Amnesty Hearings — Bloemfontein — UNKNOWN

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, I realise that. I just want to make the point, Mr Chairman, that we have raised the point that we will object if the cross-examination goes into detail of those incidents.  Thank you, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

ADV MEMANI: I don't understand your legal representative.  You have applied and you said you want to tell the truth, and your legal representative seem to want to suppress the truth.

CHAIRPERSON: He is a witness in these proceedings.  He has not applied in these proceedings.  There is a pending application.

ADV MEMANI: I understand, Mr Chairman.

MR DU PLESSIS: Please, Mr Chairman, I object strenuously and strongly against the insinuation made by my learned friend, and I would please ask him to restrain himself.

ADV MEMANI: I will certainly comply.

CHAIRPERSON: Let's see if we can carry on without any more of these snide remarks being made.

ADV MEMANI: Now you were still at COMPOL during 1986/87.

COL LOOTS: That is correct.

ADV MEMANI: And you told us that you were the commanding officer for Atteridgeville, Mamelodi and Soshanguve.

COL LOOTS: That's correct.

ADV MEMANI: And Hammanskraal is no less than 70 kilometres from COMPOL?

COL LOOTS: I don't know exactly how far it is, but that might be correct.

ADV MEMANI: And your involvement in a murder at Hammanskraal was an instance of the security branch using a member from one area to go and commit a crime in another area.

COL LOOTS: I do not understand the question, and I'm sorry, please repeat that.

ADV MEMANI: I am saying that your involvement in the murder at Hammanskraal was an instance of the security branch using a member of the security branch from one area in another area.

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, I don't want to object unnecessarily, but you will know from previous applications to what length evidence about this specific point was placed before you, the reasons therefore, the way it happened, the orders that were given, the order by Brig Victor, what it entailed and how the operations took place.  If Col Loots is asked to elaborate on that, Mr Chairman, it is probably going to take him an hour to answer this question.  And Mr Chairman, the evidence about this has been placed before you in extensive detail in other applications.

CHAIRPERSON: As I understand it, it is not going to take an hour. If I understand the point of the question, it is Hammanskraal fell outside your area, which you were - which you had been appointed to. Is it so that security, the security police used members to commit acts in areas other than that for which they had been appointed?  That was your question, wasn't it?

ADV MEMANI: That is correct, Mr Chairman.

COL LOOTS: I think it has already been testified and it is indeed the case.

ADV MEMANI: Now Mr Loots, you must recall that this is the application of Ngo and no evidence has been placed in that line in this application, and I will beg you to co-operate with me when I ask these questions. Nothing would have prevented you from using Ngo, pending his application.

COL LOOTS: Mr Chair, could you please indicate what you want me to do, then I will be able to help you and the Commission to complete this matter.

ADV MEMANI: I want you to answer this question. Nothing would have prevented you from using Ngo as a ... (intervention).

COL LOOTS: If I wanted to use him, I could have and I would have.

ADV MEMANI: Now Mr Ngo, could have been used by the security branch around Mamelodi without him being appointed and Mr Ngo could have been used to go and commit a murder at Bloemfontein whilst he was stationed at Pretoria.

COL LOOTS: That is not impossible.

ADV MEMANI: You cannot dispute that Ngo started working as an informer for the security branch in 1983.

COL LOOTS: I was not a member of the security branch in Bloemfontein, so I do not know. I accept that I can't comment on that.

ADV MEMANI: And you cannot dispute that he worked in the security branch until you went to college?

COL LOOTS: No, I cannot.

ADV MEMANI: You also cannot dispute that he was working at Fountain Building in Bloemfontein, what was registered as a person working at Botshabelo?

COL LOOTS: No, I can't.

ADV MEMANI: And he did not go, you cannot dispute that he did not go back to Hammanskraal, although the records suggest that after leaving Unit 19, he went back to Hammanskraal.

COL LOOTS: I cannot, I do not know anything about his movements.

ADV MEMANI: And the time when the record which was produced by you, suggests that he was - during which it is suggested that he was at Hammanskraal for the second time, is the time when he says that he worked for JOC under your command.

COL LOOTS: Mr Chair, I never testified that he served under my command in any unit whatsoever.

ADV MEMANI: Let me repeat what I am saying. I am saying to you that in your affidavit was annexed a career record of Mr Ngo. That career record suggests that Mr Ngo would have gone back to Hammanskraal after working at Unit 19.

COL LOOTS: The record indicates that. I read through it, together with you yesterday.

ADV MEMANI: And Ngo says that he never went to Hammanskraal.

COL LOOTS: I was present when he testified that, I heard that.

ADV MEMANI: And if you don't know where he was after, during that period, then you cannot dispute it that he was at GOS.

COL LOOTS: I do not know, Mr Chairman, I simply don't know.

ADV MEMANI: And he was working under your command?

COL LOOTS: No, I cannot apply command or discipline or control over somebody who is not a member of my unit.  He did not serve under my command.

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: When a member is being used in an area where he is not ordinarily based, for the purpose of that particular project or operation, at some other place, he would be falling under the command of those people to whom he had been sent to go and carry out a particular project, I assume?

COL LOOTS: You know how it functioned, you are correct, Mr Chair.

ADV MEMANI: Now Mr Loots, you cannot dispute that he joined the police force while he had previous convictions.

COL LOOTS: I was not aware of that, I cannot comment on that.

ADV MEMANI: And you will agree with me that people with previous convictions are ordinarily not taken into the police force?

COL LOOTS: That is absolutely true, Mr Chair.

ADV MEMANI: And that he was able to join the police force in this fashion through the assistance of security branch, Bloemfontein.

COL LOOTS: I cannot comment.

ADV MEMANI: And you also cannot dispute that he was given a firearm to use in the course of duty before he was trained to use a firearm.

COL LOOTS: I cannot comment on that.

ADV MEMANI: And that despite his involvement with the security branch, the records do not indicate any time during which he would have been associated with the security branch?

COL LOOTS: Not as far as I know.  Not in what I heard yesterday.

CHAIRPERSON: Can you remind us what his previous conviction was for and what he told us about it?

ADV MEMANI: Mr Chair, as far as I can recall, it had to do with assault.

CHAIRPERSON: We can check up on his evidence in that regard later.

ADV MEMANI: And you also cannot dispute that through the assistance of security branch, after he killed Venter, he was assisted in an escape?

COL LOOTS: I cannot comment on that.

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, you will - may I just interrupt.  Bundle B, page 62, is a letter to the "afdelingskommisssaris, SAP", and paragraph 6 refers to the fact that he was found guilty on 15 December 1982, of assault, and that he was given a suspended sentence. Yes, the sentence was - part of my document is not clearly marked, it is 30 days, suspended for three years.

ADV MEMANI: A previous conviction is a previous conviction, whether you have got a suspended sentence or not. Is that correct, Mr Loots?

COL LOOTS: That's correct.