amntrans AMNESTY HEARINGS 1997-03-12 CAPE TOWN 2 CAPT WILLEM WOUTER MENTZ https://sabctrc.saha.org.za/hearing.php?id=54676&t=&tab=hearings https://sabctrc.saha.org.za/originals/amntrans/capetown/capetown_ct2.htm JUDGE MALL: Are we ready to begin? ADV MPSHE: Thank you, Mr Chairman, we are ready to begin. Mr Chairman, the matters for today are the Botswana operation Kahn House, Vereeniging incident and Komatipoort Four, on page 1, Mr Chairman. I will hand over to my learned friend, that is the application of Mentz, the Mentz application. ADV DU PLESSIS: Thank you. JUDGE WILSON: Sorry, I didn't hear, what volume, what page? ADV DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, page 68 is the first matter that is Kahn House. JUDGE WILSON: And whose.... ADV DU PLESSIS: Mentz's application, yes. JUDGE WILSON: Yes. ADV DU PLESSIS: May I beg leave to call Capt Mentz? JUDGE MALL: Yes, please. ADV DU PLESSIS CALLS WILLEM WOUTER MENTZ: (Duly sworn, states). EXAMINATION BY ADV DU PLESSIS: Capt Mentz, on page 68 the application starts. You say the period was between 1989 and 1992, is that correct? CAPT MENTZ: That is correct, yes. ADV DU PLESSIS: Could you give a closer date for us, could you remember? CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 75 CAPT MENTZ CAPT MENTZ: Unfortunately not. ADV DU PLESSIS: On page 69 you started with the explanation of this incident, and could you please start with the first paragraph. CAPT MENTZ: Instructions were given that an operation in Botswana had to be carried out. The purpose of the operation was to eliminate a business just across the border in Botswana and a shop as well. There was also a house. It was used as a shelter for terrorists. It was used as a shelter for terrorists crossing the border, and it was used as a contact point where information and messages were passed on and help and assistance given to terrorists on their way to the Republic of South Africa or were returning from the Republic. We expected to find at this house some terrorists there who would be overnighting there. The target would be eliminated due to the fact that it was necessary to prevent the passage of terrorists across the border. These terrorists, were at that stage, responsible for handgrenade explosions, landmine explosions, death of innocent civilians and also other acts of terror. I was not told anything else and it must be remembered that I acted on the instructions of my commanding officers. ADV DU PLESSIS: Capt Mentz, the persons using this particular house, the terrorists, do you know where they crossed the border normally? CAPT MENTZ: Across the border-line not through any official border post where you have to show their passport, they just jumped the fence, as we called it. There wasn't a very high or electrified fence, it was simply a farm fence and there was a river and on the RSA side there was just an ordinary fence. And they used secret routes there. CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 76 CAPT MENTZ ADV DU PLESSIS: You say it was used as shelter and accommodation for terrorists crossing the border, this particular contact house. Is your information that terrorists were often to be found in that house before they crossed the border? CAPT MENTZ: That's correct. ADV DU PLESSIS: Could you continue, please, the third paragraph. CAPT MENTZ: The persons involved in the operation were Col Eugene de Kock who was in command. He was the senior officer there. The other officers were Lieut Marthinus Ras Jnr - Gen Ras' son. He obtained the information and liaised with the local security branch in Zeerust, as well as the rest of the Western Transvaal area. We also had with us mentioned, Warrant Officer Louw van Niekerk, Charlie Chait and I later remembered other names: Douw Willemse, Dragon Andronowitz, Dawid Brits, Lionel Snyman, Snor Vermeulen, John Taite. ADV DU PLESSIS: Could you please repeat those names, slowly, because these people have not been notified. It is only brought to our attention now and you perhaps have their addresses or know where they could be found. Could you please tell the Committee that, so that they can be notified. CAPT MENTZ: Certainly, Chairperson. I will repeat the names. Douw Willemse, Dragon Andronowitz, Dawid Brits, Lionel Snyman, Snor Vermeulen, John Taite. These persons are all witnesses for the Attorney-General, except for, as far as I am concerned, John Taite. John Taite lives in the area of Knysna or George, I don't have a specific address. CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 77 CAPT MENTZ The rest, as far as I know, are all witnesses for the Attorney-General. And then there were other people who were involved, but I can't remember their names specifically and I don't want to mention a name if I am not sure of his involvement, but there were two or three other people involved as well. ADV DU PLESSIS: Capt Mentz, before we turn to the next page, were you involved in the planning of this operation? CAPT MENTZ: At no stage, Chairperson. I was at Vlakplaas. I was a junior there. And as I have said earlier, I received instructions - when I received instructions I did not doubt these instructions and the way in which Eugene de Kock had contact with the police and security head offices, I had no doubt that these instructions came right from the top, via him. When I say from the top I mean senior generals and officers in the security police. And I didn't call them into question, the instructions. ADV DU PLESSIS: How did you see your involvement in this operation relating to the political situation in the country at the time? CAPT MENTZ: The way I saw it, was that we were fighting the ANC, PAC and other liberation organisations with every means at our disposal. We wanted to eliminate these people and it was important for us that the operation should be successful, seeing that this particular complex was quite close to the border in Botswana, and terrorists had easy routes, easy access to and from the Republic of South Africa and they also received further instructions, help and weapons there. ADV DU PLESSIS: Captain, whom did you expect to find in the house? You yourself, I am not talking about the planning of CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 78 CAPT MENTZ the operation, but that night when you went out, what or who did you expect to find in the house? CAPT MENTZ: The person whose business and home it was, as well as terrorists. ADV DU PLESSIS: Please continue, page 70. CAPT MENTZ: I just want to add something here. I earlier testified that I was at no stage involved in the planning of the operation or the identifying of this place, but if I technical branch, Pretoria, just before the operation and he there obtained Scorpion weapons with silencers. These were prepared for us there and I waited in the car. He brought the weapons out in boxes, cardboard boxes. I helped him to transport these to Vlakplaas. It was only at a later stage that I found these weapons at a particular farm. So I was involved in the transporting of the weapons from security technical to Vlakplaas. We left from Vlakplaas with quite a few vehicles in a convoy to a farm near the Botswana border. The farmhouse was deserted. I don't know whom it belonged to. So we went to this farm near the Botswana border and slept in an empty house that night. The next day we all obtained weapons, these specific weapons. Some of these weapons issued to us, were inter alia, Scorpions fitted with silencers. I am saying inter alia Scorpions, if I remember correctly, we only had Scorpion weapons. On that same day the weapons were tested at that deserted farmhouse just to check that they were in good working order. The same night, the same evening we went to the Botswana border, where we drove along various dirt roads. I am not exactly sure of where the place was, and we walked CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 79 CAPT MENTZ through the veld. And we waited at a particular place until about one o'clock in the morning. We were all dressed in dark clothes. It wasn't camouflage type of uniform or clothes, it was just dark denim clothes and sweaters. I then heard that the person whose house and business it was, was one Mr Kahn. Later that night we crossed the river. There is a specific place where a type of a wall had been built and we crossed there. I had heard that there were crocodiles in the river. I was part of the so-called back-up team, Andre Andronowitz and myself. We walked right at the back. But at that particular place where we crossed the river, Eugene de Kock first waited for us all to cross and then he crossed, and then he passed us again. I was at the back the whole time to make sure that nobody was following us or pursuing us or that nobody saw us. Near the business premises and home, which was fenced around completely, and there was a type of an incline there, I couldn't see exactly what happened, but Col De Kock - I can't remember which leg it was, but he tore the ligament in his knee, near the shop, and after that he had to be carried. If I remember correctly, Louw van Niekerk and Douw Willemse stayed with him. I entered a gate and I think on the left-hand side there was a black shack, asbestos shack, but they told me that the night watchman was there. I went past this place and after having passed the shack I heard the night watchman coming out. He must have heard something. He was shot there several times. He shouted - I can't remember who shot him, it was very dark and I had already passed that point. I was inside the premises to perform security and defence functions there and I went to the shop to see if CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 80 CAPT MENTZ there were any people there. The shop is on the left-hand side. I went around it and I was between the outside fence and the shop on the premises. The direction which I was facing was back towards the border of South Africa. From the members went into the house next to the shop and people were shot. The people, I think Marthinus Ras Jnr, he was in the house, he went into the house. I think Willie Nortje as well and others. I can't remember exactly who, but I am virtually certain of these two. I later heard that an Indian man, his wife and two children had been killed in this operation or died in the operation. They were sleeping. They were shot, explosives were placed in the house. Yes, Willie Nortje now works for National Intelligence. He is also a State witness and he was one of the people who went into the house. Whilst after we had moved away from the house for some distance the house exploded, was blown-up. The explosion took place whilst we were already moving back towards the border. Nobody knew - when I say nobody I mean Lieut Ras, Marthinus Ras Jnr, he knew who was inside the house. It was his information and the security branch Zeerust. It was information I didn't know. Specifically who were in the house - the instructions were that the residents had to be eliminated because there might be terrorists in the house. There was no information available beforehand that there would be children in the house and nobody expected any children in the house. If I had known that children would be shot dead I would probably have had a problem to continue with the operation. But I would like to add here that I would still have gone along CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 81 CAPT MENTZ with the operation, I wouldn't have taken place in cross- border operations after being told that children could possibly be killed. I would have had a problem with that, but I wouldn't have told De Kock and them no, I am not going with. ADV DU PLESSIS: What effect would that have had if you had told them no, you weren't going to go with them, that you refuse? CAPT MENTZ: Well, in the first place I already knew of a cross-border operation which was to take place. I don't know what they would have done with me, but they could have eliminated me, because perhaps I had become a risk through knowing too much or they could have transferred me. But I would have been worked out of Vlakplaas. If I can describe it like this: such as a platoon which had to march, and if you take out the marker or a specific person then the platoon is no longer functional, it doesn't have sufficient people. So I just went along with the stream. I personally would not have shot an innocent child there, but as I have already testified, I didn't go into the dwelling house. I was just securing the area around the house. I would have gone along in a group context, as I have already said. I still have a problem with this operation, I think about the children who were shot, and I don't live comfortably with this fact. If I could put it this way; it won't comfort me in any way, but at that time I tried to deal with this, and I told myself that the Defence Force did aerial raids across the borders, also on foot, and there were other operations as CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 82 CAPT MENTZ well where innocent civilians were killed. Furthermore, the terrorists planted bombs in the Republic, landmines as well, and children and innocent civilians were also killed in those incidents, and that is the way in which I tried to deal with this incident. As I have already testified, Vlakplaas was the military wing of the security police, of the South African Police for the government of the day, the National Party. JUDGE WILSON: And Vlakplaas was called in to perform precisely these sort of operations? Is that correct? CAPT MENTZ: That's correct. When we left the premises, I was once again part of the back-up team. I can remember that we struggled to carry De Kock because he was a big man. So we progressed quite slowly. Andronovitch I once again walked quite fast or slow jog and we kept looking back towards the Kahn house. I can remember that there were other lights close to this particular place, and I thought that this must be a little village or something. We had to check that we weren't being followed or that somebody close to the premises had seen or heard us. That is what I meant when I said I was part of the back-up team on our way back. We once again crossed the river to the vehicles. We had already reached the vehicles when the place was blown up. As I said we were already in the Republic at that stage. We then went back to the farmhouse, from which we were operating. After which we packed our stuff and early the next morning - I remember we didn't sleep. Early the next morning we drove to Richards Bay to constitute an alibi for us. Col De Kock was lying on the back seat because his leg CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 83 CAPT MENTZ was injured. I drove the vehicle. I think we bandaged his leg but he didn't get any medical treatment for his leg. We just drove to Richards Bay with him in that condition. In Richards Bay there were other members that had already booked places and made arrangements and preparations for our accommodation. This was under the command of Warrant Officer Piet Botha. He is now Capt Piet Botha. They rented rooms for us and they would have done things to our beds to make the cleaners believe that we had actually slept in the bed. As I have said, that was to have an alibi. As I saw the operation it was essential to eliminate this passage used by terrorists. I gave no orders and I only acted on instructions and orders. The persons who were killed, four persons, including the two children. The names of the persons are unknown to me. As far as I can remember it was the Kahn family and their house had been blown up. It was only the home which had been blown up, not the shop. ADV DU PLESSIS: Capt Mentz, general motivation on page 74 to page - top of page 81, do you confirm the correctness of that? On page 81, the second paragraph, you explain the political motivation. Can you just read that for us, please, the motive. CAPT MENTZ: The motive in which I acted was in the execution of my orders. It was also for the protection of innocent people and elimination of activists. This was necessary in the light of the war that was raging then. This incident happened during the political unrest during that period. The whole land was burning. There were all sorts of problems, arson and other crimes that were CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 84 CAPT MENTZ committed in the name of the liberation movements against the State and the destabilisation of the State. ADV DU PLESSIS: The next page, page 82 at the top. CAPT MENTZ: The aim was as explained above, because liberation movements acted against the State and to resist their actions of overthrowing the State. It was also against activists. It would frighten them to act actively. I also at all times acted under the command of De Kock. As I have already said, Capt Ras Jnr, it was his information and his co-ordination. He will also come and testify to that extent. The elimination of the activists and the safe house was necessary in the light of the fact that the activists were involved in serious acts of terror. It was necessary to eliminate these activists to stabilise society. It was furthermore necessary to protect the lives of innocent people, black and white. It was impossible at that stage to neutralise activists completely by ways of the Security Act or normal police action. It was imperative to act preventatively in foreign countries. ADV DU PLESSIS: On page 83, you are asked an explanation or your explanation regarding financial gain. CAPT MENTZ: Quite a while after the operation, I will say approximately three or four weeks afterwards, Willie Nortje came to me and handed me an envelope, all the other people involved also received such an envelope. If I can remember correctly, there was R6 000,00 in that envelope. He said that it was for that operation and that the main branch congratulated us on it. I regarded that as a reward for that specific operation and for the reason that at that stage the National Party, CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE 85 CAPT MENTZ the Government of the day would not officially have been able to give us medals for bravery for over border operations and so on. We saw that we were not receiving medals for it but they gave us monetary rewards. That was the first and the last time. JUDGE WILSON: What bravery was there in shooting four civilians who were asleep, that you thought you deserved a medal? CAPT MENTZ: Mr Chair, I did not expect a medal, it was an over-border operation, in a different country, which was the enemy of the National Party, the Government of the day. If we were caught there by the Army of Botswana or the police or terrorists, they would have shot us. JUDGE WILSON: Was Botswana the enemy of South Africa? CAPT MENTZ: No, Mr Chair. JUDGE WILSON: You've just said so, you said a foreign country that was an enemy of the government of the day? CAPT MENTZ: No, Mr Chair, then I would like to correct that. They supported the enemies of the South African Government in housing these terrorists. They allowed these people to use their country for operations against the South African Government. ADV DU PLESSIS: Capt Mentz, were you told anything beforehand with regards to extra remuneration? CAPT MENTZ: No. ADV DU PLESSIS: Was the payment at all a motive for your involvement in the operation? CAPT MENTZ: No, not at all. ADV DU PLESSIS: Alright. What did you think about this when you were paid for the operation, with regards to the higher officers and the main office, what did you think they CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 86 CAPT MENTZ accomplished by this? CAPT MENTZ: It was their way of, in the first place, showing us that it had been an approved main office operation, and that they wanted to thank us in this way for destroying this house and for the fact that this route would not have been used again. ADV DU PLESSIS: And Capt Mentz, under whose command did you act? CAPT MENTZ: Under Eugene de Kock and the other officers there, who were present there. JUDGE WILSON: How was the payment made? ADV DU PLESSIS: It was at Vlakplaas ...