Amnesty Hearings — Boksburg — 1998-09-14

MS VAN DER WALT: He further said that after that, after that expiry date the AWB would accept no responsibility in preventing people from using means which would lead to them ensuring their freedom.

MR PRINSLOO: That's correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: Furthermore, he also said that he wished to send a warning to the CODESA Government, he referred to it as that, the CODESA Government
"The government of the ANC who did not grant us a free republic, we will then fight throughout the entire South Africa and win the entire South Africa, and we will pursue them until they homelands and then the whole South Africa will be ours"

MR PRINSLOO: Correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: Furthermore, he said that if we had to fight then it would be foolish ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: When did he say this?

MS VAN DER WALT: During the meeting at that stage.  He further said: "If we have to fight it would be foolish to pay too great a price for such a small piece of land.  They'll fight with us for the entire South Africa".

MR PRINSLOO: That's correct.
MS VAN DER WALT
"We will pay with lives, it's war.  The thing has broadened into a war in which we will fight and a war which we will win"

MR PRINSLOO: That's correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: That was also discussed during the meeting.
"We want a free state.  The volk will determine the boundaries, and the wars will determine the boundaries as well"

MR PRINSLOO: That's correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: Of further interest here is that the negotiations in Kempton Park are entirely rejected.

MR PRINSLOO: That's correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: Those were the important points, and that is the cassette which has the three hours worth of speech on it.  Thank you, nothing further.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS VAN DER WALT

CHAIRPERSON: Adv Prinsloo?

ADV PRINSLOO: Thank you Chairperson.
	Mr Prinsloo, the specific map upon which the Volkstaat was drawn by you, as you testified, and in this very same 2nd of April occasion it was indicated that there would be an area which was to be protected.

MR PRINSLOO: That's correct.

ADV PRINSLOO: Would that be the area which the AWB would claim or what area is that?

MR PRINSLOO: It was an area which we didn't have to take with violence because as I have testified earlier this was an area where the majority of towns had already been given over to the right-wingers by the granting of the freedom of the town, among others to the organisation.  Not only to the AWB but also to the CP and at that stage the Volksfront.
	These municipalities or these town councils which were then handed over as such comprised a committee called Wesbou which included city councillors, city secretaries, financial persons, people from the traffic departments, people who were in command of the civil protection services and so forth, and also members of a local army kommando.

ADV PRINSLOO: Would the AWB have prevented any attempt to take back that area of land from you?

MR PRINSLOO: Yes, we would have prevented it and we would have protected these towns.

ADV PRINSLOO: Members of the AWB who at that stage had gathered together, do you have knowledge thereof?

MR PRINSLOO: Yes, I do.  There were approximately 1500 people, members of the wen kommando at Koester.  These persons at a certain stage bought the property or the premises where they lived.  Furthermore, throughout this entire area in which we had made the announcement, which is stipulated by the map and the borders, throughout this entire area there were people from throughout the country who had gathered there.

ADV PRINSLOO: Thank you Chairperson.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY ADV PRINSLOO

CHAIRPERSON: Mr van Zyl?

MR VAN ZYL: There are just singular aspects which I wish to clear up, with regard to certain problems with the testimony of the former witness, and with regard to specific persons against which the AWB aimed their offences.  The previous witness did mention that it was aimed at black people.  	You have created a broader picture and more specifically that it was not only aimed at black people but also members of the ANC/SACP alliance.  Was there, in the run-up to the elections, any clarification made by the commanders of the AWB that the violence would be aimed at people who were apparently white?

MR PRINSLOO: We all realised this, we all knew that whites would also be among the ANC supporters.  We knew that there were white people who were members of the South African Communist Party, for example.

MR VAN ZYL: What about right-wing supporters, did the AWB and their commanders foresee that there would be a possibility of white right-wingers who could be injured?

MR PRINSLOO: We did foresee this and that would formed part of the sacrifice which they would have to make, if such a person was injured by an explosion or by any such action.
	One can return and say that those person who had received orders to perform acts from their various areas or under their area commanders, those persons were at a stage so intensely prepared that they wouldn't have hesitated to injure themselves or to lose their lives in the process.

MR VAN ZYL: But you would agree with me that the violence was not purposely aimed at right-wing white persons?

MR PRINSLOO: Absolutely not.

MR VAN ZYL: However the possibility existed that some of these people could very well be injured, people within your own ranks or people from other right-wing parties or organisations?

MR PRINSLOO: That's correct.

MR VAN ZYL: But you would also agree with me with regard to the evidence, on your own version, that the violence was mainly directed towards non-white people?

MR PRINSLOO: That's correct, because the non-whites one could find the most support for the ANC and the SACP alliance.

MR VAN ZYL: You gave evidence that you were part of the generals in staff, what was your specific role with regard to decision-making in that set-up?

MR PRINSLOO: My role within generals and staff essentially changed when purposeful actions were planned and when the decision was to made to go over to warfare completely.  That is when my role changed.

CHAIRPERSON: In what respect did it change?

MR PRINSLOO: In the past where I would only have liaised or served as a liaison officer between the generals and the political spokespeople, my role changed to that of combat general.  In the past I had to achieve the agreements between the SAP during public marches or AWB marches or right-wing marches.
	It changed to the effect that other people were appointed to carry out those tasks and I served purely as a combat general.

MR VAN ZYL: Effectively you participated in the decision-making process?

MR PRINSLOO: Yes, that's correct.

MR VAN ZYL: Could you provide the Committee with an example of when you would have made your own decision or a decision which was made by you which would have been accepted by the generals in staff due to the fact that you would have had knowledge of that specific matter?  In other words, which decisions would you have made according to your discretion?

MR PRINSLOO: And be accepted by the staff?

MR VAN ZYL: Yes.

MR PRINSLOO: Among others, at a certain stage legislation was passed or submitted which maintained that any person participating in a public action would have been prevented by this legislation to carry his weapon in public.
	I would have proposed that this be accepted and that if such a person not observe this regulation, that this person would be expelled.

MR VAN ZYL: You would agree with me that some of the decisions taken by you would have been accepted by the rest of the generals in staff?

MR PRINSLOO: Well a proposal, not a decision.

MR VAN ZYL: Would you agree with me then that certain decisions that you took was accepted by the generals in staff without any further communication between you?  Let's take for example the decision which you have just described to us.

MR PRINSLOO: Yes, that is so.