Amnesty Hearings — Bloemfontein — 1997-09-04

PHILLIPUS JOHANNES CORNELIUS LOOTS: Mr Chair, can I answer it in the following way, the information we gained from our informant network, we gave this to the JOC offices, we told them that there would be an illegal march or a meeting or a boycott or whatever.  We gave that information to the JOC office and unit 19 took cognisance of what would happend.  They had to act in a preventative fashion so that from that meeting or boycott or march, public violence would not result.

MPHITHIZELI NELSON NGO: Would you also give them the names of the leaders?

PHILLIPUS JOHANNES CORNELIUS LOOTS: Of course the people who had arranged or organised these.  You are 1000% correct Mr Chair.

MPHITHIZELI NELSON NGO: I suppose the essence of the questions was, could he not have possibly known the names of all these so-called political activists by reason of the fact that he was in unit 19?

PHILLIPUS JOHANNES CORNELIUS LOOTS: It is of course possible, I will concede to that.

ADV MEMANI: Mr Loots, the riot unit and that constabular rank were mainly concernd with the physical suppression of unrest and not with matters of information?

PHILLIPUS JOHANNES CORNELIUS LOOTS: Mr Chair, I have already said it might be that some information accidentally came to people's attention but their main task was the prevention of crime by means of visible policing with the use of patrols.

ADV MEMANI: And the joint operation centre would have been a place where you would have members of intelligence from both the police and the army and members of the security branch, where they came together and exchanged information?

PHILLIPUS JOHANNES CORNELIUS LOOTS: Not a permanent basis.  There weren't any people from the security branch on a permanent basis there, there were people from the SADF, the SA police, unit 19 and we had contact with the JOC offices.  I myself also visited the JOC offices sometimes to go and see how information was kept there but we didn't sit there on a permanent basis, not one security branch person.

ADV MEMANI: It is absurd Mr Loots, to suggest that an office like the joint operation centre in Mamelodi would have had all the other ramifications of the security establishment except security policemen - security branch policemen.

PHILLIPUS JOHANNES CORNELIUS LOOTS: If it is absurd to your mind, that might be the case but that's how it worked.

ADV MEMANI: But Mr Loots, the reaction unit which was the riot unit - I've alredy said to you, was mainly concerned with the physical suppression of unrest, it ws not an information gathering unit.

PHILLIPUS JOHANNES CORNELIUS LOOTS: No, it wasn't, I have told you that it wasn't.

ADV MEMANI: And members of military intelligence would have been more concerned with I will call, "higher matters of security" than an activist who was protesting against the police's burning of a house.

PHILLIPUS JOHANNES CORNELIUS LOOTS: Mr Chair, the SADF was divided or was sent to help the police with prevention of crime in Mamelodi, they had a permament base.  There were tents that were errected on the mountainside and they were under the command of a certain Captain Boshoff with whom I often and frequently had contact.  Like unit 19 they drove preventative patrols.

ADV MEMANI: This joint operation centre, between who and who was co-operation?

PHILLIPUS JOHANNES CORNELIUS LOOTS: Between the police, the SADF and of course if there was something that the other intelligence disciplines had to know, we would have reported that to them but as far as I know, this office was only manned by the SAP and the SADF, no other intelligence branches or offices.

ADV MEMANI: Mr Loots, I put it to you that the security branch would have had a stronger interest in the passing of information between the various establishments of the security branch than other units of the police and would therefore have been represented more than the reaction unit for instance would have represented in such a structure.

PHILLIPUS JOHANNES CORNELIUS LOOTS: If you tell me that we were in command of the flow of information, I do agree with you 100%, that's what I have testified.  We dealt with the informant network, this intelligence was give to the JOC where necessary.

ADV MEMANI: Now, if you're heading this thing - if you were the persons who were in control then it follows that you should have had some presence in that structure.

PHILLIPUS JOHANNES CORNELIUS LOOTS: But I have told you now, we didn't have any people there on a permament baiss, we from time to time visited them.  They were dependent on our information not - they weren't dependent on our - we weren't dependent on them.

MPHITHIZELI NELSON NGO: How often did you pass this information to the other sections?

PHILLIPUS JOHANNES CORNELIUS LOOTS: Mr Chair, I have testified we met each other twice a day, that's the various commanding officers, myself, reports were given to me,  If we had to report information to them, it would have been informed.  In certain circumstances we could not wait for the morning or the afternoon conference but intelligence of information had to be made available in the day.  On that basis the information was evaluated and sent to the disciplines who had to take note of that.

MPHITHIZELI NELSON NGO: Sorry, I'm not sure you understand or whether we understand one another, are you talking about - I'm asking you about the intercourse between you and GOS, did it take place that often?

PHILLIPUS JOHANNES CORNELIUS LOOTS: Only if we visited them.

MPHITHIZELI NELSON NGO: How often did that happen?

PHILLIPUS JOHANNES CORNELIUS LOOTS: Let's say once a day, maybe sometimes twice or three times a day.  Our people were throught in the residential areas, that is why for each residential area I had an officer.  If in the morning half past 7 I have finished or completed the meetings, I could not leave these people just to go on with their activities until 4 o'clock, somebody had to be in control there and that was these officers who had to make sure that they did their work in the residential areas.  The members that were deployed in the residential areas would the visit the JOC offices.

MPHITHIZELI NELSON NGO: Where did these other sections - where did you meet to pass information to them, did you meet in Mamelodi with them or at ...[intervention]

PHILLIPUS JOHANNES CORNELIUS LOOTS: In my office.

MPHITHIZELI NELSON NGO: Well sorry, what is this GOS - am I perhaps mistaken here, when you speak of GOS I thought you include the unit 19, the defence force ...[intervention}

PHILLIPUS JOHANNES CORNELIUS LOOTS: It was an operational centre in Mamelodi at the police station but not involved in the normal things that the police officers of police did.  JOC was centered there to see what intelligence we gave to them.  JOC was in control of the defence force and also in control of unit 19.  If we gave information to JOC, saying that there would be a riot or a meeting, JOC would inform unit 19 and the SADF.  We did not inform the military, that was the job of the JOC.

MPHITHIZELI NELSON NGO: And you met daily with GOS?

PHILLIPUS JOHANNES CORNELIUS LOOTS: Yes, that's the case.

ADV DE JAGER: Did you go to JOC on a daily basis or did Hechter go there or how did it work in practice?

PHILLIPUS JOHANNES CORNELIUS LOOTS: It was not possible for me to go to the JOC offices each and every day, I depended on my officers and if they weren't there, then the next person in command would do that.  As low down as Constable Bokaba sitting there, it he had intelligence or information that he thought had to go there, I would not have any problems with him giving the information and informing me about it later on.

CHAIRPERSON: When you get to a convenient stage, I've been reminded that some of us have been working harder than most of us for the whole day and it's been a long day for them.