Amnesty Hearings — East London — 1999-04-07

MR AVENANT: I have no re-examination, thank you.
NO RE-EXAMINATION BY MR AVENANT

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Sandi, do you have any questions to ask the applicant?

ADV SANDI: Thank you, just one.
	Mr Griebenauw, when you had this conversation with Major van der Merwe and you drew the inference that people were to be killed according to the report he was giving you, did you engage yourself in any further conversation with him?

JOHANNES LODEWIKUS GRIEBENAUW: No, I there and then gave the instruction or the order that we have no further participation in Plan Katzen.

ADV SANDI: Did you not say to him that you are not interested in the killing of people and all that sort of thing?

JOHANNES LODEWIKUS GRIEBENAUW: No, I simply gave the order that we ceasing our participation in Katzen.

ADV SANDI: Thank you.  Thank you, Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.  Mr Sibanyoni?

MR SIBANYONI: Thank you, Mr Chairperson.
	Then immediately you gave those orders, or immediately thereafter, you left Eastern Cape, did I understand you correctly? - you were transferred to either Pretoria or to KwaNdebele?

JOHANNES LODEWIKUS GRIEBENAUW: But that was only years later that I was transferred.  I immediately gave instructions there and then.  After the 10th of November that there was to be no further participation from the Security Police in Operation Katzen.

MR SIBANYONI: So you were never requested thereafter, after you had indicated that there will be no participation, further participation from the police?

JOHANNES LODEWIKUS GRIEBENAUW: I gave the order that there would be no further participation, and as far as I know there was no further participation.  And this was confirmed by General van der Westhuizen, that there was no further participation.

MR SIBANYONI: And then when did you leave the Eastern Cape, which year?

JOHANNES LODEWIKUS GRIEBENAUW: From '86 to '89 I was stationed here.  These incidents of which we're now speaking took place in '86.

MR SIBANYONI: Thank you.  No further questions, Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.  Do you have any questions arising?

MR AVENANT: No questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Knoetze?

MR KNOETZE: Yes, please Mr Chairman, just two matters.
	General, I must say you've confused me now.  I'd like to take you back to Exhibit B, paragraph 12.  Do you have the statement of Brigadier van der Merwe, or have you read it?  Please just answer, have you read this statement?

JOHANNES LODEWIKUS GRIEBENAUW: Very briefly, yes.

MR KNOETZE: Don't you please want to read it as from paragraph 7.  Just read it for yourself.  Have you read it now?

JOHANNES LODEWIKUS GRIEBENAUW: Yes.

MR KNOETZE: That is now the same person who you are now telling the Commission gave you the report at the time.

JOHANNES LODEWIKUS GRIEBENAUW: Yes.

MR KNOETZE: Now do you see that in this affidavit - this is an affidavit, in other words something more than a report, he says in paragraph 12
"There was no planning done in my presence to kill anybody in any way at any time.  I would in any case not have involved myself in such a conspiracy to commit murder."
Do you now want to tell the Committee that this man has now changed his recollection of what happened at the meeting and has now adopted a totally different stance?

JOHANNES LODEWIKUS GRIEBENAUW: No, I wouldn't know why he is now adopting this different attitude, but most definitely that was not the report he gave me orally.

MR KNOETZE: I'd like to refer you to paragraph 10.  He says
"As a result of this - or, Charles Sebe immediately reacted to this proposal by saying that Lennox Sebe should be killed.  The meeting burst out laughing and made no further comment on this proposal."
In other words, something which amounts to the killing of somebody was found to be ridiculous by this meeting.  This little piece here regarding his affidavit has a ring of truth to it.

JOHANNES LODEWIKUS GRIEBENAUW: Yes, if he told me that it was ridiculed, then I wouldn't have taken steps to withdraw.

MR KNOETZE: The way I've understood your evidence-in-chief is that I inferred from that that your inference from the words which appeared in the report, was that a decision had been taken to kill somebody.  It's not as if he told you that explicitly.

JOHANNES LODEWIKUS GRIEBENAUW: Yes, that's true and I stand by that.

MR KNOETZE: What is absolutely so?

JOHANNES LODEWIKUS GRIEBENAUW: It is true that I made the inference that somebody was going to be killed, actually going to be killed as a result of his report to me and the way in which he conveyed it to me.

ADV SANDI: Sorry, Advocate Knoetze, can I try and assist here with the manner in which I understand the witness.  He did not discuss his inferences with Major van der Merwe.  When we say van der Merwe gave him that report, he simply inferred that from this, from what Mr van der Merwe is telling me, people may have to be killed and that was the end of the matter, he did not communicate his thoughts to Major van der Merwe.

CHAIRPERSON: And he reached the inference he said through the use of the word "uithaal" in the report.

MR KNOETZE: If the Commission understands it in that manner, Mr Chairman, I'm satisfied.  I just don't want to let this matter go if there is any possibility of a misunderstanding implicating those people, which they deny.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I think that it's quite clear that the General has said that he arrived at his own conclusion as a result of the report, erroneously as it turned out, from what's been said because of the use of the word "uithaal".

MR KNOETZE: Thank you, Mr Chairman, there's only just one further matter with reference to that meeting which he attended where Joop Joubert acted as chairman.
	General, if I've understood your evidence correctly you are not saying that the police were involved in that thing because a Defence Force officer, Joubert, told you that you now have an instruction for police head office, is that not a bit ridiculous in view of the fact that you received your orders from your officers and not from the Defence Force?

JOHANNES LODEWIKUS GRIEBENAUW: No, I said the exact opposite to what has been put to me now.  I said that I objected to the fact that at Defence Force officer was giving me orders and that I took my orders, wanted to get my orders from the Commissioner of Police.  He then answered that you do indeed have an order from the Commissioner, ask your representative from the police, from the Commissioner, and that is Brigadier Schoon.  And Brigadier Schoon confirmed that.

MR KNOETZE: But the point is, you did not receive the instruction from the Commissioner.

JOHANNES LODEWIKUS GRIEBENAUW: Not directly from him, but from this confirmation of Brigadier Schoon I could only make one inference.

MR KNOETZE: Yes, I've already put to you what Brigadier Schoon said, namely that he simply had the instruction to attend the meeting and by implication you had the same order and nothing more.

JOHANNES LODEWIKUS GRIEBENAUW: Well then one can assume that I had no participation later on.

MR KNOETZE: I find it strange that you're now alleging that you had higher orders, from higher authority, but then after a while off your own bat you decided there would be no further participation.  One would expect that that decision of yours that you took, you would first take that up with your seniors before going ahead.

JOHANNES LODEWIKUS GRIEBENAUW: No, the position was that I immediately gave the order and then followed that up with a call to General van der Merwe.

MR KNOETZE: In any event, there was nothing strange about the termination at that stage because the Defence Force would in any event have stopped being involved in Katzen.

JOHANNES LODEWIKUS GRIEBENAUW: I'm not aware of any further Defence Force activities.

MR KNOETZE: Thank you, Mr Chairman.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR KNOETZE