(intervention) JUDGE WILSON: No you misunderstand was it by cheque, was it in cash? CAPT MENTZ: No, Mr Chair, it was cash in a sealed brown envelope. JUDGE WILSON: Given to you by one of the people who had participated in the operation? example, we never stood in a long queue to receive our envelopes. We were called to the side one by one. I, for and then he gave the envelope to me, but I know that other people also received money. JUDGE MALL: Are you finished? ADV DU PLESSIS: I have no further questions. NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY ADV DU PLESSIS JUDGE WILSON: Mr Mpshe, have the relations of the victims been notified in this case? CAPT MENTZ: Mr Chairman, no. Mr Chairman, attempts were made to trace the relations, Mr Chairman, and the only thing CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV MPSHE 87 CAPT MENTZ that I could lay my hands on was the Sowetan newspaper report, wherein this Kahn family was reported about by a person who was a - by a Black woman who was working for them, and at that time she made a report when she was in Botswana. I could not make any traces as to families in Botswana. It was only a report in the newspaper. JUDGE WILSON: Did you enquire from the Government and other such things? If they owned a shop, a large shop, we are told, somebody presumably wound up the estate? ADV MPSHE: I did not make enquiries in the Botswana Government, but I am making enquiries with the ANC desk and they did not have any particulars about the Kahn family, save they also referred me to the World newspaper report. JUDGE WILSON: Yes, I am not asking that. Surely when somebody dies like this, who owns property, the estate would have been wound up and there would be a record kept in the relevant department as to what had been done with the assets; had that been paid to members of the family, you would have got the names of them. ADV MPSHE: Yes, that may be so, but I did not make any enquiries with the Botswana Government. JUDGE MALL: Are there any questions you would like to put, Mr Mpshe? CROSS-EXAMINATION BY ADV MPSHE: Yes, sir. Was it necessary for the night watchman to be killed? In other words was it not possible for him just to be caught and bound and put back into his shack and go on with the operation? CAPT MENTZ: Mr Chair, I was not involved in that. I don't even know who shot the man, but I can remember that he screamed and that he was then shot. They wanted to silence him to prevent him from warning other terrorists who might CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV MPSHE 88 CAPT MENTZ have been in the house. The persons who shot him had to act quickly to silence him. I don't even know if he possibly helped ANC freedom fighters or terrorists. I don't know. ADV MPSHE: You said in your application that you wouldn't have killed the children yourself. Am I understanding you to be saying that the death of these two children was uncalled for? CAPT MENTZ: If De Kock or Marthinus Ras had told me beforehand that there were going to be children in the house and that we were going to shoot them, and if he told me I had to do it, I would have told them I won't. But as I have testified I would still have gone with. I am sorry about these children who were shot. I don't know, I don't even know how old they were. I also don't know whether or not they gave the terrorists staying over there that night, if they gave them food. I didn't know anything beforehand, but as I have already said if they had told me that I was to shoot those children I would not have done it. ADV MPSHE: Are you telling us that the killing of these children was uncalled for, according to you? CAPT MENTZ: Yes, that is possible. ADV MPSHE: Are you also asking for amnesty as far as the death of the two children is concerned, not so? CAPT MENTZ: That is correct. Because after I had heard that there were children in the house, and that was after we had crossed the border again, after we were back at our vehicles in the Republic, we were talking about who did what. I just heard that the children were sleeping. Up to today I do not know how old they were. I do have a problem with that but I apply for amnesty for them. Because afterwards we all know the law. I associated myself with CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV MPSHE 89 CAPT MENTZ their death and therefore I am as guilty as the person who shot them. ADV MPSHE: Now if you are asking for amnesty in respect of the death of these two children, what political motivation do you attach to the death of the two children? CAPT MENTZ: As I have said, they could have favoured liberation movements, they could have helped these people, given them food. JUDGE WILSON: They might three and four years old, as far as you knew, how can you make speculations like that? JUDGE MALL: I honestly think that you should avoid speculating to that extent. You have no idea as to whether they were infants or what. I think the answer should really be just exactly what you know and not what your conjecture is, please. MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Mentz, were you advised at any stage of the ages of the children concerned when you discussed the incident? On your way back you were told that the children had been killed. Were their ages indicated to you? CAPT MENTZ: No. JUDGE WILSON: Did you bother to ask to see whether they might have participated? CAPT MENTZ: I never asked. ADV MPSHE: May I continue, Mr Chairman? Thank you. I haven't heard the answer to my question. What political motivation do you attach to the death of the two children, if you were "vereenselwig" yourself with what the people did? CAPT MENTZ: Mr Chair, this home belonged to their father, Mr Kahn. This house was used for terrorists. The children, I can't speculate, but they were under the influence of CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV MPSHE 90 CAPT MENTZ their parents. It doesn't matter how old they were, they were part of the operation. Their house was blown up. The aim was to destroy this place, as I have said, to eliminate terrorists and to prevent them from using this as an entrance route, and that is why they were killed. ADV MPSHE: I won't pursue that because you are again speculating as to what you think was the position. Let us go back to the Kahn family, the husband and the wife. Were they labelled or were they investigated and proved as being activists in Botswana? CAPT MENTZ: As I have already said, they were - it was the security branch of Western Transvaal and specifically Zeerust, Capt Marthinus Ras Jnr was working in that area at that stage. They would have made sure by means of source reports that the people who were doing business on those premises, favoured liberation movements and helped them financially, that they received food, they received information. I accepted this and I accepted that this place was used for that specific purpose. ADV MPSHE: I don't want to believe that you were told or that come with us, we are going to do an operation in Botswana and you were not told as to the specifics and as to what has been investigated and found before you could go with them. Is that what happened? CAPT MENTZ: Mr Chairman, as I have already testified, we were told that the place was an entrance route at places where terrorists could overnight, where terrorists were helped. They received information there, information was transferred there, and it was an operation. At Vlakplaas I never worked with files. I was a foot soldier. I was in a CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV MPSHE 91 CAPT MENTZ war against liberation movements for the Government of the day. I accepted that since these orders came from the head office, that they would have made sure that this information was correct. It was not just simply decided we are bored and therefore we have to go over the border and destroy the house. It came from the top. I believed that they knew what they were doing. I never doubted the orders that came from the top. ADV MPSHE: Let me confine it because whenever I ask a question and then you go very wide on my question. I will confine you to what I want you to tell me, to tell this Committee. Was the Kahn family eliminated because they were activists or terrorists in Botswana or because they were housing terrorists in Botswana? CAPT MENTZ: They were aiding, helping terrorists. I do not know to which party they belonged, but according to me, if you helped a terrorist, you do conform yourself to the struggle, to the liberation movement. They were activists against the South African Government. ADV MPSHE: Yes, that may be so but helping a terrorist or an activist doesn't necessarily mean that you are also a terrorist or an activist. Is that not the position? CAPT MENTZ: No, Mr Chair, I see it differently. If you helped a terrorist movement at that stage you were in my books, also part of the struggle and a terrorist. ADV MPSHE: Let me take you back to the Ribeiro matter, I think the same facts in the Ribeiro matter would also come in here. Yes, I am told you were not involved in the Ribeiro matter, but you were present when the evidence was given and cross-examination was done on this Ribeiro matter. That day, it was established that Dr Ribeiro himself was not CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV MPSHE 92 CAPT MENTZ an activist but assisted activists and terrorists medically. How do you respond to that one? MR DU PLESSIS OBJECTS: Mr Chairman, with respect, I don't want to inhibit my learned friend, but I don't understand the relevance of that question. I don't understand why the Ribeiro matter is raised here and I don't understand the reason for the questioning. I object against the question. ADV MPSHE: Mr Chairman, it is very easy to understand. The witness has just testified that if you assist an activist or a terrorist, it means you associate yourself with that and you may be an activist yourself. Now I am sketching out the Ribeiro incident in that it was found the opposite in the Ribeiro matter, not by this Committee, but the evidence ...(intervention) ADV DE JAGER: But Mr Mpshe, then perhaps you should put the whole story. There was also evidence that they assisted them financially to go out of the country and assisted them financially after their return. ADV MPSHE: That is correct, that was the evidence given. But the point I am trying to make here, is that the fact that he was assisting them financially and medically, did not make him an activist. As the witness says if you do assist, then you are one. JUDGE MALL: I think Mr Mpshe, on that point you can address us on when the time comes, in the Ribeiro case. ADV MPSHE: As it pleases the Committee. JUDGE MALL: Yes. ADV MPSHE: Thank you. Thank you, Mr Chairman, that will sum up my questions. NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MPSHE JUDGE WILSON: One of the problems I have with the evidence CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE JUDGE WILSON 93 CAPT MENTZ here, and in other instances, is you continually say you were a foot soldier. You merely carried out the instructions of the generals. CAPT MENTZ: That is correct, Mr Chairman. JUDGE WILSON: And you took part in the killings of numbers of people. You can't even remember what year this was in. This was somewhere between 1989 and 1992. CAPT MENTZ: That is correct, Mr Chairman. JUDGE WILSON: That is the impact it had on you. Why did you people never take the trouble to do a little reconnaissance? CAPT MENTZ: Mr Chair, as I have already testified, Capt Marthinus Ras who worked in that area, close to the border, together with the other security branches, would have made sure beforehand what was going on. They would have checked where we were going through, they would have verified with the informants, that this Kahn business cum house was used ...(intervention) JUDGE WILSON: These are lovely excuses. They were not checking what was happening that night, Ras was with you, he wasn't checking, was he? CAPT MENTZ: We were not waiting and sent him over to find out what was going on. All of us went together. JUDGE WILSON: Yes, but why did you Vlakplaas hit squad who was brought in from Vlakplaas to the Western Cape, the Eastern Cape, Eastern Transvaal, all over the country to kill, why didn't you check first? You did not know who was sleeping in that house that night. You made no effort. CAPT MENTZ: I didn't. JUDGE WILSON: The whole of your unit made no effort to find out. There might have been a doctor who was treating CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE JUDGE WILSON 94 CAPT MENTZ someone who had been brought in urgently ill, or a nurse or a priest. You didn't know. You went in and killed the people you found in the houses. Why did you not bother to check up to make sure there were not innocent people, and in this case you would have found there were two children? CAPT MENTZ: Mr Chair, Marthinus Ras would, together with the local security branch, have verified this information, but we didn't go over first to make sure. We expected terrorists. JUDGE WILSON: He was with you, you were all together that afternoon, you all went there together. Nobody, it is quite obvious, nobody was checking up and nobody did in the other cases. Why not? I am not asking for a motive for the attack, I am asking for the actual mechanism. You are going to attack a house. You are going to shoot the people in it and blow it up. Why did you never take the trouble to find out who precisely was in that house, which you could have done in most instances, by just watching the house for the afternoon. CAPT MENTZ: Mr Chair, it was in a different country. Marthinus Ras' amnesty application is already before you. I will request the Committee to ask him these questions, because he was in control of this operation, together with the security branch. There might also be other applications ...(intervention) JUDGE WILSON: You were the Vlakplaas hit squad brought in to do the killings. CAPT MENTZ: That's correct Mr Chairman. JUDGE WILSON: Why did the Vlakplaas hit squad not check up on what they were attacking? Why do you always try to put the blame on somebody else. CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE JUDGE WILSON 95 CAPT MENTZ CAPT MENTZ: I refer here to Marthinus Ras who was with me in the Vlakplaas hit squad, it was his operation. I accepted that he would have made sure. JUDGE WILSON: I thought he was in the Western Transvaal Special Branch? CAPT MENTZ: No, Mr Chair, he was also at Vlakplaas, but he worked in the Western Transvaal/Botswana district, from Vlakplaas. JUDGE WILSON: So you agree, you made no effort to check up who was in the houses before you attacked them? CAPT MENTZ: No, I didn't. JUDGE WILSON: The whole of your Vlakplaas unit, not just you individually. CAPT MENTZ: Mr Chairman, Marthinus Ras would - he was not all the time with me, he would have made sure. JUDGE WILSON: He was with you that afternoon and evening, he wasn't checking up. CAPT MENTZ: From the time we came to the farm, yes. But I did not go there with him. We weren't driving there in - together, so I don't know if he checked beforehand. JUDGE WILSON: But he was with you at the farm, he wasn't watching the place. The other cases we heard, you didn't check on beforehand, did you? It was not your practice. CAPT MENTZ: No, we acted on a source information from other branches. JUDGE MGOEPE: On page 71, the third paragraph or the last paragraph there, that sentence reads "that nobody knew who were in the house before the house was entered." what does that mean? CAPT MENTZ: Mr Chair, when I read this sentence I added to that, I said nobody knew who was in the house, but I believe CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE JUDGE MGOEPE 96 CAPT MENTZ that Marthinus Ras would have known. We weren't told. When I testified in main I extended on that, expanded on that. JUDGE MGOEPE: On what basis do you believe that Ras would he have known? CAPT MENTZ: Mr Chair, because I spoke to Marthinus Ras during this week and he told that his application - I don't know if it is here yet, but he says he explains it in his application who knew and who didn't know. JUDGE MGOEPE: Further on you say, "There was no information that there had been children in the house, and nobody expected children in the house". what time did the attack take place? CAPT MENTZ: It was after one in the morning. JUDGE MGOEPE: Surely you would have expected that children would be there in the house at that time? CAPT MENTZ: Mr Chair now that I think back, yes, but I didn't know that there were going to be children in the house. I knew that Kahn and the terrorists in the house would have been eliminated and that the place would then be blown up to destroy the buildings. JUDGE MGOEPE: If the Kahn had children where would you expect their children to be at that time of the day? CAPT MENTZ: Mr Chair, in the house? JUDGE MGOEPE: You see this sentence of yours that there was no evidence that there were children in the house, is puzzling. The real question should have been, was there information that there were no children in the house, isn't it so? CAPT MENTZ: Yes, Mr Chair, that is correct. JUDGE MGOEPE: Because one would have expected that time of CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE JUDGE MGOEPE 97 CAPT MENTZ the night that children should be in the house. CAPT MENTZ: Yes, Mr Chair, I admit that, that's true, but I thought there was going to be Mr Kahn and the terrorists. JUDGE MGOEPE: Was there any real concerns about the safety of children in the house, was there any serious concern on the part of your team? CAPT MENTZ: No, Mr Chair, there was never any talk of children being in the house. It was never discussed. I don't know if specifically the people who were in the house who shot the people there, then discussed it amongst themselves, but it was never mentioned before we reached the farm house. I was the back-up, I was never told that. It was never discussed, but I don't know if, whether or not they discussed it beforehand, those people who went in the house, if they knew this, but I am sure that Marthinus Ras will come and explain this. JUDGE MGOEPE: And what you do know, you say here is that there were instructions that the occupants of the house be eliminated? CAPT MENTZ: Yes, sir. JUDGE MGOEPE: And nothing further was said about the children, as far as you can remember? CAPT MENTZ: Yes, Mr Chair, terrorists were expected in the house. JUDGE MGOEPE: Thank you. JUDGE WILSON: Where in Botswana was this? CAPT MENTZ: Mr Chair, I am not exactly sure, but Col Roelf Venter testified, I think they - he spoke about Derdepoort. This rings a bell somewhere that it could have been in this area, the Derdepoort border post. I have never been there. I am not one hundred per cent sure, but it could have been CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE JUDGE WILSON 98 CAPT MENTZ in that area. JUDGE WILSON: Can you give us a little more indication where Derdepoort is? I don't know if any of the Commissioners know. ADV DE JAGER: Is it from Rustenburg on the road to Nietverdiend where Herman Charles Bosman lived? CAPT MENTZ: Mr Chair, no, I think it is, if you drive to Zeerust you pass through Zeerust, and there somewhere to the right. If you turn to the right outside of Zeerust, there is a border post, but it is not that one, it is on a dirt road before you get Zeerust, in the Botswana direction. I think there somewhere, there is a border post somewhere there as well. ADV DE JAGER: How far is this from Vlakplaas approximately? CAPT MENTZ: To Zeerust? ADV DE JAGER: Is it in the vicinity of 2 to 300 kilometres? CAPT MENTZ: Yes. ADV DE JAGER: Did you ever serve in that area? CAPT MENTZ: No, Mr Chair. ADV DE JAGER: You were never stationed thereabouts? CAPT MENTZ: No. ADV DE JAGER: You never investigated any routes there? CAPT MENTZ: No, Mr Chair, I only once accompanied De Kock to Mmabato, Mafekeng. ADV DE JAGER: (Indistinct - not translated). CAPT MENTZ: He went to pay an informant from Botswana there. ADV DE JAGER: When were you transferred to Vlakplaas? CAPT MENTZ: It was the 1st of August 1989. ADV DE JAGER: That was after you met De Kock when you CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DE JAGER 99 CAPT MENTZ arrested one of his Vlakplaas unit members for murder in South Africa? CAPT MENTZ: That's correct, it was Almond Nofemela. ADV MPSHE: Perhaps to help the Committee Mr Chairman Derdepoort, as the witness has correctly stated, before you can reach Zeerust, there is a turn-off at the Groot Marico, just over the bridge, you turn right into Groot Marico and then it takes you through to the Swartruggens area, Derdepoort is just around there. It was the border of Botswana. JUDGE WILSON: A very long way from Richards Bay. CAPT MENTZ: Yes, Mr Chair, Richards Bay, we went there afterwards to create an alibi. MS KHAMPEPE: Can you probably throw more light why you chose Richards Bay all the way from North West? CAPT MENTZ: Mr Chair, it was to make sure that nobody could have seen us in the vicinity or in the area, because then they could have concluded that we were in the vicinity and there was an attack at