Amnesty Hearings — East London — 1999-04-19

MR SIBANYONI: Only two short questions Mr Chairperson.  Mr Nortje, in other words, as a goodwill, not specifically for the supply of the weapons for the attempted coup, but for everything which was done during the period that you were with Mr De Kock?

MR NORTJE: That is correct.

MR SIBANYONI: In your application, on page 14, you say
"... deeds were committed in order of the seniors, of Commanders, and the Ministers of the government of the day."
	Who are those Ministers of the government of the day that you are referring to?

MR NORTJE: I cannot recall specifically what the names of the Ministers were, but I would then say that it would be the Ministers who were then in control of the country.   We did not receive specific orders from them, we received them from De Kock, what happened further up, is unknown to me.

MR SIBANYONI: Thank you Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nortje, when did Vlakplaas close down?

MR NORTJE: April 1993.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lamey, do you have any questions arising from questions that had been put by the panel?

MR LAMEY: Yes, thank you Chairperson.  Just to return to the question put by Mr Sibanyoni, where you say in your initial application that the deeds were committed because of the orders of seniors, Commanders and Ministers of the government of the day, that refers in general to the totality of the incidents and deeds for which you had requested amnesty, you are not referring specifically to the Transkei coup, is that correct?

MR NORTJE: Yes.

MR LAMEY: Among others  you were also an applicant in the Khotso/COSATU House incident and it emanated from evidence given there, that the action had been approved on administrative level?

MR NORTJE: That is correct.

MR LAMEY: Then just to return to the plot which was given to you later in 1992, by Mr De Kock, is it also correct to say that when you refer to the fact that this was given to you because of everything that the two of you had done together, could you just elaborate on that, might I ask you, you and Mr De Kock travelled a long road together?

MR NORTJE: Yes.

MR LAMEY: From the days of Koevoet?

MR NORTJE: Yes.

MR LAMEY: And before you eventually testified as a State witness before the Goldstone Commission, was it correct that you and Mr De Kock had been very close to each other as friends?  In other words there was more, you were more than just an ordinary Vlakplaas member?

MR NORTJE: Yes, that is the impression which I had.

MR LAMEY: This gift of the plot, do you recall why he gave it to you?

MR NORTJE: Well, it was as a result of the fact that we parted ways, and I wasn't the only one.  He did that because he was that sort of person, perhaps he just had too much.

MR LAMEY: And you accepted the gift as such for that reason?

MR NORTJE: Yes.

MR LAMEY: And at that stage, when it was given to you, was there any talk of the dissolution of Vlakplaas, even though it hadn't taken place yet, was it at that time when it was tabled?

MR NORTJE: Yes.

MR LAMEY: Before you parted ways?

MR NORTJE: Yes.

MR LAMEY: Thank you Chairperson, I have nothing further.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR LAMEY

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Cornelius, any questions arising?

MR CORNELIUS: Thank you Mr Chairman, no.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR CORNELIUS

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Hattingh?

MR HATTINGH: No thank you, Mr Chairman.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR HATTINGH

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Malan?

MR MALAN: No thank you.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MALAN

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Jansen?

MR JANSEN: None, Mr Chairman.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR JANSEN

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mapoma?

MR MAPOMA: No questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MAPOMA

CHAIRPERSON: Could I just ask one question, I am sorry, I should have asked earlier, did you at any stage on your way back or any time after, on your way back from East London or any time after, see a white bag in the possession of Mr De Kock that he says he received from Mr Nieuwoudt?

MR NORTJE: No Chairperson, I did not see it.

CHAIRPERSON: And the car that you went to East London in, you said it was a Toyota, who car was that?

MR NORTJE: Cressida.  That was my vehicle, I am not certain if I already had the vehicle in my possession, it was first Mr De Kock's car before he gave it to me, I am not sure at which stage I took over the vehicle.

CHAIRPERSON: Because Mr De Kock, you heard him when he mentioned that he left it in the car for two to three weeks, so if it was your car, did you see a white bag full of money?

MR NORTJE: I did not see the money.

CHAIRPERSON: Or the bag?

MR NORTJE: And I don't know about the bag, I simply heard about the bag, but I didn't know about it.  I remember that that vehicle was an 1989 model, and at that stage it was still Mr De Kock's car, I only took it over at a later stage, it was not yet my vehicle.

CHAIRPERSON: So when you went back to Vlakplaas from East London, Mr De Kock would have kept the vehicle?

MR NORTJE: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Anything arising?

MR HATTINGH: Mr Chairperson, may I just clarify one aspect here, Mr De Kock's evidence was that he received the money after the third incident, not after the Duli incident?

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, I apologise, thank you.  I don't think there need any questions then arising Mr Lamey, unless you want to.  Thank you Mr Nortje.
WITNESS EXCUSED

CHAIRPERSON: I see it is now just before four o'clock, I think this will be a convenient time to adjourn.  What time will be convenient time to start tomorrow morning?  What would be convenient, half past nine or nine o'clock?  What would you prefer?

MR MAPOMA: Half past nine.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, we will make it at half past nine, I think we have made quite good progress today, so we will then adjourn until half past nine tomorrow morning at the same venue, thank you.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS