Amnesty Hearings — Cape Town — 1998-02-10

MR DU PLESSIS: I did say what my contribution as in this regard.

MR ROUX: He will testify that you were involved in the assault as described by him in his statement.  He will also give evidence that you were also involved in the torture and you gave instructions - written instructions to the people who did this torture, to determine what questions had to be asked and how they had to torture him.

MR DU PLESSIS: I think that is ridiculous.

MR ROUX: Thank you Mr Chairman.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR ROUX

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Booyens, any re-examination?

MR BOOYENS: I've got no re-examination thank you Mr Chairman.

JUDGE PILLAY: Mr du Plessis tell me, before the note was found, did Mr Kondile know what the nature of his tasks in Lesotho would be?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, I informed him in detail.

JUDGE PILLAY: In other words he knew that he was going back to Lesotho?

MR DU PLESSIS: That's correct, yes.

JUDGE PILLAY: And he would be in contact with the ANC again?

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct.

JUDGE PILLAY: And despite that he wrote notes?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes.

JUDGE PILLAY: The other thing I want to establish, how did it happen that you disclosed the identity of your main informer?

MR DU PLESSIS: How did it happen?  I don't know what you mean.  I told him about it, I had no choice.  I had to tell him about the information intelligence network, how we had to infiltrate, what we wanted from him, how he had to convey the information to me and I had to mention the principle agent and I also mentioned places where he would work.

JUDGE PILLAY: That information, was it provided to him to convince him to become an informer or did he request that information from you?

MR DU PLESSIS: No, I did not give the information to him to convince him or persuade him, he'd already been persuaded.  The information I provided him had to do with liaison that's all.  He had various ideas how he could return to Lesotho so that they would not suspect him.
	The principle agent - the intelligence regarding the principle agent was concerned about the liaison of him as an informer that had to do with the infiltration and how we wanted it to happen.

JUDGE PILLAY: As I understand your version now is, in the end the roles were reversed, he got information from you.

MR DU PLESSIS: I would say visa versa, from both sides.

JUDGE PILLAY: How did you feel when you found out that he had obtained this information? this information?

MR DU PLESSIS: I did not feel badly about the information he had obtained because I provided it.

JUDGE PILLAY: How do you feel about the fact that he obtained this information?

MR DU PLESSIS: I don't understand what you're saying but I understand what you want to know.

JUDGE PILLAY: As I understand it the roles were reversed, you had to obtain information from him and in the end he obtained from you, when you found this out - that he had betrayed you, how did you feel about that?

MR DU PLESSIS: I felt very bad.

JUDGE PILLAY: Were you angry?

MR DU PLESSIS: I don't think I was angry at that stage, I was disappointed and I was shocked because of a wrong judgement at that moment and I've done that in many instances where it worked.  I think the trust that I had put in him was shocked.

JUDGE PILLAY: Thank you.

MR BOOYENS: Mr Chairman, arising from the questions your brother asked at this stage, perhaps - it seems to me there may still be some uncertainty, may I perhaps just ask a few questions in re-examination in this regard?
	Mr du Plessis, let's put it simply, we're going through the various steps.  Initially you interrogate Mr Kondile and he provides you with information regarding the Lesotho operation.

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct, internal and foreign.

MR BOOYENS: And then you train him as an informer and he indicates that he would act as an informer.

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct.

MR BOOYENS: The purpose of this is, after he had indicated that he would be an informer you had to use him and your purpose is to send him back to Lesotho.  The information which he had to gather there as an informer, where does this principle agent come into this whole process?

MR DU PLESSIS: The information which he would gather would come via the principle agent to me.  I would also give the principle agent the necessary instructions to brief Kondile and also to debrief him based on what I what I require.

MR BOOYENS: The reason therefore why the name of the principle agent was provided to him was that he had to know whom to report to.

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct.

ADV GCABASHE: If I may ask Mr du Plessis, does this mean that at that stage when you had told him who the principle agent was, his release to Lesotho as somebody who then worked for you was imminent?

MR DU PLESSIS: As far as it concerns me, yes but he didn't know it.

ADV GCABASHE: And imminent being in a few days, in a week?

MR DU PLESSIS: I can't remember, there was still quite a lot of work we had to discuss.  I can just speculate but I'm not going to do that, I don't know but what I can say is that at that stage he did not expect to be released at that stage already.

ADV GCABASHE: But at this stage he was still in detention yes?

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct.

ADV GCABASHE: He had no visitors except yourself, Raath and Danster who guarded him?

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct.

ADV GCABASHE: And in no way was he a free agent at all, he had no other visitors?

MR DU PLESSIS: I don't know whether the inspector of detainees visited him, I don't know, I have no documentation in this regard.  I don't know whether doctors had visited him.  And if you refer to the end of his detention when he was detained in the barracks, I would say yes, just there.

ADV DE JAGER: What did you say? - when he was detained in the single quarters?  (Transcriber's own translation)

ADV DE JAGER: When he was detained in the single quarters it was only Danster and Raath who was responsible for him there and then also I.

ADV GCABASHE: At what stage would Mr van Rensburg have had the opportunity to visit him?

MR DU PLESSIS: At any time if he wanted to.

ADV GCABASHE: You would not necessarily know about this?

MR DU PLESSIS: No, I would not know about it but practice taught me that if Mr van Rensburg had visited him he would have told me.  If he came to the police station and he wanted to visit him he was free to do so.  Any police officer is justified to visit a detainee at any time.

ADV GCABASHE: But you have no clue as to who may or may not have gone?

MR DU PLESSIS: No, the documentation is not available now. If an officer had visited him or any other person, they made entries in that specific file that they had paid him visits.
	Unfortunately we don't have access to those documents and that was done to determine at a later stage - like for example, 16/17 years later, what happened to that person.  It was a book in which was written what food he ate, which medicine was given to him, everything was written in that book.

ADV GCABASHE: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you Mr du Plessis.
WITNESS EXCUSED

MR BOOYENS: Mr Chairman, can we just arrange things, I want to call Mr van Rensburg next.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.