Human Rights Violation Hearings — Cape Town — 1997-06-11

ULRICH SCHELHASE: What it suggests?

MAPULE RAMASHALA: H'n.

ULRICH SCHELHASE: What it actually says is that a military officer was of the opinion that the older people in Crossroads against the comrades enjoys support, whether it happens in a covert manner or a covered-up manner and that Mr de Jong must undertake to bring this to the attention of the Development Board so that they can investigate the possibilities of supporting the Fathers.

MAPULE RAMASHALA: Sir there had already been conflict when this document was issued.

ULRICH SCHELHASE: It was dated in February 1986.

MAPULE RAMASHALA: Yes.

ULRICH SCHELHASE: I would assume so, yes.

MAPULE RAMASHALA: Suggesting therefore that there should be continued support.  Now you say you didn't know about the term Witdoeke but you are aware of the term Father, Fathers?

ULRICH SCHELHASE: There are many various references, yes, but I think the term Fathers, which was also asked of the previous witness was more like a military reference.  It was more the military people who referred to the Fathers and some referred to the conservatives and there were various descriptions of a faction or a mindset within the community.

MAPULE RAMASHALA: Am I correct then in assuming that you knew that the Fathers were really pro-Ngxobongwana group?

ULRICH SCHELHASE: Yes Ma'am.  I think, sorry Ma'am, that that Fathers thing is probably something that was an offspring of the 1976 situation, and that it was just continued as a father/youth issue.

MAPULE RAMASHALA: Were you, or anyone else in the Development Board ever approached for the support mentioned in this document between January and June 1986?

ULRICH SCHELHASE: Not in terms of this document ...(intervention)

MAPULE RAMASHALA: But in other ...(intervention)

ULRICH SCHELHASE: I mean not formally, in terms of what this document has decided, but from other sources of course yes, yes.

MAPULE RAMASHALA: But you were approached?

ULRICH SCHELHASE: Ja.

MAPULE RAMASHALA: What kind of support, can you say exactly what kind of support we are talking about?

ULRICH SCHELHASE: You see Ma'am all our operations in terms of management, administration etc, had to be moulded within the McEwan strategy.  It was a direction.  It was a model in which we had to operate.  And if the model dictates that we have to reward people, communities or sections of communities that are non-violent, that collaborate with the system, then that section or that community, their needs must be answered to.  If they have got specific needs we must provide those needs.  That was one of the pillars of the Oil Spot Strategy.

MAPULE RAMASHALA: In fact this was a kind of a sweetheart deal.

ULRICH SCHELHASE: Of course.

MAPULE RAMASHALA: Very positive toward the so-called Witdoeke.

ULRICH SCHELHASE: Yes Ma'am.

MAPULE RAMASHALA: Would you say that this attitude was shared in all structures of the JMC as well as the Development Board?

ULRICH SCHELHASE: Can you just repeat the first part?

MAPULE RAMASHALA: Would you say that this attitude, the sweetheart deal attitude was shared with all structures of the Joint Management Centres?

ULRICH SCHELHASE: Of course Ma'am.

MAPULE RAMASHALA: I want to go back to this fascinating Oil Spot Strategy.  You were actually considered the administrative expert on the Oil Spot Strategy, theoretically.

ULRICH SCHELHASE: Well in capital letters or not.

MAPULE RAMASHALA: Theoretically.

ULRICH SCHELHASE: Yes.

MAPULE RAMASHALA: Would you explain it to us please?

ULRICH SCHELHASE: Well I was in the ideal situation where Crossroads had a fight, matters changed, things changed to the extent that it became a more admin friendly community.  The people, and especially White people who were wary in the past to move around in the areas were now free to walk around.  We could work in the area, we could bring building contractors in, which was different from a few months before.
 So that in essence Ma'am, is what an Oil Spot situation is in practice, that you have pacified - a place or an area has been pacified which now opens opportunities for development and the spin-offs from that development may wash over to other communities who can see that there are benefits if this and this and this happens.  I mean if there's benefits, if they are non-violent there is benefits, if they are prepared to negotiate their problems whatever the nature of the situation was.

MAPULE RAMASHALA: There's also benefits if one give out information.

ULRICH SCHELHASE: Of course.

MAPULE RAMASHALA: In implementing the Oil Spot strategy a number of people were involved. I'd like to name a few and I'd like you to give me a profile of what you think of them.  One of them is Odendaal, I believe Dolf Odendaal.

ULRICH SCHELHASE: I know Dolf Odendaal.  I don't know him personally very well but in a professional situation I came to know him, yes.  Are you asking me what I think of him?

MAPULE RAMASHALA: Ja.

ULRICH SCHELHASE: I think he was a good policeman, and I think he was a very courageous and a brave man.

MAPULE RAMASHALA: What does courageous and brave mean?

ULRICH SCHELHASE: It means that if you have to ...(intervention)

MAPULE RAMASHALA: Kill ...(intervention)

ULRICH SCHELHASE: No, no, no Ma'am, if you have to encounter a situation where you are actually with very few or very little support and you have to resolve that situation basically on your own steam.
 And why I say that is that I can refer to a situation in Crossroads, I don't know whether it's 1984, or even before that still, where Mr Odendaal has walked man alone into a very aggressive crowd that was protecting somebody and it was Mr Odendaal's business, I don't know whether he had to arrest him or what, but it was an aggressive crowd and he walked right into that crowd, and that is why I substantiate what I say that he was courageous, in my eyes, in my terms.

MAPULE RAMASHALA: Mr Barnard?

ULRICH SCHELHASE: Barnard I didn't know very well.  He had some tea with me now and again, probably three or four times, but I didn't know him well because he wasn't a man that was seen by us very often.  So I wouldn't say that, he was probably a roughneck obviously, looking at his background history and his track record.

MAPULE RAMASHALA: Mr du Toit?

ULRICH SCHELHASE: Mr Flip du Toit.  I have a very big respect for him Ma'am, as a policeman.  That he was a man that never carried a firearm and he was very gentle with the people.

MAPULE RAMASHALA: Finally, Mr MacMaster?

ULRICH SCHELHASE: I don't know him at all.

MAPULE RAMASHALA: The Oil Spot Strategy involved rewarding people, not solely based on monetary aspects, but included rewards in a variety of ways?

ULRICH SCHELHASE: Yes Ma'am.

MAPULE RAMASHALA: But in fact you rewarded Mr Ngxobongwana quite a bit?

ULRICH SCHELHASE: I rewarded him.

MAPULE RAMASHALA: In different ways, yes.

ULRICH SCHELHASE: Yes, I was instrumental primarily in developing his community by building creches and markets and houses and schools.  And whatever is in that township today is what I brought there.

MAPULE RAMASHALA: And the more you rewarded the more people felt that their needs were taken care of and the more they were willing to give you information about so-called comrades.

ULRICH SCHELHASE: No it wasn't my function to gather information on behalf of the security forces or the police.
It wasn't my style and I wasn't interested in it as a matter of fact.

MAPULE RAMASHALA: I want to just read a few things that we've gathered in our information and get your opinion on that.  Okay this was from an interview, not a recorded interview, so I don't hold you on it.
"Mr Barnard was a brutal killer.  He was a shooter, a stealthy operator, not like an SB using electric shocks, not that kind of brutal, he was the nice guy, cold, smiling killer".
Do you agree with that?

ULRICH SCHELHASE: I will agree with that, not as I - in terms of his reputation, yes.