amntrans AMNESTY HEARING 1998-02-23 PRETORIA 1 ADRIAAN PIETER VAN NIEKERK AM4353/96 https://sabctrc.saha.org.za/hearing.php?id=54864&t=&tab=hearings https://sabctrc.saha.org.za/originals/amntrans/pta/bopape1.htm CHAIRPERSON First of all I will introduce to you the panel. On my far left we have Mr Jake Moloi, a Committee member who is an attorney from Welkom. On my immediate left we have Mr Chris De Jager, also a member of the Committee from Pretoria who is a member of the Pretoria Bar, an advocate there. On my far right, we have Mrs Leah Gcabashe who is a member of the Committee and who is a member of the Johannesburg Bar and on my immediate right is Mr Justice Sandile Ngcobo from the Cape Bench, a member of the Committee and I am Selwyn Miller, also a Judge from the Transkei Division of the High Court. I would like to ask those legal representatives representing the Applicants and members of the family to kindly place themselves on record. MR PRINSLOO I act on behalf of Mr Van Niekerk, the first applicant and the fifth applicant, Mr Zeelie. My name is H J Prinsloo. MR VAN DER WALT Chairperson, I appear on behalf of Mr Mostert, Mr Engelbrecht, Mr Du Preez, Mr Visser and Mr Van Loggerenberg and I am L Van der Walt. MR VISSER Mr Chairman, for the record, my name is Louis Visser. I am instructed by Attorneys Wagener Muller & Du Plessis. We act, Mr Chairman before you for three Applicants. Generals Van Der Merwe, Erasmus and Du Toit and we also act for the interested party Mr Adriaan Vlok. MR RAUTENBACH Mr Chairman, my name is G Rautenbach. I am an advocate from the Johannesburg Bar. I have been instructed by the firm Cheadle Thompson & Haysom in Johannesburg and we act on behalf of the Bopape family. CHAIRPERSON Thank you very much. We can then commence with the proceedings and I think perhaps the best way to do it would be to call upon those persons representing the Applicants, perhaps for convenience sake in order of sequence to deal with their application. MR VISSER CHAIRPERSON Thank you Mr Visser. Then I call upon Mr Prinsloo. MR PRINSLOO Chairperson, the first Applicant to be called is Mr Adriaan Van Niekerk. ADV DE JAGER Your full names Mr Van Niekerk? Could you please stand? ADRIAAN PIETER VAN NIEKERK (sworn states) EXAMINATION BY MR PRINSLOO Mr Van Niekerk, you are the Applicant in this particular situation with regard to the death of Stanza Bopape? MR VAN NIEKERK That is correct. MR PRINSLOO Is it correct Mr Van Niekerk that your Application for amnesty as exposed in the bundle before the Committee is Page 1. Problem with microphones MR PRINSLOO Mr Van Niekerk, your Application is put in bundle 1 and is from Page 1 to Page 20, is that correct? MR VAN NIEKERK That is correct, your Honour. MR PRINSLOO MR VAN NIEKERK Yes. MR PRINSLOO Do you confirm that? MR VAN NIEKERK Yes. MR PRINSLOO MR VAN NIEKERK That is correct. MR PRINSLOO When did you join the South African Police? MR VAN NIEKERK In 1969. MR PRINSLOO And you had the rank of Lieutenant when you retired? MR VAN NIEKERK That is correct. MR PRINSLOO Can you please tell the Committee what your career was in the Police where you served the different branches. MR VAN NIEKERK When I joined in 1969, for a short period I was at the uniform branch then I was transferred to the detective branch where I spent most of my time on the East Rand as detective and in 1976 I was promoted to the rank of Lieutenant and I was transferred to the security branch in Johannesburg. And there I worked at John Vorster Square, up to approximately 1991. During my time with the security branch at John Vorster Square I was mainly concerned with the investigation of acts of terror and sabotage and so forth and also treason. MR PRINSLOO Mr Van Niekerk, the investigation that you did at John Vorster Square with regard to acts of terror, who were mostly the accused or the suspects? MR VAN NIEKERK It was mainly the ANC activists within the ANC, trained terrorists, members of Umkhonto weSizwe movement and then also to a lesser degree members of the APLA movement. MR PRINSLOO Mr Van Niekerk, where you in any way involved with the unrest during 1976? MR VAN NIEKERK Yes. When I arrived at the security branch in 1976 I was also part of a team who were involved with the investigation - in the investigation that started in June 1976. MR PRINSLOO The unrest raging at that time on the one hand, was it the ANC and on the other hand the police forces? How can you picture it for us? MR VAN NIEKERK MR PRINSLOO Mr Van Niekerk, did you do any specific courses to give you information on how to conduct interrogations? MR VAN NIEKERK I did a detective course while I was a member of the detective branch. At the security branch I did a course in security and later also a course in interrogation. MR PRINSLOO The course on interrogation that you refer to, broadly what did that entail? MR VAN NIEKERK It entailed interrogation methods, also how the enemy should be identified and how information should be gathered. There was a distinction made between the different kinds of information, tactical intelligence, strategic intelligence and so forth. MR PRINSLOO You refer to the enemy. Was there an enemy identified at that stage? MR VAN NIEKERK MR PRINSLOO At that stage, was there in any way an onslaught against the country by the ANC? MR VAN NIEKERK MR PRINSLOO This particular onslaught, did it diminish or did it increase? How can you explain it to us? MR VAN NIEKERK My experience was that since 1976 the onslaught increased dramatically. MR PRINSLOO MR VAN NIEKERK I was stationed at the security branch in Johannesburg at John Vorster Square and I was part of the investigation unit. MR PRINSLOO What was your specific position that you had? MR VAN NIEKERK I was a major at that stage and I was the commander of the investigating unit at John Vorster. MR PRINSLOO Mr Van Niekerk, would you tell the Committee what happened and - that gave rise to this particular case, with regard to the arrest and interrogation of Stanza Bopape. MR VAN NIEKERK Your Honour, on Friday the 10th June 1988 I was called in by my Commanding Officer, that was Erasmus and I was informed that between himself and the Commander of the West Rand Security Branch there was communication and that a number of people had been arrested in terms of the Act on Internal Security or perhaps I can put it this way, it was in relation to acts of terror, involvement with the ANC and acts of terror and General Erasmus requested me to join the West Rand Investigation Unit and the instruction was to be involved and assist with the interrogation of people. After I had spoken to General Erasmus, I contacted Captain Jan Kleynhans who was the chief investigating officer of the Krugersdorp Security Branch and I met him at the Roodepoort Police Station in relation to this incident. At the Roodepoort Police Station Captain Kleynhans gave me information with regard to the two people that I have referred to earlier, that those two people had been arrested in relation to ANC terror attacks and activities and that Mr Bopape was involved in the Maponye Terrorist Group. And that he had contact with the group and was involved with the group. The request was and the arrangement between myself and Captain Kleynhans was that in the light of the assistance that we should give, that I would interrogate or have the other two people interrogated further. MR PRINSLOO The other person was that Mr Mkosi? MS GCABASHE Had you had a report from your junior officers who work in your unit about the arrest? MR VAN NIEKERK Chairperson, if I can remember correctly, the morning of the 10th I found out from the other members that the previous night they were out and the arrests took place although I was not informed of the operation of the previous night. MS GCABASHE Was that Mr Kleynhans? MR VAN NIEKERK That is correct. MS GCABASHE Did you have any idea as to why they had gone out to arrest Mr Bopape? MR VAN NIEKERK I was informed that the West Rand Security Branch requested them to go along to assist with the arrest. MS GCABASHE ... ...(inaudible) would not first ask for your authority before using your junior officers? MR VAN NIEKERK MS GCABASHE ... ...(inaudible) circumstances, who authorised them to accompany the West Rand Police men, in your absence? MR VAN NIEKERK I have no knowledge of that. MS GCABASHE ...(inaudible) opportunity to find out yet, to date? MR VAN NIEKERK MS GCABASHE Even after the circumstances of the death of Mr Bopape, when you started investigating what had gone on, did you not think to ask who had authorised them in the first place, to go out and arrest? MR VAN NIEKERK Chairperson, after that was Bopape and the other person Mkosi who were transferred to John Vorster Square that was on the 10th June. At John Vorster Square, I gave instructions to Mostert and Engelbrecht to handle the interrogation of Mr Bopape. MR PRINSLOO Mostert and Engelbrecht are some of your Co-Applicants, is that correct? MR VAN NIEKERK That is correct. Yes, that is correct. The other person, Mr Mkosi, I asked Warrant Officer Syvert and Wilkin to interrogate him. During the course of that particular day, the 10th June, and if I can remember correctly, the people were interrogated at John Vorster Square but in the process, there was also the necessary administrative duties that go along with such an interrogation and that was also handled and that took some time but at a particular stage, Mostert and Engelbrecht were in fact busy with the interrogation of Mr Bopape. The arrangement was between myself and Captain Kleynhans that on the next day the 11th June, we would get together in Krugersdorp in order to have further discussions. On the 11th June, myself and some of the members, if I can remember correctly it was Warrant Officer Mostert who accompanied me to Krugersdorp where there was a meeting and during which meeting the detention of different people, inter alia, Mr Bopape was discussed. MS GCABASHE Mr Van Niekerk, up to this stage, did you have an idea through the types of questions the West Rand wanted you to ask of Mr Bopape? MR VAN NIEKERK The information that I got from Captain Kleynhans, namely that Bopape was involved with the Maponye Terrorist Group and that he was part of them would have given an indication that during interrogation that the people who did the interrogation would have lead the interrogation in that direction. MS GCABASHE .......(inaudible) entail asking specific questions because you had a particular objective in mind? MR VAN NIEKERK I cannot remember whether there was anything specific that Captain Kleynhans wanted or specific questions that should have been asked, it is possible but perhaps he could have told me to determine whether the person knew any other people, weapons and so forth. I cannot say today that that was indeed the instruction. MS GCABASHE What was the instruction you gave to your junior officers? What did you want them to find out? MR VAN NIEKERK MS GCABASHE Is it correct then that they would have had all the information they needed about the Maponye Group and they could therefore ask questions relevant to that aspect? MR VAN NIEKERK MS GCABASHE Exactly the sense that I have Mr Van Niekerk that you had very little information to work off. This is why my question is, what were you interrogating him about? What did you want to know, at this stage, before the major meeting with Mr Kleynhans? MR VAN NIEKERK MS GCABASHE .......(inaudible) utter no, no, no, to each one of those questions. The interrogation would go on because your junior officers did not really know what they were looking for, am I right? MR VAN NIEKERK If I had conveyed the information that I got from Captain Kleynhans then they would have asked similar questions and the questions that I have just related to, and they could have continued asking that to the person. MR PRINSLOO Could you just tell us about when you discussed it with Mr Kleynhans. MR VAN NIEKERK I said there was a meeting at Krugersdorp Security Branch, the chairperson of the meeting was Colonel Johan Le Roux. He was the Commander at that stage of the West Rand Security Branch. There were approximately 15, perhaps more members from Pretoria Security Branch, the West Rand, myself and then one or two members from my own staff. The investigation with regard to the Maponye Group was discussed and from that it was quite clear and it was also the instruction that the information was of such a nature that Mr Bopape was involved with the Group, that he was trained and that he moved between Pretoria, Johannesburg, the West Rand and the Vaal Triangle. It was conveyed to us that this Group was involved in many acts of terror, mostly in Pretoria, among others, attacks on 3 police men, a bomb at ......(inaudible). Many attacks on the houses of members of the South African Police. Several attacks on buildings, a train carriage. MR VISSER CHAIRPERSON Well, if it would assist in the leading of the evidence and make things go quicker then perhaps we could get that list now, thank you. MR VISSER CHAIRPERSON Yes, thank you. If you could proceed. MR PRINSLOO Mr Van Niekerk, you received a list from my learned friend, Mr Visser of acts committed. Could you just have a look at that? Now, you are aware of ........ [microphone problem] MR PRINSLOO That is correct Chairperson. Would you just have a look at that. That is the list that Mr Visser has made available. CHAIRPERSON [inaudible] do you have anything about the handing in of the list at this stage? Do you have any objections at all? MR VISSER CHAIRPERSON And Mr Steenkamp? MR STEENKAMP I have no objections Mr Chairman, I just would like a copy of it please. CHAIRPERSON So this list is then being used without prejudice at all and without any admissions going along with it or anything of that nature. MR PRINSLOO Do we have photocopying facilities here? MR STEENKAMP MR PRINSLOO Chairperson, before you spell it, the first three names, the three murder charges, those are members of the Police is that correct? MR VAN NIEKERK Yes, that is correct. MR PRINSLOO It was also said that those three members were shot dead. Is that correct? MR VAN NIEKERK Yes. In Attridgeville. MR PRINSLOO Can we just have some clarity. You said they were Municipal Policemen? Whilst you were reading the names. Were they members of the Municipal Police, the first three that you mention or were they members of the South African Police? MR VAN NIEKERK MR PRINSLOO Please spell the names for record purposes. MR VAN NIEKERK Patience - P-a-t-i-e-n-c-e, and the surname K-u-l-e-l-e. Chairperson, then there are other acts, attempted murder incidents and I cannot recall specifically that they were mentioned. The murders that I mentioned were mentioned during the meeting. There was also a mention made of the attack in Beatrix Street, Pretoria. If I can remember correctly that was at the Sterland Theatre Complex. MR PRINSLOO Mr Van Niekerk, just to interrupt, is it correct that at the Sterland Complex there was an explosion where Maponye, the leader of this group, where he was killed? MR VAN NIEKERK That is correct, Chairperson. MR PRINSLOO And is it also correct that it was mentioned in the specific act that will be made available that there was an explosion at Juicy Lucy in Pretoria on the corners of Andries and Vermeulen Streets? MR VAN NIEKERK Chairperson, it is correct that the Juicy Lucy incident was also mentioned during the meeting and that several people were injured during that explosion. MR PRINSLOO And you also mentioned earlier in your testimony and people that you confused with the Municipal Police that the Municipal offices in Attridgeville was also damaged in an explosion? MR VAN NIEKERK Yes, that is correct. MR PRINSLOO And that there was also an explosion where a train carriage was damaged at Saulsville in Pretoria? Did you have knowledge of that? MR VAN NIEKERK MS GCABASHE Now, Mr Bopape was arrested in terms of Section 50 of the Criminal Procedure Act on the 9th, midnight? MR VAN NIEKERK That is correct Mr Chairman. MS GCABASHE MR VAN NIEKERK MS GCABASHE MR VAN NIEKERK MS GCABASHE MR VAN NIEKERK I expect he was kept according to Article 50 because he was involved in the Maponye Group. MS GCABASHE [Inaudible] - to detain him in terms of Section 29 before this major meeting? MR VAN NIEKERK [microphone problems] MR VAN NIEKERK Mr Chairperson, on Sunday the 12th June there was a regulation or arrangement that Mr Mostert and Engelbrecht would have questioned Mr Bopape with regards to the information we had at that time. I was at the office myself at John Vorster Square, Police Station on the 10th floor and Mr Mostert and Mr Engelbrecht was in the office next to me on my left side busy questioning Mr Bopape. I was in my office busy with other matters and in another office to my right was Lieutenant Zeelie who was also an Applicant and he was busy with other matters. MR PRINSLOO When you interrogate a person do you give him the information you have or do you try and obtain it from the person? MR VAN NIEKERK MR PRINSLOO MR VAN NIEKERK Mr Chairperson, myself went to speak to Mr Bopape during the course of the morning and I made sure that he understood how serious the situation was. That in terms of Section 29 he was detained because of Section 29 there was enough grounds for us to detain him and that it was his duty to give us information he had concerning himself, others, everything. He said to me that he was not willing to give us any information. But despite that, the other two members kept on interrogating him. MS GCABASHE In the form the interrogation had taken, up to this point. MR VAN NIEKERK There was a strong wooden chair in my office and because of the fact that my office was quite small we pushed the chair out into the corridor which was quite broad, wide and Mr Bopape was placed on the chair. His shirt was removed, his hands were tied to the supports of the chair and his feet to the legs of the chair. Sergeant Du Preez had the shock device in his hand. We immediately untied him, placed him on the floor and Sergeant Du Preez gave him mouth to mouth resuscitation. It seemed that he was dead already and I think all of us standing there, including myself, Lieutenant Zeelie, Mr Mostert, Mr Engelbrecht and Mr Du Preez all thought that he was dead. If I remember correctly some of the members felt the pulse at several parts of his body. I believed the man was already dead. Afterwards, as a group we quickly spoke to each other about what we should do next and then we decided that we have to inform our seniors and I decided to phone General Erasmus. Immediately afterwards I phoned General Erasmus at his home and told him what happened and immediately afterwards I went to his house where I discussed the issue with General Erasmus. I told him that I was concerned, considering the fact that he died in detention and he was kept under Section 29, that he was involved in a terror group which was causing a huge amount of anarchy at that stage and that the [inaudible] June the 16th an arrest was under way and that another death in detention would be a great shame for the political parties of the day and that we had to make some plan or other. General Erasmus said that he would discuss it with head office. And he would come back to me on that issue. Afterwards I went back to the office and I informed the other members of the group concerning my visit to General Erasmus and the body, if I remember correctly before I left, we thought we would put the body back in the office where Mr Mostert and Engelbrecht interrogated him at first and he was placed on the floor and a blanket was thrown over him. And then we waited to receive feedback from General Erasmus. There was an instruction that we have to organise a fake escape which would happen in collaboration with Eastern Transvaal Security Branch. On the request of Mr Erasmus I phoned Brigadier Visser which is also an Applicant here and I made arrangements with him where we will meet them and what time and the arrangement was, on the highway, outside Bronkhorstspruit. The escape entailed that we would say that we took Mr Bopape out to Sebokeng in the vicinity of De Deur, close to the Vaal Triangle where he would have indicated to us the address of the specific contact person. The role of Mr Bopape was played by Lieutenant Zeelie. First we took a drive in the centre of Johannesburg and we bought food, in case there were further questions afterwards. We would have been able to give that kind of evidence and from there we went to De Deur and between De Deur residential, on the way to Sebokeng there was, it was not quite a deserted road, there was an open piece of field on both sides. That was the arrangement. It was arranged like this beforehand and then Zeelie ran down the road into the field. I pulled out my service pistol and shot several shots and Lieutenant Zeelie disappeared into the dark and about a kilometre further down there was another vehicle with Mr Du Preez in it waiting for him and that vehicle picked him up and took him back to wherever they would have gone then and the fake escape basically involved only me, Mr Mostert, Mr Engelbrecht. The next day, the Monday, I went and sat down and wrote a complete memorandum with regards to the fake escape and I explained, step by step what happened and who was involved. No mention was made of the death of Mr Bopape. The fake was well known, even at our own Security Branch that Mr Bopape escaped. MR PRINSLOO Mr Van Niekerk, with regard to this particular action, the escape of Bopape and the death of Bopape, was there any approval given for this in any way? MR VAN NIEKERK Chairperson, we acted on behalf of the Country, the Government of the day, it was practise in the Security Branch that when we were confronted by such a situation and where a person did not want to give his co-operation that methods of force, such as shock devices would be used. It is a method that was allowed by myself and I believe that it had the approval throughout of my commanders and head office. MR PRINSLOO MR VAN NIEKERK Section 29 was as is, drastic legislation, that placed force on the detainee to make available all the information at his disposal. It was one of the methods that was used, that was part of legislation to assist the Security Branch in obtaining information and it had to do with getting information. There was a need to obtain the information. MR PRINSLOO Mr Van Niekerk, was it of utmost importance for you that Mr Bopape should supply information? MR VAN NIEKERK Mr Chairperson, yes. The information was that he was involved with the Maponye Group and as has already been mentioned today, they had been involved with large scale onslaught attacks, death, damage of property, terror and that his involvement and the information that he had was of utmost importance. MR PRINSLOO You may continue. MR VAN NIEKERK The information was extremely important in order to expose the scope of the activities and should any people be involved, to arrest them and perhaps weapons that would still be available, explosives, to obtain that so that further acts of terror and death and anarchy could be prevented. MR PRINSLOO The former experience that you have had with regard to Section 29, did you get important information as you have just said that had prevented acts of terror, death, anarchy and so forth? MR VAN NIEKERK MR PRINSLOO And the action of you, was it on your behalf as a person or was it on behalf of someone else? On whose behalf was it? MR VAN NIEKERK Chairperson, I act in this capacity as a member of the Security Branch. It carries the approval of the Security Branch. It is on behalf of the Security Branch, the information that we used to stabilise the country which was experiencing extreme political problems and unrest and in no way I acted on my own behalf, nor me, nor any of the other members on that particular day. MR PRINSLOO Did you in any way act male fides, to just, in other words just inflict pain? MR VAN NIEKERK MR PRINSLOO MR VAN NIEKERK Yes, it was a fact that the ANC at that stage had already progressed far with the attack in the country itself and also in other countries from the outside and the terror onslaught escalated where initially only hard targets were attacked, such as buildings but at that stage, soft targets was also used, car bombs exploded and for example, where people were sitting at a restaurant, bombs exploded. MR PRINSLOO Did you attend to any of these particular incidents where bombs exploded, where acts of terror were committed by the ANC? MR VAN NIEKERK MR PRINSLOO Mr Van Niekerk, at that stage, was the Government of the day prepared to give the country over to the ANC? MR VAN NIEKERK No. Not at all, Chairperson. If I can recall the political statements made by the politicians, it was said throughout, we would do anything within our power to stop the onslaught of the ANC. MR PRINSLOO And how did you interpret that? MR VAN NIEKERK The total onslaught that was propagated by the politicians that they would stop. MR PRINSLOO How should it be stopped? MR VAN NIEKERK My position as member of the Security Police lead me to the interpretation that I was part of this process to stop it. That in my capacity at work, I should do everything in my ability to fight against this onslaught and where necessary, violence with violence and that is how these methods were then used. MR PRINSLOO In the Bopape case, was it in any way very important for you or urgent that you should get information or was it - or could it have happened over a period of time? MR VAN NIEKERK It was important as it was conveyed to me, it was a boiling pot, there were many other arrests and it was important that information should be gathered. MR PRINSLOO Mr Van Niekerk, the death of Bopape and the mock escape, was this conveyed to head office, according to your knowledge? MR VAN NIEKERK Chairperson, as I said, the day just after the mock escape, there was a complete report given to head office and they were informed in this regard and at a later stage I personally discussed this incident with General Joubert. MR PRINSLOO You referred to General Joubert, in which capacity did he serve in the South African Police and where was he at that stage? MR VAN NIEKERK His function, I could be wrong but General Joubert at that stage was at the Security Head Office and he had a senior position there and I know he had the task, with regard to the whole escape situation and I was under the impression that he had reported to the Minister. MR PRINSLOO Did you convey the real facts to General Joubert as it happened in reality? MR VAN NIEKERK At some stage during a discussion with General Joubert, I in fact informed him with regard to the real facts of the matter. MR PRINSLOO Was that before the escape or after it took place, that you discussed it with him? MR VAN NIEKERK It was only afterwards. MR PRINSLOO Mr Van Niekerk, was that after this issue had already been reported to head office, the escape? MR VAN NIEKERK That is correct. MR PRINSLOO According to your impression, why was it necessary for you to inform him about this? What was his interest in this? MR VAN NIEKERK General Joubert, if I can remember correctly, he also wanted to know whether the - what was put into the occurrence book. Whether that in fact corroborated with the whole escape story. So there were quite a few questions that he asked me and it was quite clear to me that he had information about this incident. MR PRINSLOO Mr Van Niekerk, could you perhaps tell this Committee what you thought caused the death of Bopape? MR VAN NIEKERK Chairperson, I was puzzled. I did not believe that he could have died as a result of the shock that we gave him and it bothered me that he died so quickly. MR PRINSLOO MR VAN NIEKERK MR PRINSLOO Mr Van Niekerk, are you aware of any explosion that would have taken place in Ellis Park during or just after that period, any period? MR VAN NIEKERK After the death of Mr Bopape there was a bomb explosion at the Ellis Park Rugby Stadium. It was approximately a month later. MR PRINSLOO Mr Van Niekerk, was there at a particular stage an identification done by a particular lady where she referred to Mr Bopape as a person that she had seen? MR VAN NIEKERK Yes, that is correct. What happened was that with the mock escape, we made the photos of Mr Bopape available and it was distributed widely through the country and I understand and at the police stations where I came, these photos were seen of this suspect and this lady was at the rugby and she a person and later on she saw a photo at a police station and then she brought the two together and this then lead to the fact that we approached her for an affidavit and an identification parade and a statement was obtained. MR PRINSLOO That person, the lady, was she known to you before hand? MR VAN NIEKERK No. Not at all. MR PRINSLOO And the reason why she had to make the statement, why was that? MR VAN NIEKERK MR PRINSLOO MR VAN NIEKERK Yes, that is correct. Yes, I had information about that. I saw that on page 761. MR PRINSLOO And is it true that Mr Peter Maluleka - just for the record purposes, also just refer to which volume. MR VAN NIEKERK Yes, that is correct. NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR PRINSLOO COMMITTEE ADJOURNS ON RESUMPTION ADRIAAN PIETER VAN NIEKERK (s.u.o.) CHAIRPERSON MS VAN DER WALT No questions. CHAIRPERSON CROSS EXAMINATION BY MR VISSER Mr Chairman, I do have one or two questions. Mr Van Niekerk, perhaps just to explain to those who have not done a course in interrogation as you had, would you perhaps just briefly explain and perhaps I could give you a question to which you can explain it. If you place yourself in the time frame when the struggle was raging in our past, 