---------------------------------------------------------------------------CHAIRPERSON: Good morning everybody. The Panel has changed as most of you would be aware from the bundle of documents. My name is Motata, I will be chairing these hearings and on my right I have Adv Bosman and on my left I have Adv Sandi. Today we'll be hearing the applications of Messrs Eugene Alexander de Kock, amnesty number 0066/96, Willem Albertus Nortje, amnesty number 3764/96, Izak Daniel Bosch, amnesty number 3765/96, Willem Frederick Schoon, amnesty number 4396/96, Schalk Jan Visser, amnesty number 5000/97, Gert Visser, amnesty number 5002/97 and Daniel Jacobus Greyling, amnesty number 5007/97.

I will the legal representatives ... who is the one more?

MS PATEL: The one more is Frank McCarter, Honourable Chair-person, amnesty application number 4063/96. The application was in fact added on and it's to be found in bundle 2.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. We'll have the last, Frank McCarter, amnesty number 4063/96.

I'll request the legal representatives to place themselves on record. Could we start with Mr Eugene Alexander de Kock?

MR HUGO: Thank you, Mr Chairman. My name is S W Hugo and I'm appearing on behalf of Mr de Kock.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Hugo. For Nortje?

MR LAMEY: Thank you, Chairperson. Lamey from the firm Rooth and Wessels, I represent Mr Nortje, as well as well as applicant Izak Daniel Bosch. Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Lamey. Mr Schoon?

MR VISSER: May it please you, Chairperson and Members of the Committee, my name is Louis Visser, I appear for W F Schoon, instructed by Wagener and Muller Attorneys.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Visser. Mr Visser, not as in legal representative.

MS VAN DER WALT: Thank you, Chairperson. I'm Louisa van der Walt and I'm appearing on behalf of Mr S J Visser.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Ms van der Walt. Gert Visser?

MR PRINSLOO: As it pleases the Honourable Chairperson, I'm Harry Prinsloo and I'm appearing on behalf of Gert Visser and Daniel Jacobus Greyling. As it pleases you, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Prinsloo. Mr Frank McCarter?

MR NEL: As it pleases you, Mr Chairman. My name is Christo Nel, I act on behalf of Mr McCarter.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Nel. And lastly but not least, are we coming to the end? Are there other interested parties?

MS PATEL: For the victims, Honourable Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Makondo, which victims?

MR MAKONDO: Thank you, Chairperson. I'm representing the Msibi family.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Makondo. Ms Patel, you must be interested in the proceedings.

MS PATEL: I am as well, but besides myself there's my learned colleague Mr Cornelius who needs to address you as well in respect of his client, Mr Vermeulen. But for the record, I'm Ramula Patel, Leader of Evidence. Thank you.

MR CORNELIUS: Thank you, Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: I hadn't forgotten you, because you are still going to bring an application as well in these proceedings.

MR CORNELIUS: Thank you, Mr Chair. I've tabled an application which I've given to all my colleagues as well as to the Committee, of the inclusion of Nicolaas Johannes Vermeulen, as an applicant in this matter. I have included in the application his full affidavit as well as the annexed application which was bound into the Sedibe incident. What happened in short, Judge, is that when he drew the original application he confused the Sedibe name with Msibi, and when he perused the application in the matters of Sedibe, he realised that he made a mistake and in fact referred to Msibi.

Judge, you will note that from all the other applications it is supported that he's referred to in all the applications and he is in fact an applicant. So I pray that this Committee grants an order that he may be included as an applicant and that we may participate in the proceedings.

For the record, I am Wim Cornelius, I'm acting on behalf of Mr Vermeulen. His application number, I think for the sake of completeness, is 4358/96. I did not include that on the application.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Cornelius. I would not say I'm undermining anybody here, I'll start with seniority. Mr Louis Visser, any opposition to the amendment?

MR VISSER: Not today, thank you Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Prinsloo?

MR PRINSLOO: No objection, Mr Chairman.

MR HUGO: No objection, thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms van der Walt?

MS VAN DER WALT: No objection, thank you Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lamey?

MR LAMEY: No objection, Chairperson, thank you.

MR MAKONDO: No objection, Chairperson, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nel?

MR NEL: I have no objection, thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Patel?

MS PATEL: No objection, thank you Honourable Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lamey, have I referred to you?

MR LAMEY: Yes, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Oh, thank you. Mr Cornelius, firstly let me just find out, has he applied in the Sedibe matter?

MR CORNELIUS: He's applied in the Sedibe matter, Judge, and I think it will just be appropriate then to withdraw the application in the matter of Sedibe, for the sake of completeness.

CHAIRPERSON: And then he'll only be going on on the Jabulani Sydney Msibi matter?

MR CORNELIUS: That is quite right, Judge, thank you.

ADV BOSMAN: Mr Cornelius, I seem to recall that the Sedibe matter was on the roll on a previous occasion.

MR CORNELIUS: That is correct, Advocate Bosman. What we did, I tabled the problem I had at that time and I discussed it, I think with Ms Patel, I'm not sure, or one of the ...(intervention)

ADV BOSMAN: You have not filed a sort of withdrawal notice yet, have you?

MR CORNELIUS: No, we indicated to the ...(indistinct) that we are withdrawing and they said it will be appropriate to bring this application at this hearing, that is why I'm only tabling this application now. But if necessary I'll file a formal withdrawal today.

ADV BOSMAN: Well once of course the Chairperson's made the ruling, I think that should be done as soon as possible.

MR CORNELIUS: It will be seen to.

CHAIRPERSON: Your application is granted and I would say, during the course of the day, would you formally file a notice of withdrawal in respect of Glory Sedibe?

MR CORNELIUS: I thank the Committee for the order, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: What order are we going to have? I see on the bundles we have Mr Eugene Alexander de Kock, but I'm in your hands who wants to start first.

MR VISSER: Chairperson, at this point everybody always looks at me, so I'll start off by saying the following, that I'm not starting off with the evidence, in this particular case, Chairperson. There was some background that happened prior to the abduction and we thought it fit and proper to start with the background leading up and we will try to lead the evidence in chronological order, as people came into the matter as it went along. I think it will make more sense, and all my learned friends are in agreement with that proposal. So that would mean that Ms van der Walt will start first with Brig Visser.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, I think it will tidy even the record, it will look at least decent or readable I suppose. Thank you, Mr Visser. Ms van der Walt?

MS VAN DER WALT: That is correct, Chairperson, it has been decided as such and I call Mr S J Visser. Thank you.

SCHALK JAN VISSER: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Advocate Bosman. You may be seated, Mr Visser. You may proceed, Ms van der Walt.

EXAMINATION BY MS VAN DER WALT: Thank you, Chairperson.

Mr Visser, your application can be found in the first bundle from page 15 to 17, that is the formal application and the incident for which you have applied for amnesty today, is from page 18 to 20, and the political motivation can be found from page 21 to 28, is that correct?

MR S J VISSER: Yes, that is correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: You are applying today for the abduction of Mr Msibi from Swaziland, could you just sketch the background to the Committee, the background which led to the abduction of Mr Msibi.

MR S J VISSER:

MS VAN DER WALT: May I just interrupt you. Were you present during this interrogation?

MR S J VISSER: No, I was not present during this interrogation in Pretoria.

MS VAN DER WALT: Very well.

MR S J VISSER:

CHAIRPERSON: Is that personal knowledge, Mr Visser, or did this emanate from the interrogation?

MR S J VISSER: It came to my knowledge after Malaza had been interrogated and after it had come to light that he had had liaison with other members of the force.

MS VAN DER WALT: And was any action planned after you had obtained this information?

MR S J VISSER: Planning was undertaken at the Head Office of the Security Branch, to identify his instructor in Swaziland. I was never involved with the planning, but I was aware of it.

MS VAN DER WALT: And did you receive any subsequent instructions?

MR S J VISSER: Subsequently, I was present at the Oshoek border post with Maj-Gen Stadler and Brig Schoon, as well as Senior Superintendent Visser and W/O Greyling, as well as members of the Vlakplaas unit and Col Eugene de Kock. During this time, Malaza was taken over the border to Swaziland, so that his handler could be identified.

MS VAN DER WALT: And what happened subsequently?

MR S J VISSER:

MS VAN DER WALT: How do you know that Msibi was a trained MK member?

MR S J VISSER: This was based upon security reports which were at the disposal of the Security Branch. These reports confirmed that he was indeed an ANC member.

MS VAN DER WALT: May I just ask you, when Mr Msibi was brought across the border, do you know whether or not he was assaulted in any way, in your presence?

MR S J VISSER: I am aware that he was indeed assaulted.

MS VAN DER WALT: Where was this, was this at the border post?

MR S J VISSER: Yes, that is correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: Do you know who assaulted him?

MR S J VISSER: I'm not entirely certain who was involved, but he was assaulted by members in my presence.

MS VAN DER WALT: Was he interrogated in your presence?

MR S J VISSER: Yes, in general terms, he was interrogated there and then taken to Pretoria, for further detention.

MS VAN DER WALT: And when you say that he was taken to Pretoria, do you know where in Pretoria he was detained?

MR S J VISSER: He was taken to a premises at Daisy, as far as I can recall. This was in Pretoria.

MS VAN DER WALT: In your application you state on page 20 that at a later stage, Msibi was transferred to Eastern Transvaal, why was he transferred to Eastern Transvaal?

MR S J VISSER: That is correct, Chairperson, upon my request he was transferred to Eastern Transvaal and he was detained at the Witrivier Police Station, in order to make an attempt to reoriented him and so doing obtain information regarding the ANC activities in Swaziland.

MS VAN DER WALT: Do you have any knowledge regarding an incident where Judge Goldstone was involved?

MR S J VISSER: Yes, I am aware of that, I was informed of it.

MS VAN DER WALT: You don't have personal knowledge of it, but what was the information that you received?

MR S J VISSER: The information that I received was that Judge Goldstone had visited the Brits Police Station and had viewed Msibi there while Msibi was being detained there.

MS VAN DER WALT: Is this the reason why you requested him to be transferred to Eastern Transvaal, or what was the actual reason for your request for his transfer?

MR S J VISSER: I believe that Msibi could indeed be capable of providing further particulars to us regarding ANC activities in Swaziland, and that due to the fact that we were responsible for Intelligence work in Swaziland, we needed to be able to interrogate him and obtain information from him.

MS VAN DER WALT: Did you obtain any information from him, was he willing to cooperate?

MR S J VISSER: He was willing to cooperate, he declared himself as such and later he was handed over to a former Brigadier, who would deal with him as an informer.

MS VAN DER WALT: Why was it necessary to remove Msibi from Swaziland?

MR S J VISSER: He was a member of the Transvaal machinery, he was connected to the ANC Intelligence structure and I also believe that he was involved in the planning of infiltration, the placement of landmines and bombs, in restaurants and so forth.

MS VAN DER WALT: Mr Visser, you then apply today before the Honourable Committee, for conspiracy to abduct as well as abduction, is that correct?

MR S J VISSER: Yes, that is correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: Furthermore, you are applying for the assault which took place in your presence, although you yourself did not participate in the assault.

MR S J VISSER: That is correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: And furthermore, are you applying for defeating the ends of justice because you did not disclose the true course of events in South Africa, pertaining to the abduction of Msibi?

MR S J VISSER: That is correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: As well as any civil liability which may emanate from these deeds, is that correct?

MR S J VISSER: Yes, that is my application.

MS VAN DER WALT: Did you draw any financial advantage or personal advantage from the abduction of Mr Msibi?

MR S J VISSER: Absolutely nothing.

MS VAN DER WALT: No further questions, thank you Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Ms van der Walt. Mr Hugo, any cross-examination?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR HUGO: Yes, thank you Mr Chairman.

Mr Visser, can you recall how many persons from the Vlakplaas contingency crossed the border with Mr Malaza in order to abduct Mr Msibi?

MR S J VISSER: No, I cannot say precisely how many persons went along.

MR HUGO: Very well. Can you tell us whether or not you can recall that the assault which took place at the border post, whether Mr de Kock was part of this assault?

MR S J VISSER: I cannot specifically, but it is possible that this may have taken place in the process.

MR HUGO: Well then let me put it to you that Mr de Kock stated that it is indeed possible that he may have participated in the assault in the regard that he may have dealt a few blows. Do you think that would be possible?

MR S J VISSER: Yes, it is possible.

MR HUGO: Then with regard to the initial planning phase, was any consideration given to the killing of Mr Msibi?

MR S J VISSER: Not as far as I know.

MR HUGO: And it was also not told to you from within the upper echelons of the rank structure that it was their intention to kill him?

MR S J VISSER: No.

MR HUGO: With regard to Mr de Kock's position you would most probably agree that he was subordinate to you as well as to Brig Schoon, and that he acted based upon the strength of your orders.

MR S J VISSER: That is correct.

MR HUGO: I have no further questions, thank you Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Hugo. Mr Visser.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR VISSER: Thank you, Chairperson.

Mr Visser, just to provide some background for the Committee, we are aware of the historic perspective that in the beginning of the '80s, a summit took place in Simon's Town, where certain divisions were made for actions by the Security Forces against what was known at that stage as terrorists or revolutionaries, is that correct?

MR S J VISSER: Yes, that is correct.

MR VISSER: And you were stationed in the Eastern Transvaal?

MR S J VISSER: Yes, I was the Divisional Commander of the Eastern Transvaal region.

MR VISSER: And this brought you into close proximity with the problems originating within Swaziland?

MR S J VISSER: That is correct.

MR VISSER: And if I understand correctly, it is also your comprehension that with regard to the Simon's Town summit, the Security Police acted in Swaziland and not the Defence Force.

MR S J VISSER: Yes, that was the decision.

MR VISSER: You have already referred to this, but would it be correct for me to say that from 1986 onwards there was a serious intensification in actions and acts of terrorism within South Africa, which were launched from Swaziland?

MR S J VISSER: Yes, there were numerous cases.

MR VISSER: You have already stated in your evidence that Mr Msibi was in control of the Military machinery of the ANC in Swaziland, but wouldn't it instead be correct to say that he was the Head of Intelligence of the ANC in Swaziland?

MR S J VISSER: He was the Head of the Intelligence division, but he was also involved by nature of the situation, in the Transvaal machinery which conducted planning.

MR VISSER: Yes. And his contribution or his activities for example, did this involve among others, the assistance to persons who were in exile from South Africa to receive training abroad, in order to return again to South Africa?

MR S J VISSER: Yes, it is possible.

MR VISSER: Well please say if you are not aware of these things. You say that you read security reports pertaining to him, do you know whether or not he was involved in the provision of arms and ammunition, for example?

MR S J VISSER: I cannot recall.

MR VISSER: You cannot say. Well, then let's leave it at that. According to the norms which were applied at the Security Branch of the Police during those years, would we have been able to describe Mr Msibi as a target of the Security Branch?

MR S J VISSER: Yes, we would have.

MR VISSER: And we are aware from the numerous amnesty applications that many targets of the Security Branch were indeed eliminated.

MR S J VISSER: That is correct.

MR VISSER: Both internally and externally in some of the neighbouring States.

MR S J VISSER: That is correct.

MR VISSER: Now in this case apparently it was decided not to eliminate Mr Msibi, but rather to attempt to recruit him.

MR S J VISSER: That is correct, Chairperson.

MR VISSER: What was the advantage to that? According to you as a Security man, if you were able to recruit an important ANC person rather than eliminating him?

MR S J VISSER: He would have been in a position to provide further information to us regarding further planning pertaining to actions by the ANC in the RSA.

MR VISSER: And were the Security Branch's actions based upon the information that you received from informers and coverage agents?

MR S J VISSER: We have a report here which Ms Patel gave us this morning, I just want to ask you, I'm not going to refer to the report as such, but apparently according to Mr Msibi, he was offered money, I just want to know whether or not you are the person who offered him money to persuade him to act as - Chairperson, I believe we'll hand it up later if necessary, at this stage it's not necessary to hand it up ...

CHAIRPERSON: You may proceed on those basis, at the time when it's handed up we will mark it.

MR VISSER: Thank you, Chairperson.

In which he states that an offer of R2 000 was made to him to cooperate with the Security Branch, are you aware of this?

MR S J VISSER: I was not present, but I am aware that money was paid out to him after he declared his willingness to cooperate with us.

MR VISSER: And according to your knowledge, would further amounts have been paid over to him, or was it only this one amount?

MR S J VISSER: He would have been paid on a regular basis.

MR VISSER: Thank you, Chairperson, nothing further.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Visser. Mr Lamey?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR LAMEY: Thank you, Chairperson.

Brigadier Visser, the assault which took place at the Oshoek border post, I deduce from your evidence and from your impression that it was not a serious and a lengthy assault, am I correct?

MR S J VISSER: No, it didn't last very long.

MR LAMEY: He had another destination and that was to go to Pretoria the next day, where further interrogation would be conducted.

MR S J VISSER: Upon the same day of his abduction he was taken to Pretoria.

MR LAMEY: Who had vested interests in his abduction and his interrogation?

MR S J VISSER: The Generals, such as Gen Stadler and other members of the Security Branch.

MR LAMEY: Do you also know that he was transferred by means of Army helicopter to the Intelligence division of the Defence Force?

MR S J VISSER: I'm not aware of that.

MR LAMEY: I have no further questions, thank you Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Lamey. Mr Prinsloo?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR PRINSLOO: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

Mr Visser, are you aware of the fact that two former members of the Security Branch who were stationed at Kompol in Pretoria, were prosecuted due to the fact that they had provided top secret information to the ANC, via Mr Malaza to Mr Msibi?

MR S J VISSER: Yes, I'm aware of that.

MR PRINSLOO: And are you aware of the fact that both those members were prosecuted in the Regional Court, regarding various charges and that Mr Msibi indeed testified against those two members as a State witness?

MR S J VISSER: Yes, I am aware of this.

MR PRINSLOO: And are you also aware that Mr Msibi, from within his position in Swaziland, was the Head of Military Intelligence? Did you have that information or not?

MR S J VISSER: I was aware of such information.

MR PRINSLOO: And by nature of his position he occupied a very high-ranking position which would have brought him into contact with much information.

MR S J VISSER: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: And would that information have been valuable to you?

MR S J VISSER: Yes, it would have been valuable to me.

MR PRINSLOO: And specifically the involvement of a member of the Security Branch in Nelspruit, a Mr Malaza whom you have already given evidence about, who gave information to the ANC and recruited other persons, was it important for you to determine what precisely Mr Malaza's role was with Mr Msibi?

