Special Hearings — Trojan Horse Hearings — 1997-05-21

DOUW VERMEULEN: Chairperson yes, I did not expect such an attack.  I used the expression in my statement that I knew from experience and the experience to which I referred there was the modus operandi or method used by people setting vehicles alight.  I had never experienced it myself but I had heard about these methods from my colleagues who attended certain scenes where these things had happened or you would just hear that these things had happened afterwards, so that's what I based my experience on.  And I never thought that such a thing could happen to me.
And on that day when I realised that we had already been brought to a standstill and we were surrounded and attacked then I realised that that was what was going to happen to me.

MS GOBODO-MADIKIZELA: Thank you Madam Chair.  Mr Vermeulen if you could tell me a little bit more about the kinds of procedures that Police are expected to follow when they go on these operations, are there any standard procedures?

DOUW VERMEULEN: I have only received fair treatment from you and I would like to return that courtesy.  Could I ask you to be specific, do you know what happened before, what is supposed to happen beforehand or afterwards, could you perhaps just make the question a little bit more specific and then I can also try and give you a specific answer.

MS GOBODO-MADIKIZELA: One of the things that was mentioned by Mr Loedolff, for example, is that it's something to do with the legal framework that guided these kinds of operations.  I don't remember his exact words, but he made reference to the fact that whenever these operations were planned they were guided by certain legal framework, and I think during the questioning by Mr Ntsebeza he went on to - or Mr Ntsebeza articulated for him what this legal framework is.  Now in addition to that there usually are procedures that Police use or that Police refer to when they go into these operations, procedures about the kinds of ammunition to be used, how to confront certain kinds of crowds, those kinds of things, are you aware of any such procedure?

DOUW VERMEULEN: I could give you two answers to this. If I remember Mr Loedolff's evidence he referred to Section 49 and he referred to Section 49 in his instructions to me.   Now it's quite some time since I've left the Police and my legal knowledge isn't up to scratch, but if I recall the section correctly it is a section dealing with what the Police can or may do when there is no other alternative to arresting a person.  The Section provides that you may shoot at a person if he commits a certain scheduled offence.  It then becomes necessary to arrest this person.  You may shoot him in certain circumstances and that that shooting then could be done with impunity.
Because I am personally very opposed to this type of arrest I had never and never will arrest a person where I have to first shoot him dead.  If that is the case he must rather just run away and must be apprehended in some other way later or get away.  
But yes, he focused my attention on this aspect, and I think at that time I was  more familiar with the Section than I am today.  In my view it is perhaps one of those sections which should never have been put onto the statute book.
But as far as the procedure is concerned, your next question, if I understand you correctly about the types of ammunition, the firearms to be used ...(intervention)

MS GOBODO-MADIKIZELA: Yes there is one - I have a translated version in front of me actually which I think you are aware of, this details the kind of - this is an ordinary, this is not a surprise, one of those surprise documents, this is really a Police document which is probably in Afrikaans, you have it in Afrikaans and it's not a mysterious document, it just details the kinds of ammunition and firearms that Police should carry when they move into an operational area.  One of the things that it says is that,
"During unrest situations the maximum use of teargas, rubber bullets, birdshot ammunition must firstly be made use of...."
and it adds that,
"....firm action is essential".
and I am just wondering if you are aware of that.  These are standard procedures, these are really not - I don't think it's a document, what is it called - it's called COMPOL REPORT 196.

DOUW VERMEULEN: If you can just give me a moment.

MS GOBODO-MADIKIZELA: It was read - reference was made to the document this morning and I think you have it somewhere there.  You are aware of those standard procedures and whether in fact Police are expected to act in accordance with those procedures?

DOUW VERMEULEN: Yes as was told to you this morning it was a document coming from Brigadier Wandrag dated 1984.  At that stage I wasn't working with the South African Police and in 1984 I was in the Railway Police but I believe there would have been a similar document applicable to the Railway Police and I am sure I would have read them and I am sure, yes, that at that stage I would have been aware of these things.

MS GOBODO-MADIKIZELA: In other words you were not aware of this document and you were not aware of the procedures, all you were acting upon is Mr Loedolff's instructions?

DOUW VERMEULEN: No that's not what I said.  This specific document or instruction, it was not possible for me to have seen this in 1984 because I was in the Railway Police at the time.  If I look at the reference on this document it would have been a South African Police document.  Because the two police forces cooperated very closely I think there would have been a similar document in circulation for the Railway Police, and it would have been similarly worded, but that is just an assumption that I am making today.  It's just that I do believe there would have been such a document in existence.

MS GOBODO-MADIKIZELA: Therefore since you were not aware of any such documents or procedures it seems to me then that you had therefore acted only upon the instruction of Mr Loedolff?

DOUW VERMEULEN: No, no I couldn't say that.  I couldn't say that I simply acted on his instructions.  As I read this document I told you that there would have been a similar document in the Railway Police, but as I read this document there is nothing here which would be any different to how a Railway Policeman would be expected to have acted in 1984, it's basically the same procedure applicable to crowd control situations, there should be maximal use of sjamboks, teargas, rubber bullets etc, I think the rubber sjambok was also prohibited after '84.  I may be wrong there.  And then batons and ammunition etc, etc, and then it refers to maximum arrests and sharp point ammunition.

MS GOBODO-MADIKIZELA: In other words there were standards, there were procedures even for Railway Police for crowd control?

DOUW VERMEULEN: That's correct, yes.

MS GOBODO-MADIKIZELA: And these are comparable to the standards that are in front of you now except for sjamboks?

DOUW VERMEULEN: No.  I think the sjamboks were prohibited in the South African Police as well, but these are, yes, the standard procedures and comparable, yes.

MS GOBODO-MADIKIZELA: Now how did Mr Loedolff's instruction to you compare with those instructions, with those standard procedures?