NAME: PITSO JOSEPH HLASA

MR BRINK: The next matter Mr Chairman, relates to the whereabouts of the next of kin of the security officer who was killed in these proceedings. Mr Chairman, you will notice that the first applicant, that is Hlasa, does not seek amnesty in regard to the death of that security policeman because he was not involved, on his application but in any event I received a fax from the Cape Town office this morning, from one of the evidence analysts to ask me to bring to your attention that the Investigation Office were unable to locate any of the next of kin of that security officer and that the police docket which they obtained also makes no mention of him. It was suggested that possibly this matter be advertised as a way of tracing the next of kin but decided that that should not be done so we don't know the name of that particular victim or the next of kin, we just don't know. That is all I can tell you in that regard.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, I was about to say something but it has escaped me. Mr Brink before we get into these things, I think it beholds us to explain to the public why we started at the time that we are only beginning now.

MR BRINK: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: We were told that there was a problem about the sound system and the interpretation system as well. We are not conversant with the technical details relating thereto but we understand this is the reason why we couldn't start earlier. And for our part we should say that we are unhappy that we have been delayed to this extent and we sincerely hope that the situation was truly unavoidable.

We should also place it on record that today, the 20th of April 1998 we are sitting here as a Committee consisting of myself, Judge Ngoepe and to my right, Advocate Bosman, to my left Advocate Sigodi and to my far left Attorney Malan and Mr Brink, you are leading the evidence isn't it?

MR BRINK: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Now to the matter that you raised earlier on about the family or relatives of the victim in the other incident, I don't quite appreciate, I thought the matter has been postponed in the Supreme Court or whatever Court pending the outcome of this application. One would have thought that the office of the Attorney General would have some kind of information.

MR BRINK: Mr Chairman, the ...[inaudible]

CHAIRPERSON: I thought I was talking about application by at least one of the applicants, application for amnesty in respect of the murder of a security person.

MR BRINK: Mr Chairman, Members of the Committee, in that regard Mr Hlasa is not applying for amnesty in respect of that, the other two applicants are together with the murder and the attempted murders of the other group. Now they are awaiting trial in respect of that second offence or batch of offences. They are not awaiting trial as I understand it, in respect of the murder of a security guard.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, maybe I'm confused. Who is the security guard - let me ask this, somebody was murdered, he was going to deliver some other things or he was only delivering a vehicle or something ...[intervention]

MR BRINK: He was in the security van when the van was ambushed by a number of these people and he was killed.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR BRINK: Now, none of the applicants have been indicted in respect of that man's death, they've only been indicted in respect of the murder of that group of youths with who AZAPO was in conflict at the time.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, but isn't there an application before us by one of the applicants in respect of the ambush on that vehicle?

MR BRINK: Yes, you're entitled to deal with application, all I'm saying to you Mr Chairman, is that we have not been able to trace the next of kin of that particular deceased. There were two batches of offences, one in July and one in August. They are separate things entirely. So two of the applicants, that's Mphoreng and Thandakubona are making application for amnesty in respect of the AZAPO quarrel and in respect of the security guard's death.

CHAIRPERSON: I know.

MR BRINK: ...[indistinct] indictment.

CHAIRPERSON: I appreciate that but you are saying that relatives of the security guard cannot be traced?

MR BRINK: They cannot be traced.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, how much effort was put into that?

MR BRINK: I can tell you this and I quote from the fax:

CHAIRPERSON: Can I suggest, can we start with - this will be subject to Mr Tloubatla's preparations or whatever, can we start with an applicant who is not making application in respect of that particular matter because we want to give it some thought. We don't want to waste time anymore now, we want to give some thought about it. We are going to seriously think about whether we shouldn't have it postponed or whatever.

MR BRINK: Then the second matter Mr Chairman, is that for some reason or another an amplified statement ...[indistinct] applicant already, the original of which I have was not copied and I ask leave to hand to the Committee a photocopy of that which I marked as page 17(a). ...[indistinct] relates to the killing of the security policeman.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you. Mr Tloubatla, I suppose Mr Brink has finished what he wanted to say.

MR TLOUBATLA: ...[inaudible]

CHAIRPERSON: We are proceeding. Call one of your applicants but it must be somebody who is not making application in respect of the killing of the security guard.

MR TLOUBATLA: ...[inaudible]

MR TLOUBATLA: Mr Chairman, what I was still saying was that there are two separate acts, one committed in July, the other one committed in August. Mr Hlasa is not involved in the act that was committed in August, I beg your pardon, that is in July, he was only involved in the murder, in the act that was committed in August.

And the act that was committed in August was, they were all involved. The three applicants were all involved in that act. I wonder whether I'm making myself clear, that is the killing of some young members SOSCO or UDF, something of that nature. The three of them were involved in that act. It's just that Mr Hlasa is not involved in the killing of the security man, that is the only thing that he is not involved in.

According to my preparation Mr Chairman, is that I was going to start with Mr Mphoreng, to lead him and in fact I don't think that there would be any difference if all of them were involved in the same thing Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: ...[inaudible]

MR TLOUBATLA: Okay.

CHAIRPERSON: Where is the applicant? Mr Hlasa?

PITSO JOSEPH HLASA: (sworn states)

MR BRINK: Mr Chairman, I notice that only one of the applicants has hearing apparatus. The other two are involved in this matter and I think it's desirable that they should also hear the evidence to be given by Mr Hlasa. I gather there's a shortage of hearing apparatus.

CHAIRPERSON: ...[inaudible]

MR TLOUBATLA: ...[inaudible] to give the Commission a background inasfar as the political situation at the time when these acts were committed, I wonder whether the Chairman will allow me to do so. It's physically background information but otherwise the applicants themselves will give evidence on the specific acts for which they are applying for amnesty.

CHAIRPERSON: ...[inaudible]

MR TLOUBATLA: Mr Chairman, I say that it was my intention, in fact I'm begging leave to do so, to address the Commission or the Committee on the political background which existed at the time when these acts were committed by my clients and the applicants themselves will definitely give evidence on the specific acts for which they are applying for amnesty.

CHAIRPERSON: ...[inaudible] do that but you can do it very briefly, very, very briefly because it must be part of the evidence of the applicants themselves.

EXAMINATION BY MR TLOUBATLA: Thank you Mr Chairman. Okay, I'll proceed to lead my client.

Mr Hlasa, do you recall a date in 1986 when you were involved in the killing of some young boys in Sawela?

MR HLASA: ...[inaudible]

MR TLOUBATLA: Do you recall when did this happen exactly? Do you remember the exact date?

MR HLASA: ...[inaudible]

MR TLOUBATLA: Can you tell the Chairman and the Committee what exactly happened on that day?

MR HLASA: No English translation. ...comrade Jeff and comrade Thandakubona ...[no English translation]

MR HLASA: Alright, on arrival at comrade Jeff ...[indistinct] ...[no English translation]

CHAIRPERSON: Can you just hold for a minute.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Brink and Mr Tloubatla, I think we have great difficulties in following these proceedings and we are afraid that we may miss quite a lot things. Much as we are anxious to get the matter started with we don't think that we can go on at this rate. We are going to have to adjourn until tomorrow morning at, we will start at 9 o'clock tomorrow morning and we hope that this problem will be sorted out. We've decided to adjourn now so that the relevant people can put this afternoon, the rest of this afternoon to good use so that tomorrow we will be able to proceed expeditiously. So I'm afraid we'll have to adjourn now until tomorrow half past nine.

MR BRINK: Half past nine?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

NAME: PITSO JOSEPH HLASA

PITSO JOSEPH HLASA: (s.u.o.)

INTERPRETER: The speaker's mike is not on.

MR TLOUBATLA: Do you confirm that the incidents for which you are applying for amnesty occurred in 1986, is that so?

MR HLASA: Yes, I confirm.

MR TLOUBATLA: In 1986, can you tell the Chairman what, basically what were you doing for your living?

MR HLASA: Well, at that time I think I was, I am now and I was the member of the Black Consciousness Movement.

MR TLOUBATLA: Did you hold any position, executive position or any position in the Black Consciousness Movement?

MR HLASA: No, not at that time.

MR TLOUBATLA: ...[inaudible] I want you to go through your statement and then I'll keep on interrupting you to explain some of the features that you have mentioned in your statement.

MR HLASA: Okay. This is the statement I think that the Truth Commission has with my name:

...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry to interrupt. Mr Tloubatla, I think we have read the statement, maybe you can deal with particular aspects that you want to highlight in the statement but before you do that - Mr Hlasa, the statement you are reading is the one which is dated, no date - Mr Tloubatla, that's the statement on pages 4 to 8 of the application? Is that it Mr Brink?

MR BRINK: Yes, that's the one I have Mr Chairman, pages 4,5,6,7 and 8 of the bundle. I've having a problem once again with the sound I'm sorry to say, serious problems.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Hlasa, you signed this statement didn't you? ...[indistinct] I'm sorry.

MR HLASA: Yes, I did.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you confirm that the contents of this statement is the truth, do you confirm the truth thereof?

MR HLASA: Yes, I do confirm.

CHAIRPERSON: And then maybe Mr Tloubatla you can just deal with particular aspects of it which you think need to be highlighted because we have actually read the statement.

MR TLOUBATLA: ...[inaudible]

MR TLOUBATLA: On page one of the statement you say that the political conflict between AZAPO and the UDF, United Democratic Front had reached unprecedented levels in 1986, is it possible for you to expand a little bit and tell us what was happening 1986 between AZAPO and the UDF?

MR HLASA: May I speak Sotho? In 1986 the violence between AZAPO and UDF in fact spread to Soweto. I would say this violence started in the Eastern Cape in 1985 or 1984, I'm not sure, when most of our members were killed by the ...[indistinct] camp.

Some of them were accused of the murder of the CRADOCK 4, then it spread until it reached Transvaal. In my area in particular it was not rife. So what has happened, in the area like Dlamini in Soweto and Zola and Mundene, Naledi, those were the areas which were affected mainly. As members of the organisation we tried by all means possible that we should have various camps so that we should be able to defend ourselves.

CHAIRPERSON: I think we still have the same problem here.

CHAIRPERSON: Let's adjourn for a while, maybe somebody needs a short adjournment to look at something.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

MR MALAN: ...[intervention] all applicants that will be giving evidence, to make sure that before you speak your microphone is on. We will arrange that two microphones can be open simultaneously. We found that the Chairman's microphone, when activated, deactivates ...[inaudible]

MR BRINK: ...[inaudible]

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Hlasa, try to keep to your language and not use too many languages interchangeable.

MR MALAN: May I Chair, please put a next request, that whatever we have not be read out to us again and when to the witness speaks, let him speak to the statement and not from the statement please. And if you can lead him on the salient issues we will appreciate it.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Brink, we have been made to understand that there are relatives of the deceased in here and that there are some issues which make them a little bit uncomfortable. I don't know whether your attention has been drawn to that.

MR BRINK: Yes, it has Mr Chairman. I've discussed the matter with a gentleman who's name I can't for the moment remember. If needs be I'll discuss it with him again. He indicated to me - I told him that I'll be representing the victims insofar was necessary and he gave me certain information, depending upon what comes out in the evidence of the applicants, what the victims attitudes would be towards the application. That is what I can tell you.

I'm waiting from a telephone call from Lorraine. I may say that the - according to the information at my disposal, notices were sent to the various next of kin and victims and indeed a Mr Katle has been subpoenaed to be here and I understand he will be here shortly if he isn't already but the last time I enquired he wasn't here. But notices were sent out on the 2nd of April 1998 from Cape Town.

CHAIRPERSON: ...[inaudible] already lost ...[inaudible]

--------------------------------------------------------CHAIRPERSON: Today, the 22nd April 1998, in the various applications of Visser and others. The Committee is constituted as follows: myself, Judge Ngoepe and to my right, Advocate Bosman, to my left, Advocate Sigodi and to my far left Attorney Malan. Mr Brink?

MR BRINK: Mr Chairman, the various next of kin, victims have all been served, I have returns of service given to me by Colonel Killian. The only person who was not served was Mr Abel Sibohadi and I am told by Colonel Killian that the address given was impossible to trace. He is the only person who could not be served with a notice.

CHAIRPERSON: Is there an application in respect of him as well?

MR BRINK: No, no, no, he is one of those, the next of kin.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry?

MR BRINK: He was one of the, I think related to one of those who were killed.

CHAIRPERSON: Oh, I'm sorry, I had somebody else in mind, I'm sorry. Alright, we have taken note of that.

ADV BOSMAN: Mr Chairman, may I just through you put a question.

Mr Brink, it would seem as though Mr Abel Sibohadi was a victim of an assault.

MR BRINK: Oh, he was a victim, you're quite right Madam. Anyway he couldn't be traced despite efforts.

CHAIRPERSON: So I was right in my thinking.

MR BRINK: I beg your pardon.

CHAIRPERSON: So well, in which case my question stands, is there any application for amnesty in respect for the assault on him? Mr Prinsloo? Miss van der Walt? Because I don't seem to recall that.

This is the gentleman who came with the bakkie, was stopped and then later the bakkie stalled and then it was pushed and then got stuck ...[intervention]

MS VAN DER WALT: It's part of that case.

CHAIRPERSON: It's part of it?

MS VAN DER WALT: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Thanks. Anyway you say that despite diligent effort he could not be traced?

MR BRINK: I'm given to understand that yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Alright thank you. Yes, I suppose we can now proceed. Mrs van der Walt? Oh, sorry, place yourselves, let everybody place themselves on record please and as to whom they are appearing for.

MS VAN DER WALT: I am appearing on behalf of the first applicant, Mr Phil Kloppers and the second applicant, Mr Deon Martin.

MR PRINSLOO: Chairman, I am appearing on behalf of Matthews, the two Visser's, Badenhorst, Diedericks and Meiring.

MR KNOETZE: May it please you Mr Chairman, my name is Barnard Knoetze, I appear on behalf of Martinus Lodewickes van der Schyff on the instruction of Mr Jan Wagener of the firm Wagener, Muller and du Plessis of Pretoria.

CHAIRPERSON: Thanks. Mrs van der Walt?

MS VAN DER WALT: As we discussed in chambers, I would like to have called in the first applicant first, Mr Kloppers because I regard his evidence as the most important with regard to this application but as a result of the fact that certain legal representatives are not prepared as of yet to appear here, I will now call the second applicant, Mr Deon Martin.

DEON MARTIN: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: Please proceed Mrs van der Walt.

EXAMINATION BY MS VAN DER WALT: You have applied for amnesty ...

MS VAN DER WALT: The events for which you are applying for amnesty appear in the Annexure, do you confirm the content thereof?

MR MARTIN: Yes.

MS VAN DER WALT: Do you also confirm the content of Annexure B?

MR MARTIN: Yes.

MS VAN DER WALT: Mr Martin, you were born on the 12th of December 1963, is that correct?

MR MARTIN: No, that's the 12th of May 1963.

MS VAN DER WALT: You were found guilty of which offences?

MR MARTIN: Chairperson, I was found guilty of murder, attempted murder, assault, assault with purpose and the possession of guns and ammunition.

MS VAN DER WALT: Do you also then apply for the offences for which you have been found guilty?

MR MARTIN: Yes, that's correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: And what was your sentence?

MR MARTIN: I received the death penalty four times as well as 20 years correctional service.

MS VAN DER WALT: And has your death penalty been amended?

MR MARTIN: Negative, not at this point.

MS VAN DER WALT: Mr Martin, were you a member of the South African Police?

MR MARTIN: That's correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: And the period of time in which you served as a policeman in the police services, during that time, against who did you act?

MR MARTIN: That was between 1981 and 1985 when I served in the police services and we acted against the ANC/SACP Alliance.

MS VAN DER WALT: Did you ever do border duty?

MR MARTIN: Yes.

MS VAN DER WALT: For what period of time?

MR MARTIN: I cannot recall the exact time period but I did perform border duty twice.

MS VAN DER WALT: And after you had left the military, did you join any other political organisation?

MR MARTIN: That's correct, I joined the Afrikaner Weerstandsbeweging.

MS VAN DER WALT: Why did you joint the AWB?

MR MARTIN: I believed that it was the only movement which could resist the government of that time as well as the ANC/SACP Alliance.

MS VAN DER WALT: Why did you want to resist the government of that time and the ANC/SACP Alliance?

MR MARTIN: I believed that the AWB was fighting for the right to self determination and I believed that that was an important right for every nation, to determine themselves.

MS VAN DER WALT: What did you believe as a member of the AWB, would happen should the ANC/SACP Alliance come into power?

MR MARTIN: I believed that a black majority government would have oppressed the Afrikaner volk completely.

MS VAN DER WALT: There are just singular aspects regarding the affidavits of the applicant which I would like to bring to the Committee's attention. On page 27 paragraph 3, he says:

That should read:

and furthermore it reads:

that's page 27 paragraph 3. It is not that he underwent courses with the AWB, it was the SAP. And then the second sentence should be inserted:

and that has been omitted.

And then on page 27 paragraph 6, it is stated, and this is on the second line:

it should read:

Furthermore, on the same page, paragraph 8, the 5th sentence or line should read:

and it should be inserted:

that has been omitted, it should be inserted. Page 35 Chairperson, the 5th line from the top of the page:

it should not read:

that should be omitted:

and the rest of the sentence:

should be omitted. And then just for the sake of completion furthermore it reads:

Page 11, paragraph 28, page 37, paragraph 28, the 3rd line from the bottom of the paragraph should read:

that is how it should read. Thank you Chairperson.

Mr Martin, you then joined the AWB, did you undergo any courses or present any courses?

MR MARTIN: I did present courses but I did not undergo any AWB courses.

MS VAN DER WALT: Which courses did you present and to whom?

MR MARTIN: The courses which we presented were usually in preparation for war, the war which was being planned. We prepared the women and children to defend themselves and those who received training were AWB members.

MS VAN DER WALT: Your application indicates that you presented courses to the IFP, which courses were those?

MR MARTIN: The same courses.

MS VAN DER WALT: Which rank did you occupy within the AWB?

MR MARTIN: During the incident I was a Commandant in the AWB, second in command.

MS VAN DER WALT: Who was in command?

MR MARTIN: The Chief Commander, Phil Kloppers.

MS VAN DER WALT: That is the first applicant?

MR MARTIN: Yes, that's correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: Was there any General who was occupied with the area in which you were a commander?

MR MARTIN: Yes, that's correct, it was General Japie Oelofse.

MS VAN DER WALT: Did you fall directly underneath his command?

MR MARTIN: Phil Kloppers stood directly below his command.

MS VAN DER WALT: During 1993, was there any commentary - you were area 9, is that correct?

MR MARTIN: Yes.

MS VAN DER WALT: Was there commentary regarding your actions in area 9?

MR MARTIN: Yes. General Oelofse, and when I speak of us I speak of myself and Phil Kloppers, he praised us quite often because of the regular and intensive activities which we undertook in our area and he was quite impressed with our area.

MS VAN DER WALT: Why were you stocking up on food?

MR MARTIN: That was for the war.

MS VAN DER WALT: You also attended a national summit which occurred in Klerksdorp?

MR MARTIN: That's correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: Can you tell the Committee what happened there?

MR MARTIN: It was basically an AWB National Summit which was held at which Eugene Tererblanche and Constant Viljoen were guest speakers. During their discussions with us I could clearly understand that war was imminent. Eugene Terreblanche himself said on many an occasion that he would appoint himself as Constant Viljoen's Corporal because the war was in fact so imminent.

MS VAN DER WALT: You are now speaking of the war, what do you mean by that?

MR MARTIN: Basically that was the resistance which the Afrikaner Volksfront had been planning. Constant Viljoen had certain Generals which he would have commandeered and it would have been a basic revolution which would be executed to take over the country.

MS VAN DER WALT: Are you aware whether the Defence Force would have delivered any input regarding this, was this discussed?

MR MARTIN: According to Constant Viljoen, the Defence Force would definitely been involved.

MS VAN DER WALT: And within the area where you operated, did you provide any further training thereafter?

MR MARTIN: Practically every weekend we provided intensive training to all the members.

MS VAN DER WALT: Was there ever any kind of secret conferences held by the CP, the AWB and other organisations as such?

MR MARTIN: I was present at one time, this was at the Embassy Hotel where we did some work for General Oelofse. He had booked himself in as Mr Smith and it was there where a conference was held with the CP and the Freedom Front.

MS VAN DER WALT: Which members of the Freedom Front and the Volksfront were there?

MR MARTIN: I can't say with certainty but I know that at a certain point Ferdie Hartzenberg and Constant Viljoen did attend but I was not there.

MS VAN DER WALT: Do you know whether subsequent to the conference any action was taken by the General's staff the AWB?

MR MARTIN: General Oelofse would call us together frequently and tell us to prepare ourselves for a war that we would not continue with the elections and that is basically the only commentary that I have regarding that.

MS VAN DER WALT: On the 12th of December 1993, approximately a quarter to 7 of that evening, could you please tell the Honourable Committee what happened then?

MR MARTIN: I was sleeping in bed, I had a great deal of pain because my left leg had been amputated. My wife awoke me and told me she had received a telephone call from the Chief Commandant Kloppers who had given her an instruction, told her to give me the instruction to contact certain members because we had a job to do that night.

I told my wife that I was going to have a bath and that she should study the list to see who she could contact and commandeer. I also told her that she should tell them that we would be meeting at Harry's Roadside Cafe in full uniform.

MS VAN DER WALT: What did you understand by going to work?

MR MARTIN: We often received such instructions, that we would be going to work and then we would guard certain institutions or we would accompany certain people, it could have been anything.

CHAIRPERSON: Could you repeat that for us please? What did your wife say to you exactly?

MR MARTIN: That Phil Kloppers had phoned and had told her to convey the instruction to me to contact some people, tell them to be dressed in full uniform because we would be going to work that night and that we would all meet at 9 o'clock at Uncle Harry's Roadside Cafe.

MS VAN DER WALT: Those were members of the AWB?

MR MARTIN: Yes, those were members of our commando.

MS VAN DER WALT: Very well, you may proceed.

MR MARTIN: My wife managed to contact a number of people, among them Jaco Badenhorst, Martin van der Schyff, Peter Matthews, Kallie Meiring, there were a number of them. She did not contact Andrè Visser.

MR MARTIN: Might I just ask for a small break, I'm not quite certain of all those who were involved. She contacted Peter Matthews and Kallie Meiring, that's correct. She told them to prepare, put on their uniforms and meet at 9 o'clock at Uncle Harry's Roadside Cafe.

MS VAN DER WALT: Very well, continue.

CHAIRPERSON: Who was phoning all these people, your wife?

MR MARTIN: Yes, it was my wife, I was in the bath at that point. I dressed - pardon me, she also contacted Gert Diedericks. Gert Diedericks then came to my residence, he left his children there to be looked after and we left from that point. We picked up Badenhorst and Etienne Visser was with him, then we went to fetch van der Schyff and we then moved on to Uncle Harry's Roadside Cafe where we met the others.

MS VAN DER WALT: Very well, you may proceed.

MR MARTIN: At 9 o'clock Phil Kloppers arrived there. I brought the people to attention, we saluted. Phil Kloppers then told us that he was called from an order group, that he had received an instruction to go and work that night. I asked him what the work involved, upon which he told me that the General had said that he should apply hard options and that he wanted to see corpses because the revolution would expand on that evening.

MS VAN DER WALT: Yes?

MR MARTIN: Om rede ons soveel voertuie by ons gehad het, we decided to go to Jaco Badenhorst's residence as his parents were on leave at that time. We decided to leave some of the vehicles there. We decided to use my Mercedes and the Nissan Sentra. We changed the number plates by using insulation tape and changing the numbers as such.

From there, using the two vehicles, we went to Andrè Visser's flat which was about three to four blocks away from the residence. We all had a drink there. From there myself and Phil Kloppers and Matthews went in the Mercedes with the Sentra following us to my residence.

On the way there I asked Kloppers what we would be doing that night. I suggested that we attack squatter camps upon which he told me that General Oelofse wanted us to set up a roadblock. We arrived at my residence. I had all the equipment with me which I received from traffic officers, such as blue lights and reflectors. We handed them out to the members.

MS VAN DER WALT: Mr Martin, did you ever had firearms on you?

MR MARTIN: Always when we went out to work we had our firearms with us.

MS VAN DER WALT: Did everyone have their own firearms or what was the situation?

MR MARTIN: No, three members didn't have firearms and at the Roadside Cafe itself Phil Kloppers took out two shotguns or handmade shotguns. He handed over one to Etienne Visser and the other to Martin van der Schyff.

MS VAN DER WALT: Where did he acquire these shotguns?

MR MARTIN: Kloppers told me that he had received them from General Jaap Oelofse.

MS VAN DER WALT: You've also mentioned that on this particular evening it was said to you that the revolution would begin.

MR MARTIN: It would begin countrywide.

MS VAN DER WALT: Very well, proceed. You handed out equipment, what else was there?

MR MARTIN: The blue lights and reflector jackets. We went to set up the roadblock at the Ventersdorp/Pietersburg/Klerksdorp crossing. I don't remember who else was with me in the vehicle. The sentra was following.

We arrived and the crossroad and Phil Kloppers said to Kallie Meiring who was a security officer for the Krugersdorp Town Council, to set up the roadblock and make it appear as if it was a genuine roadblock. Phil Kloppers and myself would drive with the Mercedes in the direction of Ventersdorp in order to identify vehicles which we could pull over and those would be vehicles with black passengers. We did this in order to eliminate the possibility of pulling of SAP or Defence Force vehicles.

We would drive past the vehicle and if we could see black passengers inside the vehicle, we would drive back, pass them and the road had a slight hill and a turn, we would then have flashed our headlights and then Andrè Visser would have connected the blue light.

We managed to pull over a great many vehicles in this manner, I don't know exactly how many but I do remember that one vehicle wouldn't start again, upon which Phil Kloppers told them to set the vehicle on fire. It was our own people who set the vehicle on fire. We searched the vehicle, we asked the people certain questions.

MR MARTIN: Which questions did you ask?

MS VAN DER WALT: Questions such as: "Where do you come from, where are you going, to which political party do you belong"? Then we would search the vehicles and let the people go.

MS VAN DER WALT: Why did you question the people and then allow them to go? What was the purpose behind that?

MR MARTIN: Our objective was to target ANC/SACP members.

MS VAN DER WALT: Were you looking for the right or specific target?

MR MARTIN: Yes. It was conveyed to me that General Oelofse said that we should pull over ANC/SACP Alliance members.

MS VAN DER WALT: Did any incidents occur during the searching of vehicles and the questioning of the passengers?

MR MARTIN: Some of the people were unhappy because of the fact that AWB members pulled them over. Kloppers hit one of them with a baton and said: "Just go".

MS VAN DER WALT: Did you openly wear the AWB uniforms or did you attempt to disguise it?

MR MARTIN: No, we wore them openly with the symbols, camouflage gear and so forth.

MS VAN DER WALT: So if people had stopped there they would have been able to see that you were AWB members?

MR MARTIN: Yes, that's correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: You may proceed.

MR MARTIN: Phil Kloppers and I drove once again in the direction of Ventersdorp and we saw two vehicles approaching from the front, one was a Honda Ballade followed by a Toyota Cressida. We saw that there were black passengers in these vehicles. We turned around and drove past them and once again I gave the signal to those who were manning the roadblock, that would be the flashing of the headlights.

I pulled over off the road. The vehicles were approaching and approximately 250 metres away from us they pulled off the road suddenly after the blue lights had been activated. I could hear the door of the vehicle opening as well as the roof light of the Honda Ballade, I could see it going on and off.

I told the men to be careful because one couldn't be sure that people were dropped off or that they were planning an attack on us. The vehicle then proceeded very slowly and stopped at our roadblock. We ordered the passengers to climb out, they were searched and we told them to sit down on a small embankment on the side of the road while the vehicle was being searched.

Once again I posed the questions to the people, where they came from, where they were going, to which political party they belonged. Phil Kloppers walked on after them and if someone didn't want to answer he gave them a slight hit with the baton. Many of them or most of them answered that they were ANC members.

After that I called Etienne van Zyl and Jaco Badenhorst who were deployed to watch for vehicles. We decided that this would be the correct target to shoot at. We stood in a line, I fired the first shot, that would be the signal that the others should commence shooting.

Everyone except Kallie Meiring, Gert Diedericks and Andrè Visser fired at the people. Kallie Meiring couldn't fire because he was position in such a manner that he had to watch for those who would attempt to run away into the veld. If he had fired he would have been firing in our direction. The shooting occurred very quickly, it was a matter of seconds. And after that Kallie shouted that a vehicle was approaching. Some of the men jumped into the Sentra and then sped off in the direction of Randfontein. Kloppers still shouted after them to meet at the City Hall. It then came to light that a vehicle was not approaching and Gert Diedericks approached with a flashlight.

We held in over the people who were lying there very still, it appeared as if they were dead. Kloppers gave me the instruction to cut off the ear of a black man, which I did.

MS VAN DER WALT: Why did you have to do that?

MR MARTIN: It was according to the instruction of General Oelofse, he wanted a trophy. He wanted to show how things

...[inaudible] of myself Phil Kloppers and Etienne Visser handed over a small steak knife with a black handle and he said that I should cut off an ear for him one day if we were to encounter a corpse and that indicated to me that the war was very imminent.

It was not the same knife which I used to cut off ears, the knife which I used I won in a lottery in Durban with Nick Fourie who is now deceased. We picked up the shells on the scene, Etienne Visser was involved therewith. We managed to pick up all the shells so that we wouldn't leave any evidence behind.

We set the vehicles alight, once again to disguise any clues and from there we travelled back in the direction of Randfontein. We could hear the sirens so we knew that paramedics and ambulances were on the way. On the way back to Randfontein we dropped off Diedericks at my house where he fetched his vehicle and his children.

After that we went to the City Hall and we found that the other men weren't there. From there we went to Jaco Badenhorst's residence where we found the others. On the question, Phil Kloppers' question who shot everybody, he said affirmative and Phil Kloppers sent someone, I don't know who it was, to take the ear from the vehicle.

