Special Hearings — Mandela United Football Club Hearings — 1997-11-24

MR DE KOCK: For covert operations, there was a selected group.   Some of them became war tired and had to be replaced.  That often happened.  People had a choice whether they wanted to remain operational or not.

UNKNOWN: How often did you get requests from other places in the country to eliminate somebody there?

MR DE KOCK: I would not say that it happened on a daily basis but reasonably regularly, and then in a subtle situation, sometimes someone would say "we have a problem;  why don't you do something?" and then that person would be eliminated.

UNKNOWN: Sometimes you didn't comply with the requests?  In other words you didn't comply with all requests?

MR DE KOCK: No.

UNKNOWN: Because you also had to live with yourself in the end.
 If I hear you correctly, we're talking here of hundreds of people?

MR DE KOCK: No.

UNKNOWN: Oh, so we're not talking about hundreds of people eliminated by Vlakplaas.  I'm not asking you to mention the cases but are we talking about five or ten?

MR DE KOCK: That would be very difficult to give you a number.  When you work with people's lives it's not like money;  it's not give and take five.   It's important to know how many.  I'm not trying to evade the question, not at all. It's just a matter of principle.

UNKNOWN: : No, I am just trying to determine:   I'm merely trying to establish how widely spread this was and the operations.

MR DE KOCK: Vlakplaas existed while I was still working in Namibia and Angola.  They already at that stage were operational and then at a later stage when Vlakplaas spread to other branches, some of those branches didn't really start with those operations, but the impression I had, the idea I had, this could perhaps be followed up a little bit later with facts is that a number of branches had their security people in groups of three or four who would have been the stronger men, one could say almost, who wouldn't hesitate in national importance to really circumvent or work against the Act.

UNKNOWN: If I understand you correctly, and I'm asking you that now, you said in your evidence that you interrogated Mabotha at Penge Mine, that he was in possession of weapons?

MR DE KOCK: I asked him the question only once, perhaps twice.  We were not there to interrogate him.  We only had to kill him.

UNKNOWN: Is that all that you've done?

MR DE KOCK: Yes.

UNKNOWN: The only question rather.   You see in the amnesty application you said Mabotha was again interrogated about his activities with specific reference to the killing of policemen and weapons.

MR DE KOCK: The policemen could have been, but the weapons was an absolute priority.

UNKNOWN: Did you ask him about the shootings of policemen there?

MR DE KOCK: That I really can't tell you.

UNKNOWN: You see, this is what you tell us here.  You didn't give evidence then and then at a later stage you gave it again.

MR DE KOCK: I understand that, Mr du Plessis.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr du Plessis you have had 15 minutes already.

UNKNOWN: Mrs Chair,  according to my calculation I've spent eight minutes.

CHAIRPERSON: : I'm going to allow you a little bit of leeway but I remind you in terms of my watch it's fifteen minutes already.

UNKNOWN: Have I got fifteen minutes left?
Yes.   I will deal with that when the time comes, Mrs Chair.   
 Now, Colonel de Kock your evidence presupposes that Colonel Vorster must have known that Vlakplaas eliminated people.  Is that so?

MR DE KOCK: Yes, I would say he knew.

UNKNOWN: And it also presupposes that Colonel Potgieter therefore, because of the actions of Mabotha with reference to the weapon question, the fact that he had weapons on him, that you would be requested to kill Mabotha.  Is that so?

MR DE KOCK: Yes.

UNKNOWN: In other words, you receive a request from Colonel Potgieter which says that here's a man that had weapons in his possession, illegal weapons, and you said it's fine, and you took him and you killed him.

MR DE KOCK: No, it is not only going about the weapons as such.  It was a situation that Mabotha had already killed policemen, he was involved in the deaths of policemen.   We didn't want a repeat of that.  I think you should just look at that, that is what I said.

UNKNOWN: I have already said to you that I have a problem with that part of the evidence but let us accept your version and let us then say that you, that he contacted you and he said that this man had been detained for six months, he was in possession of illegal weapons and he killed policemen.  You must come and kill him.  You said that you simply went and killed him.

MR DE KOCK: You must just give me the opportunity to say that the conversation was, in the conversation, a plan had to be made with Mabotha. Those were the words.

UNKNOWN: In other words you didn't have an instruction.  The words used were "a plan had to be made".

MR DE KOCK: Yes, "a plan had to be made",  and the euphemism for that clearly is that they would go to so-called ...(indistinct) or whatever.   I am very experienced in that in the north of Namibia.

UNKNOWN: This is one of those cases where you reacted on one of those and got into the car and drove off and Mabotha   (not interpreted)

MR DE KOCK: Well not climb in the car and drive, not only that, we had to make arrangements, but if it had come from somebody else than Mr Potgieter, I would have asked him what he expected one to do.  However, coming from him and the nature of the discussion, there was no doubt about where Mabotha had to be taken to and in another situation would have ignored that.  Sometimes I refused, yes.

UNKNOWN: And you also said, Colonel, in your evidence that Captain Potgieter could have done a number of things with Mr Mabotha?   He could have done a number of things with Mr Mabotha.  He could have put him in a house of safety, put him there.

MR DE KOCK: That is one of the ways things could be done.  If one looks at the evidence and the importance thereof, Vlakplaas would have been the last place where he would have been safe because he simply would have absconded again.

UNKNOWN: You see, Colonel Potgieter and you know what Colonel Potgieter said in his evidence - he said that he explained that he wanted to use Mabotha in the high treason case.   Do you deny such hearings taking place?

MR DE KOCK: I was not aware of in Soweto or anywhere else what the situation was with Mr Mabotha.

UNKNOWN: Let me place my problem before you.  I find it strange that Mr Potgieter keeps, detains, Mr Mabotha for six months, gets his information that he wanted to use in a hearing, that he then has to release Mabotha and under these circumstances all of a sudden decides to call you, that he requests you all of a sudden to eliminate Mabotha, that Potgieter is one of those people who knows that you eliminate people, that you simply get into your car without asking questions and shoot somebody  - I find it rather strange totally.

MR DE KOCK: I know that that would find it so,  however, that is how it worked and it was not a normal situation and in the normal course of things with the broad public and in companies and so forth.

UNKNOWN: What I want to know on page 11B of the amnesty application, information is being requested and perhaps the names and addresses of people who consented to that and in that case you mention Colonel Potgieter of the security police.

MR DE KOCK: Yes, that is the person I spoke to.

UNKNOWN: In other words you say that Colonel Potgieter - it wasn't a command, it was a request.