JAKOB FRANCOIS KOK: (sworn states)
ADV BOSMAN: The applicant is duly sworn, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Advocate Bosman. Mr van der Merwe?
EXAMINATION BY MR VAN DER MERWE: Thank you, Mr Chair.
Mr Kok, you are an applicant in this matter and your application is embodied in the bundle, from page 128 to ...(end of side B of tape) At the time of the incident for which application has been made at this stage, you were a Captain and you resorted under the command of Mr du Toit, who has just testified.
MR J F KOK: That is correct.
MR VAN DER MERWE: In this matter you were approached by Mr Kotze, is that how you became aware for the first time, of this matter?
MR J F KOK: That is correct, Mr Kotze and Mr Hammond approached me for assistance with the operation.
MR VAN DER MERWE: At that stage, was there any indication to you that this was an instruction from Head Office?
MR J F KOK: That is how I recall it. They told me that the instructions came from Head Office, via Brig McIntyre.
MR VAN DER MERWE: Can you recall what the instruction involved?
MR J F KOK: As I can recall the instruction was to destroy or damage the building structure of Khanya House, to such an extent that it could not be used.
MR VAN DER MERWE: And was there any talk of a printing press at that point?
MR J F KOK: Yes, it was the building and the printing press which were at issue.
MR VAN DER MERWE: Just to explain to the Committee the working method of your unit, would you at this stage have been able to become involved in the operation without the authorisation of your direct head, Mr du Toit?
MR J F KOK: No, I would not have become involved in such an operation without the authorisation of my immediate head, Mr du Toit, and from that reason we went together to speak to Mr du Toit, we told him of the request and requested whether or not it was possible to continue.
MR VAN DER MERWE: And you then received the approval from Mr du Toit to go ahead with the operation?
MR J F KOK: That is correct.
MR VAN DER MERWE: Mr de Kock has already testified as having been the operation Commander of this operation, do you agree with this?
MR J F KOK: Yes.
MR VAN DER MERWE: And he was also the person who bore the highest rank of all of those who took part in this operation? ...(transcriber's interpretation)
MR J F KOK: Yes, operationally he was the highest member of the team which participated in this operation.
MR VAN DER MERWE: At the stage when you received the instruction, was there any discussion regarding the method which would be applied in damaging the building, or was it left to the operatives?
MR J F KOK: As far as I can recall the request was to damage the building and the idea was initially to use explosives, but we had a mutual discussion about the request, me, Col de Kock, Hennie Kotze and George Hammond, and I think that the request came from Mr de Kock's side, he said that he would assist but that he could not associate with an explosion to destroy the building. That is how we arrived at the conclusion that we should use fire.
MR VAN DER MERWE: In the events leading up to the operation you were also involved in a reconnaissance operation, as it is stated on page 135 of your statement, is that correct?
MR J F KOK: That is correct. It was basically just one evening approximately a week before the time, we went in to determine for ourselves what the layout of the building was like on the ground floor. We also wanted to determine where the printing press was, because at that stage we didn't really have concrete information which could determine what the precise layout of the building was.
MR VAN DER MERWE: Who accompanied you during this reconnaissance mission?
MR J F KOK: It was me, Col de Kock and another person, but I cannot recall who that third person was.
MR VAN DER MERWE: Very well. You were not here but Col de Kock has already testified that according to his recollection, he did not enter the building, did you enter the building physically and conduct an inspection and who was with you?
MR J F KOK: We physically entered the building and as far as I can recall, Mr de Kock was with me, because at one point I struggled with a lock and he held the torch over my shoulder.
MR VAN DER MERWE: At any stage during the issue of this order or during the reconnaissance mission, did it come to your knowledge that people were living on a permanent basis in that building?
MR J F KOK: At no stage did we have any knowledge that there were indeed people living in the building. With the pre-reconnaissance we did not find anybody there. At no stage were we disturbed in our activities or did we encounter anybody during the preparation or planning phase.
MR VAN DER MERWE: And during the reconnaissance, you were not on the first, second or third floors?
MR J F KOK: I think we may have been on the first floor where the offices were, but we did not go any further into the building.
MR VAN DER MERWE: The preceding time up to the operation you had a meeting at Vlakplaas.
MR J F KOK: That is correct.
MR VAN DER MERWE: And it was there that Col de Kock divided you into different teams and expressed specific tasks and expectations to the different teams, is that correct?
MR J F KOK: That is correct.
MR VAN DER MERWE: With reference to yourself, could you tell the Committee what your task was that you had to perform during this particular operation.