MR S J VISSER: That is correct, it was crucial to me.

MR PRINSLOO: And would that information have hampered any Security Branch investigations against the ANC, if Mr Msibi had not been abducted?

MR S J VISSER: Yes, it would have placed the Security actions at a disadvantage.

MR PRINSLOO: Was it a matter of national interest for you, in terms of abducting him?

MR S J VISSER: Yes, it was important to eliminate him.

MR PRINSLOO: Thank you, no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Nel?

MR NEL: Thank you, Mr Chairperson, I've no questions for Mr Visser.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Makondo? Firstly, Mr Cornelius.

MR CORNELIUS: I have no questions, thank you Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Makondo?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR MAKONDO: Thank you, Chairperson.

Mr Visser, you said Mr Msibi was - or Mr Malaza was monitored, can you give details as to what came out of that monitoring?

MR S J VISSER: Could you just repeat the last part of your question please, I could not hear it.

MR MAKONDO: You talked of Mr Malaza being monitored, can you give the details and the outcome thereof.

MR S J VISSER: Reports that came from different sources, we compared them with each other and on this basis we then decided that information, or it seemed that information was leaked from Nelspruit, and we could point a finger at Malaza.

MR MAKONDO: I heard you saying it was Visser who was monitoring him, am I correct?

MR S J VISSER: Yes, it was Col Visser, he was a Senior Superintendent Visser, he did the monitoring. He was the Branch Commander at that stage.

MR MAKONDO: Now what other sources are you talking about when you say from different sources?

MR S J VISSER: We handled different informants who provided us with intelligence reports.

MR MAKONDO: Is it not proper to say exactly what I'm asking, like X, Y and Z were the people who were helping in the monitoring?

MR S J VISSER: No, at this stage I won't be able to give you the details of it.

MR MAKONDO: Why not?

MR S J VISSER: I cannot recall and I cannot give you that specific - I cannot recall that specific information.

MR MAKONDO: You talked of believing from your sources of the role that Mr Msibi was doing, am I correct?

MR S J VISSER: Yes, because of information reports that we received, I was aware that he was involved in the ANC, that he was a trained ANC member.

MR MAKONDO: And the role you talk about, was it ever confirmed or you took it from your sources only?

MR S J VISSER: It was at a later stage confirmed that he was a member of the ANC and that he did fulfil these roles.

MR MAKONDO: His involvement with Malaza, did you confirm the interaction perhaps?

MR S J VISSER: It was confirmed on the hand of the information that Malaza himself provided us with.

MR MAKONDO: And the assault, can you detail the assault at the border, when you were present?

MR S J VISSER: He was shaken and there could have been blows.

MR MAKONDO: I have with me here a copy of a newspaper, The New Nation, page 4 thereof of December 1999, which I believe everyone is having. - '89, Chairperson, thank you. I beg leave to hand it over to the Commission if they don't have any.

CHAIRPERSON: We do have copies.

MR MAKONDO: Chairperson, please may it be marked A.

CHAIRPERSON: The New Nation, page 4, December 1989, will be marked Exhibit A. You may proceed.

MR MAKONDO: Thank you, Chairperson.

This is the press conference that Mr Msibi gave after his release and I will particularly concentrate on the border where you said you were involved ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Let's say an excerpt.

MR MAKONDO: Thank you, Chair.

I'll particularly concentrate on the border, his report as to what happened there. He says on the second column, the third paragraph - no, the fourth one which starts with:

Do you find it?

MR S J VISSER: Yes, I have this paragraph, yes.

MR MAKONDO: He describes there what happened, he says amongst others, adhesive tape was put on his mouth and then he said that an iron leg was placed on his feet, and you have said there were only a few slaps and he was just shaken around.

MR S J VISSER: At that stage I was not present, I was on the South African side of the border and this occurred, apparently, on the Swaziland side of the border.

CHAIRPERSON: To be precise, he says the adhesive tape was removed, not placed. I don't think that's the true reading of the paragraph you're referring to.

MR MAKONDO: Thank you, Chairperson.

He says in the next paragraph, he says:

I take it that these things were happening in the border in South Africa.

MR S J VISSER: Yes, it's possible that somebody could have said that.

MR MAKONDO: But you never saw an iron leg put on his feet?

MR S J VISSER: No, I can't remember anything like that. I cannot recall.

MR MAKONDO: What is it that you can recall perhaps?

MR S J VISSER: I cannot remember anything about the iron cuffs that were placed round his legs.

MR MAKONDO: When he was handed over, what was his condition?

MR S J VISSER: He moved by himself, he walked in. It was a clubhouse at the border post and there was nothing apparently wrong with him.

MR MAKONDO: Was he interrogated at that time?

MR S J VISSER: He was interrogated very shortly in this clubhouse.

MR MAKONDO: Can you give a rough estimation of the time period?

MR S J VISSER: I cannot say exactly, but it could have been half an hour or fifteen minutes.

MR MAKONDO: During the interrogation, was there further assaults on him? During that interrogation, was he further assaulted?

MR S J VISSER: Yes, he was assaulted.

MR MAKONDO: Will you please detail that.

MR S J VISSER: I've already testified that I cannot remember specifically, but I am aware that he was slapped, shoved and he was assaulted in the process.

MR MAKONDO: Do you remember if his head was hit against the wall?

MR S J VISSER: I cannot recall that, no.

MR MAKONDO: Do you remember perhaps that his toes were stepped on?

MR S J VISSER: I cannot recall that, no.

MR MAKONDO: But you were present.

MR S J VISSER: Yes, I was present.

MR MAKONDO: Were you the most senior officer there?

MR S J VISSER: No, Chairperson.

MR MAKONDO: Were you in charge of the interrogation?

MR S J VISSER: No, Chairperson.

MR MAKONDO: Do you know perhaps who was in charge and who was the most senior?

MR S J VISSER: It was Gen Stadler and Brig Schoon was present. They are both my seniors.

MR MAKONDO: So from the interrogation was he taken, after your 30 minutes that you have said, was he taken direct to Pretoria?

MR S J VISSER: Yes, that is as far as I can recall.

MR MAKONDO: I'm asking you because from the report he says that he gave the interrogators information to go and take documents in Mbabane, is that correct?

MR S J VISSER: I'm not aware of that.

MR MAKONDO: You don't remember if some documents were brought during his interrogation?

MR S J VISSER: No, I'm not aware of that.

MR MAKONDO: What information did he give you during that interrogation?

MR S J VISSER: He did not say much, Mr Chairperson.

MR MAKONDO: The little that he said, what did he say?

MR S J VISSER: I cannot specifically recall what he said.

MR MAKONDO: Can you perhaps generally remember what he highlighted ...(indistinct)

MR S J VISSER: I cannot remember something specific that he said.

MR MAKONDO: Mr Visser, what did you get from him during that interrogation?

MR S J VISSER: Could you just repeat your question please.

MR MAKONDO: During that interrogation, what did you get from him?

MR S J VISSER: I cannot remember that he said anything specifically or pertinently, that is why we transported him to Pretoria, so that he can be interrogated further, Chairperson.

MR MAKONDO: Was it not part of the plan that he was going to be taken to Pretoria?

MR S J VISSER: It was part of the plan, yes.

MR MAKONDO: So taking him to Pretoria, it was not because you got nothing, it was part of the plan.

MR S J VISSER: Yes, it was part of the planning that he will be taken to Pretoria.

MR MAKONDO: So during your 30 minutes interrogation you got nothing from him?

MR S J VISSER: I cannot remember that he said anything pertinently or that anything came to light.

MR MAKONDO: Do you perhaps remember what you wanted to get from him at that time?

MR S J VISSER: I believe it would have been - even though I was not personally involved in the interrogation, I believe they wanted to get information concerning planned operations of ANC members in Swaziland.

MR MAKONDO: The number of people involved, can you estimate how many were there, including the ones that brought him over the border?

MR S J VISSER: There were quite few, it could possibly be six to eight people who at that stage were in the clubhouse, Chairperson.

MR MAKONDO: The court case where he testified, when was it?

MR S J VISSER: I can't remember the date.

MR MAKONDO: The year?

MR S J VISSER: It was shortly after Malaza walked out as an agent for the ANC, in other words it had to be in the '80s.

MR MAKONDO: Could it have been later than '89?

MR S J VISSER: I cannot confirm if it was later or not, Mr Chairperson.

MR MAKONDO: When he testified was it after he was released from his abduction and detention?

MR S J VISSER: Yes, it was after he was released and after he was reconciled with his mother.

MR MAKONDO: Do you know the Regional Court where he appeared?

MR S J VISSER: No, I do not know specifically where this court was or which court it was.

MR MAKONDO: The people he testified against, do you remember them?

MR S J VISSER: The police members who were involved were Mokgabudi and Rabuli, the two members who were involved in the Security Branch in Pretoria.

CHAIRPERSON: Were you present at the court?

MR S J VISSER: No, I was not.

CHAIRPERSON: You may proceed.

MR MAKONDO: Thank you, Chairperson.

Are these the similar police who suspected that Malaza is getting information from him?

MR S J VISSER: Yes, these are the two people who were manipulated by Malaza.

MR MAKONDO: In Vlakplaas, do you remember how long did he stay there?

MR S J VISSER: No, I cannot give specific time spans or periods.

MR MAKONDO: May I suggest six months perhaps?

MR S J VISSER: At this stage I cannot confirm how long it was.

MR MAKONDO: During his stay in Vlakplaas, do you know of the assault and torture that he underwent?

MR S J VISSER: I would not be able to say.

MR MAKONDO: The decision to take him to the Eastern Transvaal, whose was it?

MR S J VISSER: It was on my request, Mr Chairperson.

MR MAKONDO: When was that?

MR S J VISSER: It was in the '80s, I do not know the specific date.

MR MAKONDO: Did you make that order 6, 3, 5 months after he was in Vlakplaas? Time period.

MR S J VISSER: He was within the Pretoria area for quite a while and that was afterwards that he was transferred and it was therefore not necessary to do further interrogations myself.

MR MAKONDO: During his staying in Vlakplaas, what did your Intelligence department get from him?

MR S J VISSER: No information was specifically conveyed to me concerning this.

MR MAKONDO: Then why did you want him to come to the Eastern Transvaal?

MR S J VISSER: Because he had a relatively senior position within the ANC and he would have been able to provide me with information concerning planning and then to plan an offensive movement.

MR MAKONDO: Before you recalled him did he break when he was in Vlakplaas?

MR S J VISSER: What do you mean when you say "break"?

MR MAKONDO: Did he give vital information?

MR S J VISSER: When he was transferred to the Eastern Transvaal he was still not willing to cooperate.

MR S J VISSER: Just for the record, Mr Interpreter, I should say, "he was to an extent not willing". The translation did not exactly correspond with the evidence that was given. Just for the record.

MR MAKONDO: Thank you.

Was it perhaps your thinking that you could get more information from him?

MR S J VISSER: Yes, I was convinced that he could have provided important information and that is why I asked Greyling and Visser to attempt to reorientate him.

MR MAKONDO: Was he reorientated?

MR S J VISSER: Yes, he was.

MR MAKONDO: Did he give you information then?

MR S J VISSER: He was then handed over to Gen Buchner who then handled him as an informer, and I had no further - or I received no further reports, specific reports from this General.

MR MAKONDO: For how long did he stay in the Eastern Transvaal?

MR S J VISSER: I cannot specifically recall the dates, but it was for a month or a bit more than a month. Maybe some of the other members can testify about the time in which he was held there.

MR MAKONDO: I'm asking you because one of the applicants says he refused to be an informer, he says he never became one, what do you say?

MR S J VISSER: Initially he refused to become an informant and at a later stage he did decide to become an informant. That was after a period of time, after a period of reorientation or detention that he conceded.

MR MAKONDO: So are you saying prior to his accidental release by Judge Goldstone, he was an informer?

MR S J VISSER: Could you just please repeat your question.

MR MAKONDO: Let me rephrase it. Did he become an informer prior to his release or after his release?

MR S J VISSER: He said he would an informant before he was released.

MR MAKONDO: So did he act as an informer during his detention?

MR S J VISSER: Yes, he did convey information to the Security Branch.

MR MAKONDO: Then why was he not released after you got him where you want him? After you got him as an informer, why did you not release him?

MR S J VISSER: After he was willing to cooperate he was released and then he was taken to his home.

MR MAKONDO: Let me refer you to the similar press conference, the last but one column, the fourth paragraph where he stated that his release was because of him having accidentally met Judge Goldstone, as a detainee.

MR S J VISSER: That is not correct, he did meet with Judge Goldstone, but he was then transferred to the Eastern Transvaal where he was released after he was willing to become an informant for the Police, or to cooperate with them.

MR MAKONDO: He talks of, from the similar press conference, of a Magistrate who visited him, do you know of that visit?

MR S J VISSER: Yes, it was law then that Magistrates could visit detainees.

MR MAKONDO: Do you remember who that Magistrate was?

MR S J VISSER: No, I'm not aware who it was, it was not in my area or district.

MR MAKONDO: Am I correct, he was visited whilst he was in Pretoria?

MR S J VISSER: Yes, I assume it was Pretoria or the Brits Police Station.

MR MAKONDO: Was it an internal arrangement of your department to get the Magistrate to visit him?

MR S J VISSER: No, it was according to law that a Magistrate had to visit the detainee.

MR MAKONDO: It strikes me that you don't remember quite a number of things which, according to the letter I gave to, I think to the Evidence Leader and other legal reps, the family is opposing on the basis that there is none full disclosure of facts known to you, am I correct?

MR S J VISSER: As far as my knowledge goes, I made a full presentation and full disclosure about what happened with this incident.

CHAIRPERSON: I think you should enumerate those, because he has said what he wanted to say and you are just coming and saying there are a number of things which you haven't disclosed, we don't know what you're talking about, and you are also referring to a letter you gave to the Evidence Leader, which we are not privy to. So we are at a loss of what you are talking about.

MS PATEL: Honourable Chairperson, may I apologise that you have not been placed in possession of that letter, I do believe that my learned colleagues though, do have copies of the letter. I will hand it up shortly.

MR MAKONDO: Thank you, Chairperson, I will highlight the things that I talked of, Chairperson. Starting, Chairperson, with the monitoring. The applicant cannot say that we had to - it says Mr Visser, or one Visser was in charge ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: No, I'd rather say you direct the questions, I don't want to be involved in the debate, I just want you to say what you think he hasn't disclosed and ask him directly.

MR MAKONDO: Thank you, Chairperson.

Mr Visser, save to say that one Visser was observing the interaction of Malaza and Msibi, you talked of other sources which you either have forgotten or you don't tell us about.

MS VAN DER WALT: At this stage I'd just like to say that statement is not true, Mr Visser said that the information that was provided by other informants, and that was his answer.

MR MAKONDO: Mr Visser, perhaps I didn't ask it properly, who are those?

MR S J VISSER: I'm not capable of giving you the details of other informants that were used at the Security Branch and to give you the details concerning them.

MR MAKONDO: Hence, talking of non full disclosure, it is the view of the family that you know who the informants are, or who your sources are and you are not disclosing them.

MR S J VISSER: As far as I know the information concerning Msibi and his involvement as handler of Malaza, came from Malaza himself and it was at a later stage confirmed. But apart from that fact, other informants also brought out reports that resulted us making certain conclusions within the Security Branch.

MR MAKONDO: Mr Visser, it is also the view of the victims that the assault which Mr Msibi talked of in his press conference, occurred in your presence and you know about it and you are not disclosing it.

MS VAN DER WALT: I'm very sorry, that is a mistake, Mr Visser testified about the assault and he was cross-examined about the assault that took place in his presence.

CHAIRPERSON: He was shoved around and he was slapped a few times. Is that not true?

MR S J VISSER: Yes, it is.

MR MAKONDO: When you were asked about, by my learned colleague, about the involvement ...(intervention)

ADV SANDI: Sorry Mr Makondo, are you going to be asking him a question on something else and not assault? I want to ask him a question just on this aspect of the assault.

MR MAKONDO: ... (indistinct) go on, I'm still on ... (indistinct)

ADV SANDI: Thank you. Mr Visser, as I understand you, you did not personally take part in the assault of this man, did you?

MR S J VISSER: I did not personally partake in it, no.

ADV SANDI: Was there any reason why you did not take part?

MR S J VISSER: I was a senior member, or one of the senior members present and one of the subordinates did interrogate him and then also assaulted him.

ADV SANDI: Did you take part in the questioning of this man, asking him questions? Did you take part in that?

MR S J VISSER: I did not personally put questions to him, but some of the members who were present, the Security Branch members, did ask him questions and interrogated him.

ADV SANDI: Is it your evidence that you do not know, or you do not remember who amongst your colleagues assaulted this man?

MR S J VISSER: It could one or more of them. As I said there were approximately six or eight people in that building, amongst others, de Kock, Col Visser and other members that I cannot even recall at this stage.

ADV SANDI: Is there anyone you are able to recall who did not assault this person?

MR S J VISSER: I did not touch him.

ADV SANDI: Do you know of anyone amongst your colleagues who were there?

MR S J VISSER: There were various members, Brig Schoon did not assault him and Gen Stadler did not assault him and there could be one or two more members who did not assault him.

ADV SANDI: Thank you. Thank you, Mr Makondo.

MR MAKONDO: It surprises me that you remember who did not assault him, but you don't remember who assaulted him.

MR S J VISSER: I remember that Schoon and Stadler were not involved, because we stood together at a certain point within this clubhouse.

MR MAKONDO: Do I get you correct if you say you were just standing there observing?

MR S J VISSER: That is correct, yes.

MR MAKONDO: And you were the senior members?

MR S J VISSER: On of the senior members present, yes.

MR MAKONDO: Are you saying by implication, it was your subordinates who were assaulting Mr Msibi in your presence?

MR S J VISSER: That is correct.

MR MAKONDO: When you were asked about the involvement of Mr de Kock, you said "possibly".

MR S J VISSER: Yes, it's possible that he could have assaulted him.

MR MAKONDO: You are not sure as to whether he assaulted him or not?

MR S J VISSER: I cannot say out of my own recollection, but if such a question was put to me by his legal representative, I would be able to confirm that it was possible.

MR MAKONDO: It's surprising that you don't even recall the time period that Mr Msibi was in your detention, when I say "your detention", I mean your department, whereas you take him as this important person with important information that you need.

