Amnesty Hearings — Pretoria — 1997-02-25

UNKNOWN: being disputed, the specific question was whether it was 
political or criminal and I think that is the difference between a general motivation and the motivation 
which had already been given.

ADV DU PLESSIS: Yes, but Mr Chairman, with respect, in the motivation in the application, it comes 
out very clearly that the whole purpose of the interrogation and the investigation was absolutely of a 
political nature and that is also clearly apparent further on, where the specific motive is set out on page 161 
to 162.
	I don't attempt to prefer the evidence every time with regard to every case, but if I could just with 
regard to the questions which had been asked, if I could just be afforded the opportunity to read into the 
record, the testimony and I also wish to make the point and I will argue to it at the end, that I was under the 
impression that he did not quite clearly understand the full scope of the questions and therefore I think it is 
very important to get this stated in the record.
	Will you just continue please.
W/

UNKNOWN: "The purpose of interrogations were dual,
		Intimidation and obtaining information Intimidation -  When activists were interrogated 
they were intimidated to stop their activities and also to inform other activists that they 
would be interrogated and fought with tooth and nail, they had to understand that we 
were serious in our actions against them.
		During interrogation and after certain information had been obtained, attempts were 
made to turn activists and informants to become informants for 
PRETORIA HEARING	AMNESTY/

ADV DU PLESSIS: 154	W/

UNKNOWN: the Security Police.  These activists and/or terrorists who were turned, were the most 
effective means to combat the liberation movements, because they were trustees of the 
other terrorists and activists.
		The most striking example was Joe Mamasela as is apparent from this application.  
Ascaris who were former terrorists, were very effective in the suppression of political 
activities".

ADV DU PLESSIS: Were you successful in this attempt, if we can just pause a moment with that?
W/

UNKNOWN: Yes, that is correct.  
		"For the purpose of insurgents and counter-insurgents' activities, it was important to 
obtain information in this regard, it was of cardinal importance to get channels exposed 
etc, and without interrogation techniques a network of information would never have 
been determined to combat the total onslaught.  
		Interrogation which was effective with regard to obtaining information was essential.  It 
was essential to trace deeds of terror and to plan counter strategies and take measures on 
the basis of the information obtained.	Information was also obtained with regard to 
interrogation".

ADV DU PLESSIS: Can I stop you, you can't remember exactly which information you obtained, is 
it possible that your information during that interrogation was that you gained information which could be 
used against the liberation movements?
W/

UNKNOWN: That is correct, that is possible.
PRETORIA HEARING	AMNESTY/

ADV DU PLESSIS: 155	W/

ADV DU PLESSIS: And was he after that of assistance to you as an informant?
W/

UNKNOWN: That is correct.

INTERPRETER: The interpreters would just like the witness to read slowly.
W/

UNKNOWN: "The motive was to combat terrorism and to protect the country.  A further motive was 
to obtain information regarding his actions and strategies".

ADV DU PLESSIS: Okay.  Mr Chairman the rest of the aspects therein can that be regarded as 
being incorporated? Thank you.  
	Okay, Warrant Officer van Vuuren, lastly, did you regard a person as Scheepers Morudi as an 
activist and a criminal seen in broad terms?
W/

UNKNOWN: We as Security Police did not work with criminals, we worked with activists, but 
many of the activists also made themselves guilty of criminal deeds.

ADV DU PLESSIS: Okay, one last aspect which I forgot to ask you about.  Exactly where did your 
command come from, you state that on page 163, where the instructions originated?
W/

UNKNOWN: It came from Captain van Jaarsveld and from Captain Hechter.

ADV DU PLESSIS: Okay.
W/

UNKNOWN: I could just mention that Captain van Jaarsveld did not tell me to assault 
Scheepers Morudi.  That we did of our own accord.

ADV DU PLESSIS: Okay.  So he didn't repudiate you after that, he didn't tell you what you had 
done was wrong?
W/

UNKNOWN: No, he didn't.
PRETORIA HEARING	AMNESTY/

ADV DU PLESSIS: 155	W/

ADV DU PLESSIS: Now, Warrant Officer van Vuuren just to return to the matter of elimination, 
much testimony has been
put before the Committee regarding eliminations in particular circumstances.  Could you just make your 
testimony clear.  The type of person whose elimination was decided upon, could you tell us?
W/

UNKNOWN: It was normally a high profile activist or terrorist who was concerned with the 
deaths of other people.

ADV DU PLESSIS: And then a last question.  Mr Morudi is present here today, are you prepared in your 
application - I would like to refer you to your application - in your application on page 224, could you 
please page to page 224.
W/

UNKNOWN: Which page?

ADV DU PLESSIS: Page 224, could you please read that to the Committee?

INTERPRETER: Could the speaker please be asked to slow down while reading.
W/

UNKNOWN: "Reconciliation I have believed seriously that what I was doing was in the interest 
...(intervention)

JUDGE MGOEPE: Captain, the Interpreters are having a problem, you read too fast for them, there 
are difficulties in keeping up with you in their interpretation.

ADV DU PLESSIS: Yes, Mr Chairman, it is marked with pen on the right=hand side, page 224 of 
the bundle of applications.	Mr Chairman it was attached as an annexure and it is entitled "versoening".

HASSAN MALL: I definitely ...

ADV DU PLESSIS: I beg your pardon Mr Chairman, may I enquire from the other members of the 
Committee if they have (...indistinct).  Thank you Mr Chairman, may the witness PRETORIA HEARING	AMNESTY/

ADV DU PLESSIS: 156	W/

UNKNOWN: proceed?
W/

UNKNOWN: "Reconciliation. - I believed that what
		I was doing was in the interest of the Republic of South Africa, its people, my religion 
and christian convictions.  Today I am uncertain as to where I stand and how I ended up 
in the position which I currently find myself in.
		I am sorry about the loss which family members of the victims suffered and also the loss 
of lives.  I hope that this revelation of mine will lead to greater understanding, 
reconciliation and unity among the people of South Africa.
		It is not my decision who was right or wrong, but I am also a committed citizen of the 
new South Africa.  The truth of the past must be exposed, that goes for all Security 
Forces and also freedom fighters of the liberation movements".

ADV DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, as we recall, previously Warrant Officer van Vuuren was the one 
witness in respect of which we didn't confirm his general background as set out on pages 4 to 16, may I just 
ask the witness his confirmation of that.  Warrant Officer van Vuuren, on pages 4 - 16 your background has 
been set out,  do you confirm that as correct?
W/

UNKNOWN: Yes, it is correct.

ADV DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman I have no further questions.
NO FURTHER

<UNKNOWN>: S BY

ADV DU PLESSIS: .

JUDGE MGOEPE: Mr Currin can I ask you in the meantime just to help refresh our memories - by 
the way have you put it to the witness that your client will deny that he was a political activist?
PRETORIA HEARING	AMNESTY/

MR CURRIN: 157	W/

MR CURRIN: I put it to the witness that my  - I challenged that my client was not an ANC activist and 
put it to the witness that my client was a student activist, that I put to him.  That is what he will testify, that 
he was a student activist, but he was never a member of the ANC.  I put that to him.

JUDGE MGOEPE: What does that mean "student activist"?