All of us left there and we didn't have an opportunity to get in contact with each other.

MS VAN DER WALT: And after that, did you speak to any of the members?

MR MARTIN: I spoke with General Oelofse, we visited him the next day and he congratulated us, myself and Phil Kloppers. He congratulated us with our activities the previous evening and he suggested that we shave off our moustaches and cut our hair short and I had to get rid of my Mercedes because the Mercedes was noted. I didn't want to do this because I believed that the revolution was at hand and I decided to keep the Mercedes because as I understood it war was at hand and it would - on the 16 December.

MS VAN DER WALT: You mention the 16th December, this revolution, this particular evening of the 12th, would it have started then?

MR MARTIN: That's how I understood it.

MS VAN DER WALT: And General Oelofse, did he mentioned anything, if in any other areas there were any incidents?

MR MARTIN: Negative. At that stage he didn't say anything. At a later stage he mentioned to me that the other areas were quiet and he was angry and the area commanders because they did not act on the instruction.

MS VAN DER WALT: Do you know of any bomb explosion during that time?

MR MARTIN: That's correct. There were explosions on the West Rand.

MS VAN DER WALT: Do you know if any persons were arrested for these explosions?

MR MARTIN: At later stage, I can't recall the precise date but it was close to the New Year, General Oelofse and some other members were arrested for these explosions.

MS VAN DER WALT: And the 16th of December of that year 1993, where were you then?

MR MARTIN: I was a the Voortrekker Monument.

MS VAN DER WALT: Why did you go there?

MR MARTIN: This was the day of commemoration day, the day of Covenant.

MS VAN DER WALT: And you as AWB members, did you meet there? MR MARTIN: That's correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: And what happened there?

MR MARTIN: General Oelofse came to our tent, he called us to his tent and he congratulated us again. He asked us to form a guard of honour for the leader Eugene Terreblanche and we did that. The Generals formed a line in front and we stood behind them and he congratulated us once again with the work that we had done.

MS VAN DER WALT: Why did you have to form a guard of honour, what was the reason fro that?

MR MARTIN: I believe it was because he felt that he was proud of us and to give us some recognition for the work that we had done.

MS VAN DER WALT: And on the 6th of January 1994 you were arrested?

MR MARTIN: That's correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: Did you make any statements to the police?

MR MARTIN: Yes, I was tortured and so I had to give a statement.

MS VAN DER WALT: How were you tortured?

MR MARTIN: Murder and Robbery and Crime Information Service took me into a bush close to Soweto and held me on the ground and they used a tube method, as they call it, and they tried to strangle me, I've got a mark on my nose and I made the statement as they wanted me to make the statement.

MS VAN DER WALT: And in your statement you mentioned what had happened there, is that correct?

MR MARTIN: Yes, I was protecting many.

MS VAN DER WALT: Why do you say you were protecting many? Who were you protecting?

MR MARTIN: At first I wanted to protect myself, I tried to protect General Japie Oelofse as well as my comrades.

MS VAN DER WALT: The statement of the applicant is in bundle one, page 154 to 159.

And in the statement you did not mention or you do not make any mention for any reason why you shot these people?

MR MARTIN: Negative, that was to protect.

MS VAN DER WALT: And during the Court proceedings, did you testify?

MR MARTIN: Yes.

MS VAN DER WALT: Did you tell the Court then what you are telling us now?

MR MARTIN: No, there I mentioned what the advocate at that time wanted me to tell and we lied in Court there.

MS VAN DER WALT: Why did you tell those lies then?

MR MARTIN: This was to try to protect myself to get off as well as the General's staff.

CHAIRPERSON: You were accused number 6?

MR MARTIN: I'm not sure.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that not so?

MS VAN DER WALT: Yes, the applicants were all together initially but then they divided the hearings and the first applicant and the present applicant, their hearings were held separate. The one case was concluded first.

CHAIRPERSON: Do we have a copy of the Judgement?

MS VAN DER WALT: Yes, we have a copy of the Judgement, I think it's in the second bundle. It seems to me as if we just have a Judgement of an Appeal of Kloppers and Martin. The Judgement of the hearing in the Supreme Court we do not have.

CHAIRPERSON: The copy that I have here is only in regard to the other persons and not in regard to him? ...[Transcriber's own translation]

MS VAN DER WALT: That is correct. It seems it's just a Judgement on Appeal.

You mention the General's staff, what does that mean, who is that?

MR MARTIN: One can say they are a panel who take decisions with regard to what would happen when and where.

MS VAN DER WALT: And Eugene Terreblanche, the leader of the AWB, what is he of this General's staff.

MR MARTIN: He's supposed to be the leader and his word would be law.

MS VAN DER WALT: While you were in prison, did you meet with Japie Oelofse, what was the situation?

MR MARTIN: Yes, we were in the same section, he for the explosions in West Pretoria. I can't remember how many times Japie Oelofse congratulated us, but just about everyday he would encourage us and tell us not to be concerned because we would receive amnesty, it was a political deed and he even promised us medals.

MS VAN DER WALT: And any of the General's other staff, did you meet them in prison?

MR MARTIN: After we were sentenced, this would have been 1995, we were at Diepkloof and Eugene Terreblanche the Commander and some other officers visited us.

MS VAN DER WALT: Yes, what happened there?

MR MARTIN: And during these visits Phil Kloppers told Eugene Terreblanche straight: "Listen I want to speak to the leader" in front of all these other people, we were all present there. He told Terreblanche there: "Listen, I did not act on my own, I had an instruction from Japie Oelofse and Japie Oelofse did not deny this", Eugene Terreblanche said he was aware of that.

MS VAN DER WALT: You mention on page 37, paragraph 28 in your application:

MR MARTIN: That's correct, that is what he said. This was after Phil Kloppers told him: "Listen here, we did not act on our own". There were many rumours that we acted on our own accord.

MS VAN DER WALT: When you spoke to him there, what do you think, was he aware of this instruction?

MR MARTIN: Definitely.

MS VAN DER WALT: This deed, did you do this for your own convenience or why did you do this?

MR MARTIN: The reason why we did it was to establish political resistance and not to let the general election continue. And the acts which would take place nationwide, and we were told that it would take place nationwide and we cause a revolution in this manner, we could install fear in the general public.

MS VAN DER WALT: Did you believe that when you acted, did you believe that similar deeds would occur nationwide?

MR MARTIN: That's what Kloppers told me and I believed him.

MS VAN DER WALT: The objectives of the AWB is set out in Annexure B under political objectives that you wished to reach and you've confirmed this?

MR MARTIN: Yes, I have.

MS VAN DER WALT: No further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Prinsloo?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR PRINSLOO: Mr Martin, if I understand your testimony, General Oelofse was the general commander, here he was the commander of the whole Witwatersrand, that included your area?

MR MARTIN: That's right.

MR PRINSLOO: Are you aware that the leader of the AWB, Mr Eugene Terreblanche on the 26th of November 1993, had a meeting in Port Elizabeth and he mentioned a few aspects about the coming election and this was broadcast on TV, on the 8 o'clock news of the 26th of November?

MR MARTIN: Mr Terreblanche delivered a speech at the hearing. I can't remember what the content of this speech was.

MR PRINSLOO: If he would have said that he would make sure that there would be no election even by using the barrel of a rifle?

MR MARTIN: No, he said this often.

MR PRINSLOO: You say that he said this often, was it your impression that Mr Terreblanche did not want this election to take place?

MR MARTIN: Definitely.

MR PRINSLOO: And according to you, if the election did proceed, would the ANC and it's alliance, the SACP, have gained the upperhand?

MR MARTIN: Definitely.

MR PRINSLOO: Was it acceptable for the AWB and other rightwing groups?

MR MARTIN: Negative.

MR PRINSLOO: These acts of yours on this particular evening while you were dressed in uniform, you say that there were people who were searched, they were stopped, they were aware that you were AWB members?

MR MARTIN: That's right.

MR PRINSLOO: Now according to you this message, after these persons were killed, would this have been carried over that this was the act of the AWB?

MR MARTIN: Yes, I believed that Japie Oelofse would have released a press statement.

MR PRINSLOO: Japie Oelofse?

MR MARTIN: That's correct.

MR PRINSLOO: That's the General you're speaking of?

MR MARTIN: Yes, it's General Japie Oelofse.

MR PRINSLOO: But in the acts themselves, the public who were stopped there on that same scene who knew that you were AWB members, did you believe or did you not believe it that it was the work of the AWB, the killing of these people?

MR MARTIN: Yes, they would have done so.

CHAIRPERSON: Only if they survived.

MR PRINSLOO: Chairperson, I refer to the people who were stopped beforehand who were not killed. This was before the other people were killed, that was the question. Thank you Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Maybe it's a convenient stage to adjourn until half past eleven.

DEON MARTIN: (s.u.o.)

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Knoetze?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR KNOETZE: Mr Martin, my client Mr van der Schyff says that he joined the AWB on the 15th of October 1993 and a while after he was introduced to you and to Commander Kloppers, can you confirm this?

MR MARTIN: I can't confirm the dates but I can confirm that at some stage we met.

MR KNOETZE: Can you confirm that he joined as a member of the AWB?

MR MARTIN: Definitely.

MR KNOETZE: And he mentions that he was asked by you and Kloppers if he was interested in becoming an officer and he indicated positively and he had to do and examination which he passed?

MR MARTIN: That's correct.

MR KNOETZE: And then a while after he was appointed as an Assistant Area Commander of Area 3?

MR MARTIN: That's correct.

MR KNOETZE: And as such he was under your command?

MR MARTIN: He would have been under the direct command of Commander Kloppers.

MR KNOETZE: Under whose command were you?

MR MARTIN: Phil Kloppers.

MR KNOETZE: And under whose command was he?

MR MARTIN: Under General Japie Oelofse.

MR KNOETZE: If you look at page 156, paragraph 4 of the statement, it mentions that:

MR MARTIN: That's correct.

MR KNOETZE: Is that how it worked?

MR MARTIN: Yes, that was the procedure.

MR KNOETZE: My client also states that he received training as a member of the AWB, can you confirm this?

MR MARTIN: Yes, he was there.

MR KNOETZE: Training was given by Carel Meiring who was the instructor there?

MR MARTIN: Carel Meiring was the training officer, so he would have given the training.

MR KNOETZE: Can you confirm that he underwent training?

MR MARTIN: Yes, he did.

MR KNOETZE: And as training and the camps were held in such a manner where for example strict military discipline and training was given with reference to handling of weapons?

MR MARTIN: That's correct.

MR KNOETZE: And it was also mentioned that the reason for this training was that the people would be able to take back the country?

MR MARTIN: That's correct, for war, yes.

MR KNOETZE: You used the word I did not want to place in your mouth but that was the point, preparation for war?

MR MARTIN: That's correct.

MR KNOETZE: My client also states that he participated in marches and he attended meetings and at some points he accompanied General Oelofse, he was an escort to Vereeniging? Can you confirm this?

MR MARTIN: Yes, that was part of our duties.

MR KNOETZE: Can you remember and if you can't remember you must tell me, was he specifically with?

MR MARTIN: Yes, he was with.

MR KNOETZE: What was your impression of him as a member of the AWB, how did you see him, as a person who - was he negligent, did not ...[no English translation]

MR MARTIN: Mr Chairperson, no I would not say that he was a negligent person, he was a good officer. If an instruction was given to him he complied, he was a good officers.

MR KNOETZE: That is what he will say, he will say he was complimented for his behaviour and he got the impression that his commanders, of which you were one, were satisfied.

MR MARTIN: That's correct.

MR KNOETZE: He would also say that on the evening when you met at Uncle Harry's Roadside Cafe you acted openly as AWB members, for example you saluted, you saluted Chief Commandant Kloppers, he saluted back to you, you called the other members to attention almost as if it were a military parade?

MR MARTIN: Yes, that's correct.

MR KNOETZE: Did these things happen in view of those who were present?

MR MARTIN: Yes.

MR KNOETZE: So you were dressed in full uniform, you had weapons and you did not intend to disguise it at all on that evening?

MR MARTIN: No, not at all.

MR KNOETZE: He would also say to the Commission that Chief Commandant Kloppers used the words: "Hard option" as one of the messages brought back from the order group.

MR MARTIN: Yes, that's correct.

MR KNOETZE: What did you understand under the concept: "hard options"?

MR MARTIN: Commandant Kloppers said that he had received instructions to execute hard options and when I asked what he meant by that he said that the General wanted to see corpses.

MR KNOETZE: Could you please speak up?

MR MARTIN: He said that the General wanted to see corpses and those were the "hard options" to which he was referring.

MR KNOETZE: Therefore, not only you but the other members also in attendance, such as Mr van der Schyff were aware of exactly what that meant?

MR MARTIN: Yes.

MR KNOETZE: What was the exact purpose behind the operation, why was it necessary to see corpses?

MR MARTIN: Phil Kloppers told us that the revolution would have broken out countrywide on that night.

MR KNOETZE: Did you believe that?

MR MARTIN: Yes, because he had come from an order group meeting and the highest rank in attendance there was General Oelofse and he said that this instruction came from the Generals and staff, that the revolution would break out on that night.

MR KNOETZE: Did it come to you as a surprise that they said that the revolution would break out on that evening? I don't mean it in the sense that it would break tonight but that a revolution in itself would be breaking out?

MR MARTIN: No, because we had been preparing for a long time for the revolution.

MR KNOETZE: Which type of instructions did you receive before which had to be undertaken in preparation for the revolution?

MR MARTIN: For example stockpiling of food, generators and such because it was said to us that the country would find itself in darkness.

MR KNOETZE: And what about weapons?

MR MARTIN: It was said that if we didn't enough weapons we would have to go and steal weapons, that came from the General's own mouth.

MR KNOETZE: That is what I was hoping you would say because those were my instructions. Mr van der Schyff said that it was said that you didn't have enough weapons you'd have to go and steal them.

MR MARTIN: That's correct.

MR KNOETZE: And that was an official order from the AWB's command structure?

MR MARTIN: Yes.

MR KNOETZE: A hard option meant that you had to see corpses, why did there have to be corpses on that evening? I understand that you say the revolution had to be initiated but what other objectives were there?

MR MARTIN: I believe that the AWB had acted nationally as they had said to us and if the general public had seen that a revolution was imminent, they would have put the elections to a stop and we would have been able to establish our own Boerestaat for our Boerevolk.

MR KNOETZE: You said that the elections would have been stopped, so therefore one of the objectives was to prevent the elections?

MR MARTIN: That's right.

MR KNOETZE: So therefore I understand you correctly that the objective was to create chaos in the country to stop the elections from happening?

MR MARTIN: That's correct.

MR KNOETZE: You were also looking specifically for illegal firearms which might be in the possession of those who would be apprehended by the roadblock?

MR MARTIN: Yes, that was also part of the operation, to look for firearms and ammunition.

MR KNOETZE: And he said that it was said to them that at all costs it should be prevented that those arms be used against innocent whites by the people carrying them or otherwise that you yourselves should use them during the revolution.

MR MARTIN: Correct.

MR KNOETZE: Were there vehicles which were apprehended before the Cressida and the Ballade which were stopped and searched and of which the passengers were questioned? You've answered yes.

MR MARTIN: That's correct.

MR KNOETZE: Why were those people let go?

MR MARTIN: Various vehicles were stopped, I can't exactly remember how many and the questions were: "To which political party do you belong"? and not one of them stated that they belonged to the ANC. Our targets were people who belonged to the ANC/SACP Alliance, for example one vehicle that we stopped stated that they belonged to Inkatha and we let them go. Our target was the ANC/SACP Alliance members.

MR KNOETZE: So that would answer my next question. Why did you decide to make targets out of those in the Cressida and the Ballade, was that because they were members of the ANC/SACP Alliance?

MR MARTIN: Upon my question they confirmed that they were members of the ANC/SACP Alliance.

MR KNOETZE: Who then decided that that specific group of people would be the target for the evening?

MR MARTIN: Kloppers and I discussed the issue and called everyone together and after we had formed the group, we formed the lineage and we fired at them.

MR KNOETZE: Are you sure of that fact? Was every applicant physically present or was it simply a core group?

MR MARTIN: I would rather say that it was a core group of the members, I can't say exactly who were physically present.

MR KNOETZE: Because my client, Mr van der Schyff says that another applicant came to him and told him to prepare because they would be shooting.

MR MARTIN: I cannot answer that.

MR KNOETZE: You have already testified that you fired a shot and that that shot was meant as a signal or an order to commence with the rest of the actions.

MR MARTIN: That's correct.

CHAIRPERSON: There are two question which were asked of you, was it an order to the others to commence the firing?

MR MARTIN: Yes, I would have fired the first shot and then it would have indicated to the others to commence with the shooting.

MR KNOETZE: You would have fired the shot and that shot would have served as an order to others to commence with the shooting?

MR MARTIN: That's correct.

MR KNOETZE: Thank you Mr Chairman, I have no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Brink?

MR BRINK: Thank you Mr Chairman.

Mr Martin, I'm going to put my questions in English for the benefit of those I represent but please answer in Afrikaans. You are relying on orders which you were told had come from General Oelofse?

MR MARTIN: I didn't hear that question.

MR BRINK: No, you answer in Afrikaans please.

MR BRINK: You are relying on orders which Kloppers told you came from General Oelofse? You tell the Committee that you were relying on order which Mr Kloppers had told you had come from General Oelofse, correct?

MR MARTIN: That's correct.

MR BRINK: What would your attitude be if General Oelofse were to tell the Committee that he never gave such orders?

MR MARTIN: I carried out the orders given by General Kloppers who was my supreme commander at that point.

MR BRINK: But you'd had a few drinks, all of you had a few drinks, can you tell me what you drank, where you drank it and how much you drank?

MR MARTIN: I've stated that I had one drink and that's all.

MR BRINK: What was the nature of that drink?

MR MARTIN: I think it was whisky.

MR BRINK: Did you have it neat or with water or soda?

MR MARTIN: With water.

MR BRINK: Do you remember what the others had?

MR MARTIN: It was the same, it was one bottle.

MR BRINK: Was there brandy involved as well?

MR MARTIN: Not as far as I can recall.

MR BRINK: Were you at any stage under the influence of liquor?

MR MARTIN: No.

MR BRINK: And to your knowledge, were any of your colleagues under the influence of liquor?

MR MARTIN: No.

MR BRINK: I want to pass onto another matter. You were told that the revolution would start countrywide, that is as I understand it a revolution which in the main would involved members of the AWB?

MR MARTIN: Yes.

MR BRINK: And that this revolution would be countrywide?

MR MARTIN: That's correct, those were the orders.

MR BRINK: Now we know that the AWB were fairly strong in the, what was then the Transvaal, Western Transvaal and so on, can you possibly tell the Committee how strong the AWB was in let's say, Natal?

MR MARTIN: No, I think those answers could only be provided by Eugene Terreblanche.

MR BRINK: Not very many people.

MR MARTIN: I don't know.

MR BRINK: Can you indicate how strong the AWB was in the Eastern Cape?

MR MARTIN: No, that's completely external to our area.

MR BRINK: Insofar as your knowledge of the Western Cape goes?

MR MARTIN: Right across the country.

MR BRINK: You're only aware of the strength of the AWB in your Province, am I right?

MR MARTIN: According to computer print-outs which we had, Randfontein was about 1 400.

MR BRINK: But the AWB was strongest in the Transvaal?

MR MARTIN: I believe so.

MR BRINK: And you can't comment on how strong it was in other Provinces?

MR MARTIN: No.

MR BRINK: Because I want to suggest that the AWB didn't have a very strong following in any of the other Provinces apart from the old Transvaal.

MR MARTIN: I attended a year-end function of South Natal and the level of strength was quite high there.

MR BRINK: Do you know how many more or less?

MR MARTIN: The hall was packed with 150 to 200 people.

MR BRINK: 150 to 200 people?

MR MARTIN: Yes.

MR BRINK: Now, would you agree with me that an ordinary roadblock - and you were a policeman as I understand it, that an ordinary roadblock is set up to detect drunken diving, the detection of stolen property, stolen vehicles and that sort of thing?

MR MARTIN: That's correct but that was not our instruction on that evening.

MR BRINK: No, I understand what you're saying but you agree that that's the purpose of an ordinary roadblock?

MR MARTIN: Yes.

MR BRINK: Have you been in a police roadblock before, in the sense of taking part in the block?

MR MARTIN: No.

MR BRINK: I think you'd agree with me that it would be most unusual for members of a roadblock to make enquiries as to people's political affiliations?

MR MARTIN: Whether it came from out side or the police's side?

MR BRINK: The police side. The conventional roadblock, one wouldn't expect members of the roadblock to enquire of people that they're questioning, they wouldn't enquire as to their political affiliation.

MR MARTIN: I myself was never involved in a roadblock but I think that that would have been extraordinary.

MR BRINK: When you on your evidence, started to question inhabitants of these two, or occupants rather of these two vehicles, you said they told you they were supporters or members of the ANC.

MR MARTIN: No, the answer was that most of them said that they were members of the ANC.

MR BRINK: Wouldn't these people, these occupants of the motor cars, have been terrified when they were told to get out after being hit about, being told to get out, asked their political affiliation, surely they would kept silence and said: "We're not members of any political organisation". I find that incredible Mr Martin, that people, terrified people would admit to you that they were members of the ANC.

MR MARTIN: They did do so.

MR BRINK: Very well. There was a child involved?

MR MARTIN: Yes, I later heard that there was a child involved.

MR BRINK: Do you know who shot that child?

MR MARTIN: Unfortunately not, we stood in the line, I don't know what the child's position ...[intervention]

MR BRINK: So it was just a random massacre of innocent people?

MR MARTIN: No, the shooting incident involved shooting ANC members as per our instructions from General Oelofse.

MR BRINK: Yes, but a child was killed and that child couldn't have been a menace to society as far as you're concerned surely, it was a child?

MR MARTIN: Well, we see this on a daily basis on TV, how 9 year olds run around with guns. The child must have got in the way, I can't answer.

MR BRINK: Was the child not on the wall with the other people?

MR MARTIN: No.

MR BRINK: Was this just random shooting or was it an execution style killing?

MR MARTIN: No, our objective was to kill everybody.

MR BRINK: Whether they were women or children?

MR MARTIN: That's correct. As Eugene Terreblanche said to us that if they can carry a gun we would shoot them.

MR BRINK: Now you know of course that money was stolen in this incident?

MR MARTIN: No.

MR BRINK: You don't that?

MR MARTIN: No, I don't know of any money that was taken.

MR BRINK: Did you not hear about that?

MR MARTIN: During the trial a witness said that money was taken from him. There were two witnesses but I don't know about any money that was taken.

MR BRINK: And tape cassettes and tape recorders and that sort of thing, you knew nothing about that?

MR MARTIN: I later came to hear of it, after the incident when we had been arrested.

MR BRINK: And clothing stolen, do you know anything about that?

MR MARTIN: I didn't steal any clothes.

MR BRINK: No, I don't know whether you did but surely you must have knowledge? You must have discussed afterwards, R100 here and tape cassettes and clothing and - surely?

MR MARTIN: No. I heard about it for the first time in prison.

MR BRINK: Who discussed that with you?

MR MARTIN: The co-accused.

MR BRINK: Can you name then?

MR MARTIN: No, unfortunately I'm not quite certain. Kallie Meiring had the equipment, Matthews had the cassettes and about the leather jacket and the money I can't give you an answer.

MR BRINK: You see, I'm going to suggest to you and argue before the Committee that this was a mindless brutal racist murder without any genuine political objective.

MR MARTIN: I don't agree. Our objective on that evening was to go out and create chaos. This would have occurred on a nationwide basis and the objective was to secure the Boerestaat for the Boerevolk.

MR MARTIN: Did you ever think to make enquiries from Mr Kloppers whether any other Generals in the organisation or indeed the leader, Mr Eugene Terreblanche had given orders in this regard to Oelofse?

MR MARTIN: Terreblanche visited us in Diepkloof and he said that if everybody had acted countrywide as we had acted on that night, we wouldn't be sitting in jail on that day.

MR BRINK: But of course that would have been nonsense Mr Martin surely, because we know that even if you take Southern Natal, not the whole of Natal, Southern Natal with 150 or 200 people, surely that sort of number of people couldn't ...[indistinct] revolution?

MR MARTIN: I believe that if you act in small groups in various towns it might very well happen.

MR MALAN: Mr Martin, the first question from Mr Brink was whether you ever asked Phil Kloppers whether or why the other leaders had not acted and your answer to that was that Terreblanche had said to you in Diepkloof, that if everybody in the country had acted that way you wouldn't be in prison, is that correct, is that your answer?

MR MARTIN: No, then I would like to rectify that. I heard from General Oelofse myself that he was angry at his other commanders for not acting in a similar fashion. Phil Kloppers and I visited Oelofse together when we asked the question what had happened, that nothing else had happened.

MR BRINK: Thank you Mr Malan.

MR MALAN: Can you tell us when Mr Kloppers asked this question?

MR MARTIN: I beg your pardon?

MR MALAN: Can you tell us when you and Mr Kloppers asked General Oelofse this question?

MR MARTIN: It was in the afternoon at approximately 3 to 4 o'clock.

MR MALAN: Thank you.

MR BRINK: You see, you held a fairly senior position in the AWB at that time, is that correct?

MR MARTIN: That's correct.

MR BRINK: You must have been very concerned about the orders which Kloppers was giving you?

MR MARTIN: No, I believed that Mr Kloppers received the orders from the Generals and staff and that we would initiate the revolution.

MR BRINK: And you made no further enquiry?

MR MARTIN: No, because we went out ourselves on that evening and it was decided as per instructions of the Generals and staff that the revolution would begin. We departed and went out and did the necessary.

MR BRINK: Thank you.

ADV BOSMAN: You said Mr Martin, that you had suggested that the squatter camps be searched, what did you have in mind?

MR MARTIN: We had to identify squatter camps and kill people there.

ADV BOSMAN: So therefore by searching you meant to identify people?

MR MARTIN: Yes, that's correct.

ADV BOSMAN: ...[inaudible] mention amongst yourselves that there was a child in the group?

MR MARTIN: No.

ADV BOSMAN: Were you at that point aware of the child?

MR MARTIN: No, I was not aware of the child.

ADV BOSMAN: Did you notice any women?

MR MARTIN: I heard subsequently that there had been women and two other little ones which I had not noticed. I must mention that it was very dark that night.

ADV BOSMAN: Would it have been a factor of consideration to you had seen women and children?

MR MARTIN: Well seeing as the revolution had broken out, it wouldn't have been a factor.

ADV BOSMAN: Just one further question. You've said that you also had to search for illegal weapons and ammunition with a dual purpose, firstly to use the weapons and secondly to destroy these people. Regarding this first objective, why did you not take that a little bit further?

MR MARTIN: The AWB did not have weapons and ammunition ...[intervention]

ADV BOSMAN: One moment, I think you're misunderstanding my question. You've said that you had a dual purpose in setting up the roadblock, firstly you had to search for weapons and ammunition - I understand that you wanted to use those items, but my question is, why didn't you continue the roadblock further in order to get more weapons and ammunition, why did you decide on this specific group?

MR MARTIN: We pulled over a number of vehicles but this specific group were members of the ANC and therefore complied with our specifications for a target as per our instructions.

ADV BOSMAN: But the point was that they didn't have any arms and ammunition with them.

MR MARTIN: That's correct.

ADV BOSMAN: So what happened to the first part of the purpose?

MR MARTIN: We tried to achieve the first part of our objective and we couldn't and that is why we went over to the second part.

ADV BOSMAN: Can you perhaps indicate how long it took from when you began pulling over vehicles until the shooting?

MR MARTIN: I would have to estimate, it would be about an hour and a half to two hours.

ADV BOSMAN: Thank you Chairperson.

ADV SIGODI: I'll put my questions to you in English. You mentioned that after this whole massacre you went back to collect the shells in order to destroy whatever evidence there was, why was it necessary for you to destroy the evidence?

MR MARTIN: We did not want to draw attention to a specific group, it was just a handful of us and that is why I believe it was necessary to destroy evidence.

ADV SIGODI: If it was a political instruction, I mean it was common in those days, if a particular political group did something it would account for it and say: "We were responsible for that", why was it necessary for you to hide this as if it was just an ordinary crime and not a political activity? Why wasn't the AWB interested in making it publicly known that this was an AWB action?

MR MARTIN: My perception was that General Japie Oelofse would contact the media the following morning and tell them that the AWB was involved and would say that the AWB was involved in this area.

ADV SIGODI: But then why was it necessary for you to want to destroy the evidence, the taking of the shells and the burning of the motor vehicle?

MR MARTIN: So the finger could not be pointed the commando, that was our objective. They had to know that the AWB was involved but not us as a group.

ADV SIGODI: Did the AWB take responsibility for that massacre?

MR MARTIN: Afterwards, after we were sent to prison and Eugene Terreblanche told us that we were freedom fighters, "we see you as freedom fighters", and that is the time when hey took responsibility for the act.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Martin, you've just mentioned - let me put it this way, the previous evening you removed all the shells but now you mention that the AWB the following day would take responsibility for the act, I cannot reconcile the two.

MR MARTIN: The AWB as a whole would accept responsibility for this.

CHAIRPERSON: But then the police would come to you and say you accept responsibility, you know who did this?

MR MARTIN: Yes, but that was a long time afterwards that the police came to us.

CHAIRPERSON: That is my problem, you attempt to erase evidence and then a few days afterwards the AWB accepts responsibility for the act and then the police came to the AWB and told them: "You accept responsibility, so you know who did it"?

MR MARTIN: The AWB in that time did not take responsibility, it was much later.

CHAIRPERSON: I thought, upon a question from my colleague that you mentioned that you would have expected that the AWB openly accepted responsibility for the act.

MR MARTIN: Yes, I expected that but it never happened.

CHAIRPERSON: How do you expect this and on the other hand you do everything in your power to prevent that the police and the people of South Africa know who did this?