the house. ADV DE JAGER: It is approximately the farthest place you can come or you can go in South Africa from Derdepoort. CAPT MENTZ: That is correct, Mr Chair. The morning when we drove away we were told for the first time that we were going to Richards Bay. That's why I say we never had all the details of the operation, but the people in command, like De Kock and Basson, they knew. ADV DE JAGER: When did you realise or were told for the first time that children were shot dead? CAPT MENTZ: It was the evening when we went over the river and when we got in the vehicle, when the place blew up, it was said that children were also shot. I don't know who shot CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DE JAGER 100 CAPT MENTZ them, but we were told they were shot. ADV DE JAGER: You heard after they had been shot? CAPT MENTZ: Yes, Mr Chair. MS KHAMPEPE: The purpose for which this operation was executed, was to close the gateway for the terrorists into and out of the borders of the Republic of South Africa. I would be correct in summarising the purpose in that way? CAPT MENTZ: That is right. Also to kill terrorists that we might have found there, but there weren't any. MS KHAMPEPE: And this Mr Kahn was aiding and abetting the terrorists. Now when did you become aware that the person who was aiding and abetting the terrorists was this certain Mr Khan? Was that before you were on your way to Gaberone, whilst things were being prepared, or were you told this information as you were travelling and crossing all the rivers full of crocodiles into Botswana? CAPT MENTZ: No, Mr Chair, we were told this while we were at Vlakplaas. We were told that there was a house in Botswana - for the purposes as I have already explained - which had to be blown up and eliminated. But I didn't have any source files from Zeerust or the Western Transvaal. MS KHAMPEPE: Who told you, was it Marthinus Ras Jnr? CAPT MENTZ: It might have been either Ras or De Kock, but I think it would rather have been De Kock. He was our commander and he would have told this to us. He would have told us that. MS KHAMPEPE: Did you think it relevant at that stage to ask for more details about Mr Kahn to find out more about his marital status, to find out more about who the occupants of the house were? CAPT MENTZ: No, Mr Chair, I never received orders from De CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE MS KHAMPEPE 101 CAPT MENTZ Kock with regards to covert offensive or defensive operations. Because he had been the commanding officer and liaised with us, as well as with security head office, I never questioned this. I believed that it would have been proved by head office and police and that those people would have made sure that the information is correct. I never asked questions. JUDGE WILSON: You felt no responsibility to do that? CAPT MENTZ: No, Mr Chair, my seniors - I believed my seniors would have done that. JUDGE MALL: I just want to clear up a point which worries me too. When the decision to attack this house and property was made known to you, were you told specifically that there were going to be terrorists in that house at the time you were going to attack, or was that a matter of no concern? You knew that there was a house, you knew that there was an owner and according to you, it was known that that owner provided succour to terrorists and so on, and so it didn't matter whether there were terrorists or not, you were going to blow up this house, irrespective of - even though there were no terrorists there? Was that the plan? CAPT MENTZ: Mr Chair, I was brought under the impression that there might have been terrorists there. But the house had to be blown up. JUDGE MALL: There might have been terrorists and even if there were no terrorists the house had to be blown up. That's the point. CAPT MENTZ: Yes, Mr Chair, the place had to be destroyed so that it could not be used again in the future. JUDGE MALL: Yes, so even if there were no terrorists, that house and the family that occupied this house, had to be CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE JUDGE MALL 102 CAPT MENTZ eliminated, had to be killed. CAPT MENTZ: Yes. JUDGE MGOEPE: Captain on page 69, you say that - I might have missed something here - the purpose of the operation had been to eliminate a shop and a large business. Is this what happened eventually? CAPT MENTZ: Mr Chair, it must read the house. The people weren't sleeping in the shop, the house had to be blown up. JUDGE MGOEPE: I am told that in your evidence, you added "and the house". In other words it would have said that the aim of the operation was to eliminate "a house, a shop and a large business". CAPT MENTZ: What I meant to say was that it was a business complex, there was a shop, but the house at the business complex, I mean, the house had to be eliminated. JUDGE MGOEPE: But there must be a shop and then a business premises in which people would not be sleeping, people would be sleeping in the house. CAPT MENTZ: That is what I meant. Let's say it was a smallholding with a shop and a house next to it on one premises, the house was next to the shop. JUDGE MGOEPE: What troubles me is whether you did stick to the mandate? Were you told to eliminate the shop and the business, which is something quite distinct from the house? CAPT MENTZ: No, this is a mistake. The order was to destroy the house. There was no attempt to burn down the house - ag, pardon, the business. JUDGE MGOEPE: It is not just one word that we are dealing with here, we are dealing with quite a number of points. A shop and a large business, you in fact even described the business, shop and business, described as a big business or CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE JUDGE MGOEPE 103 CAPT MENTZ something. CAPT MENTZ: Mr Chair, there was only one business on the premises. There was only a shop. There was no garage or whatever else. JUDGE MGOEPE: But you see when you initially compiled your application you knew that the people were killed in the house, isn't it? You knew that the people were killed in the house. CAPT MENTZ: Yes, Mr Chair. JUDGE MGOEPE: Now how could you have by accident have omitted also to say that the house was also to be attacked, and instead only mentioned the shop and the business? CAPT MENTZ: Mr Chair, but just at the end of this paragraph it is mentioned that it was used for a liaising house. It might have been the case, but we never attempted to destroy the shop. JUDGE MGOEPE: I am trying to understand the basis on which you could possibly have made this kind of mistake when you compiled your application. How could you have forgotten to mention the house, when in fact you knew then already that the people were killed in the house. How could you have forgotten also to mention that the house was also to be attacked? CAPT MENTZ: Mr Chair, we sat late at night in drawing up these affidavits. We had to take it to the police the next morning. It could have slipped in there. JUDGE MGOEPE: Well let's see what you mean, are you saying that you were also, you were instructed also to eliminate the shop and the business? CAPT MENTZ: No, Mr Chair, what I mean here ... (intervention). CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 104 CAPT MENTZ ADV DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, can I please come in here. You will see on page 71, specifically - specifically in page 71 there is a clear distinction between the house and the shop; explosives were put in the house and the inhabitants were shot in the house, nobody knew who was in the house. I was inside the premises and I looked into the shop to see if there were not people there. So he draws the distinction there later on. I just want to point that out in all fairness Mr Chairman. JUDGE MGOEPE: I know that, I know that they attacked the house, isn't it? ADV DU PLESSIS: Yes, Mr Chairman, but the line of questioning, with respect, was that he never mentioned in his application the house. I just wanted to clear that up. JUDGE MGOEPE: No. No, that is not the line of my questioning. ADV DU PLESSIS: Yes, then I misunderstood. JUDGE MGOEPE: Initially I did so, but my attention was drawn to the fact that he did mention the house. ADV DU PLESSIS: Yes, then I misunderstood it. Thank you Mr Chairman. JUDGE MGOEPE: Yes. Now I am going back to page 69. You said that the shop and business were to be eliminated. Or do you want to delete that or that whole portion? CAPT MENTZ: If the Committee would allow me, I just want to reiterate, what I meant was this is a business premises, with one shop on it. It was only one shop where food and other things were sold. There were no other businesses. The shop and the premises with the shop on it, is business premises and next to that was a house. I expressed myself CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE JUDGE MGOEPE 105 CAPT MENTZ wrongly. JUDGE MGOEPE: Yes, well that will leave us with a shop, that there was a shop, isn't it. Now I am asking you whether your instructions were to attack that shop or whether we should also cancel, delete the shop as well, and leave only the house. CAPT MENTZ: Mr Chair, no, we only had to attack the home or the house where the people ...(intervention) JUDGE MGOEPE: And the shop and the business are all a mistake. CAPT MENTZ: .... where the terrorists might have been....(intervention) JUDGE MGOEPE: They should not have been here. CAPT MENTZ: We weren't ordered to burn down the house, there was no explosives - there was only explosives for the house. JUDGE MGOEPE: Are you sure that this is a mistake, wasn't this actually the order that you go and blow up a shop and instead of blowing the shop you people deviated and then attacked the house? CAPT MENTZ: No, Mr Chair, the order was Kahn, the house and terrorists. The people there had to be eliminated, the house had to be blown up. It was never said that while you people are going to attack the house, others had to burn down the shop. That was never said. JUDGE MGOEPE: Well I've noted your point, you are you saying that all this was a mistake and we could just as well delete that, but I must tell you that I cannot understand how you could have made this kind of mistake. JUDGE MALL: Can you recall who conveyed to you precisely what you were supposed to do, what you were supposed to CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE JUDGE MALL 106 CAPT MENTZ destroy? Who told you precisely, was it De Kock, was it Ras? CAPT MENTZ: No, it was De Kock. JUDGE MALL: Was he conveying his remarks to you personally or to the group as a whole? CAPT MENTZ: At the farmhouse there was a quick meeting and it was told to me, if I remember correctly, you and Andronowitz must stay behind all the time, to make sure that we are not being pursued or attacked from behind. I was on my way there and I stayed behind all the time and the same on our way back, I stayed right at the back. JUDGE MALL: Yes. No, I am concerned about the instructions as to what was to be destroyed, when that was being told, was that told to you personally or was that told to the group that you are going there to destroy this, that or the other? CAPT MENTZ: No, it was given to the group that the house had to be attacked, terrorists and Kahn had to be eliminated, we had to set explosives. If I remember correctly the explosives were set in the main bedroom and then we left the area. But we were never told you, you and you must shoot the children. That was never said. JUDGE MALL: No, I wasn't thinking about that. I know what you were told that you and Andronowitz were to stay behind or follow from the rear. CAPT MENTZ: No, there was a group meeting beforehand. JUDGE MALL: Yes I heard they had a group meeting, their instructions were that you were going to destroy certain things. CAPT MENTZ: Yes. JUDGE MALL: When you left Vlakplaas you didn't know what CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE JUDGE MALL 107 CAPT MENTZ you were going to do. Is that it? CAPT MENTZ: No, Chairperson. At Vlakplaas we were told that we were going to jump the fence into Botswana and that there was a house which the terrorists were using. So we knew we were going to operate in Botswana. That we knew. JUDGE WILSON: Were you told that after the operation you were going to go and establish an alibi? CAPT MENTZ: No, as I said, that morning after we finished and we came to the farmhouse, we decided we would go to Richards Bay to constitute an alibi. That was told to us then. JUDGE WILSON: Where did you get the clothing to go and create your alibi in Richards Bay? Here you were all dressed in dark denim clothing, which would have stood out like a sore thumb in Richards Bay, wouldn't it? CAPT MENTZ: Yes, Mr Chair, but as I testified earlier, at Vlakplaas if you left to go and do a job you sometimes were absent for two or three weeks. So we always carried clothes with us, other, a change of clothes. We only put on the dark clothes there on the farm. For the rest we had normal, we wore normal clothes, we never wore uniforms. JUDGE WILSON: So all of you had enough clothing to last for some time? CAPT MENTZ: Yes. MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Mentz, you have given evidence that you cannot sleep even up to this day because of your participation in the killing of the children, which is still weighing heavily on your shoulders. CAPT MENTZ: Chairperson, I was involved in several things which affected me, and at times I have to use sleeping tablets to be able to sleep. These things affected me. I CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE MS KHAMPEPE 108 CAPT MENTZ can't say it was only this case or another case. Each and every time when you talk about these things it all comes back to you and then the whole thing starts afresh. MS KHAMPEPE: How did you feel when you received the payment related to the killing of such children? CAPT MENTZ: All of us received that, we all used it and I thought well, that's the way it worked and I used it, but I feel bad and I have remorse about the children. As I said, at the start of my evidence, the way I tried to deal with this and to make it easier for me, I use the example of the Defence Force with cross-border operations and aerial attacks and in the course of which innocent children are also killed. That's the way I try to explain it to myself or to justify it to myself, I don't know. MS KHAMPEPE: Thank you. JUDGE MALL: Any re-examination? RE-EXAMINATION BY MR DU PLESSIS: Thank you, Mr Chairman, please. Capt Mentz, could we please go to page 23 of your application. Could you please read the last paragraph. CAPT MENTZ: I tried to make this application as detailed as possible. Any further elaboration on the facts will be done during my testifying before the Commission. Aspects such as, for instance, my motives and the objectives with which I pursued these acts will be more fully motivated during evidence. Due to constraints of time I stand by the contents of this application. ADV DU PLESSIS: Now Capt Mentz, since these applications were drafted, you have also talked about this with Marthinus Ras. Is that correct? CAPT MENTZ: Yes. CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 109 CAPT MENTZ ADV DU PLESSIS: Have you spoken to any other people who were involved in this incident? CAPT MENTZ: No, not one of them. ADV DU PLESSIS: Capt Mentz, the evidence which you have given about this incident here today, is that the truth? CAPT MENTZ: Yes, it is. ADV DU PLESSIS: Is there any reason why you would lie to this Committee about the blowing up of the house or the blowing up of the shop or business complex? Is there any reason why you would want to tell a lie? CAPT MENTZ: Not at all, Chairperson, that is why we are here. ADV DU PLESSIS: Is there any benefit which you would derive from not telling the truth on that aspect? CAPT MENTZ: No, Chairperson, if I don't tell the truth, I simply prejudice myself. ADV DU PLESSIS: Are you satisfied that if the written portion of your application, if that does not set out the situation hundred per cent correctly, that you have now clarified the position before the Committee and that they have now heard the truth? CAPT MENTZ: Yes, the questions put to me by the Committee have clarified this. ADV DU PLESSIS: Capt Mentz, there are some questions about previous applications and also this application. Questions have been asked to yourself and other persons who were in subordinate positions and I would like to go into this in some detail to sketch the situation in the military context. The South African police at that stage, especially in Vlakplaas, which operated like a military unit, I would like the Committee to understand the customs and the practices. CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 110 CAPT MENTZ If a higher officer gives you an instruction during this period that we are now referring to, and I am specifically referring to this incident, would you have accepted that the instruction was given on the basis of information at the disposal of a senior officer? CAPT MENTZ: Yes. ADV DU PLESSIS: And as I have already said, if De Kock gave you an instruction then I believed that it came from the general staff security police. CAPT MENTZ: I never doubted De Kock's instructions. I believed it came from head office. ADV DU PLESSIS: Is that how the system worked, Capt Mentz? CAPT MENTZ: Yes. I never opposed De Kock or anything like that at that stage. ADV DU PLESSIS: For instance, let us sketch the situation, I would like the Committee to understand this. Could there have been a situation where you would meet and where the instructions were given and then the matter was discussed and then you would ask questions, you cross-examine the commanding officer to make sure that his information was correct. Would that have been a possible scenario? CAPT MENTZ: I don't know, nobody ever questioned De Kock in my presence. We accepted that it came from head office. I never cross-questioned him. ADV DU PLESSIS: And during your training, was that what you were taught, that instructions work in this way? CAPT MENTZ: Yes. JUDGE WILSON: And during your training as a policeman were you not told to obey the law? CAPT MENTZ: Yes, but these were different circumstances. JUDGE WILSON: Yes, but you knew that this was not legal CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 111 CAPT MENTZ actions done by policemen during the course of their duties, didn't you? CAPT MENTZ: That is correct. ADV DU PLESSIS: Thank you Mr Chairman. Capt Mentz, if, for instance, you were to launch your own enquiry as a result of this information or your own investigation, would it firstly have been possible for you in your position to get information from the informers in the Western Transvaal, acting on your own? CAPT MENTZ: No, because then I would have had to say to them no, you wait, just wait, don't do anything, I am now going to get into my car, drive to Western Transvaal and I want to get insight into all these things. It never happened and I couldn't do it. ADV DU PLESSIS: What would your commanding officer's reactions have been if you had tried to do something like that? CAPT MENTZ: That I didn't trust them or the security branch or the police. They would have worked me out. I would then have constituted a security risk for them. ADV DU PLESSIS: Capt Mentz, at that stage did you know about operations abroad done by the South African forces, Defence Force and Police? CAPT MENTZ: Yes. ADV DU PLESSIS: Were you at that stage aware of the fact that South African Defence Force operated in South West Africa and in Angola? CAPT MENTZ: Yes. ADV DU PLESSIS: Did you know about the police unit Koevoet in South West Africa? CAPT MENTZ: Yes. CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 112 CAPT MENTZ ADV DU PLESSIS: Did you know how they operated? CAPT MENTZ: Yes, everything. ADV DU PLESSIS: Did you accept that that was part of the Government's policy, do you think the Government knew about this? CAPT MENTZ: Yes. ADV DU PLESSIS: And did you accept that the Government approved of this? CAPT MENTZ: Yes, Chairperson, we were never called in and told stop your activities or anything like that, so I believed that that was proved under the policy of the National Party to combat terrorism. ADV DU PLESSIS: And in that light, in that context, the instruction which you received about this incident, did you consider this to be part of that context? CAPT MENTZ: Yes. ADV DU PLESSIS: Did you regard it as justified in the circumstances? CAPT MENTZ: Yes. ADV DU PLESSIS: Did you regard it as an instruction from head office? CAPT MENTZ: Yes, as I have said earlier, yes. ADV DU PLESSIS: And