Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1999-07-26

FREDERIK JOHANNES PIENAAR: No they were not continually present Chairperson but I believed that they did have knowledge about what was planned there, but they were not present all the time during our discussion.

MS VAN DER WALT: That is correct and they will also testify that they knew that these persons would be lured into an ambush?

FREDERIK JOHANNES PIENAAR: That is correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: And is it correct that Mr de Kock gave the instructions and they regarded him as their senior?

FREDERIK JOHANNES PIENAAR: That is correct, we worked under Col de Kock at that time.

MS VAN DER WALT: And Mr van Dyk and Mr Botha also acted or crossed the border on the instruction of Mr de Kock?

FREDERIK JOHANNES PIENAAR: That is correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: No further questions thank you Chairperson.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS VAN DER WALT

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.  Mr Cornelius, do you have any questions you'd like to ask the applicant?

MR CORNELIUS: Thank you Mr Chairman.

MR CORNELIUS: Mr Pienaar, I'd just like you to sketch for the Committee the use of C Section. Security does certain actions and gathers information and then you request C Section to assist you, is that correct?

FREDERIK JOHANNES PIENAAR: That is correct Chairperson.

MR CORNELIUS: So you first obtain all the information and you identify the target and then you, in your capacity as Security takes the decision to involve C Section?

FREDERIK JOHANNES PIENAAR: That is correct, Chairperson.

MR CORNELIUS: You have no doubt that these MK members who would come in and infiltrate Natal, would endanger the public and the government?

FREDERIK JOHANNES PIENAAR: That is correct.

MR CORNELIUS: Did you have any doubt as to the quality or reliability of the informant from whom you obtained the information?

FREDERIK JOHANNES PIENAAR: I had no doubt Chairperson.

MR CORNELIUS: Did you doubt about the quality of the information from the source?

FREDERIK JOHANNES PIENAAR: No Chairperson.

MR CORNELIUS: Did you in the past test the information of the source and find it satisfactory?

FREDERIK JOHANNES PIENAAR: Yes, Chairperson, it was always indicated as correct.

MR CORNELIUS: Did you believe that the vehicles which would come into these two ambushes, that the two occupants would be armed?

FREDERIK JOHANNES PIENAAR: I was convinced thereof, Chairperson.

MR CORNELIUS: Did you expect that a possible shooting could ensue?

FREDERIK JOHANNES PIENAAR: Definitely Chairperson.

MR CORNELIUS: After you had established the reliability of the source's information, did you convey it to Mr de Kock?  Did you believe that he would have the same conviction as you?

FREDERIK JOHANNES PIENAAR: Yes, I did believe so.

MR CORNELIUS: Was there any reason for Mr de Kock and his team to doubt your information or doubt the target which you had identified?

FREDERIK JOHANNES PIENAAR: No.

MR CORNELIUS: Or the fact that you believed that these people would be heavily armed, to doubt that?

FREDERIK JOHANNES PIENAAR: No, Chairperson.

MR CORNELIUS: Did all of you believe that it would be men or trained MK members?

FREDERIK JOHANNES PIENAAR: We believed that it would be trained MK members and for no second did I even think of women.

MR CORNELIUS: So the logical question which this Committee would put to you is, was there another alternative to killing these persons, to eliminate them?

FREDERIK JOHANNES PIENAAR: Chairperson, yes.  They could have been arrested if one found many people, but there was always the possibility that some of your people could be killed or injured during such a skirmish.

MR CORNELIUS: And from appearances in the past before this Committee we have also learned that sometimes it was very difficult and there was sometimes a lack of evidence to prove a case against someone like this, after their arrest?

FREDERIK JOHANNES PIENAAR: That is correct.

MR CORNELIUS: Did you then rely upon your judgment of the information which you had received and then take the easier route in eliminating these enemies or infiltrators?

FREDERIK JOHANNES PIENAAR: That is correct.

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

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.  Mr Hattingh, do you have any questions you'd like to ask?

MR HATTINGH: Yes, thank you Mr Chairman.

MR HATTINGH: Mr Pienaar, you have heard Mr de Kock's evidence that he himself had an interview with the informer?

FREDERIK JOHANNES PIENAAR: With the?

MR HATTINGH: With the informer.

FREDERIK JOHANNES PIENAAR: That is correct.

MR HATTINGH: You also heard his evidence that the person who climbed out of the left front side of the minibus did not fire a
shot.  Is it possible that you may have confused his shot with the shot that you think this person fired?

FREDERIK JOHANNES PIENAAR: No, I'm certain that this person did fire a shot.  As I explained to the Committee, there was also an AK shell which was found on the scene which, unlike the first case, was not fired by one of the members but by the deceased.

MR HATTINGH: Did that shell form part of the evidence during the inquest?

FREDERIK JOHANNES PIENAAR: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, Mr Hattingh.  When you say that you were certain that Mr de Kock fired, besides the doppie that was found there, the AK47 doppie, is there any other reason why you say that you were certain that he fired?

FREDERIK JOHANNES PIENAAR: I saw the fire from the AK.  I was diagonally behind Col de Kock.  I could see it clearly and I am convinced that this person did indeed fire a shot.

ADV GCABASHE: Is it possible, Mr Pienaar, that he actually fired that shot after Mr de Kock shot him as he fell backwards and that's where the shell comes from?

FREDERIK JOHANNES PIENAAR: That would be a questions of seconds it is a possibility.  As I remember the situation, I watched the person, I saw the fire emerging from the weapon, I saw the beginning of
the shot.  It would have been a question of split seconds.

MR HATTINGH: Thank you Mr Chairman, no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR HATTINGH

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.  Mr van der Merwe, in Mr Booyens' absence, do you have any questions?

MR VAN DER MERWE: Thank you Mr Chairman, just one question.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Mr Pienaar, I am representing Mr Tait as well.  You confirmed that they crossed the border with the second incident on the 12th June under the command of Mr de Kock?

FREDERIK JOHANNES PIENAAR: Yes, that is correct.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Thank you, Mr Chairman, no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VAN DER MERWE

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.  Mr Lamey?

MR LAMEY: Thank you, Chairperson.

MR LAMEY: Mr Pienaar, did you subsequently have a conversation with Mr Manzini as to why he did not stop at the specific point?

FREDERIK JOHANNES PIENAAR: I did, Chairperson.  Manzini explained to me, and this was also confirmed by the persons who had crossed the border, when the four MK members were picked up by Manzini they immediately cocked their weapons and climbed into the kombi.  They told Manzini not to worry, that if they were apprehended he shouldn't stop for anything, that they would protect him and that put a great fear into him and I think that it is for that reason that he drove past the mark before he stopped.

MR MALAN: I beg your pardon. Do you believe this or is this something that he told you?

FREDERIK JOHANNES PIENAAR: He told me, Chairperson and it was confirmed.

MR MALAN: No, the question to you was whether you had a conversation with Manzini?

FREDERIK JOHANNES PIENAAR: Yes, I did.

MR MALAN: And then you believed him on the basis of your conversation or was there something specific that he told you?

FREDERIK JOHANNES PIENAAR: He told me what happened there and I believed him.