Amnesty Hearings — Cape Town — 2000-06-13

UNKNOWN: "It was nothing personal" is the first page.  The second page contains a photograph of Mr van Zyl, his wife and Mr Evans.  And the one headed "Face to Face with Slang" is the Weekly Mail article.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MR MARTINI: ...(indistinct - no microphone)

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, that consists of two pages.

MR MARTINI: ...(indistinct - no microphone)

CHAIRPERSON: No, that's right and then H2 is Face to Face with Slang.  No photograph.

MR MARTINI: ...(indistinct - no microphone)

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, that's it, that's H1 and then H2 is that other one you've got.

MR MARTINI: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: I'll just give you some time to read it, Mr van Zyl.

UNKNOWN: ...(no recording) to you."   Are those your words?

MR VAN ZYL: I cannot say, it may be.  It sounds like my type of discussion.

UNKNOWN: You don't have any reason to doubt that you were correctly quoted in these articles?

MR VAN ZYL: I do many press interviews and I can tell you there's no reason for me not to believe that possibly is not the truth, but I do not have a problem with the general extent of what is written here.

UNKNOWN: Alright.  You didn't write any letters afterwards to the newspaper at the time and say "I was incorrectly quoted"?

MR VAN ZYL: I did not.

UNKNOWN: Now let's look at Exhibit H1, the Sunday Star article, in the first column you're quoted as saying, third paragraph - well before we get there, you see the journalist who wrote this article, David Briar and Kit Katson, say that the two of you were brought together by the Sunday Star, is that correct?

MR VAN ZYL: That is so.

UNKNOWN: In other words, they're saying it was on their initiative that you were brought together.

MR VAN ZYL: It may be.  I did not call him and ask him to come and see me.

UNKNOWN: In the third paragraph you're quoted as saying
"I'm very proud to have been a member of the CCB.  I think they did good work and contributed to the peace climate in South Africa at the moment, no matter how strange it may sound to you."
Then on the - did you say that?

MR VAN ZYL: Yes, I said it in my statement also, I was proud of being a member of the CCB.  It was within a context of war during that time, we fought the enemy, they fought us.  I was proud of it.

UNKNOWN: On the following page of that article, third column, second paragraph and third paragraph you said the following
"I am not sorry I was a member of the CCB, but that's over now.  The new President, Mr de Klerk, has made it possible to stop this sort of action.  If you were to ask me what I would do if I were borne again, I would say that I would like to live my life all over just as I have done up to now, even if it includes going back to jail for months.  This is how I feel about it."
You said that?

MR VAN ZYL: That is so.

UNKNOWN: Then in Exhibit H2, the Weekly Mail article, first column you'll see Mr Evans writes that, this is in the fifth paragraph, he says
"I had agreed to a request to meet Mr van Zyl, under the mistaken impression that he wished to say sorry, but it emerged that his agenda was a different one."
And then he quotes you.  The one is a repeat of the quote in the Sunday Star article:
"I will never apologise for anything that I've done whilst I was a member of the CCB."
and you added:
"You have to fight war with war."
Now you will agree with me - you did say that?

MR VAN ZYL: Yes, it sounds like it.

UNKNOWN: If you say to Mr Evans "I will never apologise for anything that I've done whilst I was a member of the CCB", you could hardly have been apologising to him.

MR VAN ZYL: Yes, and no.  I think once again Sir, we should place the thing in context.  That is so.  You see, there's a day and night difference between these two reports because the one is prejudiced one-sided report of Gavin Evans himself, the other one is from a more objective reporter, and it would be good if quote the other things I have said there, but I do not deny it.  And the fact that I met Gavin Evans and spoke to him, I can give you the assurance that I apologised insofar as I thought it necessary, but do not expect of me that the past of which I was part of and what I thought necessary at that stage, and which I still think today, that if it was not for the Forces that fought the then ANC and the UDF years ago, the situation in this country would have been totally different.  We cannot debate here today whether the war was right or wrong and who was right and who was wrong.

MR MARTINI: Mr Chairperson, possibly this is an opportune time, what is the relevance of this questioning on these newspaper articles?  What relevance does it have to the Act of amnesty?  As I understand ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, it's not a criteria.

MR MARTINI: I just don't want to waste this Commission's time and just have - you know I've tried not to object, but I do appreciate we have limited time.

UNKNOWN: It goes to credibility and I'll show you why in a minute, if I can just finish dealing with the articles.
	Mr van Zyl, I've read both articles carefully, the general sentiment that you appear to be expressing is the following, correct me if I'm wrong, "It was a war situation at the time, I'm not sorry for things that of necessity had to be done during that war situation.  Those were the times.  If I could live my life over again and those times had to repeat themselves, I would follow the same path".

MR VAN ZYL: That is so.

UNKNOWN: So what is it that you were sorry about?

MR VAN ZYL: That there were circumstances in the country which forced me to have to fight under dangerous conditions with the then enemy of the country.  This is one of the things of which I was dissatisfied and that I was sorry about, that the politicians could not solve the problems and that we were used to a great extent, to solve those problems.

UNKNOWN: So you're saying you weren't - you told Mr Evans that you were sorry that there was a war, not that you were sorry that he personally was targeted.

MR VAN ZYL: You have read the reports and I think let us stick to them, I cannot tell you more.  What I said to you now was that on my appearance, first appearance before this Commission, approximately two months ago, I apologised to the party for my part in the matter because today I have a different perspective on life than what I had in 1990, when I made these statements.

UNKNOWN: Just one last point on this article.  At page 699 of the record of these proceedings I ask you the following question
"As regard Mr Evans, did he approach you or did you approach him?"
and then you said:
"We approached Evans.  At that stage Piet du Plessis was my legal representative and we approached him.  He came in.  There was a press conference after we met."
I assume that evidence is wrong because you've admitted that the approach came from the Sunday Star, you didn't approach Evans.

MR VAN ZYL: Yes, I did not call him and ask him to come and see me, my attorney contacted me and said that - my then attorney, Mr Piet du Plessis, contacted me and said that they wanted to hold a press conference with myself and Gavin Evans and whether I would accede to it.  That is what happened.

UNKNOWN: Thank you, Mr Chairman, this an appropriate time.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, this would be a convenient time to take the lunch adjournment.  We shall do so until quarter to two.

MS COLERIDGE: All rise.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
ON RESUMPTION

ABRAM VAN ZYL: (s.u.o.)