Capt Mentz, your own subjective view about this matter, what were your views about the people in commanding positions at head office, who would have given these instructions and their knowledge of the operation? CAPT MENTZ: I believed that the instructions came from them, they approved them and that was why it was carried out, and that it was done with the approval of the National Party. ADV DU PLESSIS: Do you never whether there was a report CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 113 CAPT MENTZ sent back on this incident, back to head office? CAPT MENTZ: Yes. ADV DU PLESSIS: Did anybody in your group involved in this operation, were they ever repudiated at any stage? CAPT MENTZ: No, not one of us. ADV DU PLESSIS: And that was the case, despite the fact that children had been killed? CAPT MENTZ: That's correct, and that's why they sent us money. ADV DU PLESSIS: Now about the issue of the children, I want to ask you one or two questions. Did you know, you yourself, did you know beforehand that the Kahn family had children? CAPT MENTZ: No. ADV DU PLESSIS: Do you know whether any of the other people involved in the operation knew that the Kahn family had children? CAPT MENTZ: At that stage I didn't know, but now I do know. As a result of my conversation with Marthinus Ras, I now know that he knew. ADV DU PLESSIS: That he knew that there were children? CAPT MENTZ: Yes, and that is what he will testify. ADV DU PLESSIS: Where you were present, were there any discussions about children ever? CAPT MENTZ: No, except when we crossed the river back into the Republic when the house was blown up, it was said that there were children. ADV DU PLESSIS: Captain, you were also asked about the possibility of reconnaissance operations beforehand to check out the scene there. Now in the circumstances reigning on that evening and the way in which the operation was carried CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 114 CAPT MENTZ out, and the area, would it have been possible, could it have been done easily? CAPT MENTZ: No, as I testified earlier, we were not to be seen in that area. That's why we created the alibi, the Richards Bay alibi. If we had tried to go there earlier that day and drive around there and we had been seen, that would have blown the whole operation. That's why we stayed on the farm, we were not allowed to leave there. We only left there that night to go to that place. JUDGE WILSON: If one person, presumably a black person had wandered around outside the shop, can you seriously say that would have blown the whole operation? I am not talking about the whole mob of you driving in your cars, waving your silenced guns. It was perfectly easy for you, from Vlakplaas, we have heard of all the askaris you have, to taken one and sent him quietly to just see who went in and out of the house. Wouldn't it have? CAPT MENTZ: That is so, Chairperson, but perhaps it was done and perhaps I was not aware of it by the local security branch sources. I don't know about that though. JUDGE WILSON: So if it was done, they went in knowing there were children in that house and determined to kill them. Is that what you are saying? CAPT MENTZ: Mr Chairperson, I don't know whether it was done, I can only testify about what I know, I can't testify on anybody's else's behalf. JUDGE WILSON: If it was done, it means they went in knowing it? CAPT MENTZ: It is possible, but I didn't know it. ADV DU PLESSIS: What did you expect there, whom did you expect to find there? Could you answer? CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 115 CAPT MENTZ CAPT MENTZ: Kahn and terrorists. JUDGE WILSON: And Mrs Kahn? CAPT MENTZ: Possibly, yes, I foresaw the possibility that she could be there. JUDGE WILSON: You talk about the Kahn family. When you talk about a family you would normally think of children as well, don't you? CAPT MENTZ: That is so. I didn't know that there were children. But, I have already said, that if at Vlakplaas I was told that there could possibly be children involved, then I would have had a problem with it, but I would still have gone along with the operation. ADV DU PLESSIS: Do you know how old the children could have been or are you not at all aware? CAPT MENTZ: No, until today I don't know. ADV DU PLESSIS: No further questions, Mr Chairman. NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY ADV DU PLESSIS JUDGE WILSON: You said a moment ago that no one in your group was ever repudiated, but you took steps, we have heard from time to time, to avoid or to frustrate police investigation into some of the killings, didn't you? CAPT MENTZ: That is so. JUDGE MALL: Very well, thank you. We move onto some other aspect of the matter now, Mr Du Plessis. ADV DU PLESSIS: Yes, Mr Chairman, the next matter we wish to deal with is page 104, the happening at Penge Mine. Capt Mentz, please start on page 105, read that for us. CAPT MENTZ: Chairperson, I would just like to say that, if I remember correctly, this happened before the Brian Ngqulunga case, but I can't remember specific dates. Ngqulunga was July 1990, I think. If I remember correctly, CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 116 CAPT MENTZ this happened before that, and in my application I didn't know who the victim was in this case. The Attorney General's office, during our first session in Johannesburg, they asked and told me it was Johannes Maboti. ADV DE JAGER: Mr Du Plessis, I think this mine spelling is P-E-N-G-E, Penge Mine. ADV DU PLESSIS: Thank you, Chairperson. JUDGE MALL: Proceed. CAPT MENTZ: Col Eugene de Kock, I cannot remember the date, but it was after two in the afternoon, Eugene de Kock, Col Eugene de Kock gave the instructions to take him to Vereeniging in his vehicle, it was a Toyota Cressida. At that stage I didn't know exactly what it was all about. We went to a police station near Vereeniging. As far as I can remember, it was the De Deur police station. When we arrived there we met Warrant Officer Duiwel Brits. He was there in a brown Land Cruiser. Sgt Louw van Niekerk, Sgt Leon Floris. We were outside the police station and then another security branch policeman - I know he is a security branch in Vereeniging, but I don't know him. He came walking out of the police station with a Black askari. It was the first time that I had seen that particular askari. Col De Kock told him to come with and the security policeman from Vereeniging was then no longer with us. The askari got into the vehicle by himself, into Brits' vehicle, he was not forced to get into the vehicle. Col De Kock and I followed the Land Cruiser. I asked De Kock where we were going and he said we were going to Penge Mine to find out what the askari had to say. We then went from Vereeniging on the freeway as far as Pretoria and then on the Witbank freeway. On the other side of Boschkop CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 117 CAPT MENTZ we took a turn-off to the left and then it becomes a gravel road. Here I want to make a correction. Where it says the askari was tied up, that's wrong. I will point that out now. When we stopped on the dirt road and I got out of the car and I went to the vehicle I then saw that the askari was tied up. I then inferred that they had tied him up whilst we were driving. I mean his hands were cuffed or something. At that stage I wasn't quite certain of the purpose of this operation, what was to happen to him, but my conclusion was that the askari had been detained at the police station in De Deur and I believed that he would probably be killed because he was an ANC or PAC freedom fighter who had been caught by the security police. He then became an askari and that he had gone back to the ANC and given information to them. I then suspected that he probably would be killed, because otherwise we would have gone back to Vlakplaas with him, and De Kock would then have spoken to him there. I can't remember exactly why we stopped at Boschkop. As far as I can remember now, I think De Kock wanted to make sure that he was tied up. I say here, and he also handcuffed him. I don't think he physically cuffed him, I think he just checked to see that the cuffs were secure. We then drove off to Penge Mine, the mine situated on the other side of Burgersfort, in the Eastern Transvaal and it was the first time that I ever went there. We arrived at the mine. It was - there was a small village community and then outside the place there were several mines and this Penge Mine was one of these mines. We arrived there that night at the mine and then met Warrant Officer Snor Vermeulen and Warrant Officer Lionel Snyman. They are also witnesses for the Attorney General. CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 118 CAPT MENTZ Penge Mine was at that stage used for a training base and askaris were there trained by Vermeulen and Snyman. ADV DE JAGER: Could you - Penge Mine is also about 300 kilometres from Pretoria? CAPT MENTZ: That's correct. ADV DE JAGER: In the north-easterly direction of the old Province of the Transvaal. It is now the Northern Province, CAPT MENTZ: That's correct. The askari was then cuffed to a pole and we drank further there. Later that night De Kock gave an instruction that we should take the man with us to the mine dumps. It is not on top of a mine dump, I would say it was sort of a hole that had been dug, excavated area. When we got there a chair had already been placed there and an explosive had already been attached to the underside of the chair. The askari was then placed on the chair and tied to the chair. On the way there I walked right at the back. Whilst I was walking at the back I saw how Floris, that is Leon Floris, gave De Kock a revolver. I say here in my application it could have been a pistol, but afterwards I thought about it again and I am almost certain that it was a revolver, the .38 type. As I said the explosives had already been tied to the underside of a chair before we arrived there. De Kock meanwhile had now received the weapon from Floris and he shot him twice or three times. When I saw that he was about to shoot him I looked away, but he shot him three times. I therefore didn't see how the bullets hit the man directly. Nobody told me, yes, he had gone over to the other side, but that is what my belief was, that the man had returned to the ANC and had given them information. CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 119 CAPT MENTZ We then walked back and whilst we were doing so Lionel Snyman had an LMG machine-gun and it was mounted some distance away and he then shot off a couple of shots in the mine dumps, to make it sound as if we were busy with training at night, et cetera. I then continue. Whilst we were walking back I became very nauseous. If I say nauseous, I don't mean that I stopped and vomited. My nerves were very, very tense, I was very nervous and I had a nervous feeling at the pit of my stomach. I say here that it was totally unacceptable for me. I knew the man was to be killed and I associated myself with that, but the way in which it was done, I found unacceptable. If they wanted to kill him they should have shot him from behind or they should have blindfolded him or something, but don't shoot him where he is tied to a chair and actually looks at you. I didn't feel good about that. When we were nearly at the base camp, the explosion took place and the askari was blow into the air. I was never told what the real reason was but my inference was, and I stand by that, that that is the reason why he was killed. My inference was that he was an askari who had returned to the ANC and then gave them information that he was arrested and that there probably hadn't been enough evidence against him. If I say information which he could possibly have given was that he could have given information about SAP members and he could have been subjected to intimidation, especially the black members, their homes were attacked, petrol-bombs were thrown at their houses. In some cases some of them were killed. And the information which he could have passed on, for instance, he could have revealed the identity of any CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 120 CAPT MENTZ informers. We all ... (intervention). ADV DE JAGER: Mr Mentz, you don't know of anything, you are now speculating. Do you know what the reason was or not? CAPT MENTZ: Nobody told me, but that is the inference that I drew, that he was passing on information. ADV DE JAGER: But the nature of the information and exactly what it was about, that is something that you are speculating on. CAPT MENTZ: I don't know. I continue. The middle of the last paragraph. It must, however, be remembered that I was a non-commissioned officer and my senior officer did never completely confide in me about everything, and in this case De Kock did not take me into his confidence by telling me exactly why the Askari was eliminated, as I have already said, that is an inference which I drew. I, in my earlier evidence also said how I regarded instructions from De Kock, that he was in liaison with head office and that the generals would have approved it. I regarded it as part of the struggle against the ANC at that stage, and regarded it as the elimination of an ANC activist and terrorist who had returned to the ANC. JUDGE WILSON: You keep calling people terrorists, when you have no basis for doing it whatsoever. You don't know what this person had done, you don't know why he was killed. CAPT MENTZ: I will correct that, Chairperson. I will call them - I will call him the particular askari, or the askari involved. I have already said here that I found out that it was Johannes Maboti. ADV DU PLESSIS: Captain, let us just stop there for a moment with the actions of Vlakplaas at that stage. The CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 121 CAPT MENTZ conduct and actions of the Vlakplaas people, against whom was it directed? CAPT MENTZ: Against the liberation movements and fighters, organisations such as the ANC, PAC, the enemies of the Government of the day, who was the National Party. ADV DU PLESSIS: In all cases? CAPT MENTZ: In all cases. ADV DU PLESSIS: And the way you saw it at the time, were the operations launched by the people at Vlakplaas, undertaken by them, was it approved by the commanding officers in head office? CAPT MENTZ: Yes, that's how I saw it and I still believe that today. ADV DU PLESSIS: As you saw it at the time, and today as well, relating to that particular time, were the Vlakplaas members involved in the elimination of ordinary criminals? CAPT MENTZ: No. ADV DU PLESSIS: Were they involved in the elimination of any other persons that you know of? CAPT MENTZ: No, not as far as I am aware. ADV DU PLESSIS: Now bearing that in mind, Capt Mentz, I want to ask you what is the possibility, and I don't want you to speculate, I am asking you in the light of your evidence, what is the possibility that the operation against this particular person could have been something other than an operation against the ANC or liberation movements or a person who was an enemy of the State? CAPT MENTZ: No, Chairperson, it was specifically aimed at the ANC/PAC. ADV DU PLESSIS: Please just listen to my question. Please just listen carefully to my question. I want to ask you, CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 122 CAPT MENTZ arising from what you have just testified about, the background, the way in which Vlakplaas operated, the fact that you said that Vlakplaas only operated against ANC activists and terrorists and people who belonged to liberation movements, the fact that you said that they did not act against criminals, did not eliminate criminals and did not eliminate other people, what is the possibility that this askari could have been a common criminal or just a normal person who was eliminated? CAPT MENTZ: According to me there was no such possibility. ADV DU PLESSIS: Capt Mentz, the political motive, the general justification you will find on page 110 to page ... (intervention). JUDGE MGOEPE: Sorry Mr du Plessis before you get there because you made a whole lot of assumptions, summed up in one word, askari. You said what other possibilities, what other reasons could have existed for the elimination of an askari. Once you use the word askari, you have made a lot of assumptions. You have assumed that this person, as we have come to understand what the word askari means, you already assume that this person must have at some stage have been a so-called terrorist, in the ranks of the ANC. He came back, kept at Vlakplaas, Vlakplaas, all these things you are assuming at once, once you use the word askari. I think what Mr Mentz should tell us is why do you think this man was an askari, on what basis? CAPT MENTZ: Mr Chairperson, could I put it this way, the askaris were not only at Vlakplaas. In some cases some of them were placed out to other security branches such as in Natal, Durban. There were people there who worked with askaris, in the Cape as well, and in other cities as well. CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 123 CAPT MENTZ They also had their own askaris who came from Vlakplaas. JUDGE MGOEPE: Couldn't this man have been arrested for stocktheft? CAPT MENTZ: No. JUDGE MGOEPE: Couldn't this man just have been captured? Maybe he was, as you say, he was a terrorist, he had just been captured, he was not as yet an askari, he was not as yet converted into an askari. CAPT MENTZ: No, right at the outset of my application I said that De Kock had told me that he wanted to find out what the askari could tell him, what he wanted to say. JUDGE MGOEPE: Oh I see you got it from him, from de Kock. Thank you. ADV DU PLESSIS: Thank you Mr Chairman. ...(intervention) MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Mentz, you do make reference that way on page 105, and that is the last paragraph of your application. CAPT MENTZ: Yes. ADV DU PLESSIS: Capt Mentz, perhaps we should just follow through the questions they have asked you to their logical conclusion, in the light of what Judge Mgoepe has just said. Bearing in mind the way in which Vlakplaas operated as I have asked you just now, operated against enemies of the State, terrorists, members of liberation movements, this was an askari. So is it possible that this was an action by Vlakplaas members against one of their own people, without him being in any way involved in liberation movements or being a supporter or a sympathiser of the liberation movements? CAPT MENTZ: No, no, they wouldn't have. ADV DU PLESSIS: According to your view? CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 124 CAPT MENTZ CAPT MENTZ: Yes. ADV DU PLESSIS: Could we then turn to the political motivation. You confirm that in general, from page 110 to page 115. And then on page 115 the third paragraph, the second line after the word "duties", is that sentence correct? "Although I was not a member of the security branch"? CAPT MENTZ: No, that should be scrapped. From the third paragraph, "although I was not a member of the security branch". That is a mistake on our side. This came out when I was stationed at Murder and Robbery. Then I was not a member of the security branch, so this is incorrect in this application. ADV DU PLESSIS: Capt Mentz, do you confirm the rest of the political motivation? CAPT MENTZ: Yes. JUDGE WILSON: Page 115? ADV DU PLESSIS: 115 Mr Chairman, yes. JUDGE MALL: What sentence is that? ADV DU PLESSIS: The sentence in the third paragraph, after the comma in the second line, is the word "pligte" (duties) and it must come out from the word "alhoewel" (although) until the end of that sentence - "although I was not a member of the security branch". JUDGE MALL: Yes. ADV DU PLESSIS: That was just included by mistake. Capt Mentz, do you confirm page 115 to 116? CAPT MENTZ: That's correct. ADV DU PLESSIS: On whose instructions were you operating? CAPT MENTZ: Col Eugene de Kock. NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR DU PLESSIS CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV MPSHE 125 CAPT MENTZ JUDGE MALL: Mr Mpshe, any questions? CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR MPSHE: Yes, thank you, Mr Chairman. Captain, page 115, the second paragraph, "The political objective was to combat terrorism to combat the destabilisation of the country and also to try and combat the enemies of the State, who tried to topple the State, including the ANC and the PAC, how applicable is this to the askari who was eliminated? JUDGE MALL: What is the question? ADV MPSHE: How applicable is this paragraph to the eliminated askari? In other words, does he fall within the categories mentioned here? CAPT MENTZ: Yes, if he had passed on information, as I believed he had, he had been an askari in the police, that's what I believed he passed on information back to the ANC and that would have, it would have helped the ANC/PAC in their struggle to topple the government. ADV MPSHE: But that's just an assumption you are making. CAPT MENTZ: That's what I believed at the time. ADV MPSHE: With reference to this man, that is an assumption you are making now? CAPT MENTZ: Yes, this askari. ADV MPSHE: Now if we use the word askari and we accept as you say that he was an askari, that would tell us that he was on your side, on the National party's side, not so? CAPT MENTZ: At first, the way I saw it, an askari, was that he was first a freedom fighter, and he had then been arrested by the security police and they had then turned him or got him so far as to assist us, became an askari with us, received a police salary and notwithstanding that, whilst he CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV MPSHE 126 CAPT MENTZ was doing his duties, he then fed information, which he obtained, back to the ANC or PAC, whatever the case may be. That is as far as I see an askari. ADV MPSHE: Yes, let's be specific. Is my understanding correct, that if you label, if you say this person is an askari, that means that he is now working for the security forces? CAPT MENTZ: Yes. Yes, in other words he was a double agent. He made as if he was working for the security forces ...