Amnesty Hearings — Pretoria — 1996-07-01

JEAN DU PLESSIS: No, the NSP were not designed to appear in public as such. The whole aim was to remain an underground association.  So without the co-operation of the other organisations it would have failed utterly, because in the end we would have had to mobilise the people of the country.

UNKNOWN: Thank you very much, Mr Chairman, I have no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR PRINSLOO

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: Mr Du Plessis, I assume that - or let me put it to you this way.  The vehicle that was stolen, was it going to, was it envisaged that it would ever at some stage be returned to its owner?

JEAN DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, we envisaged that in the end of the day, just like there was done during the Second World War when for instance, German tanks went into France, IOUs were given at the petrol stations. I envisaged that full compensation at the end of such a war would be done to anybody who made sacrifices or who lost some of their possessions or whatever.

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: But you didn't know the owner thereof, did you?

JEAN DU PLESSIS: I beg your pardon?

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: You did not know the owner of the vehicle?

JEAN DU PLESSIS: No, I didn't know the owner of the vehicle.

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: How would you have compensated him?

JEAN DU PLESSIS: Well, our end objective was to take control of the entire country, which would have meant that we would have been in a position of power, which would have meant that we would have had the media and various other aspects to our disposal, and to those means we would have been able to contact all the people that were damaged through these operations.

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: Is the truth not that you simply regarded him as one of those people who might fall victim in the process, must become victims in the process of your struggle?

JEAN DU PLESSIS: Is the truth ...?

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: Is the truth not that you simply regarded the owner of that vehicle to be one of those people who must become victims to your struggle?

JEAN DU PLESSIS: Yes, I did feel that it was a price that somebody had to pay, to help us along with our objectives. However, I did envisage that some time if we did get to a position of power, we would be able to compensate them.

JUDGE WILSON: Didn't you say that you thought that would take 25 to 30 years?

JEAN DU PLESSIS: Well, the ... (intervention).

JUDGE WILSON: Isn't that what you said in your evidence? That's when you thought when you would, how long it would take?

JEAN DU PLESSIS: The plan internationally, was a 25 to 30 year plan, that is correct.

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: And did you really have to steal somebody's car?

JEAN DU PLESSIS: Yes, Mr Chairman, without that car we would have been without any transport and would not have been able to do any of our further operations, because we could not get hold of somebody to donate a car to us at that stage.

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: The various points that you visited prior to the theft of this car, what were you using?

JEAN DU PLESSIS: We only went on one operation prior to the theft of that car and we used a vehicle that one of the supporting people had borrowed to us, had lent to us.

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: Now earlier on when some questions were put to you, you suggested that the death of the people in Louis Trichardt was not contemplated by yourself or that it could not be justified.

JEAN DU PLESSIS: Yes.  I feel that the people that died there, died unnecessarily and that they were innocent victims and because they are innocent, it cannot politically be justified.  However, the organisation was to as an organisation to an extent, responsible for those deaths.

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: But you also said that you envisaged that in the course of what you said will be a war situation, you expected that victims or rather civilians could be killed?

JEAN DU PLESSIS: As an unfortunate event in all wars, innocent people do die.

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: And at the time of the killing of the three people at Louis Trichardt, a war situation had not yet materialised?

JEAN DU PLESSIS: That's correct.

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: When would that materialise?

JEAN DU PLESSIS: Well, we thought that once a Black government would come to power or once we could get to such a position where we could actively start mobilising the White people in general, that there would become such a great conflict situation, that one would be able to call it a war, a civil war.

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: Why did you - why were you against this operation?

JEAN DU PLESSIS: Why was I against the theft of these weapons?

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: Yes. Yes, I thought you said when White suggested stealing these weapons from this particular place, you were against this idea but later you felt that you had turned down previously a few of the suggestions, and this time you felt that you would let him go ahead with hit. Is that what you said?

JEAN DU PLESSIS: No, what I said was that on three occasions I had turned down the operations. I had stopped the operations before we went over to the deed, and I felt under obligation at that stage. When White came to me with the idea that these weapons should be stolen, I gave in to the idea and I gave my approval that these weapons should be stolen.

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: Yes, but initially you said you were reluctant?

JEAN DU PLESSIS: Yes, I felt reluctant in the sense that it was civilians and as far as possible we wanted to only steal and direct our operations towards the security forces and what I called the money powers.

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: Wasn't one of the reasons why you initially were reluctant, the realisation on your part that civilians might be - in that particular house, might be injured or killed?

JEAN DU PLESSIS: Well, when I asked White whether it would be a difficult operation, he gave me the assurance that it would be a very simple operation, where they would just be able to go in, steal the weapons and come out.  And that took away my fears that anything could go wrong.

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: Yes, just tell us what your views are as of now, with regards to the use of violence?

JEAN DU PLESSIS: I am totally against any form of violence.

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: Thank you, Mr Chairperson.

JUDGE WILSON: Mr Du Plessis, you told us, I think, that White was a very big strong man physically.

JEAN DU PLESSIS: That's correct.

JUDGE WILSON: An easily recognisable man.

JEAN DU PLESSIS: That is correct.

JUDGE WILSON: And he was on very good terms with the people of Louis Trichardt?

JEAN DU PLESSIS: That is correct.

JUDGE WILSON: He visited their home and he knew that the guns would be found?

JEAN DU PLESSIS: That's right.

JUDGE WILSON: And they lived on a farm or smallholding.

JEAN DU PLESSIS: That is right.

JUDGE WILSON: And I put it to you, Mr Du Plessis, that it is the invariable custom in this country of ours, that on farms and smallholdings, Blacks are employed about the house.

JEAN DU PLESSIS: That is correct.

JUDGE WILSON: So White would have been going to a house where there were Black servants who may well have seen him before?

JEAN DU PLESSIS: That is possible, yes.

JUDGE WILSON: It was certain, wasn't it? Unless there had been a change of servants just before.

JEAN DU PLESSIS: Well, I wasn't thoroughly familiar with the exact details of the place, and of the people.

JUDGE WILSON: You know the practice in our country.

JEAN DU PLESSIS: Yes, I am well aware of that.

JUDGE WILSON: Yes.  And we know that the plan was for White to go there during the daytime.

JEAN DU PLESSIS: That is correct.

JUDGE WILSON: And the servant would have recognised him and your whole plot would have come unstuck, if she was left alive or he was left alive?

JEAN DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, wearing camouflage uniform and having a balaclava over your head, plus gloves, I believe you become totally unrecognisable.