MR J F KOK: Automatically I would have to go in first, I would have to walk ahead to open the doors so that we could achieve access to the building and then all the locks that had to be picked at the bottom, I would do that and then I would also gain access to the adjacent building or outside room where the printing press was.
MR VAN DER MERWE: With regard to your capacity to open locks, who would you say between you and your brother was the most experienced when it came to picking locks?
MR J F KOK: I was the most experienced when it came to that.
MR VAN DER MERWE: What would your brother's role have been, according to your knowledge?
MR J F KOK: As far as I can recall he had to open the locks on the first floor.
MR VAN DER MERWE: In your statement on page 136 you state that your brother was responsible for the doors on the top floors, is that correct?
MR J F KOK: I stated it as such on that page, but it is ...
MR VAN DER MERWE: Is it not correct?
MR J F KOK: Well it is somewhat problematic. As I read the statement now, I made my statements by myself at that stage, there are many spelling errors and I wrote down what I could recall at that point.
MR VAN DER MERWE: Perhaps just for the sake of completion I could put this before the Committee. You yourself prepared your application before the cut-off date, without the assistance of a legal representative and not in co-operation with members of the TRC.
MR J F KOK: I did this completely alone.
MR VAN DER MERWE: Therefore you didn't have any assistance from anybody?
MR J F KOK: That is correct.
MR VAN DER MERWE: After you entered the building, did you play any other role, with the exception of opening the doors on the ground floor and opening the doors to the printing press room?
MR J F KOK: No.
MR VAN DER MERWE: You were not involved in the pouring of petrol and the physical lighting of the petrol, is that correct?
MR J F KOK: No, it was impossible to perform both tasks simultaneously.
MR VAN DER MERWE: How long would you say did the operation last from the moment that you opened the first door until the moment that you withdrew from the scene?
MR J F KOK: It is very difficult to recall, but it could not have been very long, if it was 10 minutes, then it was long enough.
MR VAN DER MERWE: You yourself were not armed, is that correct?
MR J F KOK: No, I was not armed.
MR VAN DER MERWE: At the time of this action you thus acted under the instructions of your command, as you received them?
MR J F KOK: That is correct.
MR VAN DER MERWE: And you were under the impression that this operation was to be executed as part of the political struggle which waged at that stage between the government and the anti-governmental powers.
MR J F KOK: That is correct.
MR VAN DER MERWE: After this action you departed for Vlakplaas in one of the kombis, is that correct?
MR J F KOK: That is correct.
MR VAN DER MERWE: And from that point onwards you went home.
MR J F KOK: That is correct.
MR VAN DER MERWE: At the time of the operation, did you at any stage find out whether or not people were present in the building?
MR J F KOK: At no stage did I find out that there were people in the building.
MR VAN DER MERWE: Perhaps just, Mr Kok, for the sake of information, if one were to kill people in this building, would arson have been an effective method?
MR J F KOK: That is a very difficult question to answer, I wouldn't know.
MR VAN DER MERWE: Are there more effective methods that you think could have been applied in killing people, if that was what your intention was?
MR J F KOK: Well one could have shot them and then burn the place up.
MR VAN DER MERWE: Thank you, Chairperson, nothing further.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VAN DER MERWE
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr van der Merwe. Mr Hattingh?
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR HATTINGH: Thank you, Mr Chairman.
Mr Kok, just a number of general questions. On page 129 of your application, the last paragraph, there you state that in 1983 you obtained your Mechanical Engineering diploma, is that correct?
MR J F KOK: That is correct.
MR HATTINGH: And after that you followed various courses, such as a demolitions course.
MR J F KOK: That is correct.
MR HATTINGH: And as was referred to commonly in the police and here in the application, a lock-picking course.
MR J F KOK: That is correct.
MR HATTINGH: And on page 131 you state that you were also recognised as the best student of this lock-picking course, is that correct?
MR J F KOK: That is correct.
MR HATTINGH: And then you say that subsequently you established a unique capacity in the Security Branch, because you were training operatives on a national basis in lock-picking techniques, is that correct?
MR J F KOK: That is correct.
MR HATTINGH: And these were members of the police who followed these courses under you.
MR J F KOK: Yes, selected members of the Security Branch, Chairperson.
MR HATTINGH: And this course that you presented, was it as comprehensive and intensive as the course that you yourself had followed?
MR J F KOK: It wasn't as comprehensive, but if I could just explain what the course involved. It was basic knowledge that one would acquire and then the development of a practical ability, if one didn't practise these techniques one would not be able to apply them properly.