MR S J VISSER: It is possibly the reason why he was shoved around and slapped, and that is to get urgent information from him within the short period of time that he was with us at the border post.

CHAIRPERSON: I suppose he means when he was eventually brought back to your jurisdiction. Would I be correct?

MR MAKONDO: That would be correct, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: In other words, he means the second time when he was brought to your jurisdiction. Nelspruit.

MR MAKONDO: In the Eastern Transvaal, yes.

MR S J VISSER: Can you ...

CHAIRPERSON: Rephrase it.

MR MAKONDO: I'm saying I'm surprised that you don't recall even the time period within which you hand him in under your supervision from your orders to get him to Eastern Transvaal.

MR S J VISSER: I cannot remember the specific period because I gave the instruction to Visser and Greyling to do the interrogation while I was in Middelburg and he was detained in Witrivier. All that I could do was that on Sundays I could leave the office and maybe join them there and liaise with them.

MR MAKONDO: Hence I'm saying what you are saying does not correlate with what you said when you described Msibi as this person with information that was highly valuable to your department.

MR S J VISSER: But he was, or the position that he held within Swaziland as an Intelligence Officer of the ANC and of the Transvaal machinery, he was of great interest to the Security Branch and to get information from him was very important.

MR MAKONDO: Mr Visser, I've just confirmed this after I asked for the first time from the family members if Mr Msibi ever testified in any court of law, and they said according to their recollection he has not.

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Chairman, in order not to waste time, I personally prosecuted Rabuli and Mokgabudi in the Regional Court in Pretoria, and I personally called Mr Msibi as a witness. If need be we can get hold of that record and make it available.

CHAIRPERSON: The other thing Mr Visser has said is he did not attend the court as well, so your question wouldn't be relevant, because he wasn't present.

MR MAKONDO: Thank you, Chairperson.

Because according to one of the applicants, when he was killed he was due to appear in Court, that's what they know, that's the instruction I got. Do you know of any court that he was due to appear in?

MR S J VISSER: I'm not aware of any specific court, with the exception of the case that Mr Prinsloo has mentioned.

MR MAKONDO: That will be all, Chairperson, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Makondo. Ms Patel?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS PATEL: Thank you, Honourable Chairperson.

Mr Visser, what was your rank at that stage?

MR S J VISSER: I was a Brigadier.

MS PATEL: Okay. Because if one refers to Exhibit A ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Could we just hold ... Would you need a short adjournment to complete your instruction, it would appear there's a consultation whilst there's cross-examination.

MS PATEL: I ask for pardon, Chairperson, I was just clarifying a thing. Thank you, there will no need for that.

CHAIRPERSON: You may proceed, Ms Patel.

MS PATEL: Thank you, Honourable Chairperson.

Mr Visser, just to take you back to Exhibit A, it appears that Mr Msibi reported there that he was in fact assaulted at what he says looked like a clubhouse, now I would imagine that that's the brick building that you referred to at the Oshoek border post.

MR S J VISSER: Yes, it is a brick house at the Oshoek border post.

MS PATEL: He recalls specifically that Capt de Kock, as he was then, assaulted him with fists and a belt and further that he was struck on the head against the wall by Major Visser. Who would that have been?

MR S J VISSER: The only person who had a similar rank who was present there is the current Director Visser who is also one of the applicants in this matter.

MS PATEL: Would that be Gert Visser?

MR S J VISSER: Gert Visser, yes.

MS PATEL: Okay, can you confirm whether this in fact took place?

MR S J VISSER: I cannot confirm it, but it is possible that it took place, that he was also involved or that he also may have been involved in the assault.

MS PATEL: Right. Were you present at all times during the interrogation and assault at the Oshoek border house?

MR S J VISSER: Yes, I was in that particular building, or at least I was in the clubhouse.

MS PATEL: Were you present at - was he assaulted within your view at all times at the border?

MR S J VISSER: Yes.

MS PATEL: Alright. Then just one curious aspect, Mr de Kock refers in his application at page 32 of bundle 1 to us, that there was some problem between National Intelligence after Msibi was in fact abducted, do you bear any knowledge of this?

MR S J VISSER: I came to hear of this at a certain stage, I heard that National Intelligence had some or other objection regarding the abduction of Msibi.

MS PATEL: Do you know what that was about, what the objection related to specifically?

MR S J VISSER: The only inference that I could draw at that stage was that they also had an interest in the presence of Msibi in Swaziland.

MS PATEL: But you can't give us any specific information?

MR S J VISSER: No, I cannot give you any finer particulars.

MS PATEL: Okay. Furthermore, regarding the R2 000 that was paid, Mr Msibi had stated, according to the report, that that R2 000 was in fact his own money that was taken from his place in Swaziland, can you confirm?

MR S J VISSER: That is not correct, Chairperson, this was money which was used by the Security Branch in order to pay him for his continued co-operation with the Security Branch.

MS PATEL: Do you know whether his house was ever searched in Swaziland after his abduction?

MR S J VISSER: I'm not personally aware thereof, but it is possible that it may have been searched.

MS PATEL: Okay. During the subsequent interrogation by Greyling and Stadler of Mr Msibi, who would Greyling have reported to?

MR S J VISSER: What do you mean?

MS PATEL: As I understand it, after he was taken back to Daisy farm or Pretoria, he was then handed over to, or Greyling was then involved in his interrogation before he was then handed over further, is that correct?

MR S J VISSER: Yes, he would have reported to Gen Stadler regarding the interrogation which took place at Daisy.

MS PATEL: Okay. Would Stadler then have reported in turn to you, or informed you at least of the developments that were taking place?

MR S J VISSER: He would have brought a report to Head Office.

MS PATEL: And you would have been privy to those reports?

MR S J VISSER: Yes, it could have happened later that the information may have been made available to me.

MS PATEL: Alright. Honourable Chairperson, if you would just grant me a moment, I just need to check my notes.

CHAIRPERSON: Whilst she's checking her notes, when he was subsequently taken back to the Eastern Transvaal, did you have any contact with Mr Msibi?

MR S J VISSER: Yes, I had contact with him, mostly on Sundays I travelled down from Middelburg to Nelspruit, where I would have discussions with him.

CHAIRPERSON: Why I'm asking you this, he says in the report, that would be the third column which is an interview that took place after his release in December, he says, the third paragraph:

Who would that be, the other one, the other Visser?

MR S J VISSER: That's not correct, the Visser is Gert Visser, one of the applicants and Capt de Kock was not stationed at Nelspruit.

CHAIRPERSON: Did he at some stage lose consciousness when he was interrogated and resuscitated with five glasses of brandy?

MR S J VISSER: Not that I am aware of.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. You may proceed, Ms Patel.

MS PATEL: Thank you, Honourable Chairperson.

Can I just ask, was Mr Schoon present also at all times at the Oshoek border post when Mr Msibi was interrogated and assaulted?

MR S J VISSER: Brig Schoon was present, as well as Gen Stadler.

MS PATEL: Okay. Thank you, Honourable Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms van der Walt, before you re-exam, could I ask my Panel just to complete, so that you do one re-examination?

MS VAN DER WALT: I think that's correct, thank you Chairperson.

ADV BOSMAN: Mr Visser, who were the persons under your command, among the applicants that we have here today?

MR S J VISSER: Gert Visser and Greyling, Chairperson.

ADV BOSMAN: And if I recall correctly, then you said that Greyling conducted a major proportion of the interrogation.

MR S J VISSER: Yes, and he also assisted in the transportation of Malaza to Pretoria.

ADV BOSMAN: Didn't you and Mr Greyling subsequently discuss anything regarding what had taken place there?

MR S J VISSER: Yes, we liaised regarding the information which was made available.

ADV BOSMAN: I actually want to know whether or not you discussed the incident.

MR S J VISSER: No, not in detail.

ADV BOSMAN: So did the entire aspect surrounding the assault never again come to light?

MR S J VISSER: No.

ADV BOSMAN: And the other persons with the exception of the senior officers, were they generally known to you or were they simply there?

MR S J VISSER: Most of Col de Kock's persons were known to me from sight. I didn't know all their names, but the other members who were there, such as Greyling and Visser, were personally known to me.

ADV BOSMAN: Then just one more question to clarify the picture completely. Why were there so many senior officers there that night?

MR S J VISSER: It was an operation which was planned from Head Office, this action against Msibi, and I believe that to be the reason. Stadler, among others, was involved with the interrogation of Malaza, the Security Branch member who was the double-agent for the ANC. That is why he was present there at the Oshoek border post.

ADV BOSMAN: Now where were your interests vested approximately, if one could speak in degrees of importance?

MR S J VISSER: I was the Commander of the Security Branch in the Eastern Transvaal and I was primarily responsible for combating terrorism which was launched from Swaziland into the RSA.

ADV BOSMAN: So did you have primary importance there that night?

MR S J VISSER: Yes, I had a primary interest there that night.

ADV BOSMAN: Actually I'm asking you this because it is somewhat strange to me that you recall so little of the details.

MR S J VISSER: In what regard, Chairperson?

ADV BOSMAN: Mr Greyling fell directly under your command and so too, Mr Gert Visser.

MR S J VISSER: That is correct.

ADV BOSMAN: And Greyling conducted the interrogation that night.

MR S J VISSER: I don't know whether he was present at that particular stage or whether he was still in Swaziland, busy on a further operation. I cannot really recall whether or not he was actually in the clubhouse at that stage. Visser was indeed there, that I can recall.

ADV BOSMAN: I'm sorry, then I must have misunderstood the evidence at some point, I thought that Greyling was also involved in the interrogation there.

MR S J VISSER: He was responsible for the abduction of, or for the transportation of Malaza to Pretoria. Later after Msibi was transferred to Eastern Transvaal, he received the order from me to continue with the interrogation and the reorientation of the subject.

ADV BOSMAN: I understand, it's my mistake. But Mr Visser was undoubtedly there?

MR S J VISSER: Yes, as far as I know, Gert Visser was present in the clubhouse.

ADV BOSMAN: Can you recall his share in the assault? He was a member of staff.

MR S J VISSER: I cannot say precisely, but it is possible that he may have shoved Msibi around.

ADV BOSMAN: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Advocate Sandi, any questions?

ADV SANDI: Yes, thank you Chair.

Did I understand you to say you did meet the deceased after he was released? Your contacts with him, were they after he had been released?

MR S J VISSER: I did not encounter him again after he was released from police detention.

ADV SANDI: Now I understood you to say on Sundays you used to go to Nelspruit.

MR S J VISSER: That is correct.

MS PATEL: Would you personally have any discussions with him?

MR S J VISSER: Yes, I did speak to him on these Sundays, and I assisted him with the reorientation and the recruitment and his process of co-operating with the police.

ADV SANDI: Would you be able to say the deceased in the course of the contacts you had with him, would you be able to say whether he conveyed any useful information to you?

MR S J VISSER: As far as I know, he did convey important information and that is also why I asked Buchner to deal with him further as an informer.

ADV SANDI: Would it have been known to your co-applicants that the deceased was actually co-operating with you?

MR S J VISSER: Could you please repeat the question, I couldn't hear you quite clearly.

ADV SANDI: Your co-applicants, did they know, did any one of them know that the deceased was displaying this positive attitude to the police?

MR S J VISSER: Yes, they know about it, I believe that some of them may also have been present during his release and would confirm that he was willing to cooperate with the police.

ADV SANDI: Perhaps I should have asked this question as follows. You had this impression that this person was co-operating with you, did you convey that information to any person?

MR S J VISSER: He confirmed his willingness to cooperate.

ADV SANDI: What did you do with the information that this man was willing to cooperate?

MR S J VISSER: The Branch Commander of Nelspruit may possibly have produced reports and I arrange with Buchner to handle the man as an informer.

ADV SANDI: Should I understand that to mean you didn't really see the deceased as someone who deserved to be killed, did you? On the basis of what you've just said.

MR S J VISSER: Not at all, Chairperson. I accepted that he was willing to cooperate.

ADV SANDI: And you saw no need that the man should be killed?

MR S J VISSER: I saw no reason for it.

ADV SANDI: Did you at any stage become aware of what could have happened to him?

MR S J VISSER: I imagine that I heard at a later stage that he had passed away and that he died in Soweto in some or other way, but I don't know what the circumstances of his death were.

ADV SANDI: Where did you get that information from?

MR S J VISSER: In discussions with other members of the Security Branch. I heard that he died in Soweto.

ADV SANDI: You were not particularly interested to know the circumstances in which he has been killed, were you?

MR S J VISSER: I cannot recall that anybody told me precisely what took place.

ADV SANDI: Did you know who was his handler at that stage?

MR S J VISSER: The last I heard was that the current Gen Buchner would have handled him as an informer.

ADV SANDI: Yes, but surely if an informer gets killed, for that matter, even if he dies in a car accident, that must be a loss to the Security Police.

MR S J VISSER: The moment that I handed him over to Gen Buchner, I did not have any connections or involvement with him. His handler would have assumed further responsibility for him.

ADV SANDI: You did not seek to ascertain from Mr Buchner, his handler, as to what precisely could have happened to this useful informer?

MR S J VISSER: No, I did not.

ADV SANDI: Was there any particular reason why you did not do that?

MR S J VISSER: No, there is no specific reason.

ADV SANDI: Thank you. Thank you, Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Advocate Sandi.

Just one question, Mr Visser. This orientation, you said you wanted to orientate him, in what respect, what did it entail?

MR S J VISSER: Broadly speaking, it is a discussion with this person or the detainee and you then attempt him to cooperate with the police to provide information in order to prevent any other acts of terror.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Any re-exam, Ms van der Walt?

MS VAN DER WALT: No questions, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much Mr Visser, you are excused.

CHAIRPERSON: Could we approach the next applicant and take fifteen minutes break. We shall adjourn for fifteen minutes.

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Chairman, I'm calling Mr Gert Visser as the next applicant.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------GERT VISSER: (sworn states)

ADV BOSMAN: The witness is properly sworn, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much. Mr Prinsloo.

EXAMINATION BY MR PRINSLOO: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

Mr Visser, you are an applicant in this matter pertaining to the abduction of Mr Msibi, who is deceased, correct?

MR G VISSER: That is correct, Chairperson.

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Visser, at the time of these events you were the Branch Commander of the Security Branch and you were stationed in Nelspruit.

MR G VISSER: That is correct, Chairperson.

MR PRINSLOO: Is it correct that the person to whom has been referred, Mr Malaza, as well as one of your fellow applicants, Mr Greyling, served under your command at Nelspruit?

MR G VISSER: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: During your term there in 1986 or before, did you receive any information regarding the involvement of Mr Malaza with the ANC?

MR G VISSER: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: Did any information come to you indicating that information was being leaked from your office to the ANC?

MR G VISSER: Yes, such allegations were made and I was informed of these allegations.

MR PRINSLOO: And were these allegations investigated, and could you determine whether or not this was indeed true?

MR G VISSER: From 1982 already I had the instruction to monitor the actions of Mr Malaza, but at that stage I could not identify anything which would indicate that he was leaking information to the ANC.

MR PRINSLOO: Did you later obtain information, physical information which confirmed that he was indeed leaking information?

MR G VISSER: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: In which manner was this information obtained, can you inform the Committee.

MR G VISSER: Members of National Intelligence visited my office and three bundles were shown to me, these bundles contained documents which would have been removed from my office.

MR PRINSLOO: And these documents to which you have referred, did they contain information of a secret nature?

MR G VISSER: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: And could you identify these documents as having originated from your office?

MR G VISSER: Yes, with the exception of the typing and the source numbers and the information pertaining to Nelspruit, my handwriting was also on these documents.

MR PRINSLOO: Can you think of any way in which these documents would have been removed from your office?

MR G VISSER: At that stage there was a very strong suspicion that Mr Malaza was involved in this, or at the very least, he was Inspector Malaza, and that he was working in my office at that stage.

MR PRINSLOO: The procedure which was followed in the office regarding documentation which you wanted to destroy, how did you destroy the documents?

MR G VISSER: Those documents were put in a specific basket and later they were put through a shredding machine.

MR PRINSLOO: And who, according to your knowledge, was responsible for shredding these documents?

MR G VISSER: W/O Malaza was responsible for this, among others.

MR PRINSLOO: Were there any documents which were supposed to have been shredded which you later identified along with National Intelligence?

MR G VISSER: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Visser, according to evidence, Mr Malaza was later taken to Pretoria.

MR G VISSER: Chairperson, I received an instruction from Brig Visser that we had to bring W/O Malaza through to Pretoria and we were not to tell him what it was about, but we had to bring him through.

MR PRINSLOO: And did you bring him through?

MR G VISSER: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: Who accompanied you?

MR G VISSER: W/O Greyling accompanied me, along with Malaza.

MR PRINSLOO: And where did you take him?

MR G VISSER: We took him to a place which was known as Daisy. It was a farm or a smallholding near Pretoria, which was used by the Intelligence division.

MR PRINSLOO: And was Mr Malaza interrogated there?

MR G VISSER: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: By who was he interrogated?

MR G VISSER: Among others, Gen Stadler and there was also another person from the Intelligence division of the Security Branch, whose name I cannot recall.

MR PRINSLOO: And during this interrogation, did you obtain any information from Malaza regarding this specific leakage of information?

MR G VISSER: That is correct, later we were informed that he had provided information to ANC persons in Swaziland.

MR PRINSLOO: And was this handler identified?

MR G VISSER: Yes.

MR PRINSLOO: Who was it?

MR G VISSER: A Mr Msibi.

MR PRINSLOO: Is this the person involved with today's application?

MR G VISSER: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: And this person, Msibi, did you have any other information regarding his position within the ANC?

MR G VISSER: It became known that he was very high up in the Intelligence division of the ANC in Swaziland.

MR PRINSLOO: And according to you, was he a very significant component of the ANC?

MR G VISSER: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: Would that have been within the structures of the ANC?

MR G VISSER: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: And did you possess any information which indicated whether or not he had received any military training or any other training?

MR G VISSER: Yes, it appeared at that stage that he was indeed trained.

MR PRINSLOO: And after this information was obtained from Mr Malaza during the interrogation, was any planning undertaken at a later stage, and who gave the instruction for this planning?

MR G VISSER: As far as I can recall, Gen Stadler discussed this matter further at Head Office. W/O Greyling and myself returned to Nelspruit with the instruction to join them at Oshoek two days later.

MR PRINSLOO: Was any plan launched for the abduction of Mr Msibi?

MR G VISSER: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: And would Mr Malaza assist you or not?

