Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — UNKNOWN

MR VAN VUUREN: No, not hundreds, possibly I could saythere were 30 or 40 cases of interrogation involving torture. I cannot remember exactly.

MR CURRIN: ... you don't have the names of the rest, other than the ones that are referred to in your application beforethis Committee.

MR VAN VUUREN: In specific instances  where I could
2A remember/...
MR CURRIN 375 J J VAN VUUREN
remember the name, I made an application for amnesty in this regard.

MR CURRIN: ... people other than the ones that are referredto here, did you torture to death?

MR DU PLESSIS: With respect, I don't want to be difficultand I don't want to object, but as far as I understand this cross-examination,this cross-examination pertains to this  specific application. And I have made the point that  he  has applied for amnesty ona general basis in respect of certain interrogations of whichhe cannot remember the details.

CHAIRPERSON: But it is not likely that he is going to give his evidence in instalments is he?

MR DU PLESSIS: Pardon, Mr Chairman?

CHAIRPERSON: Is he expected to be called to give evidenceagain on other  matters?

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, Mr Chairman,  but he is not goingto be expected to give  evidence on that general application becausethat doesn't form part of these hearings.

CHAIRPERSON: No, I understand,  apart from the general application.

MR CURRIN: Mr Chairman, if I may say.  Surely it is relevantto full disclosure.  Surely we have a right to know, the publichas a right to know how many people this applicant tortured todeath.

CHAIRPERSON: You may ask him that question.

MR CURRIN: How many people did you torture to death, personally?

MR VAN VUUREN: In my application I think there were anadditional two or three persons, an additional two or three  personsapart from the current application.
2A

MR CURRIN: /...
MR CURRIN 376 J J VAN VUUREN

MR CURRIN: The ANC flag that was on the scene when thetorture took place, who provided the flag?

MR VAN VUUREN: I can no longer remember how the flag cameto be there.  It is simply not possible.  It might be, and  Iam emphasising that it might be, that Mamasela brought this flagalong when he picked up Sefola that evening, but I cannot rememberhow exactly the flag came to be there.

MR CURRIN: ... indication, "we then killed or shockedMakope to death".   On page 103 the top paragraph, "Wethen shocked Makope to death".  Did he die accidentally ordid you supply sufficient power to ensure that he died, and thisapplies to all three?

MR VAN VUUREN: We used sufficient power to kill them.

MR CURRIN: And who was operating the generator?

MR VAN VUUREN: It was myself and Mr Mamasela.  Captain Hechter wrote the questions down and the responses.

MR CURRIN: In your application you say, "It was additionallynecessary because we were at war with the ANC".  On page104,  the second last paragraph, final sentence, "It wasadditionally necessary since  we were at war with the ANC". What was your understanding of waging a war?

MR VAN VUUREN: (Answer inaudible)

MR CURRIN: You were not a soldier, you were a policeman. In the general evidence submitted by Mr Cronje, he said a lotabout waging war and that you were involved in waging a war... (COMMENCEMENT TAPE 2 SIDE B)  ... to become a soldier?

MR VAN VUUREN: I can only say that I was a Security Policeman,we were not normal police officers.  We were the political police,one could say.  We were to fight against  the ANC.  We did notdo normal policing tasks in which we
2B were/...
MR CURRIN 377 J J VAN VUUREN
were to prevent people from robbing banks or such.  We did nothave normal policing functions.  We were Security Police, we wenton course, on security courses.   We were trained to fight againstthe ANC with everything we had in our power.  We  were trainedon hand grenades, we were trained to jump from buildings withclimbing equipment, we had intensive training.  Not only practicaltraining, but also academic training which showed us what thepurposes of  the ANC were and we were told that this was the so-called"rooi gevaar", the communist threat.  I believed inwhat I did, I believed that I was doing it for my country andmy people.

MR CURRIN: ... waging the war you understood that thelaws of the land, whether it be the emergency regulations, the Police Act, the Internal Security Act, did not apply to you. You were entitled to kill the enemy.

MR VAN VUUREN: No, the laws also were valid in my case, but as the total onslaught became more and more serious and aswe received instructions from the top and as we were told thatwe had to combat these people with everything in our   power,even if that meant that we had to kill people, that  we had todo this.    At that time I was proud of what I did.

MR CURRIN: ... to disregard the law.

MR VAN VUUREN: That is not what I am saying.  I want tore-emphasise, our instructions came to eliminate these persons,to get rid of them because of the intensifying of the People'sWar and we were therefore told that we were to carry out certainclandestine operations which Captain Hechter and myself and Mamaselawere tasked as a team to carry out these clandestine operations. If the National
2B Party/...
MR CURRIN 378 J J VAN VUUREN
Party was in government today then none of this would have becomecommon knowledge.

MR CURRIN: ... understand the logic in your answer.  Areyou saying the killings in this particular instance were lawfulkillings?]

MR VAN VUUREN: I would not claim that.  It would neverhave been lawful to kill people, but in the context of the thenwar we as Security Police officers attempting to combat the ANC,this became a means to an end.  We combatted the ANC with everythingin us.   We were never repudiated when we killed people and whenit was unlawful we should have been taken to court.   There weremeans by which to get rid of evidence.

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: But I don't understand your answer to Mr Currin's previous question.  He said that the way you understoodyour instructions, were you to do anything, whatever you feltyou could do, even if that could be against the law?

MR VAN VUUREN: That's how I understood my instructions. Even if it was against the law, I was allowed to act in that way.  I don't mean to say that this was right.

MR CURRIN: I just want to take you back before I conclude. You said that during your interrogation of Maake, on page 97,the last sentence in the long paragraph in the middle, that yougleaned evidence that there was going to be an attempt to tryand bomb the Security Police offices in Pretoria.

MR VAN VUUREN: That is correct.

MR CURRIN: When you got that evidence,  what steps didyou take to ensure that that did not happen?

MR VAN VUUREN: I  don't understand the question.
2B

MR CURRIN: /...
MR CURRIN 379 J J VAN VUUREN

MR CURRIN: You learnt that there was going to be an  attemptto bomb police  security force headquarters in Pretoria.

MR VAN VUUREN: Yes.

MR CURRIN: What steps did you take, it never happened. What did you do to ensure that it would not happen?

MR VAN VUUREN: Maake told us that he worked with a LeicesterDumakudu and that they were going to plant a bomb at SecurityBranch Head Offices.   After we killed Maake my unit commanderand myself, that was Colonel Philip Loots, I told him what hadhappened.  He then said to me that he would take this up withthe official security of the building.  But that was long ago. I can't remember what  all we discussed in this regard.

MR CURRIN: From page 113 onwards you deal with the generalmotivation.  I just want to say to you I am not going to ask youany questions regarding the general motivation at this stage. I will reserve that when I cross-examine Mr Cronje, and I justwould like to reserve the right to call you back in regard tothat general information at a later stage.  I have no furtherquestions.

CHAIRPERSON: If you get all the answers from General Cronje,would you still require him to be called back?