(intervention) ADV MPSHE: That may be so Colonel I just want to know whether this is the position about an askari, that's all. CAPT MENTZ: That's how I saw it. ADV MPSHE: If he was an askari and as you have agreed with me, he was working for the security forces, what political motivation did exist for him to be eliminated if he was working for the security forces? CAPT MENTZ: But I told you - pardon. I said that this man was apparently working for the security police, but then that would have been a front. He pretended to work for us whilst at the same time leaking sensitive information back to the ANC/PAC. That's what I believed. JUDGE MGOEPE: Isn't is so that in fact the askaris who would normally be killed, would be those who were regarded as being a risk to the security forces? CAPT MENTZ: Yes. JUDGE MGOEPE: Those who were not regarded as a risk, those who were in the eyes of the security branch were reliable wouldn't be killed. CAPT MENTZ: Yes. JUDGE MGOEPE: It's only those who would be regarded as CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV MPSHE 127 CAPT MENTZ being a risk in the sense of being double agent, that will be killed? CAPT MENTZ: Yes. JUDGE MGOEPE: And you are saying that in your view, rightly or wrongly, the deceased in this case fell into that category for those who were a risk? CAPT MENTZ: According to the way I saw it, yes. JUDGE WILSON: Is it not correct that they would also be killed if they were a danger to the unit in that if they were going to expose the unit? In the operations of the unit they would be killed. CAPT MENTZ: Yes, sir. ADV MPSHE: Thank you, Mr Chairman and Members. You must have covered my area. NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY ADV MPSHE ADV DE JAGER: Just to get some clarification here. The two of you never drove in the same vehicle from Vereeniging to Penge Mine? CAPT MENTZ: No. So I don't know what happened or what was said in that vehicle. ADV DE JAGER: And you say that when you arrived there the chair had already been prepared, it was at a mine at some kind of excavation there. CAPT MENTZ: Yes. ADV DE JAGER: Who was in command there at Penge Mine? CAPT MENTZ: Warrant Officer Snor Vermeulen and Warrant Officer Lionel Snyman. ADV DE JAGER: They did not accompany you from Vereeniging, they didn't drive with you from Vereeniging, you just found them there? CAPT MENTZ: Yes, I found them there. CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DE JAGER 128 CAPT MENTZ ADV DE JAGER: So could we then assume from the fact that preparations had already been made, that they must have received instructions where you were not present? CAPT MENTZ: That is correct. JUDGE WILSON: Page 107, Captain, the second, first and second lines, you talked about when you arrived at Penge Mine, "The askari was handcuffed to a pole. We then continued drinking." where did you start drinking on this day? CAPT MENTZ: If I remember correctly, Chairperson, De Kock and I stopped somewhere beforehand and we bought beer or something. JUDGE WILSON: Where? CAPT MENTZ: I can't remember specifically. JUDGE WILSON: And who provided the drink now? CAPT MENTZ: We had bought this liquor. JUDGE WILSON: You bought some beer which you drank and then you bought some more you brought along for a party. Is that the position when you were going to kill the man? CAPT MENTZ: Yes, we bought a lot of alcohol, of drink. JUDGE WILSON: And of what sort? CAPT MENTZ: I can't remember, I think it was beer, but I can't remember. It might have been, there might have been strong drink as well. JUDGE WILSON: And you all drank there before you killed this man? CAPT MENTZ: Yes. JUDGE MALL: Was this man questioned at all in your presence? CAPT MENTZ: Chairperson, no, not where I was present, but CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE JUDGE MALL 129 CAPT MENTZ I can remember when we were drinking there, it was a whole crowd of us. I think that De Kock and one or two others spoke to the man. He was tied up quite a distance away from us. If I can sketch the scene, if you enter the mine then there is a building and lean-to's on the left-hand side and I - that was Snyman and Vermeulen's base where they slept. Because they arrived there a couple of days before us. We sat under the lean-to there and we made a fire and the askari was tied up quite some distance away from us, tied up to this pole. And not within earshot, and I think De Kock and one or two of the others spoke to the man at some stage, but I was not present during any conversation. JUDGE WILSON: Did you have a braai there? CAPT MENTZ: No, sir. JUDGE MALL: The man was not questioned in your presence? CAPT MENTZ: No, Sir. JUDGE WILSON: The second point I want to ask you about, is you told us in your evidence that you found this incident "totally unacceptable". CAPT MENTZ: That's correct. JUDGE WILSON: Did you ask for a transfer from Vlakplaas? CAPT MENTZ: At a later stage I ... (intervention). JUDGE WILSON: After this incident that you found totally unacceptable? CAPT MENTZ: Not directly afterwards, but at a later stage I was transferred to another unit. JUDGE WILSON: Yes but why didn't you, if it was totally unacceptable, this sort of behaviour, why didn't you ask for a transfer? CAPT MENTZ: Chairperson, I was part of an elite unit. It was at that stage seen as an elite unit in the security CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE JUDGE WILSON 130 CAPT MENTZ police. I associated myself with the fact that the man was being killed or was killed, but as I testified already, they could have done it differently. They could have, for instance, blindfolded the man or shot him from behind, and it worried me that he was actually looking straight at them when they killed him. JUDGE WILSON: Was it more important to you be part of this so-called elite unit than to do what you regarded as morally right? CAPT MENTZ: Chairperson, I believed that somebody had to do this dirty work to prop-up the Government of the day and to combat ANC and PAC terrorists. Somebody had to do it. If everybody had asked for transfers who was to do this work, and that's why I thought I would stay there. JUDGE WILSON: So although it was totally unacceptable to you, you would have us believe that, you nevertheless thought you would stay there to do this sort of work. Is that what you are telling us? CAPT MENTZ: Yes, sir. JUDGE MGOEPE: But would it have been safe for you to ask for a transfer immediately after this incident? CAPT MENTZ: No, Sir, I have testified about that as well, because then the chances were that I could just one night be shot through a window in my home. The issue here was not the colour of your skin, but if you were a threat for such a unit in the security police, the chances were that you could also be eliminated, anybody could be eliminated. I was scared, I was afraid of De Kock. MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Mentz, I know you have already testified that it was very difficult to question orders of your superiors. In this case you had taken quite a major leap by CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE MS KHAMPEPE 131 CAPT MENTZ asking De Kock where you were going to on arrival at De Deur police station, and after seeing there the askari getting into Mr Brits' car, did you not ask for more details about what the askari was going to be questioned about? CAPT MENTZ: I did ask De Kock where we were going, because I was driving the car and I had to know where to drive to. I can't specifically remember what De Kock and I discussed, it is a long time ago, but that's why I say I believe that this askari was a double agent. I can't say specifically what I asked him and what he said, because I can't remember. JUDGE MGOEPE: But was the askari already tied at that time? CAPT MENTZ: No. JUDGE MGOEPE: So it was not yet apparent that he was going to be killed? CAPT MENTZ: No, I only saw that as Boschkop. That is where I made the conclusion. ADV DE JAGER: Mr Mentz, you earlier testified that you were not one of De Kock's confidantes. CAPT MENTZ: Mr Chair, during the first time I testified I explained that I had initially been taking De Kock around. No not today, but earlier on. Later on I worked away from him. ADV DE JAGER: I do not think it is very clear whether or not you are expressing yourself correctly or whether it is the interpretation, I just want to put something to you, as I understand your evidence. You associated yourself with the fact that people had to be killed during the struggle in which you were involved between the liberation movements and the police? CAPT MENTZ: That is correct. ADV DE JAGER: You, however, did not associate yourself with CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DE JAGER 132 CAPT MENTZ the method used to kill this person? CAPT MENTZ: That's correct. ADV DE JAGER: What aspect of the method was unacceptable to you? CAPT MENTZ: Mr Chair, this askari had to know that he was going to be killed. Now he is walking with us, in front of us, he is cuffed, he sees this chair. He was a trained terrorist, he knows what explosives look like. He was tied to the chair and they shoot him. I cannot remember specifically his face or where they shot him. If they wanted to execute him, I would say shoot him from the back or blindfold him so that he couldn't see it. I never - I felt that this wasn't right. It bothered me. JUDGE MALL: So is the position that up to now we will never know why this man was killed, is that it? What the precise reason was. CAPT MENTZ: Mr Chair, except for what I believe, we won't be able to ascertain that, that it was my impression. JUDGE MALL: Yes no apart from impressions, you never learnt from De Kock or your superiors precisely why he was killed and nor did you ask? CAPT MENTZ: Mr Chair, it might be that they told me, but I can't remember specifically. JUDGE MALL: So we are left in the dark as far as this Committee is concerned, we won't know why? CAPT MENTZ: Except, Mr Chair, for the fact that all the persons I have mentioned have applied to this Committee and they will testify about that. ADV DE JAGER: Do you know whether De Kock was accused of this murder? CAPT MENTZ: I don't know. CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE 133 CAPT MENTZ JUDGE MALL: We will take an adjournment at this stage. COMMISSION ADJOURNS ON RESUMPTION WILLEM WOUTER MENTZ: (s.u.o.) JUDGE MALL: Mr Du Plessis, re-examination? ADV DU PLESSIS: I have no re-examination, Mr Chairman. NO RE-EXAMINATION BY MR DU PLESSIS JUDGE MALL: Yes, we move onto the next matter. EXAMINATION BY ADV DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, the next matter you will find on page 128. Capt Mentz, this incident took place in April 1989 - in 1992, pardon. Page 129, before you start with your evidence, Capt Mentz. What was the position regarding the bringing in of weapons into the Republic after negotiations have started with the ANC and the PAC, let's say from 1990? CAPT MENTZ: There was an increased number of smugglings from neighbouring states. ADV DU PLESSIS: What was the purpose of this smuggling of weapons, in general? CAPT MENTZ: The weapons were smuggled after the banning of the liberation movements have been lifted. The weapons we concentrated on were weapons that were brought in for in case the negotiations between the ANC, PAC and the National Party would have been abandoned, so that the weapons could possibly have been used if the liberation movements wanted to return to the liberation struggle. ADV DU PLESSIS: Can you continue on page 129, can you just please read to the Committee. CAPT MENTZ: From 1991 at Vlakplaas, weapon smuggling was investigated, amongst others, on the Mozambique border. The weapons were suspected to be brought through the Komatipoort CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 134 CAPT MENTZ as well as over the border fence. Lieut Chappies Klopper was in command of this operation. He is now a State witness There were various members of units, C10 as well as from the special task force there at this specific operation. If I can mention some of the task force members. Sarel Jansen van Rensburg, Ashley Crookes, Floors De Jonge and Andre Laas. The last three were all under officers. There were furthermore Ovambo Koevoet members. These were members who fought in the Koevoet war in Ovamboland, and they were under the command of the South African Police in South Africa now. These were Lucas Khimelo and a certain Simon Higinbamgwasa - (I don't know how to spell it), as well as other Black members, whose names I can't remember. Information was received that weapons were being smuggled or would be smuggled for giving them to the ANC and the PAC across the border, in a white Ford Cortina vehicle. I cannot remember who told me that the weapons would be The Koevoet members had an appointment with the activists in order to ambush them. When I speak here of an ambush, I don't mean an ambush to kill them. The purpose was to meet them in a police ambush and to arrest them. We, together with the task force members took position next to the road in the veld. I can perhaps just explain that our purpose was that when Lucas Khimelo met them on the dirt road and when they saw the weapons and were paid with cash, if they gave this cash money to those people, that would have been the sign and we would have jumped out of the bushes from the side of the road and arrested them. In the past we already had already had such operations where they CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 135 CAPT MENTZ were prosecuted in a normal court. Lucas Khimelo and the other members of Koevoet waited in this dirt road. They had their own vehicle there. They would then meet the weapon smugglers there. Approximately seven o'clock that evening, this vehicle had not arrived. and we went to Schoemaas, that was the police base close-by where we stayed and we went there to rest. We started drinking at the canteen and we used a lot of alcohol. I was under the influence of alcohol during the further events. Later that evening Lucas Khimelo and his members came somebody else to the side and the others of us were later on called and we had a meeting. There were quite many of us, of Koevoet members from C10, from Vlakplaas as well as task force members and also the local security branch members. Later that evening we were told by Lucas Khimelo that him and the Koevoet members drove into the smugglers. When they drove into them the smugglers told them to go into a double track road because they didn't want to be in the main dirt road there, because it was carrying heavy traffic. Khimelo followed them and told us that the smugglers had weapons in their car and that they were afraid that they would be robbed by these people. They then decided to eliminate these people by shooting them. Because the police action during that stage was sensitive and because C1 Vlakplaas used ex-Koevoet members, this evoked a lot of criticism from the National Party and it was a problem. After the smugglers have been shot, Khimelo returned and told us what had happened. First Cronje and Klopper and then us. It was then discussed and we planned the operation. CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 136 CAPT MENTZ ADV DU PLESSIS: Capt Mentz can we stop there please. Were you at all involved in the shootings? CAPT MENTZ: No, I wasn't, I was only present, I wasn't present there, I was only present afterwards. ADV DU PLESSIS: In other words what you are saying happened there, is based on what you heard. CAPT MENTZ: Yes. ADV DU PLESSIS: Can you please continue. CAPT MENTZ: During this discussion it was decided that it would create a problem if it was mentioned that the Ovambo Koevoet members shot the smugglers, because at that stage there were various rumours that the security police were involved in so-called Third Force activities and specifically Vlakplaas, by, amongst others, Dirk Coetzee and Nofomela. In other words, the information that came from this incident would of course place further pressure on the South African Police and the Government. At that stage negotiations were started and there were negotiations between the ANC and the PAC and the National Party and other such liberation movements. If it came to the knowledge that the NP Government was compromised by the police, it would make the negotiations difficult. There was then decided that we had to restructure the operation to make it seem as if the smugglers were shot by the task force members. The reason for that was that they were not accused of being involved in Third Force activities, but because it was actually an operational division of the police. We didn't want to embarrass the Government. ADV DU PLESSIS: Capt Mentz, if it had been known that this - if this operation came to the fore, would it have been to the - would it have been a good thing for the security CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 137 CAPT MENTZ police? CAPT MENTZ: Definitely. It would have helped the ANC or the PAC, because it would have shown that while they were negotiating with the Government of the day, that the police were using ex-Koevoet Ovambo members to eliminate some of their members. It would not have been good for the Government of the day. ADV DU PLESSIS: Can you go on on page 132, please. CAPT MENTZ: I was then ordered by Lieut Chappies Klopper to help with the reconstruction of the event, because I have had experience at Murder and Robbery. I did this. Nobody would have believed that weapon smugglers would have sold weapons to five white men. Therefore, the car was taken back to the main road. These people were shot in a small double track road and we decided that the story would have been that we were waiting in the vehicle until the white Cortina came back. The informant said this specifically that it would have been a Cortina. We then would follow the white Cortina and we would have approached the vehicle from the back. We would also say that we were shot on from the vehicle and that we shot, then shot back. It would then be said that the four people in the vehicle were killed. In the boot we found various illegal weapons, amongst others, AK47 weapons, an RPG7 and also RPK and Makorov pistols. The four bodies were taken out and put in our mini-bus. We had a combi mini-bus so the four bodies were put upon, on top of each other in the back and a blanket was thrown over them. The cartridges were picked up and we then left them. We took the empty cartridges to the road and left them there. CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 138 CAPT MENTZ We then went to Schoemaas with the four bodies. We didn't go into Schoemaas, but we only hooted at the gate and they came. They knew that we would find them, see them in a and Chappies Klopper to join us there. While we were waiting somebody, I can't remember who, made the remark in a joke that one is still living. These bodies were put one upon the other. There was a blanket over them. It was very dark. We stopped next to the house. I took out my pistol and shot at one of the bodies. It must have been the top body. It was dark and I could not see. I could not see who I shot or where