Amnesty Hearings — Bloemfontein — 1997-03-27

JUDGE WILSON: That is not what he said, Mr Mpshe.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: What did you say, Mr de Ru, about Security Branch?

MR DE RU: Your Honour, I said that there were Security Branches, but I mentioned that the investigations were done by the Security Branch.

ADV DE JAGER: If I understand you correctly, as soon as the political deed was committed, for example a policeman's house had been burnt down and it was, the political will was manifested the - or for example where a person would be murdered or a house would be set alight, the investigators or the investigative team would investigate and then establish the political motive if there was, if it was a political action.

MR DE RU: You are absolutely correct.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Then after the establishment whether the crime was committed as a political motivation, what would then investigators do?

MR DE RU: Do I understand you correctly if you want to know what would the Investigative Team do as far as the detectives are concerned?  I do not understand your question when wanting to know what would the Investigative Team do.  Are you referring to the Security Branch or the Investigative Unit?

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: I will rephrase that.  As a Committee member said to you, a crime is committed, houses burnt down or whatever, your team, the investigators would be on the scene, the police, and investigate and check whether this
action was politically motivated.  Is that what you said?  Good.  Now if you establish that it has been politically motivated, there is a political motivation in the whole crime, what do you do with that particular incident?

MR DE RU: We take it to court.  It would not be given back to the Security Branch, it remained with the Investigative Branch.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Colonel Voigt, how long did you know him?

MR DE RU: Since 1983.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Did you two belong to the same political organisation?

MR DE RU: I am only aware that Colonel Voigt's political view was very, very much affiliated to the right.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Did you have instances where you would sit with him for long periods discussing politics or political issues?

MR DE RU: Yes, as I already testified, Colonel Voigt and I were very good friends and comrades as well as colleagues.  I have already illustrated to you that I was his greatest confidante.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: What amount of influence did he have on you?

MR DE RU: As a police officer he had a great influence on me.  He was a very intelligent and a very competent detective in my eyes and, I believe, in the eyes of most detectives.  He was regarded as one of the best in the country.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: And I will be correct to state that he, that is Colonel Voigt, was also attached to the criminal, was also attached to the criminal investigation team?

MR DE RU: He was our District Investigative, Detective Officer, he was our Chief.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Now, you testified that you were convinced that you were shooting a political activist.  Do you remember that?

MR DE RU: That is correct.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Now, how convinced were you that he was a political activist?  What made you be so convinced?

MR DE RU: The crime which was committed, your Honour.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Did you have, did you have any information about him that made you conclude that this was, he was a political activist?

MR DE RU: Only my belief in that and the fact that I was informed that attacks of this nature were politically motivated.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: I see.

JUDGE WILSON: Which one are you talking about?

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: The first one, Mr Chairman, I am sorry, Johannes Rampalile.  My apology.  So you came to this conclusion that, that led to the death of this man on your belief?

MR DE RU: I believed, your Honour.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: And I would certainly be right to state that your belief is based on what you generally heard?

MR DE RU: Yes, and as I testified, also in what was conveyed to me by Colonel Voigt.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Yes, now moving to this second incident, the killing of Zachariah Mofokeng, is it correct that Colonel Voigt was not involved in this one?  In other words you did not get any instruction from him or any order to get - I am sorry.

MR DE RU: Your Honour, as I testified and as I indicated, if I was to have proceeded with the other bit of evidence, that this was an instruction which emanated from Colonel
Voigt.  Not just the isolated case of Kroonstad or an isolated incident, it was an instruction from him that he was involving me in all investigations with regards to the murder of farmers and aged people, the attacks and the robberies committed against them.  I also mentioned to you that I investigated several of those matters.

ADV DE JAGER: Can you give us a possible indication with regards to that period of time, how many attacks there were more or less?

MR DE RU: I would love to give the Committee the exact amount and I tried to get the Investigative Team to give me the statistics, but circumstances did not grant me access to statistics, but I can tell you that there were tens of them, there were scores of attacks and I did ask them, but I assume that it was not possible for them to obtain that information for me.  I, personally, was involved in scores of them.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Will you please look at your statement, page 17 thereof, paragraph three, paragraph three starting from line ten.  For convenience I will read that, page 17, paginated, paragraph three, starting from line ten.
"Detective Officer Nel said that he, when he was
		last working at Internal Stability, had last shot a Black person then".  
Would I be correct to state that this statement indicates that the desire was to kill a Black man?

MR DE RU: That is probably as far as Captain Nel was concerned.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Yes.

MR DE RU: It was probably a desire on his part.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Good.

MR DE RU: It would be difficult for me to tell you what his desires were.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Good and that desire came about as a result of the question that you people were to take this man out for further investigation?

MR DE RU: Your Honour, I am not sure if I understand the question very well.  Could you please rephrase that for me?

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Alright.  The desire was in Sergeant Nel's mind at the time when discussion took place, took place amongst yourselves inasfar as the taking out of this man for investigation was concerned.  In other words it is linked to taking him out.

MR DE RU: That is correct.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Good.

JUDGE WILSON: Well, it was linked, if one reads your statement more correctly, to the discussion about who was going to shoot him, was it not?  The lines before is ...

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Yes.

JUDGE WILSON: "... the other members argued over whose turn it should have been to take out the suspect and in case he was to attempt anything which was to look like an escape so that he could
			be shot".
So, the three of you were discussing the shooting with, of him and it was then that Sergeant Nel said, it was some time since he last shot a Black man.  He knew you were discussing taking out this Black man and shooting him.  That is the position, is it not?

MR DE RU: Your summary is completely correct, your Honour.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Thank you.  The next sentence that follows, two sentences down, starting with,
"I also believed that this criminal was also influenced by youth leaders and political leaders to kill aged and farmers and to rob them and to assault them".
Will I be correct if I state that you referred to him here as a criminal who has been influenced by the youth and political leaders?

MR DE RU: Yes, as I said, that is correct.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Good.  Now, will I be correct to state that if he was then influenced, it does not necessarily make him an, a political activist?  Would that be right?