Amnesty Hearings — Boksburg — 1998-06-25

MR LANDMAN: Mr Fourie, is it not correct that nowhere in that paragraph do you say that Commandant Du Plessis gave you instructions to accompany Mr Steyn and Mr Nel on this mission?

GERHARDUS D FOURIE: That is correct, I did not write it down here, but I did make a note there that Du Plessis was the Commandant of Operations, and you are correct I did not write it in here.

MR LANDMAN: Is it not correct that it was your brother, Commandant Abe Fourie, who asked you to go with, who asked if you would go with Peet Steyn and Jaco Nel?

GERHARDUS D FOURIE: No, that is not correct.  I told my brother that I, I told him that I am driving with Jaco Nel and Peet Steyn to Pretoria and he asked me, do I want to drive with them and I said yes, I've received an instruction to go with them.

MR LANDMAN: You see Mr Fourie, I want to put to you what the more important part of that evidence is, what Mr Du Plessis told you, the order that you were given, yet you don't even include this in paragraph 24.
	Are you not protecting your brother?

GERHARDUS D FOURIE: No, it is not necessary to protect him, he was a Commandant, he was a Camp Commandant and the instructions were given by the Commandant of Operations.  I do not think that he would have given such an instruction, he would have given it to everyone, but he did not give any instructions.

MR LANDMAN: When did you first see the pipe bombs?

GERHARDUS D FOURIE: The pipe bombs, I saw when I arrived there, people were still unloading pipe bombs out of this car, and I saw them, I saw the pipe bomb in Pretoria in the boot of the vehicle.

MR LANDMAN: Mr Fourie, were you told what the target was?

GERHARDUS D FOURIE: As I have already testified, it was taxi ranks.

MR LANDMAN: Who told you that?

GERHARDUS D FOURIE: I have already answered that, Commandant Du Plessis.

MR LANDMAN: And were you told to go specifically to Pretoria?

GERHARDUS D FOURIE: That was my instruction, I must go with Jaco Nel and Peet Steyn to Pretoria.

MR LANDMAN: Mr Fourie, did you realise at that stage that the election was a couple of days away?

GERHARDUS D FOURIE: That is correct yes.

MR LANDMAN: And that it was now urgent for you to ensure that these bombs went off in order that the election could be stopped?

GERHARDUS D FOURIE: That is correct yes.

MR LANDMAN: Yet, despite that you did all sorts of things that day and only placed the bomb, or the bomb only went off later that evening?

GERHARDUS D FOURIE: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Landman, you have long exceeded your two or three questions.

MR LANDMAN: Mr Chairman, if I could find my second question.  I can't find it ...[intervention]

MR LANDMAN: .

MR PRIOR: Mr Chairman, it just strikes me that although one can't preclude cross-examination, my understanding was because there were certain events where certain people had interests, cross-examination by those still interested in those events, would ask those questions.
	I just place it on record in the interest of limiting, in saving time, we are entitled, the Committee is entitled to invoke Section 34(2) of the Act and to place reasonable limits with regard to the time allowed in respect of cross-examination.
	A lot of these issues have been canvassed with the other nine applicants, it just seems to me that as ideas are coming up, questions are being asked with respect.

CHAIRPERSON: It doesn't mean that it has been canvassed with other witnesses, it can't be canvassed again.  I think leave the Committee explore the application ...[intervention]

MR PRIOR: Well, I am on record.  I have placed my view on record, thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Kriel?

ANDRIES STEPHANUS KRIEL: Thank you Mr Chairman, if I can just reply to Adv Prior, there was an objection when I partook in the cross-examination yesterday, my answer was why was I cross-examination and I said in search of the truth, and I think that is why we are all here sir.
	We will limit ourselves, but that is the search, all the endeavour that we are here for.
	Thank you Mr Chairperson.  Mr Fourie, just a few aspects, you heard yesterday the evidence of Mr Jaco Nel and Mr Peet Steyn, is that correct?

