Amnesty Hearings — Boksburg — 1998-06-23

JOHAN WILHELM DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairperson, I do not know what the reaction of the AWB was but I thought that it was just another way to deter.

UNKNOWN: Did you not think that it was a positive step to deal with this very difficult question so close to the elections in order to defuse the situation.  Terreblanche called for a war and if the government of the day went over to this positive step in order to establish a council for those who supported the idea of a Volkstaat, was that not enough?

JOHAN WILHELM DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairperson, I do not know if the people who served on that committee did support that idea.  What I know is that they were appointed to investigate it.  What I thought was that the government of the day established such a council because they saw that certain rightwing groups became militant and they wanted to calm down or quiet down the rightwing.

UNKNOWN: Is it correct if I put it to you as follows that Mr Eugene Terreblanche refused that concept?

JOHAN WILHELM DU PLESSIS: I cannot positively answer on that but I think that is what he would have done, yes.

UNKNOWN: It is interesting that you mention that the groupings of the Germiston bomb group and the Jan Smuts bomb group was differently grouped as the other members at the game farm.  That was your evidence?

JOHAN WILHELM DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairperson, the Germiston bomb group originally came from Koesterfontein and that grouping of the members who were at the game farm, they wanted to include them in their activities as in the Jan Smuts bomb, an extra person was included who had to drive the vehicle.

UNKNOWN: The judge, on page 95 of Bundle 2, in his statement talked about the Bree Street bomb and how it was built and how it was executed and he said that the offence could have been done by the BKA of which applicants 1 - 4 were members, i.e. Myburgh, Le Roux and De Wet.  Was that when you talked about a different grouping Ystergarde or AWB members?  Did you not maybe indicate towards the BKA who built these bombs and planted them?

JOHAN WILHELM DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairperson, as far as I know, those four members were not members of the BKA.

UNKNOWN: And you yourself?

JOHAN WILHELM DU PLESSIS: No I'm not a member of the BKA.

UNKNOWN: Page 85 - just for your comment - the judge in the second or third paragraph said the following:  "In general, it is the interpretation that the Jan Smuts Airport Bombing stands alone and was executed by a conspiracy, an independent conspiracy.  Evidence shows that later that evening at the shooting range that someone took a decision to make a last bomb seemingly out of frustration in order to illustrate something to the security police."  What is your comment on that?

JOHAN WILHELM DU PLESSIS: I would not say that it was a separate grouping - the grouping was still Mr Cliff Barnard, Koekemoer still built the bomb and Cliff Barnard gave me the order to go and detonate the bomb.

UNKNOWN: As you understood it from Prinsloo, did you still understand the favour or as the Judge discussed it that in the end out of frustration to go out on a last mission.  Did you do it out of frustration?

JOHAN WILHELM DU PLESSIS: Nico Prinsloo was present at the shooting range.  Later that evening he left.  I'm also sure that he was aware that Cliff Barnard was present there.  I'm also sure that he knew that explosives were there, I think he's got the blessing.

UNKNOWN: I understand it was a broader part of the instruction that you got initially to execute these operations?

JOHAN WILHELM DU PLESSIS: Yes, that is correct.

UNKNOWN: Can you say Mr Randall, Mr Fred Randall, did you know him?

JOHAN WILHELM DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairperson, I did not know him up and to that stage - I did meet him in court, at the High Court.

UNKNOWN: During your court case did he give evidence or testify?

JOHAN WILHELM DU PLESSIS: He was at the court case yes.  I cannot remember if he testified or not.

UNKNOWN: At page 13 of Bundle A, that is at the Annexure file that was submitted, words were ascribed to Mr Randall and amongst others I quote:  "According to Mr Randall the AWB plans to" - I would just like to say the date, this is the 22nd April 1994, that was now before the court case.  He was quoted as follows:  "According to Mr Randall the AWB plan to protect people on farms within the area, their property, the offices of town councils will also be protected" and this is the part that is important: "we are not planning to act aggressively but if our people are attacked they'll have to face the force of the whole AWB and furthermore we will not  disrupt the elections.  What must we do to prevent them to get to the voting polls, we will not do it because we are not kaffirs."  It seems to us out of this article while the AWB was busy saying that on the 22nd, especially the 22nd April before you started with your bomb attacks that the AWB will not go over to aggression, they were not planning to do it.

JOHAN WILHELM DU PLESSIS: It was definitely not true, the AWB did go over to aggression.  I do not remember in what capacity Mr Randall made those utterances, I heard in this hearing that he was the spokesperson of the AWB but I do not see him as the spokesperson of the leader of the AWB or of the Generals in Staff.

UNKNOWN: A last quote, there was an article in the Citizen on the 2nd April 1996 and that was just after your court case.  The headline reads as follows:  "AWB never gave orders for bombings - leaders of the Afrikaner Weerstandsbeweging had never issued instructions to members to plant bombs to derail the April 1994 general election, AWB media spokesman, Mr Randall told the Rand Supreme Court in Germiston yesterday."
Did you hear that evidence?

JOHAN WILHELM DU PLESSIS: I'm not aware of it no.

UNKNOWN: It seems that in mitigating ...[inaudible]

JOHAN WILHELM DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, I was found not guilty.

UNKNOWN: Did you then leave?

JOHAN WILHELM DU PLESSIS: I do not know if I was present then, no.

UNKNOWN: But you do identify or you don't identify yourself with that utterance of Mr Randall if it would be the truth?

JOHAN WILHELM DU PLESSIS: I assume that it is the truth but I do not identify or reconcile myself with that, that is not how it was conveyed to us.

UNKNOWN: Thank you, I've got no further questions.

ADV BOSMAN: Can I just clarify something, you said that you do identify yourself that it is the truth, what do you mean by saying that it was the truth?

JOHAN WILHELM DU PLESSIS: I assume, Mr Chairperson, that Mr Randall made those utterances at the court but I'm not saying that it is the truth that it was the AWB's viewpoint.

ADV BOSMAN: Thank you.   In Annexure A you said to the Committee it will be that orally certain things were discussed with your advocate?

JOHAN WILHELM DU PLESSIS: Yes that is correct.

ADV BOSMAN: Where did you sign your statement?

JOHAN WILHELM DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairperson, it was a day before the Application for Amnesty had to be in, it was typed in Bloemfontein.  What I can add there is that it could have been possible that I have seen that typed version, I cannot remember at this stage.

ADV BOSMAN: So you say it was a day before the closing, it would be then the 9th May, although it's not very clear on my copy on page 103, I don't know about your copy.  So it was the 9th May in Bloemfontein where you signed it?

JOHAN WILHELM DU PLESSIS: Yes, I did.

ADV BOSMAN: No further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.  We adjourn till tomorrow morning at half past nine.
WITNESS EXCUSED