I shot that person, although I hit the body. I don't know exactly where. At that stage I was certain that all of them were dead. My actions there I can describe as very tense and drunk, irrational, something I would not normally have done. I was so frustrated and angry at these people who brought in the weapons, still while we were negotiating - while there were negotiations going on. I was very drunk and angry and frustrated. I did this. The shot I fired did not cause any injury or death. I was under the influence of liquor. I would not have done this under normal circumstances. The bodies were then taken to the mortuary in Komatipoort. The bodies were taken to the mortuary. A dossier was opened. I then made an affidavit on this, which was not a true and correct explanation of the event. It was done for the reasons above. ADV DU PLESSIS: The specific reasons you mention here, are these the reasons you also testified about just now? The reasons about the fixing of the scene? CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 139 CAPT MENTZ CAPT MENTZ: Yes. ADV DU PLESSIS: Were these the reasons relating to the problems of the information being made known? CAPT MENTZ: Yes. ADV DU PLESSIS: Can you please page to 135. Are these the names of two persons involved? CAPT MENTZ: Yes, that's right. The other two we you could not identify. ADV DU PLESSIS: The political motivation and general motivation from page 136 up to 140 and on 141, the second paragraph, you want to change something. What do you want to remedy there? CAPT MENTZ: In the third line. The original operation was - I want to take the word "moontlik" (possibly) out, weapons and in the "in" must be "to". ADV DU PLESSIS: And on the next page 142, at the bottom, you say in whose, on whose orders you acted? CAPT MENTZ: I acted on the orders of Chappies Klopper and believed that Eugene de Kock would have approved these before we went out to go and remedy the scene. ADV DU PLESSIS: And then on the next page you said that the prosecution took place in the Supreme Court. You also have a copy of the - the case is still hanging, in any case. Oh, sorry, of the charge sheet. A copy of the charge sheet has been attached. NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY ADV DU PLESSIS ADV DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, I see the charge sheet was never attached. It is in my possession if the Committee would want a copy thereof. CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 140 CAPT MENTZ JUDGE MALL: Does the charge sheet give the names of all four people who had been killed? ADV DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, perhaps I will have a look, I have it in my possession. If the cross-examination can go on, I will look for it and I will give you an indication. I don't think so, Mr Chairman. JUDGE MALL: Mr Mpshe, are there any questions you would like to put to this witness? ADV MPSHE: I don't have questions, Mr Chairman. NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MPSHE JUDGE MALL: You have referred to these persons who are bringing the arms in as smugglers, is that right? CAPT MENTZ: That's correct, Mr Chair, smugglers of the liberation movements. JUDGE MALL: I want to know why you say they were smugglers of the liberation movements, what proof is there that they were smuggling for the liberation movement and were not people who were merely selling arms to the highest bidder? CAPT MENTZ: Mr Chair, I know that some of these people we questioned in the past, said that these weapons were going to Natal for attacks on Inkatha, and people were arrested on the East Rand who had of these weapons in their possession. They, during questioning, said that they give it to the liberation movements. I did not speak to these specific four, but I believe it was concerning this matter. JUDGE MALL: They may be lying of course, they may be running a business, selling arms to people who want to buy them, to ordinary criminals? CAPT MENTZ: That is possible, Mr Chairman, some of these people were also found guilty in different cases, but it is possible. CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE JUDGE WILSON 141 CAPT MENTZ JUDGE WILSON: Found guilty of what? CAPT MENTZ: Possession of weapons and selling weapons. ADV DE JAGER: The questions asked mean that if that - would that person not possibly have supplied me with those weapons if I offered them a higher price? CAPT MENTZ: No, Mr Chair, they would definitely or certainly not have sold weapons to anybody. We got onto through Khimelo. They would not have sold to strange people. They would have had to contact informants. But if we did this, it would have been possible. JUDGE MALL: If a warlord or leader of a gang was interested in getting arms, and made contact, he would be supplied arms by these smugglers wouldn't he? CAPT MENTZ: Yes, it is possible, sir. JUDGE MALL: And is there nothing to say that on this occasion the arms that were being smuggled were for the ANC on this occasion or the PAC? CAPT MENTZ: Mr Chair, I could not say specifically for whom these weapons were intended. They might just as well have gone to Inkatha. Furthermore, in my application before the Commission I also apply for a certain event where we received weapons from Inkatha, but from a specific person. I believe that these weapons were going for a militant freedom organisation. The political parties murdered each other on the trains and everywhere. JUDGE WILSON: As I understand the evidence, your evidence, your agents were going to buy these guns from these people. CAPT MENTZ: Yes, and then arrest them. JUDGE WILSON: So they were not bringing the guns in to give to known ANC or other activists whom they knew, they were CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE JUDGE WILSON 142 CAPT MENTZ prepared to sell them and they were going to sell them to your agents. CAPT MENTZ: Our people pretended to be members of a political party. I was not there when they spoke with them. JUDGE MALL: That opens up all kinds of possibilities. If your agents could have easily bought guns from them, the suppliers don't seem to be particularly concerned about who they were going to sell to. They weren't going to ask proof from your agents whether they were members of the ANC or PAC? They were quite happy to sell them. CAPT MENTZ: That might be the case, but I believe that the weapons were going to the ANC, the PAC or Inkatha. JUDGE MALL: No, I don't understand it when you say you believe it, we are now trying to test the reasonableness of your belief. JUDGE WILSON: You can't have believed they were going to them. Haven't you told us that you set up an ambush, a trap but when they bought the weapons the money was handed over, you are going to jump out and arrest them? CAPT MENTZ: That is correct, Mr Chair, and we could have interrogated further to find out to whom these weapons were really going. JUDGE WILSON: No the weapons were going to be sold there, in front of your eyes. CAPT MENTZ: Yes, Mr Chair, we would have arrested them and we could have questioned them further. JUDGE WILSON: Instead of which you went off and had a party again? CAPT MENTZ: Mr Chair, the operation was then cancelled. It would not have continued. We then went, we had a braai and we drank. That was all that we could do at Komatipoort. CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE JUDGE MALL 143 CAPT MENTZ JUDGE MALL: Who gave instructions to the leader of the Koevoet from your group, or under whose orders were Koevoet acting? CAPT MENTZ: They were divided at Vlakplaas into certain units. They were under the command of Gen De Kock at C10. There were also other ex-Koevoet members who were used as trackers at other branches. All of them weren't with us. JUDGE MALL: I'm talking about this particular occasion. ADV DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, may I just point out and I should have done that perhaps at the beginning. Amnesty is not sought for murder in this matter. Amnesty is simply sought for being an accessory after the fact for - for perjury and obstruction of justice. I am just making that point Mr Chairman because of the fact that we are not asking for amnesty for murder. CAPT MENTZ: Mr Chair, they were under the command of Lieut JUDGE MGOEPE: Is it therefore reasonable to conclude that when these people were killed by the Koevoet, they were CAPT MENTZ: Mr Chair, it is difficult to tell, because before they were shot, we were together. We then withdrew. I think they acted on their own, on the spur of the moment. JUDGE MALL: What about Klopper? CAPT MENTZ: To my knowledge, I can't remember whether Klopper later spoke with them before these people were shot. It might be the case but I have no knowledge. JUDGE MGOEPE: I understand you to say that you helped in covering up this incident because you were worried that the CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE JUDGE MGOEPE 144 CAPT MENTZ disclosure thereof would have embarrassed or weakened the Government, or being to the advantage of the ANC or PAC during negotiations? CAPT MENTZ: That's correct. JUDGE MGOEPE: What I don't understand is, why would that be so? The people killed would have been simply arms smugglers. How can that - I am trying to wonder whether everybody in the country would not have been happy that arms smugglers were killed? CAPT MENTZ: No, Mr Chair, if I remember correctly, it was in the news and in the newspapers that the Government allowed that ex-Koevoet members, Ovambos, operated with the security branch and specifically Vlakplaas and Vlakplaas' reputation how they could go and shoot these people. They didn't want - they didn't want the police to employ these ex-Ovambo members, but it was still done. JUDGE MGOEPE: In fact I think the feelings were very strong against these Koevoet members? CAPT MENTZ: Yes, that's correct. JUDGE WILSON: So basically when you discovered the Vlakplaas people had killed them, it was a cover-up now for the security police and Vlakplaas - the Koevoet people who killed them, sorry. When the Koevoet people came back and said they had killed them, you covered up to save the name of the security police and Vlakplaas? CAPT MENTZ: That is correct, Mr Chairman. ADV DE JAGER: Could you please explain to us, members of Koevoet were members who - were they South African citizens? CAPT MENTZ: Some of them, but not all of them. The South African white policemen who served in Ovamboland, like in my case, I went for three months at a time, and we were a CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DE JAGER 145 CAPT MENTZ normal counter-insurgence unit, some of these members then applied for staying there for very long, for a year or two years, and they were then members of the Koevoet team. When I say Ovambo members, they were members from South West - now Namibia. They then also worked with the tin units, the counter-insurgence units. They could - they were very good at warfare. There were also Ovambo members, together with Koevoet. ADV DE JAGER: Were there in South Africa feelings against Koevoet? CAPT MENTZ: Yes. ADV DE JAGER: Were they regarded as members of a Third Force? CAPT MENTZ: Yes. ADV DE JAGER: And now if you covered this event up, was it for the protection of Koevoet or for the protection of the Government, in whose service they were? CAPT MENTZ: The security police, the police and the Government in whose service they were. JUDGE MALL: Did I understand your answer to be that your action was taken in the interest of the South African Government and the South African Police? Is that what you are saying? CAPT MENTZ: Yes, the security police, the police as a whole and the police who pursued the objectives of the Government of the day, which was the National Party Government. JUDGE MALL: But if you were directly implicating and holding out to the world that this action was performed by the police, by the South African Police or a Vlakplaas unit, if that is what you were going to hold out to the world how was that protecting the police? CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE JUDGE MALL 146 CAPT MENTZ CAPT MENTZ: The false plan which we had was to say that it was the task force, the special operational unit which had shot these people. Then no questions would have been asked. But the moment you mention that it was Koevoet members or Vlakplaas members, then it was a problem. RE-EXAMINATION BY ADV DU PLESSIS: Thank you, Mr Chairman. At that stage were the actions of specially the Vlakplaas unit,was it still directed against the liberation movements? CAPT MENTZ: Yes, Chairperson. ADV DU PLESSIS: And the Vlakplaas involvement in this event, if that was disclosed, would that have a prejudicial effect on the Vlakplaas operation? CAPT MENTZ: I believe so, because if I remember correctly, just after this it was insisted that people such as De Kock and other persons who were known to the ANC, that they had to leave the police. I think it was one of the ANC's requirements for further negotiations, and that in fact happened, they packages and our unit was disbanded just after that. ADV DU PLESSIS: Capt Mentz on page 129, the bottom paragraph, you said that information was received that weapons were smuggled for making available to the ANC and the PAC across the border, in a white Ford Cortina. CAPT MENTZ: I can't remember who told me that the weapons would be made available to the ANC. CAPT MENTZ: That is correct. ADV DU PLESSIS: Now you have conceded that there is a possibility that these people could have sold weapons to other people. Now I want to ask you, what do you, in the light of what you can remember, what was told to you, what CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 147 CAPT MENTZ was more probable, would they have sold weapons to private people or was it more probable that they would have sold weapons to supporters of freedom fighters and movements? CAPT MENTZ: No, they would rather - if they didn't sell it to trained terrorists, they would have sold it to street committees, the self-defence units and those kinds of bodies and people. JUDGE MALL: We are talking about this particular consignment, not generally? ADV DU PLESSIS: No, this particular consignment. JUDGE MALL: Yes. ADV DU PLESSIS: Yes, this particular one. We are speaking of this specific consignment of weapons. CAPT MENTZ: Yes, I believed that the weapons were going to these people. ADV DU PLESSIS: Can I take you to page 132, the last two sentences of the first paragraph, the middle of the page, it starts with "the reason for that". The last two sentences of the first paragraph. It is on page 132, it starts with the words "the reason for that". CAPT MENTZ: The reason for that was that they were not accused of Third Force activities and they were actually the operational section. There was already a kind of a stigma attached to Vlakplaas at the time that they were involved in Third Force activities. NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY ADV DU PLESSIS JUDGE MALL: Thank you, you are excused. ADV DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, before the witness is excused. In respect of the matter of Brian Ngqulunga, we did some research and we got hold of parts of the record of the evidence in the Eugene de Kock trial, and we also are going CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 148 CAPT MENTZ to be placed in possession this evening of the excerpts of Ngqulunga's evidence before the Harms Commission, which we deem important for this Committee. Now I have in my possession bundles of the evidence in the De Kock trial, especially, well, actually the evidence of Warrant Officer I want to do, Mr Chairman, and it is going to be very short, is refer you to one or two pages in the evidence and ask Capt Mentz's commentary on that, if you will allow me to. ADV DU PLESSIS: Pardon, Mr Chairman? ADV DU PLESSIS: He is a State witness, Mr Chairman, I am not sure - not in this application. Not in this application. He is a State witness, I am not sure if he is applying for amnesty. JUDGE MALL: Don't know whether he has. ADV DU PLESSIS: Or whether he has, I don't know. But as far as I know all State witnesses did apply for amnesty, so we can accept that he probably did. JUDGE MALL: You would like to put portions of the evidence ADV DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, I just want his comments. JUDGE MALL: Yes. ADV DU PLESSIS: I want his comments on that. JUDGE MALL: Does it affect him or implicate him? ADV DU PLESSIS: There is mention of him in the evidence, Mr Chairman. I may mention - perhaps I can give you an idea of the purpose thereof, and if the Committee doesn't deem it important or necessary, then we can dispense with it. There are two aspects which become clear from the CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 149 ADDRESS evidence. The first one is that there was a plan to eliminate Ngqulunga, apparently and that was the - what Capt Mentz testified about that he heard later, apparently because there was a worry that he would become scared because of the false evidence that he gave in front of the Harms Commission. a second reason for killing Ngqulunga, and that is that he was a person who was giving information to the ANC. He does refer in his evidence to that fact. I can point that out to you. Then thirdly, the evidence indicates that people high up in the security headquarters knew exactly what happened in this incident, with Ngqulunga. Fourthly, Mr Chairman - pardon, I lost the point now. If you could just bear with me. If you could just bear with me, Mr Chairman. Oh, the last point was that there is also evidence in this record pertaining to the fact that De Kock wanted the people who were involved in this matter, that is Bellingham, Botha, Baker and Mentz, and especially Baker and Bellingham, to be tied up with an incident such as this, so as to have a hold over them. That is the gist of what I wanted his comments on. I can, however, just hand it in and deal with that in argument, if the Committee doesn't deem it necessary to hear any evidence on this. JUDGE MALL: I think you may proceed by putting that to your witness. ADV DU PLESSIS: Thank you, Mr Chairman. May I beg leave to evidence. It is thick but I am going to refer you to just the relevant pages. That would be, I think EXHIBIT AA, Mr CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 150 CAPT MENTZ Chairman. EXHIBIT AA HANDED IN Mr Chairman, I want to place on record that I haven't provided Mr Mpshe with a copy of this, which I perhaps should have done earlier in this week and it is my mistake that I didn't do that. If he needs to ask any questions about that, he has got a problem with that, then that's my fault. May I proceed, Mr Chairman? JUDGE MALL: Yes, sure. ADV DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, am I correct that this is Exhibit AA? JUDGE MALL: Annexure AA, yes. ADV DU PLESSIS: Thank you, Mr Chairman. JUDGE MALL: Exhibit AA. ADV DU PLESSIS: Capt Mentz, could we turn to page 7 of this volume. I would like you to read the second last paragraph to also tie up Bellingham and Baker to certain incidents, on the next page, because they are not yet directly involved. They haven't as yet been contaminated, as we called it, and he decided that the two of them - he would use the two of them. Actually he went for Baker. And then he says further, and he then gave them instruction, after we rented the combis, or they knew that they were going with. He then called in Wouter Mentz and Piet Botha. Mentz had just been transferred from Murder and Robbery at that stage. He hadn't been there for very long. Now could you comment on this for the Committee, about the whole issue of the contamination and the purpose and the whole modus operandi? CAPT MENTZ: Chairperson, I don't know why De Kock gave CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 151 CAPT MENTZ Baker and Bellingham these instructions and that he wanted to contaminate them. I don't have any knowledge of that. ADV DU PLESSIS: Could I ask you, were you aware of the fact that that was the way in which De Kock operated, to involve people in certain events, to contaminate them as such? CAPT MENTZ: Yes, I misunderstood, yes. ADV DU PLESSIS: Now in your case, if you were involved in certain events, would it have created a problem for you, if you wanted to leave Vlakplaas or to talk about what happened there? CAPT MENTZ: It would, yes. ADV DU PLESSIS: Good I then take you to page 25. In the middle of that page the question was asked do you know whether people higher up knew of that? I believe they would have been informed there, must have been informed. Is that in line with your evidence? JUDGE WILSON: My page 25 is blank for the top half of the page. ADV DU PLESSIS: Yes, yes, that is the page I am on, Mr Chairman. JUDGE WILSON: So where are you starting from? ADV DU PLESSIS: In the middle of the typed part? JUDGE WILSON: In the middle of the typed portion? ADV DU PLESSIS: Yes, it says - let me read the second paragraph, "vanwaar af" - from Brig Van Rensburg's side who was then the commanding officer, and do you know where the people higher than him knew of this? I believe that they would have been so informed, they must have been informed. ADV DE JAGER: If you read the previous one it reads as an instruction and the question was where did the instruction come from? CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 152 CAPT MENTZ CAPT MENTZ: Yes, I would have rectified that now. ADV DU PLESSIS: This deals with the instruction and where it came from. Is that in line with how you remember it? CAPT MENTZ: That is correct. ADV DU PLESSIS: And then the next question was, what, according to you, was the reason why Brian Ngqulunga had to be eliminated and the answer, because he wanted to talk about Mxenge from Durban. That is one of the reasons. You have already testified about that, that you were not aware of that. CAPT MENTZ: Yes, I didn't know anything about that. ADV DU PLESSIS: Then he says Mxenge and on the next page he says yes, let us assume that, let us accept that. He has already testified to that before the Harms Commission? That is correct. And on which occasion he also denied his involvement of that. The answer was that is correct. And then Capt Mentz you said that information came from elsewhere, not from C1, but from elsewhere, that this man had possibly changed tactics and went to talk to the ANC and that in line with the information which you had received relating to the reason for Brian Ngqulunga's elimination? CAPT MENTZ: That is correct, Chairperson. ADV DU PLESSIS: And then it said, and from the top the decision was taken that he must be eliminated. CAPT MENTZ: That is correct. ADV DU PLESSIS: Just bear with me, please, Mr Chairman. Capt Mentz, just to complete the picture here, on page 45 from 21, lines 21 to the next page 22, there is once again evidence about the contamination. Mr Chairman, I am just drawing your attention to this, I have already asked the CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 153 CAPT MENTZ witness about this. JUDGE MALL: Yes. ADV DU PLESSIS: Then on page 45 ...