Amnesty Hearings — Pietersburg — 1997-07-03

ADV VISSER: Can we call Mr Dreyer, Mr Chairman?

PIETER ANDRIES DREYER: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Visser?

ADV VISSER: Mr Dreyer, you are one of the applicants for amnesty before this Commission and your application is found on B122 of the bundle of documents.
	Your application is set out in your amnesty application and do you confirm the correctness of your application?  Do you also confirm that it is the truth?

PIETER ANDRIES DREYER: That is correct yes.

ADV VISSER: Your experience and career in the police was set out on pages 122 to 123, did you read that again?

PIETER ANDRIES DREYER: Yes.

ADV VISSER: And is that correct?

PIETER ANDRIES DREYER: With one amendment, yes.

ADV VISSER: Which is that?

PIETER ANDRIES DREYER: Paragraph 8(b).

ADV VISSER: Paragraph 8(b), yes?

PIETER ANDRIES DREYER: Number 4.

ADV VISSER: Number 4?

PIETER ANDRIES DREYER: That must be Mooirivier.

ADV VISSER: Not Witrivier, but Mooirivier.

PIETER ANDRIES DREYER: And number 5 must be Ingwavuma and not Inkswavuma.

ADV VISSER: Ingwavuma, yes.

PIETER ANDRIES DREYER: That is correct.

ADV VISSER: Apart from that, the rest is all correct?

PIETER ANDRIES DREYER: Yes.

ADV VISSER: Mr Dreyer you have referred to the Foundation for Equality before the Law of Submission and also to General Van der Merwe's submission and you ask that we incorporate it in your application as well as Mr Erwee's affidavit where he refers to the facts of the events, is that correct?
	You've listened to his evidence, do you confirm his evidence in broad terms?

PIETER ANDRIES DREYER: Yes, I do.

ADV VISSER: You are requesting amnesty for the incident which took place on the 10th of July 1986 and for any offence of delict associated with it.
	Could you tell the Committee were you at that stage stationed at Louis Trichardt?

PIETER ANDRIES DREYER: I was the Branch Commander.

ADV VISSER: And the judicial inquest was apparently finalised in Louis Trichardt?

PIETER ANDRIES DREYER: Yes.

ADV VISSER: And the documentation which was provided for purposes of the inquest fell under your command?

PIETER ANDRIES DREYER: Correct.

ADV VISSER: And we have heard from Mr Erwee that it was intentionally a watered down submission, the full facts were not revealed?

PIETER ANDRIES DREYER: That is correct.

ADV VISSER: Although the fact that were given, were mainly correct, the full facts and the full causal sequence and names of participants were not revealed?

PIETER ANDRIES DREYER: Correct.

ADV VISSER: And you were Mr Swarts' immediate superior?

PIETER ANDRIES DREYER: Correct.

ADV VISSER: And what he did, you knew about?

PIETER ANDRIES DREYER: Correct.

ADV VISSER: And you thought it fit to accept it like that and let it go like that?

PIETER ANDRIES DREYER: Yes.

ADV VISSER: Could you tell the Committee why you acted in that way?

PIETER ANDRIES DREYER: Chairperson, I didn't think that the omission of these facts would cause the court to come to a different conclusion.  I also did it because I believed that the incorporation of these facts would protect the lives of the members who took part in the operation, that is now Sehlwana and the informer.

ADV VISSER: And within the ambit of that which became known as the struggle in that time, you felt that you were acting in a justifiable manner?

PIETER ANDRIES DREYER: Yes.

ADV VISSER: And if Swarts acted, he acted according to your instructions and also those of Erwee?

PIETER ANDRIES DREYER: Correct.

ADV VISSER: According to the evidence we know that there were five identity books found on the bodies of the insurgents.  Can you from your personal knowledge of the inquiry made to Home Affairs, were these identity books of any value for identification purposes?

PIETER ANDRIES DREYER: Apart from the photographs in the ID books,  it had no value as identification tools.

ADV VISSER: So you couldn't identify anybody on the basis of an ID book?

PIETER ANDRIES DREYER: That is so, they were all false books, ID books.

ADV VISSER: And the identification of the three people which could eventually be done, how was that done?

PIETER ANDRIES DREYER: The finger prints were taken of all six corpses, sent to the Department of Home Affairs and the identification of three could be made afterwards on that basis, but three could not be identified.

ADV VISSER: You were present at the scene when the shooting took place?

PIETER ANDRIES DREYER: Yes.

ADV VISSER: Where were you placed?

PIETER ANDRIES DREYER: I was in the little dry river bed next to Johan van Dyk.

ADV VISSER: Where he has already indicated where he was?

PIETER ANDRIES DREYER: Yes.

ADV VISSER: Did you fire any shots?

PIETER ANDRIES DREYER: No.

ADV VISSER: Did you think that what you did there, you did in terms of general instructions of the police and according to the general instructions of Colonel Van der Merwe in respect of what happened there that day?

PIETER ANDRIES DREYER: I believed that yes.

ADV VISSER: Do you believe that you did anything wrong there?

PIETER ANDRIES DREYER: No.

ADV VISSER: Why are you applying for amnesty?

PIETER ANDRIES DREYER: After Colonel Erwee and I had spoken to the Investigating Officer, Mr Ivor Human and Mr Neels de Lange and they told us that a case of murder was being investigated against us, and possibly also a case of perjury and defeating the ends of justice, and also as a result of the various calls for reconciliation which had been made from such as for instance Archbishop Tutu's call that people should come and testify before the Truth Commission, I decided to apply.

ADV VISSER: One last aspect which I have been reminded of.  Mr Swarts' sworn statement and which he filed during the inquest, you administered the oath there?

PIETER ANDRIES DREYER: That is correct.

ADV VISSER: Were you aware at that stage that there was wrong information contained in that statement?

PIETER ANDRIES DREYER: Yes.

ADV VISSER: And that he was therefore not the person who removed the bodies of the deceased from the scene to Alldays and that where he stated that in paragraph 4, excuse me in paragraph - it is on page - C/17, paragraph 4.
	I put the two bodies in the government vehicles and under my command and supervision took them to the Alldays police station, that is not true?

PIETER ANDRIES DREYER: Chairperson, afterwards he told me that.  I wasn't at the scene when the bodies were taken away.  I left earlier, I was sent back to Alldays.

ADV VISSER: Yes, because as we understand it, Theuns Gerber who has since died, he was the person who received instructions from Erwee to take the bodies away?

PIETER ANDRIES DREYER: Yes.

ADV VISSER: Thank you Chairperson.

ADV VISSER: Please just a moment's indulgence.  Mr Dreyer, one aspect.  Thus far we haven't heard direct evidence from any of the applicants who could testify to this on the basis of their own observations.
	Do you perhaps know whether any of the Defence Force members fired at the combi?  Firstly did you see it and secondly, do you have any reason to accept on the basis of inference that they did or didn't shoot?

PIETER ANDRIES DREYER: I couldn't see the combi, but afterwards I saw that the shots had been fired in the side of the combi, so my assumption was that the Defence Force members must also have fired.

ADV VISSER: In other words, not from the direction where the casspir was, but from another direction?

PIETER ANDRIES DREYER: Yes.

ADV VISSER: And you simply deduced that?

PIETER ANDRIES DREYER: Yes.

ADV VISSER: But you couldn't see it yourself?

PIETER ANDRIES DREYER: No.

ADV VISSER: Were you present when a wounded person was wounded?

PIETER ANDRIES DREYER: No.

ADV VISSER: Mr Chairman, thank you very much.

ADV VISSER: .

ADV VISSER: It is now one o'clock, Chairperson.