Special Hearings — State Security Council Hearings — 1997-12-04

LUCAS DANIEL BARNARD: This standpoint I cannot establish that, I do not have information against that and I cannot confirm.

MR MCADAM: : And you earlier identified, you earlier asserted that in respect of the information collected by Trevits that that information was used for the purposes of internal operations.

LUCAS DANIEL BARNARD: My standpoint was that the internal operations, there's a big difference between internal operations.  My standpoint was Trevits was established to gather security information to establish information databases regarding the situation in South Africa.  You did not give me the benefit to provide documents to refresh my memory.  And in the third place I draw no inferences from the documents and I think that this information could also be applied to cross-border operations.

MR MCADAM: In respect of information co-ordinated by Trevits and acted on internal to the country by special forces, would you not agree that it is at least forseeable given the nature of special forces and the tasks that they are designed to carry out, that when Trevits gathers information or co-ordinates information and it is acted upon by an institution such as special forces it is at least forseeable based on what one understands the tasks of special forces to be that that may result in deaths.

LUCAS DANIEL BARNARD: I've already put my standpoint I don't know what any new additions I can make.

MR MCADAM: How is it Dr Barnard that if you have agreed - (i) that special forces are highly trained operatives, that they take actions - you don't typically use special forces to arrest people, that if you gather information and task special forces to act on the information it is not reasonably forseeable that in some instances death may result. How is that plausible?

LUCAS DANIEL BARNARD: I am very sure that the information, Trevits information and the information contained in the information databases and these information databases to contain information regarding internal activities.  I am not going to say that it led to the death of people.

MR MCADAM: But what do you think special forces would do with information provided to them by Trevits?

LUCAS DANIEL BARNARD: I think that is a question you should ask a representative of Trevits

MR MCADAM: : No, but Trevits is a structure which falls under your department

LUCAS DANIEL BARNARD: No,  Mr Chairman that is not correct.

MR MCADAM: Dr Barnard you testified earlier that Trevits was a substructure of CIC, correct?   And you were the Chair of CIC...(intervention)

LUCAS DANIEL BARNARD: Please complete your question first

MR MCADAM: Sure,  you testified earlier that you were the chair of CIC and that Trevits was on the evidence you testified earlier possibly one of the substructures of CIC.

LUCAS DANIEL BARNARD: That is what I've said, it was an interdepartmental structure it did not mean it was under my authority ...(intervention)

MR MCADAM: But would you not ....(intervention)

LUCAS DANIEL BARNARD: Just give me a chance please, I'll apreciate that.

MR MCADAM: : I beg your pardon.

LUCAS DANIEL BARNARD: It was a body through which activities were co-ordinated for the Intelligence community.  I was the chairman for that regarding military Intelligence. It was not under my personal authority.

MR MCADAM: I beg your pardon, I didn't mean to imply that if fell under your personal authority but it was a structure that was a subcommittee of a structure that you chaired, so it fell within your broad perimeters of authority.

LUCAS DANIEL BARNARD: Yes it was a structure which I've already said did play a specific role, yes.

MR MCADAM: And when a structure gathers information which is subsequently acted upon would you not agree that  one has a responsibility to at least enquire as to how that information is used and what steps are taken based on that information?

LUCAS DANIEL BARNARD: Mr  Chairman I'm surprised, just repeat your question.  Are you saying  if you are working in the Intelligence work,  you have a revolutionary conflict on hand which has to be managed, there's an escalation of conflict internally and externally and you establish varied bodies to co-ordinate the Intelligence so that you can work on the basis of information, are you saying that when the Intelligence comes to these structures you should ask what the lines functionaries are doing with this information, is this what you're saying?    If that is your point of view I want to say that is not the case that is not the way it operated.

MR MCADM: What I am asking is that you gather information for a purpose and that once you've gathered that information if that information is acted upon you need to at least foresee what use the information that you gather will be put to you.  Not so?

LUCAS DANIEL BARNARD: Information was gathered to combat the revolutionary onslaught internally.  That was the contribution by NI and Trevits.   I've already said that five or six times.

MR MCADAM: Yes.  Sorry, just to round up this line of questioning you've just said that the information was gathered to counter the revoltionary situation inside the country. Countering of that revolutionary situation was carried out because gathering of information in and of itself doesn't counter anything.  The countering of that revolutionary situation was carried out by special forces, highly trained military men who in the usual course of action take military steps which may result in deaths.

LUCAS DANIEL BARNARD: I've already stated my point of view is, that the security information gathered was also used for the political negotiation process.  I do not agree with your stand of view that that information was used for killing people.  If the special forces or the security forces used this information it could have been the case.

MR KHOISAN: Mr Barnard when you are looking at the situation of the Lesotho raid of December 1985, do you accept responsibility for the end product, the fact that several targets were ANC people were eliminated, they were killed and as you put it a lot of collateral damage occurred, do you accept responsibility for that?

LUCAS DANIEL BARNARD: Mr Chairman I certainly do not accept responsibility for that.

MR KHOISAN: Now if I put it to you, and as it has been put to you already, that three people have applied for amnesty, a colonel, a  brigadier and a general.  That is Colonial Eugene De Kock currently in C-Max prison, Brigadier Schoon and General van der. Merwe.  And all three of these senior officials, I'll call them senior officials of the security forces, security police if you will, point to you.  They point first of all to your structurem, the structure that you chaired, CIC, as the final line of authorisation for the raid in Lesotho which resulted in the death of Jackie Quinn, Leon Meyer and other people who were already in the Trevits database. ...(intervention)

MR TREURNICHT: Mr Chairman ...  (intervention)

MR KHOISAN: No let me finish here one second. These amnesty applications before I say we can and I think you if you don't have the amnesty application of General van der Merwe we can hand it to you, but I'm saying to you, are you putting to this Commission that a general, a colonel a brigadier are lying to this Commission when they say that CIC  and its Chairman, Mr Neil Barnard, who they have named by name are lying when they say that CIC and you as the Chairman provided the authorisation for the Lesotho raid in 1985 which resulted in the death of several targets of ANC people and a lot of collateral damage the death of Lesotho citizens etc?