MR G VISSER: He declared his willingness to cooperate with us in the abduction.

MR PRINSLOO: Can you tell the Committee what the action was from Oshoek onwards.

MR G VISSER: At Oshoek there were members of the former C-Section from Vlakplaas, who rendezvoused with us there. The plan was for us to take Malaza through to Swaziland, we were to monitor him, he was to establish contact with Mr Msibi at a butcher and then he would accompany him on the Mbabane/Oshoek road, to his vehicle which had broken down there, apparently. On the way there they would be apprehended by members of the Security Police.

MR PRINSLOO: Were you accompanied by Mr Greyling, your subordinate officer?

MR G VISSER: Yes, we monitored Mr ... He went into the butchery and met Mr Msibi there, they left together and climbed into the vehicle. We informed C-Section by radio that they were on their way.

MR PRINSLOO: And was Mr Msibi then apprehended?

MR G VISSER: Yes, he was apprehended on the Oshoek/Mba-bane road.

MR PRINSLOO: And where did you take him?

MR G VISSER: He was then taken to a place in the RSA.

MR PRINSLOO: Specifically which place?

MR G VISSER: He was taken to Oshoek.

MR PRINSLOO: And at Oshoek, there was evidence of a clubhouse, is that where you took him?

MR G VISSER: Yes, firstly he was taken to a secluded spot among trees where C-Section waited with him. At that stage I and Mr Greyling and among others Mr de Kock, did not come out, we were still in Swaziland.

MR PRINSLOO: And was Mr Msibi then interrogated?

MR G VISSER: Yes, later that evening he was interrogated at the Oshoek recreational club.

MR PRINSLOO: Was he assaulted during this interrogation?

MR G VISSER: Yes.

MR PRINSLOO: Did you assault him?

MR G VISSER: Yes, I personally was also involved in the assault.

MR PRINSLOO: In which manner did you assault him?

MR G VISSER: Perhaps I could just provide more clarity regarding what took place there.

MR PRINSLOO: Certainly, go ahead.

MR G VISSER: We spoke to Mr Msibi, he gave us his address, we sent members into Swaziland to see what they could find in the house. In the meantime we put general questions to him regarding his involvement. Later that evening members returned to the border post and they brought documents and a box, a cardboard box in which there were electronic devices, shiny boxes with wires coming out of them. Mr de Kock still remarked that these electronic devices could possibly be used in the planting of bombs, and we also interrogated him about that. And this also led to the assault.

MR PRINSLOO: And just to return to the assault itself, in which manner did you assault him?

MR G VISSER: I, among others, slapped him and shoved him around.

MR PRINSLOO: In a report in Exhibit A, a report from The New Nation, it is stated that among others, his head was knocked against the wall.

MR G VISSER: Yes, this may have happened, I don't believe that it was done intentionally, but it is possible.

MR PRINSLOO: Who else except you assaulted him?

MR G VISSER: I recall that Mr de Kock also participated in the assault.

MR PRINSLOO: And after this interrogation and the assault and the goods which were obtained and the address that he provided, what happened to Mr Msibi?

MR G VISSER: We realised swiftly that he would not provide us with much information which would be useful for immediate action and from there we decided that he would be taken through to Pretoria that very same evening.

MR PRINSLOO: Were you involved in the transportation of Mr Msibi to Pretoria?

MR G VISSER: No.

MR PRINSLOO: And your colleague, Mr Greyling?

MR G VISSER: No.

MR PRINSLOO: And was he then out of your hands?

MR G VISSER: At that stage he was out of my hands.

MR PRINSLOO: The information that Mr Msibi would have possessed regarding information which was provided to him by Mr Malaza, was there any other information or were there any other documents which could have been provided to him by other persons or Mr Malaza?

MR G VISSER: There were two members in the Security Branch in Pretoria, who according to Malaza, were also co-operating and who had also provided information which was conveyed to Mr Msibi.

MR PRINSLOO: Do you have any personal knowledge that these two members who were mentioned as Mokgabudi and Rabuli by the previous applicant, were prosecuted?

MR G VISSER: I know about it but I wasn't at the trial itself, or I was not involved in the investigation into the matter either.

MR PRINSLOO: Was Mr Msibi returned to you at any stage?

MR G VISSER: Yes, Chairperson, a few months later I received an order from Brig Visser that they were going to transfer Mr Msibi to Witrivier, where we would detain him further under the Section 29. We were then to attempt to convince him to cooperate with the Security Police. During that period he was brought to the Security Branch frequently, where among others, Mr Greyling spent many hours with him. Mr Jack Buchner also spent many hours with him, among others, with regard to photo album identifications and systematically he was recruited to cooperate with the Security Police.

MR PRINSLOO: And was he later released from the stipulations of Section 29 under which he was detained?

MR G VISSER: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: Do you have any knowledge of any payments which were made to him by the Security Branch or any other organisation?

MR G VISSER: Yes, I'm aware that Mr Jack Buchner indeed offered him and amount and it was also arranged for everything to be recorded on a video tape, to provide proof of his co-operation with the police, in case anything went wrong in the future.

MR PRINSLOO: Do you know what amounts were paid to him?

MR G VISSER: I cannot recall the amounts.

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Visser, was Mr Msibi interrogated by you or any other person regarding the information that he had obtained from Mr Malaza?

MR G VISSER: That is correct, we interrogated about that at length and also specifically regarding information pertaining to bomb incidents and terrorist attacks in the Transvaal region.

MR PRINSLOO: And during 1985/'86, there were various bomb attacks in the Eastern Transvaal.

MR G VISSER: Yes, there were various such attacks and landmine attacks, as well as incidents of terrorism.

MR PRINSLOO: The information which was illegally channelled to Mr Msibi and the ANC, did this in any way place police action at a disadvantage?

MR G VISSER: Undoubtedly so, Chairperson. It was classified information, it was information which was used for operations, it was also information which could have been very detrimental to the Security Branch.

MR PRINSLOO: Did you see it as a matter of national interest to obtain the information from Mr Msibi, in order to thwart any attacks which the ANC was planning?

MR G VISSER: It would undoubtedly have contributed to the successful prevention or partial prevention of acts of terror in the Eastern Transvaal.

MR PRINSLOO: During Mr Msibi's detention in Nelspruit and Witrivier, was he ever assaulted in your presence, or by you?

MR G VISSER: No, we treated him very well. On the contrary, with the idea to get him to cooperate with us ultimately.

MR PRINSLOO: Did you at any stage disclose the actual facts to the authorities, explaining how Mr Msibi arrived in South Africa? In other words, that he was illegally removed from Swaziland, that he was abducted. Did you ever disclose this in any application, and I'm not referring to this particular amnesty application?

MR G VISSER: No.

MR PRINSLOO: And in that regard, pertaining to his detention, was that fact also not disclosed?

MR G VISSER: How we obtained him was not disclosed.

MR PRINSLOO: And it was your duty to do so. ...(transcriber's interpretation)

MR G VISSER: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: At this stage, Mr Visser, you then apply for amnesty for the fact that you conspired with other members to abduct Mr Msibi from Swaziland, for the fact that you abducted him and that you detained him here in the Republic of South Africa.

MR G VISSER: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: And that under the circumstances you also defeated the ends of justice and you also committed assault.

MR G VISSER: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: And do you also apply for any delictual liability which may emanate from your involvement in these actions?

MR G VISSER: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: Your application appears on page 77, the application itself and subsequently your description of the incidents appears up to page 84, after which you describe the political background, do you confirm this?

MR G VISSER: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: Thank you, Chairperson, I have nothing further.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Hugo?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR HUGO: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

Mr Visser, just a few aspects. If I understand your evidence correctly, after Mr Malaza was taken to Daisy and interrogated, you were given the instruction to return and to report back at Oshoek the following day, is that correct?

MR G VISSER: Yes, there was a day afterwards, I'm not quite sure.

MR HUGO: The fact of the matter is, if I understand your evidence correctly, at the stage when you left Daisy you were not told what would be the future plans concerning Mr Msibi.

MR G VISSER: I was informed that there were such plans, but it had to be confirmed and certain discussions had to take place on Head Office level.

MR HUGO: During the interrogation at Daisy and in Pretoria, was mention ever made that Mr Msibi will be abducted or will be killed?

MR G VISSER: It was planned that it was very important to get hold of this person, yes.

MR HUGO: When you arrived at Oshoek the following day or two days later, who was the person who was in charge there of the operation, the spokesperson?

MR G VISSER: It was Gen Stadler, he was at the scene and he was the most senior person present. He was also the person who gave the instructions.

MR HUGO: What was the nature of the discussion that took place and the people who were present there?

MR G VISSER: Well the planning was that we had to abduct Mr Msibi.

MR HUGO: And is it then correct if I put it to you that you were then confronted with a fait accompli in terms of the decision that has already been taken and you just had to fall in with that?

MR G VISSER: That is correct.

MR HUGO: And the fact that there were so many senior people present, did that create a perception with you, or the impression that this operation came from a very high level and that it was planned at that level?

MR G VISSER: I thought so, yes.

MR HUGO: And there was no doubt with you that they did get authorisation from Head Office before you started with this operation?

MR G VISSER: I believed so, yes.

MR HUGO: Then just a few other aspects. This vehicle in which Mr Msibi drove, I think you said it was a red vehicle ...

MR G VISSER: Yes, it was a red vehicle.

MR HUGO: Can you remember if it was an Alpha vehicle? That is Mr de Kock's recollection.

MR G VISSER: Yes, I think it was an Alpha.

MR HUGO: So you know what happened to the vehicle?

MR G VISSER: Mr Chairperson, yes, when we conveyed the information that they were on their way with the vehicle, it took a while and then we took the same road and at the point, or when we arrived at the point where this person was abducted or taken, they were removed from the scene and those persons, I do not know who it was, took that vehicle and drove away. I later heard that they pushed this vehicle over a cliff.

MR HUGO: Yes, I just wanted to put it to you, and that is Mr de Kock's evidence and he will testify to it, that they pushed this vehicle over a cliff and according to them this vehicle was damaged and they do not know what happened to it afterwards.

MR G VISSER: Yes, I also heard the same thing.

MR HUGO: Very well. Then concerning the money, you will see in Exhibit A, mention is made of the fact that Mr Msibi said the R2 000 came from his house and that the Security Police paid him back this amount, can you remember anything concerning this?

MR G VISSER: I cannot confirm it no, but according to my knowledge it was money that was offered to him in order to recruit him, and as I've already mentioned, it was on tape, it was recorded and we could then later use it as evidence against him.

MR HUGO: Can I just ask you concerning the assault at Oshoek, was it initially the idea that this person will be interviewed as an introductory part of the whole process?

MR G VISSER: Yes, the whole idea was that if there wasn't information that could come out quickly and that we could act immediately on, maybe go back to Swaziland and get hold of somebody who was just as involved as Msibi, and then the interrogation will take place on a different place.

MR HUGO: Would you then agree with me that it doesn't quite make sense if you and your colleagues, or the colleagues from Vlakplaas as well as Mr Greyling, that they would take part in a serious assault in the presence of senior officers, keeping in mind that this interrogation was, or should have happened in Pretoria?

MR G VISSER: No, it was not the intention. As I've testified, those electronic devices that we got from his home, it did give us a suspicion that he was involved in the setting of bombs and we just asked a few questions concerning that.

MR HUGO: Now that you've mentioned it, I will say that Mr de Kock, he did not mention it in his initial application, but he now can recall that it is indeed correct that you did mention it to him, and I will put it to you for clarity's sake.

Concerning then the assault, in Exhibit A they furthermore mention - and let me read it to you, it's the third column, the second sentence where there's apparently a reference to Mr Msibi's affidavit and also his version and where he says:

Do you know anything about this?

MR G VISSER: No, at all.

MR HUGO: I've got no further questions, thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Hugo. Mr Visser?

MR G VISSER: Mr Visser, Mr Schoon whom I represent has got this recollection that this operation could not be completed on the first day and that Schoon spent the night at Oshoek and that the operation was only successful the second day.

MR G VISSER: No, Mr Chairperson, I cannot recall that.

RE-EXAMINATION BY MR VISSER: Very well. When you brought Msibi over the border, did you take him through a border post or did you go through the border illegally, at another place?

MR G VISSER: Mr Chairperson, I was not involved in bringing him across the border, I do not know how they brought him across the border.

MR VISSER: Well we'll as that from somebody else then.

Knowing Mr Msibi and his position in the ANC, did you see him as an enemy of the State?

MR G VISSER: Yes, I did.

MR VISSER: You say that Stadler was Schoon's senior, I would say it's the other way around, Schoon was the senior of Stadler.

MR G VISSER: Yes, that is possible.

MR VISSER: I do not know if I have to put it to you, but because you've mentioned it now, I would have dealt with it with Mr de Kock, if it came up in his evidence, but the matter concerning National Intelligence, Mr de Kock in his application mentions the fact that there was an argument or a disagreement because of the Msibi incident, and that was between Johan van der Merwe, Gen Johan van der Merwe who was then a member of the Vlakplaas(sic) and National Intelligence and then by name, Mr Neil Barnard. I'm not quite sure if he refers to Neil Barnard. Page 32 of bundle 1. I'd just like to put it to you more clarity for the Committee itself, I spoke to Gen van der Merwe, he was not the Security Branch Commander at that stage, it was Stan Schutte, and he told me that he did not know about this incident before it occurred, but afterwards he heard about it when National Intelligence made it known or disclosed that the Security Branch had been infiltrated by ANC spies and it then seemed that National Intelligence had information that they did not disclose to the Security Branch, and that there was an argument between them. Do you know anything about this?

MR G VISSER: No, Mr Chairperson, I do not know anything about an argument on that level.

MR VISSER: But your knowledge in terms of the participation of National Intelligence was that they came to you and said, "look the people are carrying documents out of your office"

MNR G VISSER: "Dis korrek."

MR VISSER: Thank you, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Visser. Ms van der Walt?

MS VAN DER WALT: No questions, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nel?

MR NEL: I've also got no questions, thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Cornelius?

MR CORNELIUS: Thank you Mr Chair, I've got no questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Lamey?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR LAMEY: Thank you Mr Chairperson.

Mr Visser, just one or two questions. The applicant whom I'm representing, Mr Bosch, recalls that with your arrival in the Eastern Transvaal and before the abduction took place and it was successful, that there was another attempt and that Mr Msibi did not arrive and that the next day a further attempt was made. Can you recall that?

MR G VISSER: No, I cannot recall that but it is possible, I cannot remember specifically how it happened.

MR LAMEY: Very well. Then I'd like to ask you, you do recall that while you were present at the interrogation at Oshoek, the place where he was initially questioned, especially after the aspect of the electronic devices came up, can you recall in which way was he was attacked or assaulted by Mr de Kock?

MR G VISSER: Mr Chairperson, the way in which I recall it was that he was slapped around, shoved around. I do not know of any other type of assault that took place there.

MR LAMEY: Very well. I've got no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Lamey. Mr Makondo?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR MAKONDO: Thank you, Chairperson.

Mr Visser, let's start at the forest where you said you waited with him, was it across the border, were you in Swaziland?

MR G VISSER: Could you please just get the question again, could you just repeat the question.

MR MAKONDO: Where you waited with Mr Msibi in the forest, was it across the border? Was it in South Africa or in Swaziland?

MR G VISSER: I did not wait there with him, the people who brought him through waited there in the bushes on the - I was not present there, I was there when we called them back, when everybody again gathered at the Oshoek clubhouse. The planning was that they will not bring him to the clubhouse, that they will drive further on and then wait there, but I was not present there during that time, I was still in Swaziland.

MR MAKONDO: Thank you. And the information he gave you initially, was it at the clubhouse, the one that led to the electronic devices being found in his house?

MR G VISSER: Yes, that was at the club.

MR MAKONDO: Everyone that was present here knows about this, should have seen them?

MR G VISSER: I accept so, yes.

MR MAKONDO: And the time you spent with him in the clubhouse, can you recall it?

MR G VISSER: Mr Chairperson, it was not very long, it was the evening. It's very difficult for me to say how long it was, it could have been two or three hours that we were in the clubhouse itself, but I know that that same evening he was taken back to Pretoria and we went back to Nelspruit.

MR MAKONDO: The time that you estimated, was it the time you spent interrogating him?

MR G VISSER: Mr Chairperson, initially certain questions were put to him, for example, is address, his position and this information he gave to us and this also led to people being sent to his house, and real interrogation, as the word was used, and where violence was used, that took place after the people arrived back from the house and brought back these electronic devices.

MR MAKONDO: The first information he gave you, are you saying he gave it to you without you applying any sort of violence on him?

MR G VISSER: That is correct, yes.

MR MAKONDO: Then why apply violence thereafter?

MR G VISSER: Mr Chairperson, because as I've already mentioned, certain electronic devices or components came from his house and the suspicion was then that these devices were used with the planting of bombs and he denied all knowledge of this and this led to the assault.

MR MAKONDO: You described the assault as he was slapped around and juggled around.

MR G VISSER: That is correct, yes.

MR MAKONDO: When you asked with my colleague that, was he hit against the wall, you said possibly.

MR G VISSER: I said in the process he could have hit his head against the wall, yes. I am not saying that we hit his head against the wall, but it could have happened that in the process he could have bumped his head or hit his head against the wall.

MR MAKONDO: Who was taking part in that assault?

MR G VISSER: As far as I recall it was myself and Mr de Kock. I cannot recall if there was any other member who took part in this.

MR MAKONDO: How many people were present there?

MR G VISSER: I cannot recall, there were various senior officers, there were also Mr Greyling who came from Nelspruit, then there were various members of Section C. If they all, if all of them were present in the clubhouse the whole time, I cannot say.

MR MAKONDO: The number of seniors who were there, can you recall, could it have been five, ten?

MR G VISSER: I can recall it was Brig Visser, Brig Schoon, Gen Stadler. This is the people I can recall at this stage.

MR MAKONDO: And the members of the C-Club, whatever you call it, can you estimate how many were there? C Group.

CHAIRPERSON: C-Section.

MR G VISSER: It could have been six or ten people, but not more than ten.

MR MAKONDO: Then roughly we're talking of about around fifteen people who were present there with you?

MR G VISSER: Yes, I'd say that.

MR MAKONDO: Are there possibilities that almost all of them were taking part in that?

MR G VISSER: No not at all, definitely not. Myself and Mr de Kock did ask the questions and did only get unsatisfactory answers at that stage.

