Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — UNKNOWN

MR DREYER: : I will leave it at that Mr Chairman.   Mr Kloppers, we have been speaking about the military precision in this exercise and you have said you had a very easy answer for the Committee, why you lied during various phases of the proceedings wherein you were involved.   You said that you wanted to protect the AWB, as well as your leaders.   Is that correct?

PHILLIPUS CORNELIUS KLOPPERS: : Yes.

MR DREYER: : Well, let us consider the motive which you are providing for the lies because to me, it is about the truth and the untruth of your order.   I do not occupy myself with what happened at the road-block because that is the Committee's decision and, according to my client, your application is not being opposed, that is the Committee's issue;  but I am arguing that you did not receive such an order from my client, and that is the crux of my cross-examination.   Let us consider your motive and why you said that you lied at various phases.  You said that you wanted to protect the AWB and your leadership figures.

PHILLIPUS CORNELIUS KLOPPERS: : That's correct.

MR DREYER: : In the first place, if you wanted to protect the AWB, why did you act on that evening openly, with AWB symbols, because that emerges in paragraph 33 of your application.   This is on page 18 of volume 1.   On that evening, 12th December 1993, we acted openly as AWB members.   Before our arrest reports appeared in the media which said that the right-wingers were responsible for this conduct.   So in no way did you disguise that you were acting as AWB members.   Is that correct?

PHILLIPUS CORNELIUS KLOPPERS: : That's absolutely correct.   That is the message that we wanted to convey to the public.

MR DREYER: : How did you want to protect the AWB then?

PHILLIPUS CORNELIUS KLOPPERS: : By not disclosing the names of my immediate commanders.

MR DREYER: : If that appears to be a logical answer but it is not in line with what you were doing because you, during the Criminal Proceedings and your statements to the police, did you not say that I acted as an AWB member with my group, but I did not act in the orders of the AWB.   I acted according to my own conviction.   You are therefore contradicting the AWB structure because you are implicating them.

PHILLIPUS CORNELIUS KLOPPERS: : That's correct.

MR DREYER: : But then I don't understand your motive.

PHILLIPUS CORNELIUS KLOPPERS: : There is a difference once again between corpses and looking for arms and ammunition.   I tried to mitigate the circumstances.

MR DREYER: : Well let me ask it to you this way.   When you were charged for these deeds, the death penalty was a possible punishment which could be imposed, and it indeed was.

PHILLIPUS CORNELIUS KLOPPERS: : That's correct.

MR DREYER: : And while these Criminal Proceedings were under way, you incriminated Japie Oelofse and the AWB top structure, as the person who gave you the order to seek out arms and ammunition for the purposes of the revolution.   There were crimes in the South African statute such as treason.   Is that correct?

PHILLIPUS CORNELIUS KLOPPERS: : That's correct.

MR DREYER: : And at the same time, when the death penalty could be given for murder, as in your case, the death penalty could be given for treason and such crimes.   Is that correct?

PHILLIPUS CORNELIUS KLOPPERS: : Well I am putting it to you that that is the case.

MR DREYER: : And I am asking if that is the case, why did you think that you could protect the leaders of the AWB if you presented enough evidence, during the Criminal Proceedings, which stated that these people told us that we should collect illegal ammunition and arms, in order to co-ordinate a revolution and to break up the process of peaceful Governments in the country.

PHILLIPUS CORNELIUS KLOPPERS: : If that could be treason as you put it, but I did not state it explicitly in Court that we received an order to leave corpses behind.

MR DREYER: : The gathering of illegal arms for a revolution in opposition to the orderly process of Government was enough.  How did you think you were going to protect the AWB leaders.

PHILLIPUS CORNELIUS KLOPPERS: : As I have answered you, it was a fact that I attempted to protect them by not disclosing that there had to be corpses.

MR DREYER: : You don't understand what I am saying.   I am saying that the mere fact that you did not insert or add the corpse aspect, did not protect them.

PHILLIPUS CORNELIUS KLOPPERS: : According to me, it did appear to protect them because they did not appear in Court.

MR DREYER: : Now let us proceed regarding this protection theory.   On page 646 of the proceedings.   646 volume 8, Mr Chairman.   It deals with the fact that you said that you lied in your statement, regarding the issue of the two pipe/shot guns.   On page 646, once again, your statement is read out aloud by your Advocate and he says:  `The phone rang, I answered,' and so forth, and we proceeded to the next paragraph.  `I had a .38 Special pistol and a home-made rifle in my possession.'   Is that correct Sir.  And you were once again granted the opportunity to comment and to rectify it, if you had said something which you didn't want to say under pressure, during your statement.   Is that correct?

PHILLIPUS CORNELIUS KLOPPERS: : No that's not correct.

MR DREYER: : Just a moment.  Is it correct that you were once again granted the opportunity by the Advocate to rectify your statement if indeed you had said something under pressure from the police, something which you did not want to say.   You had the opportunity?

PHILLIPUS CORNELIUS KLOPPERS: : Yes, that's correct.

MR DREYER: : Well what did you do with this opportunity?   You said:  this is not correct.   I understood afterwards that two pipes were on the scene.   I said in my statement that I had manufactured it in order to protect General Nick Fourie.   Is that correct?

PHILLIPUS CORNELIUS KLOPPERS: : Yes, that's correct.

MR DREYER: : These proceedings took place in June 1994.   Am I correct?

PHILLIPUS CORNELIUS KLOPPERS: : Yes.

MR DREYER: : But General Nick Fourie had passed away by that time, because he had passed away during the Bophuthatswana incident.   I would have thought that his absence would have protected him.   Why did you want to protect him in his absence?

PHILLIPUS CORNELIUS KLOPPERS: : I did not want to protect him.   When I made the statement he was still alive, because the Bophuthatswana incident much later while I was already under arrest.

MR DREYER: : No the Bophuthatswana incident took place shortly before the election.

PHILLIPUS CORNELIUS KLOPPERS: : But I was already under arrest.

MR DREYER: : You were arrested on the 6th of January 1994. When did you make this statement?

PHILLIPUS CORNELIUS KLOPPERS: : On the 6th of January.

MR DREYER: : At that point, Nick Fourie was still alive?

PHILLIPUS CORNELIUS KLOPPERS: : Yes.

MR DREYER: : And you say in your statement that this is why you did it, because you wanted to protect him.   Am I correct?

PHILLIPUS CORNELIUS KLOPPERS: : Yes, I made an amendment that I had first manufactured the pipes myself, but later during the Court, if I remember correctly, I amended it and said that the pipes had not been manufactured by me, and that I had obtained them from General Nick Fourie.   I did this because Nick Fourie was deceased by that point.   I said that I did it to protect him, that was not the case.  I was told by General Japie Oelofse who was in detention with us, that I should use Nick Fourie's name.

MR DREYER: : I am going to point out what I am saying to you because you are struggling here.   Listen carefully.   You said that during the Criminal Proceedings, when I in my statement of the 6th of January 1994, said that I had manufactured the pipe shotguns, I was lying because I did not manufacture the pipe shotguns.   I had obtained them from Nick Fourie.

PHILLIPUS CORNELIUS KLOPPERS: : That's correct.