amntrans AMNESTY HEARINGS 1999-08-26 PRETORIA 8 K KLOPPER https://sabctrc.saha.org.za/hearing.php?id=53650&t=&tab=hearings https://sabctrc.saha.org.za/originals/amntrans/1999/99081631_pre_990826pt.htm K KLOPPER (sworn states) EXAMINATION BY MR LAMEY Thank you, Chairperson. Mr Klopper, you have applied for amnesty for several incidents. Is it correct that some of the things for which you have applied for have already been heard? MR KLOPPER That's correct. MR LAMEY And you apply for amnesty for your involvement in the Nelspruit incident, during which four persons were killed in an ambush, is that correct? MR KLOPPER Yes. MR LAMEY An initial application has been drawn up for you, which contains certain summaries of the acts. Some of the facts were, after further consideration, not repeated in your application because of several reasons, is that correct? MR KLOPPER That's correct MR LAMEY Your initial application is dated the 29th of November 1996. We find that from page 100 to 106, as well as the annexure on page 111. MR KLOPPER That's correct. MR LAMEY Afterwards you obtained legal representation and then a supplementary affidavit was drawn up, which appears from 112 and the relevant parts thereof, up to page 126 of the bundle, is that correct? MR KLOPPER That's correct. MR LAMEY In the introductory part you say that the parts which are contained in here are embodied in the application in as far as the incidents occur and further incidents - excuse me, Chairperson, I'm on page 117. And then furthermore there's a summary of your background and your training, on page 118 up to 122, do you confirm that? MR KLOPPER That's correct, Chairperson. MR LAMEY To arrive at the Nelspruit incident, you mention in paragraph 1 that one of the members of Vlakplaas gained information with regard to ANC persons who wanted to launch an operation. MR KLOPPER That's correct. MR LAMEY How long before the incident took place did you become aware that such an action would take place? MR KLOPPER I cannot recall the specific date and the specific time, but it was a while before that that there was talk that such an incident would take place. MR LAMEY And did you hear beforehand who was the source of the information from Holtzhausen? MR KLOPPER At some stage I did find out who the source was, but I cannot recall at which stage it was. MR LAMEY Who was the source of Mr Holtzhausen? MR KLOPPER It was Ben van Zyl. MR LAMEY Did you know him? MR KLOPPER Yes, I knew him. MR LAMEY Were you involved in the planning of the arrangements beforehand, before the Nelspruit incident? MR KLOPPER No. MR LAMEY Were you involved to some extent or were you informed? MR KLOPPER I would say I was informed, I did not participate in the planning. MR LAMEY Who did the planning? MR KLOPPER As far as I know it was between Holtzhausen and members of Murder and Robbery and I think Mr de Kock. MR LAMEY Did you understand that you would accompany them for the operation? MR KLOPPER That's correct. MR LAMEY Did you know in Pretoria what the operation would be about, that an ambush would be set up? MR KLOPPER I cannot recall whether I knew in Pretoria, I cannot remember exactly. MR LAMEY If you say that you - are you not sure of Pretoria or Nelspruit? MR KLOPPER That's correct. MR LAMEY What did you understand about this group? This group of people, were they indeed intent on launching a robbery? MR KLOPPER All I knew is that they were members of the ANC and they had committed robberies. What was told to me and what I can recall is, they were involved in a big robbery in Witbank. ADV DE JAGER Please go a little bit slower so that we can write down what you are saying. According to your information they were? MR KLOPPER They were members of the ANC and they had committed robberies before that, amongst others a big robbery in Witbank. ADV DE JAGER Continue please. MR LAMEY The connection with Witbank, can you remember where you heard this, in Pretoria or Nelspruit or was there a specific briefing session which you can recall, or was it in general conversation? MR KLOPPER I think more it was in general conversation, but I cannot recall pertinently. MR LAMEY So you went to Nelspruit. MR KLOPPER That's correct, at some stage. MR LAMEY And with whom did you travel there? MR KLOPPER It was myself, de Kock and the two secretaries of the unit. MR LAMEY I would just like to ask you, why did the two secretaries go along? MR KLOPPER As far as I can recall, there were problems with previous claims which some of the members had handed in when they had stayed at Malelane Lodge, and that is the reason why they came along. MR LAMEY Was there a place when you travelled to Nelspruit, where you met? Or before the incident took place, did you go to a specific place in Nelspruit? MR KLOPPER Yes, de Kock and I and the ladies went to the - met the rest of the people at the Drum Rock Hotel. MR LAMEY Can you recall who were all present? MR KLOPPER There were members from Murder and Robbery. MR LAMEY Can you mention the members of Murder and Robbery? MR KLOPPER It was Leon Boshoff, Chris Geldenhuys, Deon Gouws. It's the members that I have put in my statement and members from the farm, Holtzhausen, Charlie Tait, Johnny Swart, Hanekom. I cannot recall who the rest were. MR LAMEY And the other members - I have just omitted to ask you something. You were at that stage a member of Vlakplaas. MR KLOPPER That's correct. MR LAMEY What was your rank? If we can just refer to the date, March 1992, you may refer to your statement if your memory fails you. There may be a summary. MR KLOPPER Chairperson, I was either a Lieutenant or a Captain, I cannot recall what my rank was at that stage. MR LAMEY And the other members of C10, other members that you met at the Drum Rock Hotel? After your arrival at the Drum Rock Hotel, you refer to the members of Murder and Robbery. MR KLOPPER And the members of Vlakplaas. MR LAMEY Who was that? MR KLOPPER It was Dougie Holtzhausen, Willie Nortje was there, Johnny Swart, Rolf Gevers, Jannie Hanekom. I cannot recall exactly who the rest were. MR LAMEY At what time did you arrive at the Drum Rock Hotel, can you recall? MR KLOPPER I cannot recall the time, but I do recall that it was dark when we arrived there, but I cannot recall the specific time when we arrived there. MR LAMEY Mr de Kock and yourself, how long did you stay there at the Drum Rock Hotel? MR KLOPPER I cannot recall how long we stayed there, but from there we went to the Malelane Lodge and that is where we stayed. MR LAMEY Can you recall whether there were any further discussions before you departed from the Drum Rock Hotel to Malelane? MR KLOPPER I cannot specifically recall, but I believe the time would have been made so that we could return back to the Drumrock, but I cannot recall. MR LAMEY So you would be part of the operation? MR KLOPPER Yes. MR LAMEY You and Col de Kock? MR KLOPPER That's correct, yes. MR LAMEY Do you know for what time the operation was planned? MR KLOPPER I cannot recall, it was for later that evening. MR LAMEY So did you and Col de Kock go to Malelane? MR KLOPPER Yes, we went there. MR LAMEY And you left the secretaries there? MR KLOPPER That's correct. MR LAMEY And you returned back to Drumrock? MR KLOPPER That's correct, yes. MR LAMEY Were the other members there when you arrived at the Drum Rock Hotel, what was the position? MR KLOPPER As far as I can recall, we arrived there, we met the other members while they were just about to depart and we almost missed them, and we went to the scene. MR LAMEY If you're saying - so you went to the scene? MR KLOPPER That's correct. MR LAMEY When you arrived at the scene, where was the scene? MR KLOPPER It was under a bridge. As one would come out of Nelspruit, I think it's on the Witrivier Road. I cannot recall exactly, but I know it was under a bridge outside Nelspruit, in the direction of some or other residential area, Khanyamazaan. MR LAMEY And what happened further at the scene? MR KLOPPER Planning was done as to how the line of fire would be set up and I think persons were sent out to drive along the road and to survey the road that the robbers were used. As I've said, the line of fire was set up and Gouws and Holtzhausen would have sat on the bridge and as soon as the vehicle passed them, they would open fire and then the rest of us would open fire. MR LAMEY Did you deliver any input with regard to the line of fire and so forth? MR KLOPPER It was not my action, I did not have part in the planning, but I recall that we were to be opposite each other and logic told me that we would be firing at each other and I only ventured that we not stand opposite either. MR LAMEY Did you know at some stage that the plan would be to cover up any evidence at the scene? Did you know of the petrol, can you recall? Or the AK47s that would be planted? MR KLOPPER Chairperson, no not before the incident. I cannot recall that I knew about it before the incident. MR LAMEY Can you continue. MR KLOPPER The accused and I waited in the car, the plan was to shoot the people. No attempt was to be made to ...(intervention) ADV DE JAGER Who are you referring to when you say "accused"? MR KLOPPER I beg your pardon, Mr de Kock, excuse me. There was no plan to arrest the people, but to shoot and when the planning had been done ...(intervention) MR LAMEY What was the purpose of the stop vehicle? MR KLOPPER It was my vehicle and it would seem as if there was an attempt to stop the vehicle when they passed through the bridge. MR LAMEY Like a roadblock? MR KLOPPER Yes, like a roadblock. MR LAMEY Please proceed. MR KLOPPER Mr de Kock and I remained in my vehicle, we slept for a while, I do not recall how long and a message came that the vehicle was on its way and we moved over to the other side of the road. It is a big road, the bridge on top and it was a small road that passed. And we moved over to the other side of where we had set up the ambush. We waited there. I cannot recall how long afterwards did the vehicle come through and we heard the shots of Holtzhausen and Gouws and we moved in in front of the vehicle and we fired on the minibus with the deceased. MR LAMEY Did you also fire shots? MR KLOPPER Yes, that's correct. MR LAMEY In which direction did you fire shots, did you have a specific target? MR KLOPPER As far as I can recall, I fired at the driver and the front passenger. I don't recall whether that was my instruction, but I fired at them. I was almost in front in the line. MR LAMEY How many shots did you fire? MR KLOPPER As far as I can recall, I exchanged three magazines. I cannot recall how many rounds in a magazine, but I think it's 30 rounds in a magazine, so it may be 90 to 100 shots. MR LAMEY And what happened after that? MR KLOPPER As we had fired to the driver the minibus did not stop. If I recall correctly, that was one of the things that was said, that if the driver is shot the minibus would stop, but he did not stop. And as the vehicle went further and with all the shots fired at the vehicle and at some point in time it did come to a stop. I recall some of the people moved around the vehicle and fired into the vehicle and everything became quiet at that stage. MR LAMEY May I just ask you, were there any signs of life? MR KLOPPER Yes, that is why we moved around the vehicle and fired shots. MR LAMEY Did you also fire shots? MR KLOPPER Yes, I also fired shots. And then at some stage it became quiet and everything was over. If I recall correctly, I moved up and I fetched my car and pulled it into the road so that it would seem that there was a roadblock with the blue light. I cannot recall who went and fetched petrol. Firearms were placed in the vehicle and shots were fired from the vehicle so that it would seem that shots were fired on us from the vehicle and that would be the reason why we shot at the vehicle. MR LAMEY And did the vehicle catch fire? MR KLOPPER Yes, it started burning tremendously and at some stage other people arrived there. The fire brigade was there, the police arrived. We kept some of the people away because there were explosions in the vehicle because of the handgrenades that were placed in the vehicle. MR LAMEY And what came to your knowledge after that? MR KLOPPER At some stage it was established that the vehicle belonged to one of de Kock's friends who lived in Springs, the minibus, the kombi ...(intervention) MR LAMEY I beg your pardon, may I just ask - I actually wanted to ask you something else. After the shooting had ceased with the people in the minibus and the minibus caught fire, did you know about the persons who were in the vehicle? MR KLOPPER Chairperson, it was established later that there was one person who was not in the vehicle. MR LAMEY Did you know who the person was that they mentioned? MR KLOPPER Afterwards I heard that his name was Tiso, but at that stage I didn't know who it was. MR LAMEY And what happened next? MR KLOPPER I think Willie arrived and conveyed a message and it was arranged that Rolf Gevers and Blackie Swart - and I cannot recall who the other one - Charlie Chait, that they would drive and would meet Snor Vermeulen and Dawid Britz on their way back from Nelspruit to Pretoria and they would take the man to Penge Mine. MR LAMEY Who gave that instruction? MR KLOPPER It came from de Kock. MR LAMEY And did you know what Penge Mine would mean? MR KLOPPER MR LAMEY What did that mean? MR KLOPPER Not, that the person would be killed, but that they would blow him up with explosives. CHAIRPERSON MR KLOPPER That's correct. CHAIRPERSON What does that mean? Does that mean that the body is blown up? MR KLOPPER The explosives are put inside the person and he is blown up. CHAIRPERSON Is it the position that the person takes up, where the name comes from? Does he sit in the position of a Buddha? MR KLOPPER Chairperson, I was involved once with this instance, but the body was already stiff so we could not Buddha it. CHAIRPERSON And here we hear evidence that the person, after he was shot, his clothes were removed and the explosives was put in his lap and taped to his body. MR KLOPPER Yes, that's how it works. CHAIRPERSON So the person sits in that position? MR KLOPPER That's correct, yes. That is where the term Buddha is used. CHAIRPERSON Like a statue? MR KLOPPER That's correct. CHAIRPERSON Mr Lamey? MR LAMEY Thank you, Chairperson. Afterwards, was there a post-mortem inquest? MR KLOPPER That's correct. MR LAMEY Can you just sketch the circumstances surrounding that and mention about it? MR KLOPPER Chairperson, I had already left Vlakplaas and a post-mortem inquest was to be held with this story and we were called in to Adv Coetzee in Pretoria and all the other members who were involved there ...(intervention) MR LAMEY May I just ask you, before that did you depose to a statement? MR KLOPPER No, I did not make a statement, but I signed one. MR LAMEY Was it prepared beforehand? MR KLOPPER Yes, it was just given to me to sign. MR LAMEY Were these the true facts? MR KLOPPER No, it wasn't the true facts which were presented, it was as if - how can I say, that it was a legal police action. MR LAMEY In your statement you mention, or you make reference to Gen Engelbrecht ...(intervention) CHAIRPERSON Page number? MR LAMEY Page 124. What is the reference to Gen Engelbrecht there? MR KLOPPER Oh, Gen Engelbrecht and of the members, Holtzhausen, de Kock and Geldenhuys, we met at a safe-house in Waterkloof and the statements were drawn up there and it was drawn up in such a manner because most of them had investigative experience. MR LAMEY To present false facts? MR KLOPPER That's correct, yes. MR LAMEY You have referred in your evidence to the minibus, what do you know of that? MR KLOPPER Chairperson, what I can recall, at some stage de Kock and I went to visit this friend of his, Mannie, in Springs. He and de Kock had a conversation in our office and on our way back, de Kock told me that this Mannie was experiencing financial trouble and then we had to steal a minibus for sequestration purposes or whatever. And after the shooting incident, I realised that this was the same vehicle that was referred to. MR LAMEY Do you know whether the minibus was stolen and how it arrived at the scene? MR KLOPPER No, I don't have firsthand knowledge. MR LAMEY And then a following aspect. You then apply for amnesty for the murder of four persons with regard to perjury and defeating the ends of justice and you also apply for accessory with regard to the murder of the fifth person. Chairperson, I would just request with regard to the fifth person, that we also include conspiracy there because I think it was part of the planning, that he would also be in the minibus, so it boils down to conspiracy. Can we just make that amendment on Mr Klopper's side. CHAIRPERSON Yes, there's no problem. MR LAMEY And then Mr Klopper, on page 125, your amnesty application referred to the political objective and you have set it out there, do you confirm it as you had believed it then, and according to you, was this the motivation for your action? MR KLOPPER That is correct, yes. MR LAMEY And with regard to approval and command you say "yes" and you say you received instructions from de Kock, but the details were also received from Holtzhausen. MR KLOPPER That's correct, yes. MR LAMEY And did you understand that although you were a Lieutenant and W/O Holtzhausen, that overall he received the approval, or blessing from de Kock? ...(transcriber's interpretation) MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR LAMEY And then with regard to the false statements in the post-mortem inquest, according to you everything had the blessing of Gen Krappies Engelbrecht? MR KLOPPER That's correct. MR LAMEY Thank you, Chairperson, I think that is the evidence-in-chief. NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR LAMEY CHAIRPERSON Thank you, Mr Lamey. Mr Klopper, what weapon did you have? MR KLOPPER We were all issued with R5 rifles. CHAIRPERSON And you changed three magazines. MR KLOPPER Yes, that's correct. CHAIRPERSON Were they all empty? MR KLOPPER I cannot recall if they were all empty, I cannot exactly, but there was a lot. MR LAMEY Chairperson, there is something that I have omitted. CHAIRPERSON Certainly. FURTHER EXAMINATION BY MR LAMEY Your question with regard to the firearm and the magazines just promoted me to ask about it. At the scene did you play a role to minimise the amount of shots and in what manner? MR KLOPPER I think I had instruction and Blackie went with me and we picked up most of the - or a lot of shells and we went and threw it away. MR LAMEY What was the purpose thereof? MR KLOPPER So that it would not seem as if we had shot so many - fired so many shots. MR LAMEY Was this to minimise the forensic evidence? MR KLOPPER Yes, that's correct. MR LAMEY As it pleases you, Chairperson. NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR LAMEY CHAIRPERSON Thank you, Mr Lamey. We'll adjourn and reconvene at eleven thirty. COMMITTEE ADJOURNS ON RESUMPTION K KLOPPER (s.u.o.) CHAIRPERSON Mr Hattingh? CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR HATTINGH Thank you, Chairperson. Mr Klopper, the introductory questions that I want to put to you I have put to you previously, but unfortunately this is a new Committee, so I will have to go through it again. You left Vlakplaas because you were in quite a heavy confrontation with Mr de Kock. MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR HATTINGH You could not get along with him at all, neither could he get along with you. MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR HATTINGH And these confrontations were so serious that he physically assaulted you on occasion. MR KLOPPER Yes, that is correct. MR HATTINGH And you then requested a transfer to SANAB, is that correct? MR KLOPPER Yes. MR HATTINGH And I would like to put it as lightly as possibly, would it be correct to say that there is no love lost between the two of you? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR HATTINGH And that is still the case, not so? MR KLOPPER I have no sentiments towards him. MR HATTINGH Very well. These events took place quite a long time ago and upon repetition you have said that you cannot recall certain things. MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR HATTINGH You were examined at length by me during Mr de Kock's trial. MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR HATTINGH And you gave evidence about certain incidents, but with regard to the Nelspruit incident in particular, you were cross-examined at length. MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR HATTINGH And Mr Klopper, during the course of cross-examination you were forced to admit that you had committed perjury, not so? MR KLOPPER I don't really understand what you mean. MR HATTINGH But you would recall without going into too much detail, that I questioned you about your evidence in the District Court, which differed from that which you gave in the Magistrates Court, and the record of those proceedings was presented to you in order for you to admit that you had committed perjury. MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR HATTINGH You received indemnity for, among others, the Nelspruit incident, is that correct? MR KLOPPER Yes, that is correct. MR HATTINGH Very well. MR HATTINGH Since you gave evidence against Mr de Kock, I assume that your recollection about these events has become even more vague, not so? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR HATTINGH The statement that you deposed, which served as the foundation for your evidence against Mr de Kock during the criminal trial, was taken from you in Denmark, is that correct? MR KLOPPER Yes. MR HATTINGH And you were Q1 before the Goldstone Commission, not so? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR HATTINGH And it was also under great haste and secrecy that you were taken out of the country for the sake of your own safety? MR KLOPPER Correct. MR HATTINGH You believed that your life was in danger if it should come to light that you had exposed these facts. MR KLOPPER That's correct. MR HATTINGH And it was there that you were visited by investigating officers and the statement was taken from you. MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR HATTINGH You did not have any documentation at your disposal when you made your statement and you could not use any documents to refresh your memory. MR KLOPPER No. MR HATTINGH You also did not have the opportunity to consult with other colleagues of yours who had been involved in these incidents with you, in order to refresh one another's memories back and forth. MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR HATTINGH Is it also then correct that during cross-examination by myself upon various occasions, you had to concede that certain of your allegations within your statement were not correct? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR HATTINGH Very well. Let us deal with this matter. Your recollection today is that you were not involved in the planning and that the planning was managed by Mr Holtzhausen and whoever else? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR HATTINGH You simply travelled with to Nelspruit? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR HATTINGH And it was there that you became involved in the incident? MR KLOPPER Correct. MR HATTINGH Your recollection is that you arrived there when it was dark. MR KLOPPER Yes. MR HATTINGH If it is Mr de Kock's recollection that you arrived at midday, what would your answer be? MR KLOPPER That is entirely possible. MR HATTINGH It is possible. Very well. Is it also correct that you did not spend much time at the Drum Rock Hotel? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR HATTINGH Was there any planning session which was held regarding the incident, that evening at the Drum Rock Hotel when you were present? MR KLOPPER No, I was not present. If there was something like that, I wasn't present. MR HATTINGH And if you were to be involved in the incident that evening, would there be any reason why you were excluded from such a planning session? MR KLOPPER I don't know. As I've said, it was Dougie Holtzhausen's action. That is the only reason I can think of. MR HATTINGH I think that we are actually speaking past each other. If the plan was for you to be a participant in the operation that evening and there was a planning session in which the other members were involved, which would inform them of what was going to happen and so forth, is there any reason that you can surmise as to why you would have been excluded, or would you have expected to be a participant in this if it had taken place while you were there? MR KLOPPER As I've said, the planning that we attended was at the scene where the action took place. MR HATTINGH Very well. You then departed with Mr de Kock and the two ladies. Is it correct that on the way to Malelane you had a meal in Nelspruit? MR KLOPPER I cannot recall that we had a meal there, but I know that on the way we stopped at a place. MR HATTINGH You say that you returned that evening and when you arrived at the Drumrock, the persons were on the point of departure? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR HATTINGH Is it possible that some of them had already departed? MR KLOPPER I cannot recall that, I cannot recall that pertinently. MR HATTINGH Can you recall, according to the pre-planning, what Mr de Kock's role during this operation would be? MR KLOPPER Chairperson, what I do recall is that Mr de Kock's name would not be mentioned as a member of the action. MR HATTINGH Do you not recall that he would undertake observation with Mr Nortje? MR KLOPPER No, Chairperson, I cannot recall that. MR HATTINGH With whom did he travel to the scene from the Drumrock? MR KLOPPER As far as I can recall, Mr de Kock was with me all the time. MR HATTINGH Yes, and you went directly to the scene. MR KLOPPER Yes, from the hotel. MR HATTINGH And from your point of arrival at the scene to the completion of the shooting incident, did you ever leave the scene? MR KLOPPER Chairperson, Mr de Kock and I drove to the police station. I think that was at the point where he went to telephone his brother, Vossie. MR HATTINGH Yes, but listen carefully to my question. Up to the shooting incident itself, did you and he ever leave the scene? MR KLOPPER From our arrival there? MR HATTINGH Yes. MR KLOPPER No, not as far as I can recall. MR HATTINGH You state that you and he sat in your car sleeping, and you also recall that you were cross-examined at length about this aspect during the criminal trial? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR HATTINGH On page 245, that is the statement which you made in Copenhagen, the last sentence of the first paragraph on the page, there you state "I then lay down in my car and fell asleep." MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR HATTINGH Mr de Kock does not have a version that he was with you, or he wasn't pertinently questioned about that, but his version was not to the extent that he went to the car and slept there with you. MR KLOPPER As far as I can recall he was with me in my vehicle. MR HATTINGH Yes. Is it possible that you may be mistaken in this regard? MR KLOPPER I cannot recall as pertinently, but I recall is that he was there with me. MR HATTINGH Yes. And did you possess a police radio at that time? MR KLOPPER I cannot recall whether I had one there, but all of us had police hand radios, but I cannot recall whether I specifically had one with me at that point. MR HATTINGH Were you aware that the prospective robbers were approaching? MR KLOPPER No, I cannot recall. MR HATTINGH Because you say in paragraph 35.9 "Suddenly we were informed by radio that the suspected car was approaching." If you were sleeping in the car, how would you be aware of this? MR KLOPPER Chairperson, as far as I can recall, all of us who were with the vehicles on the same side, which was on the opposite side of the point that we had moved in and where we would open fire, we were contacted by radio that they were approaching, but I wasn't specifically contacted. MR HATTINGH Very well. You then describe the events on the scene. And the following day you also went to the game reserve with Mr de Kock. MR KLOPPER No, I did not go with. MR HATTINGH Did you not go to the conference? MR KLOPPER No, it was Willie. MR HATTINGH Okay, it was Willie. Very well. You remained behind, and you mentioned something about a braai which was held by Col Alberts. MR KLOPPER Yes, the people from Nelspruit. MR HATTINGH Very well. Mr Klopper, did you see Gen Engelbrecht at the scene? MR KLOPPER What I can recall is that Mr de Kock had not been gone for long when Gen Engelbrecht and Mr van Dyk arrived there and I did see him at the scene, that is correct. MR HATTINGH Is it possible that Mr de Kock may still have been at the scene when Engelbrecht arrived there, because he gave evidence that he indeed spoke to Mr Engelbrecht? MR KLOPPER As far as I recall, Mr de Kock had already left, because I spoke to Gen Krappies there. MR HATTINGH And what did you tell him, Mr Klopper? MR KLOPPER I cannot recall precisely what was said, what I do recall is that Engelbrecht told us that we should not make any statements there, but that we would make the statements once we were back in Pretoria. MR HATTINGH Let me just make certain about one of these statements. You say that you told Gen Engelbrecht everything about the incident. MR KLOPPER That is in my statement, but I cannot recall precisely what I told him. MR HATTINGH Yes, page 248, is that correct? MR KLOPPER That's correct. MR HATTINGH "Gen Engelbrecht and Paul van Dyk also arrived at the scene, they were on their way to the same conference. I then explained to Gen Engelbrecht what had taken place. I would have told him everything, the full story." MR KLOPPER As I've said I would have told him. MR HATTINGH Very well, I see I have misread the sentence. Can you recall that you indeed told him the whole story? MR KLOPPER I cannot recall that I told him everything precisely, no. MR HATTINGH If you use the word "would", would that indicate that your state of mind when you made the statement was of such a nature that you wanted to say by that, that there wouldn't have been any reason for you to withhold anything from him? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR HATTINGH In other words, you would have taken him into your confidence and told him precisely what had taken place? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR HATTINGH Very well. Mr de Kock's credibility has been attacked by Mr Engelbrecht's statement, may I question you about Mr Engelbrecht? Did you give evidence during the post-mortem inquest into the death of Mr Webster, David Webster? MR KLOPPER No, as far as I know, I did not give evidence. MR HATTINGH Were you consulted in that regard? MR KLOPPER Yes, I was consulted. MR HATTINGH By whom? MR KLOPPER By Ferdie Barnard. MR HATTINGH And what was it about, just briefly, I don't want the entire version. Let me just put it to you, it was about the shotgun which was used to shoot Mr Webster. MR KLOPPER If I recall correctly, it was actually more about the credibility of evidence which was given by witnesses who would testify against Mr Barnard, and he approached me and wanted to know whether I could find out from Gen Krappies whether he would assist him, and I did take him to Mr Engelbrecht. MR HATTINGH Very well. You took him to Mr Engelbrecht, where, at his residence? MR KLOPPER Yes, at his residence. MR HATTINGH And what was planned there? MR KLOPPER Gen Engelbrecht gave him advice on how to approach the matter regarding his handlers at the CCB and head office. He advised him on how to discredit them and in so doing get away. MR HATTINGH In other words, he assisted him in presenting a version during the Webster incident, which would be false? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR LAMEY Just for clarity's sake, Chairperson, I believe that my learned friend is not referring to the recent trial in the supreme court in Pretoria, this is the post-mortem inquest. MR HATTINGH Yes, I said the post-mortem inquest. If I recall correctly, it was before Justice O'Donnel. MR KLOPPER I don't know. MR VAN DEN BERG It was Judge Stegman. MR HATTINGH Thank you, I am indebted to my learned friend, Mr van den Berg. Can you recall whether Gen Engelbrecht gave evidence during that post-mortem inquest? MR KLOPPER I cannot recall, I don't know whether he was involved. MR HATTINGH I have a vague recollection that he did give evidence and that there was criticism about his testimony, but I will re-examine that fact before I table it again. In terms of that matter, was Gen Engelbrecht ever involved in other matters, during which he assisted with the cover-up of incidents in which you had been involved, can you recall anything? MR KLOPPER As far as I can recall, the Piet Retief incident was led by Gen Engelbrecht, the post-mortem inquest was led by him, and I can tell you directly that it is general knowledge that Gen Krappies was our sweeper. MR HATTINGH And when you say "sweeper", do you mean that he had to get rid of the problems? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR HATTINGH By adjusting evidence so that the action would appear to be lawful? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR HATTINGH I would imagine that during the Piet Retief matter you were tasked to do something with regard to the weapons and the firearms which were issued, the weapons registers or something like that. MR KLOPPER Yes, I had to create a false image in the register, which would appear that there was control over the issue of these weapons. MR HATTINGH But the police rules and regulations stipulate that a register must be kept regarding weapons and the number of rounds of ammunition which are issued. MR KLOPPER Yes. MR HATTINGH And if you have fired, you must apply for the re-issue of that ammunition and you must also account for how those rounds which you fired were fired, under which circumstances they were fired? MR KLOPPER Yes, that is correct. MR HATTINGH And that was in order to control the use of firearms by the police? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR HATTINGH And it was your task to adjust that firearm register, so that it would correlate with the false version which was presented for the Piet Retief incidents to the Magistrate who handled the post-mortem inquest? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR HATTINGH And under whose order did you do this? MR KLOPPER If I may put it this way, it was Gen Engelbrecht, but I don't know who gave me the precise order. MR HATTINGH Was he aware that you would tamper with the firearm register? MR KLOPPER Yes, it was with his knowledge. MR HATTINGH Did you receive any reward for your participation in the Nelspruit incident? MR KLOPPER No, I did not receive any reward. MR HATTINGH I just want to examine you in general about fraud which was committed at Vlakplaas, in which you were also involved and regarding which you also gave evidence against Mr de Kock in his criminal trial. He has been found guilty of a great deal of fraud charges. MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR HATTINGH One of the methods that you used was to obtain funds for whichever purpose and you did this by means of establishing false stockpiles. MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR HATTINGH And then you created the impression that you had found the stockpile in terms of information which an informer had provided. MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR HATTINGH And then you would claim a reward for the informer. MR KLOPPER Yes, the so-called informer would then receive a reward. MR HATTINGH But it was a false informer and a false name was used for this false claim, there was no such person? MR KLOPPER Yes, that is correct. MR HATTINGH And the funds would be obtained in this manner? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR HATTINGH Mr Klopper, among others, Mr de Kock upon other occasions has given evidence and also before this Committee, in terms of Exhibit C, that some of the funds were used to pay for functions at Vlakplaas and so forth. MR KLOPPER Yes, that is correct. MR HATTINGH And that it was also applied in order to replace vehicles which had been damaged due to negligence, to improve Vlakplaas and so forth, to pay for heart operations of officers who were not prepared to undergo the operation with physicians who were appointed by the police. You recall that? MR KLOPPER Yes, that is correct. MR HATTINGH And for the furnishing of the police chapel and so forth? MR KLOPPER Yes, that is correct. MR HATTINGH Let us forget what it was applied for, that's not the most significant matter. If this was done, it means that you received exorbitant amounts of money, not so? MR KLOPPER That's correct. MR HATTINGH At times, if I recall correctly, it would be as much as R60 000 which was paid out for this fund, for this reward for discovering a stockpile. MR KLOPPER Yes, it was more than that. MR HATTINGH More than that. MR KLOPPER Yes, there were large amounts. MR HATTINGH And it was a very easy and simple way of obtaining money? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR HATTINGH Because you possessed a great deal of weaponry which you could apply for this purpose? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR HATTINGH In fact, on some occasions it was presented that the explosives which were so-called found with these stockpiles, would be so unstable that the weaponry could not be lifted without risk and that meant that the stockpile had to be destroyed. MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR HATTINGH I don't know if photos were taken of the place before the time, or whether notes were simply taken of what was allegedly there. MR KLOPPER I can't recall whether we always took photographs of such a case. We had our own explosives persons who worked on the farm, who could decide themselves whether they would explode it. So I cannot remember. ...(transcriber's interpretation) MR HATTINGH But in actual fact whenever such a stockpile would be blown up, then everything which was allegedly found there would not be destroyed, they would remove certain items for later use and then explode the place so that it would appear to have been completely destroyed. MR KLOPPER Chairperson, I'm not really sure about that. MR HATTINGH Whatever the case may be, Mr Klopper, there were far easier ways to obtain funds than for example to say let us find someone to lure four to five persons into committing a robbery and then all of us will go down to Nelspruit together with Murder and Robbery and shoot them dead and then institute a claim of which we will pay a portion to the informer and keep the rest for ourselves? MR KLOPPER Yes, there were far easier ways than that. MR HATTINGH And these were methods that you did apply? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR HATTINGH I've just spoken of stockpiles, another case was whenever you possessed rhinoceros horns or any such items which came into your possession, was this ever used to institute false claims? MR KLOPPER Yes, various things were used, not necessarily only weapons. MR HATTINGH Very well. CHAIRPERSON Mr Klopper, did you yourself betray the police? MR KLOPPER Yes. Everybody at Vlakplaas was a participant to this fraud, I myself as well. CHAIRPERSON So in other words, you defrauded the entire police system, so that you could obtain money? MR KLOPPER In my opinion a great deal of fraud took place in the top structure and they used Mr de Kock in this respect, but the entire structure was involved in this fraudulent business. CHAIRPERSON The entire structure? You see the funding that you obtained by means of this fraud was official police funds. MR KLOPPER Yes, it was part of the Secret Fund. CHAIRPERSON Were these funds which were meant for paying for such activities? MR KLOPPER Yes, for example, the payment of informers and so forth. CHAIRPERSON Yes. Mr Vlok, the former Minister, appeared on TV and offered R6 000 for an AK, or for information which would lead to the possession of an AK, and that just opened the door for that kind of fraud. CHAIRPERSON So there was a lawful process for which this money was earmarked? MR KLOPPER That is correct. CHAIRPERSON But by means of this scene which was used, one could almost say that the money was stolen from the official police structure. MR KLOPPER Yes, that is correct. CHAIRPERSON So it was then used, among others, for personal reasons? MR KLOPPER Yes, or for functions, for a variety of things. CHAIRPERSON Was it used for Vlakplaas activities, in order to fund these activities, or were there separate funds, official police funds that would cover Vlakplaas expenses? MR KLOPPER If one looks at the way the farm was built up over the years, there are very few state institutions that were as well kept and developed as Vlakplaas. The Generals would make use of it as a recreational area later. If they visited, we had to buy only the best alcohol and the best meat and only the best of everything for them. And Mr de Kock would be responsible for arranging such a function and he also had to appropriate the funds. CHAIRPERSON I don't know whether you could clarify this for us, but why would it be necessary for example, to obtain money by fraudulent means in order to improve Vlakplaas? MR KLOPPER I don't know whether with regard to the open and the secret system they would have managed to achieve such development, I don't know exactly how it operated. CHAIRPERSON Very well. Mr Hattingh? MR HATTINGH Thank you, Chairperson. May I just elaborate on this, Mr Klopper. The purchase of Vlakplaas had quite a long history, isn't that so? MR KLOPPER I don't know about that. MR HATTINGH I can put it to you that initially the farm was rented and then there was an issue of whether it belonged to public works or the police and I think that somewhere in Mr de Kock's version or in his evidence which he has given before another Committee, he testified that the funds for the refurbishment of Vlakplaas could not be obtained from the police, because the property was not acquired or registered in the name of the police. MR KLOPPER I don't know about that. MR HATTINGH Very well. But we all know that when it came to expenditure for state buildings and State furnishings, the policy was very conservative. MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR HATTINGH That the tender system was used and that there were prescribed items of furniture which had to be purchased. MR KLOPPER Yes. MR HATTINGH And this furniture also had to suit the person's level of seniority. For example, a General could have a bigger and more luxurious desk than a Captain would have. MR KLOPPER Yes, that is correct. MR HATTINGH And Vlakplaas was more luxuriously furnished as what the standing regulations made provision for. MR KLOPPER Yes, that is correct. MR HATTINGH And it would have created a tremendous level of red tape if you were to obtain that funding by means of the usual method, and that is why the false claims are used to generate the income for this expenditure. MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR HATTINGH And as you have just stated, this was done exactly because Vlakplaas was one of the more popular recreational places used by officers in the South African Police. MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR HATTINGH These false claims according to you were instituted with the knowledge and approval of the entire structure, do you include head office in that? MR KLOPPER Yes, I have been sent back by a General once to change a claim because I would be caught out, because the signatures appeared to be too similar. That is how easy it was. ADV DE JAGER Mr Hattingh, with regard to this matter, are you requesting any amnesty for fraud? MR HATTINGH No, Chairperson, it has been foreshadowed by our learned friends on the other side there and also by Ms Patel, that it will be argued that Mr de Kock executed this action for financial gain and I just want to put the evidence of how easy it was to obtain funds with the knowledge and approval of the higher structure, by means of false claims. ADV DE JAGER Yes, but there has been no suggestion of evidence which will be submitted to indicate that he obtained money. MR HATTINGH Yes, it is my intention to address you regarding that in my argument. It would appear to me as if submissions will be made by means of an inference and so far you are entirely correct with regard to us. With respect, no evidence has been submitted to that extent, but I must make provision for the possibility of something like that emerging and therefore I'm acting out of contingency. CHAIRPERSON In terms of the apparent shortage of that claim? MR HATTINGH Yes, the inferred shortage, yes, Chairperson. CHAIRPERSON The R20 000, R6 500 and R7 000. MR HATTINGH Yes, yes. CHAIRPERSON Very well. MR HATTINGH Thank you, Chairperson. I will not take it any further Mr Klopper. There is just one aspect that I would like to mention. Did you know Mr Koekemoer at head office? MR KLOPPER Yes. MR HATTINGH And what was his capacity? MR KLOPPER As far as I recall, he was the person who was in charge of the Secret Fund. We received the money from him. MR HATTINGH Did you ever receive any orders from him to submit false claims? MR KLOPPER No, not me personally, so I cannot tell you. MR HATTINGH Do you know that he was aware of the submission of false claims? MR KLOPPER I believe that he was aware. I think that Mr de Kock once sent me to take Makarov or Tokarev bullets to him, so that he would keep quiet. MR HATTINGH So that there wouldn't be too many questions asked? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR HATTINGH Then just one further aspect, Mr Klopper, and that is the question of the minibus belonging to Mr Aragio. You and I had quite a lengthy debate about this during your cross-examination in Mr de Kock's trial, is that correct? MR KLOPPER Yes. MR HATTINGH MR KLOPPER Yes, I later heard who stole the vehicle, but as I said in my statement regarding that which was put to me, I do not know whether anybody was ever benefited, all I knew was that this person was in financial dire straits and that we had to steal the bus. MR HATTINGH Isn't it possible that you may be mistaken in your recollection about this and that Mr de Kock may have said something as follows to you: "I am going to steal Mannie's bus because I know that he will not be prejudiced by this because the insurance will pay out? MR KLOPPER No, that is not how I recall it. MR HATTINGH But is it possible that your recollection may be mistaken, in the light of your incorrect recollection of so many other aspects, Mr Klopper? MR KLOPPER It is possible, but I cannot put it as pertinently as that. MR HATTINGH But with regard to the incident itself, your information was that these persons wanted to commit a robbery where? MR KLOPPER It was in Nelspruit. MR HATTINGH Yes, but at which premises? MR KLOPPER It was either Fidelity Guards or Coin. MR HATTINGH It was the Coin Security company? MR KLOPPER Yes, that is correct. MR HATTINGH And with regard to you, if they had not been shot there, in terms of your attitude and your knowledge, would they have gone there and attempted to commit the robbery? MR KLOPPER Yes, I was under the impression that they would commit this robbery. MR HATTINGH And they only reason why they didn't do it is because you thwarted their attempt by luring them into an ambush? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR HATTINGH There is just one further aspect, the Witbank matter. You were also cross-examined quite lengthily about that? MR KLOPPER Yes, that is correct. MR HATTINGH And it was put to you, if I recall correctly, I have not studied this again, but I recall that we consulted with a lady who was a member of the investigating team who investigated that murder and robbery, do you recall that? MR KLOPPER No, I don't believe that it was put to me. MR HATTINGH And that it was put that it had not been the same persons who had been involved in the incident, the persons that you shot dead during the Nelspruit incident were not the same people. MR KLOPPER I don't recall. MR HATTINGH Isn't it possible that it may have been put to you and that you just don't recall? MR KLOPPER I'm not certain. It is possible, but I cannot recall. MR HATTINGH Mr de Kock's evidence is that there was an incident during which a woman was shot dead in Witbank and that in fact he sent some of his members to assist with the investigation, among others, some of the askaris were sent by him. Do you know about that? MR KLOPPER No, I don't know about that. MR HATTINGH But that that incident had nothing to do with the Tiso matter? MR KLOPPER I don't know. MR HATTINGH And then in your affidavit, page 244, you state that - you gave evidence here today that the ladies accompanied in order to rectify certain claims. MR KLOPPER That's correct. MR HATTINGH And that was the actual reason? MR KLOPPER Chairperson, according to my statement this was under cover, I cannot recall the actual reason for their accompaniment. Today I'm sure that it must be fore that claim, but I cannot recall precisely. MR HATTINGH Is it possible that that was the actual reason? MR KLOPPER I really cannot recall, it may be so. MR HATTINGH If you would grant me a moment please, Chairperson. CHAIRPERSON While you are looking for that point. This misunderstanding between you and Mr de Kock, was it among others, about the fact that Mr de Kock had a problem with the fact that you were possibly meddling with some of the female staff members? MR KLOPPER Yes. CHAIRPERSON Was Mr de Kock angry with you about that? MR KLOPPER Yes, later it appeared to be as such. MR HATTINGH In fact he was so angry about it that he even produced a weapon and placed it next to you ear. Can you recall that he hit you with the weapon? MR KLOPPER Yes. CHAIRPERSON And you say here on page 244, paragraph 35.5 "(That later some of these girls and women heard that these ladies had been with you and they were upset)" What was that about? MR KLOPPER That's correct. CHAIRPERSON What was that about? MR KLOPPER You see, the men that were working at Vlakplaas spent a lot of time travelling and they weren't at home much. The women that worked there, worked in an administrative capacity, and later I heard that the wives were not happy to hear that ladies had accompanied the men on an excursion. It didn't look very good. CHAIRPERSON Therefore, the girlfriends and wives didn't believe that this was actually official work. MR KLOPPER That is correct. CHAIRPERSON Thank you. MR HATTINGH Thank you, Chairperson, we have nothing further. NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR HATTINGH CHAIRPERSON Thank you. Mr Cornelius? CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR CORNELIUS Thank you, Chairperson. Mr Klopper, there are just three questions that I wish to put to you and this is about your subjective thoughts and the political objective which you had. The most senior rank was de Kock, and second in rank was Chris Geldenhuys and third was you, is that correct? MR KLOPPER Gevers and I shared the same rank, but I had spent a longer time at Vlakplaas. He was my senior if we had to approach the rank structure technically speaking, but I was his senior in terms of Vlakplaas, because at Vlakplaas rank didn't really count for much. If I may put it that way. MR CORNELIUS In either event, you were the senior to Swart, Hanekom, Britz and Vermeulen? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR SIBANYONI So it would be significant to examine your political subjective thoughts at that stage in time. If we look at page 125 or your amnesty application, paragraph 10(a), you say "I inferred or believed that the objective of the robbery would be to generate funds for the ANC or its members." MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR CORNELIUS And you, as third in rank and seniority, believed that the robbers were ANC members? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR CORNELIUS And furthermore, in 10(b) you state "As already mentioned, I was not involved in the detailed planning beforehand, but during the action on the ground level, I believed that these persons would be heavily armed." MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR CORNELIUS This general belief and these subjective thoughts which you had, were these conveyed to the other members? MR KLOPPER It was like that throughout the entire unit. MR CORNELIUS So everyone would have believed that these were ANC members who would be heavily armed? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR CORNELIUS Thank you, Chairperson. NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR CORNELIUS CHAIRPERSON Thank you, Mr Cornelius. ADV DE JAGER While we are at this point I want to ask you something further. All political parties had members who were criminals, there isn't a single organisation which didn't have criminals in its ranks. MR KLOPPER That is correct. ADV DE JAGER Then why if it was known that this would be an ANC person who was going to commit a robbery, what would that have to do with the situation? MR KLOPPER The majority of white Afrikaners were raised to hate the ANC, let us not fool ourselves about this. Now we had ANC robbers who wanted to rob in order to collect funds for the ANC and that is what we believed sincerely. ADV DE JAGER Where did you obtain this information regarding the filling of coffers or why did you believe this? MR KLOPPER I don't know exactly from whom I heard it, but this was as a result of discussions among the members. We spent a lot of time together and spoke to one another quite often and this was the information which was conveyed to us, and that is what we believed. CHAIRPERSON Mr Bam, any questions? MR BAM Thank you Chairperson, there are just certain aspect which I wish to refer to. Simply that there are differences in detail regarding the events which took place in Nelspruit, however I find it unnecessary to put any questions about it or to place Mr Holtzhausen's version on record at this point. Thank you. CHAIRPERSON Thank you, Mr Bam. Mr van den Berg? CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR VAN DEN BERG Thank you, Mr Chairperson. Mr Klopper, before you started working for Vlakplaas, were you connected to the Soweto Security Branch? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR VAN DEN BERG And if one consults your initial amnesty application, especially page 107 and following, there are just singular aspects about which I would like to examine you. Firstly, during your time at Soweto, were you aware of the activities or not of Mrs Mandela? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR VAN DEN BERG And you mention that her telephones were tapped. MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR VAN DEN BERG You then also state something about a plan to place handgrenades on Mzwake Mbuli, did that take place? MR KLOPPER Yes, that is correct. MR VAN DEN BERG And this was not a singular occasion upon which something like that took place while you worked in Soweto? MR KLOPPER It was the only incident in which I was involved. MR VAN DEN BERG I don't know what the Afrikaans word is, but in English we would say "it was a dirty trick". MR KLOPPER Yes, that is correct. MR VAN DEN BERG And you were aware that this took place from time to time? MR KLOPPER Well today all of us know of many cases, yes. MR VAN DEN BERG Furthermore you state in paragraph 13 on page 110, that there was a plan to blow up Mrs Mandela's house. MR KLOPPER Yes, that is correct. MR VAN DEN BERG And this was a plan which was formulated by Mr de Kock. MR KLOPPER Yes, the order came to me from Mr de Kock. MR VAN DEN BERG What I want to establish is that you were aware of Mrs Mandela and her activities. MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR VAN DEN BERG Now if we get to this incident, the Nelspruit incident, what information were you aware of regarding the prospective robbers? MR KLOPPER Chairperson, at a stage it came to my knowledge that Tiso was allegedly Mrs Mandela's driver, but I don't know whether this was before or after the incident. MR VAN DEN BERG I put it to various of the other applicants that the involvement of Tiso, Tisetso Leballo, may have created the possibility to implicate Mrs Mandela in the matter, in the sense that there was no the opportunity to arrest a person who was involved with Mrs Mandela and then embarrass her and the ANC. Can you comment on that? MR KLOPPER Firstly, I did not do the planning, I don't know about it, but it that was the case we would have arrested Tiso. It would be far easier to turn him as a witness against her, but I really cannot give you a genuine answer about it because I was not part of the planning. MR VAN DEN BERG Did this idea ever occur to you? MR KLOPPER Which idea? MR VAN DEN BERG The idea that I have just put to you. MR KLOPPER No, Chairperson. MR VAN DEN BERG And I also put it to some of the other applicants that Tisetso Leballo only began working for Mrs Mandela in March of 1992, you cannot dispute that? MR KLOPPER I don't know, Dougie Holtzhausen and Ben van Zyl would perhaps be able to elaborate on that for you because I never met this person. MR VAN DEN BERG Were you involved in the matter regarding Coin, the first incident regarding which there is evidence that the group waited for the robbers at the premises? MR KLOPPER No. MR VAN DEN BERG Did you know about it? MR KLOPPER I knew that a team went there. MR VAN DEN BERG Once again, what information did you have regarding the prospective robbers? MR KLOPPER As I've said, the information that I had indicated that this was a gang of robbers who had been involved in the Witbank robbery as well as other robberies, that they were ANC members and that they were filling the ANC's coffers. That is the information that I had. MR VAN DEN BERG Now there are others of you, of the applicants, who refer to ANC/PAC, do you know about that? MR KLOPPER No, Chairperson, what I can recall today after the incident, is that I heard that one of the persons in the vehicle was an IFP members, but I never heard of the PAC within this specific context. MR VAN DEN BERG Sorry, Mr Chairperson, if I could just have a look at my notes. CHAIRPERSON Yes. MR VAN DEN BERG What did you know about the planning - sorry, let me just reformulate this. At a certain stage AK47s were planted in the vehicle, do you know about that? MR KLOPPER Yes, that is correct. MR VAN DEN BERG What did you know about the planning surrounding that? MR KLOPPER You mean the prior planning? MR VAN DEN BERG Yes, that is correct. MR KLOPPER We believed firmly that these persons would be armed and I really cannot recall whether we prearranged for the weapons to be planted directly into the vehicle. After the shooting - and this is what I think, this was not necessarily part of the planning, I saw that there wasn't any weaponry and that the weapons were stolen, but I cannot recall pertinently. MR VAN DEN BERG And the aspect with regard to the petrol ...(intervention) MR KLOPPER I'm sorry, could you just repeat. MR VAN DEN BERG Now the aspect with regard to the petrol, the fact that the vehicle was set alight by using petrol, did you know about that? MR KLOPPER Yes, as far as I can recall the plan was for the vehicle to be set alight, before the incident. MR VAN DEN BERG And what was the reason for that, what was said to you? MR KLOPPER Chairperson, as far as I recall in terms of the Piet Retief incident, there had been so many pieces of evidence and if the vehicle was burnt there would be less evidence which could prejudice us. MR VAN DEN BERG I don't have any further questions, Mr Chairperson. NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VAN DEN BERG CHAIRPERSON Thank you, Mr van den Berg. Mr Francis or Ms Pillay. MR FRANCIS It will be me. CHAIRPERSON Mr Francis then. CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR FRANCIS Mr Klopper, I'm first going to deal with this whole question of the false claims. Am I correct that some - that the members of Vlakplaas did in fact benefit when the false claims were lodged? MR KLOPPER Yes, in many instances we did indeed benefit directly from it. MR FRANCIS Including Mr de Kock himself? MR KLOPPER All of us, that includes everybody, Mr de Kock and the labourers as well. MR FRANCIS So it's not just a question that false claims were lodged to improve Vlakplaas? MR KLOPPER No, it was not only for non-official/official business, it was for personal business as well. MR FRANCIS And if you were to estimate how much benefits you got from lodging the false claims over the years whilst you were at Vlakplaas? MR KLOPPER I have been asked that question and I can honestly not say, there were so many false claims. If we went out as a group to go and drink, then it was that money, so it's difficult to estimate. MR FRANCIS How much were you earning at that time? MR KLOPPER It was long ago. MR FRANCIS Let's talk about '91/'92. MR KLOPPER 1992? MR FRANCIS '91/'92. MR KLOPPER Chairperson, it's possible that a police captain at that time, between R50 000 and R50 000 maximum, if not less, but maximum R50 000 per annum. CHAIRPERSON Gross? MR KLOPPER Yes, Chairperson. MR FRANCIS You don't know how much Mr de Kock was earning? MR KLOPPER No, Chairperson, he was a Lieutenant-Colonel at that stage, I don't know, probably R80 000 or R90 000, I'm not certain. MR FRANCIS But we all know that policemen don't really earn a lot of money, is that correct? MR KLOPPER Ja, they get very little money. MR FRANCIS And obviously this false claim was basically to fill the pockets of the police? MR KLOPPER No, the Secret Fund was there ...(intervention) MR FRANCIS No, I'm talking about the false claims. MR KLOPPER Ja, the false claims you see, if the Generals could steal, if they give you instruction to steal, why can't you steal for yourself? I think that was the feeling of the people, it seems even Mr de Kock. MR FRANCIS So the feeling was that if the Generals stole, why can't the foot-soldiers steal? MR KLOPPER That's correct. If you receive an instruction to kill somebody, an official murder, what is the difference between an official murder and killing somebody else, a non-official murder? MR FRANCIS Who authorised those false claims? MR KLOPPER The section commander. It was signed by de Kock and from there it would go to Gen Engelbrecht or it was first Griebenauw and then Engelbrecht, and these are persons who had to approve it. MR FRANCIS So for your Section 10, all the claims were authorised by Mr Eugene de Kock? Most of the claims. MR KLOPPER Of our group, yes, but there were other groups of Baker and du Toit. MR FRANCIS So how many false claims do you know about that was authorised by Mr de Kock? MR KLOPPER There were many, there were very few real claims, if I can put it like that, so it's difficult to tell you. CHAIRPERSON Did Baker and de Kock's people also do that? MR KLOPPER The whole group. MR FRANCIS You say there were very few true claims? MR KLOPPER True claims. CHAIRPERSON True claims. MR KLOPPER Yes, if I can put it that way. CHAIRPERSON There were more false claims? MR KLOPPER That's correct. MR FRANCIS If you say "many", could that have been 200 false claims, 300 false claims? Give us some you know, guidance because "many" could mean many things to many people. MR KLOPPER Chairperson, I would say much more than that. It was a lot. ADV DE JAGER If you speak of much money, do you speak of much money or many claims? Was it many documents in the sense of one claim or the second claim or were there lots, large amounts of money? MR KLOPPER If you speak of the documents themselves, there were a hell of a lot. The money was a lot as well, but there were so many documents. You see we never for example, we never put in claims such as travel claims for more than R500/R600 maximum because then it starts to look suspicious. If for example a person travels to Swaziland and now he must draw R3 000/R4 000/R5 000, it didn't work like that. But at some stage they would write off R7 000, R8 000 or R10 000 and - let's work it at R500 per claim, then you can look at how many claims there were. Do you understand? So there was a lot of paper work, enormous amounts of paper work, but there was much money. In one instance I claimed R90 000 for arms. So if you want to have a look, there were many thousands of rands. MR FRANCIS Mr Klopper, you referred to the false claim for R90 000. MR KLOPPER That's correct. MR FRANCIS How much did Mr de Kock get from the R90 000? MR KLOPPER R80 000. MR FRANCIS So he got the bulk of it? MR KLOPPER Yes. MR FRANCIS So obviously, Mr de Kock lied to his superiors about the claims? MR KLOPPER No, I don't think so, I think they knew of it and they had a share in it. MR FRANCIS But the fact of the matter is that he lied about it, the false claims, so he took part in this lie. MR KLOPPER Yes, if you look at it like that, but the person who signs it and knows it's wrong, then he lies, they're all lying. MR FRANCIS So I think there can be no doubt that you lied, Mr de Kock lied and some other members of Vlakplaas lied? MR KLOPPER Absolutely. MR FRANCIS When it suited them to. MR KLOPPER Absolutely. MR FRANCIS And you're also saying that Engelbrecht also lied because he was a sweeper? MR KLOPPER That's correct. MR FRANCIS So that unit consisted of a bunch of liars? MR KLOPPER If you put it as such, yes. MR FRANCIS But again, just to ...(intervention) CHAIRPERSON Sorry, Mr Francis. What I do not understand, who were you lying to, who were the victims of this fraud school? MR KLOPPER The taxpayer, where the money comes from. CHAIRPERSON But somebody had to pay these things, now who was it then? MR KLOPPER That is Koekemoer, which Mr Hattingh spoke of earlier, the thing that I had to go and give the ammunition so that they don't ask funny questions. They were part of the conspiracy. CHAIRPERSON But he was also just in the line, he's the man who issued the cheques, or what did he do? MR KLOPPER With regard to the whole administration of this thing, I am not certain how it works, but X amount of money is given to the Police Secret Fund, Koekemoer is the person who decides where that money must go, he and I believe in conjunction with the General's staff. He would decide that X million rand would go to Vlakplaas, X million rands would go to D-Section Intelligence and how they had to spend the money. In our terms this is the persons who we had to account to and Koekemoer and those people, they would have to account to the Finance Department. So I'm not sure who we lied to, but at the end it was the taxpayer. CHAIRPERSON So these things were paid out in an irregular manner? MR KLOPPER I would not say all, but a great percentage was. CHAIRPERSON So there a part of the police, the official police, who were lied to? MR KLOPPER Absolutely, yes. It is true, there were police who performed real official duties for which claims were paid out. CHAIRPERSON Very well. Sorry, Mr Francis. MR FRANCIS How well did you know de Kock? MR KLOPPER I knew him very well. MR FRANCIS When did you join Vlakplaas? MR KLOPPER I think 1989. MR FRANCIS And by the time you left Vlakplaas what rank you were? MR KLOPPER I was a Captain. MR FRANCIS I had put to Mr Engelbrecht that - Mr de Kock, I think, that Engelbrecht had described him - that's now de Kock, as a liar and that he'd lied to his superiors, he lied to the Harms Commission, he lied at the Goldstone Commission, he lied at the Maponya inquest, he lied at every given opportunity. Would you agree with that? MR KLOPPER Chairperson, yes, but Engelbrecht gave him instruction to lie. But if we look at the Harms Commission, who - I don't know what Gen Engelbrecht's involvement was there, but with the post-mortem in question Gen Engelbrecht was the one who had looked after our interests, so it was a collective lie, if I could say it as such. MR FRANCIS But Mr Engelbrecht was more of a sweeper, he had to clear up your mess. Especially when an operation had taken place and you guys didn't act professionally and you had left some clues, he just came to sweep away the mess. MR KLOPPER That's correct. MR FRANCIS I see in your application Mr Klopper, on page 104, that's paragraph (c), you're asked the following question "Were you benefited in any manner, financially or otherwise?" MR KLOPPER In this instance, no ...(intervention) MR FRANCIS Sorry, and the answer that you gave was "Ja" MR KLOPPER In certain of the other instances yes, but not in this instance. I did not receive anything for this operation. MR FRANCIS For which operations were you paid monies? MR KLOPPER The false claims which we sent in, for arms. You will see ...(intervention) MR FRANCIS Please just tell us in which matters were you given - did you receive benefits, financial benefits. MR KLOPPER Not for any of the applications before the Committee. You will see in my initial application, before I had legal representation, I said everything that I could remember that I had done wrong and offences that I had committed and that included false claims, such as the arms which we would have found and saying that this was from a source. That is what I had to say there. MR FRANCIS I think before I move away from the false claims, evidence was led at the de Kock hearing that a claim was lodged for the Nelspruit incident, the R20 000 and I think Ben van Zyl said that he only got between R6 500 or R7 000 and didn't know what had happened to the balance. MR KLOPPER I don't know. MR FRANCIS But let's talk about the modus operandi. Let's first deal with the instance I think where - you've already said to this Committee that when false claims were lodged, de Kock will get the bulk of it, is that correct? MR KLOPPER Correct. MR FRANCIS Now in instances I think where there was an informer who informed, would Mr de Kock still get a cut of that money? MR KLOPPER Chairperson, ...(intervention) MR FRANCIS Be honest. MR KLOPPER Let's say R50 000 is paid out - I'm just mentioning a figure, then that informant would get the half and the rest would be distributed amongst the members. But now there are various claims, you get a real informer where an action is launched and it is successful in police terms, and there are other claims for informers with regard S&T of informers, which covers his travelling costs, his food, so we would have to look at the two. MR FRANCIS So are you saying that Mr de Kock would have gotten a cut thereof and it would be shared amongst the members? MR KLOPPER In many instances, I don't know of this case. MR FRANCIS You were a Captain? MR KLOPPER Yes. MR FRANCIS You were quite close to Mr de Kock? MR KLOPPER Yes. MR FRANCIS So I assume that you would have known about his modus operandi, is that correct? MR KLOPPER Yes. MR FRANCIS Now evidence was led yesterday that - and I think Mr de Kock was asked - well I'm not so sure if it was Mr de Kock or Mr Nortje, but somebody was asked about it and I think it was said that in the Nelspruit incident the claim would have been for the fact that the four robbers were killed and two AK47s were found at the scene. I think it was Mr de Kock. MR KLOPPER Chairperson, I don't ...(intervention) MR FRANCIS I think - the answer I think that was given was that when a claim was lodged, I think it would depend on the nature of the operation, what risks were involved, what else was found at the scene, but this claim I think would also have included you know, AK47s and the - I think the person I think who had to approve it would then decide on the amount. MR KLOPPER Absolutely, yes. MR FRANCIS Now if Ben van Zyl only got between R6 500 or R7 000, obviously I think from what you've said, it just follows that because Vlakplaas became involved in this they would have received the balance thereof? MR KLOPPER Yes. MR FRANCIS So they would probably have received R35 000 or R14 000? MR KLOPPER Yes. MR FRANCIS And the person - I think Mr de Kock I think, led evidence by saying that look what will happen I think is that he would authorise the claim, it will have to go through one of the Generals, it will then land up somewhere at head office and eventually I think when this is approved, a cheque would be cashed and the monies would be taken back to where it came from, or where the claim came from. MR KLOPPER Yes. MR FRANCIS And they would then give the informer the money and he would sign for it. MR KLOPPER That's correct. MR FRANCIS And I think evidence was led also at the Criminal Court hearing, that there was a receipt that was issued, again for between R6 500 and R7 000. So you're saying to us that the ...(intervention) MR HATTINGH No Chairperson, at the criminal trial the evidence was that a receipt was signed for R20 000. MR FRANCIS Chairperson, I think I've put it wrong, incorrectly. CHAIRPERSON Yes, will you re-put the proper position to the witness. MR FRANCIS Ja. Obviously I think Mr van Zyl said that he then got between R6 500 and R7 000 and I think Mr de Kock said that the person concerned I think, would have signed for it, for the cash that was handed over. MR KLOPPER Yes. MR FRANCIS And you are saying to us that the balance thereof must have been taken by the Vlakplaas persons. MR KLOPPER That's correct. MR FRANCIS And shared amongst themselves. MR KLOPPER That's correct. MR FRANCIS I think we also know now that Mr de Kock I think, authorised the claim? MR KLOPPER You see what happens ...(intervention) MR FRANCIS Well look, I'm not asking for an explanation, but I think it's common cause I think, he said that he authorised the claim that was brought by Ben van Zyl. MR KLOPPER You see the handler who arranges the action - if I can explain to you, before it's signed by de Kock it goes to Engelbrecht, he recommends it. Let's say you ask for R20 000, you go to Engelbrecht, he cuts it to R15 000, it goes to the Financial Department at head office, the uniformed personnel, he cuts another R10 000 and then the cheque is signed and then it comes back. So what would happen is we will sign a receipt for R10 000 - or let's say he gets R5 000, he signs a receipt for R5 000, so he's under the impression there was only R5 000. Do you understand now who it works? TYPED IN AFRIKAANS BECAUSE OF EVIDENCE THAT WAS NOT TRANSLATED CHAIRPERSON So daar is twee kwitansies? MR KLOPPER Ja, en jy gooi dan net die een weg wat hy geteken het. CHAIRPERSON MR KLOPPER Die een wat ...(onduidelik) hoofkantoor gee, ja. CHAIRPERSON Ja, wat hy gekry het. MR KLOPPER Wat hy werklik gekry het, daai kwitansie gooi ons weg. CHAIRPERSON Ja, uiteindelik die ...(tussenbeide) MR KLOPPER The false receipt. CHAIRPERSON You give the informer R5 000 and he signs for R5 000. MR KLOPPER That's correct. CHAIRPERSON Which is correct, seen from his point of view, and the other one is destroyed and the other one goes back in the official records. MR KLOPPER Yes, the one for R10 000. ADV DE JAGER Does the informer sign two receipts? MR KLOPPER No, he only signs one. Let's say it's R5 000, he only signs that one, so he believes that he received R5 000. ADV DE JAGER Yes, but head office must have a receipt of the claim which was made out. MR KLOPPER The whole file is set up falsely, we had false signatures everything, Chairperson. ADV DE JAGER So you sign a false receipt, you sign B van Zyl, and then the guy at head office thinks it's B van Zyl? MR KLOPPER Yes, he believes it's the proper B van Zyl. MR FRANCIS So in our situation, the Nelspruit one, the claim that was approved by national office - national head office sorry, was R20 000? MR KLOPPER Ek dra geen kennis ...(tussenbeide) MR FRANCIS No, I'm putting it as a fact. MR KLOPPER I don't know, I have no idea. MR FRANCIS And what Ben van Zyl got I think was between R6 500 or R7 000. MR KLOPPER I did not even know that a claim was put in, but I did not know ...