MR MAKONDO: After the interrogation, who transported him to Pretoria?

MR G VISSER: I am not quite sure, I accept that it was the people from Section C.

MR MAKONDO: Do you perhaps know who of the seniors accompanied these people?

MR G VISSER: I'm not quite sure, we went into a different direction, that evening we went to Nelspruit, they went to Pretoria. I cannot recall who was with him in the vehicle.

MR MAKONDO: May I refer you to Exhibit A, the third column from the top. This is the press conference that Mr Msibi gave after his release. He says there:

Can you confirm this as being true?

MR G VISSER: I can say that he was assaulted yes, but as he described it here, I cannot exactly confirm it as it is here.

MR MAKONDO: Mr Visser, perhaps for us to understand, can you explain how this assault was happening, was it orderly, was it everyone just hitting, was it one after the other? Can you give us a better picture?

MR G VISSER: It was between myself and Mr de Kock and the person was between the two of us and the interrogation took place between the two of us and he was shoved between the two of us and slapped around.

MR MAKONDO: Now if he's shoved between you two, how does it come that he might have hit the wall?

MR G VISSER: Mr Chairperson, it's a clubhouse with four walls, it's not a very big clubhouse, there's not a lot of furniture in it, only a few chairs and it could have happened that he hit his head against the wall. If that is what he alleges here.

MR MAKONDO: Was he hit with any object other than your hands?

MR G VISSER: I cannot recall any object that was used to hit him.

MR MAKONDO: Did he lose consciousness, according to your recollection?

MR G VISSER: At no stage, no.

MR MAKONDO: On the same document he says that, the second paragraph thereof, he was forced to drink four to five glasses of brandy.

MR G VISSER: No, Mr Chairperson, I cannot recall that at all, that at any stage we gave him any alcohol.

MR MAKONDO: So would I take it that it was basically you and Mr de Kock who were dealing with him at that moment?

MR G VISSER: That is correct, yes.

MR MAKONDO: And anything contrary to that would be not true?

MR G VISSER: Yes, as far as I can recall.

MR MAKONDO: I'm asking you because Mr Visser SJ, said that were a number of people who were assaulting him at that time in the clubhouse, hence he could not recall who assaulted him. My question is on this basis, that if it was between you two, it wouldn't be difficult for anyone to recall. He said he could not recall who assaulted him because a number of people were involved. Are you saying that is not true?

MR G VISSER: Well as far as it concerns me, it was only myself and Mr de Kock who were involved in the assault.

MR MAKONDO: So as far as you're concerned, what has been said by Mr Visser SJ, is not true.

MR G VISSER: I can only say what I saw what happened there and what I can recall.

MR MAKONDO: You said the devices - perhaps let me ask this, he gave you the address in the clubhouse.

MR G VISSER: That is correct.

MR MAKONDO: So everyone who was present there knew about the address and you waited for the people to go and get whatever they brought back.

MR G VISSER: Yes.

MR MAKONDO: And saving - what happened to the documents, the things that you got from his house?

MR G VISSER: All of that accompanied him to Pretoria, or they took it with them to Pretoria.

MR MAKONDO: Excluding what you got from Mr de Kock, that those were devices used in bombing, do you know anything about it?

MR G VISSER: I do not know.

MR MAKONDO: Did you confirm that those devices for used for that?

MR G VISSER: I never received any further information concerning this, no.

MR MAKONDO: Do you know for how long was he detained in Pretoria?

MR G VISSER: Unfortunately I cannot recall, but it had to be a month or two. It could have been two months, I'm not quite sure. It was a period of time, yes.

MR MAKONDO: Did you get contact with him thereafter, when he was brought back to Eastern Transvaal?

MR G VISSER: The first time I again met Mr Msibi or had contact with him was when he was brought to Witrivier and where he was interrogated further and he was detained there.

MR MAKONDO: What information did you get from him during the second detention in the Eastern Transvaal?

MR G VISSER: He was interrogated about what happened in the Eastern Transvaal at that stage, certain incidents, landmines, bomb incidents, attacks, terrorist attacks, and he gave certain information concerning this. I also did a photo identification where he took the photo album, it was from the Security Branch, they went with him through it and he then identified all the people who he had contact with and then provided information on that specific person or persons.

MR MAKONDO: How long did that take, how much time did you spend with him during that second time?

MR G VISSER: Mr Chairperson, I cannot recall, but I think it was approximately two months.

MR MAKONDO: His release, do you remember how did it come about?

MR G VISSER: Mr Chairperson, it was arranged with Jack Buchner at the stage where we believed that he will cooperate with us and that he can be released and that he will then continue to work with the Security Branch. We then decided to release him and to then hand him over to Mr Buchner.

MR MAKONDO: With Mr Buchner, did he continue giving you information as you anticipated?

MR G VISSER: I accept it so, but I do not have firsthand knowledge concerning this. Mr Buchner acted as his handler, if he gave him information, I do not know.

MR MAKONDO: Do you know of his incidental meeting with Judge Goldstone during his detention?

MR G VISSER: I just heard about it, that before he was at Nelspruit there was an incident in Brits where he had contact with Judge Goldstone, but I do not have firsthand knowledge.

MR MAKONDO: After his release, do you know if he was given another handler perhaps?

MR G VISSER: No, I do not have any knowledge concerning that.

MR MAKONDO: When did you learn about his death?

MR G VISSER: It was probably a year or two after that that I heard that he was shot.

MR MAKONDO: Was there a follow-up on his killing, because you said he was your informer?

MR G VISSER: At that stage I was at Nelspruit and he was in Johannesburg or Soweto, where he was active, I had nothing to do with that.

MR MAKONDO: That will be all, Chairperson, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Makondo. Ms Patel?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS PATEL: Thank you, Honourable Chairperson.

Sir, can you tell us, prior to the interrogation of Mr Malaza, did you have any information on Mr Msibi at that time?

MR G VISSER: No, none at all.

MS PATEL: Not even from reports that would have come in from the Security Branch generally?

MR G VISSER: No, no information at all.

MS PATEL: Are you saying that he was completely unknown to you at the time?

MR G VISSER: Yes, I'd never heard of such a person.

MS PATEL: So whatever information was gained about Mr Msibi at the time was gained through Mr Malaza?

MR G VISSER: That is correct, yes.

MS PATEL: Okay. And the information that you have regarding Mr Msibi, would have been the information that the rest of the persons involved with Mr Malaza and Mr Msibi at the time, would have had?

MR G VISSER: That is correct, yes.

MS PATEL: Okay. Why was he then - if there was no information on him at the time, why was he then seen as such an important figure at the time of his abduction?

MR G VISSER: Mr Chairperson, when Mr Malaza made known who the person was and we could connect a name, or give him a name with the security information that we had at that stage, that he was a very important figure in Swaziland.

MS PATEL: Alright. After Mr Msibi's abduction you're absolutely certain that he was at the clubhouse for about two to three hours before he was then taken to Pretoria?

MR G VISSER: That is correct, yes.

MS PATEL: Okay. Would the rest of the applicants present here have been in the clubhouse during the time of the interrogation and assault on Mr Msibi?

MR G VISSER: Well at one stage they had to be there, I would not say that they were there the whole time, because people came in and out, went to go and eat or whatever, but yes, at some stage all of them had to be there.

MS PATEL: Who was primarily in charge of the interrogation of Mr Msibi in the clubhouse itself?

MR G VISSER: Mr Chairperson, I would say that it was myself and Mr de Kock that put the questions to him. I would say that the two of us did the interrogation or the questioning.

MS PATEL: Okay. And would that have been, at whose behest?

MR G VISSER: It would be the senior officers who were present there, they would be interested in hearing this information, and they were also present in the clubhouse.

MS PATEL: You say then that after that he was taken to Pretoria and then handed over to you at Witrivier, more-or-less a month or two later. Can you tell us what his condition was at the time that he was handed over to you at Witrivier, generally, physically and emotionally?

MR G VISSER: Mr Chairperson, physically there was nothing wrong with him, emotionally he was very detached and initially he did not want to cooperate at all, but this changed.

MS PATEL: Okay. So at the time that he was handed to you, the report was that he wasn't co-operating?

MR G VISSER: I am not aware of what information he gave to the police during those two months, all that I can say is that my instruction was to gather more information concerning the Eastern Transvaal, and then specifically to convince him to cooperate with the police. I am not aware of any other information that he would have given at that stage.

MS PATEL: Okay. What specifically did you do to convince him to cooperate with you?

MR G VISSER: Mr Chairperson, we spent a lot of hours with this person, he was everyday in my office and after a period of time you get to know this person, you deal with him in a humane manner concerning the circumstances, and it is a very long process to get that person to then trust you.

MS PATEL: Why would he have trusted you, after all you were to traditionally seen as the enemy? I don't understand how a man who has resisted for so long to cooperate, is then eventually convinced to cooperate with you, could you elaborate?

MR G VISSER: Well Mr Chairperson, I was not the only person, it was myself, it was Mr Greyling, Brig Visser also came through to discuss things with him, to talk to him, and Buchner also spent a lot of hours with him, so we were a team who worked with him. I got the impression that he could not recall that I was the person who was present at Oshoek. I do not think he brought two and two together there.

MS PATEL: He mentions here that there was a Maj Visser who was present during his assault at the Oshoek clubhouse, that would be you?

MR G VISSER: That's correct, yes.

MS PATEL: Okay. Could you just give us an indication of the size of the room at the clubhouse, where hew as interrogated? How big was it?

MR G VISSER: Mr Chairperson, probably the half of this room, then in one corner there'd be a built-in bar, I would say it would be half the size of this room. It would be a large square building with a thatch roof, it would not be bigger than half of this building.

MS PATEL: Okay. And can you give us an indication where specifically, in which specific part of the room was he interrogated, was it in the middle, on the side, near to the bar area, what?

MR G VISSER: As far as I can recall it was in the section the furthest from the bar area, that would be on the opposite side of the club.

MS PATEL: Is that more-or-less in the middle of the room?

MR G VISSER: No, that would have been more to the other side, as far as I can recall.

MS PATEL: Okay. And was Mr Schoon present at all times as far as you can recall, in that room?

MR G VISSER: Yes, I ...(intervention)

MS PATEL: And he would have witnessed the assault on Mr Msibi?

MR G VISSER: Yes.

MS PATEL: Okay. Sorry, Honourable Chairperson, if you will just grant me a moment.

Can I just ask, you say that in Swaziland your task was to monitor Mr Msibi's place of work, is that correct?

MR G VISSER: Well actually we monitored Malaza while he was going to Msibi's place of work, then he would establish contact with him and move out to the prearranged rendezvous point where the abduction or the attack would take place.

MS PATEL: Can you recall what specific information Mr Malaza would have handed over regarding Mr Msibi's activities at the time? Prior to the abduction of course.

MR G VISSER: Chairperson, as I have understood it, Mr Msibi was his handler and there were also other persons who were in Pretoria, who sent information through to Mr Msibi from the Security Branch.

MS PATEL: So the information at that stage was that he was involved in the handling of persons and the collecting of information, but no specific involvement in any acts specifically that related to the planting of landmines, etcetera?

MR G VISSER: He was in the Intelligence division and he dealt with information.

MS PATEL: Okay. The nature of the documents that were retrieved from his home, do you have any idea what they were about?

MR G VISSER: I cannot say, Chairperson.

MS PATEL: And you don't know what happened to Mr Malaza?

MR G VISSER: When we were still in Swaziland, after Mr Msibi had been abducted, Mr Greyling, Mr Malaza, Mr de Kock and I, went to Iselweni(?) where we discussed the incident and Mr Malaza then told us that there was a further person with whom he had also had contact, who was also part of the ANC network in Swaziland and that if we could get hold of him we would also be able to obtain good information.

After that we departed to Manzini, Malaza said that this person was always in the library. At that stage we trusted Malaza, because we had already performed a successful abduction. Mr Malaza moved into the library, we lost him there and we never saw him again. He then joined the ANC somewhere abroad, as far as we could surmise. We could never again trace him. He defected into Swaziland.

MS PATEL: Just finally, how long did it take after he was brought to the clubhouse and he gave you his address, how long did it take to go back into Swaziland to get the documentation and whatever else you took from his house and to get back to where he was being held?

MR G VISSER: As I recall, it must have taken 45 minutes. It may have been an hour, but it wasn't very long.

MS PATEL: And how long - that initial period where he handed that information over to you about his address, how long did that take?

MR G VISSER: Chairperson, during the course of his interrogation he gave that over, he responded to the questions that we put to him regarding his address, who he was and so forth. It wasn't in any way a problem to obtain that information.

MS PATEL: Alright, thank you very much.

MR VISSER: Chairperson, I wonder whether I may interrupt, there's one issue which I forgot to take up with this witness, it's just one issue. I wonder whether you would allow me to ask him that question.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, certainly, you may go ahead.

FURTHER CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR VISSER: Thank you, Chairperson.

I just want to put it to you that Brig Schoon has no recollection that he was present at Oshoek when the assault on Mr Msibi took place, he says that he recalls that he departed to go and make a telephone call from some place. However, he was indeed present during an assault at Vlakplaas, and you say and were very fair with your evidence, you say that as far as you can recall they must have been there from time to time, the senior officers, therefore, could it be that Brig Schoon might not have been there during the assault?

MR G VISSER: That is possible, but I can recall that the officers were there. I cannot recall that Mr Schoon specifically left to go and make a telephone call.

MR VISSER: But can you recall that he was specifically present during the assault?

MR G VISSER: I recall that he was there but at the specific time during which the assault was committed, I would not be able to say unequivocally that he was there.

MR VISSER: Thank you. Thank you, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Visser. Advocate Bosman?

ADV BOSMAN: Thank you, Chairperson.

I just want to follow up on the questions put by the Evidence Leader, Ms Patel, it would appear to me that there were two stages, the interrogation before the persons returned with the cardboard box containing the documents, and then there was a further session of interrogation, is that correct?

MR G VISSER: I would say that the interrogation continued more-or-less, but that the intensity of it changed when the electronic devices were discovered and he denied any knowledge of it.

ADV BOSMAN: Let us begin again. How do you estimate, how long do you estimate approximately, did the interrogation last before the persons returned with the cardboard box containing the documents?

MR G VISSER: I would say approximately 45 minutes to an hour.

ADV BOSMAN: Does that include the time that they were gone?

MR G VISSER: That is correct.

ADV BOSMAN: And once they returned was it necessary to change the nature of the interrogation, because now you were confronted with certain things?

MR G VISSER: That is correct.

ADV BOSMAN: How long did it continue afterwards?

MR G VISSER: It is difficult to say, it may have been half an hour, it may have been 45 minutes, but it really wasn't very extensive.

ADV BOSMAN: There was evidence that the total interrogation took approximately three hours.

MR G VISSER: I would not dispute that. It was during the night and I know that we moved back to Nelspruit on that very same night.

ADV BOSMAN: But from what you have said it would appear that there was a reasonable time of interrogation after they returned with the box containing the documents.

MR G VISSER: As I've stated, Chairperson, it may have been 30 minutes to 45 minutes, but it definitely wasn't a question of hours.

ADV BOSMAN: How did the discovery of the box containing the documents and the electronic devices influence your interrogation?

MR G VISSER: The fact that the persons who were sent to the house brought back the box containing the documents and the apparatus and stated that they found it in the house and the subject denied any knowledge of it.

ADV BOSMAN: But my question is, how did this influence the nature and the style of your interrogation?

MR G VISSER: Well I was convinced that at that stage he was beginning to conceal certain information from me.

ADV BOSMAN: Didn't that also influence the extent of your frustration? I'm just trying to establish the situation here.

MR G VISSER: Yes, it did, we were rather frustrated at that stage because it would appear at that stage that there was significant evidence which had come to light and all of a sudden this person didn't know anything about it.

ADV BOSMAN: But didn't that also alter the nature of the assault?

MR G VISSER: Well that actually gave rise to the assaults.

ADV BOSMAN: Let me just be certain, because I do not want to trick you into anything, I just want to understand your evidence properly. Is it your evidence that the assaults actually commenced after the cardboard box was brought to the scene?

MR G VISSER: That is correct.

ADV BOSMAN: Just for the sake of interest, you have stated that there was a bar on one side of the room.

MR G VISSER: Yes.

ADV BOSMAN: Was any liquor consumed during the course of the evening?

MR G VISSER: I cannot recall with certainty, it is possible, but I cannot recall that there was voluntary use of liquor.

ADV BOSMAN: Was it available?

MR G VISSER: There was always liquor in the cabinet, but it was closed and this cabinet was controlled by the border post staff at Oshoek. Whether or not there was someone there selling the liquor, I cannot recall.

ADV BOSMAN: Did the police control the border post?

MR G VISSER: Yes, that is correct.

ADV BOSMAN: So it was a police clubhouse.

MR G VISSER: That is correct.

ADV BOSMAN: And at what time did all of this take place approximately? Early or late evening?

MR G VISSER: It was during the course of the evening, it was definitely before midnight. It couldn't have been after midnight because afterwards we drove back to Pretoria.

ADV BOSMAN: There is something that bothers me, I'm looking at paragraph 3 of Exhibit A and it would appear from the order of the statements there, as if the assault took place first, before he gave the address.

Would you agree with me that if one examines that, it would appear as if the assault began before he gave his address? In other words, during the first section of the interrogation, isn't that correct?

MR G VISSER: One could interpret it as such, but it says:

therefore it would appear to me that he gave information about his house and that subsequently he was assaulted.

ADV BOSMAN: Precisely. Upon a question of mine you answered that the assault began after they returned with the box containing the documents and that there was a certain measure of frustration in your mind, because you felt that you weren't gleaning any further information, so can we just try to clarify that course of events. Was he assaulted before they came back with the box containing the documents?

MR G VISSER: No, he was not assaulted before that point.

ADV BOSMAN: So if you read this now, would you say that what appears here is incorrect?

MR G VISSER: No, it is not correct.

ADV BOSMAN: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. I notice we've gone just past quarter past, could we take the lunch adjournment and return at two? Is that "billik"? We'll adjourn until 2p.m.

GERT VISSER: (s.u.o.)

CHAIRPERSON: Advocate Sandi?

ADV SANDI: Thank you, Chair, I don't have a question to ask.

CHAIRPERSON: Any re-examination, Mr Prinsloo?

MR HUGO: Mr Chairman, sorry, may I just be permitted to ask one question and it flows from questions asked by Adv Bosman. It's just one aspect that I want to clarify with this witness, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: You may go ahead.

