Amnesty Hearings — Pietersburg — 1997-07-01

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN DER MERWE: It wasn't something new for them because the possibility is always there and he also made people available.

ADV VISSER: Could you just perhaps explain to the members, it might be confusing.  Before this date, where you ask formerly for assistance, is it correct that there were defence force members involved in some way with this operation before May and June and if so in what capacity and why.

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN DER MERWE: Yes that's true.  You earlier asked whether I was on the ground and from where I acted. Obviously many things that took place in this operation on the ground, I wasn't present and I only heard about it during our discussions of the plan during the planning at an earlier stage with the possible of these three people, there were already people used from the defence force with more sophisticated radio equipment, they helped us in that regard.  In this process we had observation points manned by my men and there had to be communication to say what was happening at the different places. At that stage in that regard we made use of the defence force.

ADV VISSER: The police didn't have sufficient radio systems and equipment to stay in contact with each other but the defence force had that?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN DER MERWE: Yes our security vehicles were equipped in such a way that we could communicate but there were - that is correct.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY ADV VISSER

MR ROSSOUW: Mr van der Merwe, just two issues.  The first one relates to the planning. From the planning of how this operation would take place were you ever on the scene itself?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN DER MERWE: No.

MR ROSSOUW: No.  From the planning where you involved taking into consideration the assistance of the defence force, the number of people, 36 who were involved and the plan that was conveyed to Mr Sehlwana, do you think that it is a reasonable deduction that there would be shooting at the scene?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN DER MERWE: Yes I think that that could be a probable inference.

MR ROSSOUW: His testimony was that while it was being rehearsed that they were going to shoot there.

ADV DE JAGER: Doesn't he go any further, didn't he say that he thought these people were going to be killed there?

MR ROSSOUW: Mr Chairman that is not my recollection, I think his testimony -  Mr Chairman I can't remember the words dood gemaak word, I can only recollect that he said that they were going to shoot.

CHAIRPERSON: No, I think he actually said that.

SISI KHAMPEPE: Yes that's our recollection.

CHAIRPERSON: He actually said that he realised that they were no longer going to arrest those people but to kill them.

SISI KHAMPEPE: If I'm not mistaken Mr Rossouw, that also appears from his written application. That appears from the annexure from his application.

ADV VISSER: It's page 9 Mr Chairman, paragraph 7.

MR ROSSOUW: Mr Chairman, I beg the Committee's pardon.  I was just, it was pointed out to me by my learned colleague, that at one stage my recollection is also that he said, he stated it in various ways but at one point he did indicate that he said it came to my mind that they were going to kill them. That is the deduction that he made.  Mr van der Merwe from the planning you agree that from the planning it could be a reasonable deduction that there could be shooting.

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN DER MERWE: Yes the possibility did exist.

MR ROSSOUW: You also said and I assume that Mr Sehlwana wasn't involved when it was said, but you also said, and I wrote it down, that you told Erwee and the defence force captain that they should be under no illusion that if danger should arise that the lives of the security forces would have been first priority.

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN DER MERWE: Yes that is so.

MR ROSSOUW: But you said that to them but not to Sehlwana?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN DER MERWE: No I told that to them. He wasn't present.

MR ROSSOUW: And then you also answered what it would imply and you said that they would have to shoot if necessary.

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN DER MERWE: Yes.

MR ROSSOUW: And then lastly. Relating to the incident where the 6th person of the MK soldiers were killed, you said that later in the afternoon you were contacted and what were you informed?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN DER MERWE: That the operation was completed and that six terrorists were shot dead.

MR ROSSOUW: It wasn't said that five were killed and one was wounded fatally?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN DER MERWE: The initial message came through as I said to you now but later on I did realise and heard what actually happened.

MR ROSSOUW: So the first report that you got was an inference that everybody was shot at the scene?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN DER MERWE: That is how I understood it.

MR ROSSOUW: Were you at some stage told how the wounded occupant of this combi was transported to the hospital?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN DER MERWE: I was informed that when the person was wounded that, that's the army officer, the helicopter transported him and the other MK soldier, the wounded one was transported with the vehicle.

MR ROSSOUW: I don't know whether you can give any commentary on that but if you could, why was the heavily wounded member in the combi, why wasn't he also transported by helicopter?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN DER MERWE: I judged, based on my observation and my knowledge with the teargas present and there was also communication, the army officer was shot and immediately the helicopter took him away and left and he was already quite some distance and later on you will perhaps hear how it long it took to determine that there was still someone alive. And the fact was that he was far away and it would have been impractical that he would return to come and fetch this other man because he was almost at his destination.

SISI KHAMPEPE: May I interpose Mr Rossouw.  Mr van der Merwe what you have just stated would be your assumption.  You never spoke to Mr Erwee or to any of the officers who were at the scene to find out why the injured person was not taken by helicopter together with the captain from the defence force?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN DER MERWE: I'm sorry but my equipment was not switched on properly but I did hear what you said. The members that you refer to, I did speak to them afterwards but I wasn't on the scene so I didn't know exactly what happened there.

SISI KHAMPEPE: My question was merely to find out if you made any specific enquiry why the injured person was not taken by helicopter together with the captain from the defence force. Did you make such an enquiry, did you ask the people who were there why the injured person was not taken by helicopter?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN DER MERWE: I just want to mention that my hearing equipment is not working.  I can hear what you say but I can't get the interpretation. Don't you please want to repeat it and then I can answer it?

SISI KHAMPEPE: What I wanted to find out is whether you made any specific enquiry from the officers who were at the scene as to why the injured cadre was not taken by helicopter together with the captain from the defence force. Did you or did you not make such a specific enquiry?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN DER MERWE: Yes and that is logical. People were transported, why not this man that we actually wanted to have alive at the hospital. And then they said that the helicopter had to move away quickly because of the teargas that was still present and the helicopter was already a far distance away from the scene, and they had quickly moved away before there was an episode where this person who was then questioned that there was any need for him to go to the hospital.

SISI KHAMPEPE: Thank you.  Mr Rossouw, you may proceed.

MR ROSSOUW: Thank you Mr Chairman.
	Mr van der Merwe a last question.  You say that approximately a month ago you heard from Mr Visser about the allegation that Mr Fuchs shot the wounded person?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN DER MERWE: Yes that is correct.