GERHARDUS D FOURIE: Yes, that is correct.

ANDRIES STEPHANUS KRIEL: With whose version do you identify yourself, Mr Nel or Mr Steyn's?

GERHARDUS D FOURIE: Mr Steyn.

CHAIRPERSON: I think to be fair, it can be put to him that they are not completely opposed to each other, the two versions, there are just certain aspects.

INTERPRETER: The speaker's microphone please.

ANDRIES STEPHANUS KRIEL: ...[inaudible] Pretoria, can I put it as follows, with the events Monday in Pretoria, it was the version of Jaco Nel and the version of Peet Steyn, with which of these versions do you identify yourself with?

MR PRINSLOO: With respect Mr Chairperson, that evening in Pretoria, there were only a few differences in aspects, and he should indicate what aspects differ from Mr Fourie and Mr Nel's.
	There are various aspects, especially the most important aspects.

CHAIRPERSON: Can you specifically ask the person then what the differences are?  I know what you are trying, but you were now challenged to be specific.

ANDRIES STEPHANUS KRIEL: Mr Chairperson, I wanted to limit my cross-examination, if the Committee then sees it as such.
	According to Jaco Nel, he went to go and visit two blind friends in a flat in Pretoria and according to Peet Steyn, there were women present?

GERHARDUS D FOURIE: That is correct.

ANDRIES STEPHANUS KRIEL: I accept there were women present.

GERHARDUS D FOURIE: At the flat?

ANDRIES STEPHANUS KRIEL: Yes, that is correct and also later that day at the holiday resort.

GERHARDUS D FOURIE: That evening, yes, women were involved yes.

ANDRIES STEPHANUS KRIEL: And you were at the hearing?

GERHARDUS D FOURIE: Yes.

ANDRIES STEPHANUS KRIEL: And there were talk about a relationship of Mr Jaco Nel?

GERHARDUS D FOURIE: That is correct.

ANDRIES STEPHANUS KRIEL: Was it with one of the women who were there at the flat in Pretoria and also at the Hartebeespoort?

GERHARDUS D FOURIE: Yes, that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Was it the same women of the flat that was at the holiday resort?

GERHARDUS D FOURIE: Yes, that is correct.

ANDRIES STEPHANUS KRIEL: Did it seem as it such an affair existed?

GERHARDUS D FOURIE: No, I cannot comment on that because you have to get the facts right, and I haven't got any facts to substantiate it.  He was with her in a room when we arrived there at the holiday resort.
	They left with both of the women.  I don't know if there was an affair or relationship, I do not want to get involved in this.

ANDRIES STEPHANUS KRIEL: Thank you.   Early the morning you then left the holiday resort and went back to the game farm where you found Major Smit and it was obvious that this person was angry because you arrived so late?

GERHARDUS D FOURIE: Yes, that is correct.

ANDRIES STEPHANUS KRIEL: The group in the hall was not the original group the way I understood it, because the people from Natal arrived?

GERHARDUS D FOURIE: No Mr Chairperson, that group was still the same.  The people from Natal arrived there even before I left there that Monday.

ANDRIES STEPHANUS KRIEL: Did you then leave for the shooting range?

GERHARDUS D FOURIE: Yes, that is correct.

ANDRIES STEPHANUS KRIEL: And from the shooting range, with the approval, did you go to your wives?

GERHARDUS D FOURIE: Yes, and also to get food because we only had a week's food with us.

ANDRIES STEPHANUS KRIEL: When did you realise that there is trouble, you have to flee?

GERHARDUS D FOURIE: The morning we went to Ventersdorp, we arrived there, the leader Mr Terreblanche said or told us that Nico Prinsloo and Leon van der Merwe were arrested.

ANDRIES STEPHANUS KRIEL: What day was it when you arrived in Ventersdorp, and this is now with the leader?

GERHARDUS D FOURIE: This was the 27th of April 1994.