1980, thereabouts and perhaps also later, if you as a person involved with the investigation unit who had to investigate ANC activities, if you had only received information from an informer that a specific person was a member of Umkhonto weSizwe and you or one of your members in your command would have arrested such a person? Are you following? MR VAN NIEKERK Chairperson, no, there will still be an interrogation based on the information that you have received. You would still interrogate the person. MR VISSER And you said the typical thing that you would have liked to know is where he is connected, whether weapons are involved, where the caches are, these kinds of things. MR VAN NIEKERK If that is the information obtained from the informer that the person is connected to the MK, a military unit, then the questioning would follow that route but you could find him in another terrain and you would have other questions. MR VISSER Mr Van Niekerk, something else. You testified here today and also during the Section 29 interview into investigation, you also testified to this regard and you said that you, as a member of the Security Branch were under the impression that Head Office or your Commanders were aware of the fact that in certain circumstances, force would be used and was used by members on the ground, if I can put it that way. When they were of the opinion that the person interrogated was in possession of very important information, can you remember that? MR VAN NIEKERK Yes, I can remember that. MR VISSER MR VAN NIEKERK Yes, that is correct. MR VISSER Is it perhaps also the case, according to your knowledge that should a member would go overboard and assaulted a detainee, and he was then caught out, that that member would then personally have to take responsibility for the assault? MR VAN NIEKERK MR VISSER MR VAN NIEKERK As I see it, is that it was condoned and if you take the case of Bopape, we know it was condoned and we exclude that. MR VISSER Are there any other instances that you have knowledge of, that it was in fact condoned? MR VAN NIEKERK MR VISSER MR VAN NIEKERK I would not contest that. MR VISSER MR VAN NIEKERK Yes, it is possible. MR VISSER And that the death was something totally unexpected based on the violence that was executed on Mr Bopape? MR VAN NIEKERK Yes, that is correct. MR VISSER And did you also mention to General Erasmus that the members were worried about the situation and that they were not prepared to follow the normal legal process in the case of the death of a person to be prosecuted, or that this should be followed? MR VAN NIEKERK MR VAN NIEKERK MR VISSER Did you also tell General Erasmus that because of these considerations, you did not inform the District Surgeon about the death of Mr Bopape? MR VAN NIEKERK MR VISSER Where would you have gone to? MR VAN NIEKERK I would have contacted the Investigating Service Officer and he would then have taken over the investigation as in the case with a death. MR VISSER MR VAN NIEKERK Yes, that is correct. MR VISSER And one of the reasons was that you, the men who interrogated Mr Bopape knew very well that you were perhaps guilty of murder and attempted murder or rather homicide. And Erasmus then said that he would take it up with Head Office and that he would then report back to you? MR VAN NIEKERK Yes, that is correct. MR VISSER And you also testified about the rest? [intervention] I have no further questions. Thank you, Mr Chairman. NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VISSER CHAIRPERSON Advocate Rautenbach, would you prefer Mr Steenkamp to go first? MR RAUTENBACH CHAIRPERSON Is there any objection to this document going in from any of the parties? MR VISSER CHAIRPERSON Yes, thank you. MR VISSER The only document is the indictment, Mr Chairman, which we already have now. MR STEENKAMP Mr Chairman, maybe for record purposes we can mark the two pre-trial minutes as, Exhibit B and C, the of the 5th February, marked Exhibit B and the one of the 16th February, marked Exhibit C, sir. CHAIRPERSON MR STEENKAMP Thank you Mr Chairman. CHAIRPERSON CROSS EXAMINATION BY MR RAUTENBACH Mr Van Niekerk, I act on behalf of the family of Mr Stanza Bopape and at the start of my interrogation I would like to say to you that the family is not satisfied with certain of the explanations that were given for his death and in that light, I will continue my interrogation. The first aspects I would like to talk about is that you referred to the process of interrogation and a process which was general practise. If I understand the evidence correctly, concerning the use of the electric shocks and other forms of torture, am I correct? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK That is correct. MR RAUTENBACH The question that was asked to you, [inaudible] and the answer was, "This came with time. We saw that in the days when I was an investigator, it happened. I did not learn it in the Security Branch. It was a general practise in the South African Police that where you were dealing with a criminal, methods were used to make that person talk. It has been in practise for a long time. People who were involved in - Police Officers who were involved in the questioning or interrogation of criminals would make use of these methods. I assume that Murder and Robbery, although I never was a member of Murder and Robbery made use of that." MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH And you say it started a long time ago. If I understand your answer correctly, the practise has been in use for quite a long time? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH Regarding this answer, would I be correct if I say that this is a practise which existed, generally within the Police Force? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH So it was not something reserved specifically for political crimes? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK Correct. MR RAUTENBACH These were practises that existed for quite a long time. How would you distinguish between a person that was accused of robbery and then shocked by a shock device and a person who was detained because of a political crime? MR VAN NIEKERK In the Security Branch we had the situation where we dealt with the ANC, the onslaught of the MK, acts of terror and it was of crucial importance that that onslaught should have been stopped. And within this whole national political context, the Security Branch was allowed to do this whilst at the Detective Branch it was a completely different situation. MR RAUTENBACH You see Mr Van Niekerk, it seems that the handling of people, this handling of people came down to a system that was followed by the Police. It was [inaudible] more than only political criminals. It also involved other people in other categories. MR VAN NIEKERK That is so, that it was used by other branches of the Police but with different goals. MR RAUTENBACH You see Mr Van Niekerk when people are, for example, detained because of political activities then it happens - would you agree with me - that people made admissions when they were interrogated in this way? MR VAN NIEKERK That is possible that admissions would have flown from that, yes. MR RAUTENBACH Would you say admissions were made by people who were not detained for political crimes and was similarly treated? MR VAN NIEKERK That is correct. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK I do not agree with you. In the Security Branch, it was a method used to obtain information. Urgent information that we had to acquire and it was approved and it was used generally. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK That is correct. MR RAUTENBACH As far as Section 29 is concerned, the goal of Section 29 was to detain a person until information is received? Do you agree with that? MR VAN NIEKERK That is correct. MR RAUTENBACH Would you also agree with me that the fright this person experienced kept in terms of Section 29 that if he did not give the information his detention would continue longer than he would have liked it himself? And would you also agree that attacks happening in which either way in terms of Section 29 would have been illegal at all times? MR VAN NIEKERK That is correct. CHAIRPERSON MR RAUTENBACH MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK I gave a report to General Joubert. I saw him I spoke to him and I was under the impression that he was responsible to give a report of this to the Minister. If it happened like that, I do not know. MR RAUTENBACH Can you just give us an indication around when General Joubert became aware of the fact of what actually happened, the true facts? MR VAN NIEKERK I cannot tell you the exactly because shortly after the incident I spoke to him about the escape as well as the memorandum and afterwards I saw him and then we spoke about the true facts. MR RAUTENBACH Can you just tell us as far as General Joubert is concerned what was his position within the Police at that stage? Why did you have to contact him? What was his role? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH Mr Van Niekerk, at that stage, who was the head of the Security Police, in general? MR VAN NIEKERK I think it was General Van Der Merwe. MR RAUTENBACH And who was the Commissioner at that stage? MR VAN NIEKERK Commissioner De Witt. I speak under correction. MR RAUTENBACH In 1988, what was your rank in the Police? MR VAN NIEKERK Major. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK Could you just repeat that? MR RAUTENBACH It was very important to make arrangements to hide his death? MR VAN NIEKERK Yes, that was the plan. MR RAUTENBACH With regards to the escape scene which happened - or created fictionally - it seems a lot of planning went into that. Is that correct? MR VAN NIEKERK As I said earlier today, in a question of one to two hours, this preparation was made. MR RAUTENBACH So you actually told us you drove out to where the scene was created and Lieutenant Zeelie played the role of Stanza Bopape. Is that correct? MR VAN NIEKERK Yes, that was part of the mock escape. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH But you will have to agree with me that as far as what would happen to the body was also very important? MR VAN NIEKERK Very important, I agree. MR RAUTENBACH The decision that one had to get rid of the body, who gave this decision? Who made this decision? MR VAN NIEKERK General Erasmus told me that after talking to head office that Visser was asked to get rid of the body. MR RAUTENBACH When you spoke to General Erasmus, you got the impression that Visser was already informed about all of this? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH The arrangements as far as Brigadier Visser is concerned, you spoke about how you drove out, how the body was transferred and handed over to Visser and whoever was with him. Is that correct? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH After Visser and Van Loggerenberg went away with the body, from your side, did you do anything to find out what happened to the body? MR VAN NIEKERK No. MR RAUTENBACH If the body should appear in any way, then the statements concerning the escape, it would have caused great shame, if this body appeared in some way. Is that not true? MR VAN NIEKERK No. It would have worked with the escape because today we know that the body was thrown in the Komati River, so maybe the body washed out and then we could say that the man escaped and we could have corroborated with that. MR RAUTENBACH Mr Van Niekerk, the question is this. If the body appeared, for example, the next day, then it would have lead to great shame as far as you are concerned. CHAIRPERSON [inaudible] ... wrapped up in plastic bags. MR RAUTENBACH Is that so? If the body was wrapped in plastic, then it could have lead to a problem because it would not have tallied with the escape. In other words, in your thoughts, it must have been of incredible importance that this operation had to be successful? MR VAN NIEKERK Yes. Positive. MR RAUTENBACH Is there any reason why you would not like to question the fact whether it was successfully concluded or what would have happened to the body? MR VAN NIEKERK Probably, I had trust in the people conducting this. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK At a later stage I learned that the body was disposed of. How, I do not know. This happened in consultation with the Advocate. MR RAUTENBACH You later learned that the body was disposed of but you never learned how it was disposed of. Is that correct? And you also did not want to learn that? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH Were you never worried that the body might appear? MR VAN NIEKERK Initially. At first I was worried but as time went by, even if the body was found, today I know they mention plastic bags, but if the body was found, surely one could have referred it back to the escape. MS GCABASHE Are you saying you did not even ask Mr Visser or Van Loggerenberg how they were going to dispose of the body? MR VAN NIEKERK Do you mean at the stage when we gave them the body? MS GCABASHE The time that you handed the body over. MR VAN NIEKERK No, I did not ask. MR RAUTENBACH You testified and I would just like to go through this with you, that you came onto the scene and became involved after Bopape, Nkosi had already been arrested, is that correct? MR VAN NIEKERK On the 10th June I became aware of the arrests. MR RAUTENBACH And where were the two at that stage when you became aware of it? MR VAN NIEKERK I was informed that they were detained at the Roodepoort Police Station and I also ascertained it myself later on. MR RAUTENBACH When were these people specifically transferred to John Vorster? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH With regard to the 10th, can you perhaps tell us whether there was any interrogation on the 10th of Mr Bopape. MR VAN NIEKERK As far as I know, there was interrogation in an office and it had to do mostly with administrative processing about the persons history, his family and things of that nature. MR RAUTENBACH Now, the first interrogation, where did that take place? MR VAN NIEKERK That you refer to now? It must have been at John Vorster Square. I take it that it was there and it would have been on the 10th floor. MR RAUTENBACH Who did that interrogation? MR VAN NIEKERK The people that were appointed to work with the person was Warrant Officer Mostert and Constable Engelbrecht. MR RAUTENBACH Can you remember how long that interrogation took? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH After this interrogation on the 11th, what knowledge do you have of the 11th June with regard to the interrogation, if any? MR VAN NIEKERK If I can remember correctly, I was informed and - I could be wrong. Nkosi was interrogated similarly on the 10th and the 11th. If I remember correctly Bopape was interrogated on the Sunday. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK Correct. MR RAUTENBACH With regard to the 12th, what time did the interrogation start? MR VAN NIEKERK It was in the morning. MR RAUTENBACH Could you perhaps give us some indication, we want to have a look at the duration? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH You have already said that the two people who were directly involved were Mostert and Engelbrecht and that you and Zeelie went to look from time to time to see how the interrogation was going. MR VAN NIEKERK We walked in. We were in the vicinity. MR RAUTENBACH At approximately what time did Mr Bopape die, as you remember it? MR VAN NIEKERK I think it was after 12 in the afternoon. MR RAUTENBACH If we give an estimate of this period that Mr Bopape was questioned, would you agree with a guesstimate of approximately 3 hours? That he was interrogated for 3 hours? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH Can you tell us, with regard to Du Preez, who came on to the scene from Sandton, what time did Du Preez arrive at the office, at the interrogation? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH Was it quite early in the morning, late in the afternoon? When did he arrive? MR VAN NIEKERK He arrived after the interrogation. After Mr Mostert, Engelbrecht, Zeelie and myself decided that we were going to use the shock device. Only after that, he was contacted. And then he arrived. He was totally out of the picture. MR RAUTENBACH Is it possible for you to give us a time framework? When did this decision take place, to get this shock device from Sandton? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK I was in command. MR RAUTENBACH You? MR VAN NIEKERK Yes. MR RAUTENBACH What did you find at the points when you had to go and look at the interrogation? What was taking place? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH To put it to you in this way, did they make use of an interpreter or not? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH Did they make use of an interpreter? MR VAN NIEKERK No, there was no one else. MR RAUTENBACH Which language were they using? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH So it was English or Afrikaans in which the conversation took place? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH Did you in any way notice, whilst you were going in and out that there was frustration on the side of Mostert and Engelbrecht with this person that they were interrogating? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH And did you, because of that information talk to Mr Bopape to get his co-operation at a particular stage and perhaps that gave rise to it? MR VAN NIEKERK I sat with him alone and talked to him, as I testified earlier. MR RAUTENBACH And what was the result of that? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH The decision to get the shock device from Sandton, was that taken by you? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH Who proposed it? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK It was part of the tactic. To keep his body stable. Otherwise when the shock was administered, his body would have pulled away and he would have moved and then he could be injured. It was a method to tie him. MR RAUTENBACH If you say, if he pulls, moves, you have experience, when people are shocked with these devices, what happens? Especially in the sense of having been tied down, in other words giving a very strong twitch or pull - it would of course depend on the extent and the intensity of the shock, but his body would start shivering. Do you have any technical knowledge of the number of volts, amps, involved when using these machines? MR VAN NIEKERK No. MR RAUTENBACH You referred in your testimony to the fact that this particular device is applied for approximately 2 or 3 minutes? MR VAN NIEKERK That is the process, yes. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH And you say that this took place over a period of approximately two to three minutes? MR VAN NIEKERK What happens is that the device is turned, the handle is turned and at the same time the poles was moved over the persons body and then the person stops turning it and the person who has been interrogated is then asked, "what do you say now?" and that is how it proceeded. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH How did Bopape react to the first shock? MR VAN NIEKERK He never reacted. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK No. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK No. MS GCABASHE MR VAN NIEKERK When the shock went through him, his body shivered, it jerked, however you would describe it. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK What do you mean with protest? MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK Correct. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK No. MR RAUTENBACH Did you ask the members present specifically with regard to the treatment they gave him before he was shocked, whether he was assaulted, were there any method of coercion was used on him? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH With regards to methods of coercion, we already dealt with the electrical shocks that was used from time to time. Can you give us any examples of any other methods of coercion used? MR VAN NIEKERK Other members would have assaulted the person. MR RAUTENBACH Could you perhaps describe this? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH Examples perhaps? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH The whole question of using water, I suppose you must have heard about this that water is used in this process with the so-called tube pulled over the face? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH With regard to the process of interrogation, is it possible for you to just give an indication? I take it the process first starts with ordinary interrogation? MR VAN NIEKERK Yes. Normally 90%. It is by discussing. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK That would depend on the person interrogating. He might decide that he is going to assault the person or he might make use of a shock device or perhaps a different method. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK Do you mean on Mr Bopape? MR RAUTENBACH Yes. MR VAN NIEKERK No. I was there the Sunday morning and I would have seen had he been assaulted or had a wet bag been used over his head. I would have known about it. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH But at all times you had the impression, right from the start that he did not want to co-operate? MR VAN NIEKERK That is correct. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH Am I correct when I say that there was a practise, I think it was prescribed when someone is detained in terms of Section 29 that that person shortly afterwards he has been detained, to be taken to a District Surgeon? MR VAN NIEKERK Yes, that is correct. MR RAUTENBACH What was the position with regard to Mr Bopape? Was he taken to the District Surgeon after his detention? MR VAN NIEKERK If I can remember correctly, he was taken to the District Surgeon. MR RAUTENBACH When would that have been? You were in command of the interrogation? When was it that he was taken to the District Surgeon? MR VAN NIEKERK I think it was on the 10th June, the day that he was transferred from Roodepoort to John Vorster Square. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH If he was taken to the District Surgeon, does the District Surgeon give a report? MR VAN NIEKERK Yes. A report is then completed and then it is placed in his detention file. MR RAUTENBACH Who was in charge of that file? MR VAN NIEKERK Usually it comes back to the detention or interrogation file and it is then available for the interrogators or whomever wants to have a look at it. MR RAUTENBACH Are you aware of such a report or where such a report is? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK It must have been in the detention file. That is where I should have seen it, or in a copy at the District Surgeon. MR RAUTENBACH In other words, it might still be something that can be obtained, this report. Is that how you see it? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK Not necessarily. Any member could have taken him for that purpose. MR RAUTENBACH Mr Van Niekerk the decision, could you just tell us how is a decision taken, which requirements have to be met to put someone in detention under Section 29? MR VAN NIEKERK MR VAN NIEKERK I think the decision comes from the particular Security Branch where they decide that there are enough grounds. It then goes to head office where the approval is given. And then an officer designated by the Act that has to inform him. So I think the decision actually lies with the Security Branch. MR RAUTENBACH I just want to say this to you, because it will become of importance later on as I understand you, it is a question of recommendation made by the Branch who then has to motivate why this person has to be detained under Section 29? MR VAN NIEKERK That is why I said earlier that West Rand Security Branch would still be involved with the detention and the application of that. MR RAUTENBACH Now that recommendation is then given to head office to say "these are the grounds why this person has to be detained under Section 29"? Correct? MR VAN NIEKERK No. Head Office just then gave a specific order. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH A document is signed? Now with regard to the signing of this document, who would have done this in the case of Bopape? MR VAN NIEKERK If I remember correctly, it would have been General Du Toit. MR RAUTENBACH And with regard to the Warrant, it says - that would then follow from Head Office later on? MR VAN NIEKERK Yes. MR RAUTENBACH Now the documentation, with regard to the signing of the document by General Du Toit, as well as the Warrant from Head Office, where would we get that? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH Do you think that this file would, in any case, still exist or has it been destroyed? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH Was there ever, while you were there, that instruction that you had to destroy files? MR VAN NIEKERK Yes, there was. MR RAUTENBACH Now, if there had been such an instruction, had it been executed or not? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH Which kinds of files had been destroyed? MR VAN NIEKERK Files on suspects, activists, personal files, as we knew them. MR RAUTENBACH A file on a suspect, is that not a personal file? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK I cannot tell you. MR RAUTENBACH You cannot tell me? Something I just want to clear up with you, this question of Du Preez. He comes from Sandton with the machine, the device, is there any reason why Du Preez had to be present during the interrogation? But was he present? MR VAN NIEKERK Yes. MR RAUTENBACH Why then was he present? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH Did he know - just one minute - as far as Du Preez is concerned, the fact that he went with you in the transportation of the body seems to me it was coincidental? MR VAN NIEKERK After Mr Bopape died, he was involved in the whole issue, and maybe that caused the fact that he remained involved. MR RAUTENBACH Did you know anything of Bopape before he was arrested at this specific incident? MR VAN NIEKERK No. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK I have realised this now but before I never knew that. MR RAUTENBACH What concerns the role Mr Kleynhans played, what was his rank? I forgot, what was his rank, Mr Kleynhans? MR VAN NIEKERK I think he was a Captain. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK Yes. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH So there were members of Roodepoort, as well as members of your branch which had a hand in the arrest? MR VAN NIEKERK Yes, they told me that afterwards. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK Exactly. MR RAUTENBACH When these people were arrested on the grounds of - .. because of the fact that Krugersdorp requested this. How does it happen that interrogation takes place at John Vorster Square without the knowledge of the people at Krugersdorp who was actually after this person? MR VAN NIEKERK I gave evidence this morning that after the arrest of these people I was informed that they were transferred to Roodepoort and not John Vorster. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK That is correct. MR RAUTENBACH Can you just give us more information with regards to this. How does it happen that the people who are at Krugersdorp, these are the people who looked for them at first, now they are in detention at Krugersdorp. Why, for what reasons are they transferred to John Vorster? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK I think that was very important. I think information was quite important if you look at the whole picture of this Maponye Group and the acts that took place. I speculate when I say this, maybe there were quite a few other people they were looking for, I do not know. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH As much pressure as possible to obtain this information, is that correct? MR VAN NIEKERK Correct. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK Correct. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK Yes, I was surprised, I was shocked. It was very strange for me. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK CHAIRPERSON MR RAUTENBACH Yes, I will, thank you. MR MOLOI Let me just ask you one question. Why were you surprised that Bopape died as a result of the shock? MR VAN NIEKERK MR MOLOI As I understand your evidence, you had no knowledge of the voltage of the apparatus, did you? MR VAN NIEKERK MR MOLOI Do you have any knowledge of the amount of voltage that had to be administered for it to result in the death of a person? MR VAN NIEKERK No. MR MOLOI Why were you surprised then? MR VAN NIEKERK MR MOLOI Thank you. MS GCABASHE MR VAN NIEKERK MS GCABASHE MR VAN NIEKERK MS GCABASHE MR VAN NIEKERK MS GCABASHE MR VAN NIEKERK That was practise. If it was wet it gave a stronger shock. MS GCABASHE MR VAN NIEKERK MS GCABASHE MR VAN NIEKERK MS GCABASHE MR VAN NIEKERK MS GCABASHE A passage that has various doors coming off and into that passage? MR VAN NIEKERK That is correct. MS GCABASHE So anybody who happened to be working in their offices could have come out, stood around and spectated, had a look at what was going on, yes? MR VAN NIEKERK If it was a normal working day, yes. But this was a Sunday, there was control as far as interest was concerned, doors locked and no one allowed entrance and as far as that was concerned, no one could have seen us and it was completely secure. MS GCABASHE MR VAN NIEKERK MS GCABASHE MR VAN NIEKERK MR DE JAGER But there are some of the activists who never gave any information, despite what you did to them? MR VAN NIEKERK There were cases like that, Mr Chairperson. MR DE JAGER MR VAN NIEKERK Yes, I remember there were cases like that. MR DE JAGER And despite that, despite the force and the coercion, Mr Bopape received, he was not willing to give you any information? MR VAN NIEKERK That is correct. MR DE JAGER MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH You mentioned, Mr Van Niekerk ... [intervention] MR DE JAGER Mr Rautenbach, this device used, was it a telephone or what? MR RAUTENBACH MR DE JAGER Is that not the inside bit of an old telephone? MR RAUTENBACH MR RAUTENBACH Mr Van Niekerk, regarding the same aspect, you answered and said that if he lived, what would the next step be, you said that maybe you would have applied greater shocks. Can you remember that answer? Can you just explain that to us, how do you apply bigger shocks? MR VAN NIEKERK The intensity would be increased by turning the device for a longer time, although the power ends would be kept to a specific part of his body. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH I assume then that if he was shocked over a period of hours continuously and he then died, like you said, in those circumstances you would not have been surprised if he died, correct? MR VAN NIEKERK The statement sounds correct, yes. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK Correct. MR RAUTENBACH And how long would this procedure have carried on? MR VAN NIEKERK Maybe another five minutes, ten minutes. MR RAUTENBACH Twenty minutes? Where would he have stopped? MR VAN NIEKERK Personally I would have stopped shortly. MR RAUTENBACH Can you give us more, can you make it clearer to us? What do you mean when you say you would have stopped shortly? At which stage would you have stopped? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH How would he have to look, how would Mr Bopape have to look before you would have stopped? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH So his physical appearance, would it have been an indication to you for when you should stop? MR VAN NIEKERK At a stage, yes. MR RAUTENBACH What made you think at that stage, we were told, two to three times that he was shocked, that it would have helped for you to continue the shocks? MR VAN NIEKERK Because something that I realised about - there was nothing about how he behaved that I thought that there was something wrong. MR RAUTENBACH But if you should have continued to shock, why do you think he would have given you any information? MR VAN NIEKERK I do not follow the question. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK Correct. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK Because I hoped that he would change his mind. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK Yes. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH You are saying that in your mind you have decided that if he should have lived, you would have at a later stage continued with bigger shocks? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH If I can just answer on that for the Committee. The whole question with regard to the interrogation is of crucial importance because of the way in which the version of the Police is contested and doubted by the family and it is my submission that this already gave an indication of the methods usually applied and it has already, also made a contribution about two possibilities that could have arisen during this interrogation. But if that is not the case, what precisely does this have to do with the amnesty application. It was the method that was used to get the information. It was improper, it was an illegal method. It could even have lead to the death of a person. As it was the case in other where we had evidence to that effect. And therefore they can be prosecuted for murder, culpable homicide and it is not contested in this case that they committed a crime, that they, well, have at least been negligent or that they could have foreseen that the person could die and that it could be considered to be murder. MR DE JAGER [intervention] CHAIRPERSON MR PRINSLOO Chairperson, there is no evidence except that Mr Rautenbach presented to the Committee that that is the attitude of the family but there is nothing that can prove that this witness is not telling the truth but with due respect it is not serving any purpose except Mr Rautenbach can give some grounds to say that this is the evidence and this could not have been the case as we are presenting to the Committee. Thank you. CHAIRPERSON COMMITTEE ADJOURNS ON RESUMPTION MR STEENKAMP CHAIRPERSON Yes, thank you Mr Steenkamp. Does anybody have any submissions on this document? No opposition to it going in? This document will then be received as Exhibit D. MR STEENKAMP Thank you Mr Chairman. MR VISSER Just one remark, not a submission, Mr Chairman, and that is that the document must be understood to be simply a list of attacks which preceded the death of Mr Bopape. It goes no further than that. CHAIRPERSON Yes, thank you Mr Visser. The panel has considered the submissions made by the legal representatives regarding the hypothetical questions put by Mr Rautenbach to the witness and after deliberation and due consideration we are of the view that the questioning be allowed in this regard. It has been said by the witness that it was a general practise that methods involved in interrogation which involved the use of force were common practise, particularly in the Security Branch and these hypothetical questions really only go so far as to establish a type of modus operandi used in that sort of interrogation and we feel that it can be allowed, the questioning [inaudible]. But if I could just ask Mr Rautenbach that one gets in to the realm of hypothetical questions, the limits thereof are unbounded and we would ask you to put a boundary on it and not spend too much time on it please Mr Rautenbach. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK I do not follow the question. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH How did it happen in that after the death of Mr Bopape I looked through some of the documents and specifically found the document which looked like [inaudible] or some other document which came from this specific hospital and according to the documents he received treatment and I asked Officer Farquar to go to the hospital and find out what might have happened. He himself was under the impression that Mr Bopape escaped and he went and he came back and he said that the information he received shows that he was taken into the hospital because of a heart condition. In as far as that suggestion is concerned I would like to put it to you that my information is that the contact the Mr Bopape had with the hospital, I think it was the Princess Clinic, that this is in relation to a sinus problem and had nothing to do with a so-called heart condition and it was shown. I would just like to tell you this. MR VAN NIEKERK I cannot contest it. I accept it like that. JUDGE NGCOBO You sent Mr Farquar to establish what exactly? What was your instruction to him? MR VAN NIEKERK JUDGE NGCOBO Did you not refer to a heart attack at all when you instructed him to go and make the investigation? MR VAN NIEKERK JUDGE NGCOBO Not knowing at all [inaudible] what his health condition was. MR VAN NIEKERK .... health condition. JUDGE NGCOBO MR VAN NIEKERK That is so. JUDGE NGCOBO In the middle of the page there, I read, "I do not know," you are answering to a question by Dr. Allie, "But where did this person obtain this information from?" Your reply is, "I do not know. I merely told him that he was to do a clandestine enquiry for me at the hospital in question. He himself did not know that Bopape was dead. I told him to establish for me whether he had a heart attack or why he was admitted to hospital and what other information we could use." So will that statement then be incorrect that you instructed him to check if he had a heart attack, in the light of your evidence [inaudible]? MR VAN NIEKERK In the light of this evidence, I cannot remember that I told him this. I was aware of the fact that the hospital treated patients with heart conditions and I thought what I wanted to say here was to make sure whether he had a heart condition because this hospital treated people with heart conditions but I did not tell him that Mr Bopape had a heart problem. JUDGE NGCOBO MR VAN NIEKERK JUDGE NGCOBO From the information that you had was that in fact he had a heart problem? MR VAN NIEKERK JUDGE NGCOBO But did this condition he had, according to you was actually the cause of his death and not so much the shocks that were applied to him? MR VAN NIEKERK JUDGE NGCOBO So this very fact was also dealt with by the other Applicants and they got it from you that he had a heart problem. MR VAN NIEKERK It was during consultation when we wrote to Applicants this specific text that handled with this was in the light after me and my Advocate spoke about it we brought this forth and the other Applicants took notice of this and it might be that we could have discussed this at quite an early stage. MR MOLOI that it is in fact the heart attack or heart failure that lead to his death and not so much the shocks that were applied? MR VAN NIEKERK CHAIRPERSON Mr Van Niekerk, did Farquar give you his source of information at the hospital? Did he say that I spoke to a nursing sister or a doctor or I went into the records and saw it in writing? MR VAN NIEKERK Not as far as I can remember, Mr Chairperson. MR RAUTENBACH Mr Van Niekerk I would like to ask you about the following aspects. At this stage, according to your version, when Mr Bopape died you testified that his body was placed in the office and if I remember correctly, in the office where he was initially interrogated by Mostert and Engelbrecht, is that correct? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK Correct. MR RAUTENBACH This body then had to be taken as your evidence stated to Bronkhorstspruit, is that correct? MR VAN NIEKERK Correct. MR RAUTENBACH Can you tell us how was the body taken out of the office? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH When you returned, where was the body? MR VAN NIEKERK In the specific office that you referred to. Then his body was still there. MR RAUTENBACH And later, you moved with two cars to Bronkhorstspruit? Is that correct? MR VAN NIEKERK Correct. MR RAUTENBACH So, how did the body get from the office to the car? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH So were you present when the body was put into the car? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH Do you know who wrapped the body? Wrapped, wrapped up. I believe the body was wrapped in something, is that correct? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH Did you see the body before he left with the cars? Did you actually see the body? MR VAN NIEKERK I think before we drove off I saw the body in the boot but I am under correction. MR RAUTENBACH Good. In what was the body or was it uncovered? MR VAN NIEKERK I think it was in a plastic bag. MR RAUTENBACH It was in a plastic bag? MR VAN NIEKERK Yes. MR RAUTENBACH Did you know who was responsible for wrapping that body in the plastic bag? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH Then you drove to Bronkhorstspruit? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH And the people from Eastern Transvaal arrived there. Did they also have two cars? MR VAN NIEKERK Yes. MR RAUTENBACH Now I would like to ask you. The body was transferred from one of your vehicles. Which vehicle was it? MR VAN NIEKERK The vehicle of Lieutenant Zeelie. MR RAUTENBACH It was taken from that vehicle to which vehicle? MR VAN NIEKERK To the vehicle of Dr Van Loggerenberg. MR RAUTENBACH Can you tell us which kind of vehicle it was? MR VAN NIEKERK Lieutenant Zeelie .... MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH Can you remember what colour the vehicle was? MR VAN NIEKERK No. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK It was Zeelie and Loggerenberg. They themselves carried the body. MR RAUTENBACH Am I correct in saying that you did not tell Zeelie or Van Loggerenberg whose body it was? So you did not tell them who the deceased was? MR VAN NIEKERK No, not as far as I can remember. No names were mentioned. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH Did you indicate to Visser where the body came from or what body it was? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH Do you mean in the sense whether it was a man or a woman? Well, the circumstances of how it happened? You are sitting with this body? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH What did you say to him concerning the escape? Can you make that clear? MR VAN NIEKERK The initial idea was that we will have a mock escape with Eastern Province. MR RAUTENBACH Yes, but Mr Van Niekerk, you said to Visser - what were you saying to him about an escape? MR VAN NIEKERK Initially. When we were in Johannesburg, apparently there was an arrangement between Erasmus and Visser that they would help with the escape and General Erasmus told me this and we got to Bronkhorstspruit and I spoke to Visser concerning the escape because I thought we then had to discuss it and then he said he was not going to do it. MR RAUTENBACH But if you wanted to know that, would you agree that Visser had to know that you needed to formulate a mock escape? Visser had to know this. MR VAN NIEKERK Well, the person is dead. MR RAUTENBACH So Visser had to know that considering the person dead, these people want to create a mock escape? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH But despite that, Visser did not know who this person was and under what circumstances he died? MR VAN NIEKERK Correct. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH Would I be correct if I say, Mr Van Niekerk, that the implications and the consequences for the Police would have been enormous if the body was found and the body had several injuries, for example, broken arms etc. MR VAN NIEKERK But Sir, that would not have been the case. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK Yes. It probably would have had big consequences. MR RAUTENBACH But which one could have explained, looking at the escape? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH The situation you have referred to, if he died with injuries of the nature I have already told you, and you did not get rid of the body, then you would agree with me, the implications and the consequences would have been enormous? Do you agree? MR VAN NIEKERK I do not follow the question. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK Correct. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK I think the information was given concerning Bopape, was the same information we received regarding Nkosi, that he walked with Bopape, a collaborator with him but in a less extent. MR RAUTENBACH When did you get that information concerning Nkosi? MR VAN NIEKERK Again the 10th or the 11th. MR RAUTENBACH By who? MR VAN NIEKERK At Mr Kleynhans. Maybe on the Saturday at the big conference in Krugersdorp. MR RAUTENBACH So the information you received from Kleynhans is that Nkosi was a collaborator of Bopape? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK If I remember correctly, the information said that he was a Unit Commander. MR RAUTENBACH Could I just have some clarity, this fact that he commanded a unit, was that information that you got from Captain Kleynhans? MR VAN NIEKERK Some of the information came from him. I cannot state clearly which came from him and what was told to me at Krugersdorp the next day. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH The Saturday, was that when the meeting would have been? MR VAN NIEKERK Correct. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH The information that he would have commanded a unit, where did you get that? MR VAN NIEKERK I believe it was conveyed on the Saturday. MR RAUTENBACH That was at the meeting? MR VAN NIEKERK Correct. MR RAUTENBACH Could you just give me an indication. This information you would have received from the people who were involved with the people at the Krugersdorp Security Branch as well as Pretoria? MR VAN NIEKERK Yes. MR RAUTENBACH Can you remember from whom you got the information? If it was not Captain Kleynhans, could you just say again? Could you just give us an indication? From whom you got the information, if it was not Captain Kleynhans? MR VAN NIEKERK We were in a meeting. Fifteen to twenty people were there and all the members took part and information was conveyed. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK It was Warrant Officer Syvert and ... MR RAUTENBACH With regard to Nkosi. Why was he also arrested? Was it because of the fact that he was collaborator? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH What kind of information did you want to obtain from Nkosi? MR VAN NIEKERK Information with regard to the activities of Mr Bopape because they lived together. He was a collaborator. MR RAUTENBACH Did you see the statement made by Nkosi after he was freed? What was your comment about how he was tortured by means of electrical shocks? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH Would you agree with me that this described here, namely the way in which Nkosi was tortured, that it seems to be a much more serious kind of torture than the torture that you referred to in the case of Bopape. MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH "An electrode was placed on my left wrist, my left calf, one all over my body, pelvic parts and buttocks and another was applied to my body on different occasions. The electrodes were placed in tubes but I could feel the wires scratching by body from the three cords." He then continues and he then says, "In intervals," "Was increased and applied for a long time. I was screaming and some of the torturers held me down to prevent more screaming and spoke in a vernacular." I want to ask you, the type of interrogation taking place here. This type of torture that he is describing, according to his version that he is describing here. Is that the type of torture that you would say that that is the type of torture that would lead to a persons death? MR VAN NIEKERK Not necessarily, but it can. Yes. MR RAUTENBACH And the person that we have here, if I can put it in the following way that was the small fish if we had to compare him to Bopape, is that correct? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK I think that was the Saturday, you refer to the Saturday, yes. MR RAUTENBACH I doubt it. Is it possible Mr Van Niekerk that Saturday that he could have been taken to Pretoria? MR VAN NIEKERK It is possible. MR RAUTENBACH Once again, with regard to the shock device. I want to ask you why was it decided to do it in the hall? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH Why was it necessary to move him out of the office where Mostert and Engelbrecht were interrogating him? MR VAN NIEKERK Because we moved the chair from my office to the corridor and he was taken from there to the chair. MR RAUTENBACH And then I also want to ask you did you ever obtain any knowledge that people lose control of their bodily functions when they are seriously shocked. MR VAN NIEKERK Yes, I have heard about that. MR RAUTENBACH Is it a possible reason why he was taken from the office? MR VAN NIEKERK No. MR RAUTENBACH Mr Van Niekerk, I [inaudible] opinions throughout your testimony that when the interrogation took place you moved in and out from time to time he was interrogated, correct? MR VAN NIEKERK Yes. MR RAUTENBACH At the point where the process was started to shock him with the electrical device, were you present the whole time? MR VAN NIEKERK Yes. I was. MR RAUTENBACH Any specific reason why you were present the whole time? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH But you were physically present where the shocks were taking place? MR VAN NIEKERK Yes. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK No, that was not the reason. MR RAUTENBACH Now what would have been the reason? MR VAN NIEKERK I was there, it was next to my office, I was the senior officer. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK Because it was at my office and because the device was being used and I thought that I had an interest. MR RAUTENBACH You say that it was because the device was being used and you had an interest. Now what does the device have to do with this? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK Yes, that is correct. MR RAUTENBACH With regard to the escape situation, whose initiative was it that a mock escape should be created? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK The idea was perhaps mentioned in the discussion between me and General Erasmus. MR RAUTENBACH I also want to know, with regard to the Ellis Park situation, was the idea to give more credibility to the fact that Bopape would have been seen in the vicinity of the explosion and that that would support the escape theory? Did I understand that correctly? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH All of a sudden a person who we know is dead is now seen alive in the vicinity of an explosion. That would support your theory? MR VAN NIEKERK Yes. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK I read her statement at some stage and it is possible that she could have said that. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH No idea? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH Did anyone ever try when the device was there to compile technical specifications with regard to what the machine is able to do? MR VAN NIEKERK What I can remember is that after Mr Bopape had died, at some stage, two of the members who were involved there touched the poles and tried to feel whether there was any power coming through. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK No. MR RAUTENBACH So you had nothing to do with that? MR VAN NIEKERK I never went to look for it, perhaps if I look at the registers now, perhaps I could now observe it but I was not aware of every movement throughout. MR RAUTENBACH I assume that you would then also could not give an indication why Nkosi would have been taken to Pretoria for interrogation? MR VAN NIEKERK If he had been taken to Pretoria, well Pretoria was involved in the investigation, it might have been the case that someone took him there for some reason. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH This is just for clarity. If we look at the escape situation, I know that at some stage the dog unit was also on the scene with the escape? MR VAN NIEKERK Yes. MR RAUTENBACH And that they had to follow a trail? MR VAN NIEKERK Yes. MR RAUTENBACH How did you create such a situation? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH So in other words, his shoes were used to leave the trail? MR VAN NIEKERK That is correct. JUDGE NGCOBO His shoes? MR VAN NIEKERK That is correct. MR RAUTENBACH Mr Van Niekerk, you conveyed this situation to General Erasmus, that was after Bopape had died. You told him what had happened, is that correct? MR VAN NIEKERK Yes. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK No, well I deduced it from the documents, that it was General Van Der Merwe. MR RAUTENBACH Were you at any stage confronted by any member, any senior member, your superior in rank on how it could have happened that Bopape had died? I use the word confront specifically. You also referred to deceased. MR VAN NIEKERK At some stage I talked to General Joubert and in that discussion he asked me questions and it was clear that he had knowledge about this incident and we had a discussion over the death of Mr Bopape. MR RAUTENBACH Let me put it in this way. Were you ever seriously confronted over the death of Bopape because of the fact that your version was that he died because of two or three shocks? MR VAN NIEKERK No. NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR RAUTENBACH CHAIRPERSON Thank you Mr Rautenbach. Mr Steenkamp would you ....[intervention] MR STEENKAMP No questions Mr Chairman, thanks. CHAIRPERSON Mr Prinsloo, do you have any re-examination? RE- EXAMINATION BY MR PRINSLOO Only a few questions. Mr Van Niekerk, if Bopape would have been taken to Johannesburg for an investigation it would also have been indicated in the occurrence book, Bopape? MR VAN NIEKERK Yes. That would have been the case. If he had been taken out, it would have been noted. MR PRINSLOO And then also in relation to a question of Mr Visser, with regard to the cover up, you also answered on a question of Mr Rautenbach that the aim was to prevent it that the politicians who already had problems because of death in detention and also the nearing of 16 June as well as possible revenge attacks that that was the main reason why this case was handled in this way? MR VAN NIEKERK Yes, that is correct. MR PRINSLOO In other words it was not so much to protect you? MR VAN NIEKERK It was not to protect myself but on behalf of the political situation as a member of the Police in which I found myself. MR PRINSLOO Is that also how you interpreted General Erasmus to understand it? MR VAN NIEKERK Yes, I believe that to be the case. MR PRINSLOO Thank you Chairman, no further questions. NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR PRINSLOO CHAIRPERSON I will now ask members of the panel if they have any questions to put. Advocate Gcabashe? Do you have any questions? MS GCABASHE MR VAN NIEKERK Yes, that is correct. MS GCABASHE [inaudible] you reported the true facts or the mock arrangement to them, which was it? MR VAN NIEKERK I reported to General Erasmus. I told him that Mr Bopape died and that we shocked him. MS GCABASHE Who else did you give the true facts to? General Joubert at a later stage? MR VAN NIEKERK Yes, that is correct. MS GCABASHE Nobody else? MR VAN NIEKERK At some stage I came to know that Mr Pretorius, who worked with me, that he had knowledge of the incident. MS GCABASHE You did not tell him anything? MR VAN NIEKERK No. I told him nothing, I just confirmed it. MS GCABASHE Having read you Section 29 evidence, you talk of Vlakplaas and Trevitts and you talk about Regional Security Branch meetings, you know how you move from your, you do with the lower level chaps, you had your regional meetings and these would eventually be reported in whichever form to the National Security Council. Now, as I understand it, at those regional meetings you would share information about activists, you would have lists that would have been compiled, you would, I assume pull people off lists if they were no longer alive, you would add people to the lists once you had arrested them, is that right, have I got the right sense of what you did at these regional meetings? MR VAN NIEKERK Within the Trevitts context, that was how I saw it. MS GCABASHE Now, in a case such as this, are you saying that you did not inform that forum that Bopape was in fact dead? That they need not spend any more State resources looking for him, asking questions about him? Is this what you are saying? All of those people at that level were under the assumption that Bopape had escaped and was in fact at large? MR VAN NIEKERK Bopape was a suspect from Pretoria so one would have expected Bopape, should his name have been on the Trevitts structure that it should have been mentioned there and then a mock escape would have continued and all the other members would have been under the impression that he had escaped. Had his name been on there then it would have remained there. MS GCABASHE Am I right in assuming that you attended these meetings? MR VAN NIEKERK I attended some of the Trevitts meetings. MS GCABASHE It was not your duty to correct any impression that forum might have and in that way save State resources in respect of somebody who was no longer alive. MR VAN NIEKERK If I attended a meeting where the escape of Mr Bopape had been discussed I would never have corrected it. I would have left it as it was. MS GCABASHE Are you saying that it was acceptable practise within the Police service? There was nothing wrong with just leaving it like that? MR VAN NIEKERK MS GCABASHE Higher up the ladder, you have your regional meetings. The superiors, whose duty would it be to inform them of the true facts? General Joubert, would it be his duty to really tell them what had happened? MR VAN NIEKERK MS GCABASHE MR VAN NIEKERK As I have said, I was worried should the body be found as was said, especially wrapped in plastic covers that would then have erased the escape theory. But should they have found the body at a later stage, it could have been liked to the escape situation and I was worried. It would have been better if they did not find the body in the light of the circumstances in the country, the escape, all the problems there. MS GCABASHE Had you worked with Van Loggerenberg before? MR VAN NIEKERK MS GCABASHE What was the basis of your trust in his ability to dispose of this body in an effective manner? MR VAN NIEKERK The little that I knew him, I trusted him and Brigadier Visser, the fact that he gave him the instruction and I had absolute confidence in Visser. MS GCABASHE Thank you. No further questions at this point. CHAIRPERSON Thank you. Mr Moloi. MR MOLOI MR VAN NIEKERK MR MOLOI In as far as Bopape is concerned, none of those things happened to him during the interrogation. In other words, people were standing around him, asking him nicely, please tell us this, please tell us that, and only when he refused to do so, it was resorted to use of electric shocks? MR VAN NIEKERK That is correct. MR