MR HATTINGH: So with only the theoretical knowledge, one would not be able to practise these techniques?
MR J F KOK: That is correct.
MR HATTINGH: Did you consistently practise these techniques?
MR J F KOK: Because we were specialists and because we performed these tasks on a more regular basis than what they were required, due to the fact that I provided training, I performed these techniques on a regular basis.
MR HATTINGH: Would you then say that you were better equipped to do the job than someone who had actually simply followed the course under your guidance and who had not performed these techniques regularly?
MR J F KOK: That is correct.
MR HATTINGH: You stated that you were better equipped in the lock-picking technique than your brother, is that correct?
MR J F KOK: Yes.
MR HATTINGH: And you opened the doors on the ground level, is that correct?
MR J F KOK: That is correct.
MR HATTINGH: And according to your recollection, he would then take the next floor, being the first floor, is that correct?
MR J F KOK: That is correct.
MR HATTINGH: Was it your plan to open the doors on the second and the third floors as well?
MR J F KOK: As far as I can recall we did not have any such order and it also was not our objective to open the doors on the second and third floors, we didn't have time.
MR HATTINGH: If it had been the objective to do so, to open the locks on all floors, would you have left the first, second and third floors to your brother and only dealt with the locks on the ground floor?
MR J F KOK: No, I would have dealt with a greater portion of the work, I would have assisted him once I had finished my work.
MR HATTINGH: And you did not assist him in any way on the first floor?
MR J F KOK: No, it wasn't necessary.
MR HATTINGH: And you did not go to any of the other floors?
MR J F KOK: No.
MR HATTINGH: What is your knowledge regarding fires or arson and fire prevention, if any?
MR J F KOK: I don't really have any knowledge, the only knowledge that I have regarding arson or the danger of fires, would be knowledge that I have due to the demolitions courses that I followed.
MR HATTINGH: Can you recall where the ignition cord was placed that night?
MR J F KOK: I would not be able to comment on that, I didn't see it and I did not know who was responsible for it.
MR HATTINGH: When you were busy on the ground floor, how was the lighting?
MR J F KOK: It was dark. Our modus operandi was to keep it as dark as possible. We had small torches with which we could work, one would have to place it in one's mouth and work as such in the dark.
MR HATTINGH: So you made use of those small torches.
MR J F KOK: That is correct.
MR HATTINGH: What was the idea, were you supposed to unlock the door and then douse that particular room with petrol?
MR J F KOK: Yes, I had to open the room so that people could get in to douse the rooms with petrol in order to make the whole process possible.
MR HATTINGH: Would the doors be locked subsequently?
MR J F KOK: No, I would not have wasted time in locking doors, I would have left the doors open.
MR HATTINGH: Can you recall how many doors you were supposed to open on the ground floor?
MR J F KOK: It is very difficult to recall at this point.
MR HATTINGH: Was it a question of two or three doors, or were there ten or more doors? Were there many doors or few doors?
MR J F KOK: If I have to think back and estimate, I would say that it would be in the vicinity of four to five doors, Chairperson.
MR HATTINGH: And while you were busy with that, the people who were supposed to douse the rooms with petrol, had already gained access to the building?
MR J F KOK: Yes, as far as they could continue with their tasks they did.
MR HATTINGH: Therefore, as you opened the rooms they would walk through and douse the rooms with petrol?
MR J F KOK: That is correct.
MR HATTINGH: Did you try in any way to perform your tasks in silence, or did you just go about your work in a normal manner, without really trying to neutralise any sound?
MR J F KOK: As far as I can recall, it was a covert task, so one would do so as quietly as possible, one wouldn't want to alert everybody to your presence there.
MR HATTINGH: But anybody who was on the outside of the building, in the street, would they have been able to hear you talking to one another?
MR J F KOK: No, I doubt it.
MR HATTINGH: So it wouldn't have been strange if you had spoken to one another in a normal tone of voice in the building?
MR J F KOK: That must probably be so.
MR HATTINGH: Because information indicates that someone said after the incident during a press conference, that those who were involved in the incident were most probably under the impression that no-one was in the building, because they did not try to conceal their activities there in the building. Would you agree with such a general statement?
MR J F KOK: Yes, one could probably agree, but it is very difficult to remember.
MR HATTINGH: Very well. Can you tell us more-or-less how much time you spent in the building, from the moment that you accessed it to the moment that you exited?
MR J F KOK: I've said that I cannot think that we were there for longer than 10 minutes.
