Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — 1998-10-14

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: Yes they were aware of what we'd done there.

MR PRINSLOO: Did you inform them of the events?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: No, I didn't do so personally but my General did so.

MR PRINSLOO: Did you inform your General, Gerhard van Rensburg about what had happened?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: Yes I had.

MR PRINSLOO: And as far as you know was this carried over or was this message given through to the movement?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: Yes.

MR PRINSLOO: Did you have any opportunity to accept responsibility for this deed?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: At that stage I couldn't accept responsibility for the deed because shortly after my hospitalisation I was arrested.

MR PRINSLOO: While you were in hospital?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: Yes that is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: Did you state your version of what had happened to the police?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: Yes.

MR PRINSLOO: And did you also inform them that you had initially gone to Pretoria?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: Yes I did.

MR PRINSLOO: So they were aware of this throughout?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: Yes.

MR PRINSLOO: And you also made a statement before a Magistrate?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: Yes I did.

MR PRINSLOO: And during your trial did you initially plead not guilty?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: Yes that is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: Was that before Judge Grobbelaar in the Circuit Court of Springs?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: Yes that is correct to both questions.

MR PRINSLOO: And after the first witness had been led, Mr Swart, did you change your plea to guilty?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: Yes that is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: Without having been cross-examined at that stage?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: Yes that is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: Why did you initially plead not guilty?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: That was at the recommendation of my Advocate, Mr Nel.

MR PRINSLOO: Did you plead not guilty to both the murder and the robbery with aggravating circumstances?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: Yes that is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: And you were found guilty on both counts?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: Yes.

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Chair, I wish to just state that I am in possession of Judge Grobbelaar's finding in the case and I will provide the Honourable Committee with copies of this, I obtained this yesterday.  If I look at the finding the judgement, page 2, approximately line 20, says statement had been submitted, that the respective cases of the State and the Defence had been concluded and both passed that the accused be found guilty and then Judge Grobbelaar said it was clear that you had been of the intention to plead guilty, is that correct?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: Yes.

MR PRINSLOO: After this deed and after these events and that which you had been wanting to achieve, how do you feel about all of this?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: Well I'm disappointed because I feel that I had not really achieved my objective.

MR PRINSLOO: And how doe you feel about the victim, the late Mr Terblanche who was fatally wounded and killed during this action?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: Well I'm very sorry about the death of Mr Terblanche.

MR PRINSLOO: During your trial did you meet any relative of Mr Terblanche?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: Yes, during the trial I met his father and his stepbrother and other relatives.

MR PRINSLOO: Did you discuss things with them?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: Yes they three talked to me but in particular Mr Terblanche, the deceased's father.

MR PRINSLOO: What did you say to him?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: Well just after deciding to change my plea from not guilty to guilty, Mr Terblanche after the court had adjourned, met me in the passage and he held me against him and said they didn't hold it against me and they were praying for me and also on the day I was sentenced, after my sentence had been given, I was given time to greet my family and when I stepped towards my family, Mr Terblanche met me, gave me Christian books, told me that they didn't hold it against me, that they realised it had been for a political struggle and they were praying for me.

MR PRINSLOO: Did you at any stage receive any letter from anybody in this regard?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: Well after I had been sentenced, Mr Terblanche wrote a letter to me whilst I was in prison in which he explained to me how he had felt in the beginning about the death of his son and that he had realised after he had met me that he had to forgive me and there he once again confirmed that he had forgiven me and that they didn't hold it against me.

MR PRINSLOO: Today, do you commit yourself to violence, to negotiation or what is your position at present?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: Well at this stage today I do not wish to associate myself with violence, I feel negotiation is the right road to follow.

MR PRINSLOO: Just a moment, your Honour.
	And Mr de Meillon, just to conclude, in your application did you state at all that you had done it for any other purpose than for political purpose?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: No Sir.

MR PRINSLOO: Is your reply no?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: Yes, I did not do it for any other purpose or any other objective than a political objective.

MR PRINSLOO: Thank you your Honour.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR PRINSLOO

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Kotze?

MR KOTZE: Thank you Mr Chairman.
	Is it correct that ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Just a moment.  I think those two microphones can work simultaneously if you press your red buttons, let's just see?

INTERPRETER: The Chairperson's microphone is still off.

MR KOTZE: Mr de Meillon, is it correct that you met Mr Holder and Van Zyl just a couple of weeks before the incident on 23 April 1984?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: Yes that is correct.

MR KOTZE: And this meeting was brought about by Mr Ochert van Schalkwyk who at that stage a commandant in the AWB?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: Yes that is correct.

MR KOTZE: And you say he was an old confidante of yours, Mr van Schalkwyk?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: Yes that is correct.

MR KOTZE: I was instructed that during this introduction Mr van Zyl and Mr Holder were told that they could trust you and on the other hand that you could trust them, is that correct?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: Yes.

MR KOTZE: And they were also informed that you had the rank of Commandant in the BRL?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: No in the BWB.

MR KOTZE: Okay that's correct, in the BWB.  During that discussion the possibility of co-operation between the AWB and the BWB was discussed, is that correct?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: Yes.

MR KOTZE: And in the presence of Mr van Schalkwyk it was also stated that should Mr Holder and Mr van Zyl receive a request from your side to assist you and members of the BWB in operations, they had to do so?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: I'm not sure whether they were instructed to do so but I was told that I could trust them and they would be prepared to assist.

MR KOTZE: But a strong possibility of co-operation was mooted at that point?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: Yes that is correct.

MR KOTZE: And furthermore, was the arrangement that should they co-operate with you, it would be under your control?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: Well I wouldn't be able to state that, it would depend on whether I would be supporting them when they had received an instruction or whether they would co-operate with me when I had received an instruction.

MR KOTZE: But should you have received an instruction it would have been regarded as a BWB instruction and you would be in command?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: Yes that is correct.

MR KOTZE: Furthermore the idea was that you would report to your higher command regarding the result of such an operation?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: Yes that is correct.

MR KOTZE: You at that stage also lived and worked in Secunda?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: Yes that is correct.