Amnesty Hearings — Port Elizabeth — UNKNOWN

GEORGE BIZOS: This is June, from June 7th to June 27th.
	Your group, an army group and the Goniwe group.  And it was said by one of your fellow applicants that you were lucky on the 27th  because your plan worked on that day, whilst the others were trying to do the same thing.
	What comment would you have to make on that statement?

MR J VAN ZYL: Mr Chairman, I have no knowledge of that utterance, or of the contents of it.  But I definitely don't know about any other groups or teams that were having the same task at the time.

GEORGE BIZOS: And on the question of your authority, and the reason why you did this.
	The person that you say gave you authority may be interpreted as having left it in your discretion as to whether it was in the best interests of South Africa or not.  Can you please tell us if that is so interpreted, how you would have served (in your view) the interests of South Africa by murdering four people.

MR J VAN ZYL: Mr Chairman, that was Colonel Snyman's way of putting it I think lightly for himself.  There was no doubt about what he meant.
	It was no question of discretion.

GEORGE BIZOS: Yes.  Now as far as your authority....

CHAIRPERSON: Well answer this then.  How did you think by killing these four gentlemen it would serve the interests of the Republic of South Africa?

MR J VAN ZYL: Along with the instructions that I received, Mr Chairman, I was convinced at the time, at the time, that the elimination of these people would bring about stability in the area.  It was not my decision, but I agreed with it.

GEORGE BIZOS: In which area?

MR J VAN ZYL: In the areas that Mr Goniwe, especially, were influential in.

GEORGE BIZOS: And where was that?

MR J VAN ZYL: It was the whole of the Eastern Cape, including some regions in the Karoo, towards the South Western Districts and the Northern Border areas as well, Mr Chairman.

GEORGE BIZOS: If the information was - before you was only that which appears in the documents which were at the disposal of the Commissioner of Police, would you agree that it was not sufficient to kill people for that sort of activity?

MR J VAN ZYL: If the information at our disposal at the time were only the information that we had seen here today and yesterday, it would not have even been an issue in the Security Police, Mr Chairman.

GEORGE BIZOS: Even though the Security Police felt it duty bound to report it, like a visit by the Ambassador and things like that and other matters - helping to form civic organisations.  All those things that are listed by the Commissioner would not have been grounds for killing Mr Goniwe or any of the others.

MR J VAN ZYL: Not that was listed here as such, Mr Chairman.

GEORGE BIZOS: Yes, well you see, because we are going to suggest to you that Mr Goniwe was not doing anything else, I am going to suggest to you that there was ill-will and malice in your action, possibly as a result - not only you personally but the others, that having suggested his dismissal from his job, that he would have been viewed as a victor over you by being reinstated, and you were going to stop it.

MR J VAN ZYL: That is totally untrue, Mr Chairman.

GEORGE BIZOS: It does correspond, however, does it not with the "nooit, ooit, ooit weer" statement in the document of the 23rd May, and that which was the Security Police view at the time, and that being overridden by higher authority.  The Secretariat of the Security Council.

MR J VAN ZYL: Mr Chairman, was that a Security Police document or a....

GEORGE BIZOS: Well we can look at it.  It's an exhibit.
	It's quite clear in the documents as a whole that that was the position of the Security establishment.

MR J VAN ZYL: I'm sorry.  May I just remind myself of that again please, Mr Chairman.

GEORGE BIZOS: Exhibit "C", Mr Chairman.

MR J VAN ZYL: Mr Chairman, this is not a Security Police document.  This is a GBS document.

GEORGE BIZOS: Yes.  Do you say that the police didn't agree with this proposal?

MR J VAN ZYL: No, I could never say that, but you had said Sir that the Security Police had said "nooit, ooit, ooit weer"....

GEORGE BIZOS: Wasn't that the Security Police view?

MR J VAN ZYL: I cannot remember that specifically Mr Chairman.  I was a Captain at the time and I might have missed it because of that, but I didn't know this.

GEORGE BIZOS: And having regard to the savage manner in which these murders were committed would be additional evidence, would it not, that you really hated these people, Mr....

MR J VAN ZYL: Not at all, Mr Chairman.

GEORGE BIZOS: You didn't hate them?

MR J VAN ZYL: No.

GEORGE BIZOS: You stood by whilst they were stabbed in a cumulative number of sixty-three times.

MR J VAN ZYL: It does not mean that I like it, Mr Chairman.

GEORGE BIZOS: Thank you.
	I have no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS

ADV D POTGIETER: Mr van Zyl, do you have exhibit "J"?

MR J VAN ZYL: Yes, Mr Chairperson.

ADV D POTGIETER: Can you please look at paragraph 9.

MR J VAN ZYL: Yes, I have it here Chairperson.

ADV D POTGIETER: Do you accept that the two addendum's, "K(i)" and "K(ii)" originate from the Commanding Officer of the Security Branch and partially the Port Elizabeth Division of the Security Branch.

MR J VAN ZYL: That is highly possible, Mr Chairperson.

ADV D POTGIETER: So, in other words, these exhibits "K(i)" and "K(ii)" actually originate from the Security Police.

MR J VAN ZYL: Not as such.  The content of the information probably comes from Port Elizabeth on the basis of other information acquired from the Port Elizabeth branch.

ADV D POTGIETER: Thank you.

UNKNOWN: Thank you Mr van Zyl.
	If I can refer you to page 48 of the bundle, it is your application in fact.  To paragraph 10.  In there you have mentioned that you gave both Eric Taylor and Sergeant Lotz instructions to monitor the deceased in this matter.
	Could you perhaps elaborate, what stage or when specifically were these instructions given.

MR J VAN ZYL: Mr Chairman, this was shortly after I originally spoke to Colonel van Rensburg and after I had spoken to Major Du Plessis.  Shortly after the first instructions, three weeks or so, two or three weeks before the incident.

UNKNOWN: So that would have been about three weeks before?

MR J VAN ZYL: More or less, Mr Chairman.

UNKNOWN: Two to three weeks before.
	What was the import of the instruction.  What specifically did you want to know?

MR J VAN ZYL: I wanted to know exactly where these activists were going, what they were doing, who they were dealing with and who were the people that were being used as their helpers or their Lieutenants in the different regions.

UNKNOWN: Was it explained to Mr Taylor and Mr Lotz what the purpose of the information was that you required?

MR J VAN ZYL: Mr Chairman as far as I can recall I spoke to them at that time about this and about what the purpose was, yes.

UNKNOWN: So they would have known that there was a plan that you would have wanted to put into operation and the information was  required for that specific purpose?

MR J VAN ZYL: Yes Mr Chairman.

UNKNOWN: Right.  Can you perhaps then explain why Mr Lotz in his application makes no mention of these instructions that you would have given to him?  If I can refer you to page 13 of the bundle.

MR J VAN ZYL: No.  Mr Chairman, no I don't know why Mr Lotz says it like that.  He was definitely part of the intelligence gathering in the preceding weeks.

UNKNOWN: Mr Lotz in fact goes further and he says quite clearly that he was informed only on the 27th as to what the purpose of the operation would be.
	Surely Mr van Zyl, if this was explained to him three weeks before and that if he was, as you say, actively involved in the intelligence gathering, there would have been no need at all for you to explain on that day why his services were required.