FURTHER CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR HUGO: Thank you.

Mr Visser, in relation to the questions put to you by Adv Bosman, I would just like to put it to you that Mr de Kock's recollection is that the assault at Oshoek did indeed start before the documents were fetched from Swaziland. I could just put it to you for your comment.

MR G VISSER: Mr Chairperson, that is not how I recall this incident and that it only happened afterwards.

MR HUGO: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Prinsloo?

RE-EXAMINATION BY MR PRINSLOO: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

Mr Visser, on a question by Ms Patel, the Evidence Leader, you were asked if you had any information concerning Mr Msibi before information was provided by Mr Malaza, can you remember that?

MR G VISSER: Yes.

MR PRINSLOO: Was Mr Msibi in information sources before Malaza provided the information known to you by name?

MR G VISSER: There was a Msibi in Swaziland but I did not know who and what he was.

MR PRINSLOO: And was there information concerning this person available?

MR G VISSER: Only after we could make the connection and after Malaza said that Msibi, that he handled Msibi(sic) and then we could make that connection and we then realised that he was the person also called MK.

MR PRINSLOO: If I understand you correctly you did have information about a person, but you could only connect that information with that person after the information Malaza gave to you?

MR G VISSER: Yes.

MR PRINSLOO: At any time during that evening did you give alcohol, or did you use alcohol?

MR G VISSER: No.

MR PRINSLOO: And the interrogation that you led concerning Mr Msibi and the devices that were brought it, was it very urgent or necessary to get that information as soon as possible?

MR G VISSER: Mr Chairperson, it was very urgent, we had to know what these devices were and what they were used for, in order to prevent future incidents.

MR PRINSLOO: No further questions, thank you Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Thank you Mr Visser, that concludes your evidence, you are excused.

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Chairman, may Mr Visser be excused from further attendance, unless he's required, I can easily get in touch with him.

CHAIRPERSON: I have excused him.

MR PRINSLOO: Thank you, Mr Chairman, I appreciate that.

MR G VISSER: Thank you, Sir.

WITNESS EXCUSED

CHAIRPERSON: I think from his evidence it would make sense if we could have Mr Greyling next.

MR PRINSLOO: I'm calling Mr Greyling, Mr Chairman.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------ADV BOSMAN: Mr Greyling, can you just give us your full names.

DANIEL JACOBUS GREYLING: (sworn states)

ADV BOSMAN: The witness is properly sworn.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Advocate Bosman. Mr Prinsloo?

EXAMINATION BY MR PRINSLOO: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

Mr Greyling, you apply for amnesty for the abduction and other incidents resulting from this, is that correct?

MR GREYLING: Yes.

MR PRINSLOO: Your application appears on page 96 of the bundle, up and to page 98, and the incident itself appears on page 99 up until page 101, is that correct?

MR GREYLING: Yes.

MR PRINSLOO: And the political background appears from page 102 of your application, up and to page 107, is that correct?

MR GREYLING: That's correct, yes.

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Greyling, during this incident you were stationed at Nelspruit Security Branch.

MR GREYLING: That's correct.

MR PRINSLOO: What was the rank?

MR GREYLING: I was a Warrant Officer.

MR PRINSLOO: Evidence has already been led by the previous witness, Mr Gert Visser, that he was the Branch Commander and that Malaza was your colleague at the same branch.

MR GREYLING: That's correct, yes.

MR PRINSLOO: Well during this period of time where you served at the Security Branch in Nelspruit, at an opportunity information was made available that there's a leakage of information to the ANC.

MR GREYLING: That is correct, yes.

MR PRINSLOO: You have already heard the evidence of Mr Visser concerning this, that there were certain documents that were intercepted and that landed in the hands of the ANC.

MR GREYLING: That is correct, yes.

MR PRINSLOO: Some of the documentation that disappeared, could you yourself at a later stage, or that was later found by somebody and it was shown to you, could you identify it as information that was part of the office documentation?

MR GREYLING: Yes, that is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: And that information, concerning that information, did you deal with that information personally at a certain stage?

MR GREYLING: Yes.

MR PRINSLOO: And that documentation or information that disappeared from the office, did you plan to destroy it, or what was the idea behind it?

MR GREYLING: Yes, usually it would happen that after it was typed it would then be shredded.

MR PRINSLOO: In this specific incident, who would have been responsible for the shredding of such documentation?

MR GREYLING: It was Mr Malaza.

MR PRINSLOO: In this specific incident, or can you recall where he did the shredding?

MR GREYLING: He said that after the typist typed it she'd put it in a basket and he would then go and shred it afterwards.

MR PRINSLOO: This information on which Mr Visser testified, that was provided to Intelligence and then later taken to Pretoria, did you have a look at it? Did you identify it?

MR GREYLING: Was that now through National Intelligence?

MR PRINSLOO: Yes.

MR GREYLING: Yes, I did look at some of the documentation.

MR PRINSLOO: And you identified it?

MR GREYLING: Yes.

MR PRINSLOO: Was that of a secretive nature?

MR GREYLING: Yes, it was.

MR PRINSLOO: Did you accompany Mr Visser and Mr Malaza to Pretoria?

MR GREYLING: Yes.

MR PRINSLOO: And was Mr Malaza interrogated in Pretoria?

MR GREYLING: Yes.

MR PRINSLOO: Who interrogated him?

MR GREYLING: He was taken to Daisy, to the farm Daisy, where Brig Stadler interviewed him, or interrogated him.

MR PRINSLOO: Did they obtain information from Mr Malaza concerning who was involved?

MR GREYLING: Yes.

MR PRINSLOO: And who were they?

MR GREYLING: At that stage you said Mr Msibi handles him.

MR PRINSLOO: Did you know who Mr Msibi was at that stage?

MR GREYLING: Because people make use of MK names, I did not specifically know that this is this Mr Msibi.

MR PRINSLOO: Did he identify the person?

MR GREYLING: Later after we gathered more information because of, or from informants, we found out that this is this specific Mr Msibi.

MR PRINSLOO: And did you have any information sources within the Security Branch that could provide you with information concerning the background of Mr Msibi?

MR GREYLING: Yes, we knew people in Swaziland who knew Mr Msibi.

MR PRINSLOO: Because of this information that you got, an action was launched to abduct Mr Msibi from Swaziland.

MR GREYLING: That is correct, yes.

MR PRINSLOO: Did you act on instructions to accompany them on that operation?

MR GREYLING: Yes.

MR PRINSLOO: And did you accompany Mr Visser to Swaziland?

MR GREYLING: Yes, I did accompany him.

MR PRINSLOO: In Swaziland, can you tell the Committee were you involved when you took Mr Msibi out of Swaziland?

MR GREYLING: Yes, I was present in Swaziland.

MR PRINSLOO: Were you present when he was abducted?

MR GREYLING: Yes, myself and Gert Visser arrived a little bit later, after they had already had him with them.

MR PRINSLOO: Did you then take Mr Msibi out of Swaziland?

MR GREYLING: Yes.

MR PRINSLOO: Very well. Evidence was led that he was then taken to a clubhouse.

MR GREYLING: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: Were you present?

MR GREYLING: Yes.

MR PRINSLOO: There's also evidence that this Mr Msibi was interrogated and assaulted.

MR GREYLING: That is correct, Mr Chairperson.

MR PRINSLOO: Did you participate in the interrogation?

MR GREYLING: No, Mr Chairperson, Mr Msibi was handed over to the senior officers present and the junior officers stood outside.

MR PRINSLOO: What was your rank at that stage?

MR GREYLING: I was a Warrant Officer.

MR PRINSLOO: Did you see that he was assaulted?

MR GREYLING: I did not see, but I could hear that they were assaulting him, yes.

MR PRINSLOO: Did you at any stage accompany any person to go to a specific house of which you received the address from Mr Msibi?

MR GREYLING: That's correct.

MR PRINSLOO: Who did you accompany?

MR GREYLING: I accompanied Mr de Kock to the house where Mr Msibi lived.

MR PRINSLOO: And at that specific house did you find something?

MR GREYLING: Yes, we found a box with wires and things.

MR PRINSLOO: Did you the seize it, take it?

MR GREYLING: Yes.

MR PRINSLOO: Did you take it back to the clubhouse?

MR GREYLING: Yes.

MR PRINSLOO: Do you know if any further interrogations resulted from this?

MR GREYLING: I assume that the people, or the experts, or the explosives experts would know about that.

MR PRINSLOO: No, I'm talking about the clubhouse, did they follow up with certain interrogations or questioning?

MR GREYLING: Yes.

MR PRINSLOO: Did you take part in that?

MR GREYLING: No, not at all.

MR PRINSLOO: After the interrogation was concluded, evidence was led that he was taken to Pretoria.

MR GREYLING: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: There was also evidence that he was detained in the area around Pretoria, were you involved in that?

MR GREYLING: No, I wasn't.

MR PRINSLOO: And was Mr Msibi later returned to Witrivier in the Eastern Transvaal?

MR GREYLING: Yes, he was then detained according to Section 29.

MR PRINSLOO: Did you interrogate him there?

MR GREYLING: Yes, I did work with him there.

MR PRINSLOO: During that period of time while you interrogated him or worked with him, as you put it, did you assault him?

MR GREYLING: No, not at all.

MR PRINSLOO: Did he provide you with certain information?

MR GREYLING: Yes, he did.

MR PRINSLOO: And this information that was distributed by Mr Malaza to the ANC, could you indicate or could you find out what it entailed?

MR GREYLING: No, I couldn't, because I assumed it went to the ANC Headquarters.

MR PRINSLOO: That is now apart from the documentation that you saw?

MR GREYLING: Yes, that is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: Did you have any information that people were recruited by Kompol, who provided information to Mr Malaza to give to the ANC?

MR GREYLING: That is correct, yes.

MR PRINSLOO: Were you involved in the investigation of that case?

MR GREYLING: No, I was not.

MR PRINSLOO: Did you then release Mr Msibi later?

MR GREYLING: Yes.

MR PRINSLOO: Did he cooperate with the Security Branch?

MR GREYLING: He was handed over to Gen Buchner and from then on I broke all ties with them.

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Buchner was stationed at Head Office in Pretoria, can you tell us where he was?

MR GREYLING: I'm not quite sure at that stage where he was stationed, I don't know if he was in Natal.

MR PRINSLOO: He was not in the Eastern Transvaal?

MR GREYLING: No, not at all.

MR PRINSLOO: And Mr Greyling, you knew that Mr Msibi was going to be abducted and that it will be an illegal action.

MR GREYLING: Yes, that is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: You never made any information public that he was assaulted at the clubhouse.

MR GREYLING: That's correct.

MR PRINSLOO: And while he was detained at Witrivier, you also did not make public the information that he was held there.

MR GREYLING: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: Did you do it for any personal gain?

MR GREYLING: No, not at all.

MR PRINSLOO: Did you do it for any malice?

MR GREYLING: No, not at all.

MR PRINSLOO: So you then apply for amnesty for conspiracy to abduction, abduction and also the fact that you did not make known the assault that took place, as well as defeating the ends of justice.

MR GREYLING: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: Or any delicts that may come from this.

MR GREYLING: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: This action of yours, did you see it as in the interests of the country?

MR GREYLING: That is correct, yes.

MR PRINSLOO: Thank you, Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Prinsloo.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR HUGO: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

Mr Greyling, it seems as if, well if I understand your evidence correctly, that you do agree with Mr de Kock with the version that we've put before the Committee, that at the stage of assault and interrogation, and please correct me if I'm wrong, if I misunderstood, but it seems to me as if there was an initial stage of interrogation and assault where the junior officers were outside, but you could hear that there was some assault. And then you continued with an operation where you accompanied Mr de Kock and Mr de Kock said there may have been another person, you went to the house, from the address that you got you brought certain items back and further assaults took place as well as interrogation.

MR GREYLING: That is correct.

MR HUGO: You once again stood outside and you did not go into the clubhouse.

MR GREYLING: That is correct.

MR HUGO: While we are on this topic of the clubhouse, there was certain information that Mr de Kock's recollection was that the clubhouse was more-or-less as big as this room and that it could have been one and a half times the size of this room. Can you recall how big this room was?

MR GREYLING: Mr Chairperson, I do not think it could have been as big as this room, I think it was smaller.

MR HUGO: I do not think it's very important, but ... the last aspect that I think all of us, or not anyone has really testified about, that we need clarity about is the question concerning the weapons that you had with you at that stage. Let me just ask this directly, because he said that he had Uzzi weapons, silencers that they brought from Vlakplaas - or let me put it this way, did you have a weapon with you?

MR GREYLING: No, I went with Mr Visser and we had no weapons.

MR HUGO: Then concerning the presence of senior officers at the scene, is it correct that you had the perception and the impression that this operation was planned from a very high level?

MR GREYLING: That is correct, yes.

MR HUGO: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Hugo. Mr Visser?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR VISSER: Thank you, Chairperson.

Is your recollection that this operation was launched on that specific day and was completed on that day, or that it was over a period of two days before it was successfully completed?

MR GREYLING: Well we took Malaza to Pretoria the next day, so it could have been the day or the next day that the abduction took place.

MR VISSER: Brig Schoon says that his recollection was that there was an attempt on the first day and they did not succeed and they had to go in the next day again and then only Msibi was brought out. Could that be right?

MR GREYLING: Mr Chairperson, I do not recall it in that way, no.

MR VISSER: Yes, and I would just like to tell you that Brig Schoon's recollection is that that clubhouse is about twice the size of this hall and Gen Buchner was stationed in Pretoria at that stage, I think maybe you forgot it.

MR GREYLING: Yes, that is possibly so.

MR VISSER: Thank you, Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Visser. Mr Cornelius?

MR CORNELIUS: I have no questions, thank you Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Ms van der Walt.

MS VAN DER WALT: No questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Nel?

MR NEL: No questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Lamey?

MR LAMEY: No questions, thank you Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Makondo?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR MAKONDO: Thank you, Chairperson.

Mr Greyling, you said that whilst you were at the clubhouse the juniors stood outside and seniors were inside.

MR GREYLING: That is correct, yes.

MR MAKONDO: Do you remember the seniors who were inside?

MR GREYLING: It was the people as Brig Stadler, Schoon, Visser, Maj Visser, they were the senior officers present. Mr de Kock was at that stage also as a senior office, that was now for subordinate officers.

MR MAKONDO: Do you recall the juniors who were with you outside?

MR GREYLING: No, I cannot remember them. In the previous application I could identify them and could say yes, they were present.

MR MAKONDO: Do you remember how many were you, those who were outside?

MR GREYLING: Probably five or six.

MR MAKONDO: The people you were with, were they members of your unit?

MR GREYLING: Please repeat your question.

MR MAKONDO: The people you were with outside, were they members of your unit?

MR GREYLING: No, I came from Nelspruit.

MR MAKONDO: So you said you could hear that there was an assault inside.

MR GREYLING: That's correct, yes.

MR MAKONDO: I mean, what did you hear, were there perhaps the screaming?

MR GREYLING: You could hear the sound of slapping like if somebody hits somebody on the back. I just assumed that somebody was slapped. There was a noise. They wanted to get information from this man.

MR MAKONDO: Could you perhaps deduce from what you were hearing, that what kind, whether they were using hands or some type of weapon?

MR GREYLING: No, I would say it would be an open hand.

MR MAKONDO: If there was a belt used, would it sound the same like what you were hearing?

MR GREYLING: I do not know if somebody is beaten on the back or hit with a belt, I don't know. It's possible.

MR MAKONDO: At what stage did Mr Msibi give you the information that led you to his house?

MR GREYLING: That was while he was interrogated in the clubhouse.

MR MAKONDO: No, I'm not clear, was it shortly when you got there or after a certain period when you were at the clubhouse?

MR GREYLING: I would say it was after a while that he provided them with the information. I cannot specifically say if it was an hour, two hours, half an hour, I'm not quite sure.

MR MAKONDO: Was it after or during the interrogation?

MR GREYLING: That is correct, yes.

MR MAKONDO: During?

MR GREYLING: They had to ask him and yes, he would have then provided them with the information.

MR MAKONDO: How long did it take you to go to his house and come back with what you found?

MR GREYLING: Approximately an hour to an hour and fifteen minutes, because it's down the valley.

MR MAKONDO: You said you could identify the documents which proved that Mr Malaza had provided the ANC with information.

MR GREYLING: That is correct, yes.

MR MAKONDO: How did you identify them?

MR GREYLING: What would happen is that when you send your reports to Headquarters, you put a - there's either a signature or a stamp.

MR MAKONDO: So the ones that you received must have been similar, copies of what you think to be the documents of your department?

MR GREYLING: That is correct, yes.

MR MAKONDO: I'm asking you because one of the applicants said that the typing on the documents that they got back was different.

MR PRINSLOO: With respect, Mr Chairman, I don't recall such evidence.

CHAIRPERSON: Nor do I. No, no, Mr Makondo.

MR MAKONDO: I'll withdraw that question, Chairperson, perhaps I've got it wrongly.

Do you know Mr Msibi's MK or ANC name in Swaziland?

MR GREYLING: I'm not quite sure, but I think it could be Jabulani, I'm not quite sure.

MR MAKONDO: I'm asking you because you said that you have known of Msibi earlier, because in Swaziland he was using a name Thomas.

MR GREYLING: It is possible, yes.

MR MAKONDO: Is it possible that the Msibi that you thought you know him, could have been a different one?

MR GREYLING: No, I do not believe so, because from the informants, after we confirmed or found out where he worked, they came to us and then came to identify him to us.

MR MAKONDO: When he was in the Eastern Transvaal, after he was taken to Pretoria and back, what information did he provide you with?

MR GREYLING: Mr Chairperson, we usually just sat down and worked with the people from our area, asked about where they, from which machinery they are, we went through photo albums to find out from where the people come from, which machinery specifically.

MR MAKONDO: And what did you do with that information?

MR GREYLING: I put it in writing.

MR MAKONDO: For how long did you stay with him in the Eastern Transvaal?

MR GREYLING: Approximately a month.

MR MAKONDO: And after his release, did you have any contact with him?

MR GREYLING: No, I did not have any further contact with him.

MR MAKONDO: When did you learn about his death?

MR GREYLING: It was a long time afterwards, I cannot specifically say when.

MR MAKONDO: Thank you, Chairperson, that will be all.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Makondo. Ms Patel?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS PATEL: Thank you, Honourable Chairperson.

