Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — UNKNOWN

CHAIRPERSON: At some stage I'd like you to formulate yourrequest so that the Committee can consider it.   Mr Mpshe haveyou any questions to ask of this witness?
NO QUESTIONS BY MR MPSHE

CHAIRPERSON: Any re-examination?
RE-EXAMINATION BY MR DU PLESSIS

<UNKNOWN>: Brigadier Cronje could you please with regardto informants, just sketch for us whether there were differentcategories of informants, just in the broadest sense, what categoriesof informants existed?

ANSWER: There were informants at every one of our sections,that's the black unit, the trade union unit, the churches unitand all the general organisations had informants.

<UNKNOWN>: Would there have been informants on differentlevels, would there have been more trustworthy and less trustworthyinformants, did you classify them?

ANSWER: Yes there were certain informants where we hadalready evaluated their information and determined that underall circumstances their information was correct.  Certain otherinformants were less trustworthy or less reliable and they werecategorised in this way.

<UNKNOWN>: Brigadier could you page to page 28 of yourapplication?   The propaganda to which you referred which theGovernment waged, if you want to put it like that,
4. towards /...
MR DU PLESSIS 518 J H CRONJE
towards the white public, could you again in terms of the questionsasked of you read the second paragraph on page 28 with regardto propaganda because this contains the core of what you saidwith regard to this propaganda.

ANSWER: It was an excellent way in which the propagandawent in every form of Government, it can be found in the bookof President Mandela, "Long walk to freedom" on page405 where President Mandela says the following and it is quoted
  "..and worked for the prison service.   He was properlybrainwashed by the Government's propaganda.   He would have believedthat we were terrorists and communists who wanted to drive thewhite man into the sea."

<UNKNOWN>: That is fine then.   Brigadier you've alreadygiven testimony in this regard but you were asked questions withregard to the reasons for the elimination of terrorists.   Youwere asked again and again for the reasons of elimination.   Therewere a general justification for the elimination of activistsunder certain circumstance given in your application at everyincident where you eliminate someone.   Is that the case?

ANSWER: That is the case.

<UNKNOWN>: Brigadier were your actions during 1986 and87 primarily aimed at the elimination of activists or did thesecurity branch also carry out a range of responsibilities.

ANSWER: This is one of the lesser responsibilities ofthe security police.

<UNKNOWN>: Could you give us an indication of how largea part, in terms of percentage, of the security police eliminationsentailed?
4. ANSWER: /...
MR DU PLESSIS 519 J H CRONJE

ANSWER: A very small percentage.

<UNKNOWN>: Brigadier then I want to in addition ask you,you've said that eliminations was a very small percentage of yourtasks, would it have been fairly general or was this only in exceptionalcases that activists were eliminated?

ANSWER: Only in exceptional instances.

JUDGE NGCOBE: He's asking a question generally relatingto political activists and you say that the elimination was anexception.   What about among political activists of a high profile,specifically that group of people, was the elimination a generalrule or an exception?   I'm talking about activists of a highprofile, you used that phrase yourself.

<UNKNOWN>: I would not say that it occurred seldom, itdid occur more regularly.
RE-EXAMINATION BY MR DU PLESSIS (contd)

<UNKNOWN>: Brigadier you were also asked with regard tointerrogations, where information was gained and then subsequentlywhere people were killed, you were asked what the reason wouldhave been for their elimination.   Would that be covered underyour general explanation for eliminations of particular activistsas in your application?

ANSWER: Yes it would.

<UNKNOWN>: The fact that the information might have beenrevealed to magistrates and that that would refer to the interrogations,this would then not have been the only reason why such a personwould have been eliminated?

ANSWER: No it would not have been the only reason.

JUDGE WILSON: : ...it was the injury?

MR DU PLESSIS: : Yes I understand that Mr Chairman maybeI should just formulate the question correctly.
4.

<UNKNOWN>: /...
MR DU PLESSIS 520 J H CRONJE

<UNKNOWN>: The question was asked Brigadier Cronje, onceyou've interrogated someone, did you then eliminate the personbecause you were scared that the manner of interrogation wouldhave come under the attention of a magistrate and you would havebeen in trouble?

ANSWER: No that was not the reason.

<UNKNOWN>: Was it the only reason?

ANSWER: No it was not the only reason.

<UNKNOWN>: Were there additional reasons for the eliminationof such a person?

ANSWER: Yes, as I've explained with regard to information,the protection of sources and the uselessness of the information.

<UNKNOWN>: Would that have been the general reason forthe elimination of an activist?

ANSWER: Yes.

<UNKNOWN>: Brigadier did you or your subordinates at anystage, eliminate someone simply because you were afraid that informationwith regard to the manner of interrogation would have come underthe attention of a magistrate?

ANSWER: No.

<UNKNOWN>: Brigadier you were also asked with regard toinstructions and whether those who worked under you knew whatto do.   Were instructions normally given in writing or orally?

ANSWER: Not in writing, orally.

<UNKNOWN>: Would instructions in the broadest sense, interms of which your subordinates acted, would that also have beengiven orally?

ANSWER: Yes it would.

<UNKNOWN>: Mr Cronje, if Mr Mamasela was sent to someoneto
4. entice /...
MR DU PLESSIS 521 J H CRONJE
entice the person to come to you or to give information for youor to you, and should it then happen that you had to kidnap theperson or if you interrogated the person, then actually this wasa death sentence because the next day you could have told peoplethat you saw Mr Masemela?

ANSWER: That is the case.

<UNKNOWN>: If this person approached a potential informeror someone, then it would have been a death sentence?

ANSWER: Mamasela worked in the townships under the coverof being a terrorist, he would have immediately have had his identityrevealed.  (end of tape 4 side 1)...

<UNKNOWN>: In general the propaganda on which you gavetestimony in terms of which you, your people and so on were broughtunder, was this propaganda mainly aimed at white people?

ANSWER: Yes it was mainly aimed at the white population.

<UNKNOWN>: Brigadier, with regard to the intimidationby the security police, would that have been aimed primarily againstmembers of the liberation movements?

ANSWER: Yes it would have been aimed at them.

<UNKNOWN>: Brigadier you have given testimony with regardto your reports to your head office with regard to events thathad occurred.   Would you have mentioned in these reports if anactivist was eliminated and would you then say that this activistwas eliminated or would you simply say there was an occurrence,an incident, and that during this incident the activist died.  How would you say this?

ANSWER: I would have referred to it as "an incident",I would not have used the word "elimination".

<UNKNOWN>: Would you have mentioned who was responsiblefor the death of the activist?
4B ANSWER: /...
MR DU PLESSIS 522 J H CRONJE

ANSWER: No.

<UNKNOWN>: Brigadier you were asked with regard to warcrimes and the Geneva Convention, how did you see your actionsand that of your subordinates in view of the situation of war,the state of war.   Would you have seen your actions as part ofthis war?

ANSWER: I considered our actions as part of the war andas necessary in order to win the war.

<UNKNOWN>: Did you consider these acts of yours as crimes?

ANSWER: No.