MR HATTINGH: Very well. And then you immediately left the environment as well?
MR J F KOK: Yes, we withdrew immediately and completely.
MR HATTINGH: Just with regard to the reconnaissance operation, you state that Mr de Kock was present.
MR J F KOK: As far as I can recall he was definitely present.
MR HATTINGH: And did you move in from the back of the building?
MR J F KOK: We climbed over the wall on the northern side of the premises. As far as I can recall, I think that we entered the building on the side via a glass door. That was the pre-reconnaissance.
MR HATTINGH: Was anybody left at the door to stand guard?
MR J F KOK: No, if we had conducted such a reconnaissance we would basically have gone in and closed the door so that it would not look suspicious if somebody passed by, Chairperson.
MR HATTINGH: And were you then on the ground floor?
MR J F KOK: Yes, we were busy on the ground floor looking at what was going on.
MR HATTINGH: And did you open any of the other doors?
MR J F KOK: Yes, we did.
MR HATTINGH: Basically to view the layout of the offices, is that correct?
MR J F KOK: That is correct.
MR HATTINGH: And did you find offices there?
MR J F KOK: Yes, what I saw looked like offices, I did not see any bedrooms.
MR HATTINGH: And at any stage during the reconnaissance or the operation itself, did you enter the first floor or the next floor?
MR J F KOK: I cannot recall whether I did so during the reconnaissance, but during the operation I did not go further than the ground floor. During the reconnaissance I would be almost certain to say that we entered the first floor.
MR HATTINGH: Did you see offices or bedrooms?
MR J F KOK: Offices.
MR HATTINGH: Did you have any reason to believe that there was anything other than an office complex in the building?
MR J F KOK: As far as I can recall, according to my perception I did not suspect that there were bedrooms, Chairperson.
MR HATTINGH: You thought it was an office building?
MR J F KOK: That is correct.
MR HATTINGH: And at any point at the time of the operation, did it come to your knowledge that there could possibly be people in the building?
MR J F KOK: At no stage.
MR HATTINGH: Thank you, Chairperson, I have nothing further.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR HATTINGH
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Hattingh.
MR NEL: Chairperson, Nel, no questions.
NO QUESTIONS BY MR NEL
MR WAGENER: Neither have I, Mr Chairman, it's Jan Wagener.
NO QUESTIONS BY MR WAGENER
MR BUNN: Steven Bunn, I have no questions, thank you Mr Chairman.
NO QUESTIONS BY MR BUNN
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR JOUBERT: Mr Chairman, just one issue.
Mr Kok, on page 135 where you refer to Capt Kotze and Lieut Hammond who approached you to assist with the execution of an order that they received from Brig McIntyre, Brig McIntyre has indicated that he never had direct contact with these persons, so the order would not have gone directly to them, it would have been Mr Hattingh, who has previously testified. Would you accept that?
MR J F KOK: Yes.
MR JOUBERT: Nothing further, Chairperson.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR JOUBERT
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Joubert. Mr du Plessis?
MR DU PLESSIS: Thank you, Mr Chairman, I have no questions in my capacity as Mr Lamey, but I do have questions in my capacity as du Plessis, yes.
NO QUESTIONS BY MR LAMEY
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, you may proceed, Mr du Plessis.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Kok, this reconnaissance mission that you executed prior to the operation, you stated that you thought there was a third person present, but that you could not recall who it was. That was your evidence, it was you, Mr de Kock and someone else.
MR J F KOK: Yes, we were definitely three persons.
MR DU PLESSIS: You would not dispute when Mr Kotze says that he was also there.
MR J F KOK: No, I would not.
MR DU PLESSIS: Thank you, nothing further.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR DU PLESSIS
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr du Plessis.
MR CORNELIUS: I have no questions, thank you Mr Chair.
NO QUESTIONS BY MR CORNELIUS
CHAIRPERSON: Ms Cambanis?
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS CAMBANIS: Thank you, Chair.
Sir, please turn to page 136 of the bundle, under "uitvoering".
MR J F KOK: Yes.
MS CAMBANIS: Second paragraph
"I was responsible for the doors on the ground floor, while my brother Kobus Kok who is also an officer at the Technical division of the Security Police, was responsible for "die deure op die boonste vloere."
Do you see that?
MR J F KOK: Yes.
MS CAMBANIS: It is your evidence-in-chief that this is a spelling mistake?
