Special Hearings — Helderberg Flight Special Hearing — 1998-06-03

UNKNOWN: Yes, I have two more witnesses for the day, this actually concludes our witnesses for the Helderberg.  I am now calling Mr J N J van Rensburg, he was the attorney who assisted Judge Margo on both the enquiries.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, you're excused Mr Peyaga.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr van Rensburg you are reminded that you are still under oath.
 This is the enquiry into the Helderberg air disaster and Mr van Rensburg, who has been sworn in already, will testify.  Miss Terreblanche?

UNKNOWN: Thank you.  Now, Mr van Rensburg, I assume that the same procedure was followed vis a vis DCA with the Helderberg enquiry.

MR VAN RENSBURG: In terms of annex. 13.2, the Chicago Convention, yes.

UNKNOWN: So basically they provided you with evidence?

MR VAN RENSBURG: That's correct.

UNKNOWN: I also understand that when, just before the enquiry was opened or started, some submissions were asked for from all interested parties.

MR VAN RENSBURG: Yes.

UNKNOWN: And was there a deadline to that?

MR VAN RENSBURG: If I can just give you an idea here ...(intervention)

UNKNOWN: How much time did they get?

MR VAN RENSBURG: No, no, it was - we published well in advance, before the actual hearings, I mean, the Board conducted its proceedings in public in Johannesburg on the 15, 16, 17, 18, 22, 23, 24 and 25 of August 1989, this was after notice had been given and advertisements placed of the date and place of the hearings.  I still recall that when the venue of the hearings in Johannesburg in the Johannesburg Supreme Court was determined, then we published the notices for all interested parties to come forward with whatever evidence they may have.

UNKNOWN: Now at what stage did you first get a transcription or listen to the CVR records that there were, the recovered black box records?

MR VAN RENSBURG: Well that was, we even listened to that during the course of the hearing and we've read it as it was typed.

UNKNOWN: I hear what you're saying, but at what stage did you first have access to it, before or during the enquiry?

MR VAN RENSBURG: No, I think we had, you know, it's quite some time ago, but if my memory serves me, I think we listened to that before the hearing and during the course of the hearing, and it was also on paper of course.

UNKNOWN: You relied, as in the previous enquiry, it was relied on Dr Leonard Jansen to do the interpretation?

MR VAN RENSBURG: Yes, we analysed the DVI.

UNKNOWN: And the full transcript?

MR VAN RENSBURG: Yes.

UNKNOWN: Now, at the enquiry the Pilots Association was called right in the beginning to ask their permission to play the entire recording and run into the court record the entire transcript, is that correct?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

UNKNOWN: And they were questioned by Judge Margo a number of times where they said, yes, they would not mind the whole one until he said that perhaps it contains confidential evidence, and then they conceded and said, well in that case, no, they don't want the whole one.

MR VAN RENSBURG: No, I do not recall the reference to confidential information, but what I recall which also came from the Airline Pilots Association that some strong language was used by Captain Dawie Uys on board that aircraft and they didn't want all those heavy expressions or strong language to be broadcast in open, because it was an open hearing, the general members of public were there and there was some objection to that part, but not because of confidential information, to the best of my recollection.

UNKNOWN: What stage was it decided that only the part from when the fire warning bell rang was applicable to the enquiry, and not the part where the strong language was used?

MR VAN RENSBURG: No, the strong language was used right through, I mean up to the last bit, I mean, if you go through that recording, Dawie Uys was very tense up to the last minute.

UNKNOWN: Listen to the question, at what stage was it determined that only the part after the fire-bell rang was applicable to the investigation and the enquiry, as to the cause of the accident?

MR VAN RENSBURG: I think when Judge Margo made it clear to the Airline Pilots Association that that's the critical time just before the accident and they will not be able to stand in his way to play that part because that is of critical importance, and that is why that part only was incorporated in the record.

UNKNOWN: Would you say that Judge Margo had a better understanding of such an interpretation that a pilot?

MR VAN RENSBURG: Well, I will not judge that, I just know that Judge Margo is also an experienced pilot and he was assisted by even more experienced pilots that any pilot of the Airline Association in this enquiry.  We had test-pilots from all over the place, and I will not try to be the judge of who was the better one to assess the situation.

UNKNOWN: Just for the record, Judge Margo never flew a 747.

MR VAN RENSBURG: No, that is correct, but many of the other witnesses involved, they flew that type of aircraft, and we had them all there.

UNKNOWN: Do you think that the Pilots Association and the Flight Engineers Association were interested parties in this investigation?

MR VAN RENSBURG: Of course yes, they reacted to the notice that we published and that's why they came.  They are always an interested party when it comes to aviation matters.  They've just recently filed a serious complaint about air traffic control all over with the Licensing Councils, nationally and internationally, so we would most definitely regard them, that's why they've been given audience there.

UNKNOWN: Would they have had access to all records, even the entire CVR recording?

MR VAN RENSBURG: Absolutely.  It was an entire open - even, you know, with the previous investigation, I was personally attacked by not one person, but more than one when I said to the Media, that as we are leading the evidence to this Counsel, as we handed it up to the Chairman of the Board of Enquiry, I always secured an extra copy for the Media and said, as you get it, here it is for the Media.   I was criticised for doing that, but we decided it's an open enquiry, whatever comes to record must be part of the record, we are not to try and hold anything back.  And that was the attitude from the Board's side, internationally represented and all the legal representatives involved in the Enquiry.

UNKNOWN: I think you must now listen closely, we have had more than one person come forward, particularly pertaining to the Flight Engineers Association who said that they asked for participation, but was given only observer status.  They then had difficulty of accessing the full transcript of the voice recording.  After securing that, a number of them put together - well, were in fact originally seconded to the board, but was never used, put together their own interpretation of the CVR where they said that the part that was not played and not taken in account, was vital to determine the cause of the accident or the wreckage of the plane.  Now, we've had it from more than one person that there was a meeting called after this submission was made, in Judge Margo's chambers.  First of all they were told that they were out of the deadline, they dispute that, saying that they were 48 hours inside the deadline of making submissions.  We were told ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: You have put a number of things to him already, can he react to some of these that you have already put to him.  Do you still remember some of the things that have been put to you?