(intervention) MR FRANCIS So what you're saying is that the modus operandi that was used was that the receipt coming from head office would indicate that the informer must be paid R20 000. MR KLOPPER Correct. MR FRANCIS And that would be signed by someone amongst Vlakplaas. MR KLOPPER Correct. MR FRANCIS To indicate that a Ben van Zyl got R20 000. MR KLOPPER Yes. MR FRANCIS Where in fact Ben van Zyl would have received R6 500 or R7 000. MR KLOPPER That's correct. CHAIRPERSON Mr Klopper, in the example you have mentioned where amounts were taken from the claim, that sounds like a real - it doesn't seem like it is part of the false chain. MR KLOPPER That's what I'm trying to explain to you. You get the real action money or - where they found a real weapons cache and then there's the other one also. The real claims are also defrauded. CHAIRPERSON So in other words, the officials who scale it down, they are rendering an honest service there, they are not in the chain of the fraudsters? MR KLOPPER No. CHAIRPERSON He looks at the claim and he says it's not so serious that it has to be R50 000, make it R40 000. MR KLOPPER Yes, that is correct. CHAIRPERSON So those people are not part of that chain? MR KLOPPER No, not at all. CHAIRPERSON The chain is lower down? MR KLOPPER Yes, it's lower down, that's correct. MR FRANCIS Mr Klopper, when did you leave Vlakplaas? MR KLOPPER At the end of 1992, I'm not certain of the correct date. MR FRANCIS Since 1990, changes were taking place in the country, is that correct? MR KLOPPER Yes. MR FRANCIS And obviously I think you know that the activities of Vlakplaas was exposed in 1989 by Dirk Coetzee and I think Nofemela, is that correct? MR KLOPPER That's correct, yes. MR FRANCIS And the Harms, or Judge Harms I think was appointed to investigate the activities of Vlakplaas. MR KLOPPER That's correct. MR FRANCIS And I think we've dealt with this, a lot of lies was told to Harms at the hearings. MR KLOPPER That's correct. MR FRANCIS I know that - I think it was some Conradie from police and the Attorney-General used to be in KZN, KwaZulu Natal, McNally, was part of the investigation unit. MR KLOPPER Yes, that's correct. MR FRANCIS Did you give statements there? MR KLOPPER No, I was not involved there. MR FRANCIS Well obviously I think Engelbrecht also said that Mr de Kock gave statements and gave false statements there. MR KLOPPER I know Mr de Kock and Gen Engelbrecht were involved. MR FRANCIS And once Vlakplaas was exposed, I think there was an attempt to cover up the activities of Vlakplaas. MR KLOPPER It happened all through the years, yes. MR FRANCIS And you must be aware that before there was going to be a raid at Vlakplaas, I think weapons were taken away from Vlakplaas and hidden away. MR KLOPPER That's correct. MR FRANCIS You don't know why the weapons were removed and hidden? MR KLOPPER Why? MR FRANCIS Ja. MR KLOPPER If a raid would follow, then they wouldn't find any weapons there, on the farm. MR FRANCIS Why were those weapons kept on the farm? MR KLOPPER I don't know if there was any possibility that anybody would come to the farm and search it, I don't know if any organisation had the guts to do anything like that. MR FRANCIS Let me rather ask you this way. Did anybody tell the Vlakplaas members after the ANC was unbanned, to keep an arsenal of firearms or weapons? MR KLOPPER I don't about that. MR FRANCIS And you were a Captain at that time? MR KLOPPER No, at that stage - in 1990 I was still a Warrant Officer, before I became an officer. MR FRANCIS No, I'm talking about 1990 now. MR KLOPPER 1990? MR FRANCIS Ja. MR KLOPPER That's what I said, in 1990 I was not an officer. MR FRANCIS I didn't get that please. MR KLOPPER Only in the middle of 1990 I became an officer. MR FRANCIS Ja. But during that time you were still -de Kock was your friend? MR KLOPPER At a later stage we became close. MR FRANCIS When did you become close? MR KLOPPER Probably about the middle of 1991, I'm not sure about the date. MR FRANCIS But did anybody at any stage tell the members of Vlakplaas that you've got to keep your arsenal of weapons, especially after the ANC was unbanned? MR KLOPPER Not that I know of, I never heard anything like that. MR FRANCIS And obviously if this was told to the unit, you would have known about it? MR KLOPPER No, we just moved the weapons, we didn't destroy them, we just moved them. So I don't think such an instruction was given. MR FRANCIS But if there was such an order you would have known about it? MR KLOPPER Not necessarily, I think it was more the top structure who would know about that. I don't know if I had to know about it. MR FRANCIS But Mr de Kock would have known about it? MR KLOPPER He would have known yes. MR FRANCIS And he would have told his team about it? You're under oath. MR KLOPPER I cant really answer you. MR FRANCIS But one assumes that you're a specialised unit, specialised in killing people, so he must - he would have told you. MR KLOPPER As I told you, I don't if know any instruction was give to us. No instruction was given to destroy the weapons, but our weapons were just moved from the farm. We didn't go to destroy the weapons or to keep them, it was just moved. MR FRANCIS Vlakplaas' role had to change. MR KLOPPER That's correct. MR FRANCIS And it did change? MR KLOPPER Later in 1991, our work did change. MR FRANCIS But it started changing - already there were talks about change in 1990, is that correct? MR KLOPPER Politically speaking, yes. MR FRANCIS And you're saying that during 1991 it changed? MR KLOPPER Yes, I think in the later part of 1991 we moved away from political activities to more criminal activities. MR FRANCIS In fact I think Engelbrecht I think mentions in Exhibit A that I think the role of Vlakplaas became - had changed completely and then became just - its role was just to investigate crime. MR KLOPPER That's correct. MR FRANCIS And you confirm that? MR KLOPPER At some stage we moved away from political work where we worked against the ANC and the PAC, to more criminal matters. MR FRANCIS In fact I think Swart, who is going to be an applicant I think, also confirms this in his application, that the role of Vlakplaas did in fact change. And maybe you know, just in fairness, I think I should probably refer you to the right passage, but I don't think it is in dispute. CHAIRPERSON No, apparently not insofar as Mr Klopper is concerned. MR FRANCIS So I'm not even going to refer you to what I think Engelbrecht himself - no not Engelbrecht, well in what Engelbrecht himself said about this new role. But as far as you are concerned, that in 1991 your role basically was that of a criminal nature? MR KLOPPER That's correct. MR FRANCIS And there could not have been any dispute about what your new role was? MR KLOPPER No, we focused on criminal matters. MR FRANCIS And that's now to be of assistance to the various units, including Murder and Robbery? MR KLOPPER Correct. MR FRANCIS Including SANAB? MR KLOPPER Yes, any ...(intervention) MR FRANCIS And you also then worked through a network of informers, is that correct? MR KLOPPER Correct. ADV DE JAGER Sorry, the last question? MR FRANCIS ...(indistinct) Sorry, my mike was off. He worked through a network of informers. MR KLOPPER Yes. MR FRANCIS And there was no role - no dispute that Vlakplaas changed? MR KLOPPER Yes. MR FRANCIS You knew that? MR KLOPPER Yes, we all knew that. MR FRANCIS Everybody working at Vlakplaas would have known that? MR KLOPPER Yes. MR FRANCIS Let's talk about your trip to Nelspruit with de Kock and the two ladies, do you recall that? MR KLOPPER Yes. MR FRANCIS I think in your affidavit you mentioned - I'm not so sure when, that you stopped at various places, is that correct? MR KLOPPER Yes. MR FRANCIS Whilst stopping, can you recall at how many places I think you stopped? MR KLOPPER No, I cannot recall how many occasions we stopped. MR FRANCIS Whilst stopping there, what did you do? MR KLOPPER We drank a lot on the way. If that's what's going to be the question. MR FRANCIS If you say that you drank a lot, be more specific, tell us what you drank, where you drank, how much you drank. MR KLOPPER I cannot remember exactly how much, but we drank a lot. MR FRANCIS So you were very drunk when you arrived there? MR KLOPPER Yes, we drank a lot. MR FRANCIS Would you regard it as a frolic of your own? So you were on a frolic when you drove from Pretoria to Nelspruit? MR KLOPPER Yes, one can put it like that. MR LAMEY "Vrolik" of frolic? MR FRANCIS Frolic. CHAIRPERSON Of albei. MR FRANCIS Mr Klopper, when you left Pretoria and you went to Nelspruit, what was in your mind, what - where did you think you were going to? MR KLOPPER At that stage I knew there was going to be some action and that this operation will take place. I can't tell you what my state of mind was at that stage. MR FRANCIS You say that you drank a lot, did Mr de Kock drink a lot? MR KLOPPER We - all four of us drank a lot. MR FRANCIS Do you recall what Mr de Kock drank? MR KLOPPER No, I cannot recall. MR FRANCIS Was it hard liquor or just beers? MR KLOPPER It's difficult, I cannot recall exactly what he drank. MR FRANCIS Mr de Kock I think testified and said that you know when they go out on operations nobody would drink, they don't drink you know, his members won't do that. MR KLOPPER I know at per occasion there was such an instruction that nobody should drink. MR FRANCIS But with this operation you drank? MR KLOPPER Yes. MR FRANCIS Because it was not risky to you, because you guys knew that these armed robbers were set up, they had no firearms and they would be killed and there would be no resistance, so that's why you drank. MR KLOPPER No. From my side I cannot say, I believed that these people would be armed. I don't know about the other people, but I believed these persons would be armed. MR FRANCIS So why if in other operations you never drank, you decided to drink during this one? MR KLOPPER I cannot give you an answer to that. MR FRANCIS But when you got to Nelspruit - as we would say in Afrikaans "was u nou lekker dronk gewees"? MR KLOPPER Yes, we were under the influence. MR FRANCIS That includes Mr de Kock? MR KLOPPER That's right. MR FRANCIS Do you know if they had any further drinks at the Drumrock? MR KLOPPER As far as I can recall, de Kock and I did not have anything else, we went at dropped the girls off at Malelane Lodge. MR FRANCIS And do you know whether they drank at Malelane Lodge? MR KLOPPER I don't believe so. As far as I can recall we did not. MR FRANCIS What time did you arrive in Nelspruit? MR KLOPPER It was dark, I cannot give a specific time. MR FRANCIS But are you certain that it was dark? MR KLOPPER Yes, it was dark. MR FRANCIS But now I speak under correct, Mr de Kock said that it was approximately one or two. MR KLOPPER The morning? MR FRANCIS No the afternoon. MR KLOPPER That we arrived there? MR FRANCIS Yes. MR KLOPPER In the day? I think Mr Hattingh put it to me that it was almost midnight when we arrived there. MR FRANCIS No, don't look at Mr Hattingh. MR KLOPPER No, I'm not looking at him, but if I recall correctly, Mr Hattingh put it to me that Mr de Kock was put - that it was midnight. MR FRANCIS No, it was early in the day. MR KLOPPER And if I recall correctly, it was during the night. MR FRANCIS How long did you stay there? MR KLOPPER At the Drumrock, I ...(intervention) MR FRANCIS Before you went to Malelane. MR KLOPPER I cannot recall. MR FRANCIS Did you stay there for a long time? MR KLOPPER I can honestly not recall how long we stayed there. MR FRANCIS Mr Nortje said that - I think it's Nortje that said that at some stage all the members who were involved in this operation were in his room. This includes Mr de Kock. MR KLOPPER I know we went into the hotel where the people stayed and from the rooms, if I recall correctly - I cannot specifically recall, no. MR FRANCIS Do you recall that you were in a room, but you're not sure in which room it was? MR KLOPPER Yes, I was in some of the members' rooms, but I ...(intervention) MR FRANCIS Along with de Kock? MR KLOPPER I cannot recall if I was with de Kock. MR FRANCIS Think back. MR KLOPPER I can honestly not remember if I was with him. MR FRANCIS What were you doing there? MR KLOPPER We joined the rest of the members there, for the operation. MR FRANCIS And you were not part of the further planning? MR KLOPPER No, I had no part in the planning. MR FRANCIS Mr Nortje also says I think that in his room de Kock had then asked him about petrol, do you recall that? MR KLOPPER I can't answer, I don't know about that. MR FRANCIS But you are saying that you were in a room. MR KLOPPER I cannot recall that. MR FRANCIS And I know that Mr Nortje was cross-examined extensively by Mr Hattingh, but he stood still, he was quite firm, he was quite firm about that he was told to get petrol. It was just a question I think of whether or not it was 20 litres, 15 litres or 10 litres, but he stuck to his story that he was told by de Kock to get petrol. MR KLOPPER I don't know about that. MR FRANCIS I think we heard that you were assaulted on two occasions by Mr de Kock. MR KLOPPER He assaulted me on once. MR FRANCIS One is that you were interfering with women, is that correct? MR KLOPPER That was one instance, yes. MR FRANCIS And I see that in your affidavit I think, you refer to the two women that went with you. MR KLOPPER That's correct. MR FRANCIS I think you mentioned too that your "meisie", your girlfriend was not happy about that. MR KLOPPER Correct. MR FRANCIS And obviously if you say "vrouens" I think you're either referring to Mr de Kock's wife? MR KLOPPER Some of the other members as well. I don't know whether Mr de Kock's wife was part, I can't recall. MR FRANCIS Why did you mention this? MR KLOPPER There was - they were upset, amongst the ladies, that it had not happened previously that women had accompanied us according to my knowledge and that the secretaries had accompanied us and it was the first time that it happened and it was found out. MR FRANCIS Why mention this fact, I mean it's irrelevant to the murder that took place, why mention that the women were upset about this? MR KLOPPER The person who drew up the application - the statement, I must have mentioned it to him and he put it in the statement. I can't say anything about it. MR FRANCIS If we look at 244 at page 35 - 35.5, paragraph 35.5 ...(intervention) MR KLOPPER What is the page number? MR FRANCIS Page 244, paragraph 35.5, and I think it's the third line, you say "The two women, Jessie and Kobie also accompanied us undercover, so that they could repair our previous claims at Malelane Lodge." And I see you use the word "dekmantel", that's basically under the cover? MR KLOPPER Yes. MR FRANCIS What did you mean by that? MR KLOPPER It was a long time ago, but at that stage I understood that when the statement was drawn up that the ladies went along to go on a trip with us and that the excuse was that they had to rectify some claims which were outstanding at Malelane Lodge. MR FRANCIS Did they have to fix you know - put right some claims at Malelane Lodge, or was it just the cover? MR KLOPPER When I drew the claim - or excuse me, when I drew up the statement, that's what I believed, but I cannot answer, I cannot pertinently recall today. MR FRANCIS Are you saying that when the women were taken with it was just under the pretext or the cover that they were going to fix up claims in Malelane? MR KLOPPER Today I cannot pertinently recall, but when the statement was drawn up, that's what I believed, otherwise I would not have put it as such. MR FRANCIS So there were no claims that they had to fix? MR KLOPPER I can't recall, but we stayed many times at Malelane Lodge and we had many claims from there. We worked a lot in that vicinity, but I cannot recall this instance. MR FRANCIS But did you take Jessie and Kobie to Malelane on a number of occasions? MR KLOPPER No, only in one instance that I can recall. MR FRANCIS Where Mr de Kock was present? MR KLOPPER That's correct. MR FRANCIS And this was the Nelspruit one? MR KLOPPER Correct. MR FRANCIS So why is your memory so vague about this? MR KLOPPER As I have told you, the only case that I can recall when they travelled with us was with this specific incident. MR FRANCIS So they didn't go there to fix claims? MR KLOPPER I cannot recall, it was a long time ago. When the statement was drawn up that was my belief, that they were to rectify some of the claims, but I cannot recall it now. MR FRANCIS Or were they just keeping you company? MR KLOPPER No, it was not the case. MR FRANCIS These claims, were they also false claims? MR KLOPPER No, these are S&T claims, where one stays in a hotel and you pay for the room and then you have to hand it in to get the money back. Or if we had the money, then to close it up so that it's not outstanding anymore. MR FRANCIS Mr Klopper, when you booked in, under whose name did you book in? MR KLOPPER If I recall correctly, under other names, we did not use our proper names. We had false ID documents. It was Martin Reyneke. MR FRANCIS And Mr de Kock's one? MR KLOPPER He had several names, I think the one he used here and that was also in the court case, was Lourens Vosloo de Wet. MR FRANCIS Why did you use false names when - if especially I think you had to fix up claims? Why use a false name? MR KLOPPER Most of the times when we travelled, when we stayed at hotels, I always booked under a false name, we never used our own name. MR FRANCIS Was it not mainly because you knew that this operation was not authorised by head office? And I think if investigations were going to be conducted they would not be able to trace that de Kock and Klopper spent some time at Malelane Lodge? MR KLOPPER No, before one travels from Pretoria you have to draw up a travelling plan which has to be signed by the Generals and you must give an intelligence note and reasons. So you cannot just go out and come back again in that case, you have to draw up a travelling plan. MR FRANCIS But obviously it ...(intervention) CHAIRPERSON And the names of the ladies? MR KLOPPER I cannot recall. I don't even know whether they had nondeplumes of whether they had false identity documents, I cannot recall. MR FRANCIS How many rooms did you book? MR KLOPPER I cannot recall, I know Willie and I shared a room, I think Mr de Kock had his own room. It should have been three or four rooms. MR FRANCIS I think Willie's evidence I think was that he only joined you later I think, after the event. MR KLOPPER Yes, I recall that, that he stayed in a room with me, so I think we had three or four rooms, I'm not sure. MR FRANCIS No I think Willie Nortje's testimony was that he slept in Mr de Kock's room, slept on the ground, on the floor. MR KLOPPER I cannot specifically remember it. MR FRANCIS Did Nortje also join you to Malelane Lodge? MR KLOPPER No, on the way to Malelane Lodge from Drumrock, no he was not with. MR FRANCIS Let's talk about the kombi, and I think it was put to you by Mr Hattingh that because you guys were involved in so many false claims there was no need I think to kill the four persons, to then lodge a false claim. But I think we've covered that because you said look, in any event I think it was - even if there was a genuine operation, you would still lodge a false claim and your members would still benefit from it. MR KLOPPER Yes. MR FRANCIS Ja, so I'm not going to bother myself about that, but let's talk about the kombi. If one turns to page 244 of your application, it is paragraph 35.4. You say the following, Mr Klopper, I assume that when you gave this affidavit, these events were still fresh in your memory? MR KLOPPER Yes, I think this was in 1994/1995, it was a year or two after the incident. MR FRANCIS I see it was deposed on the 26th of April 1994? MR KLOPPER Yes, that is more ... MR FRANCIS Which would have been 22 months after the incident? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR FRANCIS Well, 23 months after the incident. So your knowledge I think must have been reasonably fresh? MR KLOPPER At that stage, yes. MR FRANCIS Yes. And in it you mentioned the following, you say "... de Kock and I per occasion met Manny the owner, at the hotel." Incidentally, Manny, is he also known as Fatman? MR KLOPPER No, I think Fatman is the brother of Manny. MR FRANCIS You say "... Manny and de Kock held a discussion." MR KLOPPER Yes. MR FRANCIS: "... I was not present." MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR FRANCIS: "... on our way back in the vehicle, de Kock told me that Manny was experiencing financial troubles and that the hotel minibus had to be stolen so that he could claim it from the insurance." MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR FRANCIS Did Mr de Kock say to you that because Manny has got financial difficulties, his kombi should be stolen? MR KLOPPER Yes, that is how I understood it at that stage. MR FRANCIS When Mr de Kock told you this, were you sober, what was your state of mind? MR KLOPPER I cannot recall, I can honestly not recall. MR FRANCIS But you recall this? MR KLOPPER I can. MR FRANCIS There is nothing wrong with your memory? MR KLOPPER No. MR FRANCIS Do you recall when exactly this was told to you? I mean if one looks at the incident, when before the incident was this told to you? MR KLOPPER I cannot recall how long before, maybe a month or two, it could be a week, I cannot remember. MR FRANCIS Did Mr de Kock say to you what he was going to do with the vehicle if and when it got stolen? MR KLOPPER No, I can't recall anything further and I did not hear anything about it. MR FRANCIS Before the Nelspruit incident, did you see the kombi? MR KLOPPER No, after the shooting incident, I only saw the minibus. MR FRANCIS I think you testified and said that after the shooting incident, Mr de Kock sent you to the post office, is that correct? MR KLOPPER No, we together went to the police station. MR FRANCIS Why did you go there? MR KLOPPER If I recall correctly, at the scene it was established that this vehicle was not reported as stolen and that it was from the hotel. Then we drove so that de Kock could call Manny, I think he said he had to call his brother Vossie to arrange that it be reported as stolen. MR FRANCIS I recall I think, having read in your affidavit that you then afterwards realised that Mr de Kock had some ulterior motives when the kombi was set on fire? Do you recall that? MR KLOPPER No, I am not following you, can you please repeat. MR FRANCIS I think somewhere in your application, in your statement it says that you later surmised that Mr de Kock had ulterior motives with the use of Manny's vehicle? MR KLOPPER No, I cannot recall, not now. MR FRANCIS Mr Chairperson, if I could ... MR LAMEY It is in Mr Nortje's affidavit, it is in Mr Nortje's statement. MR FRANCIS Sorry. Mr Nortje, I think in his affidavit said that he later discovered that Mr de Kock had some ulterior motives about this? MR KLOPPER I don't know about that. MR FRANCIS But you won't dispute that? MR KLOPPER No, I will not. MR FRANCIS I want us again to look at your application. At the bottom of page 109, read from paragraph 9. If you could read it aloud, please. MR KLOPPER: "... during 1992, I accompanied members of Vlakplaas and Pretoria Murder and Robbery Unit to ambush a gang of robbers. At that stage I really believed that they were genuine robbers who were to rob a bank and that they were involved in a bank robbery in Witbank. Only later did I realise that these people were set up by us. No effort was made whatsoever to arrest these four robbers and they were killed in cold blood and the minibus they were travelling, was set alight with petrol so that none of them could be identified and little remained of their bodies. There was also guns and handgrenades planted in the minibus to make everything look real. A fifth person was also taken and shot and his body was also blown to pieces with explosives, but I was not involved in this." MR FRANCIS You can stop there. Then I want you to turn to page 243 and paragraph 35.2. Read that please. MR KLOPPER: "... Dougie Holtzhausen had a source, Ben van Zyl. Ben was previously a Detective with Brixton Murder and Robbery. He conveyed information that a certain gang was responsible for the murder in Witbank. MR FRANCIS Please read further. MR KLOPPER: "... Eugene de Kock wanted to teach the robbers a lesson and a plan was made." MR FRANCIS That is enough. So you are telling us that Eugene de Kock wanted to teach the robbers a lesson? MR KLOPPER That was what was told to me, yes. MR FRANCIS Who told you that? MR KLOPPER de Kock. MR FRANCIS When did he tell you that? MR KLOPPER I cannot recall exactly what stage it was put to me, but that is what was put to me. MR FRANCIS Was that in Nelspruit? MR KLOPPER I could have been there, I cannot exactly remember where it was. MR FRANCIS And when he refers to robbers, he is referring to the robbers who were going to rob the Coin Security? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR FRANCIS So he said to you that, what was your nickname, Chappies? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR FRANCIS He said to you "Chappies, we have to teach the robbers in Witbank a lesson, we have to teach these robbers a lesson"? MR KLOPPER That is how I recall it, when I made the statement. MR FRANCIS And you are quite certain about that Mr Klopper that he told you that? MR KLOPPER At that stage, yes. MR FRANCIS So Mr de Kock's motive was to teach the robbers, who he believed were also involved in Witbank and who were going to rob Nelspruit, a lesson? MR KLOPPER That is what I believed, yes. MR FRANCIS Mr de Kock, sorry Mr Klopper, you have just now read to me, to us, page 109, paragraph 9 and in it you don't mention that these robbers were members of the ANC or PAC or IFP? MR KLOPPER No, with the drawing up of this statement, I didn't have any legal representation. MR FRANCIS Come on Mr Klopper. MR KLOPPER We were told to put in applications before the cut off date, I did not have any legal representation when I drew up the statement. MR FRANCIS Are you saying to us that later when you acquired an Attorney, he said to you "look, let's also talk about the political motive"? MR KLOPPER No, but if you look at the statement, you will see that there are several instances which are in the application, which will not fall under for what one can apply for amnesty for. MR FRANCIS I see also when looking at this one that I think you read from, that is now from you know, the one that you read from, page 243, I see there is no reference made that these were going to be ANC persons or trained people and this obviously must have been taken 23 months after the incident? MR KLOPPER I don't see any mention thereof. MR FRANCIS I put it to you that you did not know that these people were linked to the ANC or to a political organisation and that you only became involved in it because a white woman in Witbank got killed or that you were basically told that a white person got killed, and that is why you took part in this to show Mr de Kock who said to you that we need to teach these robbers a lesson, so you acted in terms of that? MR KLOPPER No, we believed that these were ANC members as I have said previously. MR FRANCIS Why isn't it mentioned in the two affidavits? MR KLOPPER I cannot answer you. MR FRANCIS You cannot tell me because you did not have the information that these were ANC members? MR KLOPPER No, I think Mr Holtzhausen and van Zyl will be able to tell you, that is the information that the guys had. MR FRANCIS I know now in the examination-in-chief I think you said that you knew that they were ANC members. Why kill them? Let's assume that I was maybe a member of the IRA that was at war with the country and I was a lawyer acting for them, would you also have killed me if you knew that I was defending people, would you have killed me for that? MR KLOPPER This is how this thing was set up, the instruction was that this is how the incident will take place and I dealt along those lines. MR FRANCIS Mr Klopper, you are lying now. MR LAMEY On what basis is that statement being made, what is the basis of that allegation? CHAIRPERSON Just give him a chance, Mr Lamey. MR FRANCIS You just now mentioned, I think earlier, that "Mr de Kock told us, we were told that people took part, these robbers took part in the Witbank matter and that we needed to teach these robbers a lesson", and that is why you became involved in it? Now to say that "I knew that they were ANC members", it is just a figment of your imagination? MR KLOPPER No, I firmly believed and at the end it was indeed sos that these persons were from the ANC. MR FRANCIS But Mr Klopper, you said that the role of Vlakplaas changed in 1991 and your role was just that of, to assist the police in criminal activities? Do you recall that? MR KLOPPER That is correct, yes. MR FRANCIS So if that was your role and if these guys were just members of the ANC, who then gave you authorisation to kill them, if your role had basically changed? MR KLOPPER The ANC at that stage was not our friend. To tell you honestly at Vlakplaas, they were still our enemy. That so many AK47 rifles were used that I believed that these people were to be heavily armed. MR FRANCIS Mr Klopper, did you have dealings with Mr van Zyl? MR KLOPPER No, I never dealt with Mr van Zyl. MR FRANCIS You say the ANC was the enemy? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR FRANCIS So that is why you killed the five? MR KLOPPER No, as I told you, I believed that these people would be heavily armed and the instruction went along, the ambush was set up, I had never met any of these persons before, I only saw Ben van Zyl before that. MR FRANCIS You believed that they were armed? MR KLOPPER Yes. MR FRANCIS Tell us about your belief, who told you that they were armed? MR KLOPPER In the discussion earlier with the members, that is why it was drawn up as such that those people did not have a chance to fire. MR FRANCIS No, but let us deal with what Mr van Zyl has got in his affidavit. MR KLOPPER Ek het nie sy "affidavit" gesien nie ... (no translation) MR FRANCIS He does not mention that these guys are going to be armed, he in fact mentions I think, at some stage there was a request for them to be given firearms, AK47's? MR KLOPPER I don't know. MR FRANCIS I think there was also direct evidence at this enquiry either by, I have forgotten it could have been Gevers or it could have been Nortje, but I think somebody said that. There was a request that they should be armed, or be given two AK47's, I think it was Nortje and the initial, I think, the initial arrangement was that the AK47's were going to be put into the vehicle, but then later I think, they decided not to put the AK47's in the vehicle? MR KLOPPER Chairperson, I don't know, I had nothing to do with the planning, I don't know anything about the planning. MR FRANCIS I think Holtzhausen ... MR LAMEY Chairperson, I just want to - I had a memory of this and in the statement of van Zyl, page 218, he mentions "... at that stage I looked into the kombi and I saw that one of the men seated at the back, had an AK47." Now my instructions also from Mr van Zyl and that would be his evidence, that he saw something which appeared to be an AK47. MR FRANCIS I don't know what the point was that you are trying to make, but ... MR LAMEY You put it to him that Mr van Zyl's evidence will be that these people were not armed. CHAIRPERSON Yes gentlemen, please. MR FRANCIS Thank you Mr Chairperson. CHAIRPERSON Yes. MR FRANCIS Mr Klopper, the fact of the matter is that only two AK47's were found on the scene, it was planted either by Holtzhausen and another police officer, Gouws, that is a fact. MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR FRANCIS And obviously if van Zyl had seen an AK47, there should have been three AK47's? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR FRANCIS This was a setup from the beginning? MR KLOPPER Yes, I agree that it was a setup, but I wasn't part of that setup, I believed that those people were armed. MR FRANCIS van Zyl must have been in contact with his handler, Holtzhausen at all times? MR KLOPPER Yes, that is entirely possible. MR FRANCIS You also knew that they had to make use of Mr Araju's vehicle that was parked at the Promenade? MR KLOPPER No, I did not know. MR FRANCIS I put it to you that no policeman I think would be silly enough to leave AK47's in the kombi? MR KLOPPER I don't know about that. MR FRANCIS Would you have done that, would you have left AK47's in a kombi and give it to trained robbers? Would you? MR KLOPPER Chairperson, not me, but I cannot speak for everybody. I personally wouldn't have. MR FRANCIS Would Mr de Kock have done that? MR KLOPPER I doubt that sincerely. MR FRANCIS Would Mr Holtzhausen have done that? MR KLOPPER I don't know. MR FRANCIS Would Capt Gevers have done that? MR KLOPPER I cannot speak for anyone of those persons, but speaking personally I wouldn't have done that. ADV DE JAGER Really we are speculating, because they didn't leave it there, so it is a fact, they didn't leave it there, there were no weapons inside, it was planted afterwards. Are we having differences about this? MR FRANCIS We are disagreeing about whether or not he knew that they were armed, what I am just putting to the witness is that they were not armed and I think van Zyl would have given this information over to the police? MR KLOPPER Chairperson, I am completely convinced that these persons would be armed. MR FRANCIS Who told you that they were armed? MR KLOPPER Chairperson, from the discussion and the planning it was indicated that these persons would be armed and that they should not have the opportunity to use those arms. MR FRANCIS Who told you, who told you that? MR KLOPPER Chairperson, I don't know that it was Dougie Holtzhausen or Deon van Zyl or whatever, we stood there in a group and undertook the planning, but I cannot tell you pertinently. I could infer that it was Dougie Holtzhausen because he was the handler of the informer, but I cannot state pertinently that it was him, I cannot recall. MR FRANCIS That they would be armed with what weapons? MR KLOPPER It doesn't matter what sort of weapon it would be, any weapon is dangerous. I cannot even - if a specific sort of weapon was mentioned. MR FRANCIS Let's talk about the role of Mr de Kock at the scene. You said that you got to the scene, you were with de Kock in your vehicle, is that correct and at some stage you slept? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR FRANCIS Was Mr de Kock at all times in your vehicle? MR KLOPPER No Chairperson, but as far as I can recall, de Kock lay sleeping in my vehicle to wait for the action to be completed. MR FRANCIS You just went to the scene and remained at the scene? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR FRANCIS At no stage did you go to where I think Nortje was parked? MR KLOPPER No, never. MR FRANCIS I think he testified and said that at one stage you and de Kock came there whilst they were observing the kombi? MR KLOPPER No Chairperson, the vehicle that I was there in was the appointed vehicle to be drawn into the road after the incident with the blue light on. MR FRANCIS So Nortje must be lying when he testified before this Commission yesterday? MR KLOPPER I wouldn't want to say that he is lying, but I cannot recall that that would ever have taken place. MR FRANCIS But you are quite definite that you didn't go to them? MR KLOPPER Yes, I didn't leave the scene. MR FRANCIS Okay, I won't ask you, I will later argue that he is lying. Let's talk about the role of Mr de Kock at the shooting. Where was he when the shooting started? MR KLOPPER Chairperson, as I have explained Gouws and Holtzhausen were waiting underneath the bridge, they would give us the signal. The rest of us were all positioned in a straight line behind a dam embankment, just behind the bridge. I cannot recall in what precise sequence we stood, I think I stood in front and then there was Chris Geldenhuys, I don't know where Mr de Kock was in terms of this entire sequence of men. MR FRANCIS When the shooting commenced, where was he, where was Mr de Kock? MR KLOPPER Chairperson, I cannot recall precisely where he was, because every man had to see to himself and make sure that he didn't get shot. I cannot tell you pertinently. MR FRANCIS At that stage, were you still under the influence of alcohol? MR KLOPPER Chairperson, I lay there for quite a while sleeping, so I don't believe that we were all very drunk. MR FRANCIS Mr de Kock testified and said that there was a lot of chaos and I think policemen were firing left, right and centre and I think he at one stage decided to call you guys into a line, do you recall that? MR KLOPPER Chairperson, we moved in a line in front of the vehicle and fired at the vehicle. The vehicle moved down and we fired at this vehicle consistently. When it came to a standstill, we stood in a group behind the vehicle and continued to fire at the vehicle upon which we heard groaning noises and we fired at the source of these groaning noises. I don't know whether we were in a line, I cannot recall specifically. MR FRANCIS Let me put to you what Mr de Kock said, I think he said there was firing, shooting took place, the kombi accelerated? MR KLOPPER Yes. MR FRANCIS And he then also became, he also came down from where he was and started firing at this kombi. I think he said he basically used his one magazine, changed his, I think his rifle to semi-automatic and fired between seven to eight shots? MR KLOPPER I cannot comment on that. MR FRANCIS He had noticed, I think, that the shooting was quite chaotic, he then formed you into a line and the shooting thereafter I think, proceeded I think, you formed a line and then followed the kombi and fired, started firing and he took a few steps forward and then went back? MR KLOPPER Chairperson, I cannot recall it that specifically. MR FRANCIS Would you dispute, are you disputing what Mr de Kock is saying or what? MR KLOPPER It is possible, because everyone of us has a different recollection of how things took place, I cannot recall that. MR FRANCIS Do you recall if Mr de Kock also wanted to shoot at one of the persons I think, who was moaning and groaning? MR KLOPPER No, I cannot recall that pertinently. MR FRANCIS If you say you don't recall that, are you saying that it is possible, but you don't recall it or he did not do that? MR KLOPPER I cannot comment on that, I cannot recall that. MR FRANCIS Mr Lamey? I think further Mr Nortje said the following, he said that Mr de Kock had asked him to shoot at this person, the person I think who was moaning and groaning? MR KLOPPER Mr Nortje? Chairperson, as far as I know, Nortje was not at the scene until much later, as far as I recall. Nortje only arrived at the scene much later. MR FRANCIS Nortje's testimony was I think that, when the shooting commenced I think, he got there. Mr de Kock told him to finish off that person, I think, who was moaning and groaning. He refused and said "no, look ..." MR LAMEY Mr Nortje's evidence was not that when the shooting commenced, he was on the scene. It is not what he testified. CHAIRPERSON Yes, gentlemen please. MR LAMEY No. After the shooting was completed, he was on the scene. CHAIRPERSON Yes, Mr Lamey, are you done? MR LAMEY Yes Mr Chairperson, my learned friend is putting ... CHAIRPERSON Yes, he said, you say that he said that when the shooting commenced, Nortje was on the scene and you are saying that that is not correct. MR LAMEY That is not what my client testified. CHAIRPERSON Nortje says that he arrived at some time after that point. MR LAMEY Yes Mr Chairman. CHAIRPERSON Mr Francis, what is your response to that? MR FRANCIS I think Nortje said that when the shooting commenced, I think, he got there at some stage. If I am wrong, I think I am wrong. CHAIRPERSON I think Mr Lamey is more correct, Nortje waited for a while and then drove passed the scene, made a U-turn and went back, etc. So won't you deal with it on that basis? MR FRANCIS I think I am wrong. But Mr Nortje said that when he got to the scene, I think, he was told by Mr de Kock to shoot the person I think, who was laying down? MR KLOPPER Chairperson, I cannot recall that. We fired many shots by that stage already. MR FRANCIS If you say you don't recall it, are you saying that it didn't happen or it could have happened, but I am not so sure? MR KLOPPER I don't know, I do not have any knowledge. MR FRANCIS If you say I don't know about it, what are you saying, didn't happen at all? MR KLOPPER That I don't know whether it is true or not, I didn't hear it, I don't know anything about such a case. CHAIRPERSON Yes Mr Francis, are you done with this point? MR FRANCIS I think it may be an appropriate opportunity to ... CHAIRPERSON Very well, we will adjourn and we will reconvene at two o'clock. COMMITTEE ADJOURNS K KLOPPER (s.u.o.) CHAIRPERSON Mr Francis, have you got any more questions? CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR FRANCIS (cont) I do have. Mr Klopper, what was the role of Mr de Kock in this matter? MR KLOPPER He participated in the shooting. MR FRANCIS Was he part of the planning? MR KLOPPER I cannot recall whether Mr de Kock offered any input with the planning at the scene, I cannot recall whether he offered any input. MR FRANCIS And before he got to the scene? MR KLOPPER As I have told you, I was not a member of the planning before the time. I cannot recall whether Mr de Kock was in any way a member of the planning and if he had been, what he would have said. MR FRANCIS You say after the kombi was set alight, Mr de Kock had instructed some people to go away, is that correct? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR FRANCIS Who were those people? MR KLOPPER Chairperson, it was Gevers, Swart and Chait. MR FRANCIS Did you see him having a discussion with Holtzhausen and Nortje before they left? MR KLOPPER Chairperson, I cannot recall precisely. MR FRANCIS Some of the applicants I think said, I think Nortje himself said that Ben van Zyl got to the scene, he told Holtzhausen that Tiso wasn't there, Holtzhausen and Nortje I think, approached de Kock and de Kock then told them to go and look for Tiso? MR KLOPPER Chairperson, I don't know about that, I cannot recall that. MR FRANCIS Are you saying it didn't happen or are you not so sure? MR KLOPPER I am not certain, I don't know. MR FRANCIS I think Nortje said he then came back and told de Kock that they had found Tiso, do you recall that? MR KLOPPER Chairperson, no, I don't have any knowledge of that. MR FRANCIS Did you at any stage hear de Kock say that Tiso should be buddha'ed? MR KLOPPER What I did hear is that he told Gevers and Swart and Chait to go and meet Vermeulen, that is what I remember that he said. MR FRANCIS So you didn't hear him say buddha'ing? MR KLOPPER No, I cannot say that I ever heard that. MR FRANCIS In how many instances have you taken part, cases where a person was buddha'ed? MR KLOPPER In one case. MR FRANCIS What would happen before a person is buddha'ed? MR KLOPPER In my case the guy had already died and he was stiff, the way that I can explain is that the explosives would be placed around the person, but as I was involved, the explosives were placed upon and below the person. MR SIBANYONI Which incident is that Mr Klopper? MR KLOPPER That is the Sweet Sambo, a case which will be dealt with later by you. MR SIBANYONI Thank you. MR FRANCIS Mr Klopper, who was in control of this whole operation? MR KLOPPER Chairperson, it was Dougie Holtzhausen's action. If one had to look at this according to rank, de Kock was the senior officer at the scene, but I would rather say that it was Dougie Holtzhausen who was in command of the operation. MR FRANCIS Why did Geldenhuys go with, Geldenhuys from Pretoria Murder and Robbery? MR KLOPPER I cannot respond to that. I cannot explain anything about that. MR FRANCIS Was this not just to give it an air of respectability, to mislead people to say that look, this is basically an operation done by Pretoria Murder and Robbery? MR KLOPPER Chairperson, I cannot respond to that because I do not know anything about it. MR FRANCIS Were you not told why the other members had to be there from Murder and Robbery? MR KLOPPER I could speculate, but I cannot tell you. MR FRANCIS Was this a Pretoria Murder and Robbery Unit operation or was it a Vlakplaas one? MR KLOPPER Chairperson, Dougie as a member of Vlakplaas, handled the informer and I would rather call this a Vlakplaas operation, we were also more in number than Murder and Robbery. MR FRANCIS I think Geldenhuys himself said that he got the distinct impression that de Kock, I think, was in control of things and the fact that the majority I think, of his members were members of Vlakplaas and he basically thought that it was a Vlakplaas operation? MR KLOPPER Chairperson, it is also my opinion that it was a Vlakplaas operation, but from what I saw, de Kock did not participate that extensively in the planning, from what I saw. MR FRANCIS I think he also went further and I think he said that the impression that he got was that they were being used by Vlakplaas and that is why the members of the Murder and Robbery Unit were there? MR KLOPPER Chairperson, I cannot respond to that. MR FRANCIS Why are you applying for amnesty? MR KLOPPER Chairperson, ultimately murders were committed, we did not give them any chance to escape. MR FRANCIS Om enigsins ... (no translation) MR KLOPPER To escape, to be arrested, it was planned that they would not escape from the ambush. ADV DE JAGER I think that you misunderstood the question. The question is why are you now requesting amnesty, what is your motivation for requesting amnesty because you obtained 204 indemnity? MR KLOPPER I was advised Chairperson, that it would be better for me to apply for amnesty because it was a political incident, in order to prevent any further prosecution. MR FRANCIS Will you agree with me that this was a setup from the beginning? MR KLOPPER I don't really understand what is meant by setup, I believed that these were bona fide robbers and that they would be armed and that we were launching an action against them. MR FRANCIS Let me rather put it to you this way, the robbers I think were told by Ben van Zyl from the statements, I think, to go to Nelspruit? MR KLOPPER Chairperson, I don't know about how the plan was compiled, I don't know anything about that. MR FRANCIS They had asked for firearms and Ben van Zyl gave Tiso a 38 revolver, that is according to Ndimande? MR KLOPPER I don't know. MR FRANCIS Ben van Zyl gave them, gave Tiso a key which he was going to use at some place? MR KLOPPER I don't have any knowledge about that. MR FRANCIS They had requested AK47's and these were given to them? MR KLOPPER I don't have any knowledge about the dealings with the deceased. MR FRANCIS They had asked for a car and they were given a Toyota Cressida which is a police Regulation 80 vehicle. MR KLOPPER I don't know anything about that. MR FRANCIS They were given a kombi or they were told that they could get a kombi at the Promenade Hotel, just outside? MR KLOPPER I don't know about that. MR FRANCIS The keys I think, were left on one of the tyres? MR KLOPPER I did not participate in that, I don't know about it. MR FRANCIS They were told which route to follow? MR KLOPPER I don't know about that, I cannot comment on it. MR FRANCIS They were told that Ben van Zyl would drive in front of them? MR KLOPPER I don't know. MR FRANCIS They had no firearms? ADV DE JAGER Do you have any knowledge about anything that was said to these persons? MR KLOPPER I did not have anything to do with the planning whatsoever, I arrived at the scene which was on the route that they had followed. I didn't know who set up the route or how it came to be that that would be the route. MR FRANCIS I think before I finish off Mr Klopper, you spoke about an information note. MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR FRANCIS I want you to look at page, I think it is ... CHAIRPERSON Page 375 of the documents. MR FRANCIS Did you see this information note before? MR KLOPPER No, I have not seen this. As I have put it to you, with a travel plan such an Intelligence note would also be compiled and especially after actions, this is the sort of note that would be submitted, but I haven't seen this specific one. MR FRANCIS Please explain that, what would happen before an operation, at what stage would the information note be drawn up? MR KLOPPER Chairperson, in order to authorise the journey, one would have to explain why the journey was to be undertaken, that is why an Intelligence note would be compiled which would represent the facts of what was going to take place. That would be the initial Intelligence note and then after that, a full Intelligence note would be compiled regarding the things which had taken place. MR FRANCIS At what stage would you get authorisation from your seniors? MR KLOPPER Before your departure, the route plan had to be undersigned by the Commander, the travel plan. MR FRANCIS Look at - well, if Mr de Kock had drawn up the information note, it would then have gone to his seniors? MR KLOPPER I beg your pardon? MR FRANCIS It would have gone to his senior? MR KLOPPER Yes. MR FRANCIS And what would happen afterwards, after his senior basically saw this, what would happen next? MR KLOPPER It would be approved and then one would have permission to travel. That is why one needed the authorisation for expenses such as accommodation and so forth, for meals and other aspects. MR FRANCIS So if you want to ambush and kill people, would you also have to have it in the information note? MR KLOPPER Chairperson, it is difficult to say whether one would explain how it would operate. I don't know whether this is the specific note for this specific case, but it would be stated for example that there would be a possible robbery, but that the group would wait for this gang of robbers, that there would be an attempt to prevent the robbery, but I don't know precisely how things operated in this specific case. CHAIRPERSON But that would be part of the official procedure? MR KLOPPER Yes. CHAIRPERSON It wouldn't be an aspect to the fraud? MR KLOPPER No. CHAIRPERSON This would be in terms of the standing rules? MR KLOPPER Yes, that is correct. MR FRANCIS So, let's assume that you would obviously want to have some authorisation from your seniors? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR FRANCIS So that maybe later, I think, they won't blame you and say look you took part in an unlawful activity, that wasn't approved by us, by them? MR KLOPPER Yes Chairperson. The basic thing was that if one had authorisation to stay in a hotel, that one would have to draw travel and accommodation fees because if there was some form of car accident while on such an operation, they would hold you responsible for the damages. MR FRANCIS Mr Klopper, you said that this was basically to ambush people and to kill them? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR FRANCIS And what should the information note have contained? MR KLOPPER Chairperson, that there was going to be a robbery and that the group was going to wait for them. MR FRANCIS This would go to either Engelbrecht or some senior person and he would authorise it? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR FRANCIS By signing it? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR FRANCIS And the signed copy will go back to your Commander? MR KLOPPER Yes Chairperson, it would go back to the Unit, to de Kock. MR FRANCIS And that would then be kept? MR KLOPPER Yes, it would be kept there, that is correct. MR FRANCIS And that was the procedure that was followed in all operations? MR KLOPPER For example with the Sambo incident, I did not compile an Intelligence note saying that I would fetch a body and blow it up. I did not compile any such notes, I was just told verbally to go. MR FRANCIS But in the other operations? MR KLOPPER Yes, then it would be the case, but as I have said it did not work that way with every case. MR FRANCIS So one would assume that in this one here, the same procedure would have been followed because you got information already sometime, I think, in November, well beginning of December, but you had enough time to get authorisation for this? MR KLOPPER I would believe so, yes. CHAIRPERSON Mr de Kock states that there were certain cases that did not go onto the system? MR KLOPPER For example yes, with the case where I was sent to fetch the body, that was unlawful, even though the police was involved. One could not however place it on paper that one was going to break the law, to put it that way. With the operations that were not authorised, I don't know how to express this, one would not provide an Intelligence note, then there would be an oral or verbal order. CHAIRPERSON Yes, but if it was something that was clearly beyond the parameters of the law? MR KLOPPER Yes. CHAIRPERSON Which should never really be authorised, one would not go through this channel where one would leave tracks? MR KLOPPER No, there wouldn't be a paper trail. ADV DE JAGER Do you know whether an Intelligence note was submitted during the Piet Retief incident? MR KLOPPER No, that was before my time, I don't know anything about that. But the procedure worked as such that a list of names would be compiled so that there would be authorisation for the group that would be participating. ADV DE JAGER If you received authorisation to commit a murder in Durban, then you wouldn't say I am going to commit a murder, you would say ... MR KLOPPER Yes, you would provide some other form of excuse. ADV DE JAGER Would you think up an excuse? MR KLOPPER Yes, you would justify your journey by proposing something else. CHAIRPERSON But you didn't necessarily have to do that, you could just do it upon a verbal order? MR KLOPPER Yes, with a verbal order, then the General would take responsibility in the event of an accident or something, he would say "but I gave this man authorisation, there wasn't time to compile an Intelligence note." CHAIRPERSON Sorry, Mr Francis. MR FRANCIS If you could look at the same document, page 375, can you read it out please. MR KLOPPER: "... On 92-03-24 unregistered source of Unit C10 reported that he had gathered information of a consignment of AK47 guns which would be transported between Komatipoort and Mamelodi, Pretoria. Source also reports that weapons would be fetched on 92-03-25 or 92-03-26 and that it was intended for use during a planned armed robbery of a bank in Pretoria. The source will report to his handler as soon as he has gathered further information. Members of Pretoria Murder and Robbery will accompany Unit members of C10 because there are indications that the suspects are wanted by them due to other armed robberies. As soon as further particulars are available, there will be liaison with MID Nelspruit for a police action." MR FRANCIS Am I correct that this does not refer to armed action that the police were going to take in Nelspruit? MR KLOPPER Yes, that is correct. MR FRANCIS And obviously it also states that if and when further information were acquired, they would give it back, they would convey this to the seniors? MR KLOPPER That is correct. ADV DE JAGER I see at the bottom it says "compiled by Sgt Holtzhausen" and then it has been signed by de Kock? MR KLOPPER That is correct. I don't know whether this is his travel plan and Intelligence note in this case. The person who was handling the information with regard to the action, would state that it is he that compiled it. CHAIRPERSON It does not appear to be covert? MR KLOPPER No, this is not covert, not according to this document. MR FRANCIS The person I think who would have, so a senior would then have either signed on this document saying "approved" or "rejected" or "denied"? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR FRANCIS When you went to Nelspruit, were you thinking that you were going to ambush people who were going to smuggle weapons from Komatipoort with the intention to take it to Pretoria or what were you thinking? MR KLOPPER Chairperson, my knowledge was that these were robbers that we were going to wait for. I cannot recall that I knew anything about weapons or arms smuggling. MR FRANCIS I think the only person, I think, who knows about arms smuggling is Mr de Kock? MR KLOPPER I don't know, I don't have any knowledge. MR FRANCIS And the others? MR KLOPPER I don't have any knowledge, Dougie managed the information, I don't know anything about that. MR FRANCIS Do you know that Mr Ben van Zyl had asked, I think it is confirmed by Holtzhausen, had asked that well, Holtzhausen I think in his affidavit states that he had asked that - that van Zyl had asked that the robbers be killed because he feared that his cover would be blown? MR KLOPPER I don't know about that. MR FRANCIS And it would seem to me that they got killed because of the request from Ben van Zyl? MR KLOPPER I don't know about that. MR FRANCIS Is it common that you would get instructions from an informer? MR KLOPPER No, one would usually try to protect your informer, but I cannot say that the informer would launch any action. MR FRANCIS This would seem to me like an informer you know, instructing C10 to kill five robbers and they kill them? MR KLOPPER No, as I have told you, I did not have any discussions or dealings with him. I cannot cast any light upon that. MR FRANCIS If you knew about the request to kill the five to hide the identity of van Zyl, would you have still taken part in the operation? MR KLOPPER It is easy to say today "no", but at that stage, I can really not tell you, if one received an order, one would have to follow that order. If you were there and told to do something, you would not be disobedient towards your superior. MR FRANCIS Mr Klopper, I think on page 109, I think we have dealt with that but let's turn to 109, paragraph 9. I think it is the fourth line where you say the following "... only later did I realise that these people were setup by us." At what stage did you realise this? MR KLOPPER Chairperson, it is difficult for me to give you the precise point in time, it is logical that when the vehicle was set alight and the weapons were planted, that not all the facts were the way I had them. I cannot really tell you what to say. MR FRANCIS Mr Klopper, I get the impression from this statement that you must have believed that you were going to apprehend robbers and I think, I think the fact that you drew this up without legal representation, I think you basically told the truth. You must have believed that "I am joining other people to catch these robbers" and the other thing I think is, later I think you changed your version? MR KLOPPER I don't think that I changed my version, I cannot tell you at which stage, I think it was probably more in Nelspruit when I realised that there would be no attempt to arrest these persons, but I believed completely that we were going to prevent a robbery. If this person, Tiso, had taken a weapon from Ben, how would one rob a place without being armed, would one rob a place with knives? It wouldn't work that way, not with a place like Coin Security. MR FRANCIS So you went down, you wanted to prevent a robbery from taking place? MR KLOPPER That was my honest belief. MR FRANCIS And your intention was just to prevent the robbery from taking place? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR FRANCIS In what way were you going to prevent it from taking place? MR KLOPPER Through police action. As I have said, I cannot tell you at precisely what stage I realised that these persons would not be arrested, but I believed initially that they would be arrested. Sometimes in certain cases, it would include the shooting of persons. MR FRANCIS But Mr Klopper, you hear people moaning and groaning, you believe that you are going to prevent them from robbing the place, they are defenceless and you keep on shooting? MR KLOPPER I cannot tell you, if you are working in a group, I really cannot tell you. MR FRANCIS I put it to you that you were not even so sure what your role had to be there. MR KLOPPER I beg your pardon? MR FRANCIS You were not even so sure what your role had to be at the scene? MR KLOPPER Chairperson, I believed that we were going to prevent a robbery. MR FRANCIS But not to kill them? MR KLOPPER I don't know at which stage it occurred to me that these persons would not be arrested, but at a stage, my belief was that we were going to prevent a robbery. MR FRANCIS These were hardened criminals that had to be stopped from robbing? MR KLOPPER That was my knowledge. MR FRANCIS Is it also true that you got information that Tiso had been involved in the robbing of 16, or the police were seeking him for robbing 16 other places? MR KLOPPER I don't know about that. MR FRANCIS It was never mentioned at the scene? MR KLOPPER Not that I can recall. MR FRANCIS So your aim basically was to prevent the robbers from robbing? MR KLOPPER Yes, initially. MR FRANCIS That was your main aim? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR FRANCIS To prevent them from robbing Coin Security? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR FRANCIS Nothing else? MR KLOPPER Chairperson, previously based upon the information that we had, they had been involved in the Witbank robbery, they had committed robberies in order to fill the coffers of the ANC, that is the information that I had. I acted accordingly and I also received an order to be there and to act there. MR FRANCIS I put it to you that filling the ANC coffers is an afterthought? MR KLOPPER I beg our pardon? MR FRANCIS It is an afterthought. MR KLOPPER No Chairperson, that was the information which I had. MR FRANCIS I think I have dealt with this and that is why I think in the two portions that I referred you to, the two affidavits, I think there was no reference made to ANC people? MR KLOPPER It was my understanding, that is what I believed the situation to be. MR FRANCIS And I put to you that you are honest, I think when you say that your primary reason was to prevent the robbers from robbing. That is why you went there? MR KLOPPER That is the case. MR FRANCIS One second please. CHAIRPERSON How did you understand the setup to be? MR KLOPPER I don't understand? CHAIRPERSON At a stage you realised that this was a setup, what did you understand, what was the setup? MR KLOPPER Chairperson, at that time I did not compile a statement, the statement was compiled for me which stated the weapons and the fire. I think that they still wanted to commit the robbery, but it was a conspiracy to cover up the incident. It was covered up to such an extent that nobody would have realised what the actual situation was. All the policemen worked together under the leadership of Gen Engelbrecht so that no one would have the chance to catch us out if anything went wrong. CHAIRPERSON The setup refers to the period after the shooting, did you think it was a setup after the shooting or before the shooting? MR KLOPPER No, I thought after the shooting, I did not have any prior knowledge. CHAIRPERSON So you thought afterwards that it was a setup in order to cover up your action? MR KLOPPER Yes. CHAIRPERSON Yes, Mr Francis? MR FRANCIS Mr Klopper I think that is not what you are saying at page 109, paragraph 9. I think in that you refer to these people were set up? MR KLOPPER If you see there I say that no attempt was made to arrest those persons, that they were going to be shot. Everybody cooperated, as I have said the statements were compiled for us. It was Dougie's story, if these persons were set up, I had nothing to do about it, I did not know about that. MR FRANCIS Mr Klopper, what was your knowledge about the people in the minibus, the five, what information did you have about them? MR KLOPPER As I have stated, that they had been involved in previous robberies, that they were ANC members, that they would be armed. MR FRANCIS That all of them were ANC members? MR KLOPPER That is difficult to say, I cannot say if it was all of them or just two or three. MR FRANCIS No, but I think when Mr Lamey asked you, I think I wrote it down you said "I knew that they were members of the ANC and wanted to rob and I was told that they were involved in the big robbery in Witbank and other robberies." MR KLOPPER Yes. MR FRANCIS So did you just have knowledge that all five were members of the ANC and were going to rob on behalf of the ANC? MR KLOPPER It would have been stated, although I cannot recall as pertinently, that these were members of the ANC, would that mean then that all five of them were ANC members, that is what I am trying to say. It is difficult for me to tell you. MR FRANCIS But you put it as a fact that "I knew that they were members of the ANC"? MR KLOPPER I believed that the persons involved were members of the ANC. MR FRANCIS So you only believed, but didn't know whether they were? MR KLOPPER That is correct. As I have said, I did not handle the information from the informer. MR FRANCIS But the informer himself doesn't even mention that they were all members of the ANC? The informer did not mention that all of them were members of the ANC? MR KLOPPER I received no information from the source, I did not speak to him. MR FRANCIS So where did you get the information that they were members of the ANC? MR KLOPPER It was from discussions with our members, among one another, where we spoke about the action. For example Dougie who received the information from the informer. MR FRANCIS So did Dougie Holtzhausen say to you that these guys were members of the ANC? MR KLOPPER Yes, that is where the information would have come from, because he received the information from the informer. MR FRANCIS No you are saying it would have come from him, did it come from him? MR KLOPPER I cannot tell you pertinently where precisely it came from, but from discussions, we would stand in groups and talk about the matter, but I cannot tell you that Dougie said such and such on this or that day. I cannot recall that pertinently. MR FRANCIS I've got no further questions. NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR FRANCIS CHAIRPERSON Thank you Mr Francis. Ms Patel, any questions? CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS PATEL Thank you Honourable Chairperson. There is just one aspect that I would like to clarify with you, Mr Klopper. Given the manner in which this operation was carried out and the claims that would have been filed afterwards, from your experience, would a claim have been put in for the two AK47's that were found? MR KLOPPER Yes, if I was the handler, I would have done so. MS PATEL Where would that money have gone to, generally, just from your experience, where would the money have gone to? MR KLOPPER I will give you another example, for example if R10 000 is approved, then approximately R5 000 of this R10 000 would go to the informer and the rest would be divided among the Commander and those who were involved, or the handler. MS PATEL Okay, would the value of the weapons have been included in the claim for the informer then? MR KLOPPER Yes, there will be one claim which would sketch the circumstances and what robbery or act of terror had been prevented and if lives had been protected and if weapons had been involved, everything would be included in that document. The handgrenades which had exploded, would also be included as items of explosives. MS PATEL Would the value of those AK's at that stage, have been around R6 000 a piece, or not? MR KLOPPER No Chairperson, when Mr Vlok came forward with the R6 000 everybody wanted to hand in an AK47 to get R6 000, which meant that they had decreased the amount, so then it was more about the merits of the matter, not only the R6 000. They abandoned that plan completely. As today they say you can claim up to R250 000, it is not always R250 000 it depends upon the merits of the case. MS PATEL All right, from your experience, given the merits of this case, what would the value of those AK's have been? MR KLOPPER I really cannot answer you about that, it is very difficult, because the person who would approve the claim is very subjective, for example in the Detective Branch, if Detectives instituted claims, they would get for example R12 000 but in the Security Branch, one could get R60 000 to R70 000 for the same thing. Therefore it was a subjective difference between the person who ultimately sign the claim. CHAIRPERSON This question of the R6 000, did this emerge during that time? MR KLOPPER No, I think it was at roundabout 1984, 1985, I cannot remember precisely when. CHAIRPERSON So you don't know whether this was still of application during your time? MR KLOPPER No, it wasn't. CHAIRPERSON Sorry, Ms Patel. MS PATEL Okay, would you agree with Mr de Kock if he says the average claim at that time would have been between R1 000 to R2 000 per AK47? MR KLOPPER It is possible, yes. MS PATEL All right, thank you, I have no further questions. NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS PATEL CHAIRPERSON Thank you Ms Patel. Has the panel got any questions? No? Mr Lamey, re-examination? RE-EXAMINATION BY MR LAMEY Thank you Chairperson. Mr Klopper, if we study your initial amnesty application, you have listen 19 incidents within the course of four typed pages? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR LAMEY The explanations of everything that took place and the full picture, with regard to those incidents, was this ever provided in your initial amnesty application? If you look at page 108 up to 111, you have indicated numbers, 19 instances have been listed and all of these are very short paragraphs. The Nelspruit incident for example is on one typed page and comprises one of seven incidents that have been listed by you. Is it correct to say that this is a rather cramped version of what you stated in your initial amnesty application? MR KLOPPER Yes, that is correct. MR LAMEY Can you recall that during consultation, these incidents were discussed? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR LAMEY And they were analysed one by one in consultation with you, and instructions were taken from you regarding which of them were in political relation in order to qualify for the prerequisites of the Act for amnesty? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR LAMEY And when you included this in your amnesty application, were you convinced that the Nelspruit incident was one of these incidents which according to your conviction would qualify for amnesty? MR KLOPPER Yes, that is correct. MR LAMEY According to the political criteria which has been set out in the Act? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR LAMEY Then you were asked during cross-examination about the mentioning of ANC connections which did not appear in your Denmark statement. I don't know whether it was Mr Hatting who asked you, but were the circumstances the same with you, that you had to make your statement under great pressure and that there were a number of linguistic problems? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR LAMEY Was any time spent with regard to the Nelspruit incident and examining the political motives and so forth, or did you simply tell the tale of what had happened? MR KLOPPER No, I simply told the tale. I had the impression that they simply wanted a statement from me, so that there could be an investigation. MR LAMEY Very well. You have also mentioned the abuse with regard to informer fees, did this take place in all cases or were there also some cases in which this did not take place? MR KLOPPER There were very few cases in which this did not happen, if it was so. MR LAMEY Yes, but with regard to this incident, you do not know? MR KLOPPER No, I have no personal knowledge. MR LAMEY From your perspective, did you receive any reward from this incident? MR KLOPPER No, none whatsoever. MR LAMEY Do you know whether of the other members obtained such reward? MR KLOPPER I don't know. MR LAMEY Did you at any stage claim a reward for your participation? MR KLOPPER No. MR LAMEY Or did you ever request or demand such a reward? MR KLOPPER No. MR LAMEY The evidence from the other applicants including Nortje and de Kock also indicate in this case that from the 1990's onwards, you became involved in the switch over from C10's political activities to criminal investigations, is that correct? MR KLOPPER Yes. MR LAMEY I would just like to ask you, did Vlakplaas up to and including 1992 still fulfil a political role according to your opinion? MR KLOPPER Yes, long after the ANC was unbanned for example, we still arrested many of them at Jan Smuts Airport, those who were travelling through who did not have indemnity which rendered them free to enter the country. We still acted against the PAC and the ANC, in our minds, nothing had changed. We still drove with teams of askaris to attempt to arrest these persons and so forth. MR LAMEY Very well. CHAIRPERSON You drove around with askaris? MR KLOPPER Yes. CHAIRPERSON In residential areas? MR KLOPPER Yes, at Jan Smuts Airport for example, we would be there with a whole bunch of askaris and we would monitor the flights coming in and monitor those persons coming in to see if we knew any of them, and if we did know any of them, we would take them in for interrogation. If they did not have indemnity, we would arrest them. The ANC was still regarded as our enemy, we were still working against them. CHAIRPERSON Were there ever any prosecutions in terms of those arrests? MR KLOPPER I have never been in court, with the exception of Mr de Kock's case, that was the first time that I ever appeared in court. We never managed prosecutions in that respect. CHAIRPERSON You simply took them in and your askari personnel would identify them? MR KLOPPER Yes, the local Branch would have their own Investigators and Detectives who would deal with the matter. CHAIRPERSON So it still worked like it did in the old days, you would arrest a man and if he did not give you satisfactory response to interrogation? MR KLOPPER Well, I don't know about that, but from our perspective, nothing had changed. CHAIRPERSON Sorry Mr Lamey. MR LAMEY So with regard to that aspect, the askaris still had the same role at Vlakplaas as what they had had during the past? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR LAMEY And in the cases where you had to deal with crime, did you primarily assist other more experienced and qualified Detective Units with the apprehension of criminals? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR LAMEY Very well. My learned friend has put it to you that you were on a frolic, do you know what means? A frolic in terms of unauthorised, uninstruction, unapproved excursions? MR FRANCIS I think I need to object, I think let's rather ask the witness whether or not he knew what frolic means. MR KLOPPER He spoke Afrikaans to me, so I thought he meant happy. My Commander, he was with me, there was nothing unauthorised about it, there was an order and a Commander was present. CHAIRPERSON Anything further Mr Lamey? MR LAMEY Then with regard to the Intelligence notes, you indicated that there was a standing procedure with the submission of an Intelligence note? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR LAMEY Now, would one have legal actions in which the procedure was followed? MR KLOPPER That is correct. MR LAMEY In such a case, would the true facts be reflected? MR KLOPPER Yes. MR LAMEY But then one would also have the standing procedure which was observed for a covert action? MR KLOPPER Yes. MR LAMEY And there is also documentation which had to be submitted for a covert action? MR KLOPPER Yes, in order to justify the travel and accommodation expenses ... MR LAMEY What I really want to determine is whether, during a covert action, there was also paper work? MR KLOPPER No. Not with regard to the true facts. MR LAMEY Just listen to the question, with regard to an unlawful action, would a note to that effect also be submitted which would not reflect the true facts? MR KLOPPER Yes, that would be done, the true facts would not be stated. MR LAMEY Did you yourself ever see any Intelligence notes in this regard? MR KLOPPER No. MR LAMEY Let us suppose that a document which is contained within this Bundle is an Intelligence note connected with the incident, page 375 ... MR FRANCIS Mr Chairperson, I think, I don't want to interrupt but I think Mr de Kock himself said that it was an info note, and I think it refers to the incident of the 26th. I am not so sure what we will achieve by putting a hypothetical, you know, position to the witness, rather instead of putting to him what Mr de Kock said about it. CHAIRPERSON Yes, perhaps you must do that Mr Lamey. According to Mr de Kock, this was the Intelligence note which was put in for the Nelspruit incident. MR LAMEY Mr Klopper, take it as granted, a point of departure, that this is the Intelligence note, look at the top. This goes to the Chief Crime Prevention and Investigation, the Chief Crime Intelligence and the Chief Crime - do you know, were these notes given to all those divisions? MR KLOPPER No. CHAIRPERSON So are you not misleading the addressed in that instance, then? MR KLOPPER That is my opinion, but I think that these things were only used if there were going to be enquiries or if there was an accident. Let's suppose that somebody rolls a vehicle and somebody is killed, then they use this. They would want to know, but they were indeed misled and we never liaised with them and gave them the true facts. CHAIRPERSON So you cannot say that you had authorisation because you misled these people? MR KLOPPER It is difficult to answer it. The conduct of others, or let me put it this way, you always leave space for anything else and if you wanted to buy firearms, there would always be some other excuse so that you can amend it as it would be needed, because no operation goes along to the plan. CHAIRPERSON I understand that, but if you provide false information to the Chief of Crime Prevention and Investigation, Head Office, Pretoria and Chief Crime Intelligence for example, and all these people, if you gave false information to them, it is not the situation where they approved the false information and you have approval for something which you have not put to them? MR KLOPPER It is probably so Chairperson, I don't even know whether they saw these things. CHAIRPERSON So it just lay there in the file? MR KLOPPER Yes. MR LAMEY But I want to ask you the following. Were there instances that you know of where illegal actions were approved higher up than Mr de Kock? MR KLOPPER Yes, the Sweet Sambo matter. MR LAMEY May I just ask you the following, if the paper work did not reflect the true facts, from your view, could the true facts have been communicated verbally and approval obtained? MR KLOPPER Yes, I would believe so. MR LAMEY Chairperson, I think I am done, let me just make sure. CHAIRPERSON Certainly. MR LAMEY That is my re-examination, thank you Chair. NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR LAMEY CHAIRPERSON Mr Klopper, thank you very much, you are excused. WITNESS EXCUSED CHAIRPERSON Mr Lamey, is it Mr van Zyl or Mr Holtzhausen? MR LAMEY I understand it is Mr Holtzhausen. CHAIRPERSON Just switch off in front of you. Mr Holtzhausen, would you please give us your full names for the record? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Frederik Douglas Reid Holtzhausen. CHAIRPERSON They are just going to adjust the microphones, so just give us a minute please. What is the difficulty? MS PATEL (Microphone not on) CHAIRPERSON Yes, now if he sits right next to Mr Bam, does that help or is the position of Mr Lamey a bit better, we don't want to unseat him? MS PATEL (Microphone not on) CHAIRPERSON They would prefer if he is over here somewhere. MR HOLTZHAUSEN Die probleem Mnr die Voorsitter, ek het 'n nekbesering gehad en ek kan nie die heeltyd so sit nie ... (no interpretation) CHAIRPERSON Yes. MR HOLTZHAUSEN Ek sal moet so skuins sit ... (no interpretation) CHAIRPERSON Ja, om na wie te kyk? ... (no interpretation) MR HOLTZHAUSEN (Microphone not on) CHAIRPERSON As u hierso sit, dan kan u maar net die stoel so 'n bietjie skuif, ons sal 'n plan maak ... (no interpretation). Is it better here? Mr Bam, "kan ons u samewerking vra in hierdie verband? Ek wonder of u nie miskien nader aan mnr Lamey kan skuif nie?" ... (no interpretation) MR BAM No problem. CHAIRPERSON I don't think he would mind. MR BAM I am not certain about that. MR LAMEY Chairperson, I will move to the other microphone. CHAIRPERSON Dit is nie doelbewus nie, mnr Lamey ... (no interpretation) MR LAMEY Excuse me? CHAIRPERSON We prefer you closer to us, but it is not on purpose. ADV DE JAGER Mr Holtzhausen, you don't have to look at us. You can look right in front of you. MR HOLTZHAUSEN Chairperson, I feel I am testifying to the Commission, so I would like to face the Commission. MR SIBANYONI Is it not easier if you sit on the right of Mr Bam, so you can look in one direction only. CHAIRPERSON Just bear with us for a minute, we are just trying to adjust the sound system and the seating. Ek dink dit is beter ... (no interpretation. FREDERIK DOUGLAS REID HOLTZHAUSEN (sworn states) CHAIRPERSON Please be seated. Mr Bam? EXAMINATION BY MR BAM Thank you Chairperson. Mr Holtzhausen, you have been subpoenaed to appear as a witness before this Committee? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR BAM And you know that the requirements of the Act, more specifically Section 30, that you are obliged to answer questions with regard to the subject which is being discussed? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct Chairperson. MR BAM The subject matter. What do you regard as the subject matter of this questioning? MR HOLTZHAUSEN The Nelspruit incident Chairperson. MR BAM With regard to the Nelspruit incident, you have made a statement on the 22nd of August 1995 which forms part of the documents before the Committee, from page 306 to 321? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct Chairperson. MR BAM To whom did you make the statement? MR HOLTZHAUSEN To the Investigative Team of the Attorney General, Chairperson. MR BAM Did you write out the statement yourself? MR HOLTZHAUSEN No, I did not. MR BAM Was it done in one day? MR HOLTZHAUSEN No Chairperson, it was done over a period of four days. MR BAM When you gave the information? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR BAM And was the statement drawn up afterwards? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR BAM The statement, does it contain all the detail with regard to the Nelspruit incident? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Not completely Chairperson. MR BAM Is it the normal thing that we found find with the affidavit, cryptic with regard to certain aspects? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR BAM With regard to the sequence of events as it has been set out in the statement, is it in all instances totally correct? MR HOLTZHAUSEN No Chairperson. MR BAM Without the statement, with regard to this incident in Nelspruit, do you have an absolute independent recollection of all the events? MR HOLTZHAUSEN No Chairperson. MR BAM With regard to this statement to which has been referred, the information which is embodied in there, what do you say of that, is it correct, is it incorrect? MR HOLTZHAUSEN It is correct chiefly Chairperson. MR BAM Does it reflect the picture of what had happened there more or less and do you stand by that? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes, I do Chairperson. MR BAM You are aware that several of the representatives here, I would not want to say that they want, but there is, they want to cross-examine you on what happened there. MR HOLTZHAUSEN I believe so Chairperson. MR BAM And consequently I will not go into detail of the aspects which are the issue here, I think you will have enough time to answer that. Chairperson, consequently I close my evidence-in-chief. NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR BAM CHAIRPERSON Thank you. And if there are any aspects which come about during cross-examination that you wish, that you want to place a proper perspective on, then you will have an opportunity at the end. MR BAM Thank you Chairperson, I realise that. CHAIRPERSON Mr Hattingh? CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR HATTINGH Thank you Mr Chairperson. Mr Holtzhausen, let us start at the beginning. May I just place on record, during the criminal trial of Mr de Kock, you were also a witness? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct Chairperson. MR HATTINGH And at that stage you were under psychiatric treatment? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH Was it for post traumatic stress disorder? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH You were under medication? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH And if I recall, to such an extent that we only sat for half a day or we could only sit for as long as you were able to give evidence on a particular day? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct Chairperson. MR HATTINGH Are you still under treatment? MR HOLTZHAUSEN No Chairperson. MR HATTINGH You were also initially, right at the start, you were also a client of mine and Mr Hugo, is that correct? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct Chairperson. MR HATTINGH And later you and some of the members decided to go to another Attorney? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct Chairperson. MR HATTINGH Discussion was held with the other Attorney and the Advocate in that instance, and with their knowledge and approval, you assisted us during the trial of Mr de Kock, up to the moment when you decided to become a witness yourself in the matter? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct Chairperson. MR HATTINGH Did you ask Mr de Kock what he would feel if you testified against him? MR HOLTZHAUSEN I am not sure if I asked him Chairperson, but I do recall that my consideration to become a witness emanated from the fact that he at some stage told me that everyone has to look out for himself, because the time has come. MR HATTINGH Was it to you he asked not to look after yourself, but also to look after the black members of Vlakplaas in that regard? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct Chairperson. MR HATTINGH Did he ask you to take them with you so that they could also get indemnity for them, by testifying against him? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes Chairperson, and to such an extent that it meant that I could not get bail after my arrest. MR HATTINGH Very well, you liaised with Mr van Zyl, you were his handler, is that correct? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH Initially I understood it was Mr Boshoff, is that correct? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Who handled him first? MR HATTINGH Yes? MR HOLTZHAUSEN No, it was Stolz. MR HATTINGH Oh, it was Mr Stolz? Did he give any information which led to the arrest of Mr Stolz? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes, it was about four or five AK47's. MR HATTINGH I refer to Scholtz, it is not Scholtz, it is Stolz. Were you aware that he gave information to Mr Stolz which led to an arrest? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct, during Mr Stolz' handling of the informer, he conveyed the information to Mr de Kock who gave me instructions to assist him because I had more experience in the setup of police action. MR HATTINGH That is to assist Stolz? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH In order to apprehend the person who was in possession of the weapons? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes. MR HATTINGH And was the person arrested? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes, he was. MR HATTINGH And was he prosecuted? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes Chairperson. MR HATTINGH Was he found guilty? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes. MR HATTINGH So the information was reliable? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes. MR HATTINGH Did you afterwards receive instructions from Mr de Kock in the handling of Mr van Zyl, to take over the handling of Mr van Zyl as a informer? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes. MR HATTINGH And from then, did you handle Mr van Zyl as a source of Vlakplaas? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH Just in general Mr Holtzhausen, did he, except for the AK47's, did he give you any other information which led to police actions which were successful? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes, Chairperson. MR HATTINGH And were those actions, did those actions lead to prosecutions that were successful? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct Chairperson. MR HATTINGH Could you ever judge as to the reliability of his information? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes Chairperson, I classified him as an A1 informer. MR HATTINGH Please tell us about the classification of sources. MR HOLTZHAUSEN An A1 source is a very reliable source whose information does not need to be gleaned in order to believe it, and A2, it comes down and then you have A3 and then down again from B, where you have to go and do some research with regard to the source before one would accept his word. MR HATTINGH So he had the highest classification? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct Chairperson. MR HATTINGH Did you regularly liaise with him? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct Chairperson. MR HATTINGH We have heard that he, on his part, had people under him who would gather information for him? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct Chairperson. MR HATTINGH Did you know Mr Hamilton Ndimande? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH From very early on or only later, during your relationship with Mr van Zyl? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Not immediately, but at a stage during some of the actions where Hamilton was involved, I did indeed meet him. MR HATTINGH And did he on his part, convey some of the information which Mr van Zyl conveyed to you? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH And was it the information from him which appeared to be reliable? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH So you then received information from Mr van Zyl regarding the Carousel incident? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct Chairperson. MR HATTINGH And you planned a police action with regard to that? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct Chairperson. MR HATTINGH Did you know Mr de Kock in this regard, Mr Holtzhausen? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes, I did Chairperson. MR HATTINGH Did you inform him with regard to what it was about? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct Chairperson. MR HATTINGH Did he authorise you to continue with the planning of the operation? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Indeed Chairperson. MR HATTINGH Was he involved with the action there? MR HOLTZHAUSEN No Chairperson. MR HATTINGH Did you keep him up to date of your planning? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes Chairperson. MR HATTINGH Was the operation eventually launched? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes Chairperson. MR HATTINGH If I recall correctly, at most than one instance, you were ready to execute operations where the prospective robbers did not arrive? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Chairperson, they had arrived, they had arrived and they did not hit. MR HATTINGH How many times did this happen? MR HOLTZHAUSEN At least five times Chairperson. MR HATTINGH And eventually they hit? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct Chairperson. MR HATTINGH And then you acted and they were all killed? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct Chairperson. MR HATTINGH Was Mr de Kock involved with the execution of the operation? MR HOLTZHAUSEN No Chairperson. MR HATTINGH Was he informed afterwards? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct Chairperson. MR HATTINGH Did you draw up an Intelligence note with regard to the planning of the operation? MR HOLTZHAUSEN I believe so Chairperson. MR HATTINGH And did you present it to t de Kock? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes. MR HATTINGH Did he sign it? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH But he did not have firsthand knowledge with regard to the contents thereof? MR HOLTZHAUSEN No Chairperson, that was something that only you had firsthand knowledge of? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH So he had relied on you? MR HOLTZHAUSEN yes. MR HATTINGH Now you have information with regard to the Nelspruit incident. Can you recall when you received information about this for the first time? MR HOLTZHAUSEN I cannot recall. MR HATTINGH Can you recall what the extent of the information was that you received? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes Chairperson. MR HATTINGH What was it? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That a group of trained MK members, in short terrorists, were planning to rob a bank. If I recall correctly, the bank was in Pretoria. MR HATTINGH Was it told to you how many persons planned to commit this robbery? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Not at that stage, if I recall correctly Chairperson. I know at some stage, we went and had a look at a bank, I don't know whether that was the target, I felt that many innocent people could be injured. MR HATTINGH Was this a bank in Pretoria? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. I told Ben van Zyl that we must try and prevent it, to which he made a proposal that he knew somebody at Coin Security in Nelspruit and that he would attempt to send them in that direction. MR HATTINGH The them is now the prospective robbers? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes, that is correct. During the same time, I beg your pardon, sorry. MR HATTINGH Did Mr van Zyl then succeed in drawing their attention away from Pretoria and channelling it to Nelspruit? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH Mr Holtzhausen, was there ever talk that these people would fetch weapons or anything to that nature? MR HOLTZHAUSEN I cannot really recall that Chairperson, at some stage, during the initial run up, there was mention that they had smuggled with weapons, but it did not play a specific part with regard to the action. MR HATTINGH You say Mr van Zyl succeeded in directing their interest to Coin in Nelspruit? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH And was something planned with regard to Coin Security in Nelspruit? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH In brief, what was, or maybe I should ask you, did you once again inform Mr de Kock about this? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct Chairperson. MR HATTINGH And did he authorise you to continue with the planning of it? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH Was he tasked with the planning at that stage? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Not at all Chairperson. MR HATTINGH Did you then plan an operation at Coin Security? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH Briefly what was the plan? MR HOLTZHAUSEN I cannot recall, I recall that I took Gouws, Hanekom, Gevers as well as Eric Sefadi and Simon Radebe. MR HATTINGH Let us just pause there for one moment, why Gouws? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Because he was a Detective with Murder and Robbery. MR HATTINGH You have heard the evidence with regard to a visit to Vlakplaas by Gen Engelbrecht and the Chiefs of various Murder and Robbery Units? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH Were you present at that instance? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH Was it told to you that there should be close cooperation between Vlakplaas and Murder and Robbery? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH That Vlakplaas had to assist Murder and Robbery Units in the prevention of crime? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct Chairperson. MR HATTINGH And was this flowing from that? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct Chairperson. MR HATTINGH Cross-examination has been done on the grounds that you were chosen, or that you had chosen Gouws for a specific reason, namely that he was a former Koevoet member and that he was more suited for this type of action which you had in mind, was that the reason? MR HOLTZHAUSEN According to my knowledge, Gouws was never with Koevoet, he was indeed my personal friend. MR HATTINGH Before this incident? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH Was there a reason why you only took along one person from Murder and Robbery Unit? MR HOLTZHAUSEN No Chairperson, I asked members to accompany us, they did not have any members available, most of the people were busy with other investigations and the services of Gouws was rendered to me. MR HATTINGH Did you liaise with Capt Geldenhuys in this regard? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct Chairperson. MR HATTINGH Briefly, what was the plan in Nelspruit? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Firstly Chairperson, we had to go and look what the place looked like and to familiarise ourselves with what was going on there. MR HATTINGH Did you go? Were you accompanied? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes Chairperson. MR HATTINGH By whom? MR HOLTZHAUSEN I am not entirely certain, but I think it was Gouws and I and a member of the Nelspruit Murder and Robbery. MR HATTINGH You have heard Mr Nortje's evidence that he also accompanied you and that he said that he was in the vicinity and you asked him to accompany you? MR HOLTZHAUSEN I cannot recall that he was present, but it is possible Chairperson. MR HATTINGH Did you then go and have a look at the premises of Coin Security? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH And the people who were in control there, did you inform there, did you inform them with regard to what it was about? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes Chairperson, because they would have to leave the premises open for us, so that we could take up their positions in order to prevent the robbery. MR HATTINGH May I just ask you about Coin Security, we know that they are a security company, but were they also the firm who made up Mondi Paper's factory employees' salary packages and paid it out to them? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH And somewhere I heard a figure of R80 million, in my head, which would be at a given moment in their office, or R8 million, I am not certain? MR HOLTZHAUSEN I know that it is millions Chairperson, but I cannot recall how many millions, but it was more than one million. MR HATTINGH But at times there are millions of rands cash in their offices? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH And with their approval and permission, was the action planned at Coin Security? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct Chairperson. MR HATTINGH And did you then choose people who would assist you with this? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes. MR HATTINGH Who did you choose? MR HOLTZHAUSEN The persons who originally went with me, it was Gouws and if I recall correctly Gevers was also present, Sefadi, Radebe, I know Jannie Hanekom was also there. I think four or five members of the Murder and Robbery Unit, whom I did not know at all, they were also present. MR HATTINGH Did you approach their Commander in this regard? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH Did he choose the people who would assist you? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct Chairperson. MR HATTINGH Did you take up position there in various places in the building and awaited the arrival of the robbers? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct Chairperson. MR HATTINGH What was the intention Mr Holtzhausen, did you want to kill them, did you want to arrest them, what was the position? MR HOLTZHAUSEN The initial intention was to arrest them Chairperson, but if they had entered armed, we foresaw the possibility that they would summarily be shot in order to protect our own lives. MR HATTINGH When you took up position there, was Mr van Zyl with you? MR HOLTZHAUSEN No Chairperson. MR HATTINGH Did he arrive there during the course of the evening? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes Chairperson. MR HATTINGH Before or after the prospective robbers arrived? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Approximately 10 to 15 minutes before he made me aware of their presence Chairperson, he came from Johannesburg with them, they in one vehicle and he in one vehicle. He then came inside. MR HATTINGH Alone? He was not accompanied by them? MR HOLTZHAUSEN No, they were somewhere outside. MR HATTINGH He entered and? MR HOLTZHAUSEN He informed me that they were indeed there. I asked him how they were armed and he informed me that all of them had handweapons. MR HATTINGH Did you accept that? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes I did Chairperson. MR HATTINGH Did this influence your planning in any manner? MR HOLTZHAUSEN No Chairperson. MR HATTINGH But the decision as to how you would act against them, did it influence that decision with regard to the question of whether you would arrest or not? MR HOLTZHAUSEN My standing order Chairperson, in such an action was that I would inform the members that everybody has to act on his own initiative, but if any danger existed, he had to fire first, and we would explain later. MR HATTINGH Did these prospective robbers arrive? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes, they were Chairperson. MR HATTINGH Did you see them yourself? MR HOLTZHAUSEN No Chairperson. MR HATTINGH Was it reported to you? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct Chairperson. MR HATTINGH Where did you take up position? MR HOLTZHAUSEN I was in the foyer or at reception, I cannot recall whether it was a small kitchenette or a toilet, Gouws and I were in the toilet and Gevers was in the small kitchenette. MR HATTINGH On the ground floor? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH I understand that you used a black member from Murder and Robbery who dressed himself as one of the Coin Security members? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct Chairperson, he manned the reception desk. MR HATTINGH Could you see the street from where you took up position? MR HOLTZHAUSEN No. MR HATTINGH We have heard that the building was a double storey, who was on the second level? MR HOLTZHAUSEN I had Jannie Hanekom at a window, he later reported to me that he did see them, and the Nelspruit Murder and Robbery Unit people were on the first floor. MR HATTINGH Did you know with what vehicle these persons would be arriving? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes. MR HATTINGH Is this the Cressida which we have heard of? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes. MR HATTINGH Did Hanekom report to you that he had seen that vehicle at the building? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH I understand that Springbok Patrol's premises are opposite those of Coin Security? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Chairperson, I am not certain whether it is Springbok Patrol's premises, there is an industrial area and there are several security guards at these premises, although a Springbok Patrol vehicle approached which might have frightened them off. MR HATTINGH So the prospected robbery never took place? MR HOLTZHAUSEN No. MR HATTINGH And you withdrew? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH And the Carousel incident took place a day or two after this incident? MR HOLTZHAUSEN I think so Chairperson. MR HATTINGH Did you receive information again with regard to the people who would be involved with the first attempt? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct Chairperson. MR HATTINGH What was the information? MR HOLTZHAUSEN van Zyl came to me and if I recall correctly, it was at this stage when he informed me that the one prospected robber, or ANC terrorist, was Mrs Winnie Mandela's driver. MR HATTINGH And the information with regard to this person, did it remain unchanged, they were members of the ANC, trained MK members and so forth? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct Chairperson. MR HATTINGH What did Mr van Zyl tell you with regard to them, what did they want to do again? MR HOLTZHAUSEN They still wanted to commit a robbery, and that - I don't know exactly at which stage, he told me that these robberies are committed on the instructions of the ANC, for financial gain. Whether he told me that Mrs Mandela was involved, but it was during that time, Chairperson. MR HATTINGH May I refer you in this regard to your statement, Mr Holtzhausen, I am looking for the statement itself. It starts on page 306 and more in particular I want to refer you to page 309, paragraph - at the top of the page, paragraph 10 which follows on page 309 "... Ben informed me with regards to ANC member, Titetso Leballo who was an employee of Winnie Mandela, apparently a vehicle driver. According to Ben, Titetso was a trained member, a military trained member, his nickname was Tiso. I was also informed that he was handling a robbery gang for Mrs Mandela and that according to Ben that there was a dispute between Tiso and Mrs Mandela with regard to robbed money and because of this, they wanted to commit their own robbery independent of Mrs Mandela." Did you receive that information and at what time did you receive that information? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Chairperson, I cannot recall exactly at which time, but I want to imagine that it was initially, in the initial stages of van Zyl's information, but I do speak under correction. MR HATTINGH Let us look at the rest of the sentence, the previous sentence "... that according to Ben, there was a dispute between Tiso and Winnie Mandela with regard to money," and as I interpret that sentence, it means that in the past they had committed for Mrs Winnie Mandela and in that regard, there was a dispute with regard to money? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct Chairperson, I understood so from Ben van Zyl. MR HATTINGH These were people, according to that information, who were committing robberies in order to fill the coffers of the ANC? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct Chairperson. CHAIRPERSON Did you think that they were in regard with Mrs Winnie Mandela, led to the fact that you thought that they were robbing for the ANC? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Not necessarily Chairperson, the dispute about the money, maybe they did not receive their rightful part of the money, or because she used the largest part of the money and wanted to keep it for her and did not want to use it for the benefit of the ANC. CHAIRPERSON Was there any information that it was for the coffers of the ANC? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is what I understood from van Zyl, Chairperson, that they were robbing for the ANC and that specifically they had committed robberies for Mrs Winnie Mandela. CHAIRPERSON Mr Hattingh? MR HATTINGH Thank you Chairperson. Mrs Mandela was at that time a very active member of the ANC? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct Chairperson. MR HATTINGH Very well. You say you have a vague recollection that the information which indicated that they wanted to commit their own robbery, indicated that this was an earlier position? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH So you don't have any better recollection of it? MR HOLTZHAUSEN No Chairperson, I cannot recall the exact sequence. MR HATTINGH Very well. In any case, that is the information which you received from Mr van Zyl now, that the same members and you have added anything, you have found out more, that the one was working for Mrs Mandela and they were still interested in committing robberies? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH Was another plan made? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes. MR HATTINGH I don't mean a plan, with regard to your action, would there be a place to be found which they could rob? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Chairperson, I hope I understand Mr Hattingh correctly, afterwards I went to Mr de Kock. MR HATTINGH No, I think we are at cross purposes here. Mr van Zyl came to you and he told you that these people still wanted to commit a robbery. MR HOLTZHAUSEN This was after the first attempt? MR HATTINGH Yes. MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes. MR HATTINGH And did you tell him what he should do? MR HOLTZHAUSEN I told him to continue with the arrangements and keep me up to date Chairperson. MR HATTINGH What would the arrangements be at that stage? Would a place be proposed to them or what was the position? MR HOLTZHAUSEN It would still be the same place which they would have robbed. MR HATTINGH Coin Security? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct Chairperson. MR HATTINGH Did you then report to Mr de Kock? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH Did he give you an instruction with regard to this? MR HOLTZHAUSEN He was very interested that Mrs Mandela was involved, and he gave me instructions to monitor it further and to keep him up to date. MR HATTINGH Just to monitor it or to plan an operation? MR HOLTZHAUSEN The information which was obtained, was to be monitored and to use it to plan an operation. MR HATTINGH Can we just digress from the sequence of events. We are at this point, many times it has been mentioned now the robbery in Witbank, during which a white woman was killed. Did that incident have any relation to the information which you received from Mr van Zyl? MR HOLTZHAUSEN No Chairperson. MR HATTINGH Did he in any way tell you that these were the same people who were involved in the Witbank robberies where a white woman was shot? MR HOLTZHAUSEN No Chairperson, not at any stage. MR HATTINGH You have heard Mr de Kock's evidence that such an incident had indeed taken place and some of you people were devolved to Witbank so that you and some of the askaris could assist in the investigation, were you one of the persons who were sent to Witbank? MR HOLTZHAUSEN No. MR HATTINGH Did you know that persons were indeed sent there? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes. MR HATTINGH According to your knowledge, that robbery had no relation to the Nelspruit incident? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Not at all Chairperson. MR HATTINGH You also did not receive such information from Mr van Zyl and did you convey the information to Mr Klopper or Mr Nortje? MR HOLTZHAUSEN No, not in that context Chairperson. MR HATTINGH Very well, you said that you received the order to monitor the situation further and to plan an operation for when the circumstances would justify that? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH And did you then reach that point? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH What was planned? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Initially a plan was for the persons to go to Nelspruit, I drew up a list of names of those who would have to assist me with the action. MR HATTINGH Did you select these persons? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes, I did the selection. MR HATTINGH Upon what basis did you undertake these selections? MR HOLTZHAUSEN On the basis of experience and the fact that I trusted them because ... MR HATTINGH Because? MR HOLTZHAUSEN I already knew at that point that we were going to shoot them dead. MR HATTINGH I will get to that. The names of those persons whom you selected were - just to save time, on page 307 of your statement, you mention the names of certain persons. Who of those persons were selected by you, I think it begins on page 306 actually. Did you select Gevers? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes. MR HATTINGH Klopper? MR HOLTZHAUSEN No. MR HATTINGH Did you - on page 313 your initial list of names appears. MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct, yes. MR HATTINGH It was you, Dawid Britz, Vermeulen, Gevers, Simon Radebe, Eric Sefadi, Willie Nortje, Leon Boshoff, Deon Gouws, Chris Geldenhuys and Snyman? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH Were all of these experienced members? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes. MR HATTINGH Who especially were experienced in combat situations? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH Did Mr de Kock bring any amendments to this list? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes. MR HATTINGH And did he include Mr Klopper? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes. MR HATTINGH How much experience in combat did he have? MR HOLTZHAUSEN None. MR HATTINGH And Mr Hanekom was also added? How long had he spent at Vlakplaas by that stage? MR HOLTZHAUSEN A very brief time. MR HATTINGH He also had quite a lack of experience? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH He also included Blackie Swart? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH What was his rank at that stage? MR HOLTZHAUSEN He was a Constable. MR HATTINGH Very well, so three inexperienced persons were substituted by Mr de Kock in the place of three experienced persons and those three experienced persons who were left out were Dawid Britz, Vermeulen and Lionel Snyman who would most probably have been the three most experienced members with the exception of Nortje from Vlakplaas? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH Did Mr de Kock perhaps tell you anything indicating that he wanted these junior members who were quite inexperienced to be exposed to more experience? MR HOLTZHAUSEN I don't recall anything as such. MR HATTINGH Very well, in either event these were the members who were selected? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH What did you tell those members who had been selected, what were they going to be involved in? MR HOLTZHAUSEN I simply informed them that a possible robbery would be committed and that their assistance was required in Nelspruit and that at a certain time, they would meet in Nelspruit. MR HATTINGH Did you tell them at that stage about the prospective robbers, did you provide any further information? MR HOLTZHAUSEN No. MR HATTINGH You did not indicate what their political affiliations were and so forth? MR HOLTZHAUSEN I may have said that it was a group of terrorists who were planning to rob a place, but I cannot recall my precise choice of words. I simply told them that they would have to see to it that they were there at that place. MR HATTINGH Very well. What was the arrangement with regard to vehicles, did these prospective robbers require a vehicle or did they have their own vehicles? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Chairperson, after the first failed or aborted attempt at the Coin premises, a second request was directed indicating that these persons wanted an additional vehicle and that they also wanted AK47 guns. MR HATTINGH Did he say why they required an additional vehicle? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Chairperson, it was generally known that robbers made use of a vehicle, they would commit a robbery, drive some distance and dump the vehicle or set it alight or simply just leave it there and escape further on foot. MR HATTINGH That would be the so-called getaway car? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes, that is correct. MR HATTINGH And was this the reason which was provided? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH Did you tell him anything about his request for a vehicle? MR HOLTZHAUSEN I said that I would discuss the matter and get back to him regarding it. MR HATTINGH Did you then discuss the matter with Mr de Kock? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes. MR HATTINGH What was the discussion in this regard? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Well, I informed him that the robbers requested a second vehicle as well as the arms. MR HATTINGH Did they request a specific vehicle? MR HOLTZHAUSEN No. MR HATTINGH Were you at that stage aware that there was a minibus belonging to Mr Araju or the hotel where he worked, that this vehicle was available? MR HOLTZHAUSEN No, I was not informed about that. MR HATTINGH Very well, how long before the incident took place, did you direct this request to Mr de Kock? MR HOLTZHAUSEN It wasn't very long, I don't know whether it was two or three days, but it was shortly before the incident. MR HATTINGH What did he say with regard to your request for a vehicle? MR HOLTZHAUSEN He told me that he would see what he could do and that he thought that he might just be able to find something. MR HATTINGH The request for the weapons, what did you tell Mr van Zyl about that? MR HOLTZHAUSEN I also told him that I would discuss this, although I was not very favourably inclined towards it, but if it were to facilitate the situation, I would provide the weapons. MR HATTINGH Did you discuss this with Mr de Kock? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes. MR HATTINGH What was his viewpoint in this regard? MR HOLTZHAUSEN I cannot recall precisely, but I would imagine that he said that he would think about it and that he would get back to me about it later. MR HATTINGH Did Mr de Kock then get back to you with regard to the vehicle? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes. MR HATTINGH What was his response? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That there was a vehicle which was available. MR HATTINGH Was this the minibus which was involved in the incident? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH Did he tell you where the vehicle was? MR HOLTZHAUSEN No Chairperson. However, before our departure, I found the vehicle in Willie Nortje's garage. MR HATTINGH This vehicle, Mr Holtzhausen, did you know that this was a vehicle which was used by the Off-Sales division of the hotel for the delivery of alcohol or liquor? MR HOLTZHAUSEN This is something that I only heard during his trial, I had no idea from where this minibus came. MR HATTINGH Did Mr Araju testify to that effect? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes. MR HATTINGH It was also not the usual type of kombi, it was a panel van in the sense that it did not have any seating at the back, and that the windows at the back, had been replaced by metal plates? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH Can you recall whether Mr de Kock returned to you with regard to the AK's? MR HOLTZHAUSEN I do not have a clear recollection of that, I know that Nortje at a certain point, because Nortje also sat in from time to time with the planning where van Zyl and I were busy, and Nortje and I also had quite a few discussions with each other, and he told me at a certain point that I shouldn't worry about the AK's. MR HATTINGH Did he tell you not to worry about the AK's? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes. MR HATTINGH What did he mean by that? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Well, I simply accepted that they would be available and indeed these AK's were available later. MR HATTINGH At that stage, did you still intend to provide AK's to these persons? MR HOLTZHAUSEN It would have been an absolutely final resort. MR HATTINGH What would you have proposed instead of that if they could not get the weapons that they requested, wouldn't it have created some sense of suspicion in their minds? MR HOLTZHAUSEN It may have, but by nature of the situation, because they were going to obtain the vehicle in Nelspruit and the same excuse would be used for them to obtain the weapons elsewhere. MR HATTINGH I beg your pardon, you refer to the same excuse, with the first incident, was there also an excuse about the weapons? MR HOLTZHAUSEN No, what I mean is the same excuse as for the vehicle being in Nelspruit, could also be used by saying that the weapons would be in Nelspruit as well. MR HATTINGH In other words you did not want to provide the weapons to them here in Pretoria or Johannesburg? MR HOLTZHAUSEN No, because then I wouldn't have any control over the situation. MR HATTINGH Was it ever your real intention to provide them with weapons? MR HOLTZHAUSEN No. MR HATTINGH Why not? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Because firstly as with the first incident, they could simply have decided not to commit the robbery and then they would disappear with the weapons, and that would be a situation beyond my control. Secondly, these weapons could be used against us. MR HATTINGH During the incident? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes, during the incident. MR HATTINGH Very well. What was the planning for this operation? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Would you tell me at which stage? MR HATTINGH At the stage when you decided that the time was right, you approached Mr de Kock for the minibus and for weapons and so forth, and now you were planning the operation. You have already mentioned that at times Mr Nortje was present, but I would just like to know in general, what the planning for the operation entailed? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Initially the proposal and the request from van Zyl was that these persons be shot dead. ADV DE JAGER Mr Hattingh, perhaps it would assist us somewhat, if we approached this planning in three stages, because a part of that was managed here in Pretoria. Could we first discuss the Pretoria planning phase and then the other two phases. MR HATTINGH Certainly Chairperson, it was my intention for him to discuss at first what was planned here in Pretoria, please go ahead Mr Holtzhausen. MR HOLTZHAUSEN Here in Pretoria I informed Mr de Kock of Ben van Zyl's request for these persons to be killed, along with the fact that these persons were Winnie Mandela's own robbers and so forth. MR HATTINGH Please continue. MR HOLTZHAUSEN That they were her own gang of robbers, that is how I understood it, that they were handled by her. MR HATTINGH Are you certain that you told Mr de Kock that these robbers had to be killed upon the request of Mr van Zyl? MR HOLTZHAUSEN I think that I mentioned to him at a certain point that van Zyl had also directed such a request because he was very scared specifically of Tiso. But that was not the ultimate consideration to kill them. We had a brief discussion about that. MR HATTINGH Tell us what this discussion involved, Mr Holtzhausen. MR HOLTZHAUSEN I cannot recall the details, but we regarded this as an opportunity to get to Mrs Winnie Mandela specifically and to bring herself and the ANC into disfavour possibly. MR HATTINGH What was Mr de Kock's reaction? MR HOLTZHAUSEN He did not give me an immediate answer. I was under the impression that he would have to discuss this on a higher level first and he told me that he would return to me later. MR HATTINGH I have a problem with that, Mr Holtzhausen and I will tell you what my problem is. Just now you mentioned that at an earlier stage it had already been decided that these persons would be shot dead. Was this ever decided at an earlier stage? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Do you mean by myself? MR HATTINGH Well, by whoever? MR HOLTZHAUSEN I, myself, also thought that these persons had to be shot dead. MR HATTINGH Was the operation planned upon the supposition that these persons would be shot dead? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes. MR HATTINGH So therefore it wasn't really necessary to direct a request for them to be shot dead for the sake of Mr van Zyl, if in either event it was the plan to shoot them dead? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes. MR HATTINGH That is why I am asking you are you sure that you would have mentioned something like that to them? MR HOLTZHAUSEN I am not entirely certain. MR HATTINGH Did you hear his evidence and I am speaking under correction, but if I recall correctly, he does not recall anything like this? MR HOLTZHAUSEN It is possible. MR HATTINGH Very well. We are still dealing with the planning here in Pretoria. The team was selected, the names were selected and what else was planned here in Pretoria? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Not much further. MR HATTINGH You requested a vehicle, later you were told that the vehicle was indeed available? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH Was any feedback given to you regarding the request for the firearms? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Well, Nortje told me not to worry about it, and I accepted it as such. MR HATTINGH So you did not make any further enquiries from Mr de Kock regarding the firearms? MR HOLTZHAUSEN No. MR HATTINGH And the information from him that the vehicle was available, what did he tell you? Did he tell you what sort of vehicle it was and where it was situated? MR HOLTZHAUSEN He did not tell me what sort of vehicle it was, I think that at a certain point, Nortje told me that the vehicle was at his house and that we could fetch it from there. That was the first time that I saw that it was a minibus. MR HATTINGH So you didn't know before the time that it would be a minibus? MR HOLTZHAUSEN No. MR HATTINGH What do you say about the evidence that in Pretoria it had already been planned that the vehicle would be set alight? MR HOLTZHAUSEN No Chairperson. MR HATTINGH What do you say about Mr Nortje's evidence that Mr de Kock wanted the vehicle to burn so that his friend Manny Araju, could institute an insurance claim for the loss of the vehicle? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Chairperson, as I have stated, I never knew who the owner of the vehicle was before the time at least. If my memory serves me well, I requested the petrol at a certain point. MR HATTINGH Can you recall when? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That was in Nelspruit during the planning there. MR HATTINGH Very well, so in Pretoria there was no plan to set the vehicle alight? MR HOLTZHAUSEN No, because the final planning had not already been completed. MR HATTINGH Was the plan in Pretoria already that AK's would be planted within the vehicle after the incident? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes, however it was planned by me and Mr Nortje. MR HATTINGH Was Mr de Kock aware of this? MR HOLTZHAUSEN I am not certain, I cannot recall that I ever informed him about this. MR HATTINGH And with regard to the handgrenades, what was your position surrounding this? MR HOLTZHAUSEN If I recall correctly, I also requested Nortje for the handgrenades. MR HATTINGH Why did you also want handgrenades Mr Holtzhausen? MR HOLTZHAUSEN To place inside the minibus and to bring specific damage if it be necessary. MR HATTINGH Damage to the bus? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH Did you wish to damage the minibus in order to damage the minibus or did you want to create some or other impression through that? MR HOLTZHAUSEN It was to create the impression that these persons perhaps had wanted to throw a handgrenade or two and also to shoot them into pieces, which would circumvent the forensic's team. MR HATTINGH So you requested the handgrenades? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH Who did you request them from? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Nortje. MR HATTINGH And was Mr de Kock aware of this? MR HOLTZHAUSEN I don't think so. MR HATTINGH Was he informed in general surrounding the planning? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes. MR HATTINGH Was he aware of your intention to lure these persons into an ambush? MR HOLTZHAUSEN At a stage he was informed about it. MR HATTINGH Was that still here in Pretoria? MR HOLTZHAUSEN I am not completely sure about that. MR HATTINGH I think he gave evidence to that effect, but I am subject to correction. MR HOLTZHAUSEN I am not entirely certain about that. MR HATTINGH Very well. The planning which was completed here in Pretoria, was then concluded? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH Were the men instructed to depart for Nelspruit and was a date fixed for the action? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH The Intelligence note which we can find on page 375, who compiled this? No, I beg your pardon it is 275, sorry, not 375. ADV DE JAGER It is 375. MR HATTINGH Thank you Chairperson. Yes, it is on page 375, do you have it Mr Holtzhausen? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes. MR HATTINGH Did you compile this? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes, I compiled this. MR HATTINGH Let us just deal with that. There is a heading which reads or at least it is addressed to Crime Prevention and Investigation in Pretoria and then the Head of Crime Intelligence Service, Head Office Pretoria and the Head Crime Investigation Services, Head Office Pretoria and it is also directed at a General, who is this General? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That will be Engelbrecht. MR HATTINGH Then Smuggling of Weapons of Terror, Komatipoort to Mamelodi. Is that an exact version of what you were occupied with here? MR HOLTZHAUSEN No. MR HATTINGH Why did you place that heading on the Intelligence note? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Because at this stage, we were not entirely certain where the incident would take place. That is the reason why I put it as such. MR HATTINGH Did you write the Intelligence note? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH And I see that it is dated the 24th of March, I think? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes. MR HATTINGH Did you know at that stage that this would take place in Nelspruit at the Coin Security premises? MR HOLTZHAUSEN No. MR HATTINGH When did you establish this? MR HOLTZHAUSEN The objective or the ultimate objective was Coin Security, but at that stage I had already decided that we had to get to them somewhere along the road and Komatipoort to Mamelodi left various options open to me. MR HATTINGH And what about smuggling of weapons of terror, is that what you had to deal with here? MR HOLTZHAUSEN No, not entirely. MR HATTINGH Then why did you use that expression? MR HOLTZHAUSEN It would also give me a broader option because we had the AK's and something was happening and if they were shot dead alongside the road somewhere else, it could also be explained. MR HATTINGH You did not have any information that these persons were indeed involved in the smuggling of arms? MR HOLTZHAUSEN No, with the exception that van Zyl at an early stage mentioned that they were also dealing in arms. MR HATTINGH That they were dealing in arms? That they were offering arms for sale? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH That appears somewhere in one of the Intelligence notes, I think it would be Mr Ndimande's Intelligence note from van Zyl? MR HOLTZHAUSEN I am not very sure about it, but I would assume. I think he was the source for that. MR HATTINGH Very well. The rest of the Intelligence note, what do you say about the content thereof? Just study it for a moment. MR HOLTZHAUSEN In certain aspects it is false, but then once again I have left options open to myself. MR HATTINGH Let's take it paragraph by paragraph. Is there anything false in the first paragraph? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes. MR HATTINGH What is it that is false and why is it false? MR HOLTZHAUSEN It is false because they did not go to fetch a consignment of AK47 guns to bring here. MR HATTINGH Why is it false, why did you report it as such? MR HOLTZHAUSEN As I have stated, to give myself the option for further planning. MR HATTINGH Is that all that you can say about the first paragraph? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes. MR HATTINGH The second? MR HOLTZHAUSEN The dates are more or less correct, because that was according to plan. MR HATTINGH Is it correct that weapons would be fetched and that they were intended for use during a planned armed robbery of a bank in Pretoria? MR HOLTZHAUSEN No, that is not correct. MR HATTINGH Why did you express it as such? MR HOLTZHAUSEN It gave us a reason to take along the Murder and Robbery members which we ultimately did. And to create the further facade that this was actually a Murder and Robbery action. MR HATTINGH Is that all that you can say about that paragraph? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH And then "... the source will report to his handler as soon as he has obtained further information. Members of Pretoria Murder and Robbery Unit will accompany members of Unit C10 as there are indications that the suspects are wanted by them due to other armed robberies." Is that an exact version? MR HOLTZHAUSEN No. MR HATTINGH What is not exact about that? MR HOLTZHAUSEN At that stage, we did not have any specific bank robberies as such to link these persons to. MR HATTINGH So they were not wanted for participation in specific bank robberies? MR HOLTZHAUSEN No. MR HATTINGH But the information indicated that they had been involved in robberies? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH Did you have any further information about the robberies in which they had previously been involved? MR HOLTZHAUSEN No. MR HATTINGH Why did you report it as such? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Once again, it was offered as an explanation for the presence of Murder and Robbery Unit, Pretoria. If we had not said that they were linked to certain robberies, I could just as well have obtained the Murder and Robbery Unit from Nelspruit to assist us. MR HATTINGH Why didn't you want to do that? MR HOLTZHAUSEN I didn't trust them. MR HATTINGH Why couldn't Vlakplaas operate alone in this case? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Because the facade had to be created that this was a Murder and Robbery action, that we simply assisted. MR HATTINGH Why did Vlakplaas become involved at all? MR HOLTZHAUSEN The fact that terrorists were involved here. MR HATTINGH Very well, you have heard the evidence - or at least, I don't know if you do know, were you present during the Zero-Zero grenade hearings? MR HOLTZHAUSEN No. MR HATTINGH Did you hear that I put it that when Gen Van der Merwe said that unlawful actions were planned, nothing should be reported about that on paper? MR HOLTZHAUSEN That is correct. MR HATTINGH At this stage, you had already planned to trap these persons in a ambush? MR HOLTZHAUSEN Yes. MR HATTINGH Would you have included any kind of Intelligence note? MR HOLTZHAUSEN No, not at all. MR HATTINGH Chairperson, would this perhaps be an appropriate time to take the adjournment? CHAIRPERSON Yes, we have come to the end of the day. We will adjourn and reconvene tomorrow morning, here, at half past nine. COMMITTEE ADJOURNS