Amnesty Hearings — East London — 1999-04-26

LERATO ABLE KGOTLHE: We will continue with our attack because oppression was also continuing.

ADV SANDI: Why do you say you were particularly attracted by this information that some houses in the area were occupied by members of the security forces?

LERATO ABLE KGOTLHE: They were the people on the front line, they were on the front line of the defence and naturally they had the interest that we should find against them because they were the people on the front line of the defence of that particular regime.  The other thing was that we wanted to get through certain areas into the country so that we could claim a certain area and at the end we could say that those areas were liberated so their presence was disturbing to us because they were there to ensure that they become the obstacle to liberation.  That is the reason why we ended up attacking such places.

ADV SANDI: Thank you.  Thank you Ms Patel.

MS PATEL: Thank you Honourable Chairperson.
	Mr Kgotlhe, do I understand you correctly that - I'm just trying to make sense of why you did what you did and the way that you did it that because that was the first row of houses there, you assumed that whoever occupied those houses was security branch or members of security branch would be living in those houses.

CHAIRPERSON: Wasn't that the position of Mr Dolo, is his position not that they reconnoitred or discussed with the servants to find out, isn't that the basis for his conclusion?

MS PATEL: But he also vacillates, Honourable Chairperson, between reconnoitring on the one hand and saying on the other hand that it really didn't matter?

CHAIRPERSON: Well that seems to be a more broader argument on the policy of Apla but he seemed to also say that what formed the basis of this particular attack was the information that there were security force members occupying some of the houses in that particular area, that's how I understood the evidence.

MS PATEL: Let me at least ascertain - let me put it to you simply once again, I've asked you this question before, let me ask it to you again.  From your reconnoitring from your speaking to the workers in the area, can you at least give us an indication as to how many people in that street were members of the security forces?

LERATO ABLE KGOTLHE: I think I've already answered that question.

MS PATEL: Well then answer it again please.  It's a very specific question, it requires a specific answer, that's all I want, is a specific answer, Sir.  I don't want to know from you whether it mattered or not how many people there are, I want to know from you whether you knew how many members of the security branch lived in that street before you attacked?

LERATO ABLE KGOTLHE: No, we did not know.

MS PATEL: So then how do you know if in fact members of the security branch were living in that street if you can't tell us how many there were?

ADV BOSMAN: Ms Patel I don't that security branch it has a very specific meaning, security personnel.

MS PATEL: That's what I meant, security personnel.

LERATO ABLE KGOTLHE: How do you reconcile the fact that we were shot at with an automatic rifle with what you are asking?

MS PATEL: With respect, Sir, I don't want to argue with you but whether you were in fact shot at or not is something that occurred either doing or after the attack according to your version, that is not conceded.  I'm still dealing with the information that you had at your disposal prior to the attack so my question to you again is how did you know that in fact anybody in that area who stayed in that street was a member of the security forces?

ADV SANDI: Sorry, I did not understand that to be his evidence, are you saying to him, are you asking him how did he know that anybody who stays in that street was a member of the security forces?

MS PATEL: Yes and I asked him that question specifically because he wasn't able to tell us how many members in that street were in fact members of the security force.

ADV SANDI: I thought he had said the information at his disposal was that some of the residents of that area were members of the security forces.  Now I understand you're trying to find out from him how many of such people who were members of the security forces?

MS PATEL: His response to how many was in fact that he did not know.  My question now is how does he know at all that anyone in that street who resided in that street was a member of the security forces.  It goes to the question, Honourable Committee Member, of what reconnoitring if any was in fact done before the operation was launched?

LERATO ABLE KGOTLHE: I don't understand your question because now you ask me how I found out that those houses were occupied by the security police and at the same time you talk about the reconnaissance.  I repeating that again, we did do the reconnaissance and you also agree with me and then again you come back, you ask me how I got that information.  Now I become confused because I don't know how to answer you now because you also confirm that we did undertake reconnaissance.
So information we're talking about was the reconnaissance, yes.  The only way you get information is through reconnaissance.

ADV SANDI: Yes but my understanding of this question is were you able to confirm what had been said to you by these people that some of the houses in that area were occupied by members of the security forces?  Is that the question Ms Patel?

CHAIRPERSON: Well that is now my question, in other words from your reconnoitring, could you confirm when you reconnoitred the area could you see that there were army personnel and police and people in the area, in other words did your reconnoitring confirm the information that this area was occupied by some members of the security forces?

LERATO ABLE KGOTLHE: Let me just this way to say security personnel because in those days the army and the police were one thing.  From the reconnaissance that I undertook it happened that during lunch-times I would see that some inhabitants of that area of people who were always armed with pistols and then from there it confirmed the information that I got but because I could see the people who were armed with pistols, they were always armed.

ADV SANDI: Were these people wearing any uniform Mr Kgotlhe?

LERATO ABLE KGOTLHE: No they were not wearing uniforms but what I know the special branch did not wear uniforms.

MS PATEL: For the record Honourable Chairperson, my instructions are to confirm that in fact Mr Roos did in fact wear a pistol and that he was dressed in normal civilian clothing and not in uniform.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry Mr Roos?

MS PATEL: Mrs Pienaar's deceased husband.

CHAIRPERSON: Was the late husband a member of the security forces?

MS PATEL: No he wasn't Honourable Chairperson, he was in fact in charge of the mortuary.  Whilst a policeman he had been involved in a serious accident two years prior to the incident and was merely involved in administrative duties.

CHAIRPERSON: Oh, so he was boarded?

MS PATEL: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Put on light duties because of his injury?

MS PATEL: That's right.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay thank you Ms Patel.

MS PATEL: Okay.  Mr Kgotlhe, there's just something I've been asked to clarify with you, did you have a map of the house that was attacked?

LERATO ABLE KGOTLHE: We did not.

MS PATEL: Okay, can you tell us on the evening of the attack why you chose that specific house?

LERATO ABLE KGOTLHE: Because it was in the area that we were supposed to attack.  What I can say is that we could not attack all the houses there.  We did not attack that house because it belonged to Mr Pienaar, we only attacked it because it was in an area that we identified as our target.