Special Hearings — Mandela United Football Club Hearings — 1997-11-24

JOSEPH HUME DU TOIT: He was then freed on the 25th of November 1988.  The next question, did you know whether James Radebe was seen as one of the other people who also brought Jerry Richardson in.

JAN DANIEL POTGIETER: It is said that there could be co-handlers but I didn't know who they were.

JOSEPH HUME DU TOIT: And to a certain extent you do refer to it in paragraph 35.8 with regard to the further handling of Jerry Richardson, but I would like to ask you further, we have a security branch here who is a jewel with regard to information, the person perhaps the only one very close to the Mandela household, who is an informant. Could you tell us what was decided to stop him from divulging further information?

JAN DANIEL POTGIETER: I don't know, I don't know whether there were any agreements.  I remember that he didn't even make contact to get his money.  I suppose he has broken contact but I have no further information which could help me in any way in an investigation.  Whether he received further information I don't know.

JOSEPH HUME DU TOIT: Just a short reply, do you think it would be possible that the Security Police could get another handler for him once he has been freed?

JAN DANIEL POTGIETER: If his services were to be made available further, later, I believe Mr Rademeyer could perhaps identify another handler or that Mr Radebe could proceed and give him another member as an alternative and that Mr Radebe would be the primary handler.

JOSEPH HUME DU TOIT: Basically two questions ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: I'd be grateful if you could try and finish now.

JOSEPH HUME DU TOIT: I will certainly do. The next aspect is what you know with regard to the compensation of the information given by Mr Richardson.

JAN DANIEL POTGIETER: I have no information in that regard.

JOSEPH HUME DU TOIT: But you know that he didn't collect the remuneration.

JAN DANIEL POTGIETER: You know these things are said in the corridors verbally.  I can't tell you whether I discussed it with Louis or Klaasie or whoever, this is what I picked up that he didn't make any further contact, that he wasn't interested in his money and now during the Amnesty Hearings I heard that he was offered or paid an amount of R10 000.

JOSEPH HUME DU TOIT: Just quickly, the next aspect, were you aware of the theory that Mr Watermeyer spoke about yesterday that the security police said that the death of Sgt Pretorius could have been an ambush?

JAN DANIEL POTGIETER: Any information in connection with the presence of MK members had to be handled with circumspection.  It could be, there could be a tip, it could be or it couldn't so I agree with Mr Watermeyer  in that regard and may I just quote what an old friend said, General Witkop Badenhorst.  "Make ready for war and you will have peace".  So in other words you don't have a trained person or attack a trained person from MK or APLA without preparing yourself.  It wasn't our task.

JOSEPH HUME DU TOIT: My question is whether you in the investigation and to the death of Sgt Pretorius because you were head of that section whether you developed that theory in interrogation of Mr Richardson?

JAN DANIEL POTGIETER: No.

JOSEPH HUME DU TOIT: Just a final aspect. The statement of Mr Richardson as where it's mentioned in the investigation in that there was prima facie evidence against him and Mrs Mandela with regard to the keeping of terrorists.
What happened to those two crimes, was there any follow up?

JAN DANIEL POTGIETER: Those are the tapes I referred to earlier. The argument with Tebogo and those tapes weren't broken because it had a lot to do with the keeping of MK members, the housing of MK members.

JOSEPH HUME DU TOIT: Mr Potgieter if I understand your testimony correctly then you had an interest in Mr Mabota on two bases, the first was that he was a key witness in a very important case against Mrs Mandela, is that correct?  And that the attorney general could at any stage tell you, I'm now going to prosecute, please bring the witnesses who gave the statements and he would therefor should be available at all times.

JAN DANIEL POTGIETER: Within my capability yes.

JOSEPH HUME DU TOIT: The second aspect was that you handled him almost alone for a period of six months and in that time you built up a personal relationship with him and you have, please tell me if I put it too strongly, that you developed a tender feeling for him?

JAN DANIEL POTGIETER: That's true, we built up a good relationship.

JOSEPH HUME DU TOIT: The relationship was so good that at a stage you had him moved from the cells in Soweto to de Deur close to Alberton which was closer to your home so that you could see him more often and I assume that you wanted to make it more convenient for him.  I assume that you spoke as friends about family, friends and so forth.  I assume he told you that he went to Pietersburg, what training he had, that he came from Pietersburg.

JAN DANIEL POTGIETER: It was in his statement yes.

JOSEPH HUME DU TOIT: I assume he told you about his family, what they did?

JAN DANIEL POTGIETER: Yes that's correct.  I can't remember what exactly they did, the details but you are correct, our conversations were about that.

JOSEPH HUME DU TOIT: Now you are confronted with this dilemma as you call it, that you have to release him, you feel for him and he's a very important witness in a case that you investigated and which in all probability is going to be on all the posters.  Now you have to think, what options do I have to see to it that these two requirements are complied with, that the personal relationship is looked after and that he is retained and made available in order to be able to testify.  Which options did you consider in this regard?

JAN DANIEL POTGIETER: Both, I considered both options.

JOSEPH HUME DU TOIT: No you're not understanding the question. That was the purpose, to attain that goal, which option did you consider?  You should have said to yourself, I like Mabota, we're friends, I don't want anyone to harm him and I want to have him come and testify.  No at all costs I want to achieve this goal, what am I going to do to achieve this goal.  What did you say to yourself, which options did you have.

JAN DANIEL POTGIETER: I had about one option because I couldn't detain him any longer.

JOSEPH HUME DU TOIT: Why could you not for instance appoint him with you in Soweto?

JAN DANIEL POTGIETER: We didn't work with askaris at the investigative unit.

JOSEPH HUME DU TOIT: This was an exception, you could have gone to the General on the Commission and explained and you could have said it's very important that Mr Mabota remains under my supervision.

JAN DANIEL POTGIETER: I didn't think of that, I didn't regard it as an option.

JOSEPH HUME DU TOIT: But you had knowledge of the security police that they had other farms right across the country where askaris were kept, is that not true?

JAN DANIEL POTGIETER: I knew they operated in other regions in the Cape, the West Cape they were accommodated at Koeberg if I remember correctly, Natal I don't know.

JOSEPH HUME DU TOIT: I knew that there was such a farm in Natal.

JAN DANIEL POTGIETER: Yes.

JOSEPH HUME DU TOIT: And the Cape?

JAN DANIEL POTGIETER: Yes.

JOSEPH HUME DU TOIT: They made use of the facilities at Koeberg and the Eastern Cape?

JAN DANIEL POTGIETER: No.

JOSEPH HUME DU TOIT: Did you not consider sending him to Cape Town or to Natal?

JAN DANIEL POTGIETER: No, because if he were placed under command of de Kock, de Kock would have put him where he liked.  The idea was not to put him in detention there.

JOSEPH HUME DU TOIT: Mr Potgieter he would not have fallen under de Kock had you sent him to Natal?