MR J F KOK: It is how I wrote it, it was very difficult, as I have explained. We sat and typed these things for days and days on end, we sat on our own trying to get these statements compiled, we wrote many things and if I read what I have printed here, I see many spelling errors and the way in which I put it, it's not a spelling error as such, I refer to the top floors but now that one's memory has been refreshed upon hearing all the other evidence, it was clear that there were no other floors to be dealt with, he only had to deal with one floor. I would not have tasked him to deal with the rest of the building if I only had to deal with one floor.
MS CAMBANIS: Sorry, it's not a spelling mistake, it is what?
MR J F KOK: If I could just repeat. What I wrote at that point was something that I did by myself and I had to do it in a very short span of time. I referred to floors, I did not specify the first floor or the second floor. The objective was not to go through the entire building that night or to unlock all the doors, the doors on the first floor for which he was tasked were the doors that were supposed to be opened. So it was an error or recollection on my behalf, not necessarily a spelling error.
MS CAMBANIS: You knew that there was a second and a third floor.
MR J F KOK: I must have known that the building was higher.
MS CAMBANIS: Now when did you decide to change this part of your application?
MR J F KOK: The moment when I began to read it with more clarity. When one views the document and as I've said, if I have to read this document now and see how many errors I have made and how many misformulations of sentences I have made, if I read it in proper perspective and correct the syntax, perhaps I would have put things in a different way.
MS CAMBANIS: Let me tell you when you decided, Sir, I'll put this to you. Seven people were trapped on the second floor, do you know that now?
MR J F KOK: Yes, I am now aware of it, we read it in the papers afterwards.
MS CAMBANIS: Men and woman.
MR J F KOK: Yes.
MS CAMBANIS: Including a 70 year old nun, and it has now become apparent that they were trapped on the second floor. And I put to you that since that information has been exposed at this hearing, we can't get one applicant above the first floor, including you.
MR J F KOK: It is definitely not now that we have started to say this, the moment that the information came through the media that there were people on the top floors, we were not happy about it, it wasn't part of the plan, it wasn't part of the order. We did not go there to cause any injury or death to people.
MS CAMBANIS: I'm putting to you, Sir, that throughout this bundle there's more than one reference to activities that took place above the first floor, but when it comes to giving oral evidence in this hearing, everyone is either on the ground floor or on the first floor.
MR J F KOK: I can only speak of what I know, of what I was involved with, of what I did and there is no way, because I was busy on the ground, I did my work there and I went out to the printing room, I opened the door, I still slid on the petrol which had been poured on the floor, I fell into the petrol literally, there was no way that I could have been above the ground floor during the operation. As far as I know and as far as I knew, it was Kobus’ task to unlock the doors on the first floor. He couldn't go any further because there wasn't any time.
MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, I know I'm perhaps a little bit out of line, but my learned friend, Ms Cambanis, put a question in a specific way which puzzles me and that is that she made the statement that everywhere through this bundle the people have said that they were present on the second ...(intervention)
MS CAMBANIS: I did not say that.
MR DU PLESSIS: Well that is how I understood the question. Now if that was the gist of the question, I would like her to point us to those specific passages, because I haven't seen them nor have I heard about them.
CHAIRPERSON: Ms Cambanis?
MS CAMBANIS: I would like to know what the interest of this questions is coming from him, I would expect his legal representative to be putting this in the first place.
MR DU PLESSIS: Well Mr Chairman, that is why I said maybe it's not my function to raise this, but it is of concern to me that a question goes onto the record, put in a specific way, which does not portray the correct factual situation and therefore, in so far as it may be of interest to my clients too, I raised this issue. And the gist of the question, as I understood it, was that there were various places in this bundle where reference is made to the fact that the applicants were on the second floor, second and higher floors and I haven't seen those places where it's stated and I would like Ms Cambanis to point that out to us, if she's able to do that.
CHAIRPERSON: Ms Cambanis, would you rephrase your question, let it correct the record if that is the ... for the witness to answer. Thank you, Mr du Plessis.
MR DU PLESSIS: Thank you for affording me the opportunity, Mr Chairman, I appreciate it.
MS CAMBANIS: Chairperson, it was not a question, it was actually something that I was putting to this witness. What I was putting to this witness is that if we look at the bundle and if we listen to the oral evidence that has been given, reference is made that there was activity beyond the first floor of Khanya House that evening.
MR VAN DER MERWE: But surely, Mr Chairman, there are - I have to come in here, I have not found a place like that in this bundle and if my learned colleague can point us to the point where reference is made of people, of activity beyond the first floor, then we can deal with it.
CHAIRPERSON: Hence I have come in and said what I've seen is beyond the ground floor.
