Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — 1998-06-09

CHAIRPERSON: Well, why, if you, how can you still be thinking of protecting Oelofse if you knew that you were already arrested, the revolution did not take place, why was it still necessary at that stage, because you spent a lot of time on that thing with regard to the main witness?   If you are going to go back to that aspect, I could say to you that I think that has been reasonably covered.

MR DREYER: Mr Chairman, all I... (intervention).

CHAIRPERSON: You wanted to go to that point which I suspect you're going to?

MR DREYER: No, I would like to ask a question in relation to a question that was put by the committee member, Mr Malan, as to the way in which the statement was structured at the police station and the involvement of the police there and then in relation to the possibility of Oelofse being protected or not.   That is the purpose of the question that I intend, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, if it is not the point that I think you wanted to go to, because I think you spent 1 1/2  days around issues like that with Mr Kloppers, and I really think that you should go back to spend that time again with this witness.   Firstly you had the opportunity to put questions to the witness, which you did, you didn't cover that aspect if you want to, I don't see any reason why you didn't do that if you wanted to, you've been having that statement.   I just don't see any basis why you didn't put questions to the witness about that, and at any rate, this whole question of the statement, the witness says he was forced by the police to do that.   How do you know that that is not true?

MR DREYER: Yes, Mr Chairman, I don't... (intervention).

CHAIRPERSON: We want to be careful about the statement.  We don't want to find ourselves committing unnecessary irregularities about this, unless somebody's going to call the police to say that he's lying if he says he was assaulted or pushed into making this statement.

MR DREYER: Mr Chairman, obviously I can't put into dispute that there was any kind of undue influence on him, that's his statement, that's not relevant to my question.   All I wanted to know was whether there was a reason for him to omit something in a statement?

CHAIRPERSON: Well let's see what you're saying, but you have heard my concern.

MR DREYER: As the Court pleases, Mr Chairman.

MR DREYER: Mr Badenhorst, all that I'd like to know is, if I understand correctly that you went into the small office and there were two people there, Kloppers was there and Van der Schyff was there, together with the detectives?

FREDERICK JACOBUS BADENHORST: Yes.

MR DREYER: And if I understand you correctly, your viewpoint at that stage was that, "I'm not going to say anything", but then you saw and you make the conclusion that they have already spoken or told them the story?

FREDERICK JACOBUS BADENHORST: Yes, that is true.

MR DREYER: But you did not have their statements in front of you, that is now Kloppers' or Van der Schyff's statements, so that you would know what to say?

FREDERICK JACOBUS BADENHORST: No, Mr Chairperson, but we did, before they arrested us, we already had a cover story in case we would be arrested... (intervention).

MR DREYER: I understand what I want I want to say and - I've got no further questions, Mr Chairman.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR DREYER

MR MALAN: Mr Badenhorst, when you went to the Voortrekker Monument for the festivities, how did you get there, did you go with Chief Commandant Kloppers?

FREDERICK JACOBUS BADENHORST: Mr Chairperson, Chief Commandant Klopper and Commandant Martin was there already a day before the festivities at the Voortrekker Monument.

MR MALAN: Thank you.

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Badenhorst, at the Voortrekker Monument, the "Ystergarde", were they in their uniform, the black uniforms, the "Ystergarde", and you were in the ordinary AWB uniform, so you were easily distinguished?

FREDERICK JACOBUS BADENHORST: Yes.

MR PRINSLOO: When you were detained, was it before that you were detained according to section 29 when your father said that you must not make a statement?

FREDERICK JACOBUS BADENHORST: Mr Chairperson, they arrested me in Bothaville, or picked me up, and from there took me to the Protea Police Station in Soweto.   My father drove with the detectives and went with me into the police station, into the same office where Captain Van Vuuren and other detectives were present, and he said to them, or he said to me that I must not make a statement, that he first wants to get a lawyer.

MR PRINSLOO: And after that we were detained according to the Act of Internal Security and you did not have access to any person?

FREDERICK JACOBUS BADENHORST: That is correct, Chair.

MR PRINSLOO: And when you were detained according to section 29, did you have a choice to speak or not?

FREDERICK JACOBUS BADENHORST: Repeat the question please?

MR PRINSLOO: When you were detained according to section 29, as it was explained to you, did you have a choice to refuse to give information?

FREDERICK JACOBUS BADENHORST: No, I did not have much of a choice.

MR PRINSLOO: And you say you saw Chief Commandant Klopper there.   Did he have a normal appearance?

FREDERICK JACOBUS BADENHORST: No, he was definitely not normal.   His face was swollen, he could not walk, you could immediately see that his muscles were contracted because of the shocks, his whole face was swollen, it was blood red, and you could see that they did something to his face.

MR PRINSLOO: At that stage when you were arrested, you said you were the last person, did you know or did you not know that General Oelofse was also detained regarding this matter?

FREDERICK JACOBUS BADENHORST: No, Mr Chairperson, he was not detained or arrested regarding our matter, but he was arrested concerning bombs that went off just before or... (intervention).

MR PRINSLOO: Did you know Oelofse was not detained because of your case?

FREDERICK JACOBUS BADENHORST: Yes, I knew that.

MR PRINSLOO: Did you at any stage take an oath?

FREDERICK JACOBUS BADENHORST: Yes, that is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: What did that entail, that oath?

FREDERICK JACOBUS BADENHORST: Loyalty, that everything that you do, you do it for the "volk".

MR PRINSLOO: That oath of faith, could you then implicate other people, for example a commander or other people?

FREDERICK JACOBUS BADENHORST: No.

MR PRINSLOO: And during the interrogation of the police, as you were the last person, could you then gather from the interrogation what was said by the others, or what was alleged by the police?

FREDERICK JACOBUS BADENHORST: I could gather from what was said by the others.

MR PRINSLOO: I would like to refer to Exhibit C, the charge document, as well as the name of Oelofse that appears in this document, according to this charge docket there was an explosion, on page 9 of that charge docket, it is charge 2, there was an explosion on the 15th of December at the Voortrekker Monument, do you know about it, did you hear about it?

FREDERICK JACOBUS BADENHORST: Mr Chairperson, like I said, I did not know exactly when the bombs exploded, but it was during that period.

MR PRINSLOO: Just a moment please.   At the guard of honour that was formed at the Voortrekker Monument, where the leader attended, what was the function of General Oelofse?

FREDERICK JACOBUS BADENHORST: He was part of the generals in staff, and he was, or during the leader's speech he was with the leader on stage.

MR PRINSLOO: Thank you.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR PRINSLOO

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Dreyer, Mr Prinsloo saw it fit to ask the witness a question about whether, in terms of an oath, he was free to incriminate other members of the AWB, and why he chose to ask this question only now at this stage is beyond me, but it may very well be that it could entitle you to put questions to this witness around that point.

MR DREYER: Yes, Mr Chairman, I have noticed that that is (indistinct).