MR MARTIN: The press release would have been released and it would say that it was the AWB that was responsible, the political crime.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MR MALAN: Mr Martin, let me kick off at the same point. You are sitting in a bath and you have pain, your wife tells you there is a call and you give an instruction that she call the men and you go out to Uncle Harry's, you pick up some people along the way, you drive back to another house to collect vehicles, you go to your own house, you have a drink, you drive out and you discuss with Mr Phil Kloppers the possibility of targets, you suggest a squatter camp and on your way home it was told to you - according your evidence, that your instruction was to set up a roadblock.

MR MARTIN: That's correct.

MR MALAN: You were already in the car when you asked this question on your way home?

MR MARTIN: Yes, that's right.

MR MALAN: Why did you go back home?

MR MARTIN: The place where we met again was outside of the town.

MR MALAN: Would you try to explain it to me because the first meeting place was Harry's Roadside Cafe, you were all together, you all drive from there to a second place, Mr Diedericks or Mr Badenhorst's house and there you meet again?

MR MARTIN: That's correct.

MR MALAN: All of you?

MR MARTIN: That's correct.

MR MALAN: You did not discuss the target?

MR MARTIN: Not yet.

MR MALAN: All of you leave from there to your house.

MR MARTIN: First to Andrè Visser's house and then to my house.

MR MALAN: Why every time do you go to another place and as yet you still have no instruction or a target, can you explain that to us?

MR MARTIN: We went to Mr Visser's house to have a drink.

MR MALAN: You are commanded and you were that the revolution would start, that you know already at Harry's Roadside Cafe but first you go and have a drink?

MR MARTIN: That's correct.

MR MALAN: And you move to four different points before you go into action.

MR MARTIN: It's three separate places, Badenhorst's house, Visser's house and ...[intervention]

MR MALAN: Harry's Roadside Cafe was the first place you moved to?

MR MARTIN: Yes, but that's a meeting place, it's a general meeting place. ...[Transcriber's own translation]

MR MALAN: But you are already all there, then you move to three other points.

MR MARTIN: Yes.

MR MALAN: Did you at any stage discuss any of the action or the nature of the revolution.

MR MARTIN: What we discussed, at the meeting place we did not discuss anything like that but it was when we were driving from Andrè Visser's house, it was a patrol through the area to ensure that it was safe and then we went to my place and this is where Phil Kloppers told me that need to set up a roadblock.

MR MALAN: And you were already on your way home when he made this suggestion?

MR MARTIN: That's correct.

MR MALAN: It was not decided on before the time?

MR MARTIN: No, I made the suggestion to attack or to search a squatter camp and then he said: "The instruction was to set up a roadblock".

MR MALAN: He mentions this the first time when you were in the car with him on your way to your house?

MR MARTIN: That's correct.

MR MALAN: Never before was anybody told of this instruction in spite of the fact that at three different places you met?

MR MARTIN: I don't know if he told anybody else but that was the first time he told me, on my way home from Visser's home.

MR MALAN: At the other points Mr Martin, were all of you not present there at the same time?

MR MARTIN: Yes, we were all present but one had to change the number plates.

MR MALAN: Now in these loose meeting before you acted, and you tell us with great conviction that you were under the impression that General Oelofse would release a press statement the following day, why do you say this?

MR MARTIN: The fact that the revolution would start nationwide and the AWB was involved with these actions, that is why I accepted that he would release this statement.

MR MALAN: If it was a nationwide act, why would General Oelofse release the statement, why not Eugene Terreblanche?

MR MARTIN: I just assumed it was General Oelofse.

MR MALAN: Did you expect a nationwide action or did you expect that he was going to release a press statement to take responsibility for the act?

MR MARTIN: I believed it was going to be a nationwide action because we had prepared and we warned and we were told to prepare for this.

MR MALAN: Mr Martin, you said that you were in the South African Police Service from '81 to '85.

MR MARTIN: That's correct.

MR MALAN: Your advocate asked you what was your tasks there and you said:

Which division of the police were you involved with?

MR MARTIN: At the Detective Branch, I was at Koevoet and that's where I ended my service.

MR MALAN: And the Detective Branch, were the operations also against the SACP/ANC Alliance?

MR MARTIN: When we received information yes.

MR MALAN: Were you only used in political matters? What was the other nature of your function in the Police Service?

MR MARTIN: Investigation of crime.

MR MALAN: You've mentioned secret meetings at the Embassy Hotel where you say you don't know who was present but then you say at a later stage:

MR MARTIN: That is what I heard.

MR MALAN: Where did you hear this from?

MR MARTIN: From Phil Kloppers. They were the escort for the General to the secret place.

MR MALAN: When your wife gave the instruction to call these people on the list, did you say how many people to call?

MR MARTIN: She said - no, I just told her just call most of them.

MR MALAN: How many names were on that list?

MR MARTIN: I cannot remember, this was four years ago, it was quite some time ago.

MR MALAN: Mr Martin, approximately 10 names, 100 names, 1 400 names? You were referring to Randfontein, how many names on that list?

MR MARTIN: The list just consisted of the names of officers, approximately about 60 if I recall correctly.

MR MALAN: You did not tell your wife how many of them to call?

MR MARTIN: I told het to just call some of them as the instruction was.

MR MALAN: The issue of the stopping of this roadblock, when my colleague next to me put a question to you you said it was pitch dark, you couldn't see whether there were any women or children.

MR MARTIN: I did not see, I myself personally did not.

MR MALAN: But you did the questioning.

MR MARTIN: Yes, I was standing here in the middle and then I just asked a general question and then they just answered from the side.

MR MALAN: Did you ask them one by one?

MR MARTIN: Yes, basically, I cannot remember that we questioned any women and children otherwise I would have remembered it.

MR MALAN: You asked them one by one and if you say basically, what do you mean? Did you ask all of them or did you not ask all of them?

MR MARTIN: I cannot remember. I cannot recall whether we asked all of them but I believe we did but I cannot be sure.

MR MALAN: But you say most of them said they were ANC supporters, how do you know this was the majority?

MR MARTIN: We can deduce this from the answers that were given to us.

MR MALAN: Do you know how many people there were?

MR MARTIN: I think there was about 10, yes.

MR MALAN: The pattern as you stopped these vehicles at the roadblock, can you describe this? How did you handle this? You stopped the vehicle, you walked to the driver?

MR MARTIN: That's correct.

MR MALAN: And you asked the driver: "Where do you come from"?

MR MARTIN: No, we got them out of the vehicle and then asked them: "Where do you come from"? and then we searched the vehicle.

MR MALAN: This signal which you gave, where did you agree upon this signal.

MR MARTIN: We formed a group when myself and Phil Kloppers decided this was the target, we formed a line and I gave them the signal.

MR MALAN: How did the others know this was the signal?

MR MARTIN: We told them, if I fire the weapon they should also fire.

MR MALAN: They did not know beforehand that they would shoot?

MR MARTIN: They knew already that Uncle Harry's that we were going to shoot.

MR MALAN: This issue of the cutting off of the ear of one of the persons, you were asked before and you said that this was on instruction from Phil Kloppers.

MR MARTIN: Correct.

MR MALAN: And it was asked what the purpose was of this instruction and you said he wanted to show the other areas how to go about the task. Did General Oelofse tell you this or Phil Kloppers?

MR MARTIN: General Oelofse said ...[intervention]

MR MALAN: No, no, I'm talking about this incident, the instruction to cut off the ear, did it come from Phil Kloppers?

MR MARTIN: That's correct.

MR MALAN: Then my question would be, did he - then there was asked of you: "Why"? and you said you wanted to show the other areas how to go about this task.

MR MARTIN: The ear would have been handed to General Oelofse, that is probably what I incorrectly - the ear was handed over to General Oelofse. ...[Transcriber's own translation]

MR MALAN: I just want to understand the instruction at that stage, that is what I'm trying to understand.

MR MARTIN: He told me the ear was intended for General Oelofse to show the other areas how things are done.

MR MALAN: In other words he wanted to go and brag by General Oelofse?

MR MARTIN: It would have been a trophy from Mr Kloppers to General Oelofse.

MR MARTIN: I cannot answer on that.

MR MALAN: Why can you not answer on that?

MR MARTIN: I can't.

MR MALAN: But why can't you, you can answer from a distance about this trophy but you cannot answer on the issue of the trophy with Mr Kloppers?

MR MARTIN: I know that on a previous occasion General Oelofse asked me that he wanted and ear so I knew that he wanted one as a trophy. ...[Transcriber's own translation]

MR MARTIN: And you've also said that you used the knife or you received a knife from Oelofse but you said this wasn't the knife that you used, you said the knife that you used you won at a lottery.

MR MARTIN: Correct.

MR MALAN: Why do you say from General Nick Fourie?

MR MARTIN: It was South Natal, I was there for a year-end function and that is where I got it.

MR MALAN: So Nick Fourie did not give you this knife, you won it at a lottery?

MR MARTIN: But he gave it to me.

MR MALAN: Oh, he handed it over as the prize for the lottery?

MR MARTIN: Correct.

MR MALAN: And you say that Mr Oelofse at a previous stage said if you come across a body, cut the ear off, now how do you find a body that you can cut the ear off?

MR MARTIN: I saw that war was close, it was at hand and the revolution would start soon ...[intervention]

MR MALAN: So he wanted an ear as a trophy, he didn't want you to kill people?

MR MARTIN: No, he said if we find a body and I saw this as when we were at war.

MR MALAN: And this ear, what did you do with the ear at the scene, how did you handle this? Who cut the ear off?

MR MARTIN: I cut it off, it didn't bleed profusely. I took him to the Mercedes and I put him there and I cut his ear off.

MR MALAN: And the plastic bag?

MR MARTIN: I gave it to Phil Kloppers.

MR MALAN: What did he do with it?

MR MARTIN: He took it out at Jaco Badenhorst's house and he showed it to them.

MR MALAN: Was this immediately after this incident?

MR MARTIN: Yes.

MR MALAN: The same night?

MR MARTIN: Yes, the same night.

MR MALAN: What time did this incident occur?

MR MARTIN: If I have to guess it was about 12 o'clock.

MR MALAN: The statement you refer to, that you gave to the police, on page 152, page 153 of the bundle. Will you help me please, page 155, 154/55 of the bundle. You said that the statement is correct, you confirmed it?

MR MARTIN: Yes.

MR MALAN: What is incorrect in there?

MR MARTIN: I don't have the statement in front of me but there are many things that I omitted.

MR MALAN: Mention something. If you can remember so much then you will be able to say what was not correct in the statement.

MR MARTIN: At no stage did I mention that we received instruction to shoot, that there had to be bodies and that the revolution would start that evening.

MR MALAN: The shortcoming in the statement, it's not a falsehood, are there faults here? Did you say things that were not as such?

MR MARTIN: If I had the statement in front of me but I don't have it ...[intervention]

MR MALAN: But you answered on your advocate's question, that in the statement you tried to protect yourself and your comrades, now point out where in the statement do you protect yourself and your comrades. Let's start with you, where did you protect yourself?

MR MARTIN: At no stage did I mention that I shot people that evening, I mentioned that I heard shots.

MR MALAN: Yes?

MR MARTIN: I mentioned that everybody was armed and that was false, everybody was not armed, Diedericks was not armed. And I also mentioned that the purpose of the roadblock - this in paragraph 7:

that was not the instruction.

MR MALAN: Just on that point, the statement you made, the protection, was this more just to say that it was a criminal act?

MR MARTIN: No, I think it was better than murder.

MR MALAN: And you've also said that you met Japie Oelofse in prison, I believe this was early in '95 and he congratulated you there once more and just about every day and he told you that you would receive amnesty?

MR MARTIN: That's correct.

MR MALAN: And at that stage there was no legislation on amnesty, why did you talk about it then?

MR MARTIN: I cannot answer this. He told us that we'd receive amnesty but I don't know why he that we would.

MR MALAN: Let me ask you a general question. I can understand that you were under instruction from Commandant Kloppers and that you took your instructions from him. If there was a disciplinary structure as you would tell us there was definitely one, then I can understand that you would expect in this process that those who are under you would comply with the orders. What's difficult for me to understand is why you want to involve General Oelofse according to Mr Kloppers' testimony, are you trying to protect Mr Kloppers at all?

MR MARTIN: What I am saying are facts, General Oelofse did this what he did. I do not have to protect Phil Kloppers.

MR MALAN: Most of your testimony with regard to General Oelofse is based on information that Kloppers gave to you. Most of it is firsthand witness. I refer to the incident.

MR MARTIN: The incident which was issued said that we would go from Kloppers' residence, I did not doubt his orders for one moment.

MR MALAN: That's what I said to you in the beginning. I accept the fact that you accepted his orders and that you did not question his testimony therefore, if he had said to you that General Oelofse said so, you would not have questioned it?

MR MARTIN: That's correct.

MR MALAN: But with regard to this incident, you had no first hand knowledge regarding General Oelofse's involvement?

MR MARTIN: Except that which General Oelofse himself had said to us, that he was angry with the other areas who had not acted.

MR MALAN: That is after the fact?

MR MARTIN: Yes, it was afterwards.

MR MALAN: Thank you very much Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: I haven't forgotten about you Miss van der Walt, I just thought it would be more convenient if you were to re-examine after members of the Committee would have put questions so that you come right at the end.

MS VAN DER WALT: I accept that.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Martin, it could very well appear that an impression may be created that you people were drunk that evening and then decided to go and put up a roadblock to assault, harass and intimidate black people.

MR MARTIN: That's not true.

CHAIRPERSON: Did the AWB ever adopt as it's policy, that violence be used and in particular that people be killed?

MR MARTIN: That's correct Chairperson, I would like to refer you to phase 1. This was training material which we gave to people who were undergoing training. It was compiled by General J L Oelofse. All the officers below us completed these exams.

MS VAN DER WALT: Might I just tell the Committee that I wanted to submit it, we can submit it right now. I have made copies and I also have the original copy with me.

CHAIRPERSON: Read to us what you consider relevant to my question.

MR MARTIN: Chairperson, on page 12 under the heading:

I'm referring to 3(c):

CHAIRPERSON: Well I don't understand this to the extent that - I'm sure that I understand you, but to the extent that I understand this particular portion, it's looking into the future.

MR MARTIN: Chairperson, it had then already been decided by the Generals and staff that night would be the outbreak of the revolution and I believe that this is part of the revolution. If we look at terror, strikes, revolts, sabotage and soforth ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: What is the meaning of:

MR MARTIN: I cannot answer that because it did not happen that certain circumstances contributed to that.

CHAIRPERSON: The heading thereof says:

Did you ever attend a meeting of the AWB where they said: "Well, we've been planning for the war and the like, we now hereby adopt the resolution in terms of which the was must now start"?

MR MARTIN: No, I never attended such a meeting apart from meetings which were held by General Oelofse in which he stated that war was imminent, that it would break out at any moment.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you not think that for an organisation like the AWB to resort to that kind of thing, it would have needed shift of policy?

MR MARTIN: No, I did not see it as such. The only place where I was where war was continuously discussed was with General Oelofse and it basically involved that we should prepare ourselves, prepare our people, store food and soforth. That is what he told us, nothing further.

CHAIRPERSON: Well the fact that besides a bunch of you who were there that evening, no other members of the AWB resorted to doing that sort of thing that night, doesn't that show you that that was not a decision of the AWB?

MR MARTIN: I don't know. Afterwards Eugene Terreblanche stated that if all of us acted that way on that evening we wouldn't be in prison. He admitted it to us, especially to Kloppers, that if everyone had acted the way that we had acted, we wouldn't be in prison.

CHAIRPERSON: Be careful with what you're saying Mr Martin. The words, you are just adding the words: "soos hulle moes", that is not what you told us Mr Terreblanche told you. He did not, according to your evidence, he did not add the words: "soos julle moes". Because if you are using those words you are really saying a lot more than what you are telling us.

MR MARTIN: I will read from my affidavit:

CHAIRPERSON: Well, you didn't mention that to us earlier on but nevertheless, let's leave that aspect. As I read the criminal record in respect of some of your colleagues, on your way to the roadblock you came across two black people, do you remember?

MR MARTIN: Yes, that's correct.

CHAIRPERSON: They were assaulted?

MR MARTIN: I heard that they had been assaulted, that's correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you not see that?

MR MARTIN: No, I did not see it.

CHAIRPERSON: Who told you that?

MR MARTIN: The vehicle stopped a little way ahead and we were waiting for the people.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you consider that also as part of the revolution?

MR MARTIN: No, Phil Kloppers told the men that this was not what we had been commandeered for.

CHAIRPERSON: Now what do you mean: "revolution was on"?

MR MARTIN: Chairperson, I would say it would be to establish a political revolt and in so doing prevent the government of the time from conducting elections during which the government would be handed over to a black majority. By bringing about a revolution fear would be driven into the hearts of the people and that would prevent them from participating in the elections.

CHAIRPERSON: Revolution against who?

MR MARTIN: That would be the government of the time as well as the ANC/SACP Alliance.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you regard the roadblock and the killing of a few people there as a revolution against the government?

MR MARTIN: I believe that if there had been groups such as our committing this kind of an act on a nationwide scale, it would have caused large scale chaos. We were not the only ones who were acting.

CHAIRPERSON: Why did you not remain there at the scene and continue to kill as many black people as possible and create chaos?

MR MARTIN: As I have stated, we held a torch over the people and it appeared as if they were all dead.

CHAIRPERSON: But that's what you went there for, to do and kill isn't it? What was surprising about that? Wasn't that the precise purpose?

MR MARTIN: Everybody appeared to be dead to me and I didn't know what else to do on the scene. They were all lying very still and it appeared as if they were all dead.

CHAIRPERSON: You regarded that as part of the revolution?

MR MARTIN: That's correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Now why did you not continue the revolution and kill as many as possible if you regarded what you did as part of the revolution?

MR MARTIN: Chairperson, the following day at Japie Oelofse's we decided to lay low. He didn't give us a reason therefore but I assumed that it was because he realised that his people hadn't acted the way he thought they would. He even issued an order telling me to get rid of the Mercedes and that is why we stopped the whole story at that point, the revolution that is.

CHAIRPERSON: I'm trying to understand your behaviour as a group that night. You went out to go and kill people, in fact you wanted to attack the squatter camp to kill people, there would have been many people to kill there.

You went to put up the roadblock to kill people in pursuit of a revolution, now you only kill four or five and then you leave the place and you are not continuing with the killing as planned. If that was a plan I fail to understand your behaviour.

MR MARTIN: Chairperson, we identified the enemy as the ANC and we attacked them and after that we left. If we had acted further, visited squatter camps and so forth, we would have to identify further targets. Our objective was to attack the ANC/SACP Alliance and those who appeared before us that night were members of the ANC/SACP Alliance.

CHAIRPERSON: You were at a point where you were able to find a few of the kind of people you wanted to kill and then you killed them, why not continue to kill more if that was the plan?

MR MARTIN: If we consider the timing, it was also quite late and we believed that every group countrywide would be acting in the way that we were acting and if that had happened it would have created large scale chaos and it would have promoted the revolution.

CHAIRPERSON: Isn't it correct that you people ran away when you thought there was a vehicle coming?

MR MARTIN: No, I wouldn't say that they ran away, they climbed in the vehicle and drove away but they didn't run away as such.

CHAIRPERSON: The fact is, you decided to leave the scene because there was a vehicle coming.

MR MARTIN: Some of the people left the scene, I didn't leave the scene.

CHAIRPERSON: You didn't remain there, you also left.

MR MARTIN: I left after we had set the vehicles alight and that was quite some time after.

CHAIRPERSON: Where were the vehicles set alight?

MR MARTIN: On the scene.

CHAIRPERSON: Why?

MR MARTIN: In order to disguise any clues.

CHAIRPERSON: Why worry about things of that nature if the following day you shall have taken over the country? Why worry about such trivialities when you are busy with something huge, a revolution?

MR MARTIN: As I have mentioned earlier, we would not want to be identified as the Randfontein Commando and if we had left any traces on the scene, they would have detected us and that is why we left the scene and set the vehicles alight.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, is it not so that you people left the scene because - I mean, when you saw the other vehicle coming, because you were worried you might be arrested? And isn't the reason why you removed the cartridges, burn the car, was to avoid being arrested by the South African Police who would the following day still be very much in power and control?

MR MARTIN: Where we were standing it was difficult to see a vehicle approaching from afar, so the vehicle was rather close to us at that point. While we were busy on the scene - I'm not referring to the group which had already left, a vehicle was approaching and I agree with you that the police would definitely still have been in power the next day and that is why we had to collect all the shells.

CHAIRPERSON: At that stage, did you really think that you were busy with a revolution to take over the country?

MR MARTIN: Definitely. I believed that such incidents were occurring on a nationwide level.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you say that you did not see the child and women or did you say you don't remember whether you saw the child and/or the women?

MR MARTIN: I can't remember that I saw the women and children.

CHAIRPERSON: How can you manage not to remember whether a small child was there, under those circumstances?

MR MARTIN: The child who was shot was quite grown, it appeared to me to be a grown person. The other little children who were present I did not see.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, while I'm looking to try to find out as to what his age was, the nature of the injuries inflicted on the child were such that it is difficult to accept, it would be difficult to accept that he was hit by accident, half his head was blown away, isn't that so?

MR MARTIN: Yes, I saw the photo's, that is correct. As I heard he had been sitting on his mother's lap. It's very difficult for me to explain, however he was caught in the cross-fire and that is why he was shot.

CHAIRPERSON: Doesn't that show that quite possibly intensive fire was inflicted on him?

MR MARTIN: No, as far as I know we fired in a general direction, we formed a line and we fired.

CHAIRPERSON: ...[inaudible] the child was harassed and assaulted before he was killed, did you not see that?

MR MARTIN: I can't remember that.

CHAIRPERSON: Would that have bothered you, to see a child of that age harassed and assaulted?

MR MARTIN: At that point we were involved in a war and it didn't bother me at all at that point, only much later can I admit that I do have deep sympathy for the family but at that point in time it would not have bothered me.

CHAIRPERSON: The Judge remarks in his Judgement that these people were questioned and some of the white people who were there, that is amongst you, said that these black people: "respekteer nie die base nie", and that was also a source of irritation to you people.

MR MARTIN: Nothing of that sort happened. It wasn't about who was the boss and who wasn't, it was about finding out to which group these people belonged.

CHAIRPERSON: What precisely were you told to do about people who belonged to the ANC, at the roadblock? What orders were you given in that regard?

MR MARTIN: We formed the group and decided that we would regard these people as the target and undertake our instructions.

CHAIRPERSON: I'm asking about a possible order that could have been conveyed to you from, as you say, General Oelofse?

MR MARTIN: General Oelofse told us to look for ANC/SACP people as targets, those were his instructions and furthermore we had to kill such people.

MR MALAN: Excuse me Chairperson.

You said that General Oelofse said to: "us", you choice that specific word, why are you choosing that word because you testified earlier that you weren't present and that you'd heard it from Kloppers?

MR MARTIN: I beg your pardon I will correct myself and then say Kloppers.

CHAIRPERSON: You told us that you were advised to get rid of the Mercedes Benze but you didn't want to do that, why?

MR MARTIN: I believed firmly that the revolution was definitely breaking out and we believed that Eugene Terreblanche would make his declaration of war on the 16th but it did not happen and I realised myself that it was simply too late because the Mercedes had been seen on the scene of the offence and everybody knew that I drove a big Mercedes, it would have been pointless to get rid of it.

CHAIRPERSON: You seem no to be having more than one reason for not getting rid of the Mercedes, because earlier on I thought that your explanation was that you thought that the revolution was on anyway.

MR MARTIN: That's correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Now, I don't understand why you would still have been under that impression when it must have been clear to you the very following day that you must have realised that other AWB regions did not on the previous night do what you people had been doing.

MR MARTIN: I waited and believed until the 16th of December which was three days away, that something would happen and for that reason I did not conceal my Mercedes. After the media reports appeared and mentioned the Mercedes which had been driving in the direction of Randfontein, I realised that it would be pointless to try to conceal the Mercedes.

CHAIRPERSON: And you say another reason was, at any rate people had noticed or come to know that there was a Mercedes Benze and they probably would know that it was yours.

MR MARTIN: That's another reason.

CHAIRPERSON: You said one of the objectives was to search for illegal weapons?

MR MARTIN: That's correct.

CHAIRPERSON: And if you found then you would take them away?

MR MARTIN: That's correct.

CHAIRPERSON: What about legitimately possessed weapons? If you had found that one of the people you stopped had a firearm for which he had a license, that you would not remove?

MR MARTIN: I can't answer that question because it didn't happen. Our instruction was to look for unlawful firearms and that is what we looked for.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, you would not have gone against the order would you because the order said: "Remove illegally possessed weapons, so if you had to follow the order it would mean that the weapons legally possessed would not be removed?

MR MARTIN: That is how I understood the instruction.

CHAIRPERSON: And then you put up a roadblock, you are in the middle of a revolution, somebody comes with a weapon lawfully possessed, you let him go with the weapon?

MR MARTIN: As I've said, I can't answer that because it did not occur.

CHAIRPERSON: I just want to clear something with you, when I raised the question of the child you said something like, I thought you tried to estimate to us as to how big the child was or am I mistaken?

MR MARTIN: I can't remember.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you not a few minutes ago try to indicate to me that it was not such a small child and try to indicate how big the child could have been?

MR MARTIN: Yes, that's correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Does he come into the picture, does that mean you are no able to recall the child and you now see the child in your mind?

MR MARTIN: I can remember one thing and that is that he appeared to me to be a young man rather than a child.

ADV BOSMAN: Is that the one who was seated on the mother's lap? I beg your pardon. You've referred to a child at a later stage, that the child was seated on the mother's lap.

MR MARTIN: That is what I found out afterwards, I can't answer to that.

CHAIRPERSON: Are you saying that in your view this child or however you describe him, are you saying that he was a legitimate target?

MR MARTIN: When we listened to Eugene Terreblanche's social speeches, the child was definitely a target.

CHAIRPERSON: When you people decided to go and put up a roadblock, was it planned as to how this revolution would be carried out?

MR MARTIN: I don't know, the information was not conveyed to me by Phil Kloppers.

CHAIRPERSON: Were you told how long your operation was going to last?

MR MARTIN: No, it was not mentioned.

CHAIRPERSON: Were you told what time it should start?

MR MARTIN: All that was said was that it would occur on that evening and we therefore acted on that evening.

CHAIRPERSON: Was it planned as to what should happen the following day?

MR MARTIN: No, we didn't discuss any further plans before the time, we simply decided about the roadblock and executed it.

CHAIRPERSON: As a policeman and possibly also somebody who was an officer in the AWB, don't you thing that when people go on a military operation they plan properly?

MR MARTIN: The planning which was conveyed to me was based upon information which the General gave to Kloppers regarding the roadblock. Apparently a similar roadblock had been held before and he was aware of the fact that we had the equipment to undertake a similar operation and it was from there that we executed this operation.

CHAIRPERSON: In your view you were going to kill people, what did you as an individual Mr Martin, what was planned for example as to what to do with the bodies of the hundreds, perhaps thousands of people that were going to be killed?

MR MARTIN: Chairperson, I believed that it would create the fear among the general public to not participate in the elections and that the revolution would initiate there.

CHAIRPERSON: Now, what was to happen to the bodies, the dead bodies? What was the plan? You were going to kill so many people, what was the plan? What plan was there as to how or what to do with those bodies of the many people you were going to kill?

MR MARTIN: According to my instructions the corpses would simply remain there countrywide. There would be corpses and the corpses would remain there in order to create that fear.

CHAIRPERSON: But you said: "according to the instructions", were those the instructions that you received, that the corpses of all the people who would be killed had to be left there or was that simply what you thought?

MR MARTIN: That's what I thought.

CHAIRPERSON: Please, then you must not tell us that that was an instruction because then I'm going to ask you who issued the instruction and then the situation will become rather problematic.

MR MALAN: I beg your pardon Chairperson, before Advocate van der Walt proceeds I have two questions in follow-up. Firstly you've said that during the questioning you couldn't determine who were men and who were women and who were children, that it was very dark.

MR MARTIN: Well, I can't remember if everybody was questioned.

MR MALAN: That's not my point. You undertook the questioning?

MR MARTIN: Yes.

MR MALAN: But you couldn't really distinguish between men, women and children?

MR MARTIN: It was dark, I couldn't see it.

MR MALAN: But you did have a torch?

MR MARTIN: No.

MR MALAN: Where did you find the torch to ensure afterwards that everybody was dead?

MR MARTIN: With Diedericks.

MR MALAN: Couldn't you use it during questioning?

MR MARTIN: I didn't use the torch at that point.

MR MALAN: The torch wasn't used when you stopped the cars?

MR MARTIN: Yes, it was used when we stopped the cars.

MR MALAN: Very well, and then you've said that you took the road back to Ventersdorp to identify vehicles with black passengers, that you would turn around, take over, issue the signal and stop them at the roadblock, that was the modus operandi. In the dead of night you would take over a car, you'd be driving in opposite directions, the lights of both vehicles would be on but you'd be able to see who were black passengers and who weren't?

MR MARTIN: Well, when one drove past one would clearly be able to distinguish.

MR MALAN: Very well. The issue of the ear, I'd like to follow up this issue, what happened to the ear after it had been presented to Phil Kloppers? You placed it in a plastic bag, gave it to him and placed it in the Mercedes.

MR MARTIN: I assumed that he had given it to General Oelofse and that this would be confirmed.

MR MALAN: When did you find out from Mr Kloppers?

MR MARTIN: He said it to me himself on that evening, that this was the ear for General Oelofse.

MR MALAN: No, the question is, you have said that the ear had been given to General Oelofse, that that had been executed.

MR MARTIN: That was the following day.

MR MALAN: And that Kloppers had confirmed with you that he had done this.

MR MARTIN: That's correct.

MR MALAN: When did he confirm this to you on the following day?

MR MARTIN: During the day we gathered and we went to General Oelofse's small holding. He told us to cut our hair short and he told me how he had been horrified by the ear which he had received.

