Amnesty Hearings — Umtata — 1998-08-24

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Yes.  By the time that I took over, Tshabalala had already been in service with the police for a period of approximately five years, and with his discharge under the name Tshabalala, a point of difference originated in the salary amounts.
	Every year he received an extra amount and we funded this from the Secret Fund.  I can also remember that there was a difference in the Travel and Accommodation Allowances between different rank categories.  We would have supplemented those differences from the Secret Fund, in order to ensure that he would not suffer any financial losses as a result of the change of his name.
	My recollection is however vague, because I cannot recall all the details regarding this particular matter, but we would see to it that he would not be placed at any disadvantage.

MR HUGO: Very well, you stated that you arranged for the salary payments.  You mentioned something about Parliament.

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: It was clear that Parliament was indeed misled because I heard that reaction to these questions was requested in Parliament and that there was merely a denial that the police knew anything about this certain Tshabalala.

MR HUGO: Could you just stop here for a moment please, and look at the following document.   Mr Chairman, we have prepared a bundle of documents.  May I beg leave to hand it up to the members of the Committee?
	Mr Chairman, before we start numbering these Exhibits, I think a further document was handed up this morning, and we did not mark that one, and I somehow think it is Exhibit G, if I am not mistaken.

CHAIRPERSON: That will be the statement by Gen Kawe, is that correct, which was referred to by Mr Dukada?
	Is there any objection to that statement being handed in?  Mr Mapoma?

MR MAPOMA: No objections Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Wessels?

MR WESSELS: Mr Chairman, may I enquire whether that is the original document that is there and whether it is an affidavit?

CHAIRPERSON: The document that was handed to me, is a photocopy.  It doesn't on its face, it doesn't appear to be an affidavit.  It is just a statement.

MR WESSELS: I will not object to that.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, all right.  Mr Dilizo?

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

MR MAJOKWENI: Similarly Mr Chairman, I have no objection.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay.  Shall we mark this statement by Leonard Sibobo Kawe as Exhibit G.
	The bundle of documents which Mr Hugo has handed up, shall we mark that H.

MR HUGO: As it pleases you Mr Chairman.   Thank you Mr Chairman.  Mr De Kock, you have Exhibit H before you, is that correct?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Yes, that is correct.

MR HUGO: And then the first document of Exhibit H, we have consulted this aspect, is this correct that it is an extract from the Parliament as given in the Hansard?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Yes, that is correct.

MR HUGO: Will you then please look at the middle of the page, there are three columns.  Do you see that?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: That is correct?

MR HUGO: Will you please read that extract to us as well as the answer?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: It is number 635, it is Mr P.G. Saul asked the Minister of Law and Order whether a certain person whose name has been furnished to the South African Police for the purpose of the Minister's reply, is a member of the police and if so, when did he join the Police Force, what is his present rank, to which Branch (Police) is he attached, where is he stationed, and what is his name.  The answer of the Minister of Law and Order, no, not according to the personnel records of the South African Police.
	With other words, the questions from A - E then fall away.  And that is - and that was the objective which we had, the objective was to mislead and to cover up and it also worked that way ultimately.

CHAIRPERSON: The person whose, this certain person who is being referred to here, who was that person, do you know?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Mr Chairman, unfortunately I cannot remember.  I am not sure if that was Louis le Grange or if it was Adriaan Vlok.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well.  I mean this certain person who is being referred to in the question?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Oh, no, that is Mr Tshabalala.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MR HUGO: Mr De Kock, while we are discussing these documents, can you just page, it is still part of Exhibit H, just the next document.  It is a letter that is from the Security Branch to the Commissioner of the South African Police?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: That is correct Chairperson.

MR HUGO: I am not going to read the whole letter, but is it correct that here the Chief of the Security Branch seeks leave to appoint Tulani Basil Mavusu to the South African Police?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: That is correct Chairperson.

MR HUGO: And this was signed by Gen J.V. van der Merwe, who was later the Commissioner of police?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: It is correct and just as confirmation, Mr Tulani Basil Mavusu is Mr Tshabalala.

MR HUGO: And the recommendation was approved by Major General Kemp?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: That is correct.  I would just like to meld that such changes, to discharge a person the one day and to appoint him the following day, could only happen on a very high level.
	I can do the documents, I can do the administration, but the approval has to come from a high level.

CHAIRPERSON: This letter was apparently written by Captain Stander, is that right?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Yes, that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: And the person who signed it, is Brigadier J.V. van der Merwe, who was then with the - is it the Security Branch Head Office?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Yes, he was the Chief of Security Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Chief of Security.  Now, these persons, did they know that this was in fact Tshabalala?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Yes Chairperson.  Of the three persons Captain Stander would definitely have known.  He was the Chief of the Personnel Division of Security Head Office.
	Gen J.V. van der Merwe was the Head of Security Branch Head Office as well as all the Security Branches and Divisions throughout the country.
	However, I cannot confirm that Gen Kemp would have known that we were busy misleading Parliament.  It could be that it was said to him that this was part of an operation or an infiltration, but he would not have been informed that we were busy with perjury and that we were misleading the country.

MR HUGO: Mr De Kock ...

CHAIRPERSON: Just a minute.  Captain Stander and Brigadier Van der Merwe, would they have been specifically told that what we are doing here is to mislead Parliament?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Mr Chairperson, I don't believe that Captain Stander would also have known about all these facts.  By nature of the facts, he would not have known much of the particulars.
	Regarding Gen Van der Merwe, he would have known, because the questions came from Parliament to the Commissioner, and from the Commissioner to the Security Head Office Chief and then to Brigadier Schoon and then to me.  So therefore between me, Brigadier Schoon and General Van der Merwe, that connection would have existed.
	The reason why I say that Captain Stander would not have had complete knowledge, was because it was on a need to know basis and because of that, we would not have informed him.  He was also appointed as a temporary member.
	That is why there is a (T) in brackets just after Captain, that stands for temporary.

MR HUGO: Mr De Kock, if you can then just page to the following page, it is still part of Exhibit H, and just tell us - just identify the document and tell us what it is all about?