MOLOI Is there any reason why he would be treated differently from what was common place? MR VAN NIEKERK It depends on the interrogator. I know Mr Mostert and Engelbrecht, I know them as people who would not physically assault a person with a fist or kick him. MR MOLOI In his case there was an exception made, in as far as you are aware, none of the other means of torture in order to extract information was applied? MR VAN NIEKERK MR MOLOI [inaudible] tortured whilst alive, not after his death, is it? MR VAN NIEKERK MR MOLOI Do I understand you also to say that the main purpose of this cover up of making up a story about the escape was in fact to protect the Government of the day? Is that the fact? MR VAN NIEKERK MR MOLOI MR VAN NIEKERK No. It was never told to me directly as a member of the Security Branch that we may not use violence, that it is not allowed at all. There were certain circulars, letters, certain regulations that we should not do it but it still happened and I say it happened with the cognisance of the Security Branch. MR MOLOI It was happening, despite the warnings that you were given not to do so. If you design a cover up, for whom are you doing it? Is it for the Security Forces, the people concerned or is it for the Government that has warned you not to pursue that method of interrogation? MR VAN NIEKERK MR MOLOI [inaudible] acted accordingly in the interest of the Government and not the Security Forces of which you were a member, yourself? MR VAN NIEKERK For both. Everyone. The Security Branch was but one extension of the Government. We had to fight the counter revolutionary action. We had to stop it. MR MOLOI So you were a member of the Security Forces and you acted also in their interest, then on what basis then you say you had no personal interest in the outcome of the feigned escape? MR VAN NIEKERK I said when I acted, I acted within this framework as I understand it. And that is to use violence. If I had been prohibited to do it, I would not have done it. MR MOLOI You were not forbidden, at any stage, not to use force? MR VAN NIEKERK As I said in writing, there were many rules and regulations that prohibited this but we acted outside of the Law to stop this onslaught on behalf of the Government. CHAIRPERSON Mr De Jager? MR DE JAGER No. CHAIRPERSON Judge Ngcobo? JUDGE NGCOBO As I understand your evidence, the Security Branch unit that was interested primarily in the deceased, was the West Rand, is that right? Did you hear my question? MR VAN NIEKERK In Pretoria. JUDGE NGCOBO In Pretoria, yes. Now, during the first phase of the interrogation, was there any member of the Security Branch from the West Rand? MR VAN NIEKERK Not that I am aware of. JUDGE NGCOBO On the 12th June, was there any member of the Security Branch from the West Rand near? MR VAN NIEKERK No. JUDGE NGCOBO Why not? MR VAN NIEKERK Because the West Rand, at the gathering on the 11th were asked to interrogate the person. JUDGE NGCOBO What would you have done with that information? MR VAN NIEKERK We would have channelled it back to the West Rand and probably we would have had another meeting to exchange the information. JUDGE NGCOBO Was it not considered necessary that at least a member from that branch be present? During the interrogation. MR VAN NIEKERK JUDGE NGCOBO When was the deceased interrogated for the first time? Asked the information relating to his place of residence, place of birth? MR VAN NIEKERK JUDGE NGCOBO The first day would have been the 10th, Friday the 10th? MR VAN NIEKERK Under correction I say that, yes. JUDGE NGCOBO Well, let me put it this way. When you went to the meeting, had the deceased been interrogated already? MR VAN NIEKERK JUDGE NGCOBO But had he been questioned at that stage? MR VAN NIEKERK JUDGE NGCOBO When he was first interrogated, whenever that was, did the Police get the impression that he was prepared to co-operate with the Police? MR VAN NIEKERK I can speak of the Sunday when he was not willing to co-operate. JUDGE NGCOBO Can you still recall what time that interrogation started? MR VAN NIEKERK JUDGE NGCOBO [inaudible] estimated time given. MR VAN NIEKERK This could be possible. JUDGE NGCOBO How soon after the interrogation had started did it become apparent that the deceased was not willing to co-operate with the Police? MR VAN NIEKERK I believe after about an hour, an hour and a half, maybe two hours. JUDGE NGCOBO If it would have taken an hour to two and a half, to establish that the deceased was not willing to co-operate, what would have been happening during that one hour or two hours? MR VAN NIEKERK The times when I walked into the office, Mr Mostert and Mr Engelbrecht were busy asking him questions. Questions which were not really important. Let me put it like this, information which was not important. They spoke about not important things. JUDGE NGCOBO What sort of things would those be? MR VAN NIEKERK [microphone problems] JUDGE NGCOBO When you entered the interrogation room for the first time on the 12th, what feedback did you receive from Mostert and Engelbrecht, as to whether the deceased was willing to co-operate with the Police? MR VAN NIEKERK JUDGE NGCOBO Did you specifically ask Mostert and Engelbrecht whether the deceased was willing to co-operate? MR VAN NIEKERK JUDGE NGCOBO What was his attitude to you? MR VAN NIEKERK JUDGE NGCOBO [inaudible] you take the decision to use the shocking device? MR VAN NIEKERK JUDGE NGCOBO As I understand your evidence, you had used a shocking device previously? MR VAN NIEKERK JUDGE NGCOBO But you were not familiar with the one that you used on this occasion? MR VAN NIEKERK The device all look the same. Maybe in size and colour they will differ but this specific one was the first time I saw this specific one. JUDGE NGCOBO MR VAN NIEKERK JUDGE NGCOBO At the enquiry, you mentioned you had been warned, that is the Police had been warned about the consequences of a death in detention or something to that effect. Can you remember that testimony? MR VAN NIEKERK Yes. I can remember that. JUDGE NGCOBO Who would have warned you? MR VAN NIEKERK There were letters being sent. There were discussions coming from our Commanders that we had to be careful. JUDGE NGCOBO [inaudible} regulations as well against the use of force? MR VAN NIEKERK Can I have that question again? JUDGE NGCOBO [inaudible] the position there are also regulations which prevent the use of force? MR VAN NIEKERK That is true. JUDGE NGCOBO Despite all these warnings and the regulations, you still believe that you were working, what you did was in the interest of the Government? MR VAN NIEKERK Definitely. Yes I believe that I acted on behalf of the Government. JUDGE NGCOBO If a Police officer was found to have used torture, was that Police officer disciplined? MR VAN NIEKERK If it became known, yes, he was disciplined. JUDGE NGCOBO Who should first know about that before any steps are taken? MR VAN NIEKERK JUDGE NGCOBO So in your case, you made known to your superiors that you had been part of a group of officers who had been involved in the torture of the deceased, right? MR VAN NIEKERK That is correct. JUDGE NGCOBO And yet nothing was done against you? MR VAN NIEKERK No steps were taken against me in the light of the whole way that the issue was treated afterwards. JUDGE NGCOBO Did the taking of any steps against a Police officer involved in the torture depend on the relationship which that officer had with his commander? MR VAN NIEKERK JUDGE NGCOBO To your knowledge, was it Police practise to notify the politicians of the facts surrounding a death in detention? MR VAN NIEKERK JUDGE NGCOBO Would the Minister be told the truth? MR VAN NIEKERK I specifically referred to an Inquest which would then have followed the right route but in our case, I cannot tell you whether the Minister was informed about what actually happens or not. JUDGE NGCOBO Did you expect that the Minister would be informed? MR VAN NIEKERK JUDGE NGCOBO Let me just ask you one general question. Yourself and your colleagues were involved in a cover up as to the circumstances leading to the death of the deceased, and in doing so, you came up with an escape plan, all of which we now know amounted to the untruth. You mislead some of your colleagues in order to have your way out. Why should this Committee now believe you? Why should we believe that you are now, you have disclosed to us everything you know of and concerning the death of Stanza Bopape? MR VAN NIEKERK JUDGE NGCOBO In preparation of your application for amnesty, did you as an individual, in order to assist, to bring to the fore, all the relevant facts relating to the death of the deceased [inaudible] some form of investigation, i.e.: in regard to whether or not the body of the deceased was disposed of in the manner described to you? MR VAN NIEKERK No. JUDGE NGCOBO Did you not consider that perhaps that would be, that it would help the Committee in understanding the facts, if you had to come to this Committee and indicate the steps that you have taken to verify some of the information that was given to you? MR VAN NIEKERK JUDGE NGCOBO Thank you, no more questions. CHAIRPERSON MR VAN NIEKERK Yes I agree with that. CHAIRPERSON MR VAN NIEKERK CHAIRPERSON MR VAN NIEKERK CHAIRPERSON You said also that, in your evidence, that what happened when the shocks were being applied was that Du Preez had the device and was turning the handle and somebody else was moving the electrodes, the two cords with the wet cloth at the end across the torso, is that correct? MR VAN NIEKERK That is correct. CHAIRPERSON Is that usual because we hear from the statement made by Mr Nkosi that the electrodes were applied to the body and fixed in a spot, not moved around? MR VAN NIEKERK CHAIRPERSON When you say it was moved across the body, was it moved across when the handle was being turned or was the handle turned when it was on one spot and then moved to another spot and then the handle turned again or was it moved while the handle was being turned? MR VAN NIEKERK CHAIRPERSON Would you agree that the detentions in terms of Section 29 of the Security Act at that time were highly contentious and controversial? MR VAN NIEKERK That is correct Mr Chairman. CHAIRPERSON They often received much coverage in the media and even in Parliament, questions relating to Section 29 detentions were raised. MR VAN NIEKERK That is correct, there was a lot of opposition against it. CHAIRPERSON MR VAN NIEKERK CHAIRPERSON Were they noted down in the case of the deceased in this matter, Mr Bopape? MR VAN NIEKERK As far as I know Mr Chairperson, up to the point when he died that book was kept by Mr Mostert and one of his duties was to, the rest of the afternoon after his death up to the point of the escape, to complete this. If one looked at that, one would see that he received food up to the point where he escaped, so we also fabricated all of that. CHAIRPERSON The question relating to precisely when the interrogation started and when it stopped, would that not be recorded there? MR VAN NIEKERK From the point he was arrested it would be correct and the morning when he was booked out of the cells, when the questions started that would be correct and whether he received tea or coffee during the morning, that would be there as well and from there onwards the further bit would then be fabricated. CHAIRPERSON It was also part of the so-called cover up? MR VAN NIEKERK That is correct Mr Chairman. CHAIRPERSON Mr Prinsloo, do you have any questions arising from any questions that have been put from the panel? FURTHER RE-EXAMINATION BY MR PRINSLOO MR VAN NIEKERK MR PRINSLOO With regards to the question concerning the criticism concerning Section 29, what was the attitude of the ANC at that time when somebody died in detention and an Inquest was held, was it used as propaganda or what happened? MR VAN NIEKERK Mr Chairman there was a lot of propaganda campaigns in such a case, not only by the ANC but by the opposition. I think the biggest onslaught came from the opposition within the Parliament and also the ANC and often it lead to revenge attacks. MR PRINSLOO Another aspect that was also put to you, with regard to Mr Du Preez who brought the machine to you on the Sunday, was Mr Du Preez in any way involved with the Security Branch? MR VAN NIEKERK Yes, he was part of the Security Branch. MR PRINSLOO He was stationed at Sandton? MR VAN NIEKERK Yes, that is correct. MR PRINSLOO Was he under your command or not? MR VAN NIEKERK Yes, I think he was under the command of Major Pretorius. MR PRINSLOO Was Mr Pretorius your junior? MR VAN NIEKERK Yes, he was. MR PRINSLOO Thank you. No further questions. NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR PRINSLOO CHAIRPERSON Ms Van Der Walt, any questions? MS VAN DER WALT No questions. CHAIRPERSON Mr Visser, any questions arising? MR VISSER CHAIRPERSON Thank you Mr Visser. Have your colleagues, the other legal representatives had sight of this affidavit? MR VISSER CHAIRPERSON MR RAUTENBACH That is in order Mr Chairman. CHAIRPERSON Mr Steenkamp? MR STEENKAMP Yes Mr Chairman. CHAIRPERSON Mr Prinsloo and Ms Van Der Walt? Thank you. MR VISSER Thank you Mr Chairman. CHAIRPERSON Mr Rautenbach, do you have any questions arising out of questions that were put by the panel to the witness? FURTHER CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR RAUTENBACH Mr Van Niekerk, just one issue that came to the fore. You specifically asked, with regard to notes that were kept with people detained MR VAN NIEKERK Yes, that is correct. MR RAUTENBACH And I think you also agreed that because it was so controversial it was necessary to have a record when you, for example should be attacked in a court about what happened to a person, where he was, whether he was in a cell, whether he was interrogated, where he was interrogated and so forth. Can you remember that? MR VAN NIEKERK Yes. That was the rule at that stage, that that document should be kept and that should have tallied with the escape. MR RAUTENBACH So with that the whole issue of medical treatment, the fact that he went to a district surgeon, that observations were made with regard to certain marks, signs of assault, that documentation was also kept thoroughly to protect you. Is that correct? MR VAN NIEKERK MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK That is correct. MR RAUTENBACH MR VAN NIEKERK Yes it was. And the documentation was available for the detective who investigated the escape. MR RAUTENBACH Now I want to ask, if that had been so important, what happened to these documents? MR VAN NIEKERK NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR RAUTENBACH WITNESS EXCUSED CHAIRPERSON Ms Van Der Walt? MR DE JAGER Mr Mostert, your full names please? NEW WITNESS MR MOSTERT Hendrik Albertus Beukes Mostert. ADV DE JAGER Could you please stand? HENDRIK ALBERTUS BEUKES MOSTERT (sworn states) MS