Amnesty Hearings — Pietersburg — 1997-07-03

ANDRIES JOHANNES GERHARDUS ERWEE: That is correct.  I believed that after all six people died, it would not be 
necessary that it in fact wouldn't influence the Presiding Officer at the inquest.

CHAIRPERSON: Colonel, isn't it so that look Sehlwana transported this people, he runs 
in a roadblock with them, then it is clear, it would have been clear to these people that 
Sehlwana was in fact selling them out, wasn't that just a death warrant to these people, 
silence them once and for all, no problem with the cover, blowing the cover of your 
informers and your agents?
	If they are silenced and all killed, there would be no problem about anything 
being blown?

ANDRIES JOHANNES GERHARDUS ERWEE: Let me put it this way, I am quite honest when I say this, it was 
important for us to arrest these people and if we really believed that these insurgents 
should be shot dead summarily, there surely would have been other easier ways of 
doing it, ways which did not entail so much risk.
	For instance in this river bed which is quite wide, we could have shot them 
dead there.  I could have requested the police's Special Task Team and the Defence 
Force, we could have requested these teams to shoot the people dead.
	At the time that we threw in the gas grenade, we could have also have thrown 
in a bigger hand grenade or some other explosive device to just destroy all the people.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, I am asking you this question Colonel because we have heard 
similar evidence in other matters of  a light nature, in which we were told that virtually, 
it may not apply in your case, but we have learnt that in instances where the identity of 
an informer would be disclosed, once it would be discovered by somebody, detained 
or arrested that so and so was in fact working with the police, that amounted to a 
death warrant to that person.
	And it troubles me that you should say that you misled the inquest because you 
were concerned with the cover of some of your people, but then at the same time you 
say that you wanted to arrest the deceased and then bring them to an open trial.

ANDRIES JOHANNES GERHARDUS ERWEE: If I may answer that, I concede that there were calculated risks in 
respect of Sehlwana and the informer and other people who operated along the border, 
to expose them in case these insurgents were arrested. 
	I believed that Brigadier Coetzee and Warrant Officer Van den Berg and 
Sergeant Sehlwana would have consulted with the informers as to how they could to 
some extent protect these people, because you would remember Mr Chairperson, that 
there was even a press statement released that the seventh person had escaped and this 
was done to protect Sehlwana and the agent.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.  Mr Visser, did you want to put any more questions in 
relation to the questions that had been asked?

ADV VISSER: Only in regard to questions put this morning 
Mr Chairman.  Please give the Committee an estimate of how far this place where the 
incident took place, was from Pietersburg?

ANDRIES JOHANNES GERHARDUS ERWEE: I would say approximately 150 - 180 kilometres.

ADV VISSER: And how far is that from Louis Trichardt?

ANDRIES JOHANNES GERHARDUS ERWEE: I am not quite sure how far it is from Louis Trichardt, but I think 80 to 
100 kilometres.

ADV VISSER: As far as you knew, was Alldays the closest place where medical aid 
would be available?

ANDRIES JOHANNES GERHARDUS ERWEE: Yes, that is correct.

ADV VISSER: To a question put by Judge Ngoepe, you said that with hindsight you 
should perhaps have arranged for an ambulance to come from Alldays to meet you 
halfway with this wounded person.
	If we talk about hindsight, then one could perhaps also say that you should 
have taken an ambulance from Louis Trichardt or Pietersburg - what however was the 
purpose with which you confronted these people?

ANDRIES JOHANNES GERHARDUS ERWEE: Chairperson, yes, it was not customary for an insurgent to walk around 
with his firearm openly exposed.  For that reason we believed that we would take them 
by surprise and wouldn't really encounter significant opposition.
	So, for that reason we didn't really arrange for ambulances and all that kind of 
equipment.

ADV VISSER: You at all times believed that you would be able to perform a 
successful arrest?

ANDRIES JOHANNES GERHARDUS ERWEE: Yes, that is correct.

ADV VISSER: Mr Erwee, we are speculating now, but the question has been put to 
you and I think you have already answered, if your purpose was simply to kill these 
insurgents, just to shoot them dead, would this place where you have erected the road 
blockade, would that have been the proper place for it?  Would it have been the ideal 
place for it or where do you think should it have been done?

ANDRIES JOHANNES GERHARDUS ERWEE: I believe that if we simply wanted to execute this people so summarily, 
we would have done so in the riverbed, when they crossed the border because it would 
have been a lot easier to do so with a sharp shooter, there would have been fewer 
risks.

ADV VISSER: Yes, you would have needed six shots and that would have been that?

ANDRIES JOHANNES GERHARDUS ERWEE: That is correct.

ADV VISSER: And if you really wanted to act in a sinister way, you could have just 
buried the bodies in the river bed?

ANDRIES JOHANNES GERHARDUS ERWEE: Correct yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Speculation Mr Visser.

ADV VISSER: We are busy ...

CHAIRPERSON: And I could ask him whether that could still have looked like self 
defence, could it?  If they had killed them and buried them there and hidden the bodies, 
that could not have looked a bit like, it wouldn't have looked for a minute anything like 
self defence.

ANDRIES JOHANNES GERHARDUS ERWEE: Yes, of course not.

CHAIRPERSON: It depends on what the plan is and it depends on what in the mind of 
the person is and I don't think we really, well you can go on putting those questions to 
him, but at the same time you - I don't know where we are getting to because 
questions will be put to those speculations and then they just appear to be nothing else 
but speculations.

ADV VISSER: Mr Chairman, the only reason why I am putting these questions is 
because I thought these are the questions you put to him, I may have misunderstood 
you.
	But is really a question of argument in any event and if this end comes up, I 
can cover it in argument, so I will leave that Mr Chairman.
	One other aspect, the question which now arises is if they don't shoot and you 
arrest them, what would be the outcome of that?
	You said that the would be processed and ...

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, can I interrupt you there, because I would like you to, as far as 
possible, the last word though that is not necessarily the case, but the point you have 
just asked him something, I think I must make a follow up on it about the question of 
calling an ambulance and the like.
	Was it not your evidence and you must tell me if I misunderstood you, was it 
not part of your plan that the helicopter or a helicopter would be at hand in case some 
of your people were injured, then it would lift them?  Was it not in the plan?

ANDRIES JOHANNES GERHARDUS ERWEE: The reason why the helicopter was there, was to help with the 
possibility of somebody escaping, the helicopter would have been able to follow the 
tracks of the escaping person, so we could arrest him.

CHAIRPERSON: ... as to how to rush any of your people to hospital, should they be 
injured?

ANDRIES JOHANNES GERHARDUS ERWEE: No, Chairperson.

ADV VISSER: Just to get back to the last question Mr Erwee, you mentioned the 
possibility of the people to be put on trial and be prosecuted, there are also other 
possibilities and that is that - well, perhaps you can tell us what these other possibilities 
are.