Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1999-08-25

CHAIRPERSON: What was the unlawful detention?  Shabalala had been arrested, he was suspected of being a terrorist who returned to the country illegally?

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: So that was a legal arrest?

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: Chairperson, the problem had arisen from the fact that he was an informer.  It was not an unlawful arrest as such, the problem arose to place a person back.

ADV BOSMAN: We're talking about Shabalala, pardon for interrupting you.

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: Could you please repeat the question?

CHAIRPERSON: Shabalala was, as I understand it, a known terrorist who was illegally in the country.  He was arrested.

MR LAX: He was legally in the country, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Well I think he'd returned illegally.

MR LAX: I think he'd been trained internally.

CHAIRPERSON: Oh, he'd been trained here.  Sorry, he hadn't left the country, he was a trained terrorist.

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: He was a locally trained terrorist.

CHAIRPERSON: You arrested him.

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: Correct Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Was that illegal?

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: We didn't have any case against him at that stage.

CHAIRPERSON: But you had an informer who had told you he was meeting him and that's why you went, you were frightened that he might kill your informer, you suspected him of being a violent man?

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: Chairperson, the fear was not that he would kill the informer, the fear was that the informer would then walk out as an informer.

MR LAX: There were two in fact, the one was that some danger might come to Ndaba, the other was that his cover might be blown?

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: I thought you told us that you went there to protect Ndaba?

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: That is correct, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, so Ndaba was a source of information, you could have got more information from him about Shabalala?

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: The protection of Ndaba also pertained to the fact that he was an informer.

CHAIRPERSON: I'm talking about the illegal detention, this is what worries me at the moment.  If you had Ndaba who was giving all sorts of information and would undoubtedly given information about Shabalala?

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: That is correct, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: It would have been a legal arrest.  Your impropriety may have been if you had not produced him before a court within 48 hours, a technical?

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: That is correct, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: So that was what you were trying to cover up, that was what was the source of great embarrassment was it?  The arrest in those circumstances and the subsequent detention of Shabalala?

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: Chairperson, I'm not following.

MR LAX: Perhaps I could put it differently.  The fact of the matter is that by the time you were aware of Operation Vula, you barely had him in your custody for no more than six hours and I'm stretching it a bit but roughly that?

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: That is correct, Chairperson, the time when we arrested Shabalala we knew very little of Operation Vula or I knew very little of Operation Vula.

MR LAX: Yes but you were informed by Botha within six hours of his arrest or at most ten hours because they were picked up at half past 4, by the time you got to the safe house it was 5 and your evidence is that evening you were informed by Botha after he had spoken to Ndaba at the safe house, for the second time now at the safe house, that this is the outline of Operation Vula.  You knew enough to know this was a high profile matter, correct?

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: Correct, Chairperson.

MR LAX: Now at that stage he was still in lawful detention and in fact the 48 hours is neither here nor there, you could have used Section 29 if you wanted to which would have given you three months?

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: This is now for Shabalala?

MR LAX: Correct.

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: Chairperson, after he had been arrested he could not be released or locked up because he would then ...(intervention)

MR LAX: You're missing the point, with the greatest of respect, the issue is not whether he could be released or kept in custody.  At that stage he didn't know anything that Ndaba was an informer, that's the evidence, he only became aware of that a couple of days later.

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: But he was arrested with Ndaba.

MR LAX: Correct but you guys did it in such a way that he would have suspected nothing, that's been your evidence and Wasserman's evidence.  Now, the question I am putting to you is a simple one.  At that stage there was nothing in your minds that would have told you that this was an unlawful act, you're acting within the full ambit of your legal powers at that stage.  You could not have believed you were acting illegally in that point in time?

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: Chairperson, directly after the arrest of Shabalala the question had arisen what are we going to do with him, we've arrested him and it was an embarrassment, it was a problem.  The moment we arrested him Shabalala was a problem.

MR LAX: I'm explaining to you that in terms of the existing laws at that time it couldn't possible have been a problem because at best under the Criminal Procedure Act you had 48 hours, you would have known that as a Lieutenant or a Captain and at best beyond that you would have known that in terms of the Internal Security Act you had three months to do something to question him whatever, because the man you know is an internally trained terrorist, he falls completely within the parameters of the Internal Security Act, you would have known that?

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: Chairperson, if I from the assumption that I would have taken him then and locked him up then, then the arrest of Ndaba would have appeared and that is why we knew right from the beginning whether it was 24 hours or 48 hours left, there was no ways that I could take him and lock him up because that would have exposed the arrest of Ndaba and that is why I say at no stage it was considered to lock him up or to illegally detain him.

MR LAX: Is that maybe because you people had decided from the beginning you were going to kill him?

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: I think shortly after his arrest it was a dilemma and we realised it was a problem and we realised that Shabalala would have to be eliminated to protect Ndaba.

MR LAX: Thanks Chairperson, I think we can leave it.

CHAIRPERSON: We'll take a short adjournment now.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
ON RESUMPTION

MS POSWA: Chairperson, would you kindly remind him of his oath?

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: (s.u.o.)

MS POSWA: (cont) We were still discussing the elimination, the discussion on elimination of Ndaba and Shabalala.  Did you not think the position of the National Party would be worsened by the killing of these two and concealing the death thereof?

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: If it had come out, yes.

MS POSWA: If it had come out?

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: That is correct but I believed that it wouldn't.

MS POSWA: Why not?

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: Because we kept it secret.

MS POSWA: And you had kept others secret before then?

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: That is correct.

MS POSWA: You had successfully kept other deaths secret so you felt that this would not be any different?

SIMON JOHANNES GERHARDUS DU PREEZ: That is correct.