EXAMINATION BY MR WAGENER

CHAIRPERSON: Any objection?

MR HATTINGH: No objection, thank you Mr Chairman.

MR VAN DER MERWE: No objection, Mr Chairman.

MR WAGENER: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr du Plessis, you are excused from further attendance of these proceedings.

WITNESS EXCUSED

MR WAGENER: Thank you Mr Chairman, that is the evidence by and on behalf of Mr du Plessis.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Patel, yesterday you spoke of documents and I stopped you because when you addressed me on that Ms Cambanis was outside taking instructions, this I think is an opportune moment to do so.

MS PATEL: Yes, thank you Honourable Chairperson. Ms Cambanis, what I'd placed on record yesterday was that I'd in fact obtained the report that you had requested in respect of the missing docket and that a copy of the report was handed to you and that you were satisfied with the contents of the report.

MS CAMBANIS: I confirm that, thank you Chair.

MR HATTINGH: May we also have sight of that report, Mr Chairman?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MS CAMBANIS: Well especially Mr Wagener, Chairperson, it actually concerns his client, Mr Engelbrecht.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, certainly. Do you have sufficient copies, Ms Patel?

MS PATEL: I'll have to have extras made, Honourable Chairperson, I'll attend to it now during the lunch break.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Mr Chairman, I thought that at this stage we would have reached openness that these things would be given to us so that we don't have to ask for it.

CHAIRPERSON: I closed it yesterday, it was open. Ms Patel, I'll give you an opportunity to make those copies and not impinge on your lunch time. We'll take our lunch adjournment earlier today. Thank you, we'll adjourn until? 0What do you suggest, one thirty? Is that okay with everybody?

MR JOUBERT: Mr Chair, sorry, you will recall I requested you to excuse me at about quarter to one, I have a consultation at one with my leader, I'm just afraid I may not be back by half past one, I anticipated that you'd only be adjourning at 1 o'clock. If I could request that ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Quarter to two?

MR JOUBERT: I'll do my best to be back by quarter to two, otherwise I'll make arrangements with one of my colleagues just to keep watch for me for the few minutes that I may be absent, with your approval.

CHAIRPERSON: Well we would reconvene at quarter to two.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

ON RESUMPTION

CHAIRPERSON: We are proceeding with this hearing. I'm in the hands of legal representatives not to break the agreement they had reached. I shall be guided by the legal representatives who is next to testify.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Very well, Mr Chairman, Francois van der Merwe on record, the next applicant will be Wybrand Andreas Lodewikus du Toit, and he will be giving his testimony in Afrikaans and he will take the oath.