Special Hearings — Trojan Horse Hearings — 1997-05-21

MAPULE RAMASHALA: Thank you so it means then that you knew that in the event of stone-throwing, that you had to fire first, before you could arrest.  By your own statement, not your written statement, but what you just said, that you knew that you couldn't, in order to accomplish the arrest or that you could not have accomplished the arrest, let me put it the way you did. You could not have accomplished the arrest without taking care of the situation by firing first?

FRANK ALBERT VAN NIEKERK: My life was in danger, I had to fire to avert the danger.  I couldn't just jump off amidst all this throwing of the stones, I would be exposing myself to serious danger, I could have been seriously injured, even dead today.  So I couldn't just jump into the crowd to try and make arrests in those circumstances.

MAPULE RAMASHALA: In a sense you knew that if you went into the area and that the people in the area saw that you didn't belong to the area, in a sense, that when they start firing that your life would be in danger- excuse me, thank you Advocate, start throwing stones, thank you I appreciate that, that your life would indeed be in danger?

FRANK ALBERT VAN NIEKERK: Please repeat the question.

MAPULE RAMASHALA: You knew that by going into the area, especially in an unmarked car with two white people in the front of the car, that when people saw that in the area they would start throwing stones and your life would be in danger.

FRANK ALBERT VAN NIEKERK: I was just one of the small fry.  I didn't take the decisions, I was simply a sergeant, there were many higher ranks and authorities above me.  I was not in a position to refuse to accompany the section on that day because then I would be disregarding and disobeying an order. So it was not for me to refuse to enter the area and to patrol the area.  I had no choice.  I had to do what I was told in the performance of my duties, I wasn't in a position to refuse.

MAPULE RAMASHALA: Mr van Niekerk, I really understand that and my heart goes out to you, I understand that quite clearly.  What I was trying to ascertain is the issue of carrying lethal ammunition.  You were down on the rungs of the ladder, I'm not trying to put blame on you.  I'm trying to understand how this happened, that in fact you could not have gone out to arrest without shooting because your lives were in danger by your own saying.

FRANK ALBERT VAN NIEKERK: Yes when you mention the fact that ammunition was issued to us, it was a daily issuing of firearms and ammunition, and I found myself in a life-threatening situation, I was obliged to use my firearm.  That is the reason why this firearm was issued to me, for my protection in the daily execution of my duties.  I was obliged to carry a firearm.

MAPULE RAMASHALA: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Dr Ramashala.  We've come to the end of our day's hearing.  I'd like to thank you all for your patience, for your attention.  I'm sorry we didn't manage to hear everybody whom we had called to be here today and we will arrange another date with you Mr van Zyl and Mr Grant.  
 I will be very brief in my closing remark.  I do need to thank everybody who has assisted us in putting together this hearing today,  all of the people responsible for this building and for giving us permission to use it, the security people who have looked after us all while we were in it, the media people whose patience we have strained to the limit, the interpreters whose endurance we have strained to the limit, the people who have provided food and drink and all of the TRC Commission staff.
 I'd just like to repeat again that our aim is to hear and to understand better what happened on the 15th of October 1985.  We've heard from the victims, those who were injured, the families of those who have died and witnesses at the time, and we've heard today from some of the security officers who were involved in the incident.  It was a time of great conflict and we've grappled to understand the pain of the people who suffered but also the role of the police in these situations.  We've heard how sometimes they were very much driven by fear, fear which with hindsight may not have been so justified but nevertheless was a true experience for them at the time. And since part of our mission is to work towards reconciliation in this country, we believe that that understanding of one another's experience is essential to the process of reconciliation. So if the questions sometimes seem questions that may not have particularly legalistic import to them, they are questions aimed at reaching into the hearts of all of us so that we all understand ourselves better and understand that process in our history better.
 So thank you again all of you who have participated in this.  Could I remind you that we will be here again tomorrow for the hearing on the experience of children.  Thank you all very much.