Amnesty Hearings — Cape Town — UNKNOWN

MR JANSEN: And is it not so that Ermelo was responsible for the largest part of the Swaziland border?

NICHOLAS JACOBUS JANSE VAN RENSBURG: From a little way above Oshoek until at Gugelel, yes.

MR JANSEN: That is the greatest part of the Swaziland border?

NICHOLAS JACOBUS JANSE VAN RENSBURG: Yes I think so; I did not measure it, I cannot tell you exactly.  I think that it is most probably the greater part.

MR JANSEN: We are getting away from the point again but what - you say that you did not know that area so well, you as head of a security branch such as Ermelo should surely have had intimate knowledge of well-known existing crossing points of ANC insurgents in the...(intervention)

NICHOLAS JACOBUS JANSE VAN RENSBURG: Not in the area where I worked.

MR JANSEN: In any case Barberton was not part of this area?

NICHOLAS JACOBUS JANSE VAN RENSBURG: That's correct.

MR JANSEN: And it can only be that stage the plan was to get rid of Mr Kondile's body.

NICHOLAS JACOBUS JANSE VAN RENSBURG: That's correct.

MR JANSEN: You say the plan was to throw it over the Mozambican border?

NICHOLAS JACOBUS JANSE VAN RENSBURG: That's correct.

MR JANSEN: Don't you think that that was possibly not a very good plan?

NICHOLAS JACOBUS JANSE VAN RENSBURG: I must acknowledge if I think back that it was not such a good plan.

MR JANSEN: Mr Coetzee also says that the fire on which Mr Kondile's body was burned consisted of amongst others large tree trunks and then also the tyres and that these things were moved and carried to the fire by Flemington and his men who had 4X4 vehicles.

NICHOLAS JACOBUS JANSE VAN RENSBURG: I do not know anything about that.  I was not there when that wood was brought there.

MR JANSEN: I also want to put it to you that I find it very strange that you as second in command together with the person who was doing investigations into bomb attacks, go to Komatipoort on the 10th of August while a bomb exploded in Port Elizabeth on the 8th of August.

NICHOLAS JACOBUS JANSE VAN RENSBURG: Just to correct your statement, I was third in command. The next point is that I did not visit the scenes of bomb explosions, it was not part of my task.

MR JANSEN: You will accept that Mr du Plessis did do that?

NICHOLAS JACOBUS JANSE VAN RENSBURG: Yes he did but he also had senior and experienced men on his personnel who did it on his behalf.  He definitely could not have done everything himself during those years; there were times when other people had to take his place.

MR JANSEN: Turn to page 3 of volume 4. I know that factually it is easy for you to deny what I have put to you recently but if you read that second paragraph in that report
"At the same time police from all towns in the border area have been called in for a massive manhunt for two gunmen",
Do you really now think that at that stage  there was also a large scale manhunt for two insurgents.  Can you recall that?

NICHOLAS JACOBUS JANSE VAN RENSBURG: Yes I can vaguely remember something.  I did not read the whole article, just the paragraph that you referred to but it seems to refer to an incident of people who shot at the police at Ugie or Maclear or at a train or something.

MR JANSEN: Yes it refers to an incident of a group...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Let me ask here, what is the relevance of this?  I wish you'd put the purpose of your questions and make it clear to me.

MR JANSEN: Yes basically Mr Chairman I can sum it up as follows, that is if I can just put the question, it will be the final one on this.
	I find it highly improbable that in those circumstances, due to the immediate security situation in the Eastern Cape, that you and Mr du Plessis would go to Komatipoort with a person who was suspected of being involved in earlier bomb attacks.

NICHOLAS JACOBUS JANSE VAN RENSBURG: I do not find it strange, it was also a crises and it had probably arranged with Mr Coetzee for that date and we kept to that date.

MR JANSEN: In that same report reference is made to Brigadier J H du Plessis.

NICHOLAS JACOBUS JANSE VAN RENSBURG: Yes that is true.

MR JANSEN: That's not you is it?

NICHOLAS JACOBUS JANSE VAN RENSBURG: No I'm van Rensburg.

MR JANSEN: The previous Mr du Plessis, it's not him either?

NICHOLAS JACOBUS JANSE VAN RENSBURG: No.

MR JANSEN: No here they are referring to a Brigadier du Plessis who in the old dispensation was the divisional commissioner in the division border when the police still consisted of sections or divisions.  I accept further that you deny Mr Coetzee's testimony where he speaks about the discussions you held with him in the Eastern Cape about Kondile and that Kondile had been injured and the potential danger, etc.

NICHOLAS JACOBUS JANSE VAN RENSBURG: Yes I deny that.

MR JANSEN: So you deny Mr Danster's testimony in this regard as well?   Possibly you can assist me; in some of these reports mention is also made of a Brigadier E H J van Rensburg.

NICHOLAS JACOBUS JANSE VAN RENSBURG: If I'm correct that was the divisional commissioner for the division Eastern Province, it was not me, it was another person with the surname of van Rensburg.  He was the divisional commissioner Eastern Province and his office was in Port Elizabeth.

MR JANSEN: Just for purposes of record, on page 26 of bundle four, reference is made to this van Rensburg.  I also want to put it to you that the real reason for your applications for amnesty must be seen in the light of the fact that at the end of 1996, Eugene de Kock's trial had already passed, the Motherwell trial was over, you were implicated in both those matters, the noose was tightening around your neck, and that this was the reason why you came forward.

NICHOLAS JACOBUS JANSE VAN RENSBURG: No you are not correct.  That's not the reason.

MR DE JAGER: If it was Mr Jansen, I think that everyone who applies has committed crimes, they are murderers, here is an opportunity for them to possibly stay out of jail. Surely that's the motive of everybody who applies, to stay out of jail?

MR JANSEN: I accept that completely; it's to do with the fact that where there are differences I will argue at the end of the day that where there are differences between Mr Coetzee's version and that of this witness, Mr Coetzee testified in a totally different context where amnesty criteria were not mentioned, while these witnesses are testifying in a totally different context and that is why there are differences and that due to the fact that they felt that they are in danger and the only way they can get out of this danger of being prosecuted is by adapting their amnesty applications that they succeed in this, this is my argument.  I will take it no further than this question in any case, but I think it can be allowed on that basis.
	I also want it placed on record if you have any comments Mr van Rensburg.  You are well aware of Mr Coetzee's version in the Harms Commission and possibly in the Neethling trial and how you are implicated.

NICHOLAS JACOBUS JANSE VAN RENSBURG: Yes I think I am.

MR JANSEN: It's not necessary for me to put every small detail to you, to deny it.  You're aware of it?

NICHOLAS JACOBUS JANSE VAN RENSBURG: Yes.

MR JANSEN: Mr Chairman I have no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR JANSEN

MR DE JAGER: Mr Jansen with reference to your last question, whether he denies it or not are you saying that this is evidence before us?