Did you notice whether Mr Msibi had leg irons on him at the time that he was brought to the Oshoek border post?

MR GREYLING: No, I cannot recall that.

MS PATEL: Is it possible that he could have had leg irons and you don't recall?

MR GREYLING: I think that the abduction took place very quickly, I do not know that they would have put it on in the vehicle. It's possible, I'm not sure though.

MS PATEL: And do you know whether he was gagged at the time, whether his mouth was taped over?

MR GREYLING: That is correct, I do carry knowledge of that.

MS PATEL: At what stage was this done, can you recall?

MR GREYLING: It had to be during the abduction stage, we were not physically there, we only got there a bit later, but it could have been when they abducted him that they covered his mouth.

MS PATEL: During the time that you worked with him in the Eastern Transvaal, after he was handed over to you from Pretoria, was he ever assaulted by anyone in your presence?

MR GREYLING: No, never.

MS PATEL: You were present when his home was searched and the documents and the equipment was found.

MR GREYLING: That is correct.

MS PATEL: How many of you were present during that search?

MR GREYLING: Mr Chairperson, I can only recall myself and Mr de Kock, I cannot recall that there was anybody else there. I will accept if there was anybody else, or somebody else there, but I can only recall myself and Mr de Kock.

MS PATEL: Can you recall whether any money was found there?

MR GREYLING: No, I do not know of any money that was found.

MS PATEL: Okay, alright. Thank you, Honourable Chairper-son.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Advocate Bosman?

ADV BOSMAN: I have no questions, thank you Chairperson.

ADV SANDI: Thank you, I don't have a question to ask, Chair, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Any re-examination, Mr Prinsloo?

MR PRINSLOO: No re-examination, thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Greyling, you are excused.

CHAIRPERSON: Are you calling any further evidence, Mr Prinsloo.

MR PRINSLOO: That concludes the evidence for the two applicants, thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Who are we calling? Are you taking the queue Mr Visser or Mr Hugo?

MR VISSER: Chairperson, it's the last of the Vissers that are going to call a witness. I call Brig Schoon.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------WILLEM FREDERICK SCHOON: (sworn states)

ADV BOSMAN: The witness is properly sworn, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Advocate Bosman. Mr Visser?

EXAMINATION BY MR VISSER: Thank you, Chairperson.

Mr Schoon, you are an applicant in this amnesty application concerning the abduction of Mr Msibi.

MR SCHOON: That is correct, yes.

MR VISSER: For the Amnesty Committee that's hearing this matter you provided them with background information, or you confirmed the background information of it.

MR SCHOON: Yes, that is correct.

MR VISSER: And you would like to submit it and to other people present that's interested.

MR SCHOON: Yes, Chairperson.

MR VISSER: May I hand that up to you, Mr Chairman. Mr Chairman, I'm in your hands ...

CHAIRPERSON: Let me mark it B, because we've got A already.

MR VISSER: Indeed, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, it shall be marked B.

MR VISSER: I was going to say I'm in your hands, the witness can read it out or we can take it as read into the record and perhaps then I can just address certain points in the statement, but I'm entirely in your hands.

CHAIRPERSON: I think just for tidiness of the record, I would request the witness to read it into the record, then you can tidy thereafter.

MR VISSER: Mr Schoon, will you then please focus on Exhibit B and just for introductory's sake ask you, you refer to Exhibit A in your Exhibit B, in paragraph (a), that Exhibit A refers to a document of which the Amnesty Committee and others here present are aware of, that is the general background to amnesty applications and the reason why we are referring to it in this piece is because it usually is referred to as Exhibit A, but now we will refer to it as Exhibit C.

MR SCHOON: That is correct.

MR VISSER: And do you ask that the contents of that exhibit, the general background that is applicable to amnesty applications of Security Police members, that we incorporate it in your application?

MR SCHOON: That is correct, yes.

MR VISSER: On page 16 to 20 of this Exhibit C, there is a discussion of the importance of Swaziland during the struggle of the past, does that correlate with your recollection and your knowledge of the time, and do you confirm that it is correct as it appears in this document?

MR SCHOON: Yes, that is correct.

MR VISSER: Brigadier, if I can then ask you, you have before led evidence and it is recorded in paragraph (b)(i) and (ii) and (iii) in certain amnesty applications and you also refer the Committee to that evidence.

MR SCHOON: That is correct.

MR VISSER: And you also ask that that evidence, that as far as applicable, be also included into your application for today.

MR SCHOON: That is correct.

MR VISSER: You have completed your application and your application for amnesty appears in bundle 1, page 1 to 14, and you deal with the incident from page 9 to 10, is that correct?

MR SCHOON: That is correct, yes.

MR VISSER: Do you confirm that it is the truth according to your recollection, also the contents of that amnesty application of yours?

MR SCHOON: Yes.

MR VISSER: And do you also confirm the political objectives and your own background as it is set out?

MR SCHOON: Yes.

MR VISSER: Now Brigadier, your application includes an incident - I'm at page 2, paragraph 1, Chairperson, you application entails an incident as in June 1986, that happened in Swaziland and also then in the Republic of South Africa. That is abduction of Mr Msibi from Swaziland, the illegal transportation of Mr Msibi over the border, that is now from Swaziland to South Africa, the illegal detention, and then something that was left out, the assault of Mr Msibi, defeating the ends of justice in not making known the true facts or any omission or offence that may result from this, is that correct?

MR SCHOON: Yes.

MR VISSER: Can you then start at paragraph 3, and maybe we can just deal with it very quickly. Some of the applicants in bundle 1, have referred to 1989 when this incident took place and your recollection was that it was in June '86. Now it seems Mr Chairperson, from Exhibit A, that although Mr Msibi is not here to testify today, it does seem that he indicated in his affidavit, it was not a media conference and it was an affidavit that he submitted, and there he explains that he left South Africa in '76, and then in the second column, the second paragraph:

So it does seem pretty clear that it was in 1986.

Can you just start at paragraph 4 and tell us how each persons fitted in within the structure of the Security Police at that stage.

MR SCHOON:

MR VISSER: And from which division was Col Buchner?

MR SCHOON: He was connected to Group C2, which dealt exclusively with the interrogations and filing of identifications of MK members who had returned and fallen into the hands of the Security Police.

MR VISSER: And is it also so that he had to do with the recruitment of such persons to whom you have just referred, and that he was also their overall handler in the country?

MR SCHOON: No, not in all cases, Chairperson. This was actually an exception in which he also became the handler.

MR VISSER: I see. Please continue.

MR SCHOON: Gen Stadler ...(intervention)

MR VISSER: You said Col de Kock.

MR SCHOON: Col de Kock was the Commander of Vlakplaas and the applicants Nortje and Bosch also fell under de Kock's command. Gen Stadler was the Head of Group D, that would be the Intelligence division.

MR VISSER: Was he above or below you in the rank structure of officers?

MR SCHOON: At that stage I was his senior.

MR VISSER: Very well, please continue.

MR SCHOON:

MR VISSER: Could you just pause there for a moment. Mr de Kock stated in his amnesty application that Mr Msibi was apparently so important that he was the bodyguard of the President of the ANC, and Mr Msibi himself states in Exhibit A, in the first column and the second-last paragraph:

Did you know of that?

MR SCHOON: Personally not.

MR VISSER: But would you deny that this was the case?

MR SCHOON: I cannot deny it.

MR VISSER: Very well, please proceed.

MR SCHOON:

MR VISSER: Now when you say this, Brigadier, was Msibi a target for the Security Branch or not?

MR SCHOON: Chairperson, when the information became available that he was the source who was fed by Malaza with information, he became an extremely important person, who had to be developed as a target.

MR VISSER: Very well, we will see the further developments of this. Please continue.

MR SCHOON:

MR VISSER: In Exhibit C, pages 16 to 20, to which we have referred, reference is also made to the Umkomati Accord, when the South African government made an agreement with the Mozambican government, and subsequently, pressure was exerted on the activities of ANC cadres in Mozambique and that consequently they defected to Swaziland and Botswana.

MR SCHOON: That is correct.

MR VISSER: Please proceed.

MR SCHOON:

MR VISSER: Brigadier, this will be a question of record, the nation-wide State of Emergency was announced on the 12th or the 21st, one of the two, of June in 1986 and was ultimately lifted in 1990, is that correct?

MR SCHOON: Yes, that is as far as I know.

MR VISSER: Now upon a question which was put by my learned friend, you were asked whether anybody arranged for a Magistrate to visit Mr Msibi in prison, what was the procedure regarding emergency regulations when it came to visits by Judges and Magistrates? Was anything arranged for this?

MR SCHOON: Yes, there were special Judges and Magistrates who were seconded in order to visit these persons regularly and to find out about their welfare and to take any complaints which may emanate from such visits, and investigate such complaints.

MR VISSER: Therefore it doesn't surprise you to hear that Judge Goldstone, for example, paid such visits?

MR SCHOON: That is correct.

MR VISSER: Did you have any personal knowledge of Judge Goldstone's visit?

MR SCHOON: No.

MR VISSER: Please proceed.

MR SCHOON:

MR VISSER: You are now coming to the facts of the matter, we have dealt with the background.

MR SCHOON: Yes, that is correct.

MR VISSER: May I just interpose? People spoke of Daisy, and perhaps it isn't very clear to everybody what Daisy is, what was it?

MR SCHOON: Daisy was a piece of land which was purchased, I think by General Coetzee, and which was used by Group D, or the Intelligence division of the Security Head Office. They had certain premises there which they used for among others, training and interrogation even.

MR VISSER: So it was a small farm or a smallholding near Pretoria?

MR SCHOON: It wasn't really a farm, it was a smallholding and it was quite to Hartbeespoort Dam.

MR VISSER: Very well, proceed.

MR SCHOON:

MR VISSER: If I may interrupt you. It is probable that you may have had discussions with Stadler, seeing as he was the leading officer regarding the Malaza matter, and because he had interrogated him?

MR SCHOON: Yes, in all probability. I recall that it came from the Security Head himself, but I cannot recall who at that stage was the Head of Security.

MR VISSER: But in 1986, and just for the record, it was Gen Stan Schutte.

MR SCHOON: He had only been there for a very brief time and that is most probably why I have omitted him.

MR VISSER: You are not certain, so you cannot say with certainty with whom you discussed it?

MR SCHOON: That is correct.

MR VISSER: Proceed.

MR SCHOON:

MR VISSER: Regarding you, who took the decision to approve the abduction of Msibi, from Swaziland?

MR SCHOON: I take that responsibility, Chairperson.

MR VISSER: As you recall, at the very least you agreed with this and you gave the approval for the instruction?

MR SCHOON: That is correct.

MR VISSER: Very well, proceed.

MR SCHOON:

CHAIRPERSON: If I could just interrupt myself here? If I may have deviated, it is because I have confused another case with this case, during which we had to stay over an extra night because the operation had not been completed on that particular day.

MR VISSER: So you are not certain, but you think it was this case that went over two days?

MR SCHOON: That is correct.

MR VISSER: Very well, proceed.

MR SCHOON:

MR VISSER: If I may just interrupt you again. We have heard evidence today from the previous witnesses that Msibi was also assaulted at Oshoek, and you haven't mentioned anything about this in your affidavit, what is the reason?

MR SCHOON: Chairperson, I'm aware of the fact that he was assaulted but to the bets of my knowledge, I cannot recall that it took place at Oshoek.

MR VISSER: Can you recall that you were present during an assault on Msibi at Oshoek?

MR SCHOON: Chairperson, as I've stated, I know that he was assaulted, but I recall that it took place at Vlakplaas, I cannot recall that he was assaulted at Oshoek.

MR VISSER: However, if you are incorrect, then you will accept that?

MR SCHOON: Yes, that is correct.

MR VISSER: Please proceed.

MR SCHOON:

MR VISSER: Just before you proceed, could we just return to Vlakplaas. Msibi was then abducted from Swaziland and taken to the Oshoek border post, to the clubhouse, can you recall whether or not he was interrogated there?

MR SCHOON: Yes, Chairperson, he was superficially interrogated and I am aware that members returned to search his place and that they returned with a box containing certain documents.

MR VISSER: Can you recall anything regarding the devices to which previous witnesses have referred as to having been in the box as well?

MR SCHOON: Yes, I can recall this.

MR VISSER: You are not a demolitions expert?

MR SCHOON: No, not at all.

MR VISSER: So you will not be able to tell us what these devices were meant for?

MR SCHOON: No.

MR VISSER: And when you were at Vlakplaas, you say that you recall that you were present when he was indeed assaulted.

MR SCHOON: That is correct.

MR VISSER: Can you recall who the persons were who assaulted him at Vlakplaas?

MR SCHOON: Col de Kock was the main person and then some of the other persons also contributed.

MR VISSER: And was Mr Msibi interrogated there?

MR SCHOON: Yes, he was interrogated.

MR VISSER: In which way was he assaulted, can you recall? Or let us begin by asking whether or not it was a serious assault, in terms of serious injuries which were incurred, or was it an assault which was aimed at getting him to talk?

MR SCHOON: A few blows were dealt to him and I do believe that he was also struck with a belt.

MR VISSER: At Vlakplaas?

MR SCHOON: Yes, that is correct.

MR VISSER: Were you in any way particularly interested in the procedure there? Who was the person that had to see to that?

MR SCHOON: The investigation was given to Stadler and he took the lead when it came to the interrogation. I did not participate in the interrogation itself, although I can recall that I also struck him once.

MR VISSER: What did you want to determine from him during this interrogation?

MR SCHOON: During this interrogation we wanted to determine what he knew about what was going on in Swaziland, who the persons were who were working with him in Swaziland.

MR VISSER: In order to obtain information as you have testified earlier?

MR SCHOON: Yes, we needed information upon which we could react.

MR VISSER: Did you feel that it was necessary to act as such in order to prevent the revolutionary threat from Swaziland?

MR SCHOON: At that stage I thought so, although I realise now that I was mistaken.

MR VISSER: Would you proceed to the last page. Just tell us what your political convictions were at that stage.

MR SCHOON:

MR VISSER: If I may just examine you on four final points. You were aware that with the abduction there was a transgression of border control regulations, is that correct?

MR SCHOON: That is correct.

MR VISSER: And you associated yourself with the fact that your men would be transgressing those regulations and they did so upon your instruction, is that correct?

MR SCHOON: That is correct.

MR VISSER: Are you aware of anything such as brandy which was fed to Mr Msibi?

MR SCHOON: No, I cannot recall anything like that.

MR VISSER: What is your recollection of the size of the clubhouse at Oshoek?

MR SCHOON: My recollection is that it was approximately the size of this venue, if not somewhat bigger.

MR VISSER: Did you make any enquiries or did you have any knowledge regarding how precisely Mr Msibi met his demise?

MR SCHOON: I have no idea, I simply heard that he was murdered.

MR VISSER: You do not know by whom?

MR SCHOON: I do not know.

MR VISSER: Was the case ever solved, as far as you know?

MR SCHOON: I have no knowledge.

MR VISSER: Are you aware of the fact that Mr Msibi testified in a criminal trial against these other persons to whom reference has been made, the persons who defected to the ANC?

MR SCHOON: The two policemen who provided documentation for Malaza, yes he testified in their criminal trial.

MR VISSER: Thank you, Chairperson.

Therefore you request amnesty as we have stipulated it at the beginning of your application, is that correct?

MR SCHOON: That is correct.

MR VISSER: Thank you, Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Visser. Mr Hugo?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR HUGO: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

Brigadier Schoon, if I understand your evidence correctly, the name Msibi came up again after Malaza was interrogated or questioned by Brig Stadler, is that correct?

MR SCHOON: That's correct.

MR HUGO: And then for the first time you became aware of his prominent position within the ANC structure and what his activities were at that stage.

MR SCHOON: That is correct, yes.

MR HUGO: This interrogation that took place by Brig Stadler, that took place at Daisy?

MR SCHOON: Yes.

MR HUGO: Were you present during this questioning or interrogation?

MR SCHOON: No.

MR HUGO: So can we then accept that the information that came to your knowledge was conveyed by Stadler after the interrogation?

MR SCHOON: That is correct.

MR HUGO: After you received this information you then made this decision that certain actions had to be launched against Mr Msibi.

MR SCHOON: I agreed with the action or the operation, because I had a suspicion that the Commander gave the instruction, but I did reconcile myself with it and I did support it and I did make the necessary arrangements.

MR HUGO: You see that is why I'm asking this question, I'd just like to clarify this in my own mind, because I would like to know where this idea came from initially, this abduction.

MR SCHOON: Mr Chairperson, it would have been impossible that the Head of Security Branch, the Commissioner, the Minister, had no knowledge of Malaza, because it was not an everyday case, at most it was high treason and I believe that those in the top structures would have been informed.

MR HUGO: But you have to take into consideration now that you were a Brigadier at that stage, that you would not have been able to have taken this, or made this decision on your own.

MR SCHOON: Yes, I would have been able to, because Swaziland was under our command, or within our district, so it wouldn't have been strange.

MR HUGO: But you would have done it after you'd spoke to Stadler and the with co-operation of Visser, Schalk Visser?

MR SCHOON: Definitely so, yes.

MR HUGO: In other words, it would have been a considered opinion that you would have formed and then on the basis of that, launched this operation?

MR SCHOON: That is correct, yes.

MR HUGO: After you've gathered this information from Brig Stadler - he was not a Brigadier at that stage?

MR SCHOON: Yes, he was.

MR HUGO: But he was a junior?

MR SCHOON: Yes.

MR HUGO: After you received this information from him, you then called in Mr de Kock to give him certain instructions.

MR SCHOON: That is correct.

MR HUGO: Just to make it short, you called in de Kock in his capacity as Commander of Vlakplaas, because the Security Branch viewed Vlakplaas at that stage as the operational unit and recruited them for this type of operation. ...(transcriber's interpretation)

MR SCHOON: Correct, Chairperson.

MR HUGO: Is it also so that during this conversation with Mr de Kock, you gave him information concerning information that was given to Stadler and that was discussed by you and that you also informed him about the decision that was taken.

MR SCHOON: That is correct.

MR HUGO: And you also then motivated why you thought it was necessary to launch such an operation.

MR SCHOON: Yes, Chairperson.

MR HUGO: And Mr de Kock indeed then agreed with what you said.

MR SCHOON: That is correct.

