Special Hearings — Armed Forces Hearings — 1997-10-09

JOHANNES FELDE VAN DER MERWE: This is quite vague in general but I can put it to you like this.  I am not aware of any case where the defence force and the police would have acted together internally and where people had been killed and had not been discussed with me.  I am not aware of any such case.

MR LAX: Do you have any knowledge of situations where the defence force in support of the police used what were referred to as revolutionary methods that resulted in the killing of people?

JOHANNES FELDE VAN DER MERWE: Internally?

MR LAX: Correct.

JOHANNES FELDE VAN DER MERWE: No not at all.

CHAIRPERSON: Mrs Burton.

MARY BURTON: Thank you Chairperson.  I would like to ask a different question which arises really from the work of the Human Rights Violations Committee and the statements that have been made to us.  One of the mechanisms that was used to try to control the countrywide resistance was the introduction of special police personnel, municipal police, people often referred to as "kits constabels".  We've had a number of statements from such persons or from their families about their gross violations of human rights, they were seen as targets, they were killed or injured, their houses were destroyed, and we have been told by some of them that they did not enjoy the same kind of protection as a fulltime or regular police personnel, that they could not expect the same kind of compensation or insurance if their homes were damaged or they themselves were injured as a result of their line of duty.  Would you be able to comment on that?

JOHANNES FELDE VAN DER MERWE: It's unfortunate that these special constables did not enjoy the same privileges as members, fulltime members of the SAP, with the result that there could have been, when they were exposed to certain incidents, that they could not have enjoyed the same protection as that given to fulltime members of the SAP.  They delivered a valuable service to us and everything possible was done within  - what was able to be done they were protected and eventually we were forced to close down this force, or to transfer them to the permanent SAP, but they did not enjoy the same privilege as members of the SAP.  We did not stand indifferent towards them because they delivered such a useful service.  As far as we were able to do it we protected their interests.

CHAIRPERSON: Alright, the final question, Mr Lax.

MR LAX: Sorry General I have just been alerted to one aspect that I forgot, specifically in relation to the last question I asked you which was about internal operations where special forces or SADF personnel acted in support of police operatives and I just wanted to remind you that in your own amnesty application there is such an incident that did result in people's death where there was such a joint operation.

UNKNOWN: No Mr Chairman with respect, what the witness said was that such a matter was never discussed with me from the side of the SADF, that was the question ...(intervention)

MR LAX: No the question was was he aware, not that he discussed.

JOHANNES FELDE VAN DER MERWE: Which incident is this?

MR LAX: I don't want to go into specifics with all due respect because we have agreed that we won't do that, but if ...(intervention)

JOHANNES FELDE VAN DER MERWE: Where defence force members were involved?

MR LAX: Absolutely.

JOHANNES FELDE VAN DER MERWE: I am not aware of such an incident.  Which one are you talking about, say it?

MR LAX: Zero zero hour ...(intervention)

JOHANNES FELDE VAN DER MERWE: No, Zero Zero Hour no members of the defence force were involved.

MR LAX: We've received evidence to the contrary.

JOHANNES FELDE VAN DER MERWE: No, according to my application I handled it with Jack Cronje but no members of the defence force, and I am not aware that any member of the defence force was ever involved.  It was not a joint operation.  It was under my control.  It had nothing to do with the defence force.

MR LAX: Thank you General.  We can clear that up later in any event.

UNKNOWN: Mr Chairman the Amnesty Committee will clear that up.

CHAIRPERSON: That concludes the questions that we have for you General van der Merwe and we appreciate very much the manner in which you have replied to these questions.  We thank you very much for your attendance.

JOHANNES FELDE VAN DER MERWE: Thank you Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Could I just make one announcement before we adjourn for tea.  We will adjourn until 11 o'clock and after which we will hear General Coetzee as well as Brigadier Alfred Oosthuizen and Major Craig Williamson.  Thank you.
HEARING ADJOURNS AT 10H36
ON RESUMPTION

UNKNOWN: ...that my client isn't here yet.  He obviously did not look at his watch.  I am terribly sorry Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: It is understood, I am sure he will be here very soon, otherwise we will send out a search party  for him.
 General Coetzee it is good to see you.  Are you going to make any opening statement or shall we proceed immediately?

PETRUS JOHANNES COETZEE: (Microphone not switched on)

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much but of course obviously you will have to take the oath so I will ask my colleague Mr Ntsebeza to do that.

PETRUS JOHANNES COETZEE: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much General Coetzee.  Mr Goosen.

MR GOOSEN: Thank you very much Mr Chairperson.  General Coetzee you were obviously present when General van der Merwe testified a short while back and you've also just indicated that you are in agreement with the thrust of the evidence that he has tendered before the Commission this morning, is that correct?

PETRUS JOHANNES COETZEE: Mr Chairman with great respect I am quite prepared to give evidence in English, but I would prefer if the questions could be posed to me in Afrikaans, but if Mr Goosen is not able to do it then I will indulge and also take the questions in English.  That is by way of preamble Sir.
 Secondly Sir, I said I am in general agreement with the main thrust of the evidence by General van der Merwe.  Obviously from my own point of view I would have placed the accent on other aspects etc, but in general I am in agreement with that.

MR GOOSEN: Thank you.  General Coetzee I am going to, if you will indulge me, I am going to ask questions in English.  If you, if there is any question that you don't particularly understand I can try to rephrase it in Afrikaans.  Obviously if you wish to answer in Afrikaans you will be more than entitled to do so.

PETRUS JOHANNES COETZEE: Yes thank you very much Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Could I also remind the General that there are headphones which would give the Afrikaans translation but I am quite sure you don't need that.

PETRUS JOHANNES COETZEE: You know me well Chairperson.

MR GOOSEN: Thank you very much General.  Just to come back to the agreement with General van der Merwe's evidence would you agree with the evidence that he tendered that the situation in the country in the period '84 through to the late 1980's was such that reliance solely on the legal framework available to the South African police and security forces in general was insufficient to be able to combat the revolutionary onslaught against the country at the time?

PETRUS JOHANNES COETZEE: I would say, Mr Chairperson, that if the legal machinery available to the police was placed in isolation, yes, it would be insufficient, but it wasn't placed in isolation, Sir, it was placed within the whole framework of the capabilities of the State.   That was the other auxiliary and accessory capabilities of the State.