Amnesty Hearings — Port Elizabeth — 1997-09-08

MR NYOKA: Did you not receive a report to the fact that his home was petrol-bombed after it was petrol-bombed at Raneswa.

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: I do not have any knowledge of that incident.

MR NYOKA: But you are the head of the information unit,  how could you not have known or got that information?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: In September, 1984, the unrest started in Port Elizabeth, and it had started with attacks and anarchy in the townships.  There were no petrol bombs, according to my knowledge, in January 1984.

MR NYOKA: No further questions, Your Honour.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR NYOKA

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mpshe, are there any questions you wish to put?
EXAMINATION BY MR MPSHE
Yes, Mr Chairman, thank you.
	Mr Nieuwoudt, let's start with the answers that you gave to my learned friend.  Just to make it quite clear.  You were asked a question and you then said that the assault was done by you.  When a person didn't want to talk and then also if a person is charged according to the criminal law ... (intervention).

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: Could you just repeat the question for me.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Under which circumstances do you use assault on a prisoner?  Could you just give me the answer, just repeat your answer.

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: That is to obtain information from him and then possibly to get his co-operation and then also possibly to give testimony, evidence in a case when he should be charged according to the law and then to get the necessary information.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: In other words, to use a person as a witness in the court of a law, he is then first assaulted.  Is that what you mean?

CHAIRPERSON: That might be part of the softening process.

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: That is breaking down the resistance of the person.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Mr Chairman, I notice the point, but this is not what I was trying to establish, on the weakness.  What I was trying to establish as to whether if a person is a potential State witness, is it necessary for him to be assaulted first?  Did you understand my question?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: Yes, but that is a general statement, but it isn't used in every case.  You should see this within a different context.  This was - has to do with the stabilisation of the unrest.  That's the difference.  It wouldn't have happened in normal circumstances.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: My learned friend asked you earlier.  You said that you can't remember who gave the instruction to detain Mr Jack for the further period.  Can you remember?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: Yes.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Your answer to that was that it was possible that Mr Du Plessis gave the instruction.

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: Yes, that is so.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Why isn't this contained in your application that possibly Mr Du Plessis gave the instruction?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: Because I really cannot independently remember this;  who gave me the instruction to detain him.  That is why I say that it is - it could be possible that it might have been him.  I didn't say it was him.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: I understand, but it just sounds strange to me that you were a unit commander, specifically for Black affairs, but you can't remember what happened in these Black affairs?  I find it strange.

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: But I can remember, but I can't specifically remember who gave me the instruction to do it.  There were many people who I detained.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Were you given instruction by a variety of people, of seniors?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: Yes, that's so, and also where I personally arrested people.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: You also testified during cross-examination that the instruction was given by means of the State Security Council.

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: Yes.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: I will read to you.  This was the submission given by the former State President at the Truth Commission on the 21st of August, last year.  I will just take this out, Your Honour.

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: Your Honour, is that De Klerk?

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: The date is 21 August 1996.  This was in Cape Town.  I am going to read what he said.

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: Yes.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: I will read slowly.
"In dealing with the unconventional strategies from the side of the Government, I want to make it clear from the outside that within in my knowledge and experience, they never included the authorisation of assassination, murder, torture, rape, assault or the like.  I have never been part of any decision taken by Cabinet that the State Security Council or any committee authorising, authorising the instructing the commission of such gross violation.
		Nor did I individually directly or indirectly, suggest, order or authorise any such action."
Mr De Klerk said specifically that the State Security Council never ever made it an instruction that human rights could be violated in such a way.

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: I can only react in giving commentary on the following and I will refer you to a case incident in 1993.
I was then falsely blamed, accused that I would have attacked the APLA base in Umtata;  that I gave an instruction to Matiwana, who has now since deceased, and he was also detained, because he gave a false statement.  
	The instruction of this attack was sanctioned by De Klerk personally and it was executed by the Army.  So I cannot see how he can deny it.  He was in command.  He was the State President of the country and he sanctioned it.  Up to this date he has not apologised to me for that.  
	If I can just refer you to Annexure 1.  I don't know how it is numbered in your bundle.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Page 31.

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: Here we have a document of the State Security Council of 10 April 1986 and I believe that he was part of it, I don't know.  I proceed to the second page, paragraph six.
"From the way in which the
revolutionaries and their collaborators are 
using the South African democratic 
institutions and their customs, it is quite 
clear that the security situation would not
 be stabilised without the enforcement and
strengthening of the South African security 
legislation.  The State cannot afford the 
state of emergency and then also 
legislation that gives broader powers to the 
security community."
Then I proceed to paragraph seven.
"Each department has a strategic communication sub-component that would be of assistance in this regard."
Then they have objectives in the same document.  The objective, if you page on, those are Annexure A of the same document.  It's part of the document.  The second page thereof.
"The aim."
Right at the top -
"Restoration, restoring law and order."
Then we page to the next one and then one of the objectives would be, do you have it?

CHAIRPERSON: It is page 36 you're looking at, are you?

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Actually it is page 34 and page 35.

CHAIRPERSON: Page 34 and page 35, yes, thank you.  Now when you were referring to this document which you said is a document of the State Security Council, on page two you read from paragraph seven.  What was the other paragraph you read from on page two?