MR HUGO: Then concerning the presence of yourself and Brig Stadler, and I think at that stage Col Visser, Schalk Visser, at Oshoek, and you'll probably agree with me that it was strange that in the broader spectrum of operations at that stage, you were a reasonably strong contingent of senior officials at this operation.

MR SCHOON: Not necessarily that strange, it was a very unique incident. Schalk had to be there because was the Commander of the section, it would have been unethical if we were there or acted there alone without him being present. Gen Stadler was at that stage Head Investigative Officer of the Malaza case.

MR HUGO: Let me tell you why I'm asking you this question. Your presence there and that of Stadler and Col Visser, had to create the impression that this operation was authorised from a very high level.

MR SCHOON: That is correct, yes.

MR HUGO: And I also accept that you will concede that when you conveyed such an instruction to de Kock and he to the people under him, and with the motivation that you gave, that you expected them to execute these instructions.

MR SCHOON: Yes.

MR HUGO: Then just concerning the weapons that were used in this operation. Did you know that Mr de Kock and his men were armed during this operation?

MR SCHOON: Mr Chairperson, they were usually armed, I did not question them about it in this specific incident.

MR HUGO: I'm not quite sure, I think maybe you did testify about it, but did you know that they would cross the border without going through the border control point?

MR SCHOON: Yes.

MR HUGO: And you also saw that as part of the operation, the planning and the execution thereof?

MR SCHOON: Yes.

MR HUGO: Can I then say to you that Mr de Kock's recollection is that concerning the weaponry, that they did have Uzzi weapons with them which had silencers, and these were weapons that they brought from Vlakplaas. Can you comment on that?

MR SCHOON: It would not have been strange, yes.

MR HUGO: Then you would not have said it was wrong, or anything in that line?

MR SCHOON: No.

MR HUGO: You would have seen it as part of the execution of the operation.

MR SCHOON: Yes, that is correct.

MR HUGO: Concerning the assault as Oshoek, can I then just tell you that Mr de Kock cannot recall that you were specifically present when the assault took place and that he does mention that it's possible that you were not in the room when it happened. I would just like to say that for record purposes. What he does say is that Mr Msibi was brought, or taken to Vlakplaas and that further assaults took place where you were present.

MR SCHOON: Yes, that is correct.

MR HUGO: Mr de Kock's recollection does agree with your version that slaps were administered and that he, Mr de Kock, personally took off his belt and did hit Mr Msibi with the belt.

MR SCHOON: Yes, that is my recollection.

MR HUGO: Can I just ask you, the fact that you did not intervene, could that also create the perception that what they are doing, even though it's outside of the parameters of the law, it was acceptable, in that it fell within a broader goal or perspective?

MR SCHOON: That is correct, yes.

MR HUGO: I'm jumping a bit now, but let us just go back to the stage where all the options were considered and a decision was made to launch this operation. At that stage, did you consider eliminating Mr Msibi in Swaziland?

MR SCHOON: No, it never came up, Mr Chairperson.

MR HUGO: And I accept the reason was that you did not want to make a decision to eliminate people without thinking of what the results would be.

MR SCHOON: That is correct, yes.

MR HUGO: Then Mr de Kock says in his written submission that Mr Msibi at a certain stage, was transported from Vlakplaas in a helicopter by, I think in his version was the Defence Force, are you aware of that?

MR SCHOON: Mr Chairperson, I may have heard of it, but at that stage Msibi was out of my hands, Stadler then took over and any further actions with him was initiated by Stadler.

MR HUGO: Then just one loose end. The time during which this event occurred, I'm now talking about the Oshoek event or incident, Mr de Kock also places the abduction at approximately 10 o'clock in the morning and then the further events that occurred in that day was during the rest of the day. Can you remember that it happened while it was still light?

MR SCHOON: Yes, I can recall that. And he also reported back that there was a lot of struggling, or they struggled to get him under control, he resisted a lot.

MR HUGO: Yes, that also agrees with the allegations that were made in Exhibit A, to which Mr Visser referred, and that also places it at approximately 9H30 in the morning.

Mr de Kock's recollection is furthermore that this operation at Oshoek was completed on that same day and that same evening they returned to Vlakplaas, but he's also not quite sure, it could have been the next day.

MR SCHOON: No, according to my recollection we arrived quite early that evening at Vlakplaas, we did not arrive very late.

MR HUGO: In other words, your recollection is that Msibi was held at Oshoek for the evening and the next day he was taken ...(intervention)

MR SCHOON: No, he was never detained there, no.

MR HUGO: Then I would just like to refer you to another aspect in Exhibit A, if you can just go through it with me. It is the second column, the first paragraph, it says - this is Mr Msibi talking:

MR SCHOON: That's correct, Chairperson.

MR HUGO:

It seems to me, and I would just like your comment on this, that Mr Msibi here indeed acted as a representative of the ANC during this meeting.

MR SCHOON: That is the impression that is created here, yes.

MR HUGO: And one could then argue the implications, but I would just like to know what your perception was, that this meeting would not have been about a squash game that they would play, but that it would be about their activities, him being an informant conveying information to the ANC member.

MR SCHOON: Yes, Chairperson.

MR HUGO: Lastly I'd like to ask you, this operation then became known in the Security Branch circles, in the sense that it was reported to Johan van der Merwe, do you know anything about that?

MR SCHOON: Mr Chairperson, they would have reported it to him or to Gen Schutte, if he was the Commander.

MR HUGO: Can you recall if you personally conveyed it them?

MR SCHOON: No, I think Stadler did it.

MR HUGO: But the report-back was with your approval, with your knowledge?

MR SCHOON: Yes.

MR HUGO: And they never took any steps against you from the higher echelons, or that you were admonished at all?

MR SCHOON: No, Chairperson. On the contrary, I can recall that while I was at Oshoek, I made a call to Headquarters to inform the Commanding Officer about the success of the operation.

MR HUGO: Mr Chairman, if you would just bear with me for one second. Thank you, Mr Chairman, it would appear that I have covered all the points that I wanted to. Thank you very much.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Hugo. Mr Cornelius?

MR CORNELIUS: Thank you Mr Chair, I don't have any questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Prinsloo?

MR PRINSLOO: Thank you Mr Chairman, I have no questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Nel?

MR NEL: Thank you, Mr Chairperson. I don't have a question, but I'd just like to put something to Brig Schoon.

Brigadier Schoon, I act for McCarter ...(intervention)

INTERPRETER: The speaker's mike is not on.

MR NEL: Although he did not put it in his application, my instruction that I received here today is that he supports paragraph 22 of your statement where you say that there was an unsuccessful attempt the evening before. Mr McCarter recalls today that for some reason or other, Mr Msibi did not arrive and then the operation was launched the next day and it was successful. I'd just like to place that on record. Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Nel. Mr Lamey?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR LAMEY: Thank you, Chairperson.

Brigadier Schoon, I represent Nortje and Bosch. Is it correct that - and I also understood so from you, that their task in this operation was the abduction itself, to go and get Msibi in Swaziland and to bring him to the Republic and then afterwards to hand him over to the Intelligence section who was interested in him at that stage?

MR SCHOON: I gave the broader plan to Col de Kock and he had to sort out the finer details and get the people to get involved in it.

MR LAMEY: And after Msibi's abduction when he was transported to Vlakplaas, it was mainly the Intelligence division who was involved in the interrogation. ...(transcriber's interpretation)

MR SCHOON: Correct Chairperson, because the investigation was given to them.

MR LAMEY: Can you recall if there was a member, Willie Botha who was involved in the interrogation?

MR SCHOON: Yes, I can recall him.

MR LAMEY: Then as Mr Nel put it, it's also my clients' recollection that before the operation took place on that specific morning, that on the previous day there was an unsuccessful attempt where the person did not arrive. In paragraph 23, I would just like to put it to you the recollection of the applicants whom I'm representing is that after Mr Msibi was abducted in this vehicle, he was at a plantation close to the border and they waited in the vehicle there before he was taken to the Oshoek Police Station at the Republic's side. Can you comment on that?

MR SCHOON: No, I do not know anything about it.

MR LAMEY: I do not think you had arrived at that stage at Oshoek. And then that afterwards he was taken to the police station, where he was interrogated and then that evening transported to Vlakplaas.

MR SCHOON: The interrogation was not at the Oshoek border post but at the clubhouse, which was approximately 200m from the border post offices.

MR LAMEY: Is it a Police clubhouse, or is it a border post clubhouse?

MR SCHOON: Yes, it was the Police clubhouse.

MR LAMEY: And that evening of the abduction or the transportation of Msibi to Vlakplaas, where he slept that evening, he was then moved from there. I assume that you were not there later that evening?

MR SCHOON: They were still busy interrogating him and I left.

MR LAMEY: Thank you, Mr Chairperson, I've go no further questions.

MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, before my learned friend, Mr Lamey - and let it not be said of me that I want to encourage him to ask questions, but he asked questions about the Intelligence Agency and it just occurs to me that there might be a confusion here. Is he referring to National Intelligence, or the Intelligence division in the Security Branch? I think you should ...

CHAIRPERSON: Or Military Intelligence?

MR VISSER: If he was referring to National Intelligence, then obviously there's no problem but I think he should just tell us what he's referring to.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I think it would make us all clearer, Mr Lamey.

MR LAMEY: Which took him later the following day? Because the Intelligence section of the Security Police was involved in his interrogation, but according to the recollection of my clients, it was Military Intelligence that took him away the following day.

MR VISSER: National Intelligence. Military Intelligence?

MR LAMEY: But it's not the Police Intelligence.

MR VISSER: That clarifies it, thank you Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you for that, Mr Visser. Mr Makondo?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR MAKONDO: Thank you, Chairperson.

Mr Schoon, at Vlakplaas, how many times did you meet Mr Msibi when he was there?

MR SCHOON: I didn't catch your question quite clearly.

MR MAKONDO: When Mr Msibi was at Vlakplaas, how many times did you meet him?

MR SCHOON: I saw Mr Msibi only once and that was on the day of his abduction at Oshoek and then at a later stage, that evening at Vlakplaas where he was interrogated, and afterwards I never saw him again.

MR MAKONDO: During the night where you saw him, his first interrogation, did you stay until the interrogation was over or did you leave somewhere in the middle?

CHAIRPERSON: His last response was that:

That was right at the tail end, when he was cross-examined by Mr Lamey.

MR MAKONDO: Thank you, Chairperson, I perhaps wanted clarity as to at what stage of the interrogation.

Can you recall at what stage? Perhaps you could estimate time.

MR SCHOON: Mr Chairperson, I will guess now, I did not stay right to the end, I think I've got the idea that I may have left about 10 o'clock that evening.

MR MAKONDO: When you left, what I want to know is the time period that you spent with him during the interrogation, do you recall that perhaps?

MR SCHOON: I did not personally interrogate him, I left that to the other men, they did the questioning.

MR MAKONDO: You mention other men, excluding Mr de Kock who you have already mentioned, who else was there at Vlakplaas?

MR SCHOON: Stadler, one of his men, I do not know who else. There were some of the Intelligence operators who also assisted with the interrogation and Vlakplaas members also periodically came in.

MR MAKONDO: During the interrogation, was there assault on Mr Msibi?

MR SCHOON: Yes, Chairperson, he was slapped and hit with a belt.

MR MAKONDO: Let me take you through Exhibit A, the third column, the last paragraph where he said:

MR SCHOON: I carry no knowledge of that, no.

MR MAKONDO: Whilst you were present during the interrogation, did he lose consciousness?

MR SCHOON: No, Mr Chairperson.

MR MAKONDO: At Oshoek, in your presence, did he ever lose consciousness?

MR SCHOON: No, Mr Chairperson.

MR MAKONDO: And the assault that took place at Oshoek, if I recall you said you were not present.

MR SCHOON: Mr Chairperson, I cannot recall that he was assaulted there. I know that he was assaulted and as far as my recollection goes, the assault took place at Vlakplaas.

MR MAKONDO: At Oshoek, do you remember who was inside with Mr Msibi and yourself, the people who were in there?

MR SCHOON: Schalk Visser, Gert Visser, Stadler and possibly one or two more.

MR MAKONDO: Were there other people who were not inside with him?

MR SCHOON: Yes, I've got an idea that some of the men stood outside, they chatted outside, they waited outside, they did not participate in the interrogation.

MR MAKONDO: After you left him at Vlakplaas, did you ever come into contact with him?

MR SCHOON: No, not at all.

MR MAKONDO: Did you learn about his death?

MR SCHOON: Yes, I heard.

MR MAKONDO: When?

MR SCHOON: It was approximately a year or two after the incident it was reported in reports and it came under our attention.

MR MAKONDO: During his stay in Vlakplaas, did you perhaps get the report as to what information did he give?

MR SCHOON: I may have, or it would have come to me in the normal sequence of events and with the desk that I dealt with, I would have seen what he had said to them, but it is such a long time ago, I cannot recall.

MR MAKONDO: Would the same be in terms of his stay in Eastern Transvaal? Would it be the same, your response?

MR SCHOON: Yes.

MR MAKONDO: Thank you, Chairperson, that will be all.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Makondo. Ms Patel.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS PATEL: Thank you, Honourable Chairperson.

Just one aspect, Brig Schoon. In your application to us on page 10, in response to a question as to whether anybody was injured or killed or property damaged during this incident, you state there that:

MR SCHOON: That is correct, yes.

MS PATEL: But you've conceded now that Mr Msibi was in fact assaulted.

MR VISSER: There is a slight difference between being injured and being assaulted, and frankly, if you look at the question, with respect ...

MS PATEL: Well really, aren't we then just splitting hairs? If somebody is assaulted and given the evidence that has been led today, that it's not a common assault, I would clearly argue that if a man is being hit with a belt, then that amounts to assault with the intent to do grievous bodily harm, and it necessarily follows that the man was then injured, surely.

CHAIRPERSON: Wouldn't there be some ubiquity, because here on page 10 it speaks of the abduction and then immediately follows that question you asked and then he says nobody was injured or killed, or any property damaged. And what he testified about is the assault at Vlakplaas, if I understood him well. So I think you can rephrase your question, because there's ambiguity in any event, which I notice immediately, speaking for myself. But if you could rephrase your question.

MS PATEL: Alright. Would you concede, Mr Schoon, that Mr Msibi was in fact injured during the assault on him?

MR SCHOON: It is possible that he was injured, yes, but he did not have any visible injuries on his body.

MS PATEL: That would be during the time that you were present though?

MR SCHOON: That is correct, yes.

MS PATEL: Thank you, Honourable Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Ms Patel.

ADV BOSMAN: I have no questions, thank you Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Advocate Sandi?

ADV SANDI: Yes, I think I do have one or two, Chairperson, thank you.

There has been evidence, Mr Schoon, that Mr Msibi was turned to work for the Security Police, did you become aware of such a circumstance?

MR SCHOON: Yes, Mr Chairperson, his questioning was done by Col Buchner and identification of the photographs ...(intervention)

INTERPRETER: The Interpreter cannot hear the speaker.

CHAIRPERSON: May I just interrupt you, the Interpreters cannot hear you, could you please speak louder?

MR SCHOON: I don't think this thing is working very well, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Can you hear?

MR SCHOON: Mr Chairperson, Buchner questioned him about people who were arrested and he would sit for two to three weeks with such a person, where he would go through all the photographs from 1 to 5 000 photographs, he would go through them and ask him, "Do you know this person", and if he's got something to say, then the history will then be written down and this person will then explain in detail which camps they met him and it would then be half a page of each person that he identified and they would then write down the history of that person.

That would take about two to three weeks before this process was completed and during the time the people who did this work, built up a relationship with this person and at the end he could then say this person will become a good witness, he's willing to cooperate and that specific person will then be chosen and asked to testify and he will then be used and later he will be taken up in the stream of rehabilitated members. He will then become an informant and in this case Buchner, because of the unique circumstances of this, he handled him right from the beginning personally from Soweto and after a few months I know he then handed him over to the Security Branch in Soweto and then they looked after him from that point onwards.

ADV SANDI: Your answer has been very long, Mr Schoon, I'm not sure if ... Is that to say that your understanding was that he was actually working as an informer, is that what you knew at the time about Mr Msibi?

MR SCHOON: Mr Chairperson, he first became an informer after Buchner recruited him and then he started working with us. What information he revealed, I do not know, and if he brought in any information, I also do not know.

ADV SANDI: And after he was released, do you know if he continued having this relationship with Mr Buchner, as an informer?

MR SCHOON: Mr Chairperson, he started working as an informer the day after he was released, before that he couldn't do it because he was detained, but when he was released, he then became a source for Buchner, but what production he delivered, I do not know.

ADV SANDI: Thank you, Brigadier.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Schoon, but before I thank you, I can see Mr Visser doesn't want to re-examine you, but let's give him the opportunity to refuse.

RE-EXAMINATION BY MR VISSER: Chairperson, if you invite me, I will ask one question.

Mr Schoon, you heard evidence about a vehicle of Mr Msibi that was destroyed, you did not mention it.

MR SCHOON: Mr Chairperson, I did.

MR VISSER: In your evidence today. The reason is because I did not lead you in that. Were you informed that such a vehicle was damaged? Were you informed about it?

MR SCHOON: Yes, Col de Kock did mention it to me.

MR VISSER: So if Ms Patel puts it to you that your paragraph is wrong on page 10, where you say no damage was done to property, then she would be right, because there was damage to property, is that correct? ...(transcriber's interpretation)

MR SCHOON: Correct, Chairperson.

MR VISSER: Thank you, Chairperson.

MR SCHOON: Paragraph 24?

MR VISSER: Yes, 24.

CHAIRPERSON: 24, Mr Visser.

MR VISSER: Yes. Thank you, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Schoon, you are excused. Should we require you at a later stage, we'll advise Mr Visser.

MR SCHOON: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Any further evidence from you, Mr Visser?

MR VISSER: That will be the evidence that we're going to present, thank you, Chairperson.

MR VISSER: Thank you. I notice that we have a few minutes before four, but it is my view that we can't lead evidence-in-chief ...(indistinct - no microphone) who would come in and cross-examined the next day. I think it would be unfair, but there are circumstances when this would happen, but I don't believe today it would be fair to any applicant. I may just say to you, Ms Patel, that I see we've got another application to-morrow, I would request you to advise the parties involved to be here too, for that matter.

MS PATEL: Thank you, Honourable Chairperson, I'll make the necessary arrangements.

CHAIRPERSON: I don't think anybody would be against me if we adjourn early, it's a Monday in any event. We adjourn for today.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS