Amnesty Hearings — Pietersburg — 1997-07-03

ADV VISSER: What was said there, was taped on this tape recorder?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: Yes.  The tape recorder was also with me in the sand where I was.  We dug a sand wall and I put this machine on top of the sand bank, I put it on a hat or a handkerchief during the incident.  When the combi came driving along, my tape recorder was on from the first or the second whistle and the whole incident was recorded on the tape recorder, shots and everything would have been recorded on it and everything said during the conversation or the questioning, I also recorded on tape.
	And I also saw the person receiving an injection, I can't remember where on his body.

ADV VISSER: Was it your impression that the person would survive if he got medical treatment or what was your impression?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: No, I thought the person was dying.

ADV VISSER: Now, the person stopped talking, that is according to Mr Fuchs and Mr Erwee and he was then carried to a vehicle to be transported to Alldays.
	Do you know who carried him, did you help carrying him?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: No, I can't remember that I carried him again.

ADV VISSER: When he was carried away from the sand where he had been laying and where the questioning took place, was he still alive or had he already died?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: When he was picked up by Captain Erwee, he was still alive.  I walked with them in the direction of the bakkie where they were going to load him into the bakkie.
	I moved along with Mr Erwee for some of the distance, when he was picked up he was still alive, I don't know if he was still alive when he was put into the bakkie.

ADV VISSER: Did you see anybody harming this person after the shooting and after you had carried him to this point in the river bed, 20 metres in a northerly direction from the road?  Did you see anybody harming him in any way?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: No Chairperson, I saw nobody harming him in any way.

ADV VISSER: Did you see more specifically See Tokkie Fuchs shooting him with a pistol in the chest?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: No Chairperson.

ADV VISSER: Mr Van Dyk, you were an Officer at that time, what was your rank?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: I was a Lieutenant.

ADV VISSER: If such a thing had happened, what would you have done?  If Mr Fuchs had shot the man right in front of you, what would you have done?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: I would have been extremely shocked.

ADV VISSER: Yes, and afterwards, would you have left the matter there?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: No, I wouldn't have left it there.   No definitely not.  I would firstly have asked him why did he do it.

ADV VISSER: Yes, but after that, officially?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: I would have reported it to my seniors.

ADV VISSER: And you  never made such a report to your seniors?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: No.

ADV DE JAGER: Wouldn't you have rather thought that you should protect him?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: No, I wouldn't have thought that.

ADV DE JAGER: Wasn't there a good relationship, a brotherhood between all of you as Security men and that you felt that you should protect each other?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: At that stage I had only been at Pietersburg for 18 months.  I knew Fuchs fairly well, but I didn't know him that well.  We didn't work in the same Unit.  I doubt if there was any fraternal feelings.

ADV DE JAGER: Let me put it very directly, we have had a lot of evidence from Security police as to how they protected each other, how they for instance prevented some of their members being prosecuted and charged.
	Was this not the case here at all, why would it be different here than in other Security Branches?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: I was never involved in such a case where I had to protect somebody.  On the contrary, in this incident I would not have considered it at all.

CHAIRPERSON: But perhaps you should be careful about that, earlier on you had just testified as to how you certified a document, knowing that your colleague was lying?  You didn't report him to your seniors, you protected him, didn't you?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: Chairperson, he hadn't killed anybody.

CHAIRPERSON: It doesn't matter, but the fact is you knew that he was making an affidavit in which he was laying and you didn't go to your seniors and say Erwee asked me to certify an affidavit where he knows that he is laying, you didn't do it?
	Isn't that so?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: I don't deny that.  I did attest to that statement, do you expect me to give an explanation?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I am just putting this question to you, because to an answer raised by Mr De Jager, you say or you give the impression that you would never have colluded with your colleagues to cover them or something like that.
	And I am saying to you, you should be careful with that answer of yours because you have already a few minutes ago confessed to us that you did in fact collaborate with one of your colleagues, and you didn't report him to your seniors.

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: May I comment?

CHAIRPERSON: Oh, yes, certainly.

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: If it pleases your Chairperson, I think the reason as set out by Captain Erwee in his application, I think he gave a written explanation to you and I associate myself with that.
	I don't think we can really link up these two incidents.  The one the conspiracy, the collusion between myself and Erwee was to protect other colleagues' lives, it is not to keep them out of prison.

CHAIRPERSON: Just repeat your answer.

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: The collusion between Erwee and myself to which you refer, was to save the lives or protect the lives of our other colleagues and an informer, it wasn't to conceal crime or to keep somebody out of prison.

CHAIRPERSON: The difference is the matter of the protection Mr Van Dyk, but at any rate you have made your point.  Mr Visser?

ADV VISSER: The one case there was the administering of the oath with the statement and in the other case there was murder?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: Correct.

ADV VISSER: Mr Van Dyk, let us turn to this tape recorder or the tape recording.  You are currently still in the police, is that correct?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: Yes.

ADV VISSER: What is your rank?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: I am a Superintendent.

ADV VISSER: And what is the scope of your duties?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: I am the Project Administrator of the Detective Branch for this Province.

ADV VISSER: Adv De Jager put an example to Mr Fuchs as to what would happen, or what would you do with a tape recorder if you have taken down a confession from somebody and you have recorded it on tape.  This person is for instance accused of murder and he says, yes, I have done it and he pleads guilty and this is recorded on tape, what would the procedure then be in such a case?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: Chairperson, just cut me short if I elaborate too much.  We have a component in the police which we call the Technical Support Services, it has had various names in the past, but they deal with technical things such as equipment, tape recorders, electronic equipment and cassettes and when you wanted to preserve such a tape, it would be sealed by these people, and numbered, it would be written down in a register and they would store it and protect it.

ADV VISSER: Now, if you knew beforehand that you were going to have an interview which would later have to be used as evidential material in a court, how would you then proceed with your tape recorder and what about the cassette itself?