Special Hearings — Armed Forces Hearings — 1997-10-09

MR GOOSEN: Thank you.  General in relation to a specific matter for which you have sought amnesty, I am not going to go into the detail of that matter, but you are on record as stating that when knowledge about that particular death had come to your attention, and this is the motivation in your application, you are on record as stating that any steps which could create the impression that the command structure were not supportive of the operatives that that would lead to them becoming totally demoralised and the command structure of the SAP losing their loyalty in those circumstances.  Would you agree that where an operative is responsible for illegal action and senior command levels of the police who become aware of that, who have a responsibility to uphold the law condone that action and ensure that those operatives are not brought to justice for that illegal action, that that creates a climate of endorsement of such illegal action?

JOHANNES FELDE VAN DER MERWE: Chairman once again one cannot generalise.  The circumstances of this specific case was described in detail.  It depends or it differs from case to case.
 There were many instances where members of the South African police, especially the Security Police, were involved in unlawful actions.  They were prosecuted and the law took its course.  Once again every incident has to be analysed to determine what the circumstances were.
 And whether one could say that it did influence the moral fibre of the South African police, that it requires certain deviation, that was not a general rule and it was not so that it was allowed, in general, that people could act unlawfully. I wish to assure you that if that was the case it would have been a worse situation than in Bosnia.  You have to analyse each situation to determine the merit.

MR GOOSEN: But General you would agree that in circumstances where the head of the Security Police, and ultimately the Commissioner of the Police, because you moved from that position to the Commissioner of Police, is the person who is participating in the covering-up of illegal activity on the part of security police that that sends a very strong signal to those operatives, not so?

JOHANNES FELDE VAN DER MERWE: Mr Chairman if Mr Goosen wishes to indicate we publicised that this incident took place countrywide I would say no, that was not the case, you can't understand it in that way.  It just happened in a small circle and the influence of this could not be determined countrywide and the influence on other operatives.  In other words the answer is definitely, no.

MR GOOSEN: In the position of leadership in which you would have been at the time and remained for a long time, you would have the responsibility to set the moral tone, not so?

JOHANNES FELDE VAN DER MERWE: That is correct Mr Chairman.

MR GOOSEN: Therefore in the circumstances if you step outside that moral tone it does, surely, send a signal to the people that you are dealing with below you?

JOHANNES FELDE VAN DER MERWE: Mr Chairman we were dealing with members of the security forces who were totally devoted to their task, people with a sense of responsibility and whatever they did they tried to do to promote the country's interests and the image of the SAP.  Errors were made, I made them too, but the point of departure was never that we would abandon all moral precepts and violate all laws at will, and there were very difficult circumstances, but we tried at all times to act fairly and legally.

CHAIRPERSON: General van der Merwe thank you very much.  There are just a couple of last questions from the panel.  Let me start and I will be very brief, just two quick questions so that I make sure I understood you correctly. First, right very early on in your presentation you talked about the circumstances in which the police and other people found themselves in supporting a government that most Afrikaans-speaking people, in your words I think, culturally, religiously and in terms of - were government supporters.  There have been those before us who have argued that for example that the SADF was totally above all of this and was neutral, the exact word was used.  Now as I heard you, and I am not putting words in your mouth, that it was natural that you would identify yourself with the objectives of the government of the day.  Is that a correct interpretation of what you said?

JOHANNES FELDE VAN DER MERWE: Very clearly, I will go as far as to say that although in theory it has been put like this and everyone strives towards this there is no police force in a country which can completely detach itself from a government, from any government.

CHAIRPERSON: Right, thank you.  The only other question - I really don't want to go back to definitions of words and so on, I just want to ask one question about that.  As I heard you speaking it seemed to me you were saying that even though you had enormous legal machinery at your disposal the situation became so desperate, I think was the word you used, that even this was not enough, but that it doesn't necessarily follow that the words used necessarily meant that people should be assassinated or killed or whatever.
 Could I ask you then in a desperate situation, in a war situation, was it never considered to use desperate measures, because if you weren't able to combat the attacks from those who were resisting the State and the legal machinery was insufficient well then what do you do?  What sort of plan do you make if you don't rely on that then you must rely on something else to try to combat that, what did you do?

JOHANNES FELDE VAN DER MERWE: Mr Chairman by means of the competence and legislation at our disposal we could have handled the situation so that it wouldn't lapse into total chaos.  Until such time as another political dispensation could be found we had no other way than to deal with the situation in this way and with the means at our disposal. I am talking about the legitimate means to do everything possible to maintain law and order that we could protect the interests of the people and the government.  On no occasion was there ever an open decision by the State Security Council, or any level that I am aware of in government, that we went over to the killing of people or actions leading to this, apart from this framework which I have already sketched for you where this perception might have arisen among operatives.   But if you are asking me about occasions when thinking went like this I - nothing to my knowledge.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.  Mr Lax.

MR LAX: Thank you Chairperson.  General yesterday we heard from a number of very senior defence force personnel and you will know, have read about that, Mr Visser was present, I am sure he may have informed you about some of the evidence that happened yesterday.  He is shaking his head at me.  Be that as it may the situation that pertained yesterday - just before I go on to the question, you were head of Security Branch from about '86 to '88, is that correct?

JOHANNES FELDE VAN DER MERWE: That's correct.

MR LAX: Some of the incidents that were discussed yesterday, without going into the detail of the specifics of those events, related to joint operations between South African defence force personnel, special forces personnel, in support of South African police elements and in the situation people were murdered and that came to the attention of the then Chief of the Defence Force who indicated that the matter had been discussed with senior police officials.  Now you were head of Security Branch, it had been reported to him that it had been already reported, we asked him why didn't you phone up your colleagues in the police and discuss it, and he said no it had been reported to him that it had already been done.  In your time as head of Security Branch were matters of that nature ever discussed with you?