Amnesty Hearings — Cape Town — 1997-11-18

W RIAAN BELLINGAN: I think it was in 1990 or 1991.  I do not have the records in front of me.

UNKNOWN: All right.  You have also referred to some documents that you have annexed as a bundle and which we have called, I think, Volume III, Mr Chairperson, I speak under correction, a document that is headed "Death to Impimpies".  What is the purpose of annexing that particular document to your application for amnesty?

W RIAAN BELLINGAN: I think that case relates to the Bryan Ingulungu matter.  It was a document which was brought out by the ANC which suggested that the askaris should be eliminated, they were seen as Impimpies.  Bryan Ingulungu was on that list and I do not actually want to elaborate on the Ingulungu case at the moment.

UNKNOWN: Yes, no, the question is not about Bryan Ingulungu, the question is about why you annexed that document called "Death to Impimpies" to your application?  What was the purpose of doing that?

W RIAAN BELLINGAN: Many of the documents you will see in the schedule refers to both sides, namely what we did and what the ANC and the PAC did.  So, it was done in order to bring a bit of balance between the information put on the table by the different organisations.  That is why I simply added that, for balance.

UNKNOWN: Is it not correct that you are, that you, in fact, annexed that document to substantiate ...  Mr Bellingan, is it not correct that you annexed that particular document, "Death to Impimpies", to substantiate your allegations regarding the threats to the police and the police force?

W RIAAN BELLINGAN: That document could show in what light the askaris were perceived from the ANC's point of view and in Lusaka.  They saw these people as or if these Impimpies, if they turned against them, they would be killed.

UNKNOWN: Yes, but you annexed that document as motivation or as an indication of what motivated you at the time of this particular incident?

W RIAAN BELLINGAN: No.

CHAIRPERSON: Where is this document?

UNKNOWN: My apologies Mr Chairperson.  Once again I am referring to Volume III, the thick bundle of annexures to the applicants application.  It is unpaginated and I am afraid it is very difficult for me to explain to you.  I, If you will give me a moment.

SISI KHAMPEPE: Is it not headed "The Case is closed", Mr William?  Are you referring to that particular portion?

UNKNOWN: That is quite correct.  It is that particular document.

UNKNOWN: It is usefully close ... (intervention).

SISI KHAMPEPE: I think it would be about six pages from the beginning of Volume III.

CHAIRPERSON: Now, was this annexed to your application?

W RIAAN BELLINGAN: This is something I added to all my applications.  It was simply done to give a total picture of our perspectives in the security police.  It is simply documentation for further information and background to my applications.

UNKNOWN: Now, Captain Bellingan, you will agree that that particular document can hardly be a motivation for what prompted this particular incident?  You will agree?

W RIAAN BELLINGAN: It does not relate to this incident, but it forms part of the bigger picture to give more clarity on Vlakplaas and its activities, because I believe that there is a very great incorrect perception regarding Vlakplaas.   For instance, the fact that we were supposed to rehabilitate the askaris and make proper policemen out of them, that is simply ignored.  Everybody simply sees us as vile wrongdoers who walked up the streets and shot people.  That is why we attached all these documents as well.

UNKNOWN: Yes, but the point is that that particular document was not what motivated you politically in respect of this particular incident, not so?

W RIAAN BELLINGAN: No, that is not what it is about.  That was simply a schedule or an annexure to my entire application.  It is not directly relevant to this case.

SISI KHAMPEPE: Mr Williams, may I interpose.  Mr Bellingan,  isn't this document relating particularly to askaris and informers and not to the police in general?

W RIAAN BELLINGAN: That is correct.

UNKNOWN: If I can then just step off to another point Mr Bellingan.  You mentioned in your evidence yesterday that your eyesight had been affected by this particular incident.

W RIAAN BELLINGAN: That is correct and I think there is medical evidence in this, in the volumes and the Bundles to substantiate that.

UNKNOWN: When did you discover that?

W RIAAN BELLINGAN: I was taken to a doctor that afternoon and I still have some shrapnel in my body.  I think in my finger, but I was taken to a doctor that afternoon and I then saw several doctors and specialists over the years.  I cannot recall specific dates.

UNKNOWN: No, when did you discover that your eyesight was affected?

W RIAAN BELLINGAN: That happened in the normal course of things,  after having several doctors appointments.  I had some treatment initially, my eye was quite blue, and I was given eye drops and it takes some while to actually heal itself.  So, it was not as if I just suddenly realised that there was something wrong with my eye.  My eye was tested and eventually it was discovered that there was something wrong with it.

UNKNOWN: You see, the problem is that the medical reports that you refer to, seem to indicate that your eyesight is normal in both instances.

W RIAAN BELLINGAN: That was the report by the District Surgeon and not a report by the specialist.

UNKNOWN: So, your comment then that the medical reports will support that is incorrect?

W RIAAN BELLINGAN: A District Surgeon or your GP will test your eyes when you go and see him.  I do use spectacles for reading and watching television.  So that is a technical point on which I cannot comment.  I cannot comment on the discrepancy between the specialist and the GP.  My eye specialist told me that my left eye was weaker than the right.

UNKNOWN: You will concede that both medical reports, and the most recent one is in August 1996, you say it is your District Surgeon's report, but he refers to your eyesight as being normal.

W RIAAN BELLINGAN: You must remember that a District Surgeon or your General Practitioner tests your eyes by means of an eye chart, but an eye specialist actually uses all kinds of technology, machines to test your eyes.

UNKNOWN: If I can step off that point and come back to the askaris.  Were the askaris used, the particular askaris in this particular matter, Jimmy Mbane and Eric Maluleka, were they used in the Western Cape region again after this incident?

W RIAAN BELLINGAN: I cannot say with certainty, I think so.  maybe Constable Mbelo would be able to remember, but I think they would have been used again or, perhaps, they would have been, well, the idea after such an operation or infiltration was to, for them to be transferred, interchanged or exchanged with other groups and teams and that is, possibly, what happened, but I do not have any documentary evidence to prove that.  We changed the teams every third month and the reason for that was to prevent them becoming too attached to each other, because they were quite a difficult group of men together, because when they bonded they started doing wrong things and became mischievous.  So, I cannot say with certainty what the situation was.

UNKNOWN: Would you agree that if there were any survivors, in this particular incident, the identities of your askaris would have been betrayed?

W RIAAN BELLINGAN: The askaris, whether they were in Cape Town or wherever, if he meets up with a MK member in Bophuthatswana or wherever, it does not matter.  An askari could be identified anywhere in the country by returned MK exiles, so (end of tape 1A) it was not such a major crisis.

UNKNOWN: ... your efforts here in the Western Cape?

W RIAAN BELLINGAN: Yes, after we withdrew, the rest of the Western Cape had to continue with their normal activities.  So, yes it could actually have hampered us.