Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — UNKNOWN

<UNKNOWN>: I want to, the instruction in 1986 from BrigadierSchoon, he was in charge of the terrorist section at securityhead quarters, is that correct?

ANSWER: That is correct.

<UNKNOWN>: He advised you that the security police mustin future work closely with Special Forces?

ANSWER: That is correct.

<UNKNOWN>: If I understand your evidence in chief correctly,you say that you regarded that as an order to get involved inwaging war?

ANSWER: Yes Chair, as I have said if he gave me an
3. instruction /...
MR CURRIN 487 J H CRONJE
instruction to work with Military Intelligence I would have interpretedit differently, but Spes Forces were a specialised combat unitand the only deduction I could make from the instruction was thatwe were supposed to co-operate with Special Forces in the war.

<UNKNOWN>: Koevoet fell under Spes-magte correct?

ANSWER: No, Koevoet was a police unit.

<UNKNOWN>: Then came the instruction in 1986 from BrigadierVictor where he gave you this general, broad instruction to takewhatever steps are necessary to bring the situation in Pretoriaunder control, because Pretoria was burning?

ANSWER: That was prior to the instruction by BrigadierSchoon.

<UNKNOWN>: You took action against people, we've heardabout that and the action that you took about people was basedon information that was given to you as to what those potentialvictims had done?

ANSWER: That is correct Chair.

<UNKNOWN>: ...a report on hearsay?

ANSWER: This information, as I've already said, was gainedfrom different informants, we would never have acted only on theinformation of a single informant.   In addition we would haveattempted to confirm the information by means of personal observation,by means of telephone tapping, by means of gaining access to theperson's mail.   We would not have acted on the information ofa single informant.

<UNKNOWN>: Are you saying that in regard to all theseapplications which you support of which you have knowledge, includingthose where you are not personally involved, great pains wouldhave been taken to ensure that the information was correct?
3. ANSWER: /...
MR CURRIN 488 J H CRONJE

ANSWER: I believe that this was the case in every instanceChair.

<UNKNOWN>: You are absolutely certain that no steps weretaken against anyone in the form of assassination because of apersonal grudge or just a whim or fancy at the time?

ANSWER: That would have been out of the question, I wouldnot believe that anyone would have done this for their own personalgain Chair.

<UNKNOWN>: Could the Committee bear with me for a momentplease?   You've said that you were involved, and that the securitypolice who were part of the police force, were involved in militaryoperations?

ANSWER: That is correct Chair.

<UNKNOWN>: I want to put it to you that our clients werenot aware of the fact that the police were waging war againstthem, they were not aware that the police were waging war againstthose that were killed or even against themselves.

ANSWER: Could you repeat the question?

<UNKNOWN>: I want to put it to you that the person inthe street, the people of South Africa and more particularly thevictims, the survivors, were not aware of the fact that the policewere waging a war against them.

ANSWER: I couldn't comment on that, I don't know whatpeople thought.

<UNKNOWN>: Did the police at any stage officially declarewar against the people, citizens of South Africa?

ANSWER: I cannot imagine that there was any sort of officialstatement that we were involved in a struggle against the peopleor that the police were involved in the struggle, but any personwho was involved or knowledgeable,
3. such /...
MR CURRIN 489 J H CRONJE
such as people in the black neighbourhoods, black townships, wouldhave known that we were operating there and that this was a stateof war.

<UNKNOWN>: ...the people in the townships knew that thepolice were at war with them?

ANSWER: I would say so Chair.

<UNKNOWN>: Our clients, the survivors of the victims willsay that ...

ANSWER: Mr Currin is that quite the correct statement,that the police were at war with all the inhabitants of a particulararea or were they at war with particular inhabitants?

<UNKNOWN>: ...valid point, of course the question is howdoes one identify who is the enemy and who is not the enemy ifyou are a citizen of a country?

ANSWER: Would it be the case, you've seen the presentationof the ANC that there was, that they identified the security forcesand the police officially as their enemy, so if the one side seessomeone as an enemy, how would the other side see that person?

<UNKNOWN>: That is an issue for argument which one willdeal with later, the point I want to make is that the police neverofficially declared that they were at war with anyone?

CHAIRPERSON: Has this not been described as "an undeclaredwar"?

MR CURRIN: : I'm not sure that those words were ever used,but it may well be that that's what the witness will say.

JUDGE NGCOBE: Mr Currin I thought, the impression I gotfrom all this material was that at some stage the police regardedthemselves as being at war not necessarily with the people inthe street, but being at war with what they
3. described /...
MR CURRIN 490 J H CRONJE
described as, rightly or wrongly, terrorists, ANC members, SACP.  I think you are putting it too broadly.

MR CURRIN: : I hear what you are saying, the difficultyis the arbitrary choosing of who is the enemy.

CHAIRPERSON: Well well-known political organisations, well-knownliberation movements, trade unions and such organisations.

MR DU PLESSIS: : Mr Chairman I may mention here that inthe general background of Brigadier Cronje's application he setsit out very clearly on page 12 and further on.

MR CURRIN: : I will move on to the next question if thatsuits the Committee.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR CURRIN (contd)

<UNKNOWN>: Brigadier, before we go back to the war situationthat we were talking about I would just like to take you backto trevits and ask you one or two more questions regarding thatstructure which still requires some clarification in my mind.  In your evidence you said that the commanding officer of trevitsinitially was Mr Louw and then there was Hoof-generaal Buchnerand subsequently there were other people.   Besides them in thatcentral structure to which all the regional structures were accountable,who else served on that central structure?

ANSWER: Chair, Colonel Louw was not in charge of trevits,he co-ordinated the information.   The head of trevits would havebeen the Brigadiers and Generals.

<UNKNOWN>: Beukes and later Victor?

ANSWER: That is correct.

<UNKNOWN>: Who else besides them were on that centralstructure?

ANSWER: I don't know.
3.

<UNKNOWN>: /...
MR CURRIN 491 J H CRONJE

<UNKNOWN>: Were there any other people on that centralstructure?

ANSWER: Not as far as I know.

<UNKNOWN>: So it was a very small structure?

ANSWER: This is because it was a secret organisation.

<UNKNOWN>: Who did they represent when for example ColonelLouw was there and Hoof-generaal Buchner, who were they representingwhen they were on that structure?

ANSWER: Certainly the Commissioner of Police.

<UNKNOWN>: The Commissioner, is that a guess or are youstating that as a fact?

ANSWER: That's a guess.

JUDGE WILSON: : Can I interrupt again at this stage?  Where was the office?

ANSWER: It was at the security branch head office.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR CURRIN (contd)

<UNKNOWN>: I want to rephrase a question that I put toyou earlier which was a little bit ambiguous and which resultedin certain comments from the Committee.   I think it's commoncause that the liberation movements were waging an armed struggleagainst the security forces.   If I understand your evidence correctly,the security forces in turn were waging an undeclared counter-waragainst the members of the liberation movement, political activistsand trouble-makers, to quote your evidence in chief.  Is thatcorrect?

ANSWER: That is correct.