special Armed Forces Hearings 1997-10-08 Cape Town 2 Major General Mortimer; Dr. Khoza Mgojo; Klopper; https://sabctrc.saha.org.za/hearing.php?id=56315&t=&tab=hearings https://sabctrc.saha.org.za/originals/special/forces/sadfpan.htm Dr. Khoza Mgojo</B> Mortimer </B> To the best of my knowledge no. Denzil Potgieter</B> Thank you chairperson. I will restrict myself to one or two issues that are burning at this stage there are many other questions but I understand that this is not the occasion for that at this stage. General Mortimer on page 49 of your submission you deal with the Civil Cooperation Bureau and you deal with the question of available records and you make the point that no documentation other than contained in the records of the Harms Commission is believed to exist. Now is that in fact the case? Mortimer</B> Yes. Denzil Potgieter</B> Are there no records available of the CCB apart from those few documents that were handed in at the Harms Commission? Mortimer </B> In the preparation of this paper we failed to find anything else. Denzil Potgieter : Now if there were records would you have expected to have found it because I am trying to understand what the position is because it says it is believed that those are the only records available. Mortimer : Well, we looked for other records which would I think indicate that one would expect to find it but we have failed to do so. Denzil Potgieter : Now, would that imply that those records have been removed or destroyed? Mortimer : Or that they have all been handed over to the Harms Commission. The possibility does exist that things have been destroyed, yes. Denzil Potgieter : And if they have been destroyed would there be a record of those destructions as General Meiring has indicated this morning, everything that was destroyed was recorded, would this be an unlawful act. Mortimer : I cannot answer that question with any accuracy. I would have to request that that be investigated. Denzil : Now, you have also said very little about the CCB in this submission and as I have indicated to the general it is obviously an issue that we are seized with and that we are very interested in as a Commission have very many questions around this organisation. Would you be able as the nodal point to facilitate further particulars some more information about this organisation or would you much rather refer the Commission to particular individuals who were in charge of this organisation and for us to deal with in terms of the powers that this Commission has to obtain information. Mortimer : Could my colleague answer. Klopper : If we were to know if we had to come to know of documents in existence with people we would assist the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in finding them. Denzil : Just to make sure that I understand correctly. This organisation according to your submission here was only terminated in April 1990 and it was finally closed in February 1994, so it seemed to have continued to exist after the Harms Commission so there must have been some official record of existence after the Harms Commission. Do I understand it correctly? Klopper : The only official documentation that could exist could be on the termination, the administration of the termination. Mortimer : The cross border pro-active steps are those ones which we have listed here as cross border operations those would be examples of them. Those are the examples we have found by studying existing documentation. At this stage from studying existing documentation we have not identified such operations internally. However as I tried to indicate that documentation is not necessarily all available at a central point at this stage. One would have to identify potential or possible operations. Identify the area in which they took place and then try to trace it according to the level and the place where it occurred. As I say from our studies at this stage, no. Denzil : And then just in conclusion is that what you mean on page 61 where you say that the list of operations as is set out here may not be complete, so you may be able to come across some more operations as you do your work as the nodal point. Mortimer : Yes, it would of course facilitate matters if the Commission could direct the search into specific areas then it might be possible to find these but a generalised search in the time that is available is probably not going to produce the results which specified searches aimed at trying to find a specific piece of information on the grounds of other information available to you would possibly give results. Denzil : So are you saying that a general search as the one that you have done has only come up with these ones here (yes) and if we are more specific as a Commission you might very well come up with some other (yes) information on more operations. Denzil : Thank you very much, thank you chairperson. Boraine : Thank you, Wildschut. Wildschut : General Mortimer my question is related to the comments my colleagues made about the narrative or descriptive nature of your presentation. I would like you to perhaps just take us through the process a little bit, perhaps just in a few sentences. Tell us why the nodal point and persons involved in the collation of this information decided or got to the point that this submission would be purely descriptive. Why was the decision made that it would be just a narrative without some interpretation at least. So take us through that process a little bit and also could you tell us if there are inferences that we should be drawing from this? What do you want the nation to know in this public submission about the work of the SADF and what kind of inference should we be drawing from this submission. Mortimer : The reason there is no mention of chemical or biological warfare in this document is that again in the time available and in the study of the available records we have not come across it if specific info is required on the subject then we could zoom on it but we have not to date come across any evidence of it. Wildschut : Just for clarity, so then do we assume that there was no strategy around chemical and biological warfare and hence asking questions around that would be stupid because it did not exist or did it exist and that we need to be quite specific about its existence. Mortimer : Well, firstly of course the SADF as a whole. Should an operation be planned at the chief of the defence force level then he would be the principal client. Should an operation be planned at army level then the intelligence available to the chief of the defence force would be made available to the chief of the army either on the request of the chief of the army but also almost as an automatic action that you push your intelligence down to your lower level. If I could now skip the command level and say an operation is planned at group level, group could be conceivably a client of covert collection but it would now have to go up the whole channel of command so group would request information or intelligence from command who would request from army headquarters who could then eventually request it. So really theoretically at any rate any person who has to carry out an operation somewhere in this organisation could request intelligence and could in that sense be applied. It is however might more likely that it would be the higher headquarters who would be the client. Boraine</B> Just so that I understand this completely, so the clients would be not outside of the SADF, private organisations, political parties, anybody like that. Mortimer</B> Boraine</B> Thank you very much. Mortimer</B> Sorry as my colleague has pointed out me it would also be what I described as the department of defence, armscor could possibly also have requested but not political parties. Boraine</B> Mortimer</B> I presume you are speaking to, referring to, the original operation in Angola in 1975. Boraine</B> Mortimer</B> I was a good bit further down on the scale on things in 1975 and so I cannot from personal experience say anything about it. I am not aware that there was any questioning of the legality or otherwise of the operation from military personnel but I certainly cannot speak with any degree of confidence when I say so. Boraine</B> Mortimer</B> I cannot answer the question. I am not aware of anything of that nature occurring but I base my answer on what is here before us. So, no I am not aware of anything like that happening and again it is something that could be examined further. Boraine</B> As you know this is a vast document and there are many many questions that one would like to pursue but we will have an opportunity to do that through the nodal point but let me finish with one last question and that is to your knowledge did the SADF ever carry out any operations that were designed to look as though they had been carried out by the enemy or the opposition. We know that it is on record that the police did. Did the SADF use that as part of its strategy. Mortimer</B> Boraine</B> Thank you very much. Let me again on behalf of the Commission thank both you and Major General Klopper for being with us for a very long time, for the very long report, for your presentation which is very demanding and tiring and we look forward to continuing the discussion with you and your colleague and in the hope that through this discussion and debate and questions the transformation which has already started and is now in the SANDF will continue and will grow, thank you very much indeed. The session is now adjourned.