Amnesty Hearings — Benoni — 1997-06-23

UNKNOWN: General that is why I included the version of Captain van Jaarsveld because as I have mentioned Captain van Jaarsveld is an important State witness against the applicants on behalf of the State Attorney, which would indicate that with regard to the ethical aspects that Captain Hechter and Brigadier Cronje would not have even been allowed to speak to Captain Jaarsveld.  I hear your answer but I want to state to you that I will bring such argument and you need not comment on this.

JOHANNES JACOBUS VIKTOR: I have no further comment Chair.

UNKNOWN: It had been stated General that you had heard with regard to Jeffrey Sibiya from General van der Merwe that there had been testimony that the person was shocked electrically.  I want to correct this to indicate that Jeffrey Sibiya was not in fact the person on whom electric shocks had been carried out, but that the statement which had been made in your testimony was therefore not correct.  This is just for the record.

JOHANNES JACOBUS VIKTOR: Chair I want to give an answer.  Since I do not know the names this is one of the cases which I had thought might be the case to which General van der Merwe had referred.  I do not know the names of the people who were actually involved.

UNKNOWN: Good.  General could you briefly give us an indication, the Security Branch of the Police and the Unit in which you served, had there been any cooperation or interaction between these various units?

JOHANNES JACOBUS VIKTOR: Chair in the control of unrest or riots your Security Branch is the information arm and you are reliant on information from them with regard to actions that might have been foreseen, unrest that might occur.

UNKNOWN: Mr Chairman if you will just give me a moment I am nearly finished.
	General with regard to the unrest in the country, we all know that there were marches and that all sorts of things happened, people threw stones, people threw bombs, there were petrol bombs thrown, use had been made of firearms on occasion, or arms at least on occasion, would you classify these as unrest and as part of the combatting of unrest?

JOHANNES JACOBUS VIKTOR: Chair it is part of this to combat the unrest but as I have stated to you already the Security Branch is the information arm of the Police and part of this is then the work or task of the Security Branch to combat these actions.

UNKNOWN: General the suggestion which you have made that action in a certain manner would be acceptable, would I be correct to say that this is what is involved or that this can also be under the umbrella of Unrest Control?

JOHANNES JACOBUS VIKTOR: No I don't think that this would properly resort under Unrest Control.

ADV DE JAGER: Mr du Plessis I want to speak on behalf of the Committee.  I think we understand the points that you wanted to make ...(intervention)

UNKNOWN: Thank you Mr Chair, I have finished.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR DU PLESSIS

CHAIRPERSON: It will be placed on record that Counsel for some members of the families have approached me, that is Mr Currin, he has indicated to me that as a result of the questions that have been put to this witness there is no need for him to cross-examine the witness and has asked to be excused.
	Mr Mpshe are there any questions you wish to put to this witness?

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Yes Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: You may do so.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: General, when you made this suggestion were you advised by anybody to make it, the suggestion you made to the three members?

JOHANNES JACOBUS VIKTOR: I had not been advised by anyone to make these suggestions.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: What had prompted you to make this suggestion to these three members?

JOHANNES JACOBUS VIKTOR: That which the gentlemen stated to me with regard to the actual situation on the ground.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Is it correct that the three members were juniors to yourself?

JOHANNES JACOBUS VIKTOR: Yes, this is a fact Chair.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Can it be taken then that when you spoke to them, you spoke to them as a senior?

JOHANNES JACOBUS VIKTOR: I did talk to them as a senior and as the father of one of them.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Now if you spoke to them in your position as a senior you should have foreseen the possibility of them acting on what you are saying as a senior?

JOHANNES JACOBUS VIKTOR: Chair no, I cannot agree with you that I had to foresee what they might have concluded.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: When you made these suggestions what did you intend to bring into their minds?

JOHANNES JACOBUS VIKTOR: Merely Chair that they - I made a suggestion to them with regard to my view on how the matter should be approached.  I may perhaps inform the Committee, on reflection on my part, had I thought that this was an instruction to three junior members, and had I thought that I had the power to make such an instruction, then I cannot see why I should have returned to Brigadier Cronje, the commanding officer of two of them.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: General can we then conclude that that suggestion was actually an advice to them as to how to go about addressing the situation?

JOHANNES JACOBUS VIKTOR: It was a suggestion with regard to how I saw a possible improvement with regard to the matter.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: But you were telling them that they've got to chase them, they've got to search for them, look for them, don't give him a chance day and night, is that not an advice telling them how to do things?  It is more than a suggestion as far as I am concerned.

JOHANNES JACOBUS VIKTOR: Chair, the difference between a suggestion such as this and the advice which might be concluded from this, the difference is very, very little.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Thank you Mr Chairman, no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MPSHE

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Visser are there questions you wish to put to the witness?

MR VISSER: Thank you Mr Chairman.  There are three issues, of which two we will deal with in argument, there is only one issue which we would like to clarify in the evidence, with your permission.

CHAIRPERSON: Please do.

MR VISSER: General you were asked a question by Mr du Plessis whether you can quote any example from your memory of a terrorist that was arrested and later you were asked whether you can quote an example of any one terrorist that you can remember that was shot in action, and you said you couldn't, is that correct?

JOHANNES JACOBUS VIKTOR: That is correct, that is what I had said.

MR VISSER: Insofar as it may be relevant were you aware of arrests of terrorists in general during the period which we are talking about, say from 1984 onwards, and of terrorists that were killed in confrontations, were you aware that this was happening?

JOHANNES JACOBUS VIKTOR: Yes Chair I was aware of this.  In my response to Advocate du Plessis I understood him to require or request detail with regards to actual instances, that is what I understood and that is why I responded to him by saying that I could not recall any particular individual instances.
TAPE SWITCHES OFF

MR VISSER: May I enquire Mr Chairman - I am sorry, we are really here to present evidence and we are not really parties to your inquiry, would you prefer us to draw written heads of argument to deal with the issues surrounding this instruction and related matters?   I you will find that convenient we are quite prepared and willing to do that and to hand it up to you later.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes Mr Visser, members of my Committee would appreciate written submissions by you on the evidence that has been led.

MR VISSER: Mr Chairman I will see to it that we draw heads of argument and my attorney would let Mr Mpshe have it.  May I request if there are no further questions whether the General may be excused.  He is from the Free State.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, yes.  General thank you very much.  You are excused from further attendance.

UNKNOWN: And perhaps we may also be excused Mr Chairman.