Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — 1998-10-14

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: I state it as a submission to which he can react if he is capable of doing so.

CHAIRPERSON: It appears as if it is a statement made based on probabilities of the circumstances concerning the relevant event.

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: Well I don't know why I wouldn't be able to tell, but we were definitely in Pretoria in Vermeulen Street.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: Are you saying you don't know which building you visited is that correct?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: Yes.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: Well I would say that it is highly improbable that you would plan a military operation at a building without knowing what the building was.

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: Well Sir, we didn't plan on entering the building we were planning to take away the firearms of the guards at the entrance to the building.

ADV GCABASHE: How did you know where the building was if you didn't know which building, which particular building, you had visited?  Just explain that to me?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: Mr Chair, as I had stated, Mr van Rensburg and I at a stage when we were in Pretoria, drove past the building and saw that there were armed guards at the entrance and this was in Vermeulen Street.  We drove past and we saw that there were armed guards there.

ADV GCABASHE: Are you saying you were familiar with Pretoria and you would thus remember which building just be driving there and out again?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: I'm not familiar with Pretoria and it's environs but I was aware of the street name because after I had seen the guards there I looked specifically to see what the street name was but I had no idea what the building was and what was held there or done there.

ADV GCABASHE: How often had you been to that particular building after that first visit?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: At the time when we visited Pretoria we always drove through there every time upon my request because I wished to ascertain that there were still guards there.

ADV GCABASHE: How often?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: Well after I had seen them the first time, probably once or twice that I had driven past there again.

ADV GCABASHE: Thank you.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: Sir, why did you go to that building specifically?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: Mr Chair, because I thought that I would be able to get hold of the firearms without any serious occurrences, I regarded that as the best option and the easiest at the time.

CHAIRPERSON: The person who phoned you, I can't remember whether I heard your testimony correctly, did he give you any targets or she?  I don't know whether it was a man or a woman?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: No, it was a man, he left the choice of target to me, he didn't specifically mention a target.

CHAIRPERSON: So that was at your own initiative you decided to go and see whether you would be successful there?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr van Schalkwyk?

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: Sir I would like to state to you that you only joined the AWB after completing your military service, is that correct?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: Yes.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: I would say that you joined and immediately resigned to join another organisation, that you were virtually not a member of the AWB?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: Well it was approximately three months that I was a member of the AWB before joining the BWB.  I'm not one hundred percent sure of the dates, I can't tell you exactly.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: In your evidence in chief you also refer on page 101 - 107 to the Boere Weerstandsbeweging.  Is that in other words the basis on which you had acted?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: Well that is the BWB programme of principles.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: Is there any reference that it is lawful to shoot policemen or attack the government of the day?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: No, it is not contained in this.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: So what you are saying that in both of these annexures there was no real basis for your actions?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: Well as I'd said, it was very clearly stated to us that war had been declared against the government of the day and I had acted in accordance therewith.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: I'm stating  to you Sir that the new government which was to come in South Africa has been democratically elected and as a democratically elected government, you cannot rebel against it.

MR PRINSLOO: Your honour, it doesn't concern the government now, it is the government of the day at the time it's referred to, the National Party government.  So what is the relevance to this aspect?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Mr van Schalkwyk, that is so.  The government being referred to if I understand correctly is the National Government before the 1994 elections.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: Sir, your struggle, was it against the National Party government or the new government that would come?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: Well, I wouldn't have been able to tell what the new government would be and who would have been in control of the new government, so the National Party at that stage was handing over our country and our heritage to the Communists.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: Had you declared war against the National Party?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: Yes that's the way I understood it.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: I am stating to you that there is no proof of such a declaration of war against the National Party?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: Well Commandant General Andrew Ford who is present here today will be able to confirm this, he is the leader of the BWB.

ADV GCABASHE: What other actions had your organisation taken against the government of the day before you acted, ones that you knew of?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: Mr Chair I am not really aware of the actions specifically carried out by my movement or our movement but at that stage I know there were many bomb explosions and that kind of activity.  I'm not sure whether they were carried out by members of my organisation but as I'd stated I operated in the BRL and one cell was not aware of what another was doing.  As a matter of fact one cell wouldn't even know who were the members of another cell, it was totally underground organisation.

ADV GCABASHE: Yes but I'm trying to understand your knowledge at the time that you acted.  How did you know that this was part of this declaration of war that your activity was tied into other activities?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: At that stage we were expecting total war over the period of the '94 elections and we were working on that basis.  We wished to prevent that election from taking place, we wanted a political uprising so the government would be forced not to continue with the elections and create fear among the general public so that they wouldn't participate in the elections.

ADV GCABASHE: Yes but so was the AWB, I've heard the same said of applicants who were AWB members.  I'm trying to distinguish your particular organisation and understand your action as part of this declaration of war or uprising because of particular principles and objectives you believed in.  Just help me understand that and this is why I'm being - organisation specifically, your organisation, your actions, tie that up with what everybody else in your organisation was doing?

OCHERT ANTONIE DE MEILLON: Well I couldn't tie it up specifically with other members of my organisation but at numerous or various meetings we were told that we would have to get hold of firearms for the war, the full scale war that was going to break out and that is the basis on which I worked, it was clearly stated to us that we had to obtain firearms and that is one of the main reasons why I carried out my instruction.

ADV GCABASHE: Thank you.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: Sir, I would like to submit further to you that the list of provisions from pages 57 - 59 had not been prepared by right-wing organisation at all.