MR MALAN: So therefore you had seen him before you and Kloppers had visited him again the next day? Did you report any information?

MR MARTIN: Yes, I believe so.

MR MALAN: I'm not asking whether you believe it, I want to know whether you had information.

MR MARTIN: It was conveyed to me.

MR MALAN: By whom?

MR MARTIN: By Kloppers.

MR MALAN: When did he tell you this?

MR MARTIN: When we gathered on that day.

MR MALAN: Why did you go to Oelofse again on that afternoon after having reported to him?

MR MARTIN: We were often at Oelofse's small holding. We went there for the purpose of meeting as we always did, to find out what would happen next and he told us to conceal the Mercedes and so forth.

MR MALAN: You described it earlier as an order, wasn't that advice, to get rid of the Mercedes?

MR MARTIN: He did not say it to me on one occasion only, on quite a number of occasions. I suppose one could have considered it as an order.

MR MALAN: No, when I say to you that it was an order, did you understand it as an order, to get rid of the Mercedes?

MR MARTIN: Yes.

MR MALAN: Why didn't you do it because you had carried out all instructions?

MR MARTIN: It was pointless to me to conceal the Mercedes.

MR MALAN: Therefore, regarding the order to apprehend ANC/SACP supporters, to identify such supporters and to kill such supporters was an order which you obeyed which you could not ignore.

MR MARTIN: Correct.

MR MALAN: But you received an order to get rid of the Mercedes, something which is quite smaller and you didn't carry it out, but a much greater order to kill people you carried out because of the strength of the order?

MR MARTIN: As I have already stated it seemed pointless to me to get rid of the Mercedes at that point.

MR MALAN: But that's my point.

MR MARTIN: When we received the orders to kill people we were busy with the revolution according to Kloppers.

MR MALAN: And you carried out an order or did you simply believe in the revolution and do it because you believed it would contribute to the revolution?

MR MARTIN: I believed in the revolution and I also carried out the orders which were given to me.

MR MALAN: Thank you Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Martin, according to the records, I'll try to get the precise page, the age of the child is given as 13, do you have problems with that?

MR MARTIN: No.

CHAIRPERSON: And I should also mention to you that according to the expert evidence given to the Court, this child was shot at a very close range and also that he had, apart from the fact - as I've already said, half his head was blown away or blown off, he had several other shot wounds.

MR MARTIN: I cannot answer to the other wounds but I know he was shot with a shotgun. They were close to him, they were not far from him, maximum of about two metres.

CHAIRPERSON: That can hardly be an accidental shooting.

MR MARTIN: I did not say it was an accident.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Let us adjourn until 2 o'clock, I'm sorry I didn't realise that we are well beyond 1 o'clock. We will start at 2 o'clock.

DEON MARTIN: (s.u.o.)

MR MALAN: Mr Martin, how long were you in Koevoet?

MR MARTIN: Just a few months.

MR MALAN: How many months?

MR MARTIN: Approximately 6.

MR MALAN: How long do you know Mr Kloppers?

MR MARTIN: I met Mr Kloppers in the beginning of '93.

MR MALAN: How did you meet him?

MR MARTIN: I had a butchery and he was a client of mine.

MR MALAN: Are you house friends?

MR MARTIN: Yes.

MR MALAN: What was your relationship as friends?

MR MARTIN: It was good, we played chess together, we braaied together, we had a good relationship.

MR MALAN: Social relationship?

MR MARTIN: Yes.

MR MALAN: In this social relationship there was no hierarchy?

MR MARTIN: No.

MR MALAN: You were at the same level?

MR MARTIN: Yes, we were.

MR MALAN: So if you were not under his command then from time to time you would have taken initiative in your social relationship?

MR MARTIN: Yes, for example I would have told him: "Let's play some chess" but I couldn't give just any instruction to him.

MR MALAN: No, I'm not talking about instruction, I'm talking about social: "Let's go to the movies, let's go for a picnic, let's play chess"?

MR MARTIN: Yes.

MR MALAN: So he would have taken the same initiatives with you?

MR MARTIN: Definitely.

MR MALAN: There was no relationship where the one was more important than the other?

MR MARTIN: Not as friends, no.

MR MALAN: When you moved around in the AWB structures, would you have argued with him with reference to instructions, would you reason with him?

MR MARTIN: No. In certain instances he would have asked me to discuss something with him but I would not have opposed him in any manner.

MR MALAN: And the AWB relationship, if he gave you an instruction, would you carry it out always?

MR MARTIN: Yes.

MR MALAN: You would not question it?

MR MARTIN: Negative.

MR MALAN: Why then did you not carry out the instruction that was given to you by General Oelofse?

MR MARTIN: Which order was this?

MR MALAN: To shave your hair, to take your moustache off?

MR MARTIN: I did that.

MR MALAN: To sell your Mercedes?

MR MARTIN: As I've said before to the Commission, my Mercedes was already identified in this incident and there was no need for me to hide it.

MR MALAN: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Miss van der Walt, are we taking this as Exhibit A?

MS VAN DER WALT: I would appreciate it as Exhibit A.

CHAIRPERSON: The document entitled:

and then:

is admitted as Exhibit A, thank you.

MS VAN DER WALT: Thank you.

You were asked about the revolution and you said that you believed that the revolution would continue, that was specifically when you were asked about the Mercedes and soforth, why did you say that you believed that the revolution would continue?

MR MARTIN: At that stage some bombs exploded on the West Rand and in Pretoria itself and there was always something happening and therefore I believed this was part of the revolution.

MS VAN DER WALT: So it did continue? It is not that it would continue but it did continue, bombs exploded in Pretoria and on the West Rand?

MR MARTIN: That's correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: And this was under the command of Japie Oelofse?

MR MARTIN: That's correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: And the vehicles, I don't know if it's quite clear but at the scene after the incident occurred, you have testified that somebody shouted: "There's a car approaching" and the vehicle disappeared, what did you do after you heard that a vehicle was approaching?

MR MARTIN: I could see that a vehicle was not approaching. The road was open, I could see there was no vehicle approaching. The Nissan Sentra of Andrè Venter was used to transport these people but we stayed behind with the Mercedes at the scene.

MS VAN DER WALT: Is it at that stage when you picked up the shells?

MR MARTIN: That's correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: You did not leave the scene and come back, you did it at the same stage?

MR MARTIN: That's correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: The order as you interpreted it, it was put to you that: "What would have happened with the bodies if hundreds of people were shot dead", how did you interpret the order when it was said to you that there should be bodies?

MR MARTIN: As I understood him, the Randfontein Commando, our Commando, we should attack a specified target which was the ANC/SACP Alliance and from there onwards we should leave. It was just one blow and then leave, we shouldn't move around.

MS VAN DER WALT: And this order for this particular evening, you had to set up a roadblock, identify a target, kill these persons and then fall back?

MR MARTIN: That's correct, that's how I understood it.

MS VAN DER WALT: Your relationship with Commander Kloppers socially, do you have the same respect or did you show the same respect to him that you showed him as your commander?

MR MARTIN: Yes, there was a measure of respect but not such as when we operated in the hierarchy.

MS VAN DER WALT: Did you look up to him still?

MR MARTIN: Yes.

MS VAN DER WALT: No further questions Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: You referred us to page 12 of Exhibit A, do you remember you are the one who drew our attention to that? What point did you want to make there?

MR MARTIN: It was point (c).

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, but what point did you want to make there?

MR MARTIN:

CHAIRPERSON: Isn't this a discussion document, you know which the author discusses various methods that can be used to get power and then for example, through revolution?

MR MARTIN: That's correct, that's how I see this document.

CHAIRPERSON: I think you produced this document when I asked you questions about the policy of the AWB. Now, did the AWB then at some point adopt this as it's policy?

MR MARTIN: This is phase one over which we had to write exams. All the officers involved already wrote this exam and they knew the contents of it.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, but I'm sure if you read books Mausetung you'll still find these theories about revolution, how it can be carried out and the like and I think the author of this book is expressing his views as to how power can be grabbed in a State, how you can stage a revolution or whatever, which is not what I'm asking. What I'm asking is, did the AWB adopt as it's policy the killing of people for the purpose of achieving ...[intervention]

MR MARTIN: What I can answer is that the whole phase was adopted as part of exams. I would then say yes, it was the AWB's policy.

CHAIRPERSON: I don't know whether you would know that but even members of the security branch when they are trained, they receive lectures to be told how terrorism is launched and all that kind of thing, they are told as a teaching material. Is this not a teaching material, a reading material or is this the policy of the AWB?

MR MARTIN: As I've told you, I believe it's definitely the police because it was written by the General and it was adopted and everybody writes about it. And what I want to say is, the evening it mentioned to us it was revolution, in other words everybody knew what was written in paragraph 3. I then see that this would be adopted by the AWB as policy.

CHAIRPERSON: Was that done? Did you ever attend a meeting where the AWB - I'm asking you these questions because you are not the first member of AWB to apply for amnesty and I want to know from you whether it is your evidence that the AWB - I mean, I know, we know that they would issue militant statements that if the time comes they would be prepared to, if the time comes, they would if the need be, resort to whatever actions. Now, I'm asking you, did the AWB at some point sit down and say: "Now the time has arrived, we are now resorting to military struggle"?

MR MARTIN: All that I know of is that before this incident with us occurred, that we had several discussions with amongst others, General Oelofse, and it was always revolutionary talk and we all wrote this exam, we knew what the revolution was about.

CHAIRPERSON: But this is the material, I'm talking about the material, I understand what you are saying. Possibly at meetings they said: "If the need arises, we will go over to the military struggle" and at any point, was such a resolution taken?

MR MARTIN: In my opinion it was taken yes, it was adopted. This whole phase was incorporated so I am of the opinion yes, definitely it would be the policy of the AWB.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that the reason why you think so or that you say so?

MR MARTIN: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: You say that because this document - this appears in this document?

MR MARTIN: And that the officers had to write an exam about it, yes.

MR MALAN: Chairperson, if I could just ask here, this document was not dated but if we look at the contents of it, it should be around '85 at the latest because it refers to the President's attempts with the National Council and the UDF's activity. It's not a new document, it's a document from round about '85.

MR MARTIN: It's possible, I cannot five you a definite answer to that.

MR MALAN: When did you see this document for the first time?

MR MARTIN: 1983.

MR MALAN: And you refer to 3(c), tell us how does this act that you apply for amnesty for, how does this fall under (c), under which parts, under which words? ...[Transcriber's own translation]

MR MARTIN: The fact that it says that simultaneously there should be sabotage, assassinations, strikes, so that social chaos and political chaos could be established.

MR MALAN: So this falls under etc? ...[Transcriber's own translation]

MR MARTIN: Yes, I would say that, yes.

MR MALAN: So you base your case on the word: "etc" under 3(c) of this whole document?

MR MARTIN: To put the government into political chaos, yes.

MR MALAN: Thank you.

MR MARTIN: Mr Chairperson, if I could just refer to page 11, the last paragraph:

he talks about guerillas and guerilla warfare. He says:

I wish to bring your attention to this point.

CHAIRPERSON: But the impression one got from your evidence was that this was not be a guerilla-like type of operation, the whole country is to be - that very night, the whole country is supposed to be under revolution, a real conventional type of situation.

MR MARTIN: I see us as groups acting as guerilla groups and I would have believed that nationwide it would have been the same, that the small groups would have acted as guerilla groups and acted as guerilla fighters.

CHAIRPERSON: Mrs van der Walt?

MS VAN DER WALT: No questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Martin, you may stand down.

MR PRINSLOO: Honourable Chairperson, the following witness is Mr Meiring.

CAREL HENDRICKS MEIRING: (sworn states)

EXAMINATION BY MR PRINSLOO: As it pleases the Chair.

Mr Meiring, what is your age?

MR MEIRING: I am 33 years old.

MR PRINSLOO: Is it correct that you are the applicant in this matter which is connect with the charges to which you were found guilty in the Supreme Court by the Honourable Judge Marais?

MR MEIRING: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: Is it correct that in this specific matter you were sentenced to death?

MR MEIRING: That's correct.

MR PRINSLOO: On several charges?

MR MEIRING: That's correct.

MR PRINSLOO: Is it correct that your sentence was amended after the Constitutional Court found that the death sentence was no longer constitutional?

MR MEIRING: That's correct, the sentence was amended to life sentence.

MR PRINSLOO: And when was this sentence changed to life imprisonment?

MR MEIRING: I cannot remember the specific date but it was about 3 weeks ago.

MR PRINSLOO: With Judge Marais?

MR MEIRING: That's correct.

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Meiring, did you undergo military training?

MR MEIRING: That's correct.

MR PRINSLOO: Just for the record, his application appears on page 68, from that page to page 84 and then 117 to 126.

And where did you undergo military training?

MR MEIRING: In 1983 I was called up to Driesaai in Potchefstroom and after that I underwent selection for the officer's course in Oudtshoorn then I also did duty at the parachute battalion.

MR PRINSLOO: Is it correct that you performed six years worth of service in the Permanent Force?

MR MEIRING: That's correct.

MR PRINSLOO: And during that time, did you ever perform border duty?

MR MEIRING: Yes.

MR PRINSLOO: During your military training and your service in the Army, was it pointed out who was the enemy at that point?

MR MEIRING: Yes.

MR PRINSLOO: Who was the enemy?

MR MEIRING: It was said to us that it was the ANC/SACP Alliance.

MR PRINSLOO: After you left the Army, did you joint the AWB?

MR MEIRING: That's correct.

MR PRINSLOO: And you joined the AWB in September 1993?

MR MEIRING: That's correct.

MR PRINSLOO: Which training did you receive in the AWB?

MR MEIRING: I myself did not receive much training in the AWB apart from the theory. I was the training officer who presented the training to the members.

MR PRINSLOO: What experience did you have in order to present such training to the AWB members?

MR MEIRING: I had been an instructor for approximately five years where I presented training to various troops, for example drilling, shooting, techniques of attack.

MR PRINSLOO: Were you also trained in shooting?

MR MEIRING: Yes, that's correct.

MR PRINSLOO: The training which you provided for other members of the AWB, what did that involve?

MR MEIRING: We did drilling for discipline, shooting for women and children as well as members who could not handle firearms who also did techniques of attack, movement and soforth.

MR PRINSLOO: How did you regard the AWB, as a military organisation or a non-military organisation, what was your view?

MR MEIRING: I provided training for them so I regarded them as a para-military organisation.

MR PRINSLOO: And the training which you presented, was it intensive by nature?

MR MEIRING: Yes, it was very intensive.

MR PRINSLOO: What was the objective of the military training which you provided?

MR MEIRING: It was necessary for the struggle which lay ahead.

MR PRINSLOO: At that point in 1993, when you joined the AWB, what was your reason for joining?

MR MEIRING: Because I believed in the ideology of the AWB, that we could obtain our own Volkstaat, have our own religion, training, education and soforth.

MR PRINSLOO: Thus the AWB was in favour of an ...[indistinct] government?

MR MEIRING: No, they were not in favour of it.

MR PRINSLOO: What was their view?

MR MEIRING: That we would wage war if this should happen, we wouldn't simply hand over the country to them.

MR PRINSLOO: Towards the end of 1993 there had already been planning for an election which would be held in 1994?

MR MEIRING: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: And did the AWB approve of that election or not? What was their attitude?

MR MEIRING: They disapproved of it completely. They maintained that we ...[END OF TAPE]

MR PRINSLOO: ... that point with regard to the training of the AWB and so forth what happened? 

MR MEIRING: It was announced from the platform that if we did not have weapons we have to steal weapons and that we would have to arm ourselves for the imminent revolution.

MR PRINSLOO: And what did you understand by that? Would it be a peaceful process? Would the weapons be used or not?

MR MEIRING: Well if we had to steal weapons it was an offence already so I assume that it could not have been a peaceful story.

MR PRINSLOO: Did you believe that the AWB would have used violence or negotiations or what?

MR MEIRING: It appeared to me as if they would use violence to further their ends.

MR PRINSLOO: On the 12th of December 1993. Let me put it to you this way. You resided in Randfontein area, is that correct?

MR MEIRING: Krugersdorp.

MR PRINSLOO: Under whose command were you in the AWB?

MR MEIRING: Under the command of Commandant Martin and Phil Kloppers.

MR PRINSLOO: Martin is the previous applicant?

MR MEIRING: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: And Chief Commandant Kloppers is the first applicant seated over there?

MR MEIRING: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: And who was the Commander in Chief in your area?

MR MEIRING: That was General Jappie Oelofse.

MR PRINSLOO: And what was your rank at that point?

MR MEIRING: I was a field cornet in the AWB.

MR PRINSLOO: On the 12th of December 1993 you received a message to meet at a certain place?

MR MEIRING: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: Who sent the message?

MR MEIRING: I received the message from my wife because I was taking an afternoon nap on that Sunday. She herself received the message from Martin's wife.

MR PRINSLOO: Did you have to go in uniform or in civilian clothes?

MR MEIRING: The instruction was to wear camouflaged clothing and to be armed.

MR PRINSLOO: From the military or what?

MR MEIRING: From the AWB.

MR PRINSLOO: And that camouflaged dress from the AWB, could that be distinguished as AWB clothing?

MR MEIRING: Yes, symbols were attached to the shoulders which would distinguish one as an AWB member.

MR PRINSLOO: Did you have to go armed?

MR MEIRING: Yes.

MR PRINSLOO: Which arms did you take with you?

MR MEIRING: I took a 9 millimetre pistol.

MR PRINSLOO: Your own pistol?

MR MEIRING: It was a pistol from work but I had permission to take it with me.

MR PRINSLOO: Where did you go then?

MR MEIRING: We went to Uncle Harry's Roadside cafe.

MR PRINSLOO: At Uncle Harry's when you arrived there, were other members present?

MR MEIRING: Myself and Peter Matthews arrived first and after that the other members arrived until we were all there.

MR PRINSLOO: The other members of those co-applicants who appear before the Committee today?

MR MEIRING: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: Who was in command there at that point?

MR MEIRING: Commandant Deon Martin was in command before Phil Kloppers arrived.

MR PRINSLOO: And with the arrival of Commandant Kloppers did you just stand around there sitting in the cafe or what did you do?

MR MEIRING: We just stood around.

MR PRINSLOO: Was there any parade that was held after that?

MR MEIRING: No.

MR PRINSLOO: Was no parade held when Kloppers arrived?

MR MEIRING: Yes, when he arrived Deon Martin brought us to attention and he saluted Chief Commando Kloppers after which Kloppers addressed us.

MR PRINSLOO: And what did Kloppers say to you?

MR MEIRING: Broadly he told us that he had just come from an order group meeting from General Jappie Oelofse. That Oelofse had said that this is the "real McCoy" and that tonight would be a hard option and that the revolution would begin tonight all over the country.

MR PRINSLOO: What did you understand by an order group meeting? What is that?

MR MEIRING: My understanding of it was that all the area generals had met. And they received various instructions there.

MR PRINSLOO: And so therefore you understood that the instruction that Kloppers received came from the higher command?

MR MEIRING: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: And what did you understand by the words "the real McCoy"?

MR MEIRING: That this was the real thing, that the revolution would begin tonight.

MR PRINSLOO: By using the words war and revolution, at that point from what you experienced in the country did you regard it or experience it as a war situation?

MR MEIRING: Definitely.

MR PRINSLOO: And then he said that it was the "real McCoy" as you put it. What then?

MR MEIRING: After that Phil Kloppers asked who of us did not have arms. Two or three of the members said they did no have arms. Upon which he produced 2 hand made shot guns from his car and gave them to the people.

MR PRINSLOO: Do you know to who the 2 hand made shot guns were handed over.

MR MEIRING: At that point I was not certain who did he give them to. One was given to Martin van der Schyff and the other one to Etienne Visser.

MR PRINSLOO: Your co-applicants?

MR MEIRING: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: And then from the roadside cafe did you go to a specific place or places?

MR MEIRING: After that we went to Jaco Badenhorst parental home where we found the 2 vehicles which we would have used, that was the Sentra and the Mercedes. And we changed their number plates with masking tape.

MR PRINSLOO: Did you enjoy a drink anywhere?

MR MEIRING: After we had changed the license plates with masking tape we went to Visser's home where we had a drink.

MR PRINSLOO: What did you have to drink?

MR MEIRING: I had a glass of whisky with water.

MR PRINSLOO: Did it have any influence on you at all?

MR MEIRING: No.

MR PRINSLOO: And at any stage was it said to you where you would go and what would happen?

MR MEIRING: We were told at Deon Martin's house that when we picked up the roadblock equipment that we would be having a roadblock at the Radora crossing. We did not know exactly where it was. Martin and Kloppers drove ahead of us to that place.

MR PRINSLOO: On the way to that specific place where the roadblock would be held did any incident occur before that?

MR MEIRING: Yes an incident did occur. Two black persons came walking out of a plot, the Sentra stopped, three jumped out to go and speak to these black people. I do not know what happened. I personally did not climb out of the vehicle and go with them. Badenhorst and I remained in the vehicle.

MR PRINSLOO: When you say that you remained in the vehicle are you referring to the Sentra?

MR MEIRING: Yes that is the Sentra which I am referring to.

MR PRINSLOO: Who were passengers in the Sentra?

MR MEIRING: Myself, Matthews, Badenhorst, Diedericks and van der Schyff.

MR PRINSLOO: And after they had climbed out and gone to those people and returned did Commandant Kloppers speak to them about their conduct at any time?

MR MEIRING: Yes. The Mercedes stopped quite a way away from there to wait for us after they had climbed back into the vehicle the Sentra drove on to where the Mercedes was, where Phil Kloppers admonished them for assaulting the black people on the side of the road.

MR PRINSLOO: So they were chastised for that?

MR MEIRING: Yes that is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: And after that you left for the specific Radora, Ventersdorp crossing?

MR MEIRING: Yes.

MR PRINSLOO: At the Ventersdorp crossing or in that area was a specific instruction issued to you as to what your tasks would be?

MR MEIRING: Yes. I had to set up the roadblock and that is what I did.

MR PRINSLOO: And who issued the instruction to you to set up the roadblock?

MR MEIRING: I am not entirely certain who it was. It could be one of the two commandants.

MR PRINSLOO: And did you set up such a roadblock?

MR MEIRING: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: Just broadly, how was it set up?

MR MEIRING: I appointed 3 people with reflector jackets as traffic officers who had to pull over the vehicles at the roadblock. Then I placed 2 other people a little bit further in the veld to ensure that people could not run away. Mr Visser would switch the blue light on the roof of the Sentra on and off. And I myself supervised to see that everything would go according to plan.

MR PRINSLOO: Was there any person who had a torchlight?

MR MEIRING: The presiding traffic officers were furnished with flashlights but I do not know who exactly had the flashlights.

MR PRINSLOO: What would happen then if a vehicle approached? What was the procedure?

MR MEIRING: The instruction was that the Mercedes would drive along, identify a vehicle with black passengers, turn around to take over the vehicle, flash headlights at us, upon which we would switch on the blue light and pull the vehicle off to the side of the road.

MR PRINSLOO: What would be the purpose of pulling the vehicle off the road?

MR MEIRING: After that the passengers would be asked to climb out of the vehicle. They would be searched and asked to sit on the side of the road upon which the vehicle would be searched.

MR PRINSLOO: Would the passengers be questioned in any way?

MR MEIRING: Martin and Kloppers would undertake the questioning. That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: Did you know what the purpose behind the questioning was?

MR MEIRING: It would be to determine to which political party they belonged, where they came from and where they were going.

MR PRINSLOO: After it had been determined that a person belonged to a certain political party what would happen then?

MR MEIRING: That would depend upon which political party the person belonged to. If it was the IFP the persons would be let go and if it was ANC then the instruction was to shoot such people dead.

MR PRINSLOO: At that point was the AWB favourably inclined towards the IFP?

MR MEIRING: Yes that is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: You have said to the Committee that the Mercedes would indicate if a vehicle was approaching, a vehicle with black passengers which had to be apprehended, what happened then?

MR MEIRING: Some of the vehicles which we pulled over early in the evening and I cannot recall exactly how many there were did not belong to certain political parties and after the vehicles and the passengers had been searched we let them go.

MR PRINSLOO: Is that after you had determined to which political parties the passengers belonged?

MR MEIRING: Yes.

MR PRINSLOO: Thus persons who belonged to other parties for example those to which the AWB were favourably inclined would be allowed to go?

MR MEIRING: Yes that is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: Can you tell the Committee what happened with the other vehicles which arrived? Can you tell the Committee what happened when the Honda Ballade and the other vehicle arrived?

MR MEIRING: When the Honda Ballade and the Cressida arrived they stopped approximately 200 metres away from the roadblock. I do not know what happened there but after a while the vehicles moved forward. The traffic officers who had been appointed or those who had been appointed as traffic officers pulled the vehicles off the road. The passengers were told to get out. They were searched as well as the vehicles.

MR PRINSLOO: And after that what happened then?

MR MEIRING: After the vehicles had been searched and the passengers had been searched and questioned the questioning was still under way when Martin gave the instruction to take the Mercedes and to drive back and to see why the 2 vehicles had stopped. Andrè Visser and I as well as the driver of one of the vehicles, I do not know which vehicle, climbed into the Mercedes and drove off. We wanted to see what they had thrown out. We only found a packet of ice where they had stopped. I reported to Martin that I had found only a packet of ice at that place.

MR PRINSLOO: What happened then?

MR MEIRING: After I had reported to Martin that I had only found a packet of ice I went back to the Sentra and I stood behind the Sentra. And the reason for that is so that I could see if some one was trying to run into the veld. Right after I stood there I heard a shot fired. After which I heard more shots being fired. This lasted for approximately 10 seconds.

MR PRINSLOO: Did you fire any shots?

MR MEIRING: No. I did not fire any shots. None of the black persons were running to the veld. I also could not shoot in the direction of those who were seated because otherwise I would have shot at my own people.

MR PRINSLOO: And after the persons had been shot, what happened then?

MR MEIRING: After the shooting I shouted that a vehicle was approaching but I could have been mistaken. I saw it as a vehicle. There are lights from residences in the area. We climbed into the vehicle, those of us who were driving in the Sentra and when we drove away Kloppers shouted to us to meet them at the Randfontein City Hall.

MR PRINSLOO: You then went to the City Hall?

MR MEIRING: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: Before you proceed, at the City Hall was anything given or shown to you?

MR MEIRING: Yes a case of cassettes was taken out as well as a tool box. The mechanics officer, Diedericks was not with us at that point. Peter Matthews took the tapes and the equipment on the order of Kloppers. He said that it might have had propaganda on it.

MR PRINSLOO: Is that what was said to you or did you hear it?

MR MEIRING: No I did not hear it, Matthews told me.

MR PRINSLOO: So that is afterwards?

MR MEIRING: Yes that was afterwards.

MR PRINSLOO: You did not hear Kloppers say it. But at the Town Hall who received the cassettes and the equipment?

MR MEIRING: The cassettes were given to Visser. I took the equipment to hand over to the mechanics officer at the next meeting. However there was no following meeting before we were arrested.

MR PRINSLOO: What would have been the purpose?

MR MEIRING: It would have been for Mr Diedericks.

MR PRINSLOO: What was his rank? The rank of Diedericks?

MR MEIRING: I cannot remember what his rank at that point was.

MR PRINSLOO: You would have given it to him?

MR MEIRING: Yes that is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: When were you arrested?

MR MEIRING: On the 6th of January 1994.

MR PRINSLOO: And therefore you could not hand it over to Diedericks?

MR MEIRING: Correct.

MR PRINSLOO: After the meeting at the Town Hall where did you go then?

MR MEIRING: We did not meet Phil Kloppers and the others at the Town Hall because a number of sirens were going off. I do not know if they were sirens of emergency vehicles. I said that we could not stand around there in public. That we had to go back to Mr Badenhorst's house where we dressed in civilian clothes. Because the instruction was to meet Kloppers there and I immediately went back to the Town Hall in order to carry out the instruction and wait for them there.

MR PRINSLOO: Why couldn't you stand around there in public in your uniform when you heard the sirens?

MR MEIRING: I was afraid that they would arrest me.

MR PRINSLOO: Did you then go to Badenhorst's home?

MR MEIRING: Yes.

MR PRINSLOO: What happened there?

MR MEIRING: There I dressed in civilian clothes and we returned to the Town Hall to wait for Kloppers.

MR PRINSLOO: Did they arrive there?

MR MEIRING: No they did not arrive there. We waited awhile and then we returned to Jaco Badenhorst's house where we found Kloppers and the others.

MR PRINSLOO: And at Badenhorst's house, what took place there?

MR MEIRING: Kloppers asked each one of us who fired shots. Everyone answered in the affirmative as well as myself because he was in a very aggressive mood, him and Martin because we had driven away so quickly from the scene without helping them to pick up the shells and so forth.

MR PRINSLOO: What happened further at Badenhorst's house?

MR MEIRING: Kloppers showed us the ear which Martin had cut off and after that we all went home.

MR PRINSLOO: Did Martin keep the ear or did he give it to some one? Do you know?

MR MEIRING: I do not know. Kloppers had the ear taken from the car. I do not know who went to fetch the ear from the car.

MR PRINSLOO: And after that you went home?

MR MEIRING: Yes that is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: And you said that you were arrested on the 6th of January 1994?

MR MEIRING: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: Were you then detained in terms of Section 29?

MR MEIRING: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: And during your detention according to the stipulations of Section 29 you made a statement?

MR MEIRING: That is correct. I did make a statement.

MR PRINSLOO: To who did you make the statement?

MR MEIRING: I made the statement before a magistrate. I do not know who it was.

MR PRINSLOO: Was your statement served in court as an exhibit?

MR MEIRING: I myself did not testify. My advocate advised me to submit a plea explanation.

MR PRINSLOO: But the statement which you made in front of the magistrate, was that ever submitted to court?

MR MEIRING: Yes it was submitted.

MR PRINSLOO: Chairperson I could not trace the statement in order to make it part of the documents. We did make certain attempts but the Deputy Attorney General does not have the dossier at his disposal. That is why we do not have the statement.

