Amnesty Hearings — Pietersburg — 1997-07-02

A J G ERWEE: If it was so, if I did say that, I should perhaps just place it in the proper perspective. It could have been 10 minutes but the little bit that I could extract was so meagre, the information, if I said 10 minutes, then I am actually perhaps over-estimating it. I would just correct myself to say five to eight minutes from the - it is actually correct if I say 10, from the time that I took him from the vehicle to the place where I laid him down and started questioning him and gave him an injection and putting him back on the vehicle.  All of that would have taken about 10 minutes.

SISI KHAMPEPE: Now during that period this person was gaining consciousness and losing it. Now you didn't think of taking immediate action to take him to hospital? I mean, you are concerned in interrogating a person who was in no condition to be interrogated.

A J G ERWEE: That is correct so, yes.

SISI KHAMPEPE: So you really did not have any interest at making sure that this person could be saved.  In your opinion the type of injuries that he had already sustained were such that it was possible that he could die. Is that the reason why you continued with the interrogation?

A J G ERWEE: That is correct, yes. According to my own observation, things did not look good for him.

SISI KHAMPEPE: So you were more interested in extracting whatever information you could and not in making sure that he gets immediate medical attention?

A J G ERWEE: That is correct, yes.

SISI KHAMPEPE: Now you also testified that the reason why you requested Mr Fuchs to interpret for you during the interrogation, was that Mr Sehlwana was not around or you had not seen Mr Sehlwana around the people who had gathered around the injured person.

A J G ERWEE: Yes, that's quite true.

SISI KHAMPEPE: The three members of the SADF who were in that vicinity, why could they not be used?

A J G ERWEE: The three Defence Force members, I didn't know their names and I didn't know them personally. So I wouldn't have had the same confidence in them as I had in Mr Fuchs to understand what I was trying to get out of the injured person.

SISI KHAMPEPE: Does Mr Fuchs speak good Sesotho?

A J G ERWEE: I would say far above the average.

SISI KHAMPEPE: Now you have also testified that you did not advise Mr Van der Merwe, nor Mr Coetsee of the fact that you had assigned Mr Swarts to investigate the matter in which he already had been a participant which investigation would then make him both participant and the referee. You then proceeded to state that you however had a perfectly good reason why you had assigned the task of investigation to Mr Swarts.  What I want to find out from you, Mr Erwee, is why did you not advise your superiors if you had a perfectly good reason why Mr Swarts had to be assigned to this investigation? Were you scared that if you had advised them something might be discovered which you didn't want them to find out?

A J G ERWEE: No, I don't think that there was anything which Willem or Brig Coetsee could have discovered which hasn't yet or already been said before the Commission.  The inquest, as I have said, which was investigated in a very watered-down way and didn't contain all the causal events, I believe from discussions and conversations with colleagues, that it was a fairly standard procedure in those times when insurgents were involved.

SISI KHAMPEPE: Is that the reason you are giving us, Mr Erwee?

A J G ERWEE: That is one of the reasons, yes.

SISI KHAMPEPE: Now in your opinion do you think that  reasonable measures were taken by yourself as a commander on the ground on the 10th of July, to minimise the use of force by your members in an attempt to avert an attack, which, I must stress, you already anticipated from the cadres?  You were dealing with a troop of six cadres and you had the support of approximately 16 members from the SA Defence Force as well as a large contingent from the security police.  Do you think reasonable measures were really taken by you to minimise the use of force?

A J G ERWEE: Yes, I suppose that is a point which could be debated for a very long time, but I thought that we were five SAP members inside the Casspir with the driver, it was a Defence Force Casspir.  Those were the only people who could have fired if it was necessary to open fire. As far as I knew we were the only ones who did in fact fire. I was convinced that with the appearance of the armoured vehicle in the road, and the appearance of Capt Bourne and the two members and the use of a grenade, that there were calculated risks, but that it would have been sufficient to make the insurgents realise that they were overwhelmed and that they should just surrender without putting any resistance.

SISI KHAMPEPE: But since you anticipated some kind of resistance from the cadres, did you take any contingency plan with the people who were in the Casspir, as to who would be able to return fire in the event that they started firing at you?

A J G ERWEE: No, there wouldn't have been a specific instruction as to who should shoot first, to respond to the comrades' fire.  It was understood that I was the senior in the Casspir and a policeman is trained in such a way that right from the outset he knows that lives and properties probably should be protected and that that was the reason why they should fire.  So they didn't wait for a specific order from me and I assume in good faith that I shot first.  Whether other people shot before me, I can't remember.

SISI KHAMPEPE: You obviously have seen the post-mortem report.  And you see the nature of the injuries and the causes of death, which resulted therefrom.

A J G ERWEE: To this day I haven't seen the photographs of the deceased.

SISI KHAMPEPE: I am talking about a report.  The post-mortem report exam not the photographs.

A J G ERWEE: O, I beg your pardon, yes.  I heard when it was mentioned here before the Commission what the nature of the injuries were.

SISI KHAMPEPE: And judging from the nature of the injuries, Mr Erwee, that does not seem to be any demonstration that reasonable force was applied in this incident.  Wouldn't you agree with me?

A J G ERWEE: Could the person please repeat the question?
The interpreters didn't quite get the question.  We apologise.

SISI KHAMPEPE: I say judging by the nature of the injuries sustained by each of the occupants of the Kombi, there doesn't seem to have been any reasonable force applied, in averting the attack from the cadres. They suffered a number of multiple wounds, fractured skulls.

A J G ERWEE: Yes, that is correct as you said.

SISI KHAMPEPE: A person who really anticipated some resistance, probably if you had done something about the use of reasonable force, this could have been averted. Do you still believe that you really didn't act outside your instructions by your superiors?

A J G ERWEE: I told the members what my instructions were, that if shots were fired at us, we should take no chances, we should respond and answer with fire ourselves, and when one shot and a volley was fired, we then immediately answered back and fired. I admit, I emptied the magazine and plus minus 10 additional bullets.  So altogether about 30 bullets which I fired into the bus. I don't know how many rounds were shot or fired by my colleagues, and the teargas which hung over the mini-bus and also the fact that the sound was muffled inside the Casspir, I can't remember whether there was any further gun-fire from the mini-bus.  My explosive experts told me at some stage when I asked how many shots had been fired from the AK-47s, I can't recall what their answer was, but several AK-47 spent cartridges were found inside the mini-bus.

SISI KHAMPEPE: Thank you, Mr Erwee.