VAN DER WALT EXAMINATION BY MS VAN DER WALT Mr Mostert, you have applied, in terms of the Act on the Amnesty. You also completed the application as prescribed by Law. Is that correct? MR MOSTERT Yes. MS VAN DER WALT MR MOSTERT That is correct. MS VAN DER WALT MR MOSTERT Yes I do. MS VAN DER WALT Mr Mostert, you were also in the service of the South African Police since when and up to what date? MR MOSTERT From 1958 up to 1991, in May. MS VAN DER WALT And in which sections did you serve in the Police? MR MOSTERT For approximately 9 years I was part of the Uniform Branch and for the majority of my career I was in the Criminal Investigation Unit, a detective and since 1986 I was part of the Security Branch in John Vorster Square. MS VAN DER WALT You now refer to Sandton an John Vorster Square? MR MOSTERT I could just perhaps put it to you. The head office was at John Vorster Square and the main branch and then an affiliation was in Sandton. In other words it was a branch at Sandton. MS VAN DER WALT At this point Mr Mostert could we perhaps just ask, was there co-operation between Sandton and John Vorster Square? MR MOSTERT Yes. MS VAN DER WALT And the people who worked at Sandton, did they do investigation work with you or the other way around? MR MOSTERT Yes. MS VAN DER WALT MR MOSTERT Yes, that is correct. MS VAN DER WALT When you were at the Security Branch since 1986, under whose command were you? MR MOSTERT In the beginning I stood under the direct command of Major Pretorius, he was a Captain at that stage. I started working there. MS VAN DER WALT Did he go to Sandton later on? MR MOSTERT Yes, he was at Sandton. MS VAN DER WALT And Mr Van Niekerk? MR MOSTERT Mr Van Niekerk came later, as well as Brigadier Victor. MS VAN DER WALT You have gone on pension? MR MOSTERT Yes, that is correct. MS VAN DER WALT What was your rank at that stage? MR MOSTERT I was Detective Warrant Officer. MS VAN DER WALT MR MOSTERT Yes, that is correct. MS VAN DER WALT How did it happen? MR MOSTERT Because we had the evidence. MR DE JAGER Just a moment. You refer to Brigadier Victor? MR MOSTERT Yes, that is correct. MR DE JAGER It is Victor, not Fikter? MR MOSTERT MR DE JAGER Thank you. MS VAN DER WALT Mr Mostert, you say that you were involved with the arrest and the testimony given, was it a problem, because it seems that it was in fact West Rand who launched this investigation, is that correct? MR MOSTERT [microphone problem] ....... in this regard with the people from West Rand. MS VAN DER WALT Lieutenant Zeelie, what was his position? MR MOSTERT He was a Lieutenant. MS VAN DER WALT What was his position? MR MOSTERT He was a Lieutenant. MS VAN DER WALT What was his position at the Security Branch at John Vorster Square? MR MOSTERT He also did investigation work with us. MS VAN DER WALT MR MOSTERT Yes, he could. MS VAN DER WALT And on the 9th June, where did you go to and what happened then? MR MOSTERT MS VAN DER WALT Were there any instructions given to you why the people had to be arrested? MR MOSTERT MS VAN DER WALT MR MOSTERT MS VAN DER WALT Did you in any way have anything to do with Stanza Bopape? MR MOSTERT No, not for the night of the 9th. But the next day, that would be the 10th June 1988. During the course of the day, I think it was in the morning I was instructed by Van Niekerk to take over with Stanza Bopape. I was also informed that Bopape and Nkosi were transferred according to an agreement between the commanders of John Vorster and West Rand and that they had been transferred to Johannesburg and on the strength of that, Engelbrecht and myself had to interrogate Bopape. Colonel Van Niekerk gave us background information in which direction we should interrogate and this is information he got from Major Kleynhans from the West Rand. MS VAN DER WALT You did the interrogation. Could you tell the Honourable Committee how such an interrogation is done? MR MOSTERT When a person arrives, you have the background information. MS VAN DER WALT How do you start? What do you say to this man? MR MOSTERT MS GCABASHE MR MOSTERT My apologies. What happened was in the afternoon of the 10th we had an interview with Mr Bopape. We were busy with the processing and in this time he was informed by Du Toit of his detention in terms of Section 29 and after that the procedure followed. MS GCABASHE MR MOSTERT Yes. MS GCABASHE Now how different is that Section 50 procedure to the Section 29 procedure? What were you doing for the first half of this investigation? MR MOSTERT MS VAN DER WALT MR MOSTERT Yes. It was only in the afternoon that we got to him that we actually booked him out and a short while after that, he was informed of the Section 29 and from there we proceeded. MS VAN DER WALT MR MOSTERT MS VAN DER WALT And is that what you and Mr Engelbrecht were busy with on the 10th? MR MOSTERT Yes, that is correct. MS VAN DER WALT He was then placed under Section 29, the deceased. Was he taken to the District Surgeon at any stage? MR MOSTERT MS VAN DER WALT Was that after the processing had started? MR MOSTERT I think it was before the processing. MS VAN DER WALT And did you do any interrogation on that particular day? MR MOSTERT No we did not. MS VAN DER WALT And after this processing was finalised, was he taken back to the cells? MR MOSTERT Yes, he was taken back to the cells. MS VAN DER WALT Did you see him on Saturday the 11th? MR MOSTERT No, I did not see him on Saturday the 11th. We attended a conference at the Krugersdorp Security Branch where we were informed concerning the background and the activities of Mr Bopape and Mr Nkosi. MS VAN DER WALT Personally, you did not interrogate him on the 11th? MR MOSTERT No. MS VAN DER WALT And on the 12th, according to your application, you interrogated the deceased? MR MOSTERT That is correct. MS VAN DER WALT Do you know when this interrogation started, the time? MR MOSTERT It was between 9 and 10 in the morning. We booked him out at the cells. MSS VAN DER WALT I refer the Honourable Committee to Volume 3, Page 746, at the top, it seems that this is an extraction, Mr Steenkamp can perhaps help us, it was typed over from an occurrence book and the information is, there is a number, in the occurrence books, they usually have numbers, is that correct? MR MOSTERT Yes, that is. MS VAN DER WALT The occurrence book 456, 9.30 in the morning, 12 June, interrogation investigation out M Bopape. Was that one of his names? MR MOSTERT Yes. MS VAN DER WALT And then the cell number? MR MOSTERT Yes. MS VAN DER WALT He was taken out by you and Constable Engelbrecht? MR MOSTERT That is correct? MS VAN DER WALT And you signed? MR MOSTERT Yes. MS VAN DER WALT Now these cells where he had been detained, where were these cells? MR MOSTERT It was at John Vorster Square and it is a special section for security detainees. The interrogation took place on the 10th floor. MS VAN DER WALT Now with regard to the 10th floor, where are the cells situated? MR MOSTERT The cells are in a totally different part of the building. I would say on the eastern side where the 10th floor is more on the western side of the cells. MS VAN DER WALT On the ground or on the same level? MR MOSTERT MS VAN DER WALT Did you get instruction from Mr Van Niekerk to interrogate Mr Bopape? MR MOSTERT Yes. MS VAN DER WALT Where did you take him to? MR MOSTERT We came to the 10th floor at an office right next to the office of Van Niekerk and I noticed him in his office and we started with the interrogation of Mr Bopape. MS VAN DER WALT When you start such an interrogation, there are many questions and it would also be correct that questions are asked? How did you as a Security Policeman handle a person? Were you immediately aggressive or did you try to win his favour? Please tell the Committee. MR MOSTERT No, I did not try to become aggressive. I believed in it, that it was a wrong start. I would rather begin by being friendly to try to win the confidence of the person, to get him at ease, perhaps to offer him some coffee or tea. Then you can start talking much better and after that you slowly begin to move into the field that you would want to have the interrogation follow as in this case, the allegation was that he was part of a terrorist group, the so called Maponye Group from Pretoria and there was wide coverage given to us about terror acts committed by this Group and then we started the interrogation in this direction. MS VAN DER WALT MR MOSTERT With that he co-operated but further than that he did not want to go. He did not want to know anything of any other questions that he had to answer. MS VAN DER WALT And did Mr Engelbrecht take part in the interrogation? MR MOSTERT Yes. Both of us. MS VAN DER WALT Did you, during this interrogation make use of any methods of coercion, regardless of what kind? MR MOSTERT No, I did not. MS VAN DER WALT Did anyone else also participate? MR MOSTERT No, it was just Engelbrecht and myself. At some stage Colonel Van Niekerk came in and he asked how it was going and I informed him that Mr Bopape refused to co-operate and he then talked to Mr Bopape and he explained the seriousness of the matter and then he walked and then we continued. MS VAN DER WALT I think you just made a mistake with the names. You twice mentioned Engelbrecht. MR MOSTERT My apologies, I meant that Mr Du Preez was handling the device and Mr Engelbrecht was pulling the cords over his body. MS VAN DER WALT Now while this process was continuing Mr Mostert, you did nothing physically. Where are you, what were you doing? MR MOSTERT We are all standing around the chair while this process is going on. MS VAN DER WALT And what are you doing? MR MOSTERT We are looking. I think one of us, I think it was Colonel Van Niekerk, at some stage asked whether this man has anything to say. MS VAN DER WALT And did he say anything? MR MOSTERT No. Not at this stage. MS VAN DER WALT How did Mr Bopape get from the office to the corridor to the chair? MR MOSTERT I think he walked on his own. MS VAN DER WALT And what was he dressed in? MR MOSTERT MS VAN DER WALT Why was he tied to the chair? MR MOSTERT I think that was to prevent him from jerking and perhaps fall from the chair or that he jumps up and run away. I think they want to restrain him in that position. MS VAN DER WALT Now this interrogation that you did after you took him from the cells at 9.30 in the morning. How long did that interrogation take before you decided to go over to this process? MR MOSTERT It was quite some time. I would say approximately one and a half hours to two hours. MS VAN DER WALT When you were talking with the other members before the shock device was obtained who decided in the end that the shock device should be obtained? MR MOSTERT MS VAN DER WALT Could you just tell us precisely with the shocks, what happened? MR MOSTERT MS VAN DER WALT Sorry for interrupting. I see in the application of Mr Du Preez that he did the mouth to mouth resuscitation. MR MOSTERT My apologies if I said Engelbrecht, sorry, it was Mr Du Preez who did the mouth to mouth resuscitation. MS VAN DER WALT What happened then? MR MOSTERT Colonel Van Niekerk departed under the impression that he was going to discuss with our Commander, General Erasmus. MS VAN DER WALT What happened with Mr Bopape? MR MOSTERT MS VAN DER WALT Is that now the foetal position that you are referring to? MR MOSTERT Later in the afternoon, Colonel Van Niekerk came to us and General Erasmus then arrived at the office and Colonel Van Niekerk and Mr Zeelie, the two Officers then went to see the General. They later returned and we were informed that the body, well it had been arranged that it should be taken away to Bronkhorstspruit and there it would be given to members of the East Rand Security Branch and then we had to try and arrange a mock escape. We agreed to this and we waited until it was dark and then we took the body out to the cellar. MS VAN DER WALT How was he taken out? MR MOSTERT MS VAN DER WALT MR MOSTERT MS VAN DER WALT MR MOSTERT MS VAN DER WALT Right, you may continue. MR MOSTERT We arrived there in the dark and we came across two vehicles on the highway. I assumed that it was arranged beforehand by Colonel Van Niekerk and the people from the Security Branch from Eastern Transvaal. I saw one person next to the vehicle and recognised the person as Brigadier Visser. I think he was a Colonel at that stage. MS VAN DER WALT Did you talk to these people at any stage? MR MOSTERT The sides of the two vehicles, the backs were pulled next to each other and from there we went back and Brigadier Visser and Mr Van Loggerenberg went in their own direction. We arrived at John Vorster Square because this mock escape had to be arranged and we also arranged at the offices and later on we went and we bought food in Jeppe Road at a take-away and from there we departed still in two vehicles and from there we went to De Deur, Residentia area. MS VAN DER WALT Could I perhaps just interrupt you here Mr Mostert. You also said earlier in your evidence that there was a mock escape was discussed. The evidence of Mr Van Niekerk was, his instruction was that Eastern Transvaal should arrange the escape? MR MOSTERT Yes. He mentioned something like that. He said that Eastern Transvaal in the form of Brigadier Visser was not willing to do that. MS VAN DER WALT Sorry I interrupted you, you bought food and then where did you go? MR MOSTERT Me, Mr Engelbrecht, Colonel Van Niekerk and Zeelie drove in one vehicle at this stage. I imagine myself this, but we did stop next to the road and Mr Zeelie punctured the back right tyre, so it deflated and I think we still drove a little bit so it made a mark on the tar and we stopped again and from here onwards Mr Zeelie had ankle cuffs and hand cuffs on as well as, he also took the keys of the cuffs, of both the sets of cuffs and he started running with these and Colonel Van Niekerk ran after him for a short distance and shot a few shots in the air. After this was done we left for Residentia Police Station where the necessary note in the occurrence book was made and we gave testimony concerning the escape. Afterwards we went back to the scene of the escape or the alleged escape. This time accompanied by members of the Security Branch in Vereeniging and also by uniformed people etc., and when we got back to the Police Station at Residentia I noted that General Du Toit was also there and from then onwards we returned to John Vorster Square where I made a note concerning the escape. MS VAN DER WALT "[inaudible] report," MR MOSTERT Yes. MS VAN DER WALT You are saying that General Du Toit also arrived at the scene, at De Deur Police Station? MR MOSTERT No, it was Residentia. MS VAN DER WALT And then you made these false testimonies? MR MOSTERT That is correct. MS VAN DER WALT And where did you go then? MR MOSTERT From there we went back to John Vorster Square. MS VAN DER WALT CHAIRPERSON COMMITTEE ADJOURNS