You were then prosecuted?

MR MEIRING: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: And we will submit the indictment to the Committee. After you were prosecuted you were detained in Diepkloof Prison?

MR MEIRING: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: And in Diepkloof you were visited by members of the AWB, is that correct?

MR MEIRING: At a point AWB members visited me. Among others General Nick Fourie and General Oelofse.

MR PRINSLOO: Was he also detained in that prison because of other matters?

MR MEIRING: Yes that is correct. He was detained in the same section with us.

MR PRINSLOO: Did you speak to him or did he speak to you?

MR MEIRING: Yes we did speak to one another.

MR PRINSLOO: And did Oelofse mention anything with regard to this case?

MR MEIRING: He congratulated us with what we had accomplished. He said that we had done a good job and he even told us that we would receive medals.

MR PRINSLOO: Were you promoted in any way while you were there?

MR MEIRING: Correct I was promoted to the Assistant Commander.

MR PRINSLOO: On whose recommendation did this take place?

MR MEIRING: I do not know upon whose recommendation but Deon Martin did promote me.

MR PRINSLOO: Would the recommendation for that promotion have come from some one else or could it have been done on own initiative?

MR MEIRING: I am not well versed regarding the procedure for promotions.

MR PRINSLOO: But you were promoted?

MR MEIRING: Yes. That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: And why would you have been promoted while you were in prison on murder charges?

MR MEIRING: We were promoted because the General had said that we had done a good job and that we were an example to the others.

MR PRINSLOO: You mention the General, which General?

MR MEIRING: General Jappie Oelofse.

MR PRINSLOO: Did you ever receive any medal?

MR MEIRING: No. Thus far I have not received anything.

MR PRINSLOO: You have heard the testimony of Commander Martin, did you attend the meeting at the Voortrekker Monument?

MR MEIRING: No. I was on standby that weekend at work and I could not leave town.

MR PRINSLOO: Thus you do not have any knowledge regarding that incident?

CHAIRPERSON: Pardon me what is your answer?

MR MEIRING: I was on standby Chairperson, I could not leave town.

MR PRINSLOO: But the question honourable Chairperson is that he does not have any knowledge regarding what happened at that meeting?

MR MEIRING: No I do not know anything about what happened at that meeting.

MR PRINSLOO: During December 1995 Oogonia Terreblanche the leader of the AWB and other senior officers of the AWB visited the prison?

MR MEIRING: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: And what happened there?

MR MEIRING: Commander Phil Kloppers asked Mr Terreblanche if he could speak to him seeing as there were rumours going around that we had acted without instructions and that we had behaved like errand children. Upon which Mr Terreblanche said to Mr Kloppers: "Well if everybody had done what they should have done that night you would not be in prison today."

MR PRINSLOO: Could you deduce from the behaviour of Mr Terreblanche and his co-officers that he disapproved of your conduct on that night?

MR MEIRING: No. It definitely appeared to me that he had knowledge of our conducts and that he had approved of it.

MR PRINSLOO: Currently, are you still a member of the AWB?

MR MEIRING: Yes I am still a member of the AWB.

MR PRINSLOO: And the application which you have made which appears on page 68 of the bundle, you are aware of your application that you completed? Do you confirm this?

MR MEIRING: Yes I do.

MR PRINSLOO: Do you confirm the events which occurred in terms of your application?

MR MEIRING: Yes.

MR PRINSLOO: Do you confirm the motivation for your acts?

MR MEIRING: Yes I confirm this.

MR PRINSLOO: As far as you are concerned at that point was there any other method, other than violence which the AWB could have implemented that evening to prevent the ANC/SACP Alliance from winning the elections in the national party government?

MR MEIRING: There was no other option but violence.

MR PRINSLOO: The elections took place on the 27th of April, that was 5 months later?

MR MEIRING: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: So therefore the election was directly involved in it?

MR MEIRING: Yes that is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: The reason why those people were killed that night, what did you understand behind the reason for the killing?

MR MEIRING: We committed these acts in order to attempt to topple the NP government of then and bring about chaos. We were trying to cause as much of a panic situation as possible in order to postpone the elections.

MR PRINSLOO: Thank you Chairperson.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR PRINSLOO.

CHAIRPERSON: Mrs van der Walt?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MRS VAN DER WALT: Mr Meiring, you committed the act and you testified that you believed that the revolution had begun. Do you know of any bomb explosions which occurred directly after that?

MR MEIRING: Yes there were bomb explosions in Krugersdorp and in Pretoria West.

MS VAN DER WALT: What did you think about that?

MR MEIRING: I thought that the revolution was still under way.

MS VAN DER WALT: And it is also so that bomb explosions took place until a few days before the elections in places like Braamfontein and Pretoria and those people who had planted the bombs and detonated the bombs there were all AWB members?

MR MEIRING: Yes.

MS VAN DER WALT: What did you think of that?

MR MEIRING: I still thought that the revolution was under way.

MS VAN DER WALT: No further questions thank you.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MRS VAN DER WALT.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Brink? Oh I am sorry. Mr Knoetze?

MR KNOETZE: Thank you Mr Chairman I have no questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Brink?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY BRINK: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Meiring I am putting my questions to you in english but please answer in afrikaans. Is it correct that the ideology of the AWB is based on Christian principles and more particularly Calvinistic principles?

MR MEIRING: That is correct.

MR BRINK: Because I read this you see in this document which was drawn up by General Oelofse and I refer specifically to page 25. So any way it is common cause that the AWB, the ideology is based on Christian principles, more particularly Christian national principles and again Calvinistic principles. Is that, that is true?

MR MEIRING: That is correct.

MR BRINK: And is it correct that all members of the AWB no matter what their seniority must abide by this aspect of AWB policy? That is to live a good Christian life?

MR MEIRING: That is correct.

MR BRINK: And you regard the Bible as being the absolute word of God?

MR MEIRING: That is correct.

MR BRINK: But God said: "Do not kill." What do you say to that?

MR MEIRING: That is correct.

MR BRINK: And do you agree that Sunday is a holy day in the Christian religion?

MR MEIRING: Saturday is my holy day Chairperson.

MR BRINK: Is it is the, what church do you belong to if I may ask?

MR MEIRING: I am from the Israel Truth.

MR BRINK: Alright, were you before a member of the Dutch Reformed Church or Die Herformde Kerk?

MR MEIRING: Previously I was a member of the Reformed Church.

MR BRINK: So you agree that for Christians, Sunday is a holy day, people go to Church? They pray to their Lord? Do you agree with that?

MR MEIRING: Yes that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: On the day of the incident what Church were you?

MR MEIRING: At that point I did not attend any Church.

MR BRINK: Were you then not surprised that an order should come from a senior member of the AWB to go out and kill people on a Sunday?

MR MEIRING: Chairperson I did not doubt the instructions. I simply carried them out.

MR BRINK: My question was; were you not surprised Mr Meiring?

MR MEIRING: No it did not surprise me.

MR BRINK: I may have misheard you but are you still a member of the AWB?

MR MEIRING: That is correct.

MR BRINK: And do you therefore still believe that what happened on that night, that horrible murderous night was justified?

MR MEIRING: At that point we were in a state of war. The situation has changed and I do not think that anything like that will ever happen again.

MR BRINK: I would like you to answer my question. Do you think that what happened on that night was justified, thinking about it now as a member of the AWB? Either it was justified or it was not justified?

MR MEIRING: Thinking back now then it was justified at that time because it was in a state of war.

MR BRINK: What do you feel about it now?

(PROBLEM WITH MICROPHONES)

MR BRINK: Isn't the situation that the group of you decided to go on a murdering spree without any orders whatsoever from senior AWB officers?

MR MEIRING: I acted on instruction from Commander Martin and Chief Commander Kloppers.

MR BRINK: Isn't the truth the matter that all of you were to a great or lesser extent under the influence of liquor?

MR MEIRING: No. One cannot get drunk from one whisky.

MR BRINK: Were you present in court when Mr Matthews gave evidence? And I refer the Committee to page 26 of the 2nd bundle.

MR MEIRING: Yes I was present.

MR BRINK: Would you like to have a look at the section, the judgment which I am about to read out? Accused number 1 was Matthews, is that so?

MR MEIRING: Yes that was him.

MR BRINK: Accused number 8 was Andrè Visser?

MR MEIRING: That is correct.

MR BRINK: And accused number 9 was Kloppers?

MR MEIRING: That is correct.

MR BRINK: And number 6 was Martin?

MR MEIRING: That is correct.

MR BRINK: In page 26 of the judgment. Do you have it in front of you?

MR MEIRING: Yes I do.

MR BRINK: Can you just read from there, it is the 2nd complete paragraph, it starts with accused number 1, that is Matthews he mentions, just read that to us please?

MR MEIRING: "Accused number 1 says that the group went to accused number 8's house and 9 people were present. That means the 9 original accused. And we drank according to the statement that accused 1 gave to the Police. Accused number 1 asked accused number 6: "Do you think our men have enough courage?" And he brought a bottle of whisky. And the precise words were not confirmed by accused number 1 but he can remember that accused number 9 said something of courage.

MR BRINK: Next sentence?

MR MEIRING: "And afterwards we drove to the house or plot of accused number 6 where we had more drink and (...intervention)

MR BRINK: You drank brandy and whisky?

MR MEIRING: I drank whisky.

MR BRINK: And the others?

MR MEIRING: Well we have to ask them themselves, I cannot answer for them.

MR BRINK: You did not see?

MR MEIRING: No I did not see.

MR BRINK: You sit together and drink?

MR MEIRING: No we did not sit together. I was alone in the kitchen when I drank the whisky at Mr Visser's house.

MR BRINK: This was a bottle of whisky and a bottle of brandy?

MR MEIRING: No at Mr Visser's house we had a bottle whisky and this is the only place where I had a drink.

MR BRINK: Now if General Oelofse gives evidence in these hearings denying that any order was given. What would you say to that?

MR MEIRING: I cannot comment on that. I received my instructions from Deon Martin and Mr Kloppers.

MR BRINK: I understand. Thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry while you are still on page 26, the question that was drawn to your attention. You people drank on 2 occasions at the house of number 8 and also at the place of number 6. Do you see that?

MR MEIRING: I see it Chairperson. Personally I only had a drink at Mr Visser's house.

CHAIRPERSON: That is number 8?

MR MEIRING: Yes that is right.

MS VAN DER WALT: Excuse me. The medical people are not here. And we just want to get Mr Kloppers some oxygen. Okay here he comes right now.

CHAIRPERSON: Do we need to adjourn?

MS VAN DER WALT: No.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Yes it may be that you personally did not drink again at the house of number 6 but did other people drink there? As number 1 has reported to have said?

MR MEIRING: I do not know Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: But you were with them? Would you not have seen it if it happened.

MR MEIRING: I was not in the house with them. I stayed at the vehicle outside.

CHAIRPERSON: So are you now saying that it is possible they might have taken some liquor but that you might not have seen that?

MR MEIRING: Yes. I did not see them.

CHAIRPERSON: So you are not able to disagree with what number 1 is supposing to be saying here?

MR MEIRING: I cannot deny it and I cannot confirm it either.

CHAIRPERSON: Were you through Mr Brink?

MR BRINK: Thank you Mr Chairman.

MS VAN DER WALT: Can we adjourn for a moment so we can make sure?

CHAIRPERSON: We will adjourn for a few minutes. Please call us as soon as the time is right.

CAREL HENDRIK MEIRING: (s.u.o.)

MR BRINK: Mr Meiring the evidence which I propose to lead from some of the victims of this attack will be to the effect that none of the occupants of those vehicles admitted to being ANC supporters or members. They were merely accused of being members or supporters of the ANC and then the shooting started. What do you say to that?

MR MEIRING: I do not know what the people told Martin and Kloppers. I was not part of the questioning.

CHAIRPERSON: Were you not there when they admitted that they were members of the ANC?

MR MEIRING: No I was not with the persons who did the questioning. I was about 10 metres away from there, behind the Sentra.

CHAIRPERSON: So you never heard them admitting that they were members of the ANC?

MR MEIRING: No I did not hear them.

ADV BOSMAN: Mr Meiring you had said that you were the training officer?

MR MEIRING: That is correct.

ADV BOSMAN: The document that was marked as Exhibit A, the phase 1 document, can you tell us what the status of the document is? In other words did you use this document and what did you use it for and how did you see?

MR MEIRING: Mr Chairperson I did not use this document in the training. I just gave basic training like drilling, shooting exercises.

ADV BOSMAN: Did you ever possess the document?

MR MEIRING: Yes I read through the document. I wrote an exam about it but I cannot remember what was in here.

ADV BOSMAN: How did you see this document? As what type of document did you see it? Just as examination material?

MR MEIRING: Yes. Much of the information like the information of guerilla tactics I had knowledge of this. I worked with it every day in the force, in the army. And I just studied it further for examinations.

ADV BOSMAN: And you testified also what rumours that went around as you used the expression naughty children, that you just acted as naughty children and you did not receive instruction. Could you point out where these rumours came from? How did you hear about these rumours?

MR MEIRING: Yes these rumours came from people from outside. If I say outside, it is people outside prison. Because at that stage we were in detention and this the message that came from outside.

ADV BOSMAN: If you talk about people outside the prison - persons of a particular group, persons of your own group?

MR MEIRING: This came from people inside the organisation who said that we acted like naughty children.

ADV BOSMAN: Would it not upset you that people in your own organisation would say so?

MR MEIRING: Yes we were upset to hear that.

ADV BOSMAN: Did you discuss this?

MR MEIRING: Yes we discussed it. And this is why Commandant Kloppers asked Mr Terreblanche and asked him: "These are the rumours going around and could you set it right for us."

ADV BOSMAN: Amongst each other did you speculate why people would say these things? Because they must have had reason to say it?

MR MEIRING: Yes we discussed it amongst each other but we could not get clarity over why these people said so.

ADV BOSMAN: Thank you Mr Chairperson.

MR MALAN: Any of your co-accused, did you see them after the incident and before you were arrested?

MR MEIRING: Not before we were arrested. We did not meet with each other.

MR MALAN: You do not have a social relationship, you not friends?

MR MEIRING: I was not with the organisation very long to be close friends with any of them.

MR MALAN: And the equipment you kept it?

MR MEIRING: Yes.

MR MALAN: And you have testified, I want to call it a pamphlet whatever was referred to but, this act would put the National Party into chaos. How did you see this happening that the government of the day would be or the government of National Unity would be in chaos?

MR MEIRING: I saw it in the light of all the acts were committed country wide at that stage the elections would be disrupted so much that it could not proceed. And the government would run around trying to let it happen.

MR MALAN: And these bombs that you referred to, they exploded before and after this act?

MR MEIRING: That is right.

MR MALAN: Not just after your act?

MR MEIRING: I cannot remember precisely if it is before or afterwards. But I know after we were arrested there were bomb explosions.

MR MALAN: And you say this is all by the AWB?

MR MEIRING: Yes these persons were with us in prison.

MR MALAN: Did you know at that stage, before you were caught that the AWB planted some of these bombs?

MR MEIRING: No I did not.

ADV SIGODI: I will put my questions to you in english you can answer in afrikaans. I just want to know why did you choose that particular crossing, the Radora crossing? Why particularly that place?

MR MEIRING: I did choose the location for the roadblock. It was decided on by Kloppers and Deon Martin.

ADV SIGODI: Do you why they choose it, particularly that particular crossing?

MR MEIRING: I do not know. I would not be able to tell you.

ADV SIGODI: Were you not involved or were you not present when the discussion was being held as to where the roadblock would be held? Were you not present?

MR MEIRING: No I was not present.

ADV SIGODI: The other question that I want to ask you is, I just want to ask you a hypothetical question. If you stopped a vehicle and there were 3 ANC members and 2 IFP members what would you have done?

MR MEIRING: It would not have been my decision. Commander Visser and Martin, this was their decision.

ADV SIGODI: The way you understood the whole operation, in your opinion I just want to know what would you have done as that group if you had found partly ANC and partly IFP motor vehicle?

MR MEIRING: I can honestly not answer that question. I was not in control of the roadblock and the happenings there. I just put up the roadblock. I was not the commanding officer that evening.

CHAIRPERSON: When did you learn for the first time that there was to be a roadblock?

MR MEIRING: The first time I heard of the roadblock was when we went to Martin's house and we picked up the equipment for the roadblock.

CHAIRPERSON: Was there some discussion that followed that decision?

MR MEIRING: No they just told us that we would put up a roadblock and we got into the vehicles and we drove off.

CHAIRPERSON: While you were at the house of accused number 8 at that stage no mention was made of a roadblock?

MR MEIRING: No.

CHAIRPERSON: Number 1 told the court that the group drank neat whisky that is now at the house of number 8.

MR MEIRING: Mr Chairperson he might have drank neat whisky. I did not drink neat whisky. I had a small glass of whisky with water.

CHAIRPERSON: He speaks about the group?

MR MEIRING: No I can testify only to what I drank and as I have said I had a glass of whisky with water.

CHAIRPERSON: You were promoted by Mr Martin?

MR MEIRING: That is correct. I was promoted by Mr Martin.

CHAIRPERSON: But it is the same person who had committed these offences with you?

MR MEIRING: That is correct. He is also my senior in the hierarchy of the AWB.

CHAIRPERSON: What is the value of such a promotion, a promotion that you have been given by somebody who committed the same offence with you and who is in prison with you for something that you did together? What is the value there of?

MR MEIRING: In prison promotion has no value because I was officer of training. What type of training can I give in prison? Personally for myself the Commander gave me the promotion.

CHAIRPERSON: Now why does he give you a promotion which has no value?

MR MEIRING: I cannot answer that question. You will have to ask him.

CHAIRPERSON: Why didn't you ask him. I mean he gave you?

MR MEIRING: No I did not ask him. I just accepted it.

CHAIRPERSON: Actually what I wanted to find out from you was whether this promotion was sanctioned by the people in higher offices in the AWB? This is actually what I wanted to find out from you?

MR MEIRING: I do not know. I did not ask him.

CHAIRPERSON: In your evidence you said that the people you were in the Sentra, when they saw I think 2 people there, the Sentra stopped and then they went out. And you said that they said they wanted to go and talk to the black people there.

MR MEIRING: No they did not say they want to talk to the black people. They just got out, went to the black people and talked to them and assaulted them.

CHAIRPERSON: I must have misheard you then because I thought you said they were going to talk to them.

MR MEIRING: No.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Prinsloo?

RE-EXAMINATION BY MR PRINSLOO: Mr Meiring when you were promoted in prison your co-accused Commander Kloppers and Commander Martin, were they also promoted?

MR MEIRING: Yes. Commander Kloppers was promoted to Brigadier, Badenhorst was promoted by Eugene Terreblanche in prison promoted to Lieutenant. And Commander Martin was promoted to Colonel.

MR PRINSLOO: Who promoted them, Commander Kloppers and Martin? Who promoted them, do you know?

MR MEIRING: If we look at the hierarchy the only person who could do this is General Oelofse.

MR PRINSLOO: And normally with regard to promotions the hierarchy would make the recommendation or Martin would receive instructions to promote you?

MR MEIRING: Yes that was the normal procedure.

MR PRINSLOO: Are you aware that General Oelofse was arrested and charged regarding bomb explosions which had taken place in the Krugersdorp area during December 1993?

MR MEIRING: Yes I am aware of that. General Jappie Oelofse was detained along with us in terms of Section 29 and he was also detained in the Johannesburg prison in the same section as us.

MR PRINSLOO: Do you know that he was prosecuted in the Johannesburg Regional Court on various charges with regard to bomb explosions?

MR MEIRING: Yes I do know about it, him and the other members who were involved.

MR PRINSLOO: Thank you Chairperson, no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: You may step down.

MR MEIRING: Thank you Chair.

WITNESS EXCUSED.

TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION COMMISSION

AMNESTY HEARING

DATE: 23RD APRIL 1998

NAME: PETRUS JOHANNES MATTHEWS

PETRUS JOHANNES MATTHEWS: (sworn states)

EXAMINATION BY MR PRINSLOO: The applicant's application appears on page 39 to 51 and the rest on page 117 to 126. How old are you Mr Matthews?

MR MATTHEWS: I am 30.

MR PRINSLOO: Is it correct that you were charged in the Supreme Court in the Witwatersrand local division on charges of murder and other charges as it appears in the indictment before the Committee?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes that is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: And after that you were found guilty on 4 charges of murder as well as other charges?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes that is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: And Judge Marais gave you the death penalty 4 times?

MR MATTHEWS: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: Is it correct that as a result of the findings of the Constitutional Court that the death penalty is unconstitutional your case was referred to the Appeal Court and your sentence was set aside. Recently you were again for the same case by Judge Marais?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes. In last year the 26th, beg your pardon, last month on the 26th I was sentenced to life.

MR PRINSLOO: That would be the month of March?

MR MATTHEWS: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: You were sentenced to life imprisonment for all the charges?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes.

MR PRINSLOO: And you are serving your prison sentence at the Leeuwkop Prison?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes that is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Matthews you have applied for amnesty in this specific case?

MR MATTHEWS: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: And you have seen your application and the annexures. Do you confirm this?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes.

MR PRINSLOO: Did you undergo military duty?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes I completed my 2 years military duty. I also completed border duty at the Omega Battalion.

MR PRINSLOO: During your training and duty in the Defence Force were you at all informed regarding the relationship between the then South African government and the ANC/SACP Alliance?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes. Especially because I was trained for border duty they made it clear that the ANC/SACP Alliance was our enemy and that they had to be destroyed.

MR PRINSLOO: The duty which you delivered that in terms of a war or what was the situation?

MR MATTHEWS: It was a war situation because I served on the border.

MR PRINSLOO: And it was military by nature?

MR MATTHEWS: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: After you had completed your military duty later on in October 1993 you joined the AWB?

MR MATTHEWS: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: Why did you join the movement?

MR MATTHEWS: It was the only movement which was supporting our own territory, right to self determination and religion. No other party was fighting for our own country and for our own rights at that point.

MR PRINSLOO: At that stage when you joined the AWB how did you see the political development in the country? Was it unavoidable that there would be a take over by the ANC/SACP Alliance?

MR MATTHEWS: It was clear to me that the government of the time was negotiating with the ANC/SACP Alliance and I foresaw that this would lead to an election during which the black majority would take over.

MR PRINSLOO: Was it acceptable to you at that time that the ANC/SACP Alliance take over?

MR MATTHEWS: No I was raised and taught by the government of that time to resist it.

MR PRINSLOO: Were you afraid at that time that a black majority would rule the white minority?

MR MATTHEWS: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: And after you had joined the AWB did you receive any specific training in the organisation?

MR MATTHEWS: During weekends they provided training on a farm. They taught us how to shoot with the home-made shot guns. These were things that I had already learnt in the Defence Force. But Mr Meiring once again showed us these things as well as how to launch attacks.

MR PRINSLOO: Are you english or afrikaans speaking normally?

MR MATTHEWS: I am afrikaans.

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Matthews did you complete any exams in the AWB?

MR MATTHEWS: I wrote an exam regarding phase 1 which appears before the Committee.

MR PRINSLOO: And you passed this exam?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes I did.

MR PRINSLOO: Which rank did you occupy within the AWB?

MR MATTHEWS: At the time of the incident I was a lieutenant because I had only been there for a short time.

MR PRINSLOO: On the 12th of December 1993 were you called in to Uncle Harry's Roadside Cafe?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes I received a call from my sister. She told me that Commandant Martin had told us to meet at Uncle Harry's Roadside Cafe at nine 'o clock dressed in our camouflage gear and with our weapons.

MR PRINSLOO: Did you go in uniform?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes I went as they instructed me to.

MR PRINSLOO: What was your weapon?

MR MATTHEWS: The 357 Magnum.

MR PRINSLOO: And at Uncle Harry's Roadside Cafe as you have already heard in the testimony Commandant Martin was in command. He was in command until Kloppers arrived.

MR PRINSLOO: And when Commandant Kloppers arrived was there any parade?

MR MATTHEWS: He brought us all to attention. And saluted Commandant Kloppers, we were then placed at ease and Kloppers took over from there.

MR PRINSLOO: Were any instructions given to you? Were you told where to go or what would happen at that point as you saw it?

MR MATTHEWS: Mr Kloppers told us that he had come from an order group meeting and that he had received instructions from the General that the time for waiting was over and that the revolution would begin that night. That we were to go out and that he wanted to see corpses.

MR PRINSLOO: This General to whom you are referring who is that?

MR MATTHEWS: That is General Jappie Oelofse.

MR PRINSLOO: And he was in command of that specific area?

MR MATTHEWS: He was in command of the entire Witwatersrand area.

MR PRINSLOO: Was he familiar to you at that point?

MR MATTHEWS: I had met him before on a few occasions but I was not on a first name basis with him. I did not know him that well.

MR PRINSLOO: And at that point in time when an order is referred to did you regard the AWB as a military or a para-military organisation or simply some kind of organisation?

MR MATTHEWS: I regarded it more as a military than a para-military organisation because we wanted to begin the war. We went over to war and that is why I regarded it as a military organisation.

MR PRINSLOO: And your conduct on that evening did you regard it as military?

MR MATTHEWS: I regarded it as military.

MR PRINSLOO: Was any military discipline applied at that specific point of time and afterwards?

MR MATTHEWS: During the entire evening we moved as a military group.

MR PRINSLOO: How did you regard Commandant Martin and Chief Commandant Kloppers? Did you regard them as superior officers or as friends?

MR MATTHEWS: That evening I regarded them as our commanding officers because of the nature of the group in which we were moving.

MR PRINSLOO: Because of your experience in the military?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes that is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: And after the meeting at Uncle Harry's Roadside Cafe did you go to a specific place?

MR MATTHEWS: From the cafe we went to Badenhorst's house where we left the vehicles which we were not using and changed the license plates of the vehicles which we would be using. After that we went to Visser's apartment.

MR PRINSLOO: If we can just go back to the cafe, what instruction was issued there?

MR MATTHEWS: The instruction was that General Jappie Oelofse had said that the revolution would begin that night and that he wanted us to use the hard option. That he wanted to see corpses.

MR PRINSLOO: And after that you went to whose home?

MR MATTHEWS: Firstly we went to Jaco Badenhorst parents' home.

MR PRINSLOO: What happened there?

MR MATTHEWS: Those vehicles which we were not going to be using because we had too many vehicles for the operation, were left there. And those vehicles which we would be using we changed the number plates there of in order to make recognition difficult. And from there on we went to Visser's apartment.

MR PRINSLOO: Before you went to the place where the roadblock was held did you use any alcohol?

MR MATTHEWS: Earlier on in that day at my home I drank a beer or two. We had a braai but I was already in bed and sleeping when I received the call.

MR PRINSLOO: And after that you heard the testimony of your colleagues saying that they had, had whisky. Did you have anything to drink?

MR MATTHEWS: At Mr Visser's home I had whisky and I also had a glass of neat whisky which has been mentioned here.

MR PRINSLOO: After you had the whisky and you departed who drove with you?

MR MATTHEWS: I was driving with Mr Kloppers and Mr Martin in the Mercedes when we went to Mr Martin's residence.

MR PRINSLOO: And when you arrived there, what happened?

MR MATTHEWS: When we arrived there they told us that we would be setting up a roadblock. And they went to fetch the necessary equipment which we would be requiring for the roadblock.

MR PRINSLOO: Did you have any alcohol at Mr Martin's house?

MR MATTHEWS: No I did not.

MR PRINSLOO: And from there you went where?

MR MATTHEWS: From there we departed for the Radora crossing where the roadblock would be set up.

MR PRINSLOO: You have already heard the testimony of Mr Martin and Mr Meiring, were you yourself involved on assault on black persons before you arrived at the place of the roadblock?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes I did assault people along the way.

MR PRINSLOO: Where was this?

MR MATTHEWS: Approximately a kilometre away from Mr Martin's residence we found 2 black people who came walking out of a plot. We stopped, we jumped out, asked them what they were doing there and they did not give us satisfactory answers. And we then assaulted them.

MR PRINSLOO: Did you have an instruction to carry out this action?

MR MATTHEWS: No. When we arrived back at the Mercedes with Mr Kloppers and Mr Martin they were very angry. Especially Mr Kloppers who had said to us that this was not part of our instructions. That we should stick to the instructions which were issued.

MR PRINSLOO: So therefore he admonished you for this?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes he was rather angry with us because of that.

MR PRINSLOO: And in which vehicle did you then travel?

MR MATTHEWS: From Mr Martin's home we were redivided and I was in the Sentra after that.

MR PRINSLOO: And then you went to the Radora/Ventersdorp crossing?

MR MATTHEWS: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: At the crossing a roadblock was set up by Mr Meiring, what was your function there with regard to the maintenance of the roadblock?

MR MATTHEWS: I was given part of a reflector jacket which we had received at Mr Martin's home. And when they would give the signal to pull the car off the road I would stand in the road as a traffic officer and do so.

MR PRINSLOO: There has been testimony that motor vehicles were apprehended.

MR MATTHEWS: We pulled over a number of motor vehicles I am not certain of exactly how many.

MR PRINSLOO: How many of those vehicles were searched?

MR MATTHEWS: All the vehicles were searched. The passengers were questioned and they were let go.

MR PRINSLOO: Was there any occasion where there was a vehicle which would not start?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes. If I remember correctly it was a Ford F100 which was pulled off. We searched the vehicle, found nothing and then the vehicle would not start after that. Mr Kloppers gave us instructions to set the vehicle alight which we did.

MR PRINSLOO: And the passengers of that vehicle, were they black?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes, all the vehicles which we pulled over had black passengers.

MR PRINSLOO: During this specific roadblock did you ever seize any cassette tapes?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes. I did this upon the instruction of Mr Kloppers. I found the cassettes and the equipment box. He told me to take them and that they would be given to the appropriate persons because the cassettes might have contained propaganda and the tools could be given to our mechanics division.

MR PRINSLOO: Did you then hand those items over to specific people?

