Amnesty Hearings — Pretoria — 1997-02-27

UNKNOWN: Mr Chairman, I myself was in a fortunate position where I had a liaison with the 
members of the previous regime in the structures which determined the various actions, so I would have 
had a better understanding, but I have no doubt in my mind that the ordinary person, and PRETORIA 
HEARING	AMNESTY/

MR CURRIN: 239	GEN V/

UNKNOWN: by this I am referring to the lay-person who was not involved in this situation by that have understood that 
action should be taken at all costs to combat illegal or violent acts on the regime, on the government of the 
day.

MR CURRIN: What I am trying to now understand and maybe you can help me General, is in a way you 
are saying that one has to take into consideration the subjective mind of the policemen at the time, the 
perpetrator, the circumstances that prevailed, what had been said by politicians at around about that time, 
and weigh up his actions in that context, there are many uncertainties around that as far as I am concerned.  
Were there any implied guidelines, any criteria that you can possibly refer to which would help us to 
understand when a security policeman in that situation is going beyond implied authority that there may 
have been. Is there anything that you can help us to identify those sorts of guidelines that you think would 
have been there by implication?
GEN V/

UNKNOWN: Mr Chairman, definitely not. Over and above saying to you that in all circumstances 
one was to consider what the exceptional approach would be of a certain member and what made him act 
like that because as I said to you there was no policy.  There was never any form of permission granted.  
All I was trying to sketch to you was the factors which lead members to believe that certain things which 
they did were in the interests of the structure of which they were serving.

MR CURRIN: I am going to move off that theme now and go onto another one.	The unlawful attacks 
that I have been referring to, very often after having committed an attack of that nature, we have heard 
about bombings of - petrol 
PRETORIA HEARING	AMNESTY/

MR CURRIN: 240	GEN V/

UNKNOWN: bombings of houses which were committed by the security police and then the impression was created that 
that attack was actually committed by the African National Congress or another liberation movement, was 
it government policy or police policy to do that?
GEN V/

UNKNOWN: Definitely not, Mr Chairman.  As I have already explained there was no policy from 
the police or the government.

MR CURRIN: Not in regard to the attack but in regard to creating the impression that in fact it was the 
ANC that committed that particular attack?
GEN V/

UNKNOWN: Definitely not, Mr Chairman, because in order to do that would have meant that 
necessarily that the government or the authority had to have had knowledge of how those acts were to have 
taken place and that was not the case.

MR CURRIN: I assume there is no record or information anywhere which would help us to know how 
many of those attacks which were laid at the door of the liberation movement were actually committed by 
the security forces?
GEN V/

UNKNOWN: Mr Chairman, I think as the duties of this Committee proceed it would indeed be a 
very good version.  There are also attempts being made on our part to assist this Committee in that regard 
and I think that as soon as it has been completed that there will be a very good indication to that affect.

ADV DE JAGER: General, just to try and clear up this point. You say that there was no such policy but 
that you personally were involved in the Zero Handgrenade attacks. How do you explain your action if it 
was not with the permission or under which circumstances would you be able to PRETORIA HEARING	AMNESTY/

MR CURRIN: 240	GEN V/

UNKNOWN: justify that?
GEN V/

UNKNOWN: Mr Chairman here we spoke generally about general policy. I initially said that there 
were certain acts which took place with the permission of the previous regime and that those very acts 
contributed to the perception which existed in the minds of the workers with regards to such acts, but in 
each case where there was such a doing we took all circumstances into consideration and we tried to 
explain it as fully as possible to you why we did it that way.

MR CURRIN: Following up from that question, in your evidence, I think you referred to two incidents of 
which you are aware, one is the Zero Handgrenade attack and the other was the attack on Zozo house, 
which were both preemptive, unlawful attacks, as we are referring to them at the moment, are those the 
only two specific cases of which you have knowledge?
GEN V/

UNKNOWN: No, Mr Chairman, the only reason why I mentioned these two incidents to this 
Committee was to give you a background around the perceptions which existed and to shed more light on 
that, those are not the only two incidents there are more incidents in which I was involved.

MR CURRIN: And those other matters in which you were involved, and I don't want to get into this 
because I know that you have yourself brought an amnesty application, and in fairness I appreciate that one 
would want to, you would want to deal with your own amnesty application in your own time, but having 
said that, may I assume that you will be referring to those other incidents when you bring your own 
amnesty application?
GEN V/

UNKNOWN: That is correct, Mr Chairman.
PRETORIA HEARING	AMNESTY/

MR CURRIN: 241	GEN V/

MR CURRIN: If the Committee would - I am not going to ask any more questions about that.  
	I would now like us to talk about the State Security Council and we would like as detailed 
information as possible from you, on the workings of the State Security council, how it featured politically 
and with regard to power and in regard to instructions and the whole question of instructions and line of 
command from, for example, if one were to go down from a Divisional Commissioner to the 
Commissioner to the Minister and then to the State Security Council, how that line of command actually 
functioned and possibly fill us in on that?  Thank you.
GEN V/

UNKNOWN: Honourable Chairman, I am going to try my best but I would like to tell you from the 
word go that the State Security Council with all its structures formed the concept of M-
dealings(?)(indelings)? and I am going to try and give it to you as briefly as possible where I was involved. 
I might say to you that it may not be complete and it may not be completely correct because from time to 
time there were many changes made to the structure, but to the best of my ability I will attempt to assist 
you.

ADV DE JAGER: General, you refer to M-dealings (indelings)? to dissertations, could you just refer to an 
authority in this regard?

ADV DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, perhaps I can help you there, I am in possession of Prof van der 
Merwe's Doctorate thesis which is a document of approximately 300 pages when I was of the opinion that I 
together with - I would deal with it with Captain van Jaarsveld and I have already given it to him and if the 
Committee would like I would make it available to the Committee, Mr Chairman.
PRETORIA HEARING	AMNESTY/

MR CURRIN: 242	GEN V/

HASSAN MALL: I think that when you are preparing that if it is possible to prepare what is called an 
"organogram" setting out the structures.

ADV DU PLESSIS: Yes, Mr Chairman, we have various organograms in respect of various phases of the 
period, so we are compiling that information, we will make it available to you.

HASSAN MALL: Thank you very much and I say that because it might avoid the necessity of calling a host 
of other witnesses on that matter.

ADV DU PLESSIS: Yes, that is why it was important to call Captain van Jaarsveld, he will be able to give 
evidence about that whole issue.

HASSAN MALL: Thank you.
GEN V/