Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1999-08-25

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: Chairperson, what Botha had explained to me I concurred with that if this had to become known, these arrests, these detentions, I agreed with him that it would be a great embarrassment for the government and that it would endanger the entire matter.

CHAIRPERSON: But why should the arrest and illegal detention of people for a few days become a great embarrassment to the government?  Hadn't South Africa become notorious throughout the world for detaining people?

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: I think it was precisely at that stage that it was such a big thing that the security branch was the target of the press.

CHAIRPERSON: ...(inaudible) and if the government had said if we'd been told we knew nothing about this, it would be the security branch who would be greatly embarrassed, not the government, wouldn't it?

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: That too, Chairperson, but there had been negotiations under way.

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: And as I understand it, I have not heard all the evidence, I have heard what's been said here, your seniors were wanting to keep it quiet by not telling anybody about all this, did you know that?

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: I accepted it like that, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: By your seniors I meant Botha and Steyn, they didn't go higher up the ladder, they concealed it from their own seniors, they concealed it from headquarters?

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: I'm sure they would have done it like that but they would not have taken it higher up.

CHAIRPERSON: You are sure they would have done it like that?  They would not have taken - they discover Operation Vula, they arrest persons who can give vital information about it and you are sure they would have kept it and not taken it higher up, is that what you say?

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: I accepted that they would not take it higher up, I could not see the necessity for it.

CHAIRPERSON: But Operation Vula was an enormous operation wasn't it?

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: Chairperson, I am talking about the arrests, the unlawful detentions.

CHAIRPERSON: Of the people who had supplied the information about Operation Vula, they weren't pocket pickers and things of that nature.  As I understand your evidence it was after Shabalala's arrest after they were taken to the safe house Ndaba told Botha about Operation Vula and Botha came out and told you?

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: That is correct, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: And that was an operation of great magnitude?

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: Correct Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: When Nyanda was arrested, I think I'm right in saying a very efficient communication system was found in the house?

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: That is correct, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: All matters of great importance and these people were sources of that information?

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: That is correct, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: And you accept that Botha and Steyn would not have told their superiors, would not have told security headquarters they had unearthed this and that they had potential witnesses?

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: No Chairperson, I did not think that Botha would not say this to headquarters.  The information they certainly would have conveyed.  I am talking about the unlawful detention of these people that they would not convey it.

CHAIRPERSON: But surely - you keep saying that, these people were the source of that information, the fact that you had people that could supply such information was of great importance, wasn't it?

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: Chairperson, in headquarters they probably only would have said that they had information, headquarters would not have asked where does this information come from, who are these people.

MR LAX: Surely in a situation where there is this huge conspiracy, okay, of major import particularly to the negotiating process, this could have put the ANC on the back foot if it had been handled properly, do you agree with that?

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: That is correct, Chairperson.

MR LAX: Now surely in those circumstances just to tell headquarters that we have information is not good enough, you've got to tell headquarters that you have information, credible witnesses, people who were involved.  You've got them in your hands and yes you warn him, listen, we've arrested them unlawfully, there may be some strings attached here, how else can they make proper analysis of the facts and of the strategy to be employed if they don't know that?

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: Chairperson, I did not inform headquarters and I was not there at the time.

MR LAX: Yes but I'm asking you as a lieutenant or captain in the security branch at that time.  An experienced officer, it would have been something you would have done, you would have thought how can they make a proper analysis here without knowing this?  The information was bigger than the unlawful arrest?

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: Chairperson, if I personally had to inform them then I would have informed them with all the facts but I would not have informed them of the fact that an Ndaba or Shabalala had been detained.

CHAIRPERSON: Why not, surely it is vital to them if they had got any brains in their head to know that they can come down and talk to these people, they can seek further information from them, that these people are there available as sources of information.

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: Further information would have come from us.

MR LAX: You see there's one more important fact here, there's - often information is obtained unlawfully, nothing unusual about that.  Unlawful phone taps are used.  Those are matters which you can use damage control very easily on, you can create legends to deal with those issues, that's not so surprising in the light of the conflict, is it, the mere unlawful detention of somebody?  That's not an unusual in your however many years you have had of experience as a security operative, it wasn't an unusual thing, correct/

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: It was not, Chairperson, at that stage.  This situation, this is what we did in the given situation because we then thought it the right thing to do.

MR LAX: You were involved in countless acts where people were abducted, information obtained, you applied for amnesty for some of them, isn't that so?

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: That is correct, Chairperson.

MR LAX: And the considerations in those matters weren't so much the unlawful detention of the person, it was that they knew information, that they knew channels, that they knew a whole range of other things that finally led to their deaths?

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: That is correct, Chairperson.

MR LAX: The unlawful detention of this person or these people per se on it's own wasn't such a big deal, that's all I'm suggesting to you?

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: Chairperson, I think the evidence of Colonel Botha pointed to all the aspects involved in this matter.

MR LAX: You see we're not talking about their killing yet, we're just talking about the stage of the unlawful detention.  The decision to kill them came later.  I'm talking about at the stage the information became available, at the stage you were informed and at the stage the decision was taken to go to headquarters.  At that stage all you were guilty of was an unlawful detention, nothing more.  On your own evidence and everyone else's evidence?

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: That is correct, Chairperson

MR LAX: Now at that stage, that's what I'm saying, at that stage that unlawful detention was no big deal, it was a relatively minor issue that could have been resolved quite quickly, not so?

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: That is correct, Chairperson.