MR MATTHEWS: I gave the equipment to Mr Meiring because he was the training officer and I gave the cassettes to Mr Visser, also one of the applicants. He would have gone through the cassettes because he had the necessary musical equipment to do so.

MR PRINSLOO: Later a Honda Ballade and another vehicle were apprehended, what happened when these vehicles were apprehended?

MR MATTHEWS: Just before then we received the signal that we had to pull them over and before we reached they had gone off the road already as the others had testified. We heard the doors open and close. We did not really know what had happened there. They approached us and we pulled both vehicles, the Cressida and the Honda off the road. I told them to get out of the vehicles and to sit down at the side of the road. I searched the boots of both vehicles and that is where I found the cassettes and the equipment box. We searched further and Mr Martin was constantly questioning those who were sitting on the ground. Questions such as where do you come from, where are you going, to which political party do you belong? And so forth. Mr Visser walked around the back, or Mr Kloppers walked around the back and if some one who Mr Martin was questioning did not want to answer Mr Kloppers would hit them on the back of the head. Mr Kloppers and Mr Martin came together and called us closer. They said that this was the group and that we would have to eliminate this group, that we would have to shoot them. We formed a line where in which Mr Martin fired the first shot. I did not shoot immediately because my weapon became stuck in my clothing and I could not fire quickly enough. Mr Martin told me not to simply stand there but to shoot. Because he was standing on my right hand side. When I managed to retrieve my weapon I shot at the people.

MR PRINSLOO: How many shots did you fire?

MR MATTHEWS: Six.

MR PRINSLOO: And you said that you fired these shots at the people?

MR MATTHEWS: I fired in the general direction of the people, where they were sitting.

MR PRINSLOO: And is it correct that 4 people were killed during the incident?

MR MATTHEWS: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: The first shot fired by Mr Martin, what was the purpose for that?

MR MATTHEWS: That would have been the commanding shot. When he fired the shot we would begin firing immediately there after and then we would know that everybody would be on their places and not end up in the line of fire by accident.

MR PRINSLOO: After shots had been fired at the people what happened then?

MR MATTHEWS: I had fired my 6 shots when Mr Meiring shouted that we should depart because a vehicle was approaching. We climbed into the Sentra. And before we pulled away Mr Kloppers shouted to us to meet them at the Town Hall. We then left and waited for them at the Town Hall. We saw emergency vehicles from the fire brigade, the Police and the ambulance driving past us and I assume that they would have been on their way to the place where we had just been. And we tried to get out of town as soon as possible so that we could go to Mr Badenhorst's house and change into other clothes. Mr Meiring and I went back to the Town Hall to see if we could find Mr Martin and Mr Kloppers. They had not yet arrived. We went back to Mr Badenhorst's home and there we found Mr Kloppers, Mr Martin and Mr Visser. But Mr Diedericks had already been dropped off at Mr Martin's home.

MR PRINSLOO: And there at the home of Mr Badenhorst was there any object? They mentioned an ear, do you know anything?

MR MATTHEWS: Mr Kloppers asked who had fired shots. Everybody answered in the affirmative even those who had not fired any shot because Mr Kloppers was severely agitated. He thought that we were trying to run away from the scene. He was rather angry and everybody answered in the affirmative. He said that he had received an ear and he ordered some one to go and fetch the ear in the Mercedes. The person fetched the ear, brought it in and he showed it to us. He said that he would take the ear to the General the following day because he would have wanted it.

MR PRINSLOO: Is that General Oelofse?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes that is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: And after that did you return home after these events?

MR MATTHEWS: Chairperson after Mr Kloppers and Mr Martin had spoken to us we left for home. Mr Meiring and I drove together.

MR PRINSLOO: On the 16th of December 1993 did you attend the proceedings at the Voortrekker Monument?

MR MATTHEWS: No I could not attend the proceedings I was in Lichtenburg at that point. I was relieving the manager there. And I could not attend the proceedings.

MR PRINSLOO: Is it correct that on the 6th of January 1994 you were arrested?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes.

MR PRINSLOO: By the South African Police?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes.

MR PRINSLOO: And that you were detained in terms of Section 29, the Act on internal security?

MR MATTHEWS: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: How long were you detained?

MR MATTHEWS: It was from the 6th until the 17th when we first appeared in court.

MR PRINSLOO: Did you make a statement to anybody?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes I did.

MR PRINSLOO: To who did you make a statement?

MR MATTHEWS: To Lieutenant Louis Smit from the South African Police.

MR PRINSLOO: What led to your making a statement?

MR MATTHEWS: They came to fetch me at home, they did not arrest me.

MR PRINSLOO: Is this the Police?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes that is South African Police. They took me to Protea in Soweto Murder and Robbery. When we arrived there I had not said anything. I had denied everything as anybody else would. I tried to maintain my innocence. The Police officers showed Kloppers to me. It looked as if his face was as big as a watermelon because it was so swollen. He also showed me Mr Martin who was seated in another room and I could clearly see that his face was very swollen, that he had been tortured and they said to me: "If you do not want to talk then this will happen." And I made the statement.

MR PRINSLOO: And this statement that you made was it submitted during the court proceedings as evidence?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes, they used my statement as an exhibit.

MR PRINSLOO: And do you have a copy of the statement in front of you? Is the truth contained within that statement or not?

MR MATTHEWS: Chairperson as I am sure, I am speaking for myself, I tried to maintain my innocence. I did not want to admit that I had committed the act. I tried to appear innocent and I tried to place as much of the blame on the shoulders of others. It is very confusing seeing as I was on medication. I had a heart attack on the 4th of January 1994. I was on very string medication at the time that I made the statement.

MR PRINSLOO: So what you are trying to tell the Committee is that it contains certain untruths?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes.

MR PRINSLOO: And in the court itself did you testify?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes I did.

MR PRINSLOO: Regarding this specific case?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes.

MR PRINSLOO: This case and that of Mr Martin and Mr Kloppers did you speak the truth in your own case?

MR MATTHEWS: No not the whole truth.

MR PRINSLOO: Did you at any moment say that you had used alcohol?

MR MATTHEWS: I thought that if one had been under the influence of alcohol it would be a mitigating circumstance and I told them that I had been drinking a lot.

MR PRINSLOO: Was that the truth?

MR MATTHEWS: No I was sober. I had only had one glass of neat whisky and it did not make me drunk.

MR PRINSLOO: Did it influence you in any way?

MR MATTHEWS: No.

MR PRINSLOO: In the prison itself after you had been placed in prison did you meet General Oelofse there, who was being detained?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes. He had been detained from the time of Soweto Police Station with us.

MR PRINSLOO: And in the Diepkloof Prison did General Oelofse speak to you or speak to other applicants in your presence?

MR MATTHEWS: He spoke to all of us because we were held alone in a section and it would have been difficult to speak only to one or two persons and he told us that he wanted to congratulate us with what we had done. That he was very proud of us and that we would later be given medals for the operation which we had carried out. He also said that he was very angry with the other areas who had not acted as they should have.

MR PRINSLOO: Did he express any doubt in terms of what Kloppers had told you that evening at Harry's Roadside Cafe?

MR MATTHEWS: I executed instructions as I received them. I did not doubt them.

MR PRINSLOO: But the question is; when you heard what General Oelofse was saying to you and your group in prison regarding the others who had not carried out instructions, did you in any way after hearing that have any doubt in that which Kloppers had said to you at Harry's Roadside Cafe?

CHAIRPERSON: Before that he doubt the veracity of the instruction then?

MR PRINSLOO: I will repeat the question. Was it affirmative to you regarding what Oelofse had said to you in the prison that what Kloppers had told you to do that evening was in fact the truth?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes.

MR PRINSLOO: And in the prison were there any congratulations extended?

MR MATTHEWS: While we awaiting trial I was promoted to a field cornet by the General because he was there with us, that is General Oelofse. As well along with the two Commandants. He promoted me to field cornet. And later when we had already been sentenced Mr Terreblanche came to visit us in December 1995. He and certain members of the Generals and staff. And from there it became even more clear to me that Mr Kloppers had been speaking the truth. And Mr Terreblanche also congratulated us and after that we also received further promotion in our ranks. And I took this to be a congratulations for the deed.

MR PRINSLOO: Regarding the deed itself the shooting of those persons on that evening, why did you do it?

MR MATTHEWS: I believed that if we did not do anything the elections would take place and our chief objective was to stop the elections so that the black majority government would not come into power because this is what would happen if the elections took place. And we did everything in our power to stop the elections. We did not want them to take place.

MR PRINSLOO: In as far as it affected the AWB did the AWB approve of the elections which were forthcoming?

MR MATTHEWS: No it went as far as the AWB saying along with certain Generals in the Defence Force and Ferdi Hartzenberg and the Conservative Party the war would be initiated against the government of the day and the new government which would come from the elections.

MR PRINSLOO: Would you have committed the same actions on that evening is it had not been an order?

MR MATTHEWS: No I would not have done anything like that out of my own. I acted upon orders of the officers.

MR PRINSLOO: Did you draw any benefit from those actions?

MR MATTHEWS: No.

MR PRINSLOO: Did you act out of racism in any way?

MR MATTHEWS: No it was not a question of racism. We even let certain IFP members let go. If it had been pure racism we would have shot them as well. Which we did not do. Our target was the ANC/SACP Alliance.

MR PRINSLOO: While you were in prison, at any point were protest marches held by the AWB where they demanded release of the prisoners?

MR MATTHEWS: That is correct I still have a poster which I received as a memento from the people.

MR PRINSLOO: Could you just open that up and show it to the Committee? Please turn it this way so that we can read it? Whose photo appears on that poster?

MR MATTHEWS: It is a photo of me.

MR PRINSLOO: Might we refer to that as Exhibit B Chairperson. Who issued that poster?

MR MATTHEWS: General Oelofse collected money for the printing of these posters during a protest march in Potchefstroom. Posters were shown to the people.

CHAIRPERSON: I do not follow the answer to the question.

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Matthews just to explain once more you said that the poster was printed by Mr Oelofse or under the instruction of Mr Oelofse and the poster was used during a protest march in Potchefstroom. For what purpose?

MR MATTHEWS: The AWB asked that we be released as freedom fighters. Mr Terreblanche at times did appear in parliament where he demanded that the soldiers be released. I think this is what led to the printing of that poster in a demand for our release.

ADV BOSMAN: Mr Matthews can you please indicate why your photograph was placed on the poster?

MR MATTHEWS: A photo was taken of each and everyone of us for the posters. It was not only a photo of me.

ADV BOSMAN: So therefore there are several posters with photos of each and everyone of you? Only your group or any other AWB members?

MR MATTHEWS: I am not certain whether there were any other people. Obviously we were not there to witness the printing of these posters.

MR PRINSLOO: Thank you honourable Chair. That completes the testimony.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR PRINSLOO.

CHAIRPERSON: I think this is a convenient stage to adjourn until half past nine tomorrow morning.

PETRUS JOHANNES MATTHEWS: (s.u.o.)

CHAIRPERSON: 24th April the Committee consists as before. The same matters. Is Mr Dreyer here?

MR DREYER: I am yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Are you now joining us?

MR DREYER: Mr Chairman and members of the Committee (...intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: You may remain seated. We remain seated here in these proceedings.

MR DREYER: I appear on behalf of Jappie Oelofse together with my attorney of record. He is on his way. Unfortunately has not yet arrived, apparently he had a problem with his vehicle. Judge I have not been here yesterday because I only received instruction late during the afternoon due to certain problems. First of all when my client received notification that there might be some incriminating statements contained in the applications that is presently before the Committee, he was merely informed that, that would be forthcoming from the evidence of Mr Kloppers. And arrangements were then made and I express my gratitude to the Committee for doing so, to have Mr Kloppers tend his evidence at a later stage and not at the outset. Although that would have most probably be the logical thing to do.

But I have been informed that during the course of the evidence that was tendered yesterday by more than one witness certain incriminating evidence was in fact advanced against Mr Oelofse. Obviously I have not had any insight to that and in view of the fact that we have only informed of the fact that he would have been incriminated by the evidence of Kloppers, it is my respectful submission that we would be entitled to the opportunity to cross-examine those witnesses in so far as he might have been incriminated. I have not obviously been in a position to ascertain when the record of such evidence would be available. So in that sense I would respectfully submit to be afforded the opportunity to once such a record is available to request recall of such witnesses in order to cross-examine them. That is firstly.

Then secondly the other logistical problem that we had is only yesterday because of a direct request to a lady by the surname of Haskins did my attorney of record receive the affidavits in the applications of or the statement and affidavit of Kloppers. Which I only received yesterday afternoon. And I have in fact worked through that in order to be prepared on that. I also only received the criminal proceedings against Martin and Kloppers in the High Court yesterday. So as far as that is concerned I am prepared to proceed with my cross-examination of Kloppers. I also been informed that Martin have already concluded his evidence. So in view of that Mr Chairman I would then submit that as far as the evidence that has been completed I would reserve my right as stated. If there is any witness and I am informed that one of the witnesses is currently being in a position of giving his evidence. I would obviously proceed with my cross-examination on that. That is more or less the background of what I had to offer. Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: The first request you make entails postponing the matter or at least not finalising the matter. Which is something that we, unless something extraordinary happens is not likely to happen. We are not likely to grant that. For a variety of reasons. Firstly we were told that your client had been informed some time back about the possible incriminatory evidence against him. And unless we have got sufficient explanation as to why since then he did not make use of the opportunity as he was entitled to in terms of the Act, we see no reason why we should be driven to a point where we should not finalise these proceedings this week as we intend doing.

A secondly and turning to the nature of the evidence which incriminates your client is not any different from the one that you know of. Namely the kind of evidence that you would expect to be incriminating from Mr Kloppers. Because in most instances, all the previous witnesses did not deport to be testifying directly as to what they heard from your client. They were conveying to us as to what they were told by Mr Kloppers and they were therefore secondary witnesses in that respect. So they are not the primary source of the incriminating evidence against your client. And I think that whatever prejudice your client may suffer as a result of incriminatory evidence that prejudice will be taken care of if your client is given the opportunity to cross-examine the primary source of incrimination.

You will recall that the Act gives your client or any incriminated person the right to present their case if not only if they are incriminated. The Act says if they are incriminated to their prejudice. So it is not sufficient simply to say they are incriminated. It must be an incrimination to their prejudice. And therefore as I have said I think that whatever prejudice your client may think that he may suffer as a result of incrimination by secondary evidence that will be taken care of if he is given the opportunity to cross-examine the primary source of incrimination. It is precisely the same nature of evidence that you know of.

At any rate yesterday to the best of my ability I took note of aspects of the evidence which could be said or be it in a secondary sense be incriminating of your client. And I had in mind to bring them to your attention. And I have tried to pick them up and to systematise them as far as possible so that if you came in I would read those things to you, those aspects to you and I think they will be of assistance to you. And I would suggest that at an appropriate stage, if you so wish, I could read those areas to you and then you will consider your position as to whether really you want, you think of having the matter postponed so that you ask for the record. And in my mind that does not justify that.

At any rate I will provide to you those aspects. I have tried to take note of them yesterday. I am going to give them to you. You will consider that and then you will see how far you can take the matter. For now we are dealing with Mr Matthews. And I do not know whether you would like to put him in the same category with the other witnesses. In other words you refrain from whether you want to refrain for now from putting any questions to him until I am going to give you a summary of what they said in incriminating your client. And then possibly if you are so advised, ask them to come back to have questions put to them. In which case we will proceed and finish with him. Then we have to take a short adjournment. Then I give you a summary of the incriminating evidence against your client. Then you take the matter further.

MR DREYER: Mr Chairman if I may just reply? There is only one aspect that I would want to raise again and that is simply the question of my client having had prior notification of the incrimination. It is my clear instruction that when he received such notice it was expressly limited to the evidence of Kloppers and he was only furnished with the application of Kloppers. He was not furnished with any of the other applications. That is why I said at the outset that he did not receive prior notification of the incrimination by the other witnesses. But I have taken note with respect of what the Committee has relayed to me. As far as this witness is concerned I will obviously listen to his evidence and once his evidence is concluded I would appreciate if I can then just look at the note as the Chairman pointed out. And that I think would then put me in a position to make a proper decision in that regard.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Knoetze?

MR KNOETZE: Mr Chairman if I may? Could Mr Dreyer also please indicate to the Commission whether he is opposing the application for amnesty made by my client, Mr van der Schyff. The reason why I asked this Mr Chairman is we would like to know on what basis that is done if that is the purpose of his presence here. And then also of course whether he tends to call his client so that he can in turn also be cross-examined.

MR DREYER: Mr Chairman and members of the Committee, first of all concerning the first question by my learned friend. My instruction is not on the basis of opposing any of the applications. My appearance before the Committee is simply on the basis at this point in time, to properly see to the interest of my client in view of the possibility of incrimination and on that basis my cross-examination of any witnesses who in fact do so is based. That is the first point.

Secondly as far as my learned friend's question in respect of the possibility of Oelofse appearing for purposes of giving evidence it is my instruction at this stage in time that he is not going to appear as a witness. He is not one of the applicants for amnesty. If the Committee is of the opinion or anyone of the other members that they have any basis upon which he should be called then those steps must be taken. I would also like to indicate that, that is my instruction at this point in time. Obviously that might change in view of the evidence as it transpired before the Committee. But that is my current instruction. That he is not going to appear as a witness.

MR KNOETZE: Mr Chairman if I may just respond to that. I think that is not the way things ought to be done. I mean it is unfair towards anybody testifying here to be subjected to cross-examination and not have the right to retaliate. I mean one do not have to have a broad imagination to know that any sort of thing can be put under cross-examination and if that cannot be tested then the value of the cross-examination is nil.

CHAIRPERSON: Just on that point. Doesn't that also answer the very curiosity if he puts questions to the applicants, he cross-examines the applicants and he puts his client's version. Eventually his client does not testify, what weight do we attach whatever version was put to your client and how adversely does that affect your client? What weight do we attach to a version which was simply put by counsel but not confirmed under oath?

MR KNOETZE: Well I will argue eventually Mr Chairman that you should attach no value to cross-examination but you will in the mean time be wasting this Commission's time and money.

CHAIRPERSON: We cannot know that because we do not know what concessions the applicants are going to make during his cross-examination. They may agree with him under oath, may agree and confirm certain things which he is going to put across on behalf of his client. And in that sense that is evidence.

MR KNOETZE: Well with respect Mr Chairman I think it will be unlikely in view of what has been said here already but can we then accept Mr Chairman that should they disagree the Commission will rule or you will rule that Mr Oelofse testifies so that he can be cross-examined?

CHAIRPERSON: It has not been the practice of the Court to compel people who apport to be acting in their own interest to come to Court and testify. Unless and I am not necessarily saying that, that will be done, unless you on behalf of the applicant would feel that he must be subpoenaed and approach the Committee and say: "I want Oelofse to come and testify. I would like to have him subpoenaed." The Act provides that we can be approached to and be asked that a particular witness be subpoenaed. In which case we can do it.

But you see there are 3 possibilities. That he may choose not to testify and the matter ends there. Secondly we as the Committee may feel that in order for us to come to the truth he must come and testify and we may decide to subpoena him. The third possibility is that if the second one is not exercised you on behalf of the applicants may feel that in the interest of your clients' case he must be subpoenaed and you may ask us to subpoena him. And then we can do so. It is not as if it is just altogether a matter of his personal choice. Of course that does not apply to only him but any other person who may think that he is possessed of information which can enable us to come to the truth.

MR KNOETZE: Thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: It may be Mr Knoetze, it may be that because you know it is difficult to make ruling in advance on issues like this. It may be that it is important that we should know that the attitude is that they are not going to call him. That may of course influence us in determining the ambit Mr Dreyer should enjoy in cross-examining the applicants. We may have to take that into account. The fact that after all his client is not coming. We may broaden or restrict, most likely restrict the ambit of his cross-examination. But we should leave it to the point where if anybody feel that he should be subpoenaed at some point let that be considered.

MR KNOETZE: Thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Because it may cause problems to the applicants if he is subpoenaed. On the other hand if he is subpoenaed he may cause worse problems for the applicants. Nobody knows.

MR DREYER: Mr Chairman if I may just answer something which I think is not quite clear with my learned friend. I would like to reiterate that it is not the purpose of my presence and appearance on behalf of Mr Oelofse to oppose any of the applications. So that is also something which I with respect submit should be taken into account when the Committee decides on the ambit of cross-examination. I am merely exercising my client's rights also in terms of the rules of natural justice to cross-examine anyone who incriminates him. And that is the purposes of my appearance. And obviously that is also clearly borne out by the du Preez case which is a very similar type of application. All I am saying is at this stage, and I would like to reiterate, at this stage it is my instructions to do so. I have just arrived. I have not seen the evidence that has been adduced as yet. I obviously cannot judge what is going to be adduced in the evidence as we proceed. So that might change my instruction.

CHAIRPERSON: By the way we should have, sorry that we did not indicate this earlier on to counsel. We should have indicated that should we not finish this week our intention is to proceed next week. And we hope that people will be available. I see Mr Wagenaar is shaking his head. Although as far as I know two weeks were set aside I think for this matter. I do not know why, how suddenly why Mr Wagenaar would not be available. We will talk about that later Mr Wagenaar. It is alright, it is not that urgent. In the meantime then let us proceed.

MS VAN DER WALT: I have no questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Brink were you through with the witness or?

MR BRINK: I do not think I had started with him.

CHAIRPERSON: Well then lets go to Mr Knoetze first. Mr Knoetze?

MR KNOETZE: I have no questions. Thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Brink?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR BRINK: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Matthews I am putting my question in english but please answer in afrikaans if you wish. You gave evidence in the court case where you were convicted. That is correct isn't it?

MR MATTHEWS: That is correct.

MR BRINK: And you spoke about the amount of drinking which went on prior to this murderous expedition. Is that correct?

MR MATTHEWS: That is correct.

MR BRINK: Do you say that evidence was untrue in regard the quantity of liquor which was taken?

MR MATTHEWS: That is correct.

MR BRINK: Now at the scene instead of taking the cassettes player and the cassettes why didn't you test them there and then to see whether it was music of some sort? It might be pop music or country and western music or Beethoven or whatever. Why didn't you test it there and then? Instead of taking it (...indistinct)?

MR MATTHEWS: What would I have tested it with? We did not have the facilities with us.

MR BRINK: Well wasn't there a tape player in the car?

MR MATTHEWS: The vehicle in which I travelled did not have a cassette player.

MR BRINK: In the vehicles which had the various black people?

MR MATTHEWS: Chairperson that was not part of my order. My orders were to take the cassettes and the tools and to hand them over to the relevant persons.

MR BRINK: Did you see this 13 year old boy who got shot?

MR MATTHEWS: Chairperson I looked at the people but the child which you are talking about now did not appear to be that young.

MR BRINK: Apparently he was 13 years old?

MR MATTHEWS: That is what they say.

MR BRINK: Did you hear any responses to the questions which were allegedly put to the occupants of the 2 motor vehicles?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes I did.

MR BRINK: And what was the nature of those responses?

MR MATTHEWS: The questions were where they came from, where there were going, to which political parties they belonged. Regarding the question where they were going they said that they were going home but regarding the questions about their party political affiliations I heard them say more than once that they were members of the ANC.

MR BRINK: However I suggest to you in fact that no questions at any stage were asked of these people regarding their political affiliation. And there will be evidence to that effect. May I have your comments?

MR MATTHEWS: The testimony will not be true.

MR BRINK: And you ask the Committee to believe that a group of people are forcibly removed from their motor cars, made to stand or sit on a wall, people who in such circumstances would have been terrified would have voluntarily told you their political affiliations? Is that what you want the Committee to accept? I see you are swallowing rather hard.

MR MATTHEWS: I am not swallowing. You should watch what I said. Chairperson I was a member of the AWB and before that I was a member of the Conservative Party. And regardless of any circumstances or any questions I would have said that I was a member of the party. I am not ashamed of my membership of the party.

MR BRINK: No you missing the point. You heard my questions to Mr Martin. Did you not? Or possibly to Mr Meiring? That this was not a proper roadblock. And the conventional roadblock is not concerned with peoples' politics. It is concerned with drunken driving, stolen goods and that sort of thing. Do you agree?

MR MATTHEWS: I do not understand how you arrive at this point.

MR BRINK: Do you agree with me that at a conventional roadblock, that is a roadblock - don't you want?

MR MATTHEWS: No I think they take to long to.

MR BRINK: You can answer in afrikaans (...indistinct) A conventional roadblock is one normally held by the Police. You agree with that?

MR MATTHEWS: That is correct yes.

MR BRINK: And that is with the view to discovering if possible whether there has been drunken driving, whether there has been stolen goods, stolen vehicles. That sort of thing. Do you agree?

MR MATTHEWS: That is correct.

MR BRINK: And it is extremely unusual I suggest for any conventional roadblock member to ask people who they are searching or interrogating about their political affiliations.

MR MATTHEWS: But that was our task. That was the objective of the roadblock. To question people regarding their political affiliations.

MR BRINK: Yes I go along with that. What I am suggesting to you is that these people would by the very nature of things have been terrified because of the manner in which they were treated. And they would not have volunteered their political affiliations.

MR MATTHEWS: They did tell us to which party they belonged.

CHAIRPERSON: Well you know when this question was first asked your answer was you had been a member of the CP and then made subsequently a member of the AWB and if anybody asked your political affiliation you would have proudly at once, proudly without hesitation told them that you are a member of the AWB. But the crux of the question which Mr Brink is asking you is if you find yourself at midnight in Soweto surrounded by people in ANC uniform and they ask you what political party do you belong to, would you probably say to them: "I am a member of the AWB"? Would you say that?

MR MATTHEWS: Chairperson I cannot say that with certainty because I have never found myself in such a situation. But I would have probably have said something to that effect.

CHAIRPERSON: Oh are you now uncertain as to how you would have responded?

MR MATTHEWS: I have never found myself in a situation like that therefore I do not know how I would respond in a situation like that.

CHAIRPERSON: I thought when this question earlier on was asked to you, I thought your answer was that at all times you would proudly announce yourself as being a member of the AWB? The fact that you are in Soweto, twelve 'o clock midnight surrounded by people in ANC uniform does make some difference? Doesn't it Mr Matthews? Would that make a difference?

MR MATTHEWS: I cannot say with certainty but I believe that I would have said that I belong to the AWB or the CP.

CHAIRPERSON: Well Mr Brink is putting it to you in that context of my explanation to you. He is putting it to you that people finding themselves around twelve 'o clock midnight, surrounded by people in AWB uniform or AWB insignia, and if those people happen to be members of the ANC he is saying it is unlikely that they would just voluntarily at once admit that they are ANC members. Even of they are. That is what he is saying to you. And he is saying what you are telling us that they voluntarily, without any problem, or not voluntarily but they just immediately admitted that they were ANC members. He is putting it to you that it is unlikely that would have happened. That is what he is saying. That is the crux of his question.

MR MATTHEWS: Chairperson, Mr Kloppers was walking behind the people while Martin was questioning them. And Commandant Kloppers would hit those people who were responding to the questions that were asked and they answered that they were in fact members of the ANC.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Brink?

MR BRINK: Well I put to you Mr Matthews that would have been extremely unlikely indeed.

MR MATTHEWS: That is your perspective but that is not how I see it.

MR BRINK: Right Exhibit B which you have put in, this poster or placard calling for your release, can you tell the Committee again, if you have not already who compiled it or who was behind it?

MR MATTHEWS: Mr Terreblanche, the leader of the AWB as well as General Jappie Oelofse, who was involved in the fundraising for the printing of the poster.

MR BRINK: Yes so Mr Eugene Terreblanche was the main person behind this placard? It was his idea was it according to your (...indistinct)?

MR MATTHEWS: At various occasions he said that he wanted to get us out of prison and that he would do anything to achieve this. He printed the posters to demand our release.

MR BRINK: Yes and he did that presumably because he approved of your conduct on that particular night?

MR MATTHEWS: That is correct.

MR BRINK: And I presume that Mr Terreblanche will be coming to give evidence on your behalf to confirm this?

MR MATTHEWS: Whether he would be man enough to do that I cannot say but indeed it is true that after the time he visited us numerous times to congratulate us with what we had done and to express his approval of our conduct.

MR BRINK: I am talking about these hearings MR Matthews. Have you been directly or indirectly in touch with Mr Terreblanche about your application?

MR MATTHEWS: You would have to ask my legal team about that. I cannot answer that question. I have been in prison, I do not have free access to him and I cannot see him when I want to.

MR BRINK: I appreciate that. I appreciate your situation. Did you ask when you spoke to your legal representatives about Exhibit B, that is the placard, did you ask them to interview Eugene Terreblanche and possibly get him to come to your hearing? To confirm what you have told the Committee about his approval?

MR MATTHEWS: Chairperson on the 7th of last month Mr Terreblanche held a meeting during which he said that he would accept the responsibility and accountability for the deeds which had been committed before the April elections. And furthermore he said that he would issue a press release and after that on the 8th it was on the news. And I would have expected from him as a leader of the AWB to testify on our behalf.

MR BRINK: Thank you?

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR BRINK.

CHAIRPERSON: What is the answer? You said you did not tell your lawyers to go and interview him or did you?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes we suggested this but we do not know whether they did it. I do not know whether he will.

ADV BOSMAN: Mr Matthews you testified that the main purpose of your action was to stop the election, is that correct?

MR MATTHEWS: That is correct.

ADV BOSMAN: And before this incident occurred what were your expectations? What would your organisation do to stop the elections?

MR MATTHEWS: The AWB would establish chaos in the country. People panicked before the elections so that the elections do not happen. Several bombs exploded before the elections and just afterwards. And this was the acts of AWB members and we thought that it would get worse but it did not happen. But we wanted to have the country in a state of chaos.

ADV BOSMAN: But you said that you primarily expected bomb explosions?

MR MATTHEWS: Not just bomb explosions. We thought that on this specific evening just more than our group would go out and we were under the impression that the whole AWB would attack the same evening.

