Special Hearings — Mandela United Football Club Hearings — 1997-11-24

MR MAVUNDHLA: Then the interrogation that took place, do you maybe still remember who are the other police officers who were involved in this interrogation?

JOSEPH HUME DU TOIT: I really can't remember, Mr Chair.

MR MAVUNDHLA: But obviouslyu you were present in this interrogation.

JOSEPH HUME DU TOIT: That is correct.

MR MAVUNDHLA: And this interrogation was followed by an assault.

JOSEPH HUME DU TOIT: I have no knowledge of that, Mr Chair.

MR MAVUNDHLA: Mr Du Toit, let's take somebody who took part in that interrogation says the interrogation obviously was followed by an assault, what will be your comment?  And that particular police officer says you personally took part in the assault.  What will your comment be?

JOSEPH HUME DU TOIT: If the person assaulted him, if they admitted it they have done that.  But I can't see why he would have been assaulted because as far as I can remember he co-operated from the beginning.  He said what the documents were about, what he was supposed to do.  I don't know why he would have been assaulted.

MR MAVUNDHLA: Then after you handed Mr Mabotha to Col De Kock what happened then?  Do you maybe still remember?

JOSEPH HUME DU TOIT: No, Mr Chair, I don't remember whether we gave him to Col De Kock.  As I testified I thought we had but it is clear that we brought him back with us to Soweto.

MR MAVUNDHLA: When did you hear about Mr Mabotha's death for the first time?

JOSEPH HUME DU TOIT: It was around the hearing of Col De Kock.

MR MAVUNDHLA: The hearing of Colonel de Kock

JOSEPH HUME DU TOIT: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mavundhla I don't want to interrupt you but we are covering ground that has already been covered, Mr Vally asked him exactly the same question.  He is on record as saying.  So please if there is no new information or new questions I would be grateful if we could finish.

MR MAVUNDLHA: Mr Du Toit you executed the arrest and later on you took the statement from Mr Mabotha.  Later on this guy was handed over to Col De Kock and you heard nothing about this guy.

JOSEPH HUME DU TOIT: Mr Chair, I wasn't at the security branch for long when I left.  So I didn't keep track.   I know I arrested him, I took the statement, he was detained according to the records in Soweto.  Who else dealt with him, what happened to him I don't remember.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Mavundhla.  Mr Semenya, are you

UNKNOWN: Mr Chairman, yes thank you.  Mr Semenya indicated that I should go first and I don't have a problem with that.   Mr Du Toit, there are a few aspects that I would like to highlight which are going to be very interesting to the Commission and which should be investigated further in this light.
 Before I point that out to you and to the Commission I want to ask you the following.  When Mr M Mabotha was taken back to the security branch can you remember whether it was the same day on which he was arrested.

JOSEPH HUME DU TOIT: We returned to Jo'burg on the same day so it  must have been the same day, yes.

UNKNOWN: And if he wasn't left in the care of the people at Vlakplaas for a time?

JOSEPH HUME DU TOIT: I can't remember how long we were there.   You will have to look at the times when he was arrested, when he was detained and so forth.

UNKNOWN: You see this is what I am trying to bring out.  I got some information yesterday from the Soweto security branch and that is what I would like to bring out here.  I have copies.   As I understood your testimony he was arrested on 21 February 1989.

JOSEPH HUME DU TOIT: I think it is 22.    22nd.

UNKNOWN: According to the detention register, and that is also in Col Potgieter's statement in paragraph 4.6 page 40 he was arrested, in other words booked in under section 29 of the detention register on 5 April 1989 and he was released exactly six months later on the 4th October 1989.  I just mention this because it seems to me there is a discrepancy of two months here.   Your testimony is that he went back on exactly the same day.  Now let me put to you what Col Potgieter says.  He remembers, although he is not 100 per cent certain, that probably as he remembers it, Mabotha was taken back to the security police on the same day that he was arrested.  So that agrees with what you have been saying.   We don't know whether the detention register is correct.  It does seem as if there are mistakes.  Further I would like to say that Col Potgieter will testify, I took it up with him just now, that when Mabotha was admitted in terms of section 29 there were no visible signs of assault, that the process in terms of section 29 would have been to send him for a medical examination and that he, who was Col Potgieter, would have known exactly that Mabotha had been assaulted once the medical examination had taken place.  I am saying to you what he would say.

UNKNOWN: No, I don't know about the dates but I would agree with that and that is why these registers are in the police and no person will be detained with injuries because the person who completes the registers are responsible for that person from that moment and if he had been assaulted to that degree they wouldn't have admitted him.  Which is also interesting is that Chappies Klopper, in the document that I just received, which I haven't had a chance to look at refers to the serious assaults in his amnesty application but Col De Kock in his application does not refer to these serious assaults.

JOSEPH HUME DU TOIT: I didn't see the document, Mr Chair, but I accept it as such.

UNKNOWN: Another aspect please, Col Potgieter's statement on page 4.4 refers to the fact that during the tapping of the phones it was realised that a military trained MK was in the Marble Hall environment and that is why he was arrested.  Can you remember anything about that?

JOSEPH HUME DU TOIT: As I said, Mr Chair, I was not part of the management group.  I can't remember whether I was at that stage under the command of Col Potgieter or somebody else but if they got that information it would have been discussed among Col Grobbelaar and Col Potgieter.  It is a security branch.  Sensitive information is dealt with as if sensitive.  It is not as though everybody can be trusted.  I was a junior member at the time and there was no reason why they were to discuss every detail with me.

UNKNOWN: So you can't dispute what Col Potgieter says?

JOSEPH HUME DU TOIT: Not at all.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.  Mr Semenya.

MR SEMENYA: Thank you Chairperson.  Can you explain something to me.  Is deserting from Vlakplaas a criminal offence?

JOSEPH HUME DU TOIT: Dit is onder die polisie wet 'n oortreding, Meneer die Voorsitter.

MR SEMENYA: Was M Mabotha an employee of the South African Police?

JOSEPH HUME DU TOIT: As far as I know if you are an Askari you are a member of the police, Mr Chair.

MR SEMENYA: He deserts from Vlakplaas it takes six high powered members of the security branch to go and effect an arrest.

JOSEPH HUME DU TOIT: Thanks for the compliment, if that was a compliment.   Mr Chair, our information is that it was an Askari.  We didn't know whether he was armed.   Many policemen have been killed because they went on their own initiative and it is procedure that we take as many as possible of people.

MR SEMENYA: On your own terms of going to arrest a colleague who has absconded.  Why would an absconded colleague want to shoot other colleagues?

JOSEPH HUME DU TOIT: It is a colleague who was a trained MK who had deserted.  My opinion is that he didn't associate himself any longer with the police and I don't think he regarded us as colleagues any more.  We acted as we thought necessary.

MR SEMENYA: Is there any reason whatsoever why you had to wait for De Kock to come?