Amnesty Hearings — Port Elizabeth — 1997-09-29

UNKNOWN: And according to Nieuwoudt?

NICHOLAS JANSE VAN RENSBURG: Nieuwoudt talked about four people.

UNKNOWN: You see in this Mr De Kock also disagrees, according to his application.  He says there were two persons and an informant, if my memory once again, serves me correctly.  Is he wrong?

NICHOLAS JANSE VAN RENSBURG: I would say he is wrong.

UNKNOWN: Are you sure he is wrong, or might you be mistaken?

NICHOLAS JANSE VAN RENSBURG: No, Mr Nieuwoudt mentioned four people when I asked him.

UNKNOWN: Sorry, are you finished?

NICHOLAS JANSE VAN RENSBURG: Yes.

UNKNOWN: You see if Mr De Kock is right, and that is his evidence, the possibility seems to arise that one of the unfortunate four in the car that was blown up, was there purely by chance, that only three persons were mentioned when the operation was discussed in your office, is that a possibility?

NICHOLAS JANSE VAN RENSBURG: No, Mr Nieuwoudt gave four persons names to me and the one I know, three of them I could place, the other one I did not know.  I did not know whether he came there after my time or not, I could not place him.

UNKNOWN: Now, in your discussions with Mr Nieuwoudt, did you put the alternatives to him, the possibility of detaining these persons?

NICHOLAS JANSE VAN RENSBURG: No, I did not mention it to him.

UNKNOWN: Why not?

NICHOLAS JANSE VAN RENSBURG: Because according to him and according to what I have accepted, it had already been cleared.

UNKNOWN: Well, did Mr Nieuwoudt tell you how long these colleagues had been under observation, how long they had been suspected of complicity?

ADV DE JAGER: Before the interval, I thought that it became clear that juniors wouldn't query instructions from the seniors?  That it was in fact dangerous to do so, and in this case, we've got the position, he has repeatedly said so, that Gilbert was his senior.  He got the instructions from a senior and if he would have applied between other juniors and seniors, why shouldn't it apply in this case too?

UNKNOWN: Are you asking me, Mr De Jager?

ADV DE JAGER: Yes, because you are putting the questions on that basis, why didn't you go over the head of Gilbert and investigate?

UNKNOWN: Commissioner, I thought there could at the very least be some distinction between the foot soldier, if one can call it the foot policeman in the street taking orders from his Commanding Officer and two Generals, a Brigadier and a General consulting with each other about an incident of this importance, I thought there might be some distinction.

UNKNOWN: I don't think at this time, this witness was a General already, I think he was a Brigadier himself.

UNKNOWN: May I then say two Brigadiers consulting about a matter of such importance, would you have felt afraid to question your order of Brigadier Gilbert, Mr Van Rensburg?

NICHOLAS JANSE VAN RENSBURG: To question Brigadier Gilbert's instruction, no I did not question what he said.

UNKNOWN: That wasn't the question.  The question was would you have been afraid to do so?

NICHOLAS JANSE VAN RENSBURG: No, I would not have been afraid to do that.

UNKNOWN: Why didn't you then?

NICHOLAS JANSE VAN RENSBURG: We were busy with a telephone conversation and it was clear from what Brigadier Gilbert had said, that he did not want to discuss the matter any further over the telephone.

UNKNOWN: So you were going to satisfy yourself with the information you received from Nieuwoudt, is that right?

NICHOLAS JANSE VAN RENSBURG: Yes, because I believed that it was cleared with Brigadier Gilbert and that he gave permission.

UNKNOWN: And we have already ascertained, it has been your evidence, that you were going to give the orders in respect of your men, not Brigadier Gilbert.  The buck stopped with you, if I could use that phrase in respect of your men from Vlakplaas?

NICHOLAS JANSE VAN RENSBURG: Yes.

UNKNOWN: And your men, as we have already ascertained, were relying on you to make an educated decision in so far as those orders were concerned?

NICHOLAS JANSE VAN RENSBURG: That is correct.

UNKNOWN: Then why didn't you consider the alternatives, why didn't you investigate them with Mr Nieuwoudt, I am not sure what his rank was at the time?  The alternative of detention?

NICHOLAS JANSE VAN RENSBURG: No, I did not sir because I have already answered this question, I did not do that because I believed that Mr Gilbert had cleared this matter and he cleared this matter at head quarters, and that they had discussed these aspects already.

UNKNOWN: Now, as has happened Mr Van Rensburg, because you are sitting here today, as this happened things went wrong, if I can use that phrase as far as you were concerned, because now you are before this Committee for Amnesty for your involvement for this matter.  Did you not think that you needed to cover your back as it were, to go to higher authority yourself?

NICHOLAS JANSE VAN RENSBURG: No, I did not.  I was under the impression that I was going to take the responsibility, and I did just that.

UNKNOWN: I am not sure if I asked the question, if you answered it, I am sorry if I am repeating it, but were you aware how long these people had been under observation, the victims?

NICHOLAS JANSE VAN RENSBURG: No, I don't know.

UNKNOWN: And you made no attempt to ascertain that?

NICHOLAS JANSE VAN RENSBURG: No, I did not.

UNKNOWN: You made no attempt to ascertain the extent of their communication with the ANC or the allegations in that regard?

NICHOLAS JANSE VAN RENSBURG: No, I heard from Mr Nieuwoudt that there were certain informers and there was surveillance and such things.

UNKNOWN: Well, if the portion you read earlier on, is anything to go by, the allegations must have been that there were substantial contact with the ANC by these members before then.  They had received orders to place a limpet mine under a Security vehicle, there was the possibility of information being conveyed with relation to the murders of Messrs Goniwe and the others, so you must have been aware there was a substantial amount of communication with the ANC according to the information?

NICHOLAS JANSE VAN RENSBURG: Yes, according to what I have been told, yes.

UNKNOWN: And one of the primary reasons for the murder of these four persons was that they should not cause this disastrous release of information with regard to the safe houses, with regard to the identity of the informants and the like, did I understand your evidence correctly?

NICHOLAS JANSE VAN RENSBURG: That is correct.

UNKNOWN: And you are looking for a hundred percent guarantee in so far as their silencing was concerned?

NICHOLAS JANSE VAN RENSBURG: Yes, that is what I believed.

UNKNOWN: What was there to suggest that they hadn't conveyed to the ANC everything that they knew, already and the ANC was just waiting for the best opportunity to use it?

NICHOLAS JANSE VAN RENSBURG: I don't know.  I can't answer that question.

UNKNOWN: Well, did you try to investigate it Mr Van Rensburg?

NICHOLAS JANSE VAN RENSBURG: No, not personally.

UNKNOWN: Did you even ask Nieuwoudt about it, that possibility that you are closing after the horse is bolted, what point is there in killing these persons, they must have given all the information away already?

NICHOLAS JANSE VAN RENSBURG: Yes, I don't know how much information has been already been conveyed to the ANC.  There was also the question of the limpet mine which I accept could have happened at any time.  That was how it happened.

UNKNOWN: That is not an answer to my question, my question is did you canvass this with Mr Nieuwoudt?

NICHOLAS JANSE VAN RENSBURG: No, I did not.

UNKNOWN: Well, on the premise which you have already told this Commission, that the murder of persons was the last possible alternative, why didn't you?

NICHOLAS JANSE VAN RENSBURG: I have already told you that according to what had been told to me is that this aspect had already been cleared on a higher level.