Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — 1998-06-12

MARTHINUS LODEWICKES VAN DER SCHYFF: Chairperson, if I can just refer you back to the letter which Kloppers sent to me at that time, that letter had an influence on me because I thought I should stay loyal to these people and as well as to the other applicants, and therefore I couldn't do it.

MS VAN DER WALT: This letter, which is Exhibit 6 Mr Van der Schyff, has got nothing to do with your amnesty application and no suggestion is made that you had to testify differently from what you had already testified today?

MARTHINUS LODEWICKES VAN DER SCHYFF: That is how I saw the letter.

MS VAN DER WALT: Also at the end of your evidence, you said you were asked when you shot these people dead, what was the intent with that, can you remember?

MARTHINUS LODEWICKES VAN DER SCHYFF: Yes.

MS VAN DER WALT: You said it was in order to show to the ANC that the AWB would not accept them as a government and that the AWB wanted their own land?

MARTHINUS LODEWICKES VAN DER SCHYFF: That is correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: When was this instruction given to you that if you shoot those people that night, that would be the purpose?

MARTHINUS LODEWICKES VAN DER SCHYFF: That is the inference I made after Mr Visser brought me the message that we must shoot and the questions that were put to them by Deon Martin, if they were members of the ANC and the people who sat there, did not answer.

MS VAN DER WALT: What you say here, because you had no or received no other instructions according to your evidence, you did not know about a revolution, you did not know that the instruction came from the Generals in Staff, but you make an accurate inference that these people who were shot, was to show the ANC that they will not take over the government, is that what you are saying?

MARTHINUS LODEWICKES VAN DER SCHYFF: Yes, that is how I understood it, or what Etienne Visser said to me, that they are going to shoot the people who sit there, and through the questions that were asked, I made the inference that the people could have answered, but I did not hear any answer.

MS VAN DER WALT: So, you are saying and that is now regarding a question that the Advocate asked, that the purpose of this shooting, was to show the ANC that they will not govern, that you made that inference on the grounds that Mr Visser said to you let us shoot.

MARTHINUS LODEWICKES VAN DER SCHYFF: That is the inference I made.

MS VAN DER WALT: That is all instruction that you received?

MARTHINUS LODEWICKES VAN DER SCHYFF: Yes, that is plus the searching of the vehicles.

MS VAN DER WALT: Searching of the vehicles and the asking of the questions?

MARTHINUS LODEWICKES VAN DER SCHYFF: That is correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: To come back to that point, when the other applicants gave evidence, there was a statement to them, that is now if you make a statement, it is according to your instructions, there was no talk of questions regarding the political affiliation of these people.

MR KNOETZE: Mr Chairman, this statement is not factually correct.  The statement to which my learned friend refers was made in respect of the vehicles, excluding the Honda and the Cressida.

MS VAN DER WALT: Mr Chairman, that was the question that was asked or the statement that was made to the other applicants.
	I specially noted it, there was no distinction made between the Honda and the Cressida, but I will leave it there and I will continue.
	This is the statement that was made, but in all fairness to you, you come and say to this Committee, you talk about a vehicle that was searched where there was an old man and a child in and it says in your statement that there were approximately three other vehicles that were searched.
	You say you never heard that for these five vehicles, questions were put to them regarding their political affiliation?

MARTHINUS LODEWICKES VAN DER SCHYFF: I never heard it Mr Chairperson.

MS VAN DER WALT: That answer is very difficult for me to understand, if you say you did not hear it at all, does that mean that you as a person was busy, that you could not hear it, that it could possibly have been said or was it never asked?

MARTHINUS LODEWICKES VAN DER SCHYFF: It could possibly have been said, because with the searching of the vehicle, you were inside the vehicle and other people were outside, it could have been questioned, but me, I did not hear it.

MS VAN DER WALT: Then the other evidence of the other applicants and I am acting on behalf of Kloppers and Martin, then their evidence could have been right in that the occupants of these vehicles were asked to what political party they belonged to.

MARTHINUS LODEWICKES VAN DER SCHYFF: I did not hear it, no.

MS VAN DER WALT: Your evidence was not very clear regarding that point.  It gave the impression that these questions were not asked, because then it makes your evidence somewhat suspicious, because the vehicles were searched and then it was said that they can continue.
	Then your evidence goes further to say that the vehicles that were searched, and I must point that out to you, after you gave evidence that they were not asked if they were ANC members or to what political party they belonged to, and then you go further to say the vehicles gave the, or got the permission to continue because there were not weapons in the vehicles?

MARTHINUS LODEWICKES VAN DER SCHYFF: That is correct yes.

MS VAN DER WALT: Now a vehicle appears, there were no weapons in them?

MARTHINUS LODEWICKES VAN DER SCHYFF: Yes, that is correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: But they did not receive the permission to continue?

MARTHINUS LODEWICKES VAN DER SCHYFF: No, because the people sat on the ground, the others stood with their vehicles while their vehicles were searched.

MS VAN DER WALT: But if your evidence is correct that the other vehicles were searched and that they were given permission to continue, it was because there were no weapons?  These two vehicles did not have weapons either, but these two, with these two vehicles something else happened, and now your evidence, suddenly according to you, you hear they were asked to what political party they belonged to?

MARTHINUS LODEWICKES VAN DER SCHYFF: Yes, Commandant Kloppers did repeat the question to them a few times.

MS VAN DER WALT: And you could not hear what they said?

MARTHINUS LODEWICKES VAN DER SCHYFF: No, I could not hear if the black person answered, according to me they did not answer because I did not hear anything.

MS VAN DER WALT: According to you they did not answer?

MARTHINUS LODEWICKES VAN DER SCHYFF: I did not hear.

MS VAN DER WALT: Did you not hear or did they not answer?

MARTHINUS LODEWICKES VAN DER SCHYFF: I did not hear.

MS VAN DER WALT: In other words, they could have answered?

MARTHINUS LODEWICKES VAN DER SCHYFF: They could have answered yes, but I did not hear anything.

MS VAN DER WALT: Because here, according to your evidence you stood on the road side of the vehicle and they sat on the left hand side, because between where you stood and where the people sat on the embankment, it was the vehicle plus where Deon Martin walked in front of them and where they sat on the embankment?

MARTHINUS LODEWICKES VAN DER SCHYFF: Deon Martin did not walk in front of them, he stood still in front of them.

MS VAN DER WALT: But it was a distance from where you were according to your evidence?

MARTHINUS LODEWICKES VAN DER SCHYFF: No, it was not that far, but there was a distance between us, yes.

MS VAN DER WALT: What is strange to me is that you did not receive any instruction beforehand that there would be a shooting?

MARTHINUS LODEWICKES VAN DER SCHYFF: No, not at all.

MS VAN DER WALT: But you act in a single moment, you are standing now on the left hand side of the road, according to your evidence, you are standing there alone?

MARTHINUS LODEWICKES VAN DER SCHYFF: That is correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: Where is the pipe gun then?