Special Hearings — State Security Council Hearings — 1997-12-04

LUCAS DANIEL BARNARD: The answer is yes.

MR MCADAM: Then  I would accept  that it would not be that we had to enforce stronger military action against the masses.

LUCAS DANIEL BARNARD: : Mr Chair it is clear that due to the escalation of the revolutionary onslaught the murders committed and bombs that exploded in Wimpy Bars etc. the actions I have already described, because of the climate and the growing revolutionary dilemma surrounding that it would by necessity require increased security forces.  It was, however, never about a point of departure that the problems in South Africa could be solved by the military  and it had to be solved in such a way that a political solution could be found.

MR MCADAM: Would you agree with me that an important central point was that prior actions by the ANC,  I believe that the ANC was at that stage more active in the area of making the country ungovernable, it was not a matter of one trained person coming in and leaving again and nobody knew who he was or what he was doing.  They operated in a very clandestine way in the early '80's.

LUCAS DANIEL BARNARD: Yes, Mr  Chair I agree that the climate had been one of mass resistance of problems in schools and it is true that "certain parts" and I say that in inverted commas, "certain areas" were not governable in the ordinary sense of being governable.  It therefore, was not only certain people, the majority of people who were excluded from political rights started mobilising themselves.

MR MCADAM: And also what would have happened, I put it to you, with the policy of the ANC of making the country ungovernable they would act in public and would then basically tell people not tO - they would order people to break the law and they would then challenge the country and the Government basically, saying that you cannot arrest me because this would cause further unrest.  That was the actions of the ANC.

LUCAS DANIEL BARNARD: That was one of the problems of the Government at that stage.

MR MCADAM: Was it important to you that these prominent leaders who were acting in such a blatant way that they would be part of the negotiating processes?

LUCAS DANIEL BARNARD: It would of course be good for the country if one could get leaders of all sides not to spend their energies on destabilising the country but to get them to take part in negotiated settlement politics in South Africa.

MR MCADAM: Would it then be true that information be gathered on these people so that this information can be transferred to the people who wanted to obtain this negotiated settlement, to convince this person to take part in the negotiation?

LUCAS DANIEL BARNARD: Yes, the answer is yes.

MR MCADAM: I am surprised that at that stage, and we have to look at the Eastern Cape, at that stage  suddenly the three leaders of Pebco disappears, a prominent organisation in East London and then Fedora who was behind all the unrest in the Eastern Cape.  They were either murdered or disappeared from the face of the earth.

LUCAS DANIEL BARNARD: With respect I do not understand what the question is.

MR MCADAM: I want to determine if you knew that this happened.

LUCAS DANIEL BARNARD: All South Africans know about this unfortunate incident where these people were murdered.

MR MCADAM: What did your department do to investigate either the death or the disappearance of these people?

LUCAS DANIEL BARNARD: I have taken great pains to explain what NI's role was. Investigation and gathering  intelligence on criminal matters was not the task of NI.

MR MCADAM: But these people were important to you for the negotiating process and you are an Intelligence service.  The one disappears after receiving an order to meet the British Ambassador at Port Elizabeth airport and the other is found dead and the car was burnt, they were burnt out and you want to tell us your Intelligence information was never tasked to find out what had happened and who had been involved?

LUCAS DANIEL BARNARD: Mr Chair I have answered that question I am not going to try and answer it again.  That was the task of the NI. I cannot answer the question any better than I did answer the previous question..

MR MCADAM: On page 11 of your submission you clearly said that the State Security Council was kept up-to-date on the plans of the revolutionary organisation.  If that had indeed been the case, you would have looked very carefully at these people and you would have been interested in finding out what happened to them, who had been responsible for their disappearance and the murders.  At that stage there was international concern and questions were asked.

LUCAS DANIEL BARNARD: I have trouble understanding the question.  On page 11 of my submission,  I want to read the whole sentence  paragraph 8.12.5.  It starts with, in the middle thereof
"The members of the SSC were kept up-to-date by means of special Intelligence publication and National Intelligence assessments they were kept up-to-date".
This is about the transferring of Intelligence to enable the State Security Council to be informed at all times.  The incidents you are referring to concerned very unfortunate murders in the country.  I have already  twice said that NI was not there to investigate murders or other criminal matters.  It was not its statutory task.  If NI investigated those matters it would act contra to the statute which brought it to life.  It was not our concerns, it was not our task and that is why we did not do this.

MR MCADAM: Was there any involvement in JMS of the SSC?

LUCAS DANIEL BARNARD: I have indicated that after 1986 the Joint Management System was expanded and NI, who had a small personnel in the country at that stage, NI's task was, in foreign countries we wanted to provide Intelligence to the various parts of the Joint Management System.

MR MCADAM: What influence did JMS have on the local commanders of police, can you tell us?

LUCAS DANIEL BARNARD: I think that the Joint Management System not always had the successes it wanted to achieve. I have explained that at that stage in the late 80's the conflict was escalating, it became necessary in a changed conflict situation to have a new and changed system.  All the examples that can be named where there were successes against the revolutionary systems in Malaysia etc, the State had to develop a management system which could  deal with the processes.
 In this case the management system attempted also on local level to deal with the battle of the hearts and minds of people so that we could win the negotiated settlement politics.  I do not always think they acted correctly, they made mistakes from time to time, but the point of view and the position was a co-ordinated attempt to build schools and to bring about economic development, to enable economic development.

MR MCADAM: Are you in possession of the amnesty application of  Harold Snyman?

LUCAS DANIEL BARNARD: Yes I have it in my possession.

MR MCADAM: : He recently testified at an amnesty application on the kidnapping and murder of the Pebco 3 in the Port Elizabeth area.  He avered that he had decided to eliminate these people because of pressure on him by the JMS system and also by senior members of the State Security Council.

LUCAS DANIEL BARNARD: Mr Chair is this the document you are referring to, can you refer me to the page you are referring to I would just like to follow that up.