(intervention) ADV DE JAGER: Page 45 which lines? ADV DU PLESSIS: From line 20 onwards. JUDGE MALL: Yes. ADV DU PLESSIS: And then on page 48 from line 12, there Nortje is testifying about the question of whether you had been contaminated. The question was: did it justify the choice of Mentz, motivate? No, but Mentz had just arrived from Murder and Robbery at that stage and he had not yet been contaminated. Yes, well, I suppose he was, but I don't know whether he knew that he had done something wrong. Did you know anything about this motivation to contaminate you? CAPT MENTZ: No, Chairperson. ADV DU PLESSIS: But is there a possibility that that is the reason why you went on this operation? CAPT MENTZ: Yes. ADV DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, I have no further places but Capt Mentz indicates he wants to say something about a specific page. Could you please continue, Captain? CAPT MENTZ: Chairperson, on page 45, the second last paragraph. Could I continue? " It was the choice of the people who were involved, who were to be involved in the operation". Chairperson, I don't agree with that. You were never given a choice, you were never asked do you want to go with tonight or not, you were just told, you never had a choice? ADV DE JAGER: But does it here refer to your choice or CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 154 CAPT MENTZ does it refer to the fact that he chooses you to go along on the operation and once you were involved you were actually caught up in the web and you were contaminated. Isn't that the choice that he is referring to? CAPT MENTZ: That's possible Chairperson, then maybe I misunderstood it. ADV DU PLESSIS: Captain, any other aspects which you would like to comment on? I am not going into detail on all of this. So please just page through and see whether there are any other aspects you would like to comment on. Captain Mentz, one last question. Insofar - I am not going to refer you to each and every place here, but insofar have testified, do you stand by what you have testified? CAPT MENTZ: I stand by what I have testified. ADV DU PLESSIS: I have no further questions in this regard. NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR DU PLESSIS ADV DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, in respect of this matter we have also obtained affidavits from the other people who were involved in this specific matter of Ngqulunga. Firstly, there is an affidavit by Col Baker and then there is also an affidavit by Col Bellingham or Capt Bellingham, I beg your pardon. I beg leave to hand up copies of these affidavits. The affidavit of Baker would then be EXHIBIT BB and the affidavit of Bellingham EXHIBIT CC. EXHIBITS BB AND CC HANDED IN Mr Chairman, you will note that both these affidavits say that they have perused the written amnesty application of Capt Mentz, that they confirm the correctness of the contents of the amnesty application of Capt Mentz, pertaining to the nature and particulars, the date, the CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 155 CAPT MENTZ place, the name of the victim, the political objectives and the particulars pertaining to the order given. Then each of them say that, "I wish to state that I will apply for amnesty for this act myself, and that my amnesty application will substantially contain the same evidence that was contained in Capt Wouter Mentz's application, as well as his testimony. I therefore support Capt Mentz's amnesty application. I am of the view that he has made full disclosure of all relevant facts pertaining to this incident". JUDGE WILSON: Does anything tie up this affidavit with the incident that we are talking about? ADV DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, it doesn't appear from the affidavits themselves, but I was involved specifically with drawing these affidavits, although I did not draw the final version. That's why I see it now for the first time. It does relate specifically to this fact. Capt Mentz can also testify to that because he was present when this was done. So I can give you a confirmation that this, it relates to this specific incident. JUDGE WILSON: Have they been present when he gave evidence? ADV DU PLESSIS: No, Mr Chairman, they were not present when he gave evidence, but there was a tape-recording made which they listened to, of the evidence which Capt Mentz made himself, Mr Chairman. But Mr Chairman, I am presenting this affidavit mainly to confirm the correctness of the application as it stands in the application papers. ADV DE JAGER: Could you again, please, give us the reference of Brian Ngqulunga's application, what was it? Schedule ...? CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 156 CAPT MENTZ JUDGE WILSON: 53, page 53. ADV DU PLESSIS: Yes, Mr Chairman, yes, it was on page 53, Schedule 4. I beg your pardon for the oversight. I won't say who was responsible for the final draft, Mr Chairman It is my attorney sitting next to me, Mr Chairman. JUDGE MALL: Yes. Mr Mpshe, are there any questions you wish to put this witness? ADV MPSHE: Mr Chairman, I have no questions to put to this witness. NO QUESTIONS BY MR MPSHE ADV MPSHE: Mr Chairman, just to respond quickly before the Chair and the Committee members are perplexed by the envelope that I have just sent up. JUDGE MALL: Yes? ADV MPSHE: The Chair and the Committee will recall that in Pretoria I was requested to obtain Annexure A to the post- mortem report of Brian Ngqulunga. Mr Chairman, I did take some means of obtaining the Annexure A. I went to the Garankua police station on the 4th of March 1997 and I was referred to a Constable Chelo Lusaba who is dealing with this type of matters. She together with another policeman entered the store room and they looked for the docket, which they could not find. Unfortunately I said to her that I need a statement from her that the docket got lost in their possession and she promised to fax it down to me, but she has not done so. Mr Chairman, in the meantime, I got hold of the contents of the envelope before you. Now these are the photos of Brian Ngqulunga where he was found, how he was found and the wounds and everything that was done by the police. I think this will or may substitute the absence of CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV MPSHE 157 ADDRESS Annexure A. Thank you, Mr Chairman. JUDGE MALL: This is in lieu of what we were expecting, that was Annexure A to the post-mortem report? ADV MPSHE: That is so, Mr Chairman. JUDGE MALL: And Mr Du Plessis, have you had sight of this document, these photographs and documents? ADV DU PLESSIS: Yes, Mr Chairman, I have had sight of the documents. JUDGE MALL: Well, these documents, including the photographs will go in as Exhibit CC. ADV MPSHE: I am sorry, Mr Chairman, is it not DD, Mr Chairman? JUDGE MALL: I'm sorry, EXHIBIT DD, you are right. Yes, thank you. EXHIBIT DD HANDED IN JUDGE MALL: I have before me a memorandum which has just been handed to us now. It is addressed to the Amnesty Committee, from Mr Pik Botha. Do you have a copy, has that been served on you? ADV MPSHE: Yes, I have, thank you, Mr Chairman. JUDGE MALL: Mr Du Plessis, do you have a copy of that? ADV DU PLESSIS: I do have a copy, Mr Chairman. JUDGE MALL: We haven't had time to read this and I am wondering whether we should take a short adjournment, to enable you to read it as well, and to consider what you should do about it. ADV DU PLESSIS: Yes, I have only received it now, Mr perhaps convey to the Committee just his view on this and his reaction on this. JUDGE MALL: Yes. CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 158 ADDRESS ADV DU PLESSIS: I cannot recall his evidence in any event as having been to the effect that he factually knows or knew that Minister Pik Botha knew about it. I will take it up. JUDGE MALL: Yes, whether the Press may have reported it. ADV DU PLESSIS: Yes, it may have been reported differently. JUDGE MALL: Yes, very well. Before we take this adjournment, apart from that, is there any other matter that has to be dealt with? ADV DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, at this point in time, in respect of evidence, there are no other matters. In respect we have decided to withdraw that matter. JUDGE MALL: Alright, just let me get that. ADV DU PLESSIS: With reservation of all our rights, Mr Chairman. JUDGE WILSON: Which number is it? ADV DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, that is page 39 of Brig JUDGE WILSON: Schedule 2? ADV DU PLESSIS: Schedule as, as it pleases you. ADV DE JAGER: What do you exactly mean, withdraw with reservation of all your rights? ADV DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, what I mean and I intended to explain that now, is that we wish to consider our position regarding this application. The cut-off date for the final applications is in May and we want a little bit more time to consider our position in this regard. If we make a decision to launch an application in regard to this matter again, we will do so. But at this point in time we have decided not to go ahead at this point in time with that application, Mr Chairman. CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 159 ADDRESS JUDGE MGOEPE: So are you just asking to have it removed from our roll? ADV DU PLESSIS: Yes, yes. JUDGE MGOEPE: Or are you in fact withdrawing the application? ADV DU PLESSIS: No, the effect is that I am asking for it to be removed. What we will do is to, if we decide to go ahead with the application, we will lodge a formal application, again in the same fashion with the same contents, just to make hundred per cent sure that there is no problem. We, however, want some time to consider that application and to decide if we really want to go ahead with that application. So I am asking the Committee to strike it from the roll of the hearings. JUDGE MALL: Yes, very well. You are granted leave to remove this matter from the roll. ADV DU PLESSIS: Thank you, Mr Chairman. Mr Chairman, then the only matter that - actually two matters that are left, would be the record of the Harms Commission proceedings which we will obtain this evening, and then Prof Robertse's report. Now as I have pointed out to you in chambers, and I can say that now here as well, I have had to have discussions with some of my clients, the applicants, about the question of the publication of the contents of that report. I also had to convey that problem to Dr Robertse and I am trying to reconcile everybody concerned in this matter so that these reports can be made available to the Committee, as public documents. I am in the process of nearly finalising that and it will be finalised hopefully later this afternoon. I cannot give you an indication hundred per cent when. Dr Robertse, I spoke to him this CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 160 ADDRESS morning, before the hearing started and he gave me an indication that he would be able to finalise it throughout the morning, but that he would - and he discussed it with me, that he would have, would like to have one final short discussion with Capt Hechter, and that is the position I find myself in, Mr Chairman. I have done my utmost to have it ready. I promised Monday, but there have been problems with this. ....Page 156, Mr Chairman. JUDGE MALL: Page 39? ADV DU PLESSIS: No, that was in respect of the Swapo incident. Are you asking me about the Swapo incident? JUDGE MALL: Yes. ADV DU PLESSIS: That is at page 39. JUDGE MALL: Yes. ADV DU PLESSIS: Yes, I beg your pardon. I thought you referred to the Gaberone bomb. JUDGE MALL: We will adjourn at this stage to enable you to consider this memorandum and for us to read it as well, and we will resume at two o'clock. ADV DU PLESSIS: Thank you, Mr Chairman. JUDGE MALL: Mr Mpshe, you asked no questions about the interim you feel that you might want to consider the matter and put questions, you will be allowed to do so. Alright, we will adjourn now and resume at two o'clock. COMMISSION ADJOURNS CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 161 CAPT MENTZ ON RESUMPTION JUDGE MALL: Mr du Plessis, the memorandum which has been handed to me, is addressed to the Amnesty Committee and it bears the date 12th of March 1997. In it Mr Botha records the following, or rather what Mr Botha said was recorded as follows: That he objects most strongly to the the CommittEe which apparently were not challenged by any members of the Committee. alleged that there was no doubt that I knew of a security force plot to eliminate one of the master minds of the 1983 Church Street bomb blasts in Pretoria. According to the Press reports, Mr certain MacKenzie was an ANC member and that he stated that there was no doubt in his mind that I not indicate any source for this allegation. The facts are that the Botswana Government complained to the South African Government. The Department of Foreign Affairs, as is the normal practice, sent the Botswana Government's comment to the South African Security Forces. The South African Police responded that they had incontrovertible evidence that MacKenzie was being used by the ANC to transport weapons into South Africa from Botswana. The SAP also said that they had evidence that MacKenzie was in regular contact with certain members of the ANC in Zambia and CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE JUDGE MALL 162 Botswana. The SAP assured the Department of Foreign Affairs that the SAP was prepared to provide access to evidence which supported the facts which the SAP conveyed to the Department of Foreign Affairs. The `incontrovertible evidence' of the SAP was forwarded to the Botswana Government in June 1987 in a formal note which was released to the Press. It is obvious that Mr information to the Department of Foreign Affairs. It is also obvious that after Mr De Klerk's evidence that the Cabinet was often deceived by certain members of the SAP dealing with these allegations as a disgraceful attempt to draw attention away from his irresponsible activities. I will be grateful if the Committee could ask Mr allegations. Due to lack of time I have no other means, but to convey the statement telephonically to the Committee." ADV DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, I firstly just want to place on record, according to Mr Mpshe, the reference to Mr De Klerk should be De Kock. I presume that's Eugene de Kock in his evidence. JUDGE MALL: You are right. ADV DU PLESSIS: And that should be rectified. JUDGE MALL: Yes. ADV DU PLESSIS: Now Mr Chairman, may I respond to this? JUDGE MALL: Yes, please. JUDGE MGOEPE: Why do you say De Kock, Mr Du Plessis? CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 163 ADDRESS ADV DU PLESSIS: I don't know, Mr Chairman, I was asked by Mr Mpshe. Perhaps he should address you on this. ADV MPSHE: Mr Chairman, I was informed last by the person who took the message, Mr John Allen, who spoke with Mr Botha this morning. He says he has made a mistake, he didn't say De Klerk but De Kock. JUDGE MALL: Yes. ADV MPSHE: He conveyed this to me. JUDGE MALL: After Mr De Kock's evidence? ADV MPSHE: That is correct. JUDGE MALL: Well, on the assumption that this ought to reflect Mr De Kock rather than Mr De Klerk, can we proceed further with this matter? ADV DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, I can respond to this, and I his allegation, and I will call him as a witness in that regard. view I was asked to place on record, in respect of the second last sentence, where Minister Botha said that it is obvious that Mr Cronje and his colleagues have supplied false information to the Department of Foreign Affairs, that evidence about that now, he will deny it, but that we also reserve our rights pertaining to deal or specifically with the purpose to deal with this allegation in a different forum in this regard. We regard this as defamatory. Now Mr Chairman, is it possible that I could call Brig his evidence? Thank you. JUDGE MALL: Please do call him. CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 164 BRIG CRONJE MR DU PLESSIS CALLS EXAMINATION BY MR DU PLESSIS: Brigadier, you don't have your application before you. I am going to read it to you, the relevant part. You will find it on page 159 to 160. You there testified, Brigadier - can you just read it to us again, please, on the last paragraph of page 159: BRIG CRONJE: "I remember when the bomb exploded, it may the headlines in the papers. Botswana complained to the South African Government. It was alleged that MacKenzie was a member of the ANC and that he blew up his own vehicle." ADV DU PLESSIS: Then the first paragraph on page 160 - BRIG CRONJE: "I have no doubt in my mind that Minister Botha had to know what the true situation was." ADV DU PLESSIS: Can you please explain to the Committee why you say that there could not have been any doubt in your mind? were called to van der Merwe's office after the incident. He wanted to find out exactly what had happened, how the operation went wrong and everything about that operation, because he said he would have to inform Minister Pik Botha. To my mind, to inform means that you tell him the truth. You do not want the true facts in order to inform him falsely. I know Gen van der Merwe so well that I know that he would not have lied to a Minister. ADV DU PLESSIS: Is it on those grounds that you said that there was no doubt in your mind that Minister Botha knew? CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 165 BRIG CRONJE up his own vehicle he would have been dead, he would not have been living any more. ADV DU PLESSIS: Thank you, Mr Chairman. NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR DU PLESSIS JUDGE MALL: Do I understand you to mean that the information that you gave to Gen van der Merwe, was in accordance with the evidence that you are giving here now? JUDGE MALL: That that is the information that you conveyed to him? Merwe, I never lied to my generals. JUDGE MALL: And you don't know how that was conveyed to Mr Pik Botha? JUDGE MALL: The report was made to Gen Van der Merwe by you personally? about the operation, because it was not my operation, it was Brig Loots'. JUDGE MALL: And were you present throughout? JUDGE MALL: Yes. Any questions? JUDGE WILSON: Did you know anything about the formal note which was released to the Press? JUDGE WILSON: And was that note correct, did it correctly reflect what had happened? JUDGE WILSON: Was that the incorrect version? CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE JUDGE WILSON 166 BRIG CRONJE JUDGE WILSON: Was that a note formally released to the Press by the Department of Foreign Affairs? JUDGE WILSON: And you don't know where they got their information from? from Gen Van der Merwe. ADV DE JAGER: Brigadier, I don't know whether you have the memo in front of you, the affidavit. I would like you to have one in front of you. The first or rather the second paragraph Mr Botha is talking about reports he saw in the Press now. He also says that according to the reports in "an allegation was made that a certain MacKenzie was a member of the ANC, was an ANC member and that he had blown up his own vehicle. ". newspaper. ADV DE JAGER: I am talking about the first article in the first paper right after the incident. ADV DE JAGER: I can't understand this memo. The way I read ADV DE JAGER: So it was the recent Press reports after you have given evidence. ADV DE JAGER: You must please help me now because I do not remember, I do not recall you saying that MacKenzie had been an ANC member who blew up his own vehicle. had been an informant and that his vehicle had been blown up CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DE JAGER 167 BRIG CRONJE by somebody else. ADV DE JAGER: Therefore this quotation Mr Botha here quotes, was read somewhere in a paper that gave the facts of your evidence wrongly. And in the second paragraph, he discusses what he then did. And there he nowhere says that anybody told him that MacKenzie had blown up his own ADV DE JAGER: He only says there that MacKenzie had been an ANC agent who brought weapons to South Africa. Was that not in accordance what you informed them at that stage, that MacKenzie had transported weapons in the vehicle? the papers at that stage. ADV DE JAGER: The vehicle had been registered in MacKenzie's name. were registered in MacKenzie's name. ADV DE JAGER: But it was not said in this report that MacKenzie had died in the incident or that he blew up his own vehicle. JUDGE WILSON: Was he one of the masterminds of the 1983 Church Street bomb blast? JUDGE MALL: Mr Mpshe, do you have any questions to put to the brigadier? ADV MPSHE: I have no questions, Mr Chairman. NO QUESTIONS BY MR MPSHE JUDGE MALL: Mr Du Plessis, before I excuse him, are there any other questions you would like to put to him? ADV DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, I just want to clear up one CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 168 BRIG CRONJE thing if you would give me one second, please. JUDGE MALL: Yes. ADV DE JAGER: Mr Mpshe, I just want to hear, was Mr Botha advised that he has been implicated in this application? ADV MPSHE: Not yet, Mr Chairman. ADV DE JAGER: Well, he's been implicated in the application itself, he wasn't implicated during the evidence. ADV MPSHE: He was implicated during the evidence, yes. ADV DE JAGER: No, on page 156 of the application he has been implicated. ADV MPSHE: Of the applicant's ... ADV DE JAGER: Of the applicant's application. ADV MPSHE: Yes. ADV DE JAGER: Or 159, I don't know, I haven't got the ... ADV MPSHE: 160, no, no, I wasn't aware of it, he was not involved. JUDGE MALL: Yes. Mr Du Plessis? RE-EXAMINATION BY MR DU PLESSIS: Thank you, Mr Chairman. Brigadier, these Press reports of Mr Botha where he makes these allegations, did you see these Press articles personally? JUDGE MALL: Is that all? ADV DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, I just want to make sure that the witness understood me. JUDGE MALL: Yes. ADV DU PLESSIS: Brigadier, the Press releases I am talking about, I am talking about this week's Press items. ADV DU PLESSIS: Thank you, Mr Chairman. NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY ADV DU PLESSIS CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE 169 BRIG CRONJE JUDGE MALL: Thank you very much, Brigadier. WITNESS EXCUSED JUDGE MALL: This memorandum will be numbered as an EXHIBIT EE. EXHIBIT EE HANDED IN WITNESS EXCUSED JUDGE MALL: Yes? ADV MPSHE: Mr Chairman, then that concludes our work for the day. What remains are the matters that are of non- gross violations which as agreed upon earlier on, will be dealt with in chambers. Mr Chairman, I am informed by my learned friend about the psychiatrist's report, that it will be available tomorrow, which would mean that the Committee adjourns and indicate a time when we are to resume for the purposes of that report. JUDGE MALL: What is the earliest that the report will be available, Mr Du Plessis? ADV DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, we are going directly to Stellenbosch to see Prof Robertse. I could have it available tonight. I want to try and make arrangements to fax it to Mr Currin and it would be available early tomorrow morning. We can deal with it at eight o'clock or earlier. ADV DE JAGER: Mr Du Plessis, if I turn up here at six o'clock tomorrow and you haven't got that report here and you ask for the matter to stand down ... ADV DU PLESSIS: I won't Mr Chair. JUDGE MALL: Very well, Gentlemen, the Committee will adjourn until nine o'clock tomorrow morning, in the hope that we will finalise this as soon as possible thereafter. ADV DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, I will give you my undertaking CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE 170 that tomorrow morning we will finalise it. JUDGE MALL: Thank you. COMMITTEE ADJOURNS ON RESUMPTION JUDGE MALL: Yes, Gentlemen? ADV DU PLESSIS: Thank you, Mr Chairman. Mr Chairman, we have had an opportunity yesterday afternoon to visit Prof Robertse in Stellenbosch. He did have another consultation with Capt Hechter and we were able to sort out any problems - all the problems regarding the report. It is possible for me to hand in a report in respect of each of the five applicants. The report is accompanied by Prof Robertse's curriculum vitae, as well as a letter in which he explains the fact that he had to consult again with Capt Hechter, and that he could not do that in Cape Town yesterday. I requested him yesterday afternoon when we adjourned, if he could come to Cape Town so that we could finalise it here and it might have been possible to deal with this perhaps late yesterday afternoon, but it wasn't possible. I beg leave to hand up copies of the report to you. Mr Chairman, I don't intend to deal with the contents of the report at this point in time. I believe that would be ANNEXURE FF, if my memory serves me correct. Mr Chairman, the report is an extensive report. If I can just give you a little bit of background about the report. It is an extensive report, dealing with firstly, post-traumatic stress, with specific emphasis on memory loss, but not only that, as a general background. Then it gives an evaluation of each of the applicants. It discusses the problems that they currently have, as a result of the CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 171 ADDRESS actions they were involved in, and it specifically then also deals with the question of memory loss. It does not only deal with that question. It deals with a further variety of issues which we deem important for purposes of argument in this regard. Specifically with reference to the general background in respect of which the applicants operated. I will refer to the report in my argument, unless you want me to address you on something specific out of the report. JUDGE MALL: I understood yesterday that you were going to find out from Mr Currin whether he has any views on this matter. Has that been done? ADV DU PLESSIS: Yes, Mr Chairman, obviously because of the logistical problem, we had a problem. My attorney, Mr Britz did speak to Mr Currin. He said - to his personnel. He couldn't get hold of him personally. They indicated that there wasn't a problem, that the report could go in, but they said that we should place on record that they reserve all their rights pertaining to this report and that they will let the Committee have their view on this in due course. I may mention that I had a discussion with Mr Currin before, last week, about this report and the possibility that oral evidence would be required. He gave me an indication that he does not think that that would be necessary and only if the circumstances really warrant it, he would ask for such an opportunity. We obviously, if he wants to do that, we obviously will have discussions with him, see if we can't sort whatever he wants to deal with, sort that out between ourselves, so that we perhaps could present the Committee then with a joint separate report or a memorandum, pertaining to his problems and the answers CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 172 ADDRESS thereto. What I foresee, Mr Chairman, is that if he has certain questions, they could perhaps be put by him to Dr Robertse telephonically. It could be taped and it could be transcribed or it could be dealt with in any other way that would make the Committee's task much easier, instead of calling him as a witness. Obviously if the members of the Committee wish to ask Dr Robertse questions the same procedure can be followed or he can be called to give evidence. He is prepared to give evidence. I don't know if there are any further aspects pertaining to this, Mr Chairman. JUDGE MALL: The way I understand it, a copy of this particular document has not yet reached Mr Currin. Is that it? ADV DU PLESSIS: It hasn't, Mr Chairman. We will, we are going to try to do that today. JUDGE MALL: Yes. ADV DU PLESSIS: We will let him have that. JUDGE MALL: Well, on the understanding that you have conveyed to us that you will endeavour to discuss this matter with Mr Currin, it may be that after you have discussed it, you will submit jointly a memorandum. If it transpires that Mr Currin requires the witness to be called to give evidence or for himself to call a consultant to give evidence, we will deal with that matter when that problem arises. ADV DU PLESSIS: Yes, that is my suggestion, Mr Chairman. I don't want to belabour the Committee with that, I think Mr Currin and ourselves can deal with that very easily, as we have dealt with other issues during these hearings, and I CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 173 ADDRESS think we can come to a very satisfactory conclusion without a problem. JUDGE WILSON: Could I also add that I would suggest if that does arise, arrangements should be made to hear the witness elsewhere and not - we don't all have to come down to Cape Town for that purpose. ADV DU PLESSIS: Yes, obviously an arrangement can be made which suits the members of the Commission the best and we will make arrangements to be available in that regard. JUDGE MALL: Mr Mpshe, have you any comments to make in this regard? ADV MPSHE: Mr Chairman, thank you, I don't have any comment, but just to confirm what my learned friend has told the Committee about Mr Brian Currin. I also had a discussion with him telephonically yesterday and he stated to me exactly what my learned friend has just conveyed to the Committee. Thank you. JUDGE MALL: Thank you. Thank you very much. This document, including the letter from Dr Robertse and all the annexures thereto, will figure as EXHIBIT FF, in these proceedings. EXHIBIT FF HANDED IN ADV DU PLESSIS: Thank you, Mr Chairman. Mr Chairman, then there is only one issue left, and that is, we gave the Committee an undertaking that in respect of the matter of Brian Ngqulunga, we would endeavour also to obtain the record of the evidence that he gave at the Harms Commission. We have been able to obtain that, Mr Chairman. I don't have the usual confirmation that it is a correct transcript, et cetera. This - one of our other clients, one of Mr Britz' other clients obtained this for us. I don't have any reason to believe that it is not correct, but I don't have the CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 174 ADDRESS normal confirmation thereof. But I, however, do have copies for the Committee which I beg leave to hand up. Mr Chairman, I don't intend to deal with that record at all in evidence by Capt Mentz at all, and I will only use it in argument, for argument purposes. Mr Chairman, that would be Exhibit GG. JUDGE MALL: This transcript of the evidence given by Mr Brian Ngqulunga before the Harms Commission will be received by the Committee as EXHIBIT GG. EXHIBIT GG HANDED IN ADV DU PLESSIS: Thank you, Mr Chairman. JUDGE MALL: Is there any other matter, Mr Mpshe? ADV MPSHE: Thank you, Mr Chairman. I don't know whether to raise that here, Mr Chairman, but it pertains to the discussion between the Chair and members with the lady, Ms Pumla. I don't think it can be raised here. JUDGE MALL: Ja. ADV MPSHE: Thank you, Mr Chairman. Then there is nothing more to say. JUDGE MALL: You will make available a copy of the report? ADV MPSHE: I have made it available to her. JUDGE MALL: Thanks. ADV DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, I'm sorry, there is just one issue that I would like to raise and that is the question of the heads of argument and the question of judgment. It is something that we could discuss it with chambers with you or we could raise it here. I just want an indication from you. JUDGE MALL: We should talk about heads of argument, so that all of us have some idea as to when we would be able to attend to this matter, in the absence of calling any further evidence. CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 175 BRIG CRONJE ADV DU PLESSIS: Yes, Mr Chairman, there are a few issues that have to be cleared up in that regard. JUDGE MALL: Yes. Well, now are we not in a position to fix a time by which heads of argument is to come in? ADV DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, yes, that wouldn't be a problem. I would need, I would say approximately three to four weeks inbetween, inbetween other matters that I have to deal with, to be able to finalise the heads of argument. JUDGE WILSON: Would you base your argument on the typed transcript to the evidence? ADV DU PLESSIS: Yes, Mr Chairman, and that would also cause a problem. JUDGE WILSON: Yes, our experience in the past, I think, to say three to four weeks might be a little ambitious. ADV DU PLESSIS: Yes, I am a bit apprehensive in committing myself to that. That was obviously on the basis that I have the record available on Monday, that I can start, which I don't think would be the case. We have the record of the first part of the hearing. JUDGE MALL: Mr Mpshe, have you any objection to the arrangement that counsel be allowed four weeks within which to submit his heads of argument? ADV MPSHE: Mr Chairman, I would have no problem with that, Mr Chairman, but I just want to indicate that the record is not yet available, Mr Chairman. JUDGE MALL: I understand that, yes. The heads of argument can be commenced with, in respect of that portion of the hearing where the record is completed, so regular work can be done in the meanwhile. ADV DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, may I enquire from the Chair if it would be possible for me to approach the Committee CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 176 ADDRESS perhaps, or yourself, if there is a problem with the availability of the last part of the record, and I see that there isn't enough time. The reason why I am prepared to commit myself to a period soon after the hearings, is the fact that we deem it important to have the heads of argument in and we want to deal with this while everything is fresh in our minds. JUDGE MALL: Of course. ADV DU PLESSIS: May I approach you then when a problem arises pertaining to the record, Mr Chairman? JUDGE MALL: Yes, there is no hard and fast rule, but we were hoping that if we discussed the matter here publicly, it is clear to all interested parties, that this matter is not just going to drag on and on, you know, and the public knows nothing about when we are going to be turning our mind to this application. So I think it is important for the public to know that the next step in these proceedings is going to be heads of argument, which at present are to be four weeks from now, and if there are difficulties in the way of obtaining a transcript of the evidence, that is a factor which the Committee will take into account. ADV DU PLESSIS: Thank you, Mr Chairman. JUDGE MALL: Thank you. ADV DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, if you will just bear with me for one moment. JUDGE MALL: Yes. ADV DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, I beg your pardon. Mr Chairman, there is one aspect which I want to raise with the Committee and that is the question, if the heads of argument is presented to the Committee, can we accept that the applications have been finalised and the applications will CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 177 ADDRESS then be adjudged on the basis of the evidence presented to the Committee coupled with the heads of argument? Obviously, if that is not the case, I would like an indication from the Committee exactly how possibly other amnesty applications might have an influence on that, because it might be important for me to present you with supplementary heads of argument, pertaining to other applications if the Committee is going to take the contents of other applications into account. JUDGE MALL: I think you must assume that when the time comes for the Committee to consider this massive volume of evidence, and its far-reaching implications, that if at some stage in the near future, other applicants give evidence, whose evidence may impact on your client's case, your attention will be drawn to that. You will be afforded an opportunity to react to it. ADV DU PLESSIS: Yes, Mr Chairman, I just want to clear this out that I would then have the right to present you with supplementary - if you haven't given judgment yet, to present you with supplementary heads of argument pertaining to that evidence in the other application that is going to be led by somebody else. JUDGE MALL: Well, the whole purpose of drawing it to your attention is to enable you to deal with the matter. ADV DU PLESSIS: Thank you, Mr Chairman, I just wanted to ...(intervention) JUDGE WILSON: As I recollect, one of your clients yesterday asked us to have regard to the evidence of someone else who had made an application. Could I add something to what the Chairman has said about notification. It seems to me that it might well be in your interest if you are notified of CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE 178 hearings. Rather than merely the evidence that was later - because obviously you would be - your clients should be interested parties at such hearings. ADV DU PLESSIS: Yes, Mr Chairman, we would appreciate that if the Commission could let us know of all hearings that are scheduled so that we can decide exactly where we have to ... JUDGE WILSON: Well, all hearings relating to incidents that your clients have been involved in or may be. ADV DU PLESSIS: Yes. JUDGE WILSON: And clearly you don't want to be told about hearings that have nothing whatsoever to do with them. ADV DU PLESSIS: Yes, but Mr Chairman, what I do foresee is that we also act for about 20 other applicants. So I do foresee that we might be here in respect of other applications as well. So we would like to have a schedule of all hearings that are scheduled so that we can decide. We will take it up with the Commission. JUDGE MALL: Yes. Alright. This brings to a conclusion the proceedings this morning, Mr Mpshe? ADV MPSHE: That is so, Mr Chairman, thank you. JUDGE MALL: Yes. Mr Mpshe, is the position that the Committee's next public hearing is going to be in East London on Monday morning? ADV MPSHE: That is so, Mr Chairman. JUDGE MALL: Very well. The Committee now adjourns and if there are any further developments that impact on this particular application, notice to all interested parties will be given. You will make a copy of your heads of argument insofar as they are relevant to Mr Currin's client as well. ADV DU PLESSIS: Yes, MR Chairman, I will make available a CAPE TOWN HEARING AMNESTY/W CAPE ADV DU PLESSIS 179 ADDRESS copy of my heads of argument to Mr Currin, and I will also endeavour to make it available to Mr Visser, if he should be interested and Mrs Kruger and anybody else who appeared during the hearings. JUDGE MALL: Thank you. Thank you very much. The Committee adjourns. COMMITTEE ADJOURNS