A covert Defence Force campaign to discredit the End Conscription Campaign was revealed in the judgement of three national servicemen in Cape Town this week. After an in camera military trial Peter Pluddeman, 25, Rein Monnig, 23 and Desmond Thompson, 20, were acquitted of disseminating information to unauthorised persons but found guilty of conspiring to do so.
They were sentenced to 18 months in detention barracks. Any appeal is ruled out in terms of the Defence Act, but all three are taking their case to the supreme court on review. Court president Colonel Manie Dempers ordered the three men be immediately taken into custody.
Brigadier AK de Jager, officer commanding Western Province Command, agreed however to release them, pending the ratification of their sentences – which could take place within the next two weeks. He allowed this on condition they neither contacted the ECC nor propagated their case and that when they eventually reported for detention, they did not arrive with large numbers of protesting sympathisers.
In his judgement, Dempers said that during cross-examination, the commanding officer of Communication Operations at Western Province Command Headquarters in Cape Town' s Castle, Colonel JJ Claassen, had conceded there was an SADP campaign to discredit the ECC in order to undermine its goodwill – in the sense of its ability to attract members and funds.
Among those who gave evidence, it emerges from the judgement, was Stellenbosch University philosophy honours student Jannie Swart, who was originally arrested with the three on December 14 but later released. Dempers said Swart testified that Pluddeman was concerned about the SADF campaign against the ECC, that he was morally outraged and therefore wanted to act by furnishing information to the ECC to warn the orgainisation.
The judgement referred to the evidence of the three accused, saying that Pluddeman had said he acted in defence of the ECC against what he saw as an illegal campaign by the SADF. Monnig said he did not participate in this, but wanted to expose lax security within the SADF. Thompson said he had taken no final decision to participate in any effort to protect the ECC.
The court rejected Monnig's version as improbable and Thompson's as untruthful. Pluddeman's evidence he found credible – but rejected it He said Pluddeman's defence of necessity did not fall within the ambit of a requirement of law – adding that there were reasons for this. He did not give them, however. His judge- meat did not refer to the second prong of Pluddeman's defence – that he honestly believed he was entitled to act as he had. The court also found:
- It was not proved that documents obtained from the SADF were to be used by the accused – and therefore fell out of contention in the trial;
- However, they were nevertheless in possession of information minted to the smear campaign, contained in their written notes. This information emanated from protected sources, the court said;
- It was not proved them was an attempt to disseminate information to the ECC – there were only "acts of preparation" to do so.
However, the court found the three had agreed to disseminate information, and that amounted to the crime of conspiracy. Dempers called the accused's action a "despicable act of undermining the SADF in a time of crisis". He said: "It's a sad day when employees of the SADF conspire against it," adding their actions came close to mutiny". He mentioned no points in favour of the accused made in lengthy legal argument which preceded their being sentenced.
Describing the sentence as "shocking", Pluddeman's advocate, John van den Berg said it had been made without apparent consideration of mitigating factors – or of the law dealing with such. "The moral blame- worthiness of the accused was not considered," he said.
This article originally appeared in the Weekly Mail.
