Amnesty Hearings — East London — 1999-04-07

MR KNOETZE: Mr Chairman, with respect, may I refer you to Section 18 of the Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act, 34 of 1995.
	It says, any person who wishes to apply for amnesty in respect of first of all, any act, secondly, any omission, thirdly an offence, on the grounds that it is an act associated with a political objective, shall within 12 months from the date of the proclamation referred to in Section 7(3) or such extended period as may be prescribed, submit such an application to the Commission in the prescribed form.  I reiterate, Mr Chairman, act, omission or offence.
	Then if I may take you to Section 19(6), it says, if the act, omission or offence which is the subject of an application under Section 18, constitutes the ground of any claim in civil proceedings instituted against a person, and then it continues, once again, three possibilities are mentioned.
	The same goes for Section 20(1)(b) which says if the Committee, after considering an application for amnesty is satisfied that (b) the act, omission or offence to which the application relates, is an act associated with a political objective, committed in the course of the conflicts of the past, in accordance with the provisions of subsections (2) and (3) and it shall grant amnesty in respect of that act, omission or offence.
	The act, I reiterate Mr Chairman, that he seeks amnesty for is everything in connection with Katzen, that has been spelt out in his application, the formal, written section thereof.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I think if we could have that list that has been compiled - we are taking into account the submission you have made, it is not uncommon for amnesty to be granted in such a way that it covers all offences or delicts that may emanate from a particular act.
	Why I say it is not uncommon, because it is very often the situation that the actual applicant doesn't know precisely what the effect of his act or omission has been.  It is often worded in such a way that the amnesty, if it is granted, it is granted to cover all omissions, and all offences and delicts emanating from an act.
	I think that this list, now that you say that you have done a list,  setting out as far as the applicant is concerned, under the advice of his legal representatives, which offences or delicts may flow out of Operation Katzen, that would go I am sure a long way to answering Mr Mapoma's question.

MR KNOETZE: As you please Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mapoma, can take a look at that and then continue with his questioning.
	We will receive this list as Exhibit E.

MR KNOETZE: Correct Mr Chairman.
LIST OF INCIDENTS COMPILED BY GEN VAN DER WESTHUIZEN, HANDED IN AS EXHIBIT E

MR KNOETZE: Would you like me to read it into the record, Mr Chairman?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, you can do that.

MR KNOETZE: Actions that could possibly believed or be considered to be offences
1.	The liberation of Charles Sebe:
2.	Discrediting actions against Lennox Sebe;
3.   	Kidnapping of Kwane Sebe and his second in command;
4.	Recruitment, training and arming of, or weaponing of the Ciskei soldiers to form the core of the Xhosa Resistance Movement;
5.	The aimed coup against Lennox Sebe, with regards as 5.1, it was envisaged in Plan Katzen and 2, in so far as Plan Katzen could have served as the reason why Gen Ron Reid-Daly in February 1987, launched an attack on Lennox Sebe's house.
6.	The use of words such as remove, get rid of, take away, as contained in Plan Katzen.  In so far as an uninformed person who could possibly read the Plan, could be encouraged to kill or kidnap or discredit the involved people;
7.	Interference with the State authority of the Ciskei.  7.1 by discrediting the Head of Ciskei, Lennox Sebe, 7.2, the establishing of the shadow cabinet for the Ciskei, and 7.3, the clandestine training of the Ciskei people at Port St Johns, and 7.4, the planned toppling of the government of Ciskei and 7.5, the liberation of Charles Sebe.
	That is the list Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Knoetze.  Mr Mapoma?

MR MAPOMA: Thank you Mr Chairperson, I have no further questions.

MR MAPOMA: .

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.  Mr Knoetze, do you have any re-examination?

MR KNOETZE: I do not, thank you Mr Chairman.

MR KNOETZE: .

CHAIRPERSON: I will just ask members of the panel if they have any questions to put to the witness.  Mr Sandi, do you have any questions?

ADV SANDI: Not really a question, but should you not add to this list then plus any other offence or omission flowing out of the implementation of the Katzen Operation?

MR KNOETZE: Mr Chairman, I didn't think it necessary.  This is in addition to what is already in the written application and there we say everything.  As I have said, this is not a list that we bind ourselves to.

ADV SANDI: I thought that is what you were suggesting, in response to some questions by the Chairperson, that it is not only in respect of specific incidents, but also any act flowing out of the execution of that?  But if that is not the way that you want it, you can leave it at that.

CHAIRPERSON: I think the situation as I understand it, is in the application, the application is made for any offence or delict arising out of Katzen and then this is merely a list specifying certain offences or delicts which the applicant considers to have arisen, as a result of the Plan.

MR KNOETZE: That is correct Mr Chairman.  If I may just refer the Commissioner to page 3 of the written application, paragraph 9(a)(i) where we are asked to indicate the deeds, omissions or offences that we seek amnesty for.  There we say Katzen.  I apply for amnesty for any offence based on my own involvement herein.
	That is our departure point.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Sandi, any further questions?  Mr Sibanyoni, any questions?

MR SIBANYONI: Thank you Mr Chairperson, just one or two.  General, I heard you saying that this document which you drew, which eventually became known as Katzen was an a-political piece of document, but the way I see it, it seems it was a political solution to solve what you were required to do to normalise the area in the Eastern Cape.  Wouldn't you say this was purely a political document?

CHRISTOFFEL PIERRE VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Chairperson, yes.  What I said was that myself, the military, is a-political and we serve the government of the day.
	In the context of Katzen, which was a counter revolutionary plan, and in this regard, you move in all the power bases, and as I indicated that 80 percent of the war was waged on the welfare base of which the political or the constitutional part was quite substantial.
	The initial part of Katzen as I indicated, the first part of phase 1, yes, that was military and the rest, there you move on the terrain of social welfare.  Phase 2, 3 and even parts of phase 1, and then it would also out of necessity touch upon the political area.  
	I am not trying to say that I would want to promote the interest of the National Party.

MR SIBANYONI: As the Head of the Army in the Eastern Cape, the request that you should normalise the area, was it supposed to be done in a military fashion or in a political fashion?

CHRISTOFFEL PIERRE VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Chairperson, both military as that in the security component, but also non-military, on the welfare and psychological terrain.  Politics per se and I am referring here to party politics and our approach against counter-revolutionary war, played a very limited role and perhaps just an influencing role.  I repeat we were a-political, we served the government of the day.
	Katzen and also Strelitzia were Plans which covered the whole spectrum of the State's power base and party politics did not play a role, or not a very important role, or even a minor role.

MR SIBANYONI: You also talked about the placement of teachers or lecturers at Universities.  What role did they play, how did that role benefit the Defence Force?