Amnesty Hearings — Cape Town — 1997-07-14

JUDGE WILSON: The question you were asking him was, was it justified to torture you like this to look for pamphlets.  The point my brother has just made to you is that they didn't torture you like this to look for pamphlets, they tortured you on the basis of the wrongful information they had, that you had firearms.

CHAIRPERSON: They were hoping to get firearms as a result of doing that to you, but they didn't.  That is the purpose of the torturing.

ADV DE JAGER: Perhaps you could tell us, did you have firearms for the organisation at that stage?

MR KRUSE: I don't think I am under cross-examination here.

ADV DE JAGER: I am only trying to test your evidence that you are putting to him, whether in fact the facts are correct.

MR KRUSE: I am not under oath here, so I don't think I have to answer any of these questions.

ADV DE JAGER: Okay, we realise that you are not under oath.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well.

MR KRUSE: Anyway, actually I just want to show that how truthful he is.  I got information that the Truth Commission has a document in their possession, issued by Brigadier Van der Westhuizen in 1986, I am not very clear on the date, which has a list of police Officers who were part of an unrest team.

ADV DE JAGER: When you give your evidence, you can put all that in.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.  For the time being you must put your questions to this witness.

MR KRUSE: What I am trying to get at, yesterday a question was posed to the witness that he was part of an Investigation team into BMW, The Bantu Military Wing, which he denied.  I would like the witness to look and maybe the Commission's Investigator can make it available, because I believe they have a copy of it too, a document where his name is listed on that  and what the task of that team was.

CHAIRPERSON: I know you are not a trained lawyer, the purpose at present is for you to put your questions to this witness.

MR KRUSE: I want him to look at the document.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, show him a document and put questions that you wish to put, arising out of that document.   What is this document headed, what is it called Mr Kruse?

MR KRUSE: It is Investigation Team for Unrest, dated 1986-07-07.

JEFFERY T BENZIEN: Excuse me, the date, I haven't got it here.

MR KRUSE: If you read under the heading, there is a date there.

JEFFERY T BENZIEN: Not on mine.

MR KRUSE: Under the heading.

CHAIRPERSON: Put your questions to him Mr Kruse.

MR KRUSE: If you look at number 12.

JEFFERY T BENZIEN: With respect Sir, could I just peruse the whole document?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR KRUSE: Can I proceed?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR KRUSE: Do you recognise the document?

JEFFERY T BENZIEN: No Sir, this is the first time I see this document.

MR KRUSE: Number 12, is that referring to you?

JEFFERY T BENZIEN: Yes.

MR KRUSE: Do you recall the functions of this Unrest Investigative Team?

JEFFERY T BENZIEN: Yes, Your Honour.

MR KRUSE: What were the functions?

JEFFERY T BENZIEN: I think this date, depicting 09-07-1986 is very close to the date of the first or second emergency, National emergency in the Republic.	Following the names of people on this list, you would see many of them are not Security Branch members.  Units or members were drawn from various Units, myself included from the Murder and Robbery Unit to either look for people that were listed as activists who had to be detained under the then Emergency Regulations and then these people were normally detained, I think it was Victor Verster and these teams went through to Victor Verster to interview these members.

MR KRUSE: Was part of the functions to investigate the BMW Unit in (indistinct)?

JEFFERY T BENZIEN: At that stage I did not know who the BMW where, it was only later that that came to my knowledge.

MR KRUSE: So at any stage, were you part of the team that investigated the BMW?

JEFFERY T BENZIEN: No, Sir.

MR KRUSE: I have another document which I want to give to the witness, which I believe is also in the possession of the TRC.  It is the follow-up document to this further instruction.  The heading - it is from Brigadier Acker, the heading is this is regarding the unrest situation in the Western Province.

UNKNOWN: Mr Chairman, I want to place on record that I have received the first document.  I did not receive the second document.  I repeatedly sent faxes to the Investigative Unit and Mr Robin Brink, and that they did not provide me with any documents, apart from the first document and the Sithlahya investigation and he assured me that no other documents was submitted and it was not necessary for me to receive those.
	Certain documents are submitted here which I could not peruse and this is unfair.

MR BRINK: I think, Mr Chairman, answer that if I may, I confirm that I spoke with Adv Cook about that, but he was sent as far as I recollect a copy of this document.  The rest of it seems, with respect, not highly significant, because it merely deals with the formation of an investigation team and the steps to be taken to investigate unrest and to detain if necessary and how the things was to be worked, but I don't think there is anything sinister in itself in the document which has just been handed in.

CHAIRPERSON: Well I think if Mr Cook hasn't seen that document, let him see it now.  This is a two-page document that we are talking about, isn't it?

MR BRINK: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: It is a letter, dated 7th of August 1987.  Mr Cook, you haven't seen that before?

UNKNOWN: No, I have never seen that before.

CHAIRPERSON: All right, let him have a look at it.

MR BRINK: But you will realise that we haven't introduced this document into evidence, but that it has been done by Mr Kruse.

CHAIRPERSON: We understand that.

MR BRINK: But certainly we can have a copy of that made available, with the greatest of pleasure.

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: Mr Kruse, what point or points do you want to make with this documents.  Perhaps we need to know that so that we could help you if you need any?

MR KRUSE: Yes, there is just one point which I want him to, to me it is important because the terminology has been used in other instances before and we know because of that terminology, people had been eliminated in previous cases.  The Goniwe trial for instance.
	It is at point 3 under point 1, subpoint 3, which says information network necessary to identify people in the community and to eliminate them and to act pro-actively.
	I just want to know from the witness what does that mean, because there had been a lot of speculation about the terminology and what has happened to people because of that terminology.

ADV DE JAGER: Can somebody perhaps ...

CHAIRPERSON: Let's just first ask him whether he knows anything about the document?

MR KRUSE: Did you know that this was the instructions to your team, I would assume?

JEFFERY T BENZIEN: I was never aware of this document, Your Worship.

ADV DE JAGER: Sorry, could somebody perhaps tell me, this would be Exhibit number?  I don't know whether it is being handed in.  Do you propose handing it in as an Exhibit?

MR KRUSE: It can be handed in, I don't know the procedures.

CHAIRPERSON: If you hand it in just for the sake of handing it in, is there a purpose?  If the purpose can be achieved without handing it in, let's do it.

MR KRUSE: I just want to know from him, even though he hasn't seen the document, how would he interpret that sentence itself in terms of police or security structures terminology at that given time?

JEFFERY T BENZIEN: My comment Sir?

CHAIRPERSON: He wants your interpretation of that paragraph 3 on page 1.