Special Hearings — Armed Forces Hearings — 1997-10-08

MR GOOSEN: But as Chief of the South African Defence Force, an Officer who was under your command, under your direct command at that stage, for him to have formulated a plan.  We are not talking about a person who is not in an insignificant position, he is the Officer Commanding Special Forces reporting directly to you, for an Officer in that position to formulate a plan which involved the deployment of Special Forces in support of the South African Police in a covert manner, to eliminate identified targets, to kill identified targets, inside the country, would that have been an unreasonable plan to formulate, or in the circumstances of the time, a reasonable plan to formulate?

JOHANNES JAKOBUS GELDENHUYS: Mr Chairman, I repeat that to put that kind of question to me during this enquiry and not during an amnesty enquiry, is unreasonable.
 We were informed that the nature of this hearing will not be about accountability or about accepting blame, but regarding motives and perceptions.  When we work with subjective perceptions associated with culpability, this is an unattainable situation.

MR COETZEE: Various letters also sent by the Commission in this regard, specifically emphasising the point that the witness has now made.  If necessary I can refer to the documentation if it is necessary, but I don't think it needs to.

MR GOOSEN: Mr Chairperson, with respect, we are dealing with the motives and perspectives of key personnel in the South African Defence Force, former South African Defence Force, in an endeavour as has been adequately explained by the Chairperson at the commencement of these proceedings, both yesterday and today, that what we are endeavouring ... (intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Goosen, the question is fair.  The question is fair, we have been - you have been given a context in which the conversation or the request or the indirection between you and General Joubert took place and I think the question now is not ... (intervention)

MR COETZEE: May I just advise my client.  My client does not want to answer the question, may I just advise him as to answering the question.

MR GOOSEN: Sorry Mr Coetzee before you do, just take cognisance of paragraph 2 of the subpoena.  The Chairperson is basically saying that the question falls within the purview of paragraph 2 of the subpoena.

MR COETZEE: I will look at the paragraph and advise my client duly.  I have advised my client, and he is prepared to answer the question at this stage.

JOHANNES JAKOBUS GELDENHUYS: Mr Chairman, my answer is as follows.  General Joubert could make his own conclusions from what I have meant, but I did not authorise those actions.

MR GOOSEN: You have answered it without answering it.  The question is in formulating the plan, was that a reasonable thing for him to have done or not?  I didn't ask you whether you had approved it, I asked you whether you would think that him formulating the plan was reasonable, or not?

JOHANNES JAKOBUS GELDENHUYS: Mr Chairman, when General Joubert discussed this with me during this occasion he referred to and I gave him an answer, there was no operational plan in place including these type of actions.  His plan at that stage did not boil down to more than the fact that he would use people from the Special Forces and would provide them to the South African Police to support them during operations and requests by the South African Police.
 It was not explained as it was done here, during this hearing today.  He said himself that he shortly explained this plan to me and this is why I am saying, this shortly refers to how the men would be allocated to commands to support the Police and I said that it sounded good.   Afterwards, according to General Joubert's own version, other procedures took place, other things happened in the development of his plan.

MR GOOSEN: General Geldenhuys, I didn't ask you whether he presented a plan, whether it was the same plan that was testified here today, whether you approved the plan or whether you didn't approve the plan, I asked you whether on the basis of the testimony given today, the plan that he says he prepared, that he says he presented to you, we can come to that just now, but the plan that he had prepared, was that a reasonable plan or not?  That is the question?

JOHANNES JAKOBUS GELDENHUYS: Mr Chairman, the plan he mentioned today Mr Chairman?

MR GOOSEN: Yes.

MR COETZEE: May I advise my client as to answering the question?

CHAIRPERSON: What he is saying, I don't want to go that far.

MR COETZEE: I am not telling the witness what to say.

CHAIRPERSON: I take your integrity as a colleague.

JOHANNES JAKOBUS GELDENHUYS: Mr Chairman, I have read General Joubert's application.  In that he described what his perception was regarding the situation and the methods required in the situation.
 If he understood it like that as he conveyed it today, I can understand retrospectively that he could have reasonably, could have interpreted it like that based on his frame of reference.

MR GOOSEN: So I take it then that you are in fact saying that on the basis of his testimony, that it was a plan reasonably thought out by him at the time?

JOHANNES JAKOBUS GELDENHUYS: Yes, Mr Chairman.

MR GOOSEN: Thank you.  Now he testified that he indicated that he had presented the plan to you and that you had approved it in the manner in which he set out in his amnesty application.  Do I understand from the answer that you gave when you were not answering the previous question, that you agree that he did present to you a plan but not necessarily a plan in the terms in which he has given evidence today?  In other words that it involved the elimination of individuals, but a plan for the deployment of Special Forces in support of the South African Police.  Did he present such a plan to you?

JOHANNES JAKOBUS GELDENHUYS: Mr Chairman, I am being asked a question about something which has happened during a social occasion, 11 years ago.  And I really can't give any specific particulars as I have already said what I can remember about that plan, it was no detailed operational plan as we usually used to do that, but it was a plan regarding the allocation of men from the Special Forces to various commands to support the South African Police.

MR GOOSEN: Thank you.  General Joubert testified that after he had from his perception, obtained your approval for the plan, that certain operations were carried out.  Now we didn't get into the details in relation to those operations, because that was the agreement we are not dealing with the substantive matters for which amnesty was sought by or is sought by General Joubert.
 But he stated in his evidence that certain operations were in fact carried out in accordance with the plan that he formulated.  And he further testified that at a certain point, it was established that the proper authorisation as he had envisaged, had not been obtained from the South African Police, and in consequence thereof a discussion then ensued about the putting into place of a procedure to deal with approval of such operations.  Do you agree with him that there was in fact such a discussion about putting into place an appropriate procedure to deal with such operations?

JOHANNES JAKOBUS GELDENHUYS: Yes, Mr Chairman.

MR GOOSEN: And do you also agree with him that the discussion about that procedure, followed as a consequence of it coming to your attention, that a particular operation which involved the elimination of an individual, had been carried out?

JOHANNES JAKOBUS GELDENHUYS: Yes, Mr Chairman.