Amnesty Hearings — Port Elizabeth — 1997-10-01

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Yes, the commanding officer of C Section, Brig Schoon informed me about the qualifications and requirements to become a commanding officer and that on an annual basis there was a conference between the head of Section C and the head of security and the Commissioner and also the Minister of Police to decide whether you, as commander, still complied with the requirements posed. In other words, were you still politically speaking, a fit person for the job and could still be trusted.

MR HUGO: Mr De Kock, you say on page 15 that there could possibly be a perception that you are an arch racist and that your actions were in essence aimed at prejudicing the Black population and you say that that is in fact not true and that in fact you were prepared to kill people like Dirk Coetzee and that you knew about certain operations that were planned against Marius Schoon, Ronnie Kasrils and Joe Slovo and that you were involved in actions against Peter Vale, and that the only thing that was important to you, was the protection of the State's interests and not racism as such?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Yes. I just want to expand further.  All my units were Black, all the units in which I served which I helped to establish and where I and some of my colleagues fought on the ground, there were no races, there were only members of the unit or there were no Whites or Blacks.

MR HUGO: Mr De Kock, perhaps at this stage we should address the issue of why you are here today. Is it correct that when the Motherwell trial was continuing, you were involved in your own trial?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Correct.

MR HUGO: And from Press clippings you became aware that the accused in the Motherwell trial were denying that they were involved in any way in this operation?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: That's correct.

MR HUGO: During your trial you never denied any of the allegations against you and you gave instructions to your advocates to simply test the allegations?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Yes.

MR HUGO: At that stage you realised that it was essential that the truth should emerge once and for all?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: That is correct.

MR HUGO: And you realised that the Motherwell trial would probably lead to a finding of not guilty or acquittal should you not or somebody else not testify and let the true facts emerge?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: I may just qualify that, Chairperson.  I wasn't sure of what the outcome would be. However, there was a catalyst in that case, and that is when Genl Van Rensburg applied for an interdict in the Cape Supreme Court to the effect that his name should not be mentioned in incidents, and I had sympathy for that.  But once again, we have a case where the generals are running away from the truth, and the time had come to let them answer for their deeds.

MR HUGO: And at that stage you approached me, specifically, I was your attorney and you requested me to contact the Attorney-General?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Correct.

MR HUGO: And what did you want me to convey to him?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: That was I was now prepared to co-operate fully and to the best of my ability and to furnish all information which I had, regarding the past and which would reveal the truth about the past.  So the matter could be put to rest, especially for the sake of the families who suffered.

MR HUGO: Is it true that there was contact between yourself and the Attorney-General by means of myself and that led to your testifying in the Motherwell trial?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Correct.

MR HUGO: After the Motherwell trial, you were given indemnity in terms of Section 204 of the Criminal Procedure Act. Is that correct?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Yes.

MR HUGO: And meanwhile you have learnt that the civil claims arising from this incident, have also been settled?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Correct.

MR HUGO: Could you tell the honourable Committee why did you feel it necessary to come and give evidence here today?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Firstly, let us put all the facts on the table and let us expose the people who gave the actual orders. I think that should be seen as the point of departure.  The finger should now be pointed towards the upper hierarchy and also to display my sympathy and empathy with the families. I would like to speak to them later.

MR HUGO: Whilst we are dealing with this issue, is it true that there is a need on your part to show your sympathy with the families?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Yes.  For what it is worth, I have an understanding of their pain and their needs, and understand the pain they have in losing their family, because I am in a similar situation.  Although not quite so traumatic, in the sense that there is no point of return.

MR HUGO: On page 16 of your application you say that you are intending to during the hearing of your amnesty hearing,  to make concrete proposals which would go further than simply apologising towards the families.  Would you perhaps like to elaborate on this?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: The idea, Chairperson, must still be thought through properly, is that I think a person has been busy writing a book, it would not be an academic treatise, but it would deal with life on the ground and should this book be written and should there be any profit, that this money be put in a trust fund and that the families on both sides of the spectrum, perhaps benefit from that fund.  That some kind of help be given to families on both sides of the spectrum.  Especially to the youth. One would focus oneself on the youth. And perhaps there would be a second book.  I have ascertained that there is a need for such a book.

MR HUGO: Is it correct that you feel that this would be a small gesture from your side to try and promote reconciliation?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Yes, it is minimal but it is all that I can do at this stage.

MR HUGO: Mr De Kock, we have already dealt with the events which gave rise to your testifying in the criminal trial locally. I would like to now deal with the events during the Motherwell incident.  But before I turn to that, I would like to touch on some issues regarding the milieu and circumstances existing at that time in the police.
	You have heard that on occasion it was put to Genl Van Rensburg that these incidents happened during the Harmse Commission of Inquiry. Can you recall that?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Yes.

MR HUGO: Can you tell us whether the Harmse Commission had already commenced or whether it was still the run-up to the Harmse Commission, when the Motherwell incident took place?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: I am not certain of that fact, but the Harmse Commission, if I remember correctly, was already a real entity. It was foreseen.

MR HUGO: Is it true that shortly before these happenings in December of 1989, you had already been put on special leave?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Correct.

MR HUGO: And you were placed on special leave because in all probability you were the chief role-player during the investigation, which was to be launched at that time?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Correct.

MR HUGO: You then say in your application, and we are dealing with the events, that Brig Van Rensburg summoned you to his office at a particular point. Now could you tell us with greater detail what the date was and I am referring specifically to page 57(b).

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Unfortunately I can't give the specific date and that's why I said it just happened one day.

MR HUGO: However, at that stage you were already on special leave?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Yes, that is correct.

MR HUGO: Can you recall where you were when Van Rensburg contacted you?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: No. I don't have a fixed recollection of that and I don't want to speculate, but we all had radio tracking devices, or Vlakplaas could perhaps have been contacted, but I don't want to speculate in case I am wrong.