Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1999-08-16

CHAIRPERSON: Now you were told by my colleague, there doesn't seem to be any logic in this because in the kwaMashu killing, that took place within your jurisdiction.  How did you agree to that?  Why did you allow that to happen?  You would have had to investigate that yourself.

S G DU PREEZ: That's correct, Chairperson, but it was more a question of what our plan was at that stage.  Certainly I could have done it in the Durban area, but it was just a decision that was taken on that day, that it would be done outside.

CHAIRPERSON: How did you go to Bulwer?

S G DU PREEZ: In a vehicle, a Nissan Skyline.

CHAIRPERSON: Just you and Wasserman and Ninela?

S G DU PREEZ: That's correct, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Nobody else?

S G DU PREEZ: That's correct, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: When did you become aware of Ninela's activities as a trade unionist, or did you never become aware of that?

S G DU PREEZ: No, I was never aware of it Chairperson.  As I've already said, after reading these statements last Thursday, it was the first time I recalled that I had arrested him before this incident.

CHAIRPERSON: What was it that you had arrested him for?

S G DU PREEZ: Chairperson, I cannot recall exactly.  I think it was for Trade Union activities.  I am not certain. As far as I can recall it was in the Sibelo Ngobe matter.
May I just mention, during that time there were many arrests executed and persons who were detained and the reason why I would have arrested him was in many cases would be a whole series of arrests and everybody would be involved.  A list of names would be given out and those people had to be arrested.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you know the people who had eventually arrested him and brought him to Taylor?

S G DU PREEZ: No, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Have you never found out who did it?

S G DU PREEZ: I never asked.   During consultation with the attorney and the advocate I read one of the statements and he said he was the person who had arrested him, I did not know this beforehand.

MR LAX: Sorry Chair, just one thing for the record.  Mr Visser suggested to you, Mr du Preez, that this person was detained in terms of the emergency regulations.  It is clear from the documents that he was detained in terms of Section 29.  Now that would have placed him in a very different category of persons, had he been detained in terms of Section 29.  You'd be very familiar with that section, I'm sure.

S G DU PREEZ: That's correct, Chairperson.

MR LAX: And that Section pertains to activities in terms of the Internal Security Act, but activities which, to use the old terminology, would have been terrorism.

S G DU PREEZ: Not necessarily, Chairperson.

MR LAX: I defer to your better knowledge because my recollection is a bit vague of that specific section.  Was that not the section that dealt with people involved in armed activities of one kind or another, of was it a general section?

S G DU PREEZ: It was not necessarily arms struggle.  It could be usurpation of the government as well.

MR LAX: Yes, I'll leave it at that.  I just thought for the record it's better to be clear that it was a Section 29 rather emergency detention.

MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, would you allow me, flowing from the questions by the Panel, to attempt to clarify two issues?

CHAIRPERSON: Certainly.

MR VISSER: But before I do so, may I just say, Mr Chairman, our understanding of the provisions of Section 29 of the Internal Security Act was that it was to arrest and detain a person, whom there was a reasonable suspicion that he had information, about
anything.  It could have been terrorism, it could have been all sorts of things, as long as it fell within the ambit of the Internal Security Act.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR VISSER: Mr du Preez, the fact of the matter is, you testified that Mr Ninela was shot in the head by Wasserman.

S G DU PREEZ: That's correct, Chairperson.

MR VISSER: So he had a hole in his head?

S G DU PREEZ: That's correct, Chairperson.

MR VISSER: The case with the kwaMashu 3, and I would not like to run through the whole thing again, but in the case of the kwaMashu 3, was this a case where the persons were sent to a specified place with an instruction to go and blow it up?

S G DU PREEZ: That is correct.  It is a place that they decided upon.

MR VISSER: Can you recall who was the person who sent them?

S G DU PREEZ: I am not certain.

MR VISSER: That's part of the record in the Ncwini case.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, we don't want to burden this record with that.

MR VISSER: That is correct, Chairperson.  Thank you, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you very much, you are excused.
WITNESS EXCUSED