ADV BOSMAN: Have you expected that the people would just murder around the country?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes.

ADV BOSMAN: And before the signal was given Mr Martin testified that a core group met and they discussed whether this was the correct target to identify, were you part of that group?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes I was.

ADV BOSMAN: You also saw this as the target?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes.

ADV BOSMAN: Thank you Chairperson.

MR MALAN: Mr Matthews can you remember that where we talked about you need to have the courage to do something? Where did that happen?

MR MATTHEWS: At the flat of Mr Visser.

MR MALAN: Who said this?

MR MATTHEWS: Mr Kloppers said so.

MR MALAN: And what was said? Courage for what?

MR MATTHEWS: I did not hear the whole conversation. I just heard the Commanders speaking and they asked men if they had enough courage to continue with the operation.

MR MALAN: Did you know what the operation was?

MR MATTHEWS: At that stage I did not know.

MR MALAN: But you drank with them to have courage?

MR MATTHEWS: That is not the reason why drank. I just drank a glass of whisky because I drink whisky.

MR MALAN: But the bottle was taken out for courage. That is why the word courage was used, is that correct?

MR MATTHEWS: No. It might have been so in the testimony in court but it was not so.

MR MALAN: Did you say this in court or didn't you?

MR MATTHEWS: In court I testified to protect myself and I drew the attention away from myself to put the blame on other persons.

MR MALAN: You say Mr Deon Martin is your brother-in-law?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes.

MR MALAN: When you received the message to prepare for service that evening were you happy about that?

MR MATTHEWS: Chairperson initially not but it was an instruction and I complied.

MR MALAN: Did you tell anyone you did not feel like it?

MR MATTHEWS: I told my wife that I did not want to go out because I would leave for Lichtenburg early the next morning.

MR MALAN: Excuse, you said the following morning?

MR MATTHEWS: I had to go to Lichtenburg.

MR MALAN: And why did you go?

MR MATTHEWS: Because it was an instruction.

MR MALAN: Did you hear Mr Martin saying anything or was any messages conveyed to Mr Martin to the effect that you had to be there?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes I heard them in the background saying that I had to attend and I accepted it as an order.

MR MALAN: Were the words correct when you heard them say that, tell him that you were going to be there?

MR MATTHEWS: That was 4 years, 4 months ago. I cannot remember his precise words.

MR MALAN: Was it an order?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes it was an order not a threat.

MR MALAN: When the persons drank the whisky and courage was spoken of were you concerned?

MR MATTHEWS: Drinking whisky and the courage, there is no relationship between the two.

MR MALAN: Well lets have them follow up then, it does not have to relate to each other. But you needed the courage to do whatever had to be done. Were you scared?

MR MATTHEWS: No I was not scared but I was attent because I expected anything because Commandant Kloppers told us that we were looking for corpses.

MR MALAN: The weapons, where were the weapons handed over to the persons, that was used in this act?

MR MATTHEWS: At the roadside cafe Commander Kloppers gave weapons to us.

MR MALAN: Why did you say in your initial testimony you received it at the house?

MR MATTHEWS: As I have mentioned previously on the 2nd January I had a heart attack and I was under medication. And when I gave my statement I was a bit confused and that is why I just gave the statement. The order of everything is not correct there.

MR MALAN: Do you remember at some stage you asked your sister to keep the revolver?

MR MATTHEWS: I just suggested it because she would have been alone at the small holding. And Commandant Martin told me to take the weapon with me.

MR MALAN: This black person that you met along the road. You got out and you hit him?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes I was one of those who hit him.

MR MALAN: Who were the other persons?

MR MATTHEWS: If I recall correctly it was Mr van der Schyff, Mr Diedericks, myself and Mr Visser who got out of the vehicle.

MR MALAN: Andrè Visser?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes that would be Andrè Visser.

MR MALAN: Andrè Visser at some stage did he come back to say he shot this person?

MR MATTHEWS: Mr Chairperson he said so but we all knew it was not so.

MR MALAN: You all what?

MR MATTHEWS: We knew it was not the truth.

MR MALAN: Why did he say this?

MR MATTHEWS: Mr Chairperson I do not know if it was in the heat of the moment that he said so but you can ask him yourself. I cannot answer for him.

MR MALAN: Yourself and Mr Meiring, you are close friends, you communicated well with each other?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes. I knew Mr Meiring for quite some time. Not very long but quite some time.

MR MALAN: Did you express your fears towards him about what was to happen that evening?

MR MATTHEWS: In my original statement I said it and once again I put it to the Committee I did this to protect myself and to draw attention away from myself. And that my statement was not totally true.

MR MALAN: What was the conversation about or did you not speak to him at all?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes we had spoken but I cannot remember what we spoke about.

MR MALAN: Did you not tell him about your fears that evening?

MR MATTHEWS: I told him there was going to be trouble but not in the sense that we were afraid. We had an order to carry out and that is what we wanted to do.

MR MALAN: Now you please have to tell me did you tell him what you said? When I put the question first time to you so you said you just put it in there to protect yourself. Now you say you did discuss it with him. And the words that you used: "We are busy with shit here." Now but now you say you did not say it, you just said it to protect yourself. But what you did say was you told him there is going to be big trouble. Explain the difference to me please?

MR MATTHEWS: In my statement I put it in to exempt myself and to get a lighter sentence if possible. I said it then but it is not in the context where, I should not have put it in the statement but this is a general discussion that we had.

MR MALAN: But you told him that trouble is coming? You told him he and yourself this evening would be in trouble?

MR MATTHEWS: No not in trouble.

MR MALAN: In your original statement you referred to the ear and you said that Mr Kloppers laughed. Do you remember you referred to it?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes I can remember.

MR MALAN: Can you remember what you said in your statement? What did you say?

MR MATTHEWS: I said he laughed like a pig.

MR MALAN: Can you remember what he said? Is that all he said? You said: "He laughed like a pig. And then he showed the ear to us." And then he showed the ear to you?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes that is what I said in my statement.

MR MALAN: Can you remember that happening?

MR MATTHEWS: Mr Chairperson, as I put it to you again. I tried to exempt myself. I did not want to go to prison. I wanted to get a lighter sentence. So of course the person who was in charge of us that evening I wanted to put him in trouble.

MR MALAN: But you did not know about the ear before the time?

MR MATTHEWS: I am not here to criticise him I am just here to say what my part was in this whole act.

MR MALAN: I ask you again. Your part in the ear, on that specific evening, your knowledge of this ear, when did you hear first about this ear?

MR MATTHEWS: When we got to Mr Badenhorst's house.

MR MALAN: Is it the first time you heard about this ear?

MR MATTHEWS: That is correct. It is the first time I heard about this ear.

MR MALAN: What happened there?

MR MATTHEWS: He showed the ear to us and he said he would take it to the General.

MR MALAN: He said he would show it to the General? And it is the same testimony that you gave in court. That he showed the ear to you and he would take it the following morning to the General?

MR MATTHEWS: That is what he told us.

MR MALAN: That is what you said in court too? Is that correct?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes.

MR MALAN: You had no other knowledge of this ear, nothing else concerning this ear?

MR MATTHEWS: Mr Chairperson I was not present when anything else was mentioned about this ear. I was there for a short while with this movement and I was not socially with them for much time.

MR MALAN: At any time did you doubt your membership to the AWB?

MR MATTHEWS: From my statement it seems so but last year only, 1997 I resigned from the movement.

MR MALAN: Why did you resign?

MR MATTHEWS: I saw that Mr Terreblanche was not with the people and he did not believe in the ideology. He did not support his persons. He stands on the stage and he just sweeps all the people up but he does not really support them. I could not belong to such a party.

MR MALAN: You did not want to belong to this party because it did not carry out its threats?

MR MATTHEWS: I do not think I can answer that question. But regarding the party's threats, what threats are you talking about?

MR MALAN: Let me ask this question to you in two parts. In your statement you say that your doubts about the party was because of the act that was perpetrated.

MR MATTHEWS: Yes as I said yesterday I made this statement. I saw the two commanders after they were tortured. I wanted to say anything. I was afraid these people could attack me too. I saw what they looked like. Commandant Martin's leg had to be put off and you can see what Commandant Kloppers looks like because ...

MR MALAN: ... If I understand you correctly he talks a lot but he does not do anything?

MR MATTHEWS: That is correct.

MR MALAN: And you want him to do?

MR MATTHEWS: He has to support his people who perpetrated these acts that he ordered.

MR MALAN: His statement on television did you see that he supports the amnesty applications in principle but he is sorry that you are looking for an order that does not exist?

MR MATTHEWS: I got my order from this person here. This man gave me the order. Other than that I cannot say anything.

MR MALAN: My question is; do you have knowledge of what Mr Terreblanche said last night? Do you know that he was on TV last night?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes I do.

MR MALAN: Is your deduction then that last night he said that you should not get amnesty? That he does not support you?

MR MATTHEWS: The piece they had on TV was that he said that he says that we sit and lie because we looking for some one who gave an order. He says sorry that he does not want to stand by his own deeds. I cannot answer for that sorry. I had a person who gave me an order but where he got it from.

MR MALAN: Why are you angry with him because he was not part of the person who gave you the order? You said Mr Kloppers gave you the order. You refer nothing to Eugene Terreblanche you refer to Mr Kloppers.

MR MATTHEWS: I was directly under Mr Kloppers and Commandant Martin. They received the instruction. I did not question the order. I just acted.

MR MALAN: Do you know that they received order or do you know that you received order?

MR MATTHEWS: I know that I received order.

MR MALAN: That is right you do not know if they received order. They just tell you that.

MR MATTHEWS: Yes, but you need to ask him. He is here to testify.

MR MALAN: Thank you Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: You told us you were one of the people who got out of the Sentra.

MR MATTHEWS: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: To assault the people there?

MR MATTHEWS: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: And you said they were assaulted because when questioned they did not give satisfactory answers or explanation?

MR MATTHEWS: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Why was the answer not satisfactory?

MR MATTHEWS: They came out of the gate of a plot close to Mr Martin's plot. It was relatively late that evening and they looked suspicious and it is suspicious they walking on that time of the night coming out of a small holding. And we got out and we asked them what were they doing there, do they live there. And they said no they do not live there. And we assumed that they were perpetrator and we assaulted them.

CHAIRPERSON: Why did you assume that because they gave you their own explanation as to why they were there?

MR MATTHEWS: That is correct Chairperson but speaking for myself I was ready that evening after what Commandant Kloppers told us and I was hasty in assaulting these persons.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you think that was also part of what you were supposed to do that night?

MR MATTHEWS: Chairperson we at the house of Commandant Martin we decided that we going to put up the roadblock. That was not my instruction to assault people along the way but I did it and Commander Kloppers reprimanded me. And not only myself but the other persons, we were all reprimanded and disciplined, told to get into the car and continue.

CHAIRPERSON: Why did you do something in the presence of the person under whom you were, why did you go and do something which was not part of the operation that night?

MR MATTHEWS: Chairperson I think we were hasty and we were nervous. Why we did it I cannot answer that now.

CHAIRPERSON: Well is it not because that night you were just looking for black people to harass and assault?

MR MATTHEWS: That was not our order. I acted outside my orders there and I was disciplined as I said by Commandant Kloppers regarding my action and all of us who got out of the vehicle we were disciplined. Because it was not part of our instruction.

CHAIRPERSON: We were told about the training that you people received in terms of policy and military discipline.

MR MATTHEWS: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: I cannot imagine how if the purpose was not to harass black people that night, I cannot imagine how you could while you are on a military operation if indeed you were then deviate, disciplined a member as you were militarily, deviate from that in the presence of your commanders. And do something which you knew was not in line?

MR MATTHEWS: This was not in the presence of the two commanders. They were in the Mercedes, they were in front of us. And we were in the Sentra, we were behind them. Then we saw these people. They would not have seen the persons because they were quite a way in front of us. And they were not present.

CHAIRPERSON: Were you taking a chance?

MR MATTHEWS: With regard to what? To assault these people?

CHAIRPERSON: Were you taking a chance that your commanders might not be aware of the fact that you stopped and assaulted people? Did you hope that they would not know?

MR MATTHEWS: I hoped that they would not know of it.

CHAIRPERSON: But you were following them weren't you?

MR MATTHEWS: They were quite a way in front of us and we stopped quickly, jumped out, asked the question, assaulted them and back in the car and we left again.

CHAIRPERSON: Well what do you think they would do if they driving and suddenly the other car which is following them is not there?

MR MATTHEWS: Exactly what they did. They stopped the car and reversed and they reversed to where they landed up with us and he asked us what happened. They did not hear the shout that Mr Visser said that he shot.

CHAIRPERSON: You must have known that they would realise that you had stopped and started questioning black people and assaulting them?

MR MATTHEWS: They knew that and they reprimanded us.

CHAIRPERSON: When did you give the cassette to Mr Meiring?

MR MATTHEWS: When we got to the City Hall for the first time. Excuse me Mr Chairperson. I did not give the cassette to Mr Meiring. I gave it to Mr Visser.

CHAIRPERSON: About the bakkie which was stopped and then later stalled, which had to be pushed to get started. You told us that Mr Kloppers ordered you to help push the car?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes he told us to push the car.

CHAIRPERSON: But the evidence which was given before the Judge, the trial Judge was that you people in turn ordered some people to push the car and you were pointing guns at those black people and ordered them to push the car. You did not personally push the car.

MR MATTHEWS: No we pushed the car ourselves, this bakkie.

CHAIRPERSON: So that kind of evidence would not be the truth?

MR MATTHEWS: No it is not true.

CHAIRPERSON: And you said they were questioned about their political affiliation?

MR MATTHEWS: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: And then what happened?

MR MATTHEWS: They answered these questions and said that they were ANC members.

CHAIRPERSON: After what happened?

MR MATTHEWS: Mr Kloppers walked up to them with the baton that he had and he tapped them. He did not hit them. But they answered that they were ANC members.

CHAIRPERSON: He just tapped them but he did not hit them?

MR MATTHEWS: Not it was not a hard shot.

CHAIRPERSON: What was the purpose of the blows?

MR MATTHEWS: I was not intently involved with the questioning. I just heard what happened. I was examining the boots of the vehicles. And the purpose of the questioning you are going to have to ask the Commanders themselves.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Matthews the evidence was that these people were assaulted with batons.

MR MATTHEWS: Mr Kloppers had the one baton with him.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Matthews the evidence was that these people were assaulted with batons.

MR MATTHEWS: No Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: You did not see that?

MR MATTHEWS: I was busy examining the cars.

CHAIRPERSON: You did not see that?

MR MATTHEWS: I just saw the one instance where Mr Kloppers hit the one man over the head with it.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry?

MR MATTHEWS: I just saw the one incident when Mr Kloppers hit the man with the baton on the head.

CHAIRPERSON: Hit him or tapped him, what did you see, the hitting?

MR MATTHEWS: I saw the blow, it was not a hard blow. I have seen harder blows.

CHAIRPERSON: So as far as you are, you are saying to us that as far as you, you never saw anybody assaulted with a baton that day? Is that what you are telling us?

MR MATTHEWS: At the scene I did not really see anybody being assaulted except for Kloppers who asked them questions.

CHAIRPERSON: I got the impression that they did not at once admit, if they did admit, they did not at once admit that they were members of the ANC and that is why the batons came into the picture.

MR MATTHEWS: Mr Chairperson I do not know how long they took to answer. I just heard a part of the questioning because I walked past them while I searched the vehicles, the boots of the vehicles.

CHAIRPERSON: We will come to the time if need be as to how long it took for them eventually to say they were ANC members if they did say that. All I am saying to you at this stage is that these people did not, at once when asked, they did not say or admit that they were ANC members. It was only after the batons came into the picture and into play.

MR MATTHEWS: I suggest that you ask that question to Mr Kloppers. I was not as involved there that I could give a correct and acceptable answer.

CHAIRPERSON: So your answer is that you do not know?

MR MATTHEWS: Not with conviction.

CHAIRPERSON: I got the, I may be wrong, I got the impression that when Mr Brink asked you the question yesterday you said that somebody hit them and then they agreed that they were ANC. Am I incorrect?

MR MATTHEWS: That is correct. That is just how I explained it to them about Mr Kloppers and Commandant Martin.

CHAIRPERSON: So they agreed that they were ANC only after somebody had hit them with a baton?

MR MATTHEWS: It seemed to me as such but I was not involved with the questioning myself. I was searching through the boots of these vehicles. I was not paying much attention to what the two officers were doing.

CHAIRPERSON: As far as you could observe they, as far as you could observe. I know you were not closely involved with the questioning according to your evidence. But as far as you can tell nobody admitted that they were ANC until they were assaulted? If you do not know say: "I do not know"?

MR MATTHEWS: Excuse me?

CHAIRPERSON: If you do not know you must say: "I do not know." I am just asking you. As far as you could observe, you could observe nobody admitted that they were ANC until they were assaulted with batons?

MR MATTHEWS: When the one person left the vehicle before they sat down then I heard something about ANC. That was before they were assaulted.

CHAIRPERSON: Only one?

MR MATTHEWS: That is what I heard.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you not think that these people or the other people with the exception of that one, did you not think that they might only be conceding that they were ANC members simply because of the assault on them?

MR MATTHEWS: Chairperson I was not involved with that. And I cannot give you any certain answers.

CHAIRPERSON: But once a person admitted that he was ANC you were going to kill him? You Mr Matthews, you were going to kill him?

MR MATTHEWS: That would have been the decision of Commandant Martin and Commandant Kloppers. They would have taken the decision. Perhaps you would have to ask them about that.

CHAIRPERSON: But I thought the decision had already been taken Mr Matthews at the time when the roadblock was put up you already knew that; "we were going to kill people who were members of the ANC."

MR MATTHEWS: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Didn't you know that?

MR MATTHEWS: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: So when these people were questioned you knew that once they said they were ANC they were going to be killed? You knew that?

MR MATTHEWS: Mr Chairperson that is why we formed the (...indistinct).

CHAIRPERSON: You knew that?

MR MATTHEWS: That would have been the decision of Commandant Martin and Kloppers. Not my own decision.

CHAIRPERSON: The decision, was the decision already not taken?

MR MATTHEWS: They had to select the target group to us. Before that it did not matter who was pulled over they had to decide, we simply executed tasks. The tasks which were given by Commandant Martin and Kloppers. They would decide who our targets would be and what our actions would be.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Matthews, you knew that if anybody at the roadblock turned out to be a member of ANC there was a good chance that he was going to be killed?

MR MATTHEWS: There was a very good chance of that but it was not my decision.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you not, for your part, did you not think that given the fact that anybody who turns out to be ANC he is likely to be killed, you have to be, to make sure that indeed and in fact such a person really has to be a member of the ANC?

MR MATTHEWS: Chairperson that would have been the work of Commandant Martin and Kloppers. They had to determine that, we simply executed their tasks.

CHAIRPERSON: Were you just operating like a mechanical robot or what?

MR MATTHEWS: I am not a mechanical robot. I followed the instructions of Commandant Martin and Kloppers. They would have given us the instructions.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you not have any, you did not have any measure of discretion to exercise?

MR MATTHEWS: In that case I could not use my own discretion. It would have been their discretion to use in the determination of the target.

CHAIRPERSON: You referred (...intervention)

ADV BOSMAN: Might I just add to what the Chairperson has asked you? He asked you whether or not you had any discretion and you answered a question of mine that you were part of a core group which made decisions. What was the nature of discussion when as a core group you decided on the target?

MR MATTHEWS: I was a member of the core group but I did not participate in the decision making. We were only part of the core group when they handed over the instructions to us and told us who would be the target.

CHAIRPERSON: Why did you have to be present in the group?

MR MATTHEWS: I would have been one of the persons who would be shooting.

CHAIRPERSON: Not the group, the core group?

MR MATTHEWS: The most of us were called together in the core group and given instructions that we would shoot these people.

CHAIRPERSON: Now why did you have to be there if there was no major role for you within the decision making?

MR MATTHEWS: Who would they have issued the instructions to if I had not been present. I had to attend the group.

CHAIRPERSON: But I am referring to the core group which made the decisions and then conveyed these decisions to the rest of the people present.

MR MATTHEWS: The core group did not take the decisions. Decisions were made by Commandant Martin and Kloppers. They called us into the group and told us who our target was and that Martin would fire a shot to signal to us when the shooting would begin. We were not part of the discussion process we were merely given instructions.

MR MALAN: Can you explain to me why they would only call out a core group to convey these decisions to because afterwards the rest of the group would form a line?

MR MATTHEWS: Mr Diedericks did not have a weapon on him that night so it would have been useless to call him into the core group. Mr Meiring was standing behind the Sentra and watching the road and he would have apprehended people who were trying to run away. Well he had his instructions. Myself and Etienne Visser, Mr Badenhorst were conveyed instructions of who would be shot because we had the weapons.

MR MALAN: But isn't it true that everyone had a weapon except Mr Diedericks?

MR MATTHEWS: That is true it was only Mr Diedericks that did not have a firearm. Mr Meiring behind the Sentra was watching the road to Randfontein.

MR MALAN: After the core group was told who the target was how were the others notified who they must shoot?

MR MATTHEWS: Mr Chairperson everyone in the group did shoot.

MR MALAN: Could you please explain to me what the difference is between the core group and those people who shot?

MR MATTHEWS: I did not use the word core group. They were not the brain behind the story. We were merely called to a group where we received instructions to fire at these people.

MR MALAN: It is very difficult for me to understand that a small group is called out and you have referred to a group, and the comprehension there of is that it was not everybody who was being called together. And a decision was conveyed. But the others were not called in. You said one was standing at the Sentra and you were merely a few steps away from the Sentra where the group was being called together. I am simply asking you. I am asking you a question.

MR MATTHEWS: I do not know why they called us to a small group.

MR MALAN: But there they told you who the target was and who you had to fire at.

MR MATTHEWS: That is correct.

MR MALAN: And were any other members notified of the target, those that had not attended the small group?

MR MATTHEWS: After we had been given instructions we went ahead with the firing. I do not who else was notified.

MR MALAN: Were you not set up in a line? All of you?

MR MATTHEWS: Not all. As I have explained Diedericks was standing to one side because he did not have a firearm. Mr Meiring was standing to another side because he had to watch the road.

MR MALAN: But he also fired?

MR MATTHEWS: No he did not fire.

MR MALAN: With your permission I would just like to return to another aspect you have testified this morning. The 13 year old child did not appear to be that young to you. You said that you had seen all of them and he did not look that young?

MR MATTHEWS: No he did not.

MR MALAN: You looked at everyone and you sure that you saw him and he did not appear to be that young?

MR MATTHEWS: My task was to pull the vehicles over and to search the boots. I did not look at the people intensively and ask them how old they were or try to determine how old they were.

MR MALAN: I am not asking what you did not do. I just want you to answer me regarding what you did. You said that you looked at the people?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes I looked in the general direction of the people.

MR MALAN: You saw that there was a younger person?

MR MATTHEWS: No.

MR MALAN: But he did not appear to be that young, could you just explain that to me that a 13 year old child did appear to be that young?

MR MATTHEWS: Chairperson it was night time, it was very dark, they were not all clearly visible and it was not my task to look at the people. I had to search the vehicles and that is what I did.

MR MALAN: But why are you testifying about things which you did not see? Why are you testifying about the 13 year old child which you saw but did not appear to be that young?

MR MATTHEWS: Chairperson I did not testify regarding the 13 year old child. You merely asked me.

MR MALAN: But you answered that question.

MR MATTHEWS: I told you that he was there but there was no person among those who I regarded that was that young.

MR MALAN: Did you not testify or hear anything about that in the court proceedings?

MR MATTHEWS: I did not see anything like that.

MR MALAN: You were in court, there was testimony in court did you listen to the testimony delivered when you were charged?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes I did.

MR MALAN: Did you hear that they were talking about the children who were in the motor vehicles?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes they did mention the children but I myself did not see the children.

MR MALAN: Did you hear that they mention these children, that they mention the age of these children? Did you hear in court that they testified that there was a 13 year old and 9 year old child in their group? That was testified before you in court.

MR MATTHEWS: I must have heard it.

MR MALAN: And you still do not know it. You are simply accepting my word?

MR MATTHEWS: But then I would have to accept the word of the plaintiffs. If I did not see it I cannot testify regarding it.

MR MALAN: You heard that there was a 9 year old child involved in the court?

MR MATTHEWS: I heard it after the time.

MR MALAN: Or did you say that you must have heard it?

MR MATTHEWS: I must have heard it. If it was said in court I must have heard it.

MR MALAN: No further questions Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Finally you referred to a speech which you say was made by Mr Terreblanche, I think you said the 7th of March. I am not sure which year, you know which?

MR MATTHEWS: 7th of April.

CHAIRPERSON: 199?

MR MATTHEWS: This year it was in 1998.

CHAIRPERSON: In which he said he accepted responsibility for?

MR MATTHEWS: That is correct he said that he was accepting the accountability for the acts of terror, the bomb explosions and so forth.

CHAIRPERSON: Just say it again?

MR MATTHEWS: He said that he was accepting accountability for the deeds which had been committed before the 1994 elections. And I also heard that our names were published as such in the newspaper by Mr van Tonder.

CHAIRPERSON: Well lets talk about what you told us. The statement that.

MR MATTHEWS: That is the press release that was issued by Mr Terreblanche and which Robert van Tonder published in his newspaper. I am currently attempting to get hold of the newspaper for you.

CHAIRPERSON: Shouldn't one understand the statement for what it is worth by Mr Terreblanche that he was speaking of the actions which were carried out by members of the AWB who were acting in terms of the policy and orders of the AWB?

MR MATTHEWS: Chairperson I am not certain that is why I am trying to get hold of the newspaper so that I can say with certainty what was in fact said there. But we heard via the news and you know that the news is not always that expansive therefore we do not have the precise detail of what he said there. But generally speaking he accepted the responsibility for the deeds committed before the 1994 elections.

CHAIRPERSON: Is it not correct that, it is something else that I am asking you about. That these people, the victims before they were shot they were put, maybe I should ask you. Where were they when they were shot?

MR MATTHEWS: They were sitting on a small embankment next to the road.

CHAIRPERSON: Were they made to lie down or were they seated?

MR MATTHEWS: No they remained seated.

CHAIRPERSON: In line?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes they sat more or less in line.

CHAIRPERSON: Were they not ordered to sit in a straight line?

MR MATTHEWS: It was not a straight line but they sat next to each other.

CHAIRPERSON: You saw them sitting in a line form?

MR MATTHEWS: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: In that, under those circumstances would you not have been able to notice a 9 year old person?

MR MATTHEWS: It was dark and as I have said I did not watch the people. I was not involved in the questioning or searching of the people so I really did notice a child of that age.

CHAIRPERSON: But it is a small child? He cannot look big simply because it is dark surely? He must just still be a small child? Unless you are saying that it was so dark that you could not see, you could not distinguish between a big person and a small child.

MR MATTHEWS: Chairperson I did have much to do with the people themselves, I did not question them. And therefore I did not notice the child. But we did shoot him. However I cannot remember that I saw such a young and small child there.

CHAIRPERSON: But how can you not if they are sitting in a line?

MR MATTHEWS: As I have said it was dark. I could not make out the detail of people seated there. I did not notice that much.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that how that it was?

MR MATTHEWS: It was dark. We had one torchlight and it could not light up all the people at once.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Prinsloo?

RE-EXAMINATION BY MR PRINSLOO:

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Matthews you were asked my Mr Malan in terms of what Mr Terreblanche had said on television?

MR MATTHEWS: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: Did you also see something about a funeral in that cut?

MR MATTHEWS: That is correct. If i might refer to what Mr Brink said yesterday that the people who we had shot that they were not ANC members. Last night on the eight 'o clock and nine 'o clock news bulletins they showed the funeral of one of these persons where the casket was carried by people dressed in MK uniforms. Therefore I am further convinced that they were in fact ANC members.

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Matthews what was Mr Terreblanche's at attitude after he came to hear of your amnesty application?

MR MATTHEWS: He was positive. He said that we should proceed with our amnesty applications. That each one of us should have a chance to get out of prison. That we should definitely go for it.

MR PRINSLOO: Thank you Chairperson.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR PRINSLOO.

MR MALAN: I beg you pardon. Might I just with Mr Prinsloo's permission ask the following? Did you at any point in time apply for further indemnity under legislation?

MR MATTHEWS: After we were arrested we filled in forms several times for indemnity. It must have been twice or three times that we filled out those forms.

MR MALAN: Do you have copies of those forms?

MR MATTHEWS: No.

MR MALAN: Do you recall what the story was that you gave there? Was it the same facts that you are telling us now?

MR MATTHEWS: I cannot really remember. I would have to consult my legal team regarding that.

MR MALAN: Just broadly?

MR MATTHEWS: Broadly speaking it would have been the same story.

MR MALAN: Or is it the same story that you told in court?

MR MATTHEWS: I would have followed my legal representatives instructions there. We could not expand a great deal. We only mentioned small points until we would be granted a trial or a hearing and we could not expand very much in our applications.

MR MALAN: Are you saying to me that it is probable that you did not tell the truth in those applications?

MR MATTHEWS: Yes I would have told the truth but we could not set it out in the same manner as the applications which we have submitted to you.

MR MALAN: Thank you.

MR PRINSLOO: No questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Matthews you can stand down.

MR MATTHEWS: Thank you.

WITNESS EXCUSED.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Brink try to find out for us whose funeral it was which was shown on TV yesterday night.

MR BRINK: Mr Chairman if I am not mistaken I think it was in regard to that child who was shot while walking at that foot path. I forgot the name but a man called Steyn apparently has been arrested in connection with that murder. I think it was that funeral.

CHAIRPERSON: Is it not?

MR BRINK: I have made a mistake. I will find out.

CHAIRPERSON: I got the impression that because they showed that at the time when they were talking about this particular amnesty hearing I got the impression that - they did not say anything about the funeral but I got the impression that it was a funeral related to this hearing. Which led me to the conclusion that it probably was the funeral of one of the victims who were

killed.

MR BRINK: I see. No I misunderstood. I did not see television news last night so I am not aware of this.

