Amnesty Hearings — Port Elizabeth — 1997-10-01

MR BOOYENS: You also have no recollection of whether he stayed behind in the car or whether he got out or what?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: No, because if I can remember anything, and I am wrong, then I would mention it here, then I would correct myself.

MR BOOYENS: You agree that there was no indication that Nieuwoudt had any form of transport?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: No, I saw no vehicles or strange vehicles there or any other vehicles.

MR BOOYENS: It is relatively unimportant, is it not, whether Nieuwoudt drove with you or not, because it doesn't really affect the evidence?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: That I must leave in the hands of the Committee.

MR BOOYENS: Yes, but as far as your memory is concerned. Is it correct? It is really an unimportant detail in the whole scheme of things.

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: I can't say.

MR BOOYENS: It could be a detail that you could easily forget.

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: The Chairperson will have to decide that matter.

MR BOOYENS: Did you first go to Brig Van Rensburg?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Yes, I went directly to his office when I arrived at head office.

MR BOOYENS: For what reason specifically?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Specifically to go and ask him what was so serious about this fraud matter that we had to kill three people on that basis.

MR BOOYENS: But you already had the protection which you formed in his house?  What had happened to change that?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Yes, that is correct, but on walking back to my house I started reflecting on it.

MR BOOYENS: There is a conflict of emotions, and you are involved with the Harmse Commission. You have just been suspended or placed on special leave.

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: We were actually being investigated because we had killed and now we were preparing to kill once again.  So this time it wasn't an issue of ANC or PAC, they were colleagues.  So it was a weighty matter and it is not a decision which you take lightly.

CHAIRPERSON: We have spent some time about this.  Do you have a problem if somebody is being taken by surprise, being told unexpectedly that you are going to kill your colleagues because he embezzled some money. He doesn't say anything. He goes, he leaves, then he reflects. He gets time to reflect properly on the issue and then decides to go back and discuss it again.  Do you have a problem about that?

MR BOOYENS: No, Mr Chairman, but I do have a problem if somebody tells me at the stage when he is initially told that the people are going to be killed about fraud, he happily accepts that and then ... (intervention).

CHAIRPERSON: He didn't say that he happily accepted it.

MR BOOYENS: Or he accepted it.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR BOOYENS: That that was a valid reason for killing them.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you have a problem if later on proper reflection he decides to go back and discuss it again?

MR BOOYENS: No, Mr Chairman, except that of course the evidence is that he didn't.

CHAIRPERSON: Whose evidence

MR BOOYENS: Van Rensburg's evidence that he didn't come back to him.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, he has been saying it for the past five minutes.  And you are still going back to it again.

MR BOOYENS: Yes, very well, Mr Chairman. Can I carry on on his walking back?  Mr De Kock, whilst you were walking back to your house, this matter started bothering you. Is that correct?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Yes. I had time to reflect.

MR BOOYENS: Yes, I understand that. According to your statement, Nieuwoudt was walking alongside you.

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Yes.

MR BOOYENS: And Nieuwoudt, and logically speaking, had to know more about what was going on than Van Rensburg, because he was the local man from Port Elizabeth.

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Correct.

MR BOOYENS: Why didn't you ask Nieuwoudt look, what exactly is going on here, what is this fraud business?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Nieuwoudt wasn't known to me at that stage.
And if he didn't inform me more completely, and thoroughly at Van Rensburg's home, the only place where I could get the answer was Van Rensburg himself.

MR BOOYENS: What made you to think that?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Well, it is only practical.  What must I do with Nieuwoudt?  Must I use a tube on him?

MR BOOYENS: Come on Mr De Kock.  Nieuwoudt and yourself and Van Rensburg had already decided you were going to kill people, and what was bothering you, was the initial reason given to you for the action, and the local man on the ground in Port Elizabeth, is present in your company.  Whether you know him or not.  You are already co-conspirators in murder.  Why didn't you ask him exactly what was going on?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: No, Chairperson, I didn't know him well enough to ask him about it any further. I didn't do it. I believe that in retrospect I perhaps could have done so, but at that stage I didn't.

MR BOOYENS: I put it to you, Mr De Kock, that if you had seriously reflected on this matter, and where you were in the company of one of the prime movers of this matter, you would have discussed it with him.

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Yes, if I have to speculate, I suppose I would have got the same answer as the one as I got at Van Rensburg's home.

MR BOOYENS: You entered your house and Nieuwoudt disappeared.

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Correct.

MR BOOYENS: You arranged to meet later at the technical section?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Correct.

MR BOOYENS: But you first had to find out whether Waal du Toit was there?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Correct.

MR BOOYENS: What was your arrangement with Nieuwoudt, what time were you to meet each other at technical?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: I have no recollection of that.  I can't recall what the arrangements were. I could speculate as to who was to phone whom, but I can't do that. I can't recall that.

MR BOOYENS: No, I understand that you can't remember that.  But the probabilities are that if you made no arrangements, then it wouldn't have been necessary if the man went along with you.

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: As I have already said, if Nieuwoudt was with me, I would have said that. I have no reason to prejudice him.

MR BOOYENS: Yes, but what I am putting to you is that because there were no arrangements made with Nieuwoudt as to when and where to meet at the technical section, you couldn't make such an arrangement, and that's why I am suggesting to you that the reason why there was no such an arrangement or could be no such an arrangement is because he actually accompanied you.

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: I can't speculate on that.

MR BOOYENS: Would you agree with me, Mr De Kock, that it fits in very logically with the fact that Nieuwoudt went along with you?

ADV DE JAGER: Mr Booyens, you are now degenerating into argument. Those arguments you can submit to the Committee later on.  Please don't argue with the witnesses about this.

MR BOOYENS: Yes, thank you, Chairperson. In any event, Nieuwoudt and yourself arrived at the technical section at the same time.

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: I am not sure. I can't give you the detail.

MR BOOYENS: I suppose you also don't know whether you met Nieuwoudt at the technical section.  Can you give us information about that?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: As far as I can recall, I met him in the office, with Waal du Toit or in Waal du Toit's office. That's how I recall it.

MR BOOYENS: How did he know that he should go to Waal du Toit?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: It could have been discussed with him.

MR BOOYENS: By whom?

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: If it was discussed it would have been discussed with me.

MR BOOYENS: But you hadn't, at that stage had knowledge of whether Waal was there.

EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK: Correct.