Amnesty Hearings — Umtata — 1998-08-24

CHAIRPERSON: Do you have any recollection of any request having been made by Tshabalala to come to the Transkei for the purposes of making a statement?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: No Chairperson, a request like that would have to be directed.  I would not have known what the nature of the investigation would have been, or how far it had come and I wouldn't have simply exposed him like that.
	I would have had to approve it first.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you know an Officer by the name of Willy I think it is, let me just ...

MR MAPOMA: I think it is page 61 Chairperson, if I may assist.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you know an Officer by the name of E. Willy of Umtata?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: No Chairperson.  I have seen the name for the first time upon studying these documents.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: And I have also heard it for the first time during the evidence which was given.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.  I think his rank at the time is given as being Colonel.  Colonel E. Willy?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Completely unknown to me Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: If Colonel Willy wanted to obtain a statement from Mr Tshabalala, would Colonel Willy have made the request to you?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: No Chairperson.  The procedure would have been to liaise with the Liaison Officer of the SAP who was either Colonel Griebenouw or Dan Naude and they would have then put the request through to us.
	I wouldn't have had any problem with sending Tshabalala, because the information which I had at my disposal was that the incident had complied with the prerequisites for using a firearm.

CHAIRPERSON: Let me just direct your attention to page 138, the last but one paragraph where you indicate that the person who should take responsibility for this conduct, obviously the Minister of Law and Order, the Commissioner of Police, the Veiligheid  (indistinct), why do you say the Minister of Law and Order should take responsibility for your conduct?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Chairperson, the Minister of Law and Order knew very well that we were using former members of MK and APLA.
	There can be no doubt about that, and they knew that we were undertaking operations on a cross border level.  Whether it was Swaziland or the Transkei didn't make any difference, it was the same.  I think that it was Min Le Grange and he was the Minister who decorated me and other members in 1983 for a cross border operation in Swaziland, so therefore he could have said in Parliament, yes, we do have such a Unit and we do have former MK and APLA members, and we are using them for counter insurgency services, and still he didn't say anything.
	I have no doubt that he had good reason to conceal this.

CHAIRPERSON: Does it, what about the Commissioner of Police?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Could you repeat please.

CHAIRPERSON: The Commissioner of Police?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Chairperson, the Commissioner of Police by nature of the matter, was usually a former Security Chief.
	The Commissioner of Police would have known that a Unit such as C1 existed.  That is something which would have been impossible to hide from the Commissioner of Police.
	The Commissioner of Police could have forced the Security Chief and said to him, bring this man to me, I want to see him, and there was no basis upon which that could have been refused.

CHAIRPERSON: What were the instructions from the Commissioner of Police to the Head of the Security Branch, do you know?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: I wouldn't know, because we are working once again with a chain of command.  It is on a one to one basis, and it is on a need to know basis.

CHAIRPERSON: You received your instructions from Brigadier Schoon?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Is he the one who said you must conceal the identity of Mr Tshabalala?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay.  Did he mention to you whether he had discussed that with the Head of the Security Branch and the Commissioner?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: No, I don't have any recollection of that right now.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.  Thank you Mr De Kock.  Is there anything arising?  Mr Dukada, is there anything arising?

MR DUKADA: I have no question Mr Chairman.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR DUKADA

MR HUGO: Could you please grant me a moment?

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr De Kock.  Does that conclude the case for Colonel De Kock.

MR HUGO: Yes, thank you Mr Chairman, that is the end of his evidence.
WITNESS EXCUSED

CHAIRPERSON: Are there any witnesses that the applicants intend to call?

MR DILIZO: Mr Chairperson, with regard to Mr Dandala, no witnesses to call.

MR KNIGHT: Mr Chairperson, in respect of Mr Tshabalala, there are no witnesses to be called.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mapoma, do you have any witnesses that you would like to call?

MR MAPOMA: No Sir, except that I can explain that at the insistence of one Mr Hugo, we did subpoena Colonel E. Willy.  He is present.  I don't know whether he intends asking some questions to him.
	Also we did subpoena Chief Keizer D. Matanzima at the insistence of the victims.  And also Gen Kawe and Colonel Booi have been subpoenaed also at the insistence of the victim's family.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Dukada, on behalf of the victims, do you have any witnesses that you want to call?

MR DUKADA: Mr Chairperson, we do not have any witnesses to call to oppose the application.  We don't have any specific witness to call.

CHAIRPERSON: What is to become of the witnesses who have been subpoenaed?
	The Committee would like to hear is it Colonel Willy, is he here?

MR MAPOMA: Yes, he is here Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Is he here, where is he?  We would like to hear Colonel Willy, but unfortunately due to the lateness of the hour, we can only hear him first thing tomorrow morning.  Colonel Willy, will you make sure that you are here tomorrow morning, at about nine o'clock?  Very well.
	Who are the other witnesses?

MR MAPOMA: Gen Kawe, Colonel Booi and Chief K.D. Matanzima.

CHAIRPERSON: Those are implicated persons, are they  not?  As far as Gen Kawe and Colonel Booi, they are represented by Mr Wessels, Mr Majokweni.  Okay, very well.  At whose instance was Mr Matanzima subpoenaed?

MR MAPOMA: At the instance of the victims Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you intend calling Mr Matanzima, Mr Dukada?

MR DUKADA: Just to clarify something Mr Chairperson.  There is a newspaper cutting which was presented as evidence during the course of the proceedings.  We don't intend to call Mr Matanzima as a witness for the family at all, but to put - to seek leave from the Committee to put questions to him regarding the remarks which were allegedly made by him in the press.  That is the only aspect that we want to cover.

CHAIRPERSON: What I want to find out is that he has been subpoenaed, I gather, what I want to find out is do you want to put questions to him, is that the position?

MR DUKADA: Certainly Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, very well.  Is he here?  Would you come up forward Sir.  As far as the microphone, to the microphone Sir.

MR HOBBS: If I may just place my name on record, I am Jonathan Hobbs, I am an Advocate at the local Barr.  I have instructions to appear for Chief Keizer Matanzima at these proceedings.
	He has received a subpoena.  I saw it fit earlier today to convey Mr Matanzima's or my instructions in this regard, to Mr Mapoma and to the victim's family at whose insistence he has been subpoenaed.
	Now, the questions raised there are such that in my submission, his evidence will not be able to proceed either today, even if there was time, or tomorrow.  I think I did convey the reasons to you Mr Chairman, earlier.

CHAIRPERSON: I think you have to state that for the record.

MR HOBBS: The Commission member, Mr Mapoma has ...  (no further proceedings, due to power failure) ...
WITNESS EXCUSED
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS