Amnesty Hearings — Pietermaritzburg — UNKNOWN

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mitchell, just dealing briefly - we'll come back to your own notes - with the Joint Management System.  Did you also then come into contact at the Divisional Headquarters with what was called the Joint Management System?

WITNESS:   That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: What was that?

WITNESS:   It's a counter revolutionary strategy that was implemented by the Government at that time in our history during the political violence in the country.

CHAIRPERSON: And what was its main function as you saw it?

WITNESS:  It was to counter the revolutionary onslaught and the maintaining of law and order.  But basically the counter of the revolutionary onslaught.

CHAIRPERSON: Now, what was the security situation as you saw it in Natal during 1987 and 1988?

WITNESS:   There were many attacks.  There was virtually a civil war going on.

CHAIRPERSON: I note that you say that people were killed and that houses were attacked and burnt down.

WITNESS:   That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: What happened to policemen within the townships?

WITNESS:   The policemen were chased out of their homes and their families were chased out.  Their houses were set alight and many of them were killed.

CHAIRPERSON: And you said that eventually, I see in the statement, that Natal became somewhat of a battlefield, is that correct?

WITNESS:   That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: You then became the secretary to the Joint Management System, in the divisional sense of the word, here in Pietermaritzburg, is that correct?

WITNESS:   That is 	/correct.

CHAIRPERSON: correct.

CHAIRPERSON: And what did you learn about the strategies implemented by this system?

WITNESS:   It was a counter revolutionary strategy known as a total strategy against the total onslaught, the latter coming from the UDF, which was regarded as the internal arm of the then banned African National Congress.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you attend meetings of this body?

WITNESS:   I did.

CHAIRPERSON: And who would attend this type of meeting?

WITNESS:   It was mainly the Defence Force and the South African Police, and other Government departments.

CHAIRPERSON: The local Defence Force officers?

WITNESS:   That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Police officers, and what other departments?  Examples?

WITNESS:   Education, social and departments dealing with economical issues.  The only department that was not allowed a sitting on the Joint Management System was the Department of Justice.

CHAIRPERSON: The Department of Justice.  Is it correct that the relevant departments or representatives would be called in as they were needed depending on the circumstances of the topics to be discussed?

WITNESS:   That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: But it would exclude the Department of Justice.  I think you said that.  Would it also happen that certain matters would be discussed in the presence of certain representatives, and they would then be excused and the discussion would continue with those who were left?

WITNESS:  That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: We will return in a little more detail to that.  Did you then become interested in this strategy, the so-called onslaught and the total strategy against the onslaught?   	/---   Yes,

CHAIRPERSON: ---   Yes, I did.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that why you made copies of certain documents?

WITNESS:   That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: What did you do with the documents after you copied it?

WITNESS:   I studied them and used them as part of my work situation.

CHAIRPERSON: Now, the first document - just to identify it - that I want to refer you to is a strategy document, is that correct?

WITNESS:   That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: It is annexure A to your affidavit, attached to your affidavit.

WITNESS:   That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: It actually starts on the marked page 32 of Volume I, is that correct?

WITNESS:   That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: It is dated February 1987.  It's a confidential document.  It was compiled by General-Major Steenkamp of the South African Police Headquarters in Pretoria, is that correct?

WITNESS:   Yes, that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: And the covering letters on pages 37 to 40 in Volume I shows that it was distributed from headquarters to various divisional commissioners and certain section heads throughout the country, is that correct?

WITNESS:   That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: But it was limited to senior officers.  If you look at page 37, in paragraph 3, you will see that - more specifically the section dealing with counter measures - according to the brigadier who wrote this letter, "Contains certain sensitive suggestions and should be distributed to district commandant level."  What rank would that have been under the old dispensation?

WITNESS:   You would then be a colonel.

CHAIRPERSON: Colonel.  Colonel and upwards.

WITNESS:   That is

CHAIRPERSON: /correct.

CHAIRPERSON: correct.

CHAIRPERSON: And you were able to copy - to make a copy because it was available because of your position as secretary of a Joint Management System?

WITNESS:   That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Were it not for that it would not have reached your eyes?

WITNESS:   That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Now, Mr Mitchell, I will return in some detail to the document later when we deal with the notes that you wrote in prison, but in paragraph 26 of your affidavit on page 13 you have given a brief summary of how you saw the document.  How did you see it?

WITNESS:   It was a document, and it was clear that it was a - that there was a total strategy on the side of the Government against what it considered to be the total onslaught.  It was required that the police implement the strategy countrywide.  It included the strategy to train special constables, to take them out of the community, and to place them back in the community as a physical force or wedge against what was described as the tyranny of the Comrades, of the UDF/ANC.  	There was in fact a very brief training, and they were armed with shotguns, mostly 12-bore shotguns, is that correct?   ---   That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: In paragraph 27 you make another observation.  Would you place that on record please, in respect of this document, the strategy document as I will refer to it.

WITNESS:   Yes.  The special constables were used against the UDF forces and the ANC forces.  This was particularly the case in black areas where the UDF/ANC made substantial gains over the years, and to prevent further gains.

CHAIRPERSON: Now, is it correct that the special constables, as the result of the strategy document and other

CHAIRPERSON: /considerations,

CHAIRPERSON: considerations, were then deployed over the country?

WITNESS:  That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: What units or section were they usually attached to?

WITNESS:   To the Riot Units throughout the country.

CHAIRPERSON: The Riot Unit would also have been present on a countrywide basis and in divisions.

WITNESS:   That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: What is also important is that I should ask you to place on record what was the relationship between the Divisional Headquarters in each division and the Riot Unit?

WITNESS:   The Riot Unit fell under the command of the divisional commissioner.

CHAIRPERSON: And were in fact attached to the Divisional Headquarters?

WITNESS:   And were - that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: So, for example, Major Terblanche would have an office both at the Unit and at the Divisional Headquarters.

WITNESS:   That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: And that is why you saw him on a daily basis, is because he would first come in every day to the Divisional Headquarters and his office there.

WITNESS:   That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Before he goes out to where the Unit members are physically stationed.

WITNESS:   That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that correct?

WITNESS:   That is correct.