Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — UNKNOWN

ANSWER: In a way yes Mr Chairman, if the source is still valuable, if the police individual or police member is still a valuable member it is allowed, it's an open hand and I think it was very clearly indicated in the Eugene De Kock trial recently where it is, there was an absolute open free hand and everything was condoned from the top as being publicly admittednow, in the majority of those cases by the former Commissioner of Police General Johan Van der Merwe.

CHAIRPERSON: It may have been condoned but I'm not talking about whether it was rightly condoned or wrongly condoned, I'm looking at the acts that were committed and I'm trying to wrestle with whether those acts can be interpreted in terms of the Act as being related to a political objective.  The evidence that we've heard so far, at least on these two murders, leave me in grave doubt whether they can be described directly as being motivated by a political objective.   For example, the purchase of the diamonds was not political, is that correct?

ANSWER: For sure.
2a

CHAIRPERSON: /...
MR MPSHE	135	D J COETZEE

CHAIRPERSON: Well that's the end of the matter isn't it.   Everything that flows out of that was part of criminal activity by the police, but because they were police of the Vlakplaas Unit, therefore they become political that's what you're saying.

ANSWER: Well the result thereof, the result of charging people on Vlakplaas with criminal matters could end up what happened in 1989 when Nofomela spoke out.

CHAIRPERSON: It would mean that the world would come to know about Vlakplaas.

ANSWER: I beg your pardon?

CHAIRPERSON: What it would mean that the world would have come to know about Vlakplaas.

ANSWER: That is correct and all the security police illegal activities.

CHAIRPERSON: Quite right but that didn't make it a political objective, that just means that the political activities of the police have now been discovered.

ANSWER: That is correct, but with great political consequences to the governing party of the day.

CHAIRPERSON: There may be political consequences out of ordinary simple acts as well, but looking at the acts themselves one wants to know whether this can be brought within the ambit of the Act.   This is a matter for argument, no doubt we will hear argument on that.

ANSWER: Thank you Mr Chairman.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR MPSHE (contd)

<UNKNOWN>: Mr Coetzee you reported to your seniors for one reason again and the reason being, as I put to you now, to get the go-ahead in the cover-up of an unauthorised operation, is that correct?
2a	ANSWER: /...
MEMBER OF COMMISSION	136	D J COETZEE

ANSWER: That is correct Mr Chairman.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MPSHE

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: I don't understand your answer to a question which was asked by the Chairman.   I would have thought that if a member of the Security Police based at Vlakplaas committed an ordinary crime, he would be prosecuted like any other person?

ANSWER: Not at all Mr Chairman, as was proven in the Eugene De Kock trial which resulted in multiple, but multiple illegal criminal activities.

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: If that is the case what makes Joe Mamasela's case special?

ANSWER: At that time he was a highly sensitive source whose identity could not be revealed and as I said if it was, and it ended up in a criminal court case, it would have had exactly the same result, I think he would have acted exactly in the same manner as Almond Nofomela did on 19 October 1989.

UNKNOWN: Except that we would have been spared eight years or nine years of continuous criminal acts by the Vlakplaas contingent...  (end of 2a)...

ANSWER: When I left the country after Almond spilled the beans to expose it to support him, the attempts on my life twice, two of them, one was a Walkman bomb which eventually killed Beke Mgeni(?), the other with a contract with the Ulster Freedom Fighters where the British police apprehended two South African agents, that it was impossible to expose to take on the system, the mighty apartheid system during those days, and more (indistinct) the South African Security Police.   Just impossible, no court as proved in the Harms Commission, when I told all these stories and it's on record
2b	where /...
MEMBER OF COMMISSION	137	D J COETZEE
where Judge Harms in public asked me and I quote, "how must I believe this crap you're talking" and I'm afraid with respect to the judge because he's been misled by the police as usually successfully, all those nonsense that I so-called spoke is exactly coming out as the truth with a little bit of finer detail here and there, but nothing else.   At the time there was not an indication that I would come home within the next year with...

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: I'm going to interrupt you because I'm asking you questions about the Lindley incident and you have drifted away from that.

ANSWER: Well Mr Chairman I'm sorry I'm just giving you examples of how impossible it was to, one of the Chairman said that if Joe was then arrested and were charged in 81, it would have moved the process of peace and reconciliation eight years earlier but at that time it was completely impossible.   If you were still a...

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: Captain Coetzee can I ask you questions about the Lindley incident if you don't mind?

ANSWER: You can Mr Chairman.

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: Why did you decide to substitute Mr Nofomela for Mr Mamasela as the person who would have fired the shots?

ANSWER: Because of the sensitivity, as I already said, of Joe Mamasela being an askari, being infiltrated with the ANC in Botswana, shooting with an unregistered, illegal firearm and if that would have come out it would have been in itself chaotic for the South African Security Police and furthermore if he was charged and he exposed the hit squad activities of the South African Security Police, even so more.
2b	JUDGE /...
MEMBER OF COMMISSION	138	D J COETZEE

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: You were placing Mr Nofomela in the danger of being prosecuted weren't you?

ANSWER: Well Mr Chairman in the way I did it, I tried to explain what happened that we tried to pull off this guy who was a danger on the road.   I didn't think it would go that far...

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: Which far?

ANSWER: That far that they will eventually charge Mr Nofomela as they did, or the order would come from the, instruction would come from the Attorney-General's office.

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: In that case if you didn't think it would go so far as to have Mr Nofomela prosecuted, what was the purpose then of substituting him for Mr Mamasela, after all he too would not have been prosecuted.

ANSWER: To keep the identity of Joe Mamasela secret Mr Chairman.

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: Your argument about this whole thing, I understand you just exactly what you are saying is that the identity, the disclosure of Mr Mamasela's identity was crucial?

ANSWER: That is correct Mr Chairman.

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: Do I understand you to say that during that time, Mr Mamasela could do anything, commit any crime with impunity and he would not be prosecuted, there would be a cover-up?

ANSWER: Very difficult to speculate if one says any crime, but I'm sure he would have been spoken to and told to calm down to keep it cool and not proceed with it.

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: Where are we to draw the line because he nearly killed people.

ANSWER: As one can see in the Eugene De Kock trial again
2b	Mr /...
MEMBER OF COMMISSION	139	D J COETZEE
Mr Chairman there was no line to draw in reality.

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: If he had raped a 14 year old girl during that time following the trend of your argument, he would not be prosecuted, apparently the police would have found an appropriate rapist to put in his place?

ANSWER: Well if...

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: They would have said Mr Nofomela did it or someone else.