Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — 1998-10-15

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN ZYL: Yes.

MR COETZEE: And when did you believe that this planning would take place?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN ZYL: As soon as we had arrived at our destination.

MR COETZEE: Thank you.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR COETZEE

ADV GCABASHE: Just one small aspect, again the dropping  off of De Meillon at Secunda and meeting him at Mr Van Rensburg's house or finding him there or whatever, you used your own initiative to go to Mr Van Rensburg's house, that is really what I want to ask you about?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN ZYL: That is correct.

ADV GCABASHE: What made you decide that you want to go there, having dropped off your partner, your colleague just a few minutes ago?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN ZYL: Mr De Meillon had been injured and I just wanted to ensure that he had indeed arrived at Mr Van Rensburg's house.

ADV GCABASHE: Was that the only reason?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN ZYL: Yes, that is correct.

ADV GCABASHE: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you have anything further Mr Coetzee?

MR COETZEE: Chairperson, I have no further evidence to lead and this concludes the third applicant's application.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR COETZEE
WITNESS EXCUSED

CHAIRPERSON: Very well, thank you.  Mr Van Schalkwyk, do you have any witnesses?

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: I have no witnesses to oppose the application, I do however have an affidavit made by the father of Constable Terreblanche which I will submit as well as an affidavit of the Constable that was involved, Renier Swart, of which I have made copies available.
	I could read this onto the record if you wish.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Prinsloo and Mr Coetzee, do you have copies of these documents?

MR COETZEE: No.

MR PRINSLOO: Neither have I.

CHAIRPERSON: Will you be leading any evidence Adv Steenkamp?

ADV STEENKAMP: No Mr Chairman, I will not be calling any witnesses.

CHAIRPERSON: All right, I think what we will do is, we will take the tea adjournment now and it will give you an opportunity to look at those affidavits as well.
	We will reconvene in 15 minutes' time, so we will take our tea adjournment now.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
AT RESUMPTION

CHAIRPERSON: We are reconvened to hopefully finalise the De Meillon application.  The matter stood down for a while since this morning, to give Mr Swart an opportunity to come through to the venue.
	I was informed that he was originally under the impression that it would not be necessary for him to attend today and to testify and therefore he had gone back to his duties as a member of the Police Service.
	He is present now and I should perhaps add that Mr Van Schalkwyk, who had appeared and is appearing on his behalf, had given us an affidavit by Mr Swart and after having had regard to the contents of that affidavit and having considered some of the other aspects of the matter, we have decided that it would be necessary for Mr Swart to testify.
	Although initially he had been under the impression that it would not be necessary for him to testify, the panel is in fact calling him as a witness and to testify in the matter.
	What I intend doing is to ask Mr Van Schalkwyk which I think would be of some assistance to us, although he is not strictly speaking, calling Mr Swart himself, but to present his testimony, to lead his testimony and then of course the other parties would be able to canvass what issues they want to canvass with him.
	Mr Van Schalkwyk to lead him specifically in regard to the affidavit which is before us.  What I am going to do, I am going to ask Mr Sibanyoni to administer the oath to Mr Swart and then I will ask Mr Van Schalkwyk to assist us in presenting his testimony.

ANDRE RENIER SWART: (sworn states)

MR SIBANYONI: He has been sworn in Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Sibanyoni.  Mr Van Schalkwyk, will you please present the testimony for us.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: As it pleases the Chairperson.  Mr Swart, on the 23rd of April 1994, were you a member of the South African Police?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: Yes, that is correct.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: At which Unit were you stationed?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: Unit 19, that is the Internal Security Unit.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: On that particular day, where were you serving?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: On that day, we were on duty at the guard house of the main gate of the base.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: Who was with you on duty?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: Constable Terreblanche.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: This place where you were on duty, was it a military base or a civil premises which you were guarding?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: It was a police base.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: Were you armed during this period?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: Yes, I had my 9 mm pistol, my State pistol on me.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: Constable Terreblanche who was with you, was he also armed?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: Yes, also with his pistol.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: What form of security was of application to these arms while you were on duty?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: Do you mean our patrolling rounds or ammunition rounds?

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: Yes.

ANDRE RENIER SWART: We did not have rounds in the chamber.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: If you were to fire a shot, would you cock the weapon first?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: Yes, that is correct.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: Was there any other firearms or semi-automatic or automatic weaponry in the guard house where you were?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: No.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: During any of these events, did you ever fire your weapon?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: No.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: Was your weapon which was out of your control at a certain point in time, fired?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: Not as far as I know.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: Was your duty pistol inspected afterwards?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: Yes, I inspected the weapon, I took out the magazine to see if the rounds were still in it.  That was directly after the incident.
	After that I reloaded it and cocked it once more.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: And no rounds were missing from the chamber or from the magazine?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: That is correct.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: Thus, shortly after the incident your hands were tested for gun powder residue?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: That is correct.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: Was any residue found on your hands?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: No.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: Please tell us in your own words what happened at approximately 22H30 that evening?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: Constable Terreblanche and I were watching television in the guard house.  It was approximately 22H30 when two men entered the door of the guard house.  They were wearing balaclavas and they told us to sit still and not to do anything stupid.
	Initially they told us to remove our weapons and when Constable Terreblanche and I attempted to do so, they said no, leave it, and they moved towards us.  The one person went to Constable Terreblanche, the other one moved in my direction.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: If I might just ask you at this point, these two persons, were they armed?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: Yes, that is correct.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: And the person who moved to Constable Terreblanche, with what sort of weapon was he armed?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: He had a pistol.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: And the person who moved towards you, what sort of weapon did he have?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: He had a revolver, a short round revolver.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: In your experience as a policeman, can you identify firearms?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: Yes.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: You would not make a mistake between a 9 mm pistol and a hand weapon which was a 38 Special?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: No, I wouldn't make a mistake.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: Please continue.