MS CAMBANIS: Thank you, Chair, then I ask for an adjournment and I will get the page numbers and paragraph numbers.
CHAIRPERSON: Certainly.
MS CAMBANIS: Thank you.
CHAIRPERSON: We'll adjourn.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
ON RESUMPTION
JAKOBUS FRANCOIS KOK: (s.u.o.)
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Ms Cambanis?
MS CAMBANIS: Thank you, Chairperson. I refer to page 120 of the bundle, paragraph 3.5
"Ignition cord was placed among the various floors and the printing press."
To page 265 ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: Let's just get the first one, the first one is 120, paragraph 3.5?
MS CAMBANIS: Yes, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, you may proceed. The next one?
MS CAMBANIS: Chairperson, before Mr Flores changed his evidence, at page 265 in the bundle he had referred to the top floor.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes.
MS CAMBANIS: Chairperson, I do not recall to which witness I put the question that someone else would have been involved on the second and third floors, I'm afraid I cannot recall to who I put that question and it was answered that someone else would have dealt with the second and third floors.
I'll put my submission that in several places in the bundles the impression was created that people had been involved on the second and third floors. That was my submission put.
MR VAN DER MERWE: Sorry, Mr Chairman, if I may come in there. The paragraph quoted at page 123.5, refers to my client, Mr Kobus Kok, and quite clearly in plain and simple Afrikaans, that does not refer to the second or third floor, it says
"Various floors"
which ground floor and first floor is "twee verskillende verdiepings", and I was going to deal with this in re-examination. If you look at paragraph 3.3, it becomes abundantly clear that he's not referring to the second or third floor.
CHAIRPERSON: Is this not subject to argument at the end of the day?
MS CAMBANIS: I accept that, Chair, thank you.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
MR WAGENER: Mr Chairman, maybe I can assist, Jan Wagener speaking. It was put to my client, Mr du Plessis, by Ms Cambanis,
"Were you instructed to pour petrol on each of the floors?"
And according to my notes he says:
"If I recall correctly, yes."
And that as far as I know, is the only relevance to the other floors.
CHAIRPERSON: I'm just looking at what ...(inaudible) but somewhere along the line under cross-examination by Ms Cambanis, he says
"I did not see somebody going to the second floor"
MR WAGENER: Yes, Mr Chairman, he was then asked by her
"Did you see anyone go to the second and top floors?"
and he said "No".
CHAIRPERSON: But it's not a ruling, I say rather than deal with semantics at this stage, let's just give the interpretation we wish as convincingly as possible under argument. It would make sense, because to say it's "verskillende verdiepings", it's already interpreted as two floors, ground and first floor. I don't want to hear that at this juncture.
MS CAMBANIS: Yes Chair, I have already accepted that.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
MS CAMBANIS: Sir, you said in-chief that you would not have locked ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: Could you just wait for a second, my colleague is showing me something.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS CAMBANIS: (Cont)
Thank you, Chair.
Sir, you have said that you did not lock the doors when you left the premises.
MR J F KOK: That is correct.
MS CAMBANIS: Yet once again in the docket there was a report, and it will be the evidence of Brother Jude, that the door was locked after this incident.
MR J F KOK: Which door?
MS CAMBANIS: The exit or the back door or where you came in.
MR J F KOK: We went in by the back door and we left by that door and I definitely did not lock it.
MS CAMBANIS: In fact, with discussions with Brother Jude, because the doors were locked it was suggested to him that it had been inside job.
MR J F KOK: What I can recall is that the motivation that we had, the way that we wanted to colour the operation was to make it appear that it was a right-wing operation, why would we waste time in locking doors in trying to get out of there?
MS CAMBANIS: If they were locked would that have been done by your brother then?
MR J F KOK: No, he would not have locked them. Our primary objective was to burn the building down and it had to be clear that it was arson and that it could be linked to a right-wing action, that the right-wingers in the country would have to assume responsibility for it. I think that there was a story at one point that the Wit Wolwe would accept responsibility for it, so why would we lock any doors, because that would just be a waste of time and we wanted to get away from the premises as soon as possible.
MS CAMBANIS: Sir, I'm putting to you that the evidence will be that the doors were found to be locked, if we had the docket we could have proved that, and I'm asking you if you and your - if you didn't do it, your brother didn't do it, who else could have done that?
MR J F KOK: I cannot answer you.
MS CAMBANIS: Were you supposed to work in conjunction with someone specifically from Vlakplaas that evening?
