Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1999-08-16

ADV BOSMAN: I am not trying to trap you with my questions Mr du Preez, I am just trying to get clarity for myself.  Did you think that it was beyond the norm that you were asked to do something actively with an elimination?

S G DU PREEZ: Chairperson, the killing of any person is definitely beyond any normal instruction and I think it was because we were a small close group and it was in regard to trusted positions that we had amongst each other.

ADV BOSMAN: You still have not answered my question.  My question is whether you regarded or you experienced it as out of the norm?  Is your answer that you did not think it was extra ordinary because you were such a small group?

S G DU PREEZ: I would say definitely it is extra ordinary to execute such an act.

ADV BOSMAN: But Mr du Preez, you do not understand me properly.  My question is not whether you thought the act was extra ordinary, my question is did you not think that it was extra ordinary that you were asked to participate so actively?

S G DU PREEZ: No, because I don't know of anybody else whom Taylor would have asked to do it.

ADV BOSMAN: Why do you say that Mr du Preez?

S G DU PREEZ: Because Taylor and I had a very long working relationship and he trusted us.

ADV BOSMAN: Do I understand correctly that your normal activities were within the Intelligence Unit?

S G DU PREEZ: That is correct.

ADV BOSMAN: But that Mr Taylor applied you for the more illegal activities?

S G DU PREEZ: That is correct, Chairperson.

ADV BOSMAN: Thank you, Chairperson.

MR LAX: Thank you, Chairperson, just one small aspect if I may.  Mr du Preez, you've told us that the decision to blow up the deceased was your decision.

S G DU PREEZ: That's correct, Chairperson.

MR LAX: And did you do that of your own initiative?

S G DU PREEZ: That's correct, Chairperson.

MR LAX: Now my only difficulty with the proposition is why did Taylor then give you the limpet mine to do that if it was your decision?

S G DU PREEZ: The fact that Taylor gave me the limpet mine, I think this brought the idea about.

MR LAX: Well you see, here was the very evidence you would use to charge the man, in your hand, isn't that so?

S G DU PREEZ: That's correct, Chairperson.

MR LAX: And this limpet mine that had been taken off him was there for everybody to see.  It's not as if it was reliant on someone else's evidence, there was the item itself right there in your own hands.  Didn't that make a mockery of the assertion that there was no evidence to charge him with?  The evidence was right there in front of you on that day, in your own hand.

S G DU PREEZ: Chairperson, I did not know the circumstances and previous incidents, many persons were taken to go and point out explosives and I just assumed that Taylor had forced this person to expose his explosives, so I don't know what the circumstances were and how they found him with the limpet mine.  In my statement I mentioned that he was found along with the limpet mine, but I am not aware of the specific circumstances as to how it took place and I am convinced that if Taylor found him with the explosives and with the limpet mine in his possession, he would have charged him.

MR LAX: You see from your own statement and I refer you to paragraph 11, you say,
"Taylor mentioned to us that Ninela was caught by the askaris while in possession of a limpet mine.  Wasserman and I took over Ninela from Taylor along with the limpet mine."

S G DU PREEZ: That's correct.

MR LAX: It's not any limpet mine, it's that limpet mine.

S G DU PREEZ: That's correct, Chairperson.

MR LAX: Now it's clear from that statement, that paragraph, that your information was that he was found in possession of that mine and that that mine was handed to him.

S G DU PREEZ: That's correct, Chairperson.

MR LAX: It's not as if this happened in some other environment and that here's direct evidence, direct knowledge in your own hand.  Are you with me?

S G DU PREEZ: Yes, I'm with you Chairperson, but I cannot comment as to what Taylor thought or what he knew and in reality I might be testifying incorrectly as to how Taylor came into possession of this limpet mine, I don't know.  I don't know what the circumstances were when the person was apprehended.  Was he caught first and he had to point out the limpet mine or was he caught with the limpet mine in his possession, I don't know.

MR LAX: Why did you take him so far away, to Bulwer.

S G DU PREEZ: Because it fell outside our immediately - or I was an explosive expert myself and it was not appropriate to investigate your own incident, so we took it out of our explosives jurisdiction.

MR LAX: You see it's clear from what Taylor says that this was meant to look like the man just blew himself up.

S G DU PREEZ: That was one of the considerations, that's correct and we also wanted it to serve as a deterrent for other persons who would want to place explosive devices or limpet mines.

MR LAX: You see that's precisely the next point I was coming to.  If it was to be a deterrent to others, then the man's identity would have been quite important, because if it was just some unknown person, how would that be a deterrent to anybody?  Whereas if it was known that Blessing Ninela blew himself up with a land mine, that would be a very good deterrent to everybody because he was a known quantity.  Do you follow?

S G DU PREEZ: It didn't come to my attention at that stage.

MR LAX: Now the last aspect that I wanted to cover with  you was, and it arises out of what you've just told me with regard to going to Bulwer.  The fact is that for example in the kwaMashu matter, those people got blown up within your jurisdiction.

S G DU PREEZ: That's correct, Chairperson.

MR LAX: So what was the big deal about having to take it out of your jurisdiction?  That happened right there within your jurisdiction?  It doesn't seem to make sense to me in the light of that.

S G DU PREEZ: Chairperson, in Ninela's instance it was the decision that was taken in the kwaMashu 3.  In the kwaMashu 3 instance it was a target which they were planning to blow up anyway, in contrast to Ninela's position, it was never known that Ninela was going to use a specific target.

MR LAX: But you see the information, on of the reasons that grounds the whole basis upon which he was killed, is the fact that he was a highly trained person who had been involved in other explosions and whose job it was to place explosives.  His direct target may not have been known, for sure, it doesn't change it though very much, does it?

S G DU PREEZ: I am not certain what the question is now.

MR LAX: What I'm saying to you is, in the kwaMashu matter I understand it looked like they blew themselves up.

S G DU PREEZ: That's correct.

MR LAX: Having gone to a particular place to place explosives.

S G DU PREEZ: That's correct.

MR LAX: This one in Bulwer would have looked exactly the same.

S G DU PREEZ: That's correct.

MR LAX: What's the difference?

CHAIRPERSON: It might have been just one of the many reasons why you killed this man.

S G DU PREEZ: I don't understand, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: I see.  Alright.  When you took this man to Bulwer, you knew beforehand that he was going to be blown up.  You've given some explanation, one of the reasons was you were hoping that his identity would not be found out.  If it were found out, there'd be inquiries as to who he was last seen with.

S G DU PREEZ: That's correct, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Then you were asked, why was he taken to Bulwer?

CHAIRPERSON: Well, you said, it was outside your jurisdiction.  If it were within your jurisdiction you would have been called upon to investigate the explosion yourself.

S G DU PREEZ: That's correct, Chairperson.