Eugene de Kock’s Testimony Revives Cradock Four Inquest on Apartheid Murders

New testimony from former apartheid operative Eugene de Kock has returned focus to the Cradock Four inquest. The inquest looks into the 1985 murders of anti-apartheid activists Matthew Goniwe, Fort Calata, Sparrow Mkonto, and Sicelo Mhlauli. Families of the victims and the South African public seek justice. This matters now on March 24, 2026, as it reopens questions about accountability for apartheid-era crimes.

The Cradock Four inquest aims to determine who is liable for the deaths. It follows two prior attempts that failed to uncover the full story. Eugene de Kock recently testified. He denied any direct role in the killings.

De Kock did acknowledge how apartheid security forces used coded language. He said “permanent removal” meant killings. These orders came from senior officials.

Eugene de Kock told the TRC how he would interpret the facts… what he was clarifying was the use of euphemisms like ‘permanent removal’ which was really a request to kill them.

The Cradock Four were anti-apartheid activists from Cradock. Security police abducted and killed them in June 1985. The apartheid government first denied any role.

Later evidence linked state forces to the murders. Still, no one faced accountability. Former judge Chris Nicholson wrote the book Permanent Removal: Who Killed the Cradock Four.

Nicholson argues circumstantial evidence shows the State Security Council agreed to “permanently remove” the four.

In my book, what I try to show is that the circumstantial evidence shows that the request to permanently remove the Cradock Four must have been agreed to by the State Security Council… I show that they must have been responsible for giving the order for the Cradock Four to be murdered.

De Kock advised one killer on hiding gun marks to avoid identification. He called the four activists, not terrorists.

This testimony raises questions about justice and accountability. It highlights euphemisms like “permanent removal.” De Kock denied direct involvement but admitted senior orders drove such acts.

Nicholson sees evidence pointing to high-level responsibility. Verified facts include De Kock’s denial and his coded language comments. Projections about the council remain unproven.

Key implications include:

• Questions over labeling activists as terrorists.
• Lack of prior accountability for state-linked murders.
• Need to clarify high-level orders in apartheid crimes.

The inquest continues under former judge Chris Nicholson. The court recently visited sites where special branch police surveilled the Cradock Four.

De Kock’s testimony is ongoing. It may bring new details. No firm outcomes are set yet.