Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — UNKNOWN

ANSWER: Obviously the police were much better then becausetoday you won't have the police coming to your house in 15
2 minutes /...
MR MPSHE 268 J HECHTER
minutes.   I can't help you in this instance, I can't explainit.

<UNKNOWN>: Are you further aware that Gerry Thibedi and his family afterthis incident, were detained by the Bophutatswana police?

ANSWER: Unfortunately not at all, I never went back toany of my, any of the places where I acted, I committed a deedin this case but I never went back.   We did receive reports butin the light of the fact that Gerry was not one of the subjectsof my office, I can unfortunately not help you, I do not know.

<UNKNOWN>: ...operation of yours, was there any follow-upby members of the security force on Gerry Thibedi?

ANSWER: Unfortunately I can't answer this, I do not know.

CHAIRPERSON: Of the many incidents in respect of which youare applying for amnesty, are there any incidents of which youhave a clear recollection?

ANSWER: Yes Mr Chair I can for example remember Hon Mkhatshwa.  I can also remember the preparation regarding the operationagainst him, and there are also other incidents I can rememberto a greater or to a lesser extent.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR MPSHE (contd)

<UNKNOWN>: Page 172 of your application, I think one ofmy colleagues has already asked a question relating to this aspect
  "Gerry Thibedi was possibly killed or injured in termsof his family and the inhabitants of his house, etc..."
Was that from your personal recollection or...?

ANSWER: No we discussed these issues Mr Van Vuuren andI, we sat in an office and discussed them and we wondered about
2 it /...
MR MPSHE 269 J HECHTER
it and a lot of information became more clear as we discussedit.   If you forgot something and you discuss it with a colleagueor a friend, somebody who was with you for example at a rugbymatch you can perhaps later remember some of those things.   Ata later stage once again, you will disagree once again about amemory but this must during our initial discussion have come through.

<UNKNOWN>: ...in line with the trend of discussion youhad with Mr Van Vuuren?

ANSWER: Yes I did hear in his testimony that this wasa safe-house, it was discussed at a later stage but in my applicationit was never corrected.   I accept that in his application itwas put that it was a safe-house but originally we discussed itand wondered if it was his house.  During our initial discussionsthis came to the fore.

<UNKNOWN>: ...in terms of the police understanding ofa safe-house, you would not expect a person to use a house inwhich, you wouldn't describe a person's house where he lived withhis family, as a safe-house?

ANSWER: No not at all.

<UNKNOWN>: If in fact there was a perception amongst youand your colleagues that Mr Thibedi lived in that house with hisfamily, then that house could hardly be described as a safe-house.

ANSWER: Yes that is so but I want to make it very clearthat possibly at a later stage it was corrected by Mr Van Vuuren,I only omitted to correct my application.   I heard in his applicationthat he said it was a safe-house, perhaps in the initial discussionduring our initial discussion thereof it was discussed that itwas his house.   It is possible but it is also true that a privatehouse can never
2 be /...
MR MPSHE 270 J HECHTER
be a safe-house.

<UNKNOWN>: If this house can hardly be described as asafe-house, then it means you destroyed a house which was nota legitimate....

ANSWER: The house was not the target, Mr Thibedi wasthe target.

<UNKNOWN>: In fact you could have...destroying the house?

ANSWER: Under circumstances yes but the problem we hadwas where do we find Mr Thibedi, when do we find him, he was livingin Shoshunguwe, we do not know the area of Shoshunguwe, it's farfrom our base and the place where we operated.   Times were difficultin black townships and one did not want to go into them unnecessarily.  Your yourself was there and you know how it was there.   Ifyou were found there you would have had problems, if you werea white person in a black township.

<UNKNOWN>: ...the police just got annoyed and angry withthis person and then they decided that we destroy his house.

ANSWER: Mr Chair no, we truly in all the cases in whichI was involved believed there were more than one reports frominformants, I received my information from Col Loots.  The volumeof information that came through which we received from variousinformants, we were never personally involved with these persons,he was the enemy and we were simply not personally involved.  We did not experience a personal feeling of animosity.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MPSHE
RE-EXAMINATION BY MR DU PLESSIS

<UNKNOWN>: Thank you Mr Chairman.   Captain Hechter hadyour application been drafted in terms of what you rememberedof what Mr Van Vuuren told you?
2 ANSWER: /...
MR DU PLESSIS 271 J HECHTER

ANSWER: Yes Mr Chair.

<UNKNOWN>: Captain Hechter could you explain to the Committeebriefly, I know Mr Van Vuuren also did so, why you used a bomb?

ANSWER: This bomb, if it does not eliminate, has a remarkableintimidation factor in the first place, and then secondly thegeneral public as well as other security forces would have deducedthat the ANC was playing with explosives and simply blew themselvesup.   This was the rationale for our use of this kind of bombor explosive device.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR DU PLESSIS

MR DU PLESSIS: : Mr Chairman may I proceed with the nextincident?

CHAIRPERSON: (Inaudible).

INTERPRETER: The Chair is not using his mike.
MR ?:: Mr Chairman I may mention that the legal representativeof Mr Deon Nieuwoudt is present here.

CHAIRPERSON: (Inaudible).

INTERPRETER: The Chair is not using his mike.

UNKNOWN: Mr Van der Merwe I'm afraid you're not neara loudspeaker you'll have to come forward.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Thank you, I beg your pardon.   Thename is Francois Van der Merwe and I am from the firm Van derMerwe & Bester in Port Elizabeth, an attorney's firm, I aman attorney.   I have arrived here this morning, I don't knowMr Chairman what you expect of me, I wasn't present when the previousprocedures took place.   We are unfortunately, I would respectfullyrequest that the proceedings be, as far as Mr Nieuwoudt is concerned,be postponed.   We are of the opinion that the summons was servedon a very short notice on Mr Nieuwoudt.   We received
2 the /...
MR VAN DER MERWE 272 ADDRESS
the summons on Thursday afternoon at 15:00.   We are also notin a position to at this stage know what evidence has been ledbefore the Committee as such.   I think the principle of fairnessand equity would suffice that my client should be allowed to atleast be put in a position where he can have a look at all thedocumentation, statements and evidence that was led before theCommittee.  We are further also respectfully of the submissionthat in this instance there was a non-compliance with Section19(4) of the Act of the Truth Commission as Mr Nieuwoudt onlygot notice from the Truth Commission of this hearing simultaneouslywith the subpoena being served on him on Thursday afternoon at15:00.   
 I might just also add that we have got an undertaking which isan order of court from the Truth Commission that Mr Nieuwoudtwill be informed if any evidence should be led against him andwe have not been informed at any stage of any evidence that wasled.   This was also the source of litigation previously in theEastern Cape and I think Mr Valli(?), who is the chief legal representativeof the Truth Commission, is well aware of this court order.  Thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mpshe is there anything you wish to say?

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: : Mr Chairman there is nothing I wish to say,thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Is it correct that there was short notice inthis matter?