CHAIRPERSON: I think just to find out from the families of the victims.

MR BRINK: Yes it may be also. Mrs Jessica Pitchford who represents the SABC is here, she might be able to assist me in that regard as well.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes alright. Who is next?

MS VAN DER WALT: I would like to call Mr Kloppers. At the moment he cannot move his neck, can we please adjourn so that we can place him in the witness place?

CHAIRPERSON: We will adjourn and then come back at twenty past. That will be tea time. We won't be, we will stop now and that will be tea time and then we will resume at twenty past eleven and we will not be stopping again until one 'o clock.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS.

TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION COMMISSION

AMNESTY HEARING

DATE: 24TH APRIL 1998

--------------------------------------------------------------------------ON RESUMPTION

MR BRINK: I have ascertained that it was Teboho Makhuza, he was one of the victims.

PHILLIPUS CORNELIUS KLOPPERS: (sworn states)

EXAMINATION BY MRS VAN DER WALT: Chairperson the interpreters cannot hear, we will be using one microphone. Thank you Chairperson.

Mr Kloppers you have applied for amnesty and it is embodied in volume 1 from page 1 to page 23 and Annexure on the page 117 to 126. You are aware of the content of your application forms as well as Annexures A and B. Do you confirm the content there of?

MR KLOPPERS: I confirm the contents.

MS VAN DER WALT: Mr Kloppers how old are you?

MR KLOPPERS: I am 45.

MS VAN DER WALT: Were you ever a member of the SAP or the Defence Force?

MR KLOPPERS: I was an information officer for the South African Defence Force.

MS VAN DER WALT: And for how long were you there?

MR KLOPPERS: For 10 years.

MS VAN DER WALT: Did you ever perform border duty?

MR KLOPPERS: I did border duty.

MS VAN DER WALT: For how long?

MR KLOPPERS: On 5 separate occasions I performed border duty.

MS VAN DER WALT: And time periods?

MR KLOPPERS: 3 months every time.

MS VAN DER WALT: And were you taught there in respect of the enemies of the Republic of South Africa?

MR KLOPPERS: We opposed the ANC/SACP Alliance at that time and also SWAPO who was involved in our struggle.

MS VAN DER WALT: And you became a member of the AWB?

MR KLOPPERS: That is correct in 1987.

MS VAN DER WALT: And were you an active member?

MR KLOPPERS: I was not an active member. At that point I was called a TV member. I became an active member later.

MS VAN DER WALT: What do you mean by TV member?

MR KLOPPERS: That I would wait for instructions and I became by my own choice.

MS VAN DER WALT: Why did you join the AWB?

MR KLOPPERS: From the very beginning at a meeting held by Eugene Terreblanche in the Town Hall in Randfontein he sounded convincing enough to me to associate with objectives which he set out there. Objectives such as a pure Akrikaner "volk," that we would have our own Volksfront just as in Bophutatswana which had its own independence. We would also achieve our own independence.

MS VAN DER WALT: Did you at that point belong to any political party?

MR KLOPPERS: I was a member of the Conservative Party and later also a member of the Volksfront. And naturally I was a member of the AWB which is not a political organisation but a para-military unit.

MS VAN DER WALT: You said that you were first a dormant member, when did you become actively involved?

MR KLOPPERS: I became actively involved in 1993.

MS VAN DER WALT: Why did you become active in that year?

MR KLOPPERS: After I had seen what was happening in South Africa that the National Party was granting a full take over to the ANC. And also had seen what had happened at the national summit with the Volksfront that they had burst through the doors and I decided that it was time to become personally actively involved so I could tell my children one day that I stood up for my country, my "volk," my fatherland. That was our motto.

MS VAN DER WALT: Yesterday an exhibit was submitted, Exhibit A it was phase 1 of the then commander officers' course of the AWB. Were you aware of this booklet?

MR KLOPPERS: I am fully aware of that booklet. It is not only a manual but it also comprised parts of the training structure which I presented as an academic officer.

MS VAN DER WALT: What was your rank? You said that you were an academic officer in 1993 in the AWB?

MR KLOPPERS: I started being a candidate officer. I moved quite quickly upwards and proved myself as a man who could be used in training because my work was involved with adult education. And that is why I was implemented as an academic officer for the West Rand. I was then promoted to Chief Commandant of Randfontein area and then I was promoted to a brigadier.

MS VAN DER WALT: As an academic officer, what were your duties?

MR KLOPPERS: As an academic officer I trained all the members of the then commando under my command and from other areas according to phase 1 that they would be familiar with it and that they would understand what was meant by an immanent revolution.

MS VAN DER WALT: This phase 1, yesterday one of the members stated that it was merely an information piece.

MR KLOPPERS: It was not only an information piece it was completely used as part of the training structure and I used it as such.

MS VAN DER WALT: Would it have embodied the objectives of the AWB ... mentioned in any way in this Phase 1?

MR KLOPPERS: Our objectives are clearly stated in Phase 1, it is on page 11, 12 and 13.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry I think at some point the taking of photos should stop because I think they are about to detract the witness.

MR KLOPPERS: Thank you Chairperson.

MS VAN DER WALT: You have said that the objectives are embodied on page 11, 12 and 13?

MR KLOPPERS: If I have it correctly.

MS VAN DER WALT: On page 17 of the document.

MR KLOPPERS: My copies are in my briefcase.

MS VAN DER WALT: He does have a copy. I am indicating Exhibit A, if you will look at page 17, page 15 has to do about the historic origin of the AWB and then on page 17 there is a revolution at hand. And then I would like to refer you to the second last line of the first paragraph underneath that heading. It says: "The AWB does not plan or desire revolution." It is in bold print. " But will not hesitate and accept a Black Communist regime. It is then a struggle until death."

MR KLOPPERS: That is one hundred percent.

MS VAN DER WALT: You have heard the testimony and I will lead you regarding the revolution which would originate but it goes further. "History has taught us that a revolution wastes its children. The AWB as a "volksbeweging" does not desire a revolution but if it is enforced upon it, it will with the help of God be the victor in the struggle. From the axles of the revolution the ideals of the "Boerevolk" will emerge. A "Boerevolkstaat" where in which the freedom ideal will be embodied." How do you reconcile this if you wish to testify that there was a revolution in 1993?

MR KLOPPERS: The revolution which originated began within the situation in Kempton Park along with the Volksfront with the take over phase of CODESA. We saw that the revolution was at hand because it was advertised to us as such from the platform by various generals among others our leader at that time, Eugene Terreblanche. And we reconciled ourselves with that. That is why I was of the view that the revolution had broken out.

MS VAN DER WALT: Did the AWB come to a decision then that the revolution was being enforced upon the "Boerevolk" and that it had to move over to that?

MR KLOPPERS: In terms of my discussions and meetings with General Jappie Oelofse I would have to admit that. It is correct Chairperson.

MS VAN DER WALT: You have testified that you then became active and you were appointed as Chief Commandant of area 9.

MR KLOPPERS: I was later appointed as Chief Commandant of area 9, it was an area of approximately 4000 according to the computer printout.

MS VAN DER WALT: And the applicants in this case were they under your command?

MR KLOPPERS: All the applicants involved in this case comprised part of my top structure but were directly under the command of my second in command, Deon Martin. We acted purely in a military fashion according to the structures of rank the hierarchy was formed. Anything which was communicated through to anyone else was communicated by my commandant.

MS VAN DER WALT: During 1993 you said various meetings were held. Were meetings held where other political parties were involved which were not AWB members?

MR KLOPPERS: Yes, among others in 1993 I attended a meeting where General Constant Viljoen, I beg your pardon Ferdie Hartzenberg, I am not exactly certain of the other persons present at that meeting. Constant Viljoen identified with the AWB and that together we would rise as a mighty "Boerevolk." There were also members of the South African Defence Force who would see to the complete take over of the regime.

MS VAN DER WALT: What would Constant Viljoen's share have been in this struggle?

MR KLOPPERS: When the struggle would move to revolution Constant Viljoen and his generals would take over certain army bases camps and Ferdie Hartzenberg along with Yster and Staal as well as the Mine Workers Union would have brought about complete darkness in South Africa. The SABC, radio stations and so forth would also have been taken over.

MS VAN DER WALT: What was the objective of this action?

MR KLOPPERS: The objective there of was to take over South Africa completely. The objective itself was to create chaos and despair so that not one of these people would have thought of participating in the elections if there were ever to be an election.

MS VAN DER WALT: Why was the AWB and the other parties opposed to the elections?

MR KLOPPERS: We can only look at what is happening outside there today. It is exactly what we wanted to prevent. We did not desire this daily level of violence, car hi-jackings and the take over of the ANC/SACP Alliance.

MS VAN DER WALT: During 1993 there was a meeting in the Assembly Hotel in Pretoria. Are you aware of that?

MR KLOPPERS: Yes I myself was present.

MS VAN DER WALT: And what happened there?

MR KLOPPERS: Secret meetings were held where among others requests were made that all the members of the generals in staff arrive in civilian clothes. What the discussion itself involved I cannot answer because it was held in the greatest of secrecy. But the top figures such as Constant Viljoen and Mr Hartzenberg were aware as well as various other persons, names which I cannot provide because of the utter secrecy of the meetings. I was there to ensure the safety of General Jappie Oelofse.

MS VAN DER WALT: Did General Jappie Oelofse tell you that a meeting had taken place?

MR KLOPPERS: Yes he did filter through certain information. One of which was very clear was that the revolution was at hand and that I had to mobilise my men on twenty four hour assistance. A decision was also taken that just as the ANC had been allowed to look at the stockpiling places of the South African Defence Force the AWB had also been allowed to go and look at these places.

MS VAN DER WALT: There was also a meeting in Potchefstroom where the AWB was involved. Did you attend that meeting?

MR KLOPPERS: Yes that was the national summit which was held in Potchefstroom. Not all my men but some of them did attend that meeting.

MS VAN DER WALT: You yourself?

MR KLOPPERS: Yes I was there.

MS VAN DER WALT: And what transpired?

MR KLOPPERS: Constant Viljoen was the chief speaker there. He still walked hand in hand with the AWB at that point and he also stated that he would not allow the South African government to be thrown overboard by the ANC/SACP Alliance.

MS VAN DER WALT: And during 1993, more towards the end of the year the leader of the AWB, Mr Eugene Terreblanche also addressed meetings where he announced revolution. Is that true?

MR KLOPPERS: Basically from the end of 1992 all the way through 1993 every meeting of Eugene Terreblanche was to such a degree so upsweeping that if one had attended a meeting there one would have murdered domestic help immediately.

MS VAN DER WALT: What was his attitude towards the elections which were to take place in April 1994?

MR KLOPPERS: It was clearly stated to us that even over the barrel of a gun we would not allow the elections to transpire. He emphasised that we should use all the means at our disposal. If we did not have any guns we would steal guns. We would have to acquire firearms but we would not allow the elections to take place.

MS VAN DER WALT: You also have a video tape in your possession where in which he also states that the firearms are to be stolen?

MR KLOPPERS: Yes that is correct. That was only one of the occasions which have been mentioned where he said that firearms should be stolen. In order to stop the proposed elections.

MS VAN DER WALT: What does one do with a gun?

MR KLOPPERS: I am a game hunter. I have been trained as a soldier. One shoots to kill.

MS VAN DER WALT: Therefore if Eugene Terreblanche said: "Steal guns," he did not want to go and have a party with those guns?

MR KLOPPERS: No. He stated it very clearly to us that even if it had to occur over the barrel of a gun. One would not just lie behind a gun just to shoot randomly. One shot to kill.

MS VAN DER WALT: Did members of the AWB also manufacture firearms illegally which was known as the pipe gun?

MR KLOPPERS: Can you please repeat?

MS VAN DER WALT: The pipe gun.

MR KLOPPERS: I missed the entire sentence.

MS VAN DER WALT: Is it true that the AWB illegally manufactured firearms among others the pipe gun?

MR KLOPPERS: That is correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: Why did the AWB do that?

MR KLOPPERS: Partly because a shot gun bullets were very difficult to trace unless forensic tests could be undertaken. And secondly so that every person had access to such firearms without a great financial burden.

MS VAN DER WALT: Was it intended to make war or was it intended for self defence?

MR KLOPPERS: The purpose was for the guerilla fighters because we acted in small groups. The guerilla fighters had to use these weapons in their attacks.

MS VAN DER WALT: Do you regard yourself as a guerilla fighter?

MR KLOPPERS: Please note I regarded myself as a guerilla fighter.

MS VAN DER WALT: In December 1993 General Oelofse called yourself and Mr Martin?

MR KLOPPERS: That is correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: Why?

MR KLOPPERS: Can you be more specific please?

MS VAN DER WALT: What happened when he called you? Why did he call you to meet him?

MR KLOPPERS: On several occasions we had been called in to his head quarters among others on one specific occasion a knife was handed over to us directly to Mr Martin. It was an ordinary steak knife, the wood handle, the type one would find in a restaurant. This knife had to be used and this is how he put it, if we were to encounter corpses we had to use this knife to cut off an ear. He wanted to show the ear to the area armies to show how hard we were working.

MS VAN DER WALT: In your application you say that in November 1993 General Oelofse called you and Deon Martin to his head quarters and it was said to you to be prepared on a twenty four hour basis.

MR KLOPPERS: That is correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: Why did he do that?

MR KLOPPERS: It was after he had visited the stockpiling locations of all the South African Defence Force. They had visited these military bases or at least several of them. And it was decided by the generals and staff to take certain steps. But in November he asked us to be prepared on a twenty four hour basis.

MS VAN DER WALT: Did he give any other further instructions with regard to food as such?

MR KLOPPERS: It was a general situation that we were trained for. We had to stockpile extra food supplies; tinned food, water had to be frozen in the freezers, generators and so forth. Members of our family, friends and our (...indistinct) commando had to be prepared.

MS VAN DER WALT: During that time where did you work?

MR KLOPPERS: I worked with Randfontein Estates. I was the senior training officer.

MS VAN DER WALT: In which division?

MR KLOPPERS: In the metallurgical division.

MS VAN DER WALT: Did you receive any instruction with regard to where you worked? What you had to find there?

MR KLOPPERS: It was told to me by General Oelofse that he wanted cyanide from the metallurgical plant. That we had to put in the drinking water or reservoirs of Soweto which would cause the death of many blacks.

MS VAN DER WALT: Your commando or the division of which you were the commander did you have anything to do with Inkatha?

MR KLOPPERS: We were personally involved with the training of Inkatha and there was about 12 people were given to us who were trained by us.

MS VAN DER WALT: And the instruction to train these persons, where did this come from?

MR KLOPPERS: I received this instruction from General Jappie Oelofse.

MS VAN DER WALT: And on the 2nd of December 1993, this was on a Sunday, is that correct?

MR KLOPPERS: That is correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: What happened there on that particular day?

MR KLOPPERS: That particular day I was called into a meeting by higher placed officers. Initially I could not understand why I was called and later I understood why I was involved. It was for all area commanders. And when I arrived at the plot of General Oelofse I knew that here on this day something big would happen. There were a few guards.

MS VAN DER WALT: Explain to us? The Committee do not understand.

MR KLOPPERS: Roaming guards, they patrol the whole place. The whole place was patrolled from the fences and there were two guards at the gate that stopped me and asked me for identification. I attended the meeting and amongst others the whole year's activities was discussed and also the financial state, our recruitment attempts and I was praised over these activities.

MS VAN DER WALT: Was it strange to you or was it normal that on a Sunday you had to attend such a meeting?

MR KLOPPERS: It was strange for me that this happened on a Sunday. Ordinarily it would have been on a normal work day and or at extreme cases on a Saturday but it was strange that this happened on a Sunday.

MS VAN DER WALT: And what happened at this meeting?

MR KLOPPERS: At this meeting particularly all points where they were with the finance and all the members, the constructing and afterwards it was told to us that the Generals in staff came to the decision that the revolution would start on the same day, on the 12th of December 1993. And that all areas had to participate.

MS VAN DER WALT: This order group meeting, you have said these were all the area commanders?

MR KLOPPERS: Yes area commanders.

MS VAN DER WALT: Was any of the Generals in staff present there?

MR KLOPPERS: Yes, General Oelofse was there and Brigadier van der Heever, he was the training brigadier.

MS VAN DER WALT: Is that Chris van der Heever?

MR KLOPPERS: That is right. And as I have said General Jappie Oelofse. And there was from the flight commando; Commander Ryno and others, I do not know them personally. At this meeting it was told to us that General Oelofse personally would want to see all the area commanders individually.

MS VAN DER WALT: Why individually?

MR KLOPPERS: As he pointed out we worked in secrecy, we do not know who to trust and every person who received an instruction that it was his own instruction and he had to handle his own area.

MS VAN DER WALT: And did you receive any instruction?

MR KLOPPERS: I personally spoke to General Oelofse. He was aware of the fact of what my area was capable of and the General recommended that I put up a roadblock. And when I asked him about it he said I had the necessary equipment like the reflectors jackets, blue lights and previously myself and Commander Deon Martin, he is now a colonel, and one Mr Gerhard Innerse, he is in New Castle Prison. We had a test run and it worked hundred percent. We could stop vehicles and people were surprised to see that AWB persons stopped them. But I was not concerned because we carried out the message that we do care.

MS VAN DER WALT: What was your further instruction? You had to set up this roadblock?

MR KLOPPERS: What he put clearly to me is this is the "real Macoy" and he mentioned also that he wanted to see corpses.

MS VAN DER WALT: What did you understand by "real Macoy"?

MR KLOPPERS: "Real Macoy" was the real thing. If you are in the army then you know when you are on foot patrol and they say that you are on "real McCoy" and then you would know soon you would have contact.

MS VAN DER WALT: Was it out to you that he wanted to see corpses? What did you understand by that?

MR KLOPPERS: I understood it that if I made contact with the target group then I had to shoot.

MS VAN DER WALT: Did you understand that you were, this particular evening, you just had to shoot or what was the situation?

MR KLOPPERS: I do not know what was said to the other area commanders that is why I did what was told to me to identify a target group, namely the ANC/SACP.

MS VAN DER WALT: When you put up this roadblock and every vehicle that passes there is ANC what would you have done under those circumstances?

MR KLOPPERS: Every vehicle with ANC persons I would have eliminated all of them.

MS VAN DER WALT: Was there any discussion with regard to weapons?

MR KLOPPERS: I had a problem my men were sharpened up with the training by Meiring was one hundred percent, people were trained, we had pipe shot guns, pump action shot guns and so forth. I did not have enough weapons. I put it to him that I would have a shortage of weapons. And General Oelofse took me outside and he - I would call it a canopy, it is a steel construction that was on a lorry that was on his property. We went with a flashlight because it was already dark and he shone the light and he took out 2 pipe shot guns and he gave it to me.

MS VAN DER WALT: When he gave these pipe shot guns to you he knew what was going to be done with them?

MR KLOPPERS: Absolutely. Because he gave the instruction that he wanted to see corpses.

MS VAN DER WALT: But under normal conditions people would not stand at a roadblock with shot guns?

MR KLOPPERS: I could not answer this because I have never been involved with a roadblock.

MS VAN DER WALT: At the first roadblock did you have shot guns?

MR KLOPPERS: The first test run, no not with the first test run.

MS VAN DER WALT: What did you do afterwards, after you received the order?

MR KLOPPERS: Directly after I received the order I saw it was about six thirty and because I did not have Commander Martin's telephone number with me, I asked General Oelofse for the number.

MS VAN DER WALT: Who is Fannie Oelofse? Is that General Oelofse's wife?

MR KLOPPERS: That is correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: What was her involvement with the AWB?

MR KLOPPERS: She handled the finance amongst others. My wife was directly under her command. She was closely involved with head quarters at the control of uniforms and so forth.

MS VAN DER WALT: Did she have any rank or was she just?

MR KLOPPERS: She was a colonel in the hierarchy and while we were in prison she was promoted to brigadier.

MS VAN DER WALT: Did she have any training that you know of?

MR KLOPPERS: The training that she received I do not know but that she did receive training from Commander Callie Meiring that I know of.

MS VAN DER WALT: And you said you called? Continue from there?

MR KLOPPERS: Yes I asked her to help me. I did not know the number of Commander Martin because I did not have my notebook with me. She dialled the number for me. I could not speak to my commander, I spoke to his wife. I gave the necessary instruction and told her to tell him that to get the men together. They should be fully equipped, we were going to work. And she ...[indistinct] the message over the telephone like send my regards to Louise or something to that effect.

MS VAN DER WALT: General Jappie Oelofse, was he present?

MR KLOPPERS: No he was not present when I made this call. He was busy with the other area commanders. And I was there alone and the Colonel.

MS VAN DER WALT: You said that they had to be prepared because you were going to go to work. Would Commander Martin know what you meant by that?

MR KLOPPERS: Colonel Martin was aware of the fact that if you go to work you had to put on your uniform and take your weapon with you. He would not have known what we would do precisely because we had different options. Amongst others to protect or to act as guards.

MS VAN DER WALT: And you would then meet at a specific place?

MR KLOPPERS: I asked that nine 'o clock that we meet nine 'o clock that evening at Uncle Harry's Roadhouse.

MS VAN DER WALT: What did you do afterwards?

MR KLOPPERS: I drove and on my way home I stopped at, I drove past Andrè Visser's house and I told him that he should meet us at the roadhouse. He brought it to my attention that he does not have a uniform. And I said it does not make a difference I can use him he should just make sure that he is at the roadhouse. I went back to my house where I ate first. At about three minutes to nine I left to the roadhouse. It is about a half a kilometre from my house.

MS VAN DER WALT: And you arrived there?

MR KLOPPERS: When I arrived there the men were all there. Commander Martin called them to attention and he saluted me. Our salute is not a normal salute. It is a Boere greeting. And I told the men that tonight is the "real McCoy." We are going to work.

MS VAN DER WALT: Anything further, did you tell them anything further?

MR KLOPPERS: I asked who had weapons. And it was said 3 of them did not have weapons and Martin, van der Schyff, Etienne Visser. I gave 2 pipe shot guns to them.

MS VAN DER WALT: This is the 2 shot guns that you received from General Oelofse?

MR KLOPPERS: That is correct. That is the 2 home-made shot guns that is known as pipe shot guns.

MS VAN DER WALT: At this roadhouse did you tell them anything further about the order that you received?

MR KLOPPERS: No I did not tell them what the purpose of work was. When we left from there it was clear that we had too many vehicles and I knew what our objectives was. We had to go and set up a roadblock as General Oelofse instructed me. We drove to Mr Badenhorst's house and we would have gone directly to Mr Visser's house if I knew there was enough parking space for these vehicles but there was not enough parking space. And therefore we went to Mr Badenhorst's house. And his parents were on vacation, it was no problem to leave the vehicles there.

We, the Mercedes Benz and the Sentra was singled out and I gave instruction that the number plates be hidden with masking tape. And from there we went to Andrè Visser's house. The reason for why we went there is I asked him if he did not have a drink for us because we liked to drink. And when we arrived there all of the men, I cannot say with conviction all of them but myself I had a whisky and water.

And from there we went to Deon Martin's house and on our way there we went through the houses as we followed the road. What do they call it? We patrolled the area. We arrived at his house and on our way there I told him that we would have a roadblock. He suggested that we do a house penetration or that we attack squatter camps and I told him that was not the order. At Deon Martin's house I put it to the men that we were to set up a roadblock and what was involved there. Callie Meiring would take charge because he had knowledge of this. And I left them there so that they could discuss the matter. I made myself at home. I went to his drink cabinet and there I took out the brandy. It was just less than half a bottle. I divided it into two bottles, I added Coke.

And when I went outside they already decided who was going to drive and I gave the two bottles to the two groups. Who in the other vehicle drank of the brandy I cannot say with conviction. I can go on hearsay. I think it was Mr Badenhorst but they can testify to that. I myself, I drank some of the brandy. Deon Martin did not drink. And along with us was Diedericks, he does not drink and Etienne Visser, he also did not drink.

We went to this roadblock and on our way there I discovered that the Sentra was getting left behind. I asked that the Mercedes stop and return and Gerhard Diedericks jumped out. After a while he came back and he told me that they had just assaulted two black men. I kept quiet, we drove a little on and we pulled off the road. And when the Sentra caught up with us it stopped and I reprimanded all the men and I asked them not to be out of line. And stick to their order, namely the roadblock that we had to set up.

And from there we went to the roadblock. I thought the ideal place would be the Radora crossing or the Krugersdorp/Ventersdorp junction. I thought this would be a suitable place because this road came from the homelands and the main purpose would be to stop ANC and SACP Alliance people and to confiscate illegal weapons from them that we could use for our own revolution.

MS VAN DER WALT: Yes? And did you go to this place, the junction?

MR KLOPPERS: We arrived there and instructions was given that Callie Meiring had to set up the Roadblock. I cannot remember who acted as traffic officers. All the men of 9, 8 they were all in camouflage with our sign, the AWB sign was clearly visible. They had one torch, reflective jackets and reflective armbands and a blue light. The Sentra was used as the emergency vehicle so that it looked like a traffic vehicle. And we mounted the blue light onto this vehicle. Myself and Deon Martin decided to drive back in the direction of Ventersdorp and he was driving and while we were driving as the car approaches from the front it was my task to see who was the persons in the vehicle and from the light from his vehicle we could see whether it was white persons or black persons.

If we identified this target group we would turn around pass them. I would make sure as we pass them whether they were white or black.

Excuse me Mr Chairperson somebody is distracting me. Can we lower the volume on it? Somebody is talking in the background.

CHAIRPERSON: We will be on the lookout, we will look out for that.

MR KLOPPERS: And when we got back and passed the vehicle I could see clearly who was in the vehicle. So I made doubly sure that we did not stop the wrong people. We hoped that some of the black persons in the vehicles would not be from the South African Police or South African Defence Force and they would cause trouble for us.

We stopped several vehicles. I remember one specific instance and the persons in the vehicle was not satisfied that they were being pulled off by AWB members. The driver, I used a tomphar and hit him over the head hard enough, not to injure him so that he would fall and not drive. I used minimum violence. To make it clear to him that I am not interested in his explanation he must just get going.

The second incident that I remember clearly is a vehicle that did not want to start after we stopped it. I told my men to push the vehicle.

MS VAN DER WALT: Mr Kloppers these vehicles, why did you pull them over? What did you do with them after you pulled them over?

MR KLOPPERS: Every vehicle that was pulled over was searched thoroughly by my men. And I tried to do most of the questioning because I used to be an Intelligence Officer along with Deon Martin we did the questioning. Namely where do they come from, where are they going and most importantly; to which political party were they affiliated? It was important for me to find this target group.

I wish to refer you back to Phase 1 and you would see there that a guerilla fighter attacks even if it is only one person that he kills for the night. Or if he wins a small portion it is a victory for a guerilla fighter. And that is what I wanted to identify with my questions.

MS VAN DER WALT: And you speak of several vehicles. Those vehicles, why did you tell them to leave instead of doing anything to them?

MR KLOPPERS: Not one of these persons whether they were or not but none of them admitted that they were affiliated to the ANC/SACP Alliance except for some of them were Inkatha members. And amongst others there were Tswana people who said that they had nothing to do with politics. Other people just said that they did not know anything of the politic.

MS VAN DER WALT: Please continue, what happened that evening?

MR KLOPPERS: That evening the last 2 vehicles that we pulled over. Myself and Deon Martin drove in the direction of Ventersdorp. It was getting late. It must have been around midnight. We were approximately 8 to 10 kilometres away from the roadblock when we saw the lights of a vehicle approaching. And the closer we got to them we saw it was 2 vehicles and it was clear to us that they were following each other, they were together. Both vehicles were close to each other. Both vehicles had black persons inside the vehicles. We passed them, we turned around and we passed them again and in front was a Toyota Cressida and behind that was the Honda Ballade. We passed them, went over the hill, it had a slight curve in the road and the lights of the Mercedes was flicked. And they switched on the blue light at the roadblock.

We had already stopped at the roadblock when these 2 vehicles arrived. When they came over the small hill and saw the blue light I knew from where the lights could be seen, it was approximately 200 to 300 metres away, the 2 vehicles stopped. My men waited in anticipation, we could hear the doors open and close. We were warned by Deon Martin to take note whether or not people were being dropped off or whether something was being thrown out of the vehicle.

After a short while, I cannot say exactly how long probably approximately 2 to 3 minutes, the vehicles started moving again. When they stopped at us the Honda Ballade was in front and the Toyota Cressida was behind the Honda this time. We ordered the passengers to get out. One of the drivers did not want to get out. I hit the side of his windshield with my tomphar(?). He saw that I was very serious and he climbed out. We made them all stand in a line on a small embankment on the side of the road and then we made them sit down on that.

The men had their instructions. They knew exactly what to do. They searched the vehicles and looked for the necessary weapons and ammunition for which they had been asked. Deon Martin and I asked questions to the people sitting on the side. I was moving behind them with the tomphar(?). Deon Martin, who was the Commandant at that point posed the question and when I was not satisfied with an answer I used my tomphar to bump the person who had been asked the question or I hit him with the tomphar(?). Once again I would like to say that these blows were not intended to kill. That was not the point. I had to determine firstly whether or not they were part of the target group. Questions were asked and they answered favourably that they were members of the ANC/SACP Alliance.

MS VAN DER WALT: And then?

MR KLOPPERS: I moved passed the men who were busy searching the vehicles. During the course of things I asked whether they had found anything but no weapons had been found. I said that they should stand closer and that this was the "real Macoy," that these were ANC people. ...

MS VAN DER WALT: ... Before you went over to the deed that they should go and look whether something had been discarded?

MR KLOPPERS: Yes that is correct. We were concerned regarding the situation when the vehicles had stopped before. I think I, myself asked Callie Meiring and Andrè Visser to take one of the accused and take them to the place where they had stopped and determine what had been dropped off or whether they had simply climbed out. When they came back they reported negatively. They spoke about a bag with melted ice. But the problem was that it was open plains and it was dark and one