Amnesty Hearings — Port Elizabeth — 1997-09-11

DANIEL PETRUS SIEBERT: The propaganda had been that Swapo, supported by the ANC, the then South West and now Namibia, would be used as a base from which to penetrate or attack South Africa and that the war there had to be countered to prevent it from spreading to the, to South Africa.

MR BOOYENS: So, in your view, even a warfare outside the borders of this country was fought in order to maintain a White Government in South Africa?

DANIEL PETRUS SIEBERT: Yes, your Honour.  When the South African Police also acted in Rhodesia to provide support there, that would have been the case.

MR BOOYENS: Subsequent to your service on the border or rather, for how long did you serve on the border?

DANIEL PETRUS SIEBERT: For about four months, your Honour.

MR BOOYENS: After that border service did you return to Port Elizabeth?

DANIEL PETRUS SIEBERT: Yes, your Honour.

MR BOOYENS: At the time of your return, which would have been during 1976.

DANIEL PETRUS SIEBERT: That is the case, your Honour.

MR BOOYENS: What would the situation have been upon your return to Port Elizabeth?

DANIEL PETRUS SIEBERT: While we were in Ovamboland the Soweto unrest broke out and in the middle of July I returned back here in The Bay in Port Elizabeth and then in August of 1976, the unrest broke out in Port Elizabeth and Uitenhage on a very large scale.

MR BOOYENS: Could you summarise for us the nature of this unrest, what happened, what was done?

DANIEL PETRUS SIEBERT: Your Honour, the schools, I am referring here to the Black communities, the townships, in New Brighton, in Kwasekela, in Uitenhage, but particularly in The Bay, the schools were burnt down, school children did not attend school, businesses were burnt down, prominent business people of these communities had their houses burnt down, vehicles were burnt out, buses, delivery vehicles were burnt out.  There was murder and a murderous situation in the area.

MR BOOYENS: Would there have been strikes and marches and intimidation?

DANIEL PETRUS SIEBERT: Naturally, there would have been strikes, marches.  In many cases marches were planned to the City Hall in Port Elizabeth.  In every case this was prevented by early information provided and police counter-action.

MR BOOYENS: Would some of your colleagues, and if I refer to colleagues, not only security branch, but all the South African Police members, would any of these colleagues of  yours have been killed during the unrest?

DANIEL PETRUS SIEBERT: Yes, your Honour.  Often the policemen had their houses burnt down.  Some of them were robbed or their firearms, some of them were murdered.  Members of the security branch were also attacked, their houses were burnt down.  Some of them were shot and wounded.

MR BOOYENS: What would the response of the security branch have been?  How did you react to this unrest situation?

DANIEL PETRUS SIEBERT: Your Honour, with respect to the then riot squad of the police, they were not entirely up to the task of dealing with this situation on their own, also because of a lack of staff and vehicles and so forth.  As a result, the security branch, who knew the area well and who worked with the information of the area, could obtain information to prevent and control further unrest.  Security branch members, therefore, became fully involved in the unrest situation in order to control it.

MR BOOYENS: So, you were directly involved in riot control?

DANIEL PETRUS SIEBERT: Yes, your Honour.

MR BOOYENS: Also, the powers of security legislation at that time, to the security branch, for instance, detention without trial and so forth, did you make use of these means?

DANIEL PETRUS SIEBERT: Yes, your Honour.

MR BOOYENS: Would there have been many detentions?  Would many people have been interrogated?

DANIEL PETRUS SIEBERT: Yes, many people were detained and interrogated, your Honour.

MR BOOYENS: Particularly during the years 1976, 77, up unto the death of Mr Biko, the rioting continued?

DANIEL PETRUS SIEBERT: Yes, your Honour, until December of 1978.

MR BOOYENS: Out of these interrogations, out of police information available to you, which organisations would, in your view, have played a prominent role in fomulgating this unrest?

DANIEL PETRUS SIEBERT: Your Honour, the black power movements in that time would have been the most active since the ANC and the PAC would have been banned organisations, they would have been in exile and their front organisations, at that time, had not yet been well organised, not as well organised as the Black power movements.  In addition, the deceased was a leader, a prominent figure in the Black power movements and his position as President of the Black Consciousness Movement, he would, in addition, he would also have had a tremendous influence on the Black youth and he was idolised as a leader.  He was a very prominent leader, not only in the Eastern Cape, but nationally and also outside the country.

MR BOOYENS: I have asked a question to one of your colleagues, but if you were to place Mr Biko, if you were to place Mr Biko on a level, not taking into account those political leaders that were, at that time, in prison, where would you rank Mr Biko in the country?

DANIEL PETRUS SIEBERT: I would rank him as number one, as one of the most prominent leaders.

MR BOOYENS: During the interrogations, and I suppose you also received information and study material on the Black power movements?

DANIEL PETRUS SIEBERT: Yes, your Honour.

MR BOOYENS: What would your impression have been, what would the eventual goal or purpose of organisations such as the BPC had been, the organisation of which Mr Biko was the President?

DANIEL PETRUS SIEBERT: It was opposed to White people.  If I understand the approach of the Black power movements, it was intended to combat the apartheid policy and, as such, White people, White power, White domination.

MR BOOYENS: What would their eventual goal have been?  Were they able to, successfully, combat the apartheid Government?

DANIEL PETRUS SIEBERT: To bring about a Black power controlled Government.

MR BOOYENS: In your perception and in the perception of the security branch, as then described in study documents and so forth, did you consider this to be a threat?

DANIEL PETRUS SIEBERT: Yes, your Honour.

MR BOOYENS: Would you have considered it to have been a serious threat?

DANIEL PETRUS SIEBERT: Yes, your Honour.  The entire White population would be touched by this, would be affected by this.  Also, the established western Government structure, which was then the status quo, and also the perception which would have, that a, the established capitalist system would be lost as a consequence.  In comparison with other African countries, which had been under colonial Government and had, subsequently, obtained Black independent Governments and which, at that time, were deteriorating into poverty, that would have been our perception.

MR BOOYENS: Would these have been only your personal perceptions or would these perceptions have been brought about by information from your head office, documents on which, documents to which you had access or on what would you have based your perceptions?

DANIEL PETRUS SIEBERT: Your Honour, this was also part of the political statements and speeches by the political leaders of the day, the head office during security training courses also presented this to us, the security reports, the motivation by seniors and, also, ones own personal perceptions.

MR BOOYENS: Did you, therefore, believe that the Black power organisations had to be combated?

DANIEL PETRUS SIEBERT: Yes, your Honour.

MR BOOYENS: Did you have instructions in this regard?

DANIEL PETRUS SIEBERT: Yes, your Honour.

MR BOOYENS: Would some of the supporters of the Black power organisations have been arrested and detained in terms of the then security legislation?

DANIEL PETRUS SIEBERT: Yes, your Honour.