Amnesty Hearings — Port Elizabeth — 1997-09-30

ADV FORD: What about somebody who believes, who has turned, 
as you say Mgoduka and the others have done, who has turned and 
he is feeding information to the other side, you know that he is 
feeding information.  He doesn't know that you know, you can feed 
him disinformation and he will in turn feed it to the people whom he 
is working for, would you agree with that?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: That is correct.

ADV FORD: And it is vitally important to have such a person, 
would you agree with that?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: That is correct, but I can explain that it can 
cause an additional problem.

ADV FORD: What is that?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: That is that the ANC will realise that we have 
knowledge or that we know that he is a double agent and they will 
use him any more.

ADV FORD: But you can make good use of him before that 
happens, surely Mr Nieuwoudt?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: Yes, it could be, I am just posing an example.

ADV FORD: Well, then you don't kill such a person, you use him, 
don't you?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: It is so, but I did not decide to have him killed.

ADV POTGIETER: And Mr Nieuwoudt, if the other side finds out 
that this person, that the opposite side knows that he is a double 
agent, it is not your problem, it is a problem for them, isn't it?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: It is a problem for them and they had to make 
a plan with him.

ADV POTGIETER: In other words, it is not necessary for you to 
provide him with disinformation because he has no purpose?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: That is correct.

ADV FORD: And if he has become worthless Mr Nieuwoudt, then 
there is no point in killing him, is there?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: I am repeating, I did not make that decision to 
kill them.

ADV FORD: You then say in paragraph 26 of your affidavit, at 
330, Mr Nieuwoudt, I started to intensively monitor these four 
members and it indicated that Mgoduka and Charles Jack was 
recruited by Godji Skenyana.  What do you mean you intensively 
monitored them?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: I used sources on them, I monitored their post, 
I infiltrated their friends.  All those things, all those intelligence 
operations I used.

ADV FORD: Well you are already tapping their phones, you are 
already intercepting their post, what else did you do?

ADV BOOYENS: No, with respect, I think this far the evidence 
was only Mgoduka's post was monitored and his phone.

ADV FORD: Is that so Mr Nieuwoudt?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: That is correct.

ADV FORD: Did you then start monitoring the post of all four of 
them?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: That is correct.  All of them and their friends 
as well.

ADV FORD: This information which you say confirmed beyond all 
doubt that they had been recruited, where did that come from.

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: From an informer who lived in Lesotho very 
near to Skenyana.  He was a trained person, he was an agent.

ADV FORD: Did you speak to that man or that person personally?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: No, he was handled on the same basis on my 
network.  And other people, my associates, went in where they 
debriefed him.

ADV FORD: Did you have any reason, or was there any way of 
being certain that this wasn't disinformation that you were being fed 
to cause problems in the Security Branch in Port Elizabeth?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: No, I did not have any reason to believe that.

ADV FORD: What I am suggesting to you Mr Nieuwoudt, is that it 
might well have been the ANC or whoever was on the other side, 
feeding you disinformation to cause problems in your Security 
Branch?  Did you investigate that possibility?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: As I have already mentioned, I believed that 
they were involved, that they were recruited, that is what I believed. 
 That is how I saw that.

ADV FORD: You have told the Commission that already.  I am 
asking you what your basis was for having such a firm belief.  
Whether you thought of investigating the possibility of 
disinformation?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: As I have already told you, I don't think it 
could have been disinformation.  The evidence was that my 
informers were eliminated.  Some of them were detained in Quatro.  
That was why I believed.

ADV FORD: But you made no attempt to confirm that in any other 
way?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: No, I was sure that the information I obtained 
from that informer was positive.  His information was evaluated and 
therefore I had no reason to doubt his information.

ADV FORD: Mr Nieuwoudt, then at page 331, you state that two 
weeks prior to 16 December 1989, they are talking about Godji 
contacted Warrant Officer Mgoduka to identify a South African 
Police vehicle for the purpose to attach a limpet mine underneath 
this vehicle.  Do I understand that Mgoduka was to do no more than 
identify the police motor vehicle?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: That was the information we obtained.  That 
these four people had to identify the vehicle.  Mgoduka was the 
principle person in this regard.  What instructions he gave, I did not 
know.

ADV FORD: But there was no question of them personally putting 
a limpet mine under the motor vehicle, they were only going to 
identify it.?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: That was so.

ADV FORD: Did you every tell anybody that your information was 
that they were going to blow a motor vehicle up by use of a limpet 
mine?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: As I remember, I conveyed the report to 
Brigadier Gilbert, the report about what they were involved in.

ADV FORD: My question is have you ever told anybody that they 
personally were going to blow up a police motor vehicle?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: As I have already said I told Gilbert that.

ADV FORD: But that wasn't your information, your information 
was that they were going to identify the motor vehicle?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: That is correct, but I believe what the informer 
said that they would provide a limpet mine to them on the 16th of 
December to show their solidarity and also to test them.

ADV FORD: Are you making this up as you go along Mr 
Nieuwoudt, because this isn't contained in your application?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: No, no.

ADV FORD: All you are talking about here is Mgoduka to identify 
a South African Police vehicle with the purposes of putting a limpet 
mine under this vehicle.

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: It is so, here I have stated that who would 
place the limpet mine, I don't know, but the purpose was to put a 
limpet mine under this vehicle.

ADV FORD: But that was precisely why, because it was unclear 
here why I asked you moments ago, if the only information was that 
they would identify a police motor vehicle, not place the bomb 
themselves and you agreed with that?  Are you changing that now?

GIDEON JOHANNES NIEUWOUDT: No, for those purposes.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, sorry, I don't understand this argument.  
You divide that sentence into two parts Mr Ford?

ADV FORD: That is so Mr Chairman, and I am leading with the 
question that I asked him.

CHAIRPERSON: Why did you divide that sentence into two 
independent portions?

ADV FORD: No, Mr Chairman, I asked him to do that.  I asked 
him if his information was only that they would identify the motor 
vehicle and not personally be involved in the bombing and he 
confirmed, because it was unclear, that is why I asked him.  He 
confirmed that and now he is saying Mr Chairman ... (intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: It doesn't matter to me what his answer is.  If the 
question was not on a proper footing, it doesn't matter to me what 
his answer is.  I am worried about the only, you say to us that you 
asked him whether that was the only thing that had to be done.

ADV FORD: Yes, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: But you knew that the sentence didn't end up 
there, you knew that it went further to say that, to state the 
purpose.