Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — UNKNOWN

MR VAN VUUREN: That night Mamasela, myself and Hechterwent  to Witbank.  We used two vehicles.  Hechter and myself waitedoutside Witbank on the main road and Mamasela went ahead on hisown.  I must mention here that with regard to
1B Tshilahle/...
MR DU PLESSIS 350 J J VAN VUUREN
Tshilahle he might have been with us and that only Mukaka mighthave been left with the other two, but I am not sure about this. After about two hours he returned with Sefola.  He presentedhimself to  Sefola as an ANC terrorist who had  been sent fromoutside the country and that there were other persons whom Sefolawas supposed to meet.  This is how he had convinced Sefola tocome with him in the vehicle.

MR DU PLESSIS: After Sefola was in the vehicle, wheredid you take him?

MR VAN VUUREN: We returned to the property to the northof the Pienaarsrivier.  We also interrogated Sefola in a similarmanner as the others.

MR DU PLESSIS: Can you remember how many times you gavehim electrical shocks?

MR VAN VUUREN: Between five and 10 times.

MR DU PLESSIS: What information did he give you with regardto acts of terror in which he was involved?

MR VAN VUUREN: He had admitted after he was interrogatedthat he was an organiser of the ANC in the area with a seniorposition.  He admitted that he provided housing for ANC activistsand terrorists and did target analysis for them.  Sefola alsospoke, although I cannot remember the names exactly, of a certainPhula or Phule as well as A Mnisi.  He admitted his involvementin bombings, limpet mine  explosions and that he was responsiblefor the planning of  all of these incidents.  He admitted to beinga trained terrorist and he provided us with the names and addressesof his own cell as well as other terrorists.

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Van Vuuren, did you obtain informationfrom him with regard to the involvement of the killing and deathof innocent persons?
1B

MR VAN VUUREN: /....
MR DU PLESSIS 351 J J VAN VUUREN

MR VAN VUUREN: Yes.

MR DU PLESSIS: Did he tell you where he had been trained?

MR VAN VUUREN: No, I can no longer remember.

MR DU PLESSIS: Were Maake and Makope also trained terrorists?

MR VAN VUUREN: I can mention that Maake had been sentoutside of the country for training as I had mentioned  at  thebeginning.  I would suppose that  Makope  must  have been trainedinside the country if he was a member of this cell.

MR DU PLESSIS: What was the response of Sefola when youinterrogated him, did he give you the information easily?

MR VAN VUUREN: No, he did not want to give the information.

MR DU PLESSIS: Why?

MR VAN VUUREN: Sefola was a strong person.  He believeddeeply in that in which he was involved in and of its correctness.

MR DU PLESSIS: Could you read the third paragraph?

MR VAN VUUREN: Mamasela forced a knife in Sefola's nose,after which he provided additional information.  He also beggedfor his life.  I was present during these interrogations.

MR DU PLESSIS: What happened next?

MR VAN VUUREN: Mamasela and myself untied him.  He askedif he could say something.  I agreed to it.  He asked if he couldsing N'kosi Sikelela Afrika and he said that we had better killhim.  He also claimed that the ANC would govern  later, that apartheidwould no longer be able to be maintained and that a democracywould be the end of the Boers.  He also mentioned that the SecurityPolice and Umkhonto we Sizwe were the toys of the politicians. I
1B never/...
MR DU PLESSIS 352 J J VAN VUUREN
never believed then that it would be possible for the ANC to becomethe Government.  Mamasela had an ANC flag present  which was withus then.  He threw this over Maake while Sefola sang Nkosi SikelelaAfrika.  We then shocked Makope to death.

MR DU PLESSIS: Could you stop there.  The applicationis not very clear.   When Mamasela threw the ANC flag over Maake,was Maake still alive?

MR VAN VUUREN: No, he had already died.

MR DU PLESSIS: How did he die?

MR VAN VUUREN: We shocked him to death with the generator.

MR DU PLESSIS: Was this done during the interrogationof Sefola?

MR VAN VUUREN: That is correct.  During the interrogationof Sefola.

MR DU PLESSIS: Why did you do this?

MR VAN VUUREN: To obtain more information from Sefola.

MR DU PLESSIS: Did you do the same to Makope?

MR VAN VUUREN: That is correct.

MR DU PLESSIS: Why did you do this?

MR VAN VUUREN: Also to obtain additional information fromSefola.

MR DU PLESSIS: Did you indeed obtain more informationfrom Sefola by killing Maake and Makope?

MR VAN VUUREN: Yes,  we did.

MR DU PLESSIS: You may continue.  What happened next?

MR VAN VUUREN: The three activists were members of thesame  cell.  They were interrogated in the first place to obtaininformation from them and also because they were involved withbombings and limpet mine explosions as well as landmine explosions. Especially Sefola made decisions with regard to
1B explosions/...
MR DU PLESSIS 353 J J VAN VUUREN
explosions where people died.   He admitted his involvement withone of the landmine incidents where people died.  There was ageneral state of emergency and unrest, rebellion, arson and murderall over the country.  If we had caught them the network wouldsimply have changed.  It was necessary to kill them in order todestroy the entire cell.  No one knew what had happened to them. After this we blew them up with a landmine so that it would beimpossible to recognise them.  This was on a road in Bophuthatswanaclose to Warmbaths.  This action was directly due to the generalinstruction of Brig Johan Viktor to sort out problems becausethe country was going up in flames.  It was additionally underthe instructions of Brig Cronje.  The purpose was to neutralisethe cell.  We did not enjoy doing this, we did not want to dothis, but we had to stop them  from killing innocent women andchildren.  It was additionally necessary to do this because wewere at war with the ANC.  I have tremendous respect for HaroldSefola because of the way in which he behaved during the process of us killing him.

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Van Vuuren, why did you decide to killthese three terrorists with the generator rather than to shootthem or to use another means of killing them?

MR VAN VUUREN: We were we to shoot them there would havebeen blood involved.  There would have been additional piecesof ammunition used lying around and we also wanted to do it ascleanly and quietly as possible.

MR DU PLESSIS: Was there the possibility if you were toshoot them that people in the area might have heard it?

MR VAN VUUREN: Yes, of the local people were around andthey might have heard it if we were to shoot them.
1B

JUDGE WILSON: /...
MR DU PLESSIS 354 J J VAN VUUREN

JUDGE WILSON: ... blood and make a noise.

MR VAN VUUREN: Yes, it caused a lot of blood as well asa large noise, but this was entirely in a different place, notat the place where we tortured them.

MR DU PLESSIS: Where you blew them up, was that saferand further away from people?

MR VAN VUUREN: It had to appear, why we blew them up,was that it had to appear that they were planting a landmine at that time.

MR DU PLESSIS: Was this far away from other persons?

MR VAN VUUREN: Yes, it was on a far-off distant road inBophuthatswana.

SISI KHAMPEPE: I am just a little unclear about your partof evidence with regard to when you knew that both of the threeactivists were members of the same cell.  At what stage did youascertain that fact, that they were members of the same cell?

MR VAN VUUREN: After we had interrogated them we determinedthat they were members of a single cell.

MR DU PLESSIS: Did you determine this prior to killingthe first person, Maake?

MR VAN VUUREN: Yes, Maake told us who his contact personhad been.