Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1999-09-01

SALMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: I beg your pardon, it is Basson.

MR WILLS: Why do you use the phrase "must have been"?

SALMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: Because all of us arrived there in that vehicle.

MR WILLS: But earlier on in your evidence you weren't sure, are you now sure?

SALMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: I cannot recall any other vehicle.

MR WILLS: No, but we know that the vehicle that Ms Khubeka was transported to Battery Beach also went back to Winkelspruit later on.  Who travelled in that vehicle?  We would assume Mbane would be one of the people.

SALMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: That's correct.

MR WILLS: Who else?

SALMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: I cannot even recall that they returned.

MR WILLS: ...there the whole day?

SALMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: I cannot recall seeing them again.

MR WILLS: But in short, you're not positive as to who was in the vehicle with you?

SALMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: Chairperson it was me, Botha, van der Westhuizen and Basson and I think that there was another member of C1 but I don't know who he was.

MR WILLS: Where were they sitting?

SALMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: I cannot recall who sat where or who drove the vehicle.  I can recall that I sat in the back of the vehicle with Nthombi.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, in that vehicle, how many people can sit where the driver sits, including the driver.  You get the driver and then, is it a bench seat, or is it room for only one other person in the front?

SALMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: There is room for three people to sit in front.

MR WILLS: Was anyone behind with you?

SALMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: There were other people in the back with me.

MR WILLS: Can you remember how many people were sitting in the front and how many people were in the back?

SALMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: I cannot recall that.

MR WILLS: So how can you be sure that these people were in fact with you in the car?

SALMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: Chairperson, there were others in the back of the vehicle with me and there was the person driving the vehicle, but I cannot recall who it was who drove the vehicle and who sat in the back with me.

MR WILLS: So in other words you don't know who was in the vehicle?  You're making assumptions post facto.

SALMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: Chairperson, the persons who were with me in the vehicle were van der Westhuizen, Botha, Basson and I cannot recall who the C1 member was.

MR WILLS: Now, if it wasn't your intention to arrest Khubeka, why didn't you just take her and detain her and put her through the normal police processes?

SALMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: Chairperson, she would be interrogated about the terrorists whom she knew about.

MR LAX: That still doesn't change the question.  You could have still questioned her.  Why take her to the shooting range?  Why not question her at C R Swart in the normal course of a Section 29 detention, which you would have been perfectly entitled to use?

SALMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: Chairperson, she would probably have been taken to C R Swart later for detention.

MR LAX: The question is why take her to the shooting range?

SALMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: Chairperson, that is the point from where we operated and that is where we were going to interrogate her?

MR WILLS: I'm asking you why did you take her there?

SALMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: To interrogate her.

MR WILLS: Why do you take her to a place that is hidden from all the other people, and hidden from where she's essentially denied all of her rights?  What was the reason for that?  You took her to a secret hide-out where you conducted these activities, why was that?

SALMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: To interrogate her.

MR WILLS: Why couldn't you just take her to the normal police station and interrogate her in the cells at C R Swart?  Book her in like a normal arrest.  Why was there the need to take her to this other place?  Can I help you?

SALMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: It was to interrogate her.

MR WILLS: Isn't it because you wanted to beat the living daylights out of her, without anybody else finding out?

SALMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: No, Chairperson.

MR WILLS: I put it to you it was.

SALMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: That is not correct.

MR WILLS: Well, can you give me another reason as to why she wasn't taken to the police station?

SALMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: Chairperson, the reason why we took her there was to interrogate her.  That was the premises from where we operated at that stage.

MR LAX: Sorry, at that time, I can't recall, was there any state of emergency prevailing?

SALMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: I cannot recall.

MR LAX: Just - my recollection is that there was.  I wouldn't know the specific date but 1987, middle of that year there was definitely a state of emergency on the go.

MR VISSER: You can accept that there was, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Wills.

MR WILLS: Thank you Mr Chairperson.  How did you expect that she was going to be interrogated?

SALMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: I accepted that Botha and Taylor would interrogate her.

MR WILLS: Yes.  What methods did you expect that they were going to use?

SALMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: Chairperson, I didn't have any preconceived ideas.

MR WILLS: What methods were usually used?  Is it that you sat down and had a cup of tea and said:  "Mrs Khubeka, nice to meet you.  We've heard about your family in Lusaka.  How are they doing now?  Please tell us about what's going on."

SALMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: Chairperson, such discussions did take place.  There were such interrogations.

MR WILLS: I put it to you, you would have foreseen the likelihood that she would have been assaulted in that interrogation.

SALMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: Not necessarily.  If a person co-operated he or she would not be assaulted.

CHAIRPERSON: But you see, the impression I got from Mr Botha's evidence was, he said that while she was being interrogated, she was being beaten by Col Taylor and as far as he was concerned, Taylor was beating her not because she was not co-operating but just to stress the seriousness of the occasion to her.  In other words, it was a sort of gratuitous type of beating, it wasn't done with the intention to get her to talk, that was the impression that Mr Botha said that he had.  She was being beaten from time to time by Taylor, just to stress the seriousness of it.

SALMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: Chairperson, I would not be able to comment on that.  During my time when I interrogated people, I cannot think that I would have assaulted someone if he or she had co-operated.

MR WILLS: Yes, but from your answer you say that on the one hand, had she not co-operated, she would have been beaten.  You would have expected that?

SALMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: That was a possibility.

MR WILLS: Let's not beat around the bush with respect.

MR VISSER: Well, Mr Chairman, what's wrong with the answer?  Who's beating around the bush?

CHAIRPERSON: He's cross-examining, he can persist with his line I think.

MR VISSER: But Mr Chairman, there's no reason to be discourteous to the witness.

MR WILLS: That wasn't my intention, with respect, Mr Visser and if it was I apologise, if I am being discourteous.  I'm trying to get to the truth of this matter.  Was it not a probability that she would be beaten, if she wasn't co-operative?  It's not a possibility, it's a probability?

SALMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: Mr Chairperson, I cannot testify now about things during which I was not present.  I don't know what the circumstances were surrounding this entire interrogation, therefore it is difficult for me to give you an answer regarding this.

MR WILLS: You testified that if she co-operated, she wouldn't be beaten and if she did ...