Amnesty Hearings — Benoni — 1997-06-23

UNKNOWN: Mr Chairman if you would just bear with me for a moment.
	General what General van der Merwe and the previous Commissioners of Police were willing to do, they said - and one can argue about the meaning of this, this includes illegal actions such as the handgrenade incident.
"We as former Commissioners of the South African Police, we were in command of the South African Police during the period 1979  to 31 March 1995 are of the opinion that with regard to those incidents and acts committed or carried out by members of the South African Police during the conflict of the past, as illustrated in the proceeding paragraphs, are morally obliged to accept collective responsibility for those acts or incidents".
They are accepting moral responsibility.  If illegal actions followed upon your suggestion what would your position be with regard to your responsibility?

JOHANNES JACOBUS VIKTOR: Chair I had never been informed that my suggestion had been accepted and that it would have been carried out.  As I have already said, insofar as I have made suggestions I would take the moral responsibility for these.

UNKNOWN: And you understood these to have been possibilities, that these persons and Brigadier Cronje might have acted on your suggestions, is that not the case?

JOHANNES JACOBUS VIKTOR: No, I never knew whether they in fact acted in terms of the suggestion.

UNKNOWN: You did, however, presume that they might have acted on your suggestion?

JOHANNES JACOBUS VIKTOR: That is the case Chair, but if I look at most or many of the cases for which they are applying for amnesty then this would not have fallen within the ambit of my suggestions.

UNKNOWN: We will still argue on this General.   Your testimony then is that members of the Security Branch received no command or would not have to carry out any instruction or command from you, do I understand you correctly?

JOHANNES JACOBUS VIKTOR: That is correct with regard to the activities of the Security Branch as such.

UNKNOWN: And with regard to Police actions you are saying then?

JOHANNES JACOBUS VIKTOR: No I said with regard to the actions of the Security Branch.  I had been a commanding officer, I know how the system works.

UNKNOWN: What kind of instructions could you then give to Security Branch members?

JOHANNES JACOBUS VIKTOR: You don't give instructions to Security Branch members with regard to their work.  I've said that, I've given testimony in regard to that Chair.  You, as an outsider, one does not have the intimate knowledge with regard to particular matters.  You would not know whether it involves information or whatever.  As an outsider you would not have that knowledge.  You could therefore not dare to give a Security Branch officer, with regard to his work, any such instructions.

UNKNOWN: General you knew what happened in the Security Branch from 1963 to 1969, from 1981 you served in the Security Branch, you were commanding officer of the Northern Transvaal Branch, is that correct?

JOHANNES JACOBUS VIKTOR: That's correct.  And because I knew how the Security Branch worked I would not dare, with regard to their work, to give instructions to Security Branch members.

UNKNOWN: Let's presume that you did give a command or instruction, if the Security Branch officer had a lower rank than yourself, could he simply ignore your instruction or command or did he have to carry it out?

JOHANNES JACOBUS VIKTOR: He would refer it to his Security Branch head office and he would then say here is an outsider who gives me an instruction, what should I do?

UNKNOWN: Let me state to you what the testimony of General van der Merwe has been with regard to this.  Mr Chairman I see it is one o'clock, could I perhaps just finish this one question, then I am at the end of that specific point.
	General, General van der Merwe on page 92 gives testimony, he had been asked, there's a statement made to him,
"Of course it was not possible to gain instruction for every action from one's subordinates and in certain instances commanding officers only gained information after actions were taken".
He agreed with this, are you agreeing with him?

JOHANNES JACOBUS VIKTOR: Are we referring to the Security Branch?

UNKNOWN: I am referring to the Security Branch, yes.

JOHANNES JACOBUS VIKTOR: Depending Chair on the action.  One would not, with regard to every action or every operative, you would not treat them in a small-minded way.  You would allow own initiative, people would be allowed to do certain things on their own initiative and then come and report back.

UNKNOWN: Let me state to you the testimony of Brigadier Cronje, a passage in his testimony which had been stated to General van der Merwe on page 92, Brigadier Cronje said,
"Early in 1986 I was contacted by Commander Viktor who was second in command of the Intelligence Unit - Counter-Insurgency Unit.  Due to the structure of the SAP at that time Brigadier Viktor, my senior, I had to accept instructions from him".
The testimony then is that Brigadier Cronje said that you were his senior and he had to receive instructions from you, or rather he had to obey instructions from you, would you understand it in this way?

JOHANNES JACOBUS VIKTOR: That is his testimony.

UNKNOWN: That is indeed his testimony.  Then General van der Merwe replies on page 93.
"This is correct".
How would you reply to this?

JOHANNES JACOBUS VIKTOR: I would say that I do not agree with this.  As a commanding officer of Security Branch you would not accept a command or instruction from another senior officer, from another branch of the security forces with regard to your work as a Security Branch officer.  Had a suggestion been made to you then it would be accepted or expected that you would refer this to your senior in the Security Branch to determine whether he found it acceptable.

UNKNOWN: So you are saying that General van der Merwe did not speak the truth under oath?

JOHANNES JACOBUS VIKTOR: I am not saying he's a liar, I'm telling you what my point of view is.

UNKNOWN: Thank you Mr Chairman.  Perhaps that's ....

CHAIRPERSON: The Committee will now take an adjournment and will resume at 2 o'clock.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
ON RESUMPTION

JOHANNES JACOBUS VIKTOR: (s.u.o.)

UNKNOWN: (cont)
	On page 6 of the application Captain Hechter says,
"The command given by General Viktor to Brigadier Cronje and also to myself, was given at the beginning of 1986.  I was called in by Brigadier Viktor to SAP Head Office.  Brigadier Viktor was at that time second in command of the Counter-Insurgency Unit.  He saw me at about six o'clock in the morning.  I was present as well as Lt Jaap van Jaarsveld and his son, Captain Johan Viktor were present.
		Brigadier Viktor was very emotional during this conversation.  He informed me that South Africa was "burning" and that Pretoria in particular was "burning" and he said to me that you people from the Security Branch are doing nothing about this".
Can you recall having said anything like this?

JOHANNES JACOBUS VIKTOR: Chair no, this is not my conversation.

UNKNOWN: He continues to say,
"Brigadier Viktor pointed out to me that myself, who was working in Unit B, the Black Power Unit, and that they had files on the Black Power activists, Brigadier Viktor told me that from this information a picture could be developed of who the key activists and troublemakers would have been.
		I was aware of the fact that Brigadier Viktor had previously worked at the Security Branch and knew exactly how these matters worked.
		Brigadier Viktor's words were roughly the following:
		'You have the files, you know who the people are'".
Would that be similar to your testimony?

JOHANNES JACOBUS VIKTOR: Chair no.  In the first place I did not call Hechter in.

UNKNOWN: Brigadier, with regard to the contents of the conversation?