Amnesty Hearings — Pretoria — UNKNOWN

MR DE KONING: Then I would also like to ask you that in answering one of the questions put by one of the panel members, that at the meetings you often communicated with certain officers because you knew them?

JOHANNES JAKOBUS DE BRUIN: That's correct.

MR DE KONING: And will you agree with me that once again that is a very strong factor which might have led the applicants to believe that you possessed certain knowledge?

JOHANNES JAKOBUS DE BRUIN: That's correct.

MR DE KONING: Would you agree with me further when you say that there was certain planning which was undertaken, as I understand your testimony, that from the AWB's side resistance and disruption of the elections would come, all that you were waiting for, and I'm referring to you specifically, is an instruction regarding what you were supposed to do and you would then also have gone over into action, is that true, that is the inference which we must make from your testimony?

JOHANNES JAKOBUS DE BRUIN: Yes, that is so.

MR DE KONING: You have said to one of the committee members that you never issued instructions to the applicants to go and kill or shoot black people, but you say in paragraph 13
"I told the applicants that the boere resistance had begun and that more explosions would occur."
So you will agree with me then that what you said to them then could clearly have been interpreted as the fact that the struggle had begun, the first shots had been fired and action had to be taken?

JOHANNES JAKOBUS DE BRUIN: That's correct.

MR DE KONING: And in the light of that which you have just said, the concession which you have just made, it could very well be interpreted as an instruction, it could be in the form of a request or someone stomping his foot and saying, "Now you will do this"?

JOHANNES JAKOBUS DE BRUIN: Yes, that's correct.

MR DE KONING: So it could very well have been an instruction, depending upon how the person hearing that statement had interpreted it?

JOHANNES JAKOBUS DE BRUIN: Indirectly, yes.

MR DE KONING: And you've also said to the committee that Mr Terreblanche created the impression that the organisation was ready and that the instruction would come from some point and that then it would flow through the channels to whoever was supposed to undertake the instructions?

JOHANNES JAKOBUS DE BRUIN: Correct.

MR DE KONING: Then, Mr De Bruin, there is another aspect which I find rather strange, you've said that you were shocked when you heard what the applicants had done.   Do you remember that?

JOHANNES JAKOBUS DE BRUIN: Yes, I remember that.

MR DE KONING: Now, I'd like to ask you whether you would agree that the explosion which occurred on the morning of that election day was, if my memory serves me correctly, on the Johannesburg International Airport, is that correct?

JOHANNES JAKOBUS DE BRUIN: Yes.

MR DE KONING: And that people died during that explosion?

JOHANNES JAKOBUS DE BRUIN: Yes.

MR DE KONING: And that ultimately people were prosecuted and placed in jail as a result?

JOHANNES JAKOBUS DE BRUIN: That's true.

MR DE KONING: And we can accept that the news reports also reported that people had died during that explosion?

JOHANNES JAKOBUS DE BRUIN: Yes, that's correct.

MR DE KONING: However, if I understand your testimony correctly, especially that which you have said in paragraph 13 of your statement, you were not shocked at the loss of life which occurred there, because that was within the strategy of disruption?

JOHANNES JAKOBUS DE BRUIN: I was shocked.

MR DE KONING: So you were shocked about that as well?

JOHANNES JAKOBUS DE BRUIN: That's right.

MR DE KONING: Although it was part of the planned strategy to disrupt the election and sow chaos so that there could be no change in the State dispensation, do I understand it correctly?

JOHANNES JAKOBUS DE BRUIN: Yes.

MR DE KONING: Although these events were to be expected to you, you said that in a humane way, it did shock you, so that would be of application to any act of terrorism in terms of the objective to disrupt and terrorise?

JOHANNES JAKOBUS DE BRUIN: Yes.

MR DE KONING: So that which you have said with regard to what you heard the applicants had done was not an exception?

JOHANNES JAKOBUS DE BRUIN: That's true.

UNKNOWN: If I might just interrupt at this point, can you explain that shock, you know Mr De Koning is talking about you were shocked?

JOHANNES JAKOBUS DE BRUIN: Ja.

UNKNOWN: Why in relation to these two applicants, why?

JOHANNES JAKOBUS DE BRUIN: Because I did not expect that the two applicants would have done something like that, because they were my friends and my friends at that point were at the mine, we never spoke in such a way that we would have killed people in order to achieve our objective.   We spoke about the possible loss of life, but not that we directly would cause it, and that is why I was shocked at my two friends, that they could be involved in such a matter.

MR DE KONING: However, you expected of them to participate in the resistance and freedom struggle which you told us of, like yourself?

JOHANNES JAKOBUS DE BRUIN: Yes, that's true.

MR DE KONING: And you knew that the resistance and freedom struggle would lead to violence, people being injured, death, blood, destruction?

JOHANNES JAKOBUS DE BRUIN: Yes, I knew that.

MR DE KONING: Chairperson, I am finished.   However, in my notes there are three places where I have placed a question mark regarding certain things which the witness has said regarding where he involved the applicant regarding certain things which he said to you, and I would like to clear this up so that I can either just get a version on that and just determine whether it is in line with the applicant's version.   Would you grant me that?

CHAIRPERSON: Is this arising out of questions that were put?

MR DE KONING: That is correct, that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, yes, all right.

MR DE KONING: My note pertaining to questions from the board?

CHAIRPERSON: Do you want to ...(intervention).

MR DE KONING: A two minute adjournment, it would be very brief.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR DE KONING: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: I think what we'll endeavour to do, I see it's getting towards four o'clock, but I think it would be good if we could finish with Mr De Bruin's evidence today, rather than ...(intervention).

MR DE KONING: Hold it over.   No ...(intervention).

CHAIRPERSON: ...hold it over until tomorrow.

MR DE KONING: I surely have that intention as well.

CHAIRPERSON: Because Mr Botha will then ask questions, and that will be the end of it.

MR DE KONING: Thank you very much.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.   We'll take a short adjournment at this stage.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

JOHANNES JAKOBUS DE BRUIN: (still under oath)

CHAIRPERSON: Mr De Koning, I see that everyone's not back in, including one of the applicants.   I think we should perhaps get them in.

MR DE KONING: We can just wait a while, thank you
...(intervention).

CHAIRPERSON: Oh here they're coming in now, yes.   Yes, I think you can continue.

MR DE KONING: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

MR DE KONING: Mr De Bruin, the second applicant has told me that in 1989 already, he, at an AWB meeting at Donald's Dam, he had completed an application for membership, did he mention that to you?

JOHANNES JAKOBUS DE BRUIN: Yes, now that you mention it, I know that he definitely told me this at a certain point.

MR DE KONING: And at another event he attended, another meeting, where he filled out another application form, because he had never received any proof or certification or membership card?

JOHANNES JAKOBUS DE BRUIN: That's correct.

MR DE KONING: Thank you, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that ...(intervention).

MR DE KONING: That is all I have, just to clarify.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR DE KONING

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Botha?

MR BOTHA: I've got no further questions in re-examination.
Thank you, Mr Chairman.
NO QUESTIONS BY MR BOTHA