Amnesty Hearings — East London — 1999-04-19

MR HATTINGH: Were many of these actions Vlakplaas actions during which people were killed and injured?

EUGENE DE KOCK: Chairperson, two of them were, the other was for the action in London, with the planing of the bomb there.

MR HATTINGH: Some of these awards were very distinguished awards?

EUGENE DE KOCK: Yes, that is correct, some of the highest.

MR HATTINGH: And this would not be an award which would be given without the person who took the decision about it, knowing what happened?

EUGENE DE KOCK: No, only the State President would be able to approve such declarations, nobody else.

MR HATTINGH: But certainly among the higher hierarchy of the Security Police structure, the persons who were involved with that, were thoroughly aware of why the award was being given?

EUGENE DE KOCK: Yes, that is correct.

MR HATTINGH: So it can never be said that the higher levels of the hierarchy within the South African Police didn't know exactly what Vlakplaas was there for and what Vlakplaas was involved in?

EUGENE DE KOCK: No, they knew exactly what it was about.

MR HATTINGH: Just as we have spoken about cross-border operations, Vlakplaas was also involved in several operations within the borders of the Republic during which people were killed and injured?

EUGENE DE KOCK: Yes, that is correct.

MR HATTINGH: So in broader terms, did those actions take place upon your own initiative or as the result of an order which was given by an Officer?

EUGENE DE KOCK: It was senior Officers and one would be called in and specifically informed about it and one would act accordingly.

MR HATTINGH: These incidents, against whom were they directed?  Against whom was the action actually aimed?

EUGENE DE KOCK: These actions were aimed against those who were regarded by the government of the day as opponents or the enemy of the policy, that would be the ANC, the PAC, the SACP and all other related or affiliated collaborators and sympathisers.

MR HATTINGH: In other words aimed against institutions who waged a struggle against the government of the day?

EUGENE DE KOCK: Yes.  The definition was very concise, if you were not for us, then you were against us.  That was the basic attitude.

MR HATTINGH: And that would be the enemy who was the target?  How did you feel personally about this so-called "enemy" against whom you acted?

EUGENE DE KOCK: Chairperson, by nature of my experience and with specific reference to Vlakplaas, we were the only ones who fought with real combatants as they were referred to.  We were the only ones who ever really were involved in a situation of conflict with the freedom fighters or the opponents.  My own view was that one would win, at any cost, it did not matter to which lengths one had to go.  However, there were certain lines of value which one had to draw which would mean that one would not be able to move beyond the norm, such as child abuse, or rape.  However, one had to achieve one's objective with regard to the enemy at any cost.

MR HATTINGH: With regard to these freedom organisations, did you also regard them as your personal enemy?  Perhaps not your personal enemy, in your personal capacity, did you also regard them as the enemy of the former State?

EUGENE DE KOCK: Yes, and my attitude towards them was relentless.

MR HATTINGH: Very well.  We have now listened to evidence about internal armed actions against political organisations such as the ANC, the PAC and the SACP and so forth.  Was Vlakplaas also used for other objectives, for example sparing the Security Police any kind of embarrassment?

EUGENE DE KOCK: Yes, at certain occasions it was requested from us and we obeyed such requests, fellow Security colleagues or Policemen had to be killed, and I will refer to the Motherwell incident briefly, and also where some of your own members within the Unit, appeared to defect to the enemy's side, one would have to kill such a person.  There was no hesitation in safeguarding the secrets of the State.

MR HATTINGH: Was any action taken against anybody who was connected to Vlakplaas and then changed their opinion and threatened to expose information about Vlakplaas and the Security Police in general?

EUGENE DE KOCK: Yes, and I can refer you to somebody like Mabotha, that will still come, I don't want to discuss it fully at the moment.  There is also the incident of Brian Ncqulunga, who was an askari at first and later became a member of the Force.

MR HATTINGH: The former person that you mentioned was also an askari?

EUGENE DE KOCK: Yes, that is correct.

MR HATTINGH: And these persons were killed by Vlakplaas?

EUGENE DE KOCK: Yes, among others there was also the case of someone called Goodwill Sekakane who exposed Operation Vula and then threatened for example, to make it public to the ANC that persons such as Charles Ndaba, among others, had been killed by the Security Police in Durban.

MR HATTINGH: Mr De Kock, these actions against former askaris, such as the persons whose names you have just mentioned, did this take place upon the order of higher Officers?

EUGENE DE KOCK: Yes, that is correct.

MR HATTINGH: And we think for example about the Harms Commission which was appointed at the time to investigate allegations of Vlakplaas activities, do you recall that?

EUGENE DE KOCK: Yes, that is correct.

MR HATTINGH: Was an investigation launched among others, into the deaths of Mr Griffiths Mxenge and others?

EUGENE DE KOCK: That is correct.

MR HATTINGH: During which Dirk Coetzee also gave evidence?

EUGENE DE KOCK: Yes, that is correct.

MR HATTINGH: And Brian Ncqulunga, there was also an involvement of him in that incident?

EUGENE DE KOCK: Yes, that is correct.

MR HATTINGH: And it was also feared that he would expose information?

EUGENE DE KOCK: Yes, it is not that there was a fear, but that the information already existed that he had made contact with the ANC.

MR HATTINGH: Yes, and who decided that he should be eliminated?

EUGENE DE KOCK: Nick van Rensburg who was the then Commander of Section C1, in other words Vlakplaas as well as the Chief Investigative Officer of the Police and the Security Forces and the Harms Commission, Gen Engelbrecht.

MR HATTINGH: The evidence which was heard by the Harms Commission with regard to various incidents, which we will not discuss at length, was this correct evidence or fabricated evidence?

EUGENE DE KOCK: No, this evidence was fabricated in all regards, documentary and other.

MR HATTINGH: In other words the Harms Commission was completely misled?

EUGENE DE KOCK: Yes.  The Judge was misled from the very first day.

MR HATTINGH: And were there high ranking Officers who were involved in this deception?

EUGENE DE KOCK: Yes.

MR HATTINGH: Can you mention any names?

EUGENE DE KOCK: I could begin among others with Gen Nick van Rensburg, Gen Engelbrecht.  I could refer to Brigadier Schoon, I can refer to the then Brigadier Johan le Roux, I could refer to Gen Basie Smit.  It was a very high level and sophisticated cover up action.

MR HATTINGH: The removal of records and documentation and that sort of thing?

EUGENE DE KOCK: Yes Chairperson, among others my personal files were just about emptied and destroyed among others.

MR HATTINGH: Mr De Kock, and as a result of the internal armed incidents of which we have already spoken, during which people were killed, there were also post mortem inquests?

EUGENE DE KOCK: That is correct.

MR HATTINGH: During which certain members of Vlakplaas, among others yourself, had to give evidence?

EUGENE DE KOCK: Yes, that is correct.

MR HATTINGH: And that evidence which was given during those matters, was that also the truth or was that also a cover up?

EUGENE DE KOCK: No, it was a complete cover up.

MR HATTINGH: What did this high level action tell you, when you became involved in this sort of action, would you be prosecuted or would you be protected?

EUGENE DE KOCK: No, one would be protected.