MR J F KOK: Willie Nortje would basically protect my back, because the minute one was unlocking the doors, one's attention would be focused solely on the lock, one couldn't keep an eye on what was happening around one, so he had to watch my back and keep and eye on what was happening, Chairperson.
MS CAMBANIS: Was he the person - he was there to look after you, who was the person in charge for operations inside the building?
MR J F KOK: I cannot recall.
MS CAMBANIS: When you went on the recognisance inside the building, previously, had you received or obtained plans of the building beforehand?
MR J F KOK: No, we did not have any plans, that was one of the reasons why we went in. We didn't have any plans of the layout of the building, no-one could really tell me where the printing press would be situated in the building.
MS CAMBANIS: Now one of the previous witnesses has talked about a radio communication via walkie-talkie, you wouldn't be someone who would have had the need to be placed in possession of a walkie-talkie?
MR J F KOK: No. Once again, because I was focusing on the locks, all the other tasks would then be removed from one because one had to concentrate on the locks, that's why I didn't have a radio or anything like that, they had to protect me.
MS CAMBANIS: Do you recall if Mr Nortje had a walkie-talkie with him?
MR J F KOK: I cannot recall.
MS CAMBANIS: Do you remember whether, who did have, or can't you recall who were the people carrying walkie-talkies that evening?
MR J F KOK: I would be lying if I tried to say who was carrying a radio that night.
MS CAMBANIS: Sir, the night that you went on the recognisance of the building, do you know what time of night, midnight, early morning?
MR J F KOK: If I have it correctly, it would have been between 11 and 12 o'clock that night. It was before midnight, not afterwards.
MS CAMBANIS: And is there any particular reason why - did you say you only went on the ground floor and the first floor?
MR J F KOK: We pertinently looked at the layout, because we were looking for the printing press which would not necessarily have been on the first floor. I cannot recall correctly, but it could be that we were also on the first floor, but we were primarily on the ground floor looking for the printing press.
MS CAMBANIS: Any reason why you didn't go to the second and third floors?
MR J F KOK: I cannot recall, there was no motivation. We also didn't want to spend too much time in the building.
MS CAMBANIS: Yes of course. And where did you find the print press?
MR J F KOK: It was the small building adjacent to the main building.
MS CAMBANIS: And have you heard me refer to something called the documentation room? Have you been present?
MR J F KOK: Yes, it was a room under the staircase, there was something that looked like a, something that we call a police basket that was attached to the door.
MS CAMBANIS: And would that be something that would definitely have to be burnt? I mean that would be something that would a priority, do you agree?
MR J F KOK: Yes.
MS CAMBANIS: And if there's going to be evidence that in fact that place was not very damaged and the petrol was only thrown up to the door, what would your comment be?
MR J F KOK: It's difficult to recall what happened that night. I opened up the place and we basically withdrew once our work was done. I cannot recall how large the fire was or the extent of the damage.
MS CAMBANIS: Thank you very much, Mr Kok. Thank you, Chairperson.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS CAMBANIS
CHAIRPERSON: Ms Patel?
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS PATEL: Thank you, Honourable Chairperson,
Just one aspect. On page 136 of your application Sir, you state under "Uitvoering", if we look at paragraph 4 thereof, you say that:
"Everything went according to plan"
The plan that you refer to, what specifically are you talking about there?
MR J F KOK: The plan was to damage the building, to start the fire, so everything went according to plan and we all withdrew.
MS PATEL: So the fact that there were people in the building wasn't part of the plan?
MR J F KOK: No, at that stage I did not know that there were people in the building, it was only on the following day that we heard that there were people in the building.
MS PATEL: Alright. So then everything couldn't have gone according to plan, as stated here?
MR J F KOK: But the plan was not to injure anybody, the plan was to damage the building and that was the plan that we executed.
MS PATEL: Alright. Then just one aspect also, you were asked if the intention was to kill the people present in the building and you suggested as alternatives that they could have been shot and the building could have been exploded, this wouldn't have been a really feasible alternative, given that according to testimony before us that there was a police, that policemen were housed very near to where Khanya House was situated, not so? It would have been problematic to carry out an operation in that way.
MR J F KOK: It was a remark. The question was put and I made a comment, but there are many other ways if you really want to kill someone. I think it's problematic to put a question like that to a person.
MS PATEL: Alright. And then finally, you state that you were approached - if I can just get this correct, you were approached by Hammond and then the two of you went to WAL du Toit for authorisation to assist, is that how it happened or did I get that wrong?
MR J F KOK: It was Kotze and Hammond who came to see me and it was regular practice. I did not do any work before it had been cleared with Col du Toit, if he was available. I would not have done any work without his authorisation and I also would not have discussed it alone with him, the person making the request would have had to come with, and that is why I went to him.
MS PATEL: Okay. And Kotze and Hammond had told you that they were approached by Hattingh, is that right? Do I get the order correct here?
MR J F KOK: Yes, they received an order from Col Hattingh, but it came from McIntyre.
MS PATEL: Alright fine, I just wanted clarity on that, thank you.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS PATEL
CHAIRPERSON: Advocate Bosman?
ADV BOSMAN: Mr Kok, what was the nature of the locks, can you recall?
MR J F KOK: The lock on the back door was an old type of lock, I'm just trying to remember, one would recall the locks which would be more difficult to open. One of the locks on the inside on the ground floor was a solid cylinder lock which is one that I spent quite some time with the evening of the reconnaissance. The lock leading to the file room - I'm just referring to it as the file room, was a lock with a small police feature on the inside, it was the regular kind of lock that one would find in the domestic situation.
ADV BOSMAN: The reason why I ask is that these were locks that had to be actively locked, it wasn't like a Yale lock that one could accidentally lock by drawing it closed?
MR J F KOK: No, all of those were locks that you had to open actively. I don't know if there was a Yale lock on the back door, but it is very difficult, generally these were locks that you had to lock actively.
ADV BOSMAN: Thank you. Thank you, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Advocate Sandi?
ADV SANDI: Yes, thank you, Chair.
Mr Kok, when did you become aware for the first time that there were in fact people on the second and the third floor?
MR J F KOK: The following day it was in the media, it came to light, we heard that there were people in the building.
ADV SANDI: How would you describe your feeling at that stage when you saw this thing in the newspaper, this report that there were actually people there?
MR J F KOK: Well one wasn't happy about it, one would be upset by it because it wasn't part of the plan.
ADV SANDI: Would you describe your feeling as one of shock and horror?
MR J F KOK: Yes, one could say so.
ADV SANDI: Did you share your feelings with anyone, having learnt what the situation actually was?
MR J F KOK: We spoke among ourselves and we realised that people could have died, it bothered us, it wasn't part of the plan. Over the period that we worked, we didn't try to target innocent bystanders, if people were involved it would be people who were involved in the struggle. We didn't go around trying to injure or kill people randomly.
ADV SANDI: Now as amongst your colleagues who were involved in this incident, would you say there was this general feeling of shock?
MR J F KOK: My brother and I worked together so we would have shared these things on a more personal level, one wouldn't have operated on a daily level with the others. I think that was basically the line of our conversation, that it wasn't acceptable.
ADV SANDI: If at the time you were busy sprinkling and dousing the place with ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: No, not him, he was just busy with the locks.
ADV SANDI: No, I'm talking about your group, the group of which you were a member, if it had become apparent that there were people in this building, would you be able to say what would have happened? Would you have called it off, what would have happened?
MR J F KOK: I think the norm would have been to withdraw. If one knew that there were people in the building, one couldn't simply set it alight. I don't think that we would have continued.
ADV SANDI: Thank you, Chair.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Advocate Sandi. Any re-examination?
RE-EXAMINATION BY MR VAN DER MERWE: Sorry, Mr Chairman, just two aspects.
Mr Kok, your application you submitted on the date stamped on page 140, on the 12th of December 1996, three days before the cut-off date, is that correct?
MR J F KOK: Yes.
MR VAN DER MERWE: If we can page back to your brother's application that ends on page 127, his was also signed on the 12/12/1996, is that correct?
MR J F KOK: Yes.
MR VAN DER MERWE: In your brother's application on page 120, he at that early stage refers to, in paragraph 3.3
"After everybody got safe access to the complex, I executed my instructions and opened the doors on the first floor."
Can you confirm that he said that?
MR J F KOK: Yes, if I can read it in the bundle.
MR VAN DER MERWE: The second aspect, you were asked and my learned colleague, Ms Patel said that everything was executed according to plan and at that stage you referred to that stage when you withdrew.
MR J F KOK: Yes, we executed our task.
MR VAN DER MERWE: Thank you, Mr Chairperson, no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VAN DER MERWE
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Thank you, Mr Kok, you're excused.
WITNESS EXCUSED
MR VAN DER MERWE: Thank you, Chairperson. Mr Chairman, I won't be presenting anymore evidence on behalf of Mr Jakob Francois Kok. The next witness will be Mr Jakobus Kok and he will be testifying in Afrikaans.
