Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1999-07-26

MS LOCKHAT: I was just under the impression that the flickering of the lights was to inform you that they had weapons or that they didn't have weapons.

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: No, this was an early warning.

MS LOCKHAT: Thank you, Chairperson, I have no further questions for this witness.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS LOCKHAT

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Ms Lockhat.  Mr Hattingh, do you have any re-examination?

MR HATTINGH: No re-examination, thank you, Mr Chairman.
NO RE-EXAMINATION BY MR HATTINGH

CHAIRPERSON: Adv Gcabashe, do you have any questions you'd like to ask?

ADV GCABASHE: Just one or two.
	Mr de Kock, both Mr Mose and Mr Manzini, in the two  different incidents, left with the whole team to go to these particular points and then passed on to the border.  Just go through that bit of detail for me.

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Chairperson, I don't want to speculate, but I think we pointed out the various points to them during the day.  And perhaps someone could assist me regarding the following, or of the following witnesses.  On the left or right-hand side of the
road we placed something, I don't know whether it was a milk carton or something else, I'm not certain, but that would have given an indication of the area in which the ambush was situated.  I'm stating this for clarity's sake, but I would need some assistance.  If someone could confirm this for me.

ADV GCABASHE: But both had a sense of the numbers who were involved, number of members who were involved in the operation?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Yes, Chairperson.

ADV GCABASHE: And both had a sense that Vlakplaas specifically was involved in this operation?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Well not only involved, but also the leading role.

ADV GCABASHE: And both understood what Vlakplaas was about, who those operatives were, how they operated, they had a sense of that?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Lt Mose, yes.  I'm not very certain about Manzini, but we can ask him.

ADV GCABASHE: Mr Mose when you sent him across - I'm interested in the identification of weapons, what were his instructions, how was he going to identify whether those persons had weapons or did not have weapons?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Chairperson, that would have been a question of whether the weapons were carried over.  And then, he was a man of sound judgement, whether the weapons would have been covered in something or placed in a bag and all these persons had carry bags.

ADV GCABASHE: But he had no brief to question anybody about anything at all, he was just collecting and driving?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: He was simply the transport.

ADV GCABASHE: Yes, thank you.  Thank you, Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Malan, do you have any questions?

MR MALAN: Mr de Kock, two questions.  The first has to do with the first incident.  Some of the applicants in their applications create the impression that you were very upset because weapons were not found during the first ambush, as if - and I'm only speaking from my own impression, I don't want to connect you specifically to their words, but to the effect that you were upset that  you had fired when there were no weapons.  You say that that is an incorrect impression, that you would have fired nonetheless?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Yes, Chairperson, because all information created that expectation that you were dealing with trained MK members.  The idea was that this ambush was going to take place, that these persons would be armed and the information indicated that they were armed, and I was satisfied with the information.  This was the result of enquiries that I had made myself, I didn't simply rely on someone else's version of the information and here we have this situation.

MR MALAN: Yes, but the situation regarding whether or not they were armed, there was a signal to indicate that?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Yes, Chairperson.

MR MALAN: That was for your protection, not for whether to shoot or not to shoot or whether to arrest or not to arrest?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Chairperson, the fact that the person, or the driver ran around the vehicle would be an indication of whether the passengers were armed.

MR MALAN: But arrest was not an option, they would be shot whether they were armed or unarmed?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Yes, ultimately they would have been shot, but I did not expect unarmed persons.  That is something which upset me.

MR MALAN: Very well.  Then just with regard to the flickering of the lights, because some of the applicants maintain that that was the indication of whether or not there were weapons, some also speak of indicators and not the flickering of the headlights.  Would you have expected other vehicles on that road, or would they have been intercepted?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: No, Chairperson, if another vehicle had approached they would not have known about our ambush position, so that would not have given that indication.  But the inroad was quite quiet at that stage of the night, so I don't believe that there would have been another vehicle on the road.

MR MALAN: The flickering of the lights, the only reason that I can understand as to why you would flicker the lights would be to indicate that that is the vehicle that you are expecting.

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Yes, Chairperson.

MR MALAN: Just in case it may be another vehicle?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Yes, Chairperson.

MR MALAN: So it isn't a warning of here we come, it is an indication that that is the correct car?  You would have reacted on lights which were approaching, whether they had dimmed the lights or not, the men would have taken up their guns?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: It is very difficult to say, Chairperson, one would have expected for the lights to flicker, that was one aspect of the operation.  If we had picked up the weapons and it wasn't one of our vehicles, it just would have gone through, but it wasn't that way, it happened as we had planned.

MR MALAN: The border post was closed.

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: That's correct.

MR MALAN: And no other vehicles would approach from the border post to Piet Retief at 12 o'clock that night?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: No, none that we had foreseen, or expected.

MR MALAN: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.  Just one or two questions, Mr de Kock.  Sorry to keep harping back to these signals.  You said the signal was that if the driver got out the car and then ran around the front of the car, that would mean that the people were armed.

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: That's correct, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Now we've heard that at the first incident they weren't armed and yet he did this.  Now under what circumstances can you in your mind think that he would have got out of the vehicle and then strolled across and not given that signal that they were armed?  Because he didn't know that they were armed in the first incident, yet he gave it, because they had bags, but one would thing that people infiltrating from one country to another would be carrying at least some bags.

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: These persons had bags and they had them on their laps.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, well that's not unusual.

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: But I believe that Lt Mose believed that there were weapons inside.

CHAIRPERSON: That's why I'm asking you, under what circumstances do you think he would ever have given "they're not armed" signal?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Chairperson, if there were none such people, or if nobody had climbed into his car, then Mose would have brought the car to a standstill there, climbed out and most probably have indicated.

CHAIRPERSON: So the signal is rather probably more accurately put that if they are armed and you see them armed, okay you run in front of the car, if you think that they may be armed you also run in front of the car?