Amnesty Hearings — Pietersburg — 1997-07-03

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: No, it wasn't necessary to do that because I didn't have to include it in my report.

MR BLACK: You mean you didn't have to describe the scene of the shooting in your report?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: No, I didn't think it necessary to make a sketch of the whole scene.

MR BLACK: Mr Van Dyk, when you returned and you made your report, when I say report, I mean when you accounted to Colonel Van der Merwe or Brigadier Coetzee, afterwards, did you tell them look I've managed to gather this information and I will file my formal report at a later stage.  I have got notes of what happened, I've got a tape recording even of an interview with one of the wounded people and I will compile a formal report for you at a later stage?
	Your immediate report back, let's put it that way?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: The reporting back of what had happened to Colonel Willem and Coetzee, was done by Colonel Erwee.  The report which was to be written, that was done by me.
	So I didn't report back to them orally, just to repeat what Colonel Erwee had said.

MR BLACK: They never came to you and said listen what information, you are the information man, what information - have you managed to gather immediate information for us?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: Mr Chairman, there was no such information as the question is suggesting that could have been important for them.  Information which arose on the scene and for instance that which came out during the questioning was already reported to them by Colonel Erwee.
	I didn't think it necessary to go back to them and say that what Colonel Erwee told you, I can now confirm.  That didn't happen and I didn't think it necessary.

MR BLACK: How do you know what Colonel Erwee told them?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: I don't know what Colonel Erwee had told them, but I had full trust in him that he would have told them everything that had happened.

MR BLACK: Because you see, this tape recording which you say is of no significance, I submit it is of crucial significance, because if the evidence of Mr Fuchs is correct, it would tend to suggest that you in fact did act in self defence.
	It would help you case, because according to Fuchs, he said you can clearly hear one shot and then a volley of fire.  And that first shot did not come, so it would clearly bolster your case.  And it would be of crucial importance.  It is not an insignificant tape recording.

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: I agree completely that this tape recording is very important at this stage, but you will excuse me if I say that at that stage, let's take it in 1988 or 1989, that I couldn't not have foreseen in my wildest dreams that I would sit here today and that this situation would arise ever and in any forum, so at that stage I didn't think that that would happen ever again.
	The importance which the tape now seems to have, wasn't present then.  The importance of that tape just disappeared.

CHAIRPERSON: But even then, at that stage already, the injured person was removed and he left you at the scene.  He might have survived and he might have come before court to be trailed and for all we know, and you should correct me if I am wrong, you didn't take the measurements.  You might have written a report later on at Alldays, but your report could not have had for example the following information, the distance from the combi and the casspir was so many metres.
	The position of the combi at the time when the first shot was fired, was the following and I was at this distance when the second set of shots were fired.  All that information you did not have.  You didn't take those particulars.

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: If I may explain and that is why I didn't understand the question put to me.  It wasn't my task and perhaps that is what was suggested in the question, it wasn't my task to gather that kind of information to do surveys and measurements afterwards.
	My task was to gather the tactical information, if I can call it that.  To gather the tactical information which arose from this incident, such as for instance the questioning of the wounded man, that is tactical information which can be acted upon immediately.

CHAIRPERSON: I am satisfied with your explanation that it was not your task.  I mean if it was not your task, it was not your task, whose task was it?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: It was not my task.  In such a case Chairperson, it would have been the task of the Investigating Officer, in other words the person who had to deal with the inquest.  It was not my task.

MR BLACK: And in this instance, it was Mr Swarts?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: Yes, in this case it was Mr Swarts.

MR BLACK: And did you make this tape recording and your notes available to Mr Swarts for purposes of his investigation?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: No, I didn't make the tape recording available to him because in my view there was no information contained on the tape that could possibly help him.
	The notes to which you refer and the report which I wrote, that was made available to him.

MR BLACK: But I don't want to labour this too much, but this tape recording seem to be as you used the words, a bit of a sensation amongst the members of that particular Security Branch in Pietersburg?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: I think I said that certain persons found it sensational.

MR BLACK: Yes, you think that some of them may have even made recordings for themselves?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: I know that some of them did.

MR BLACK: So I put it to you that the existence of this tape recording within the Pietersburg Security Branch was widely and well-known, the fact that it existed and that in fact possibly more than one version was circulating?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: I believe so, yes.

MR BLACK: Would I be correct in saying so?

ADV DE JAGER: If there had been a shot after the questioning, would that shot also have been recorded on the tape recording?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: I believe so, it is difficult to say, but I believe so.

ADV DE JAGER: And if it had been heard by everybody and played over and over again, everybody would have known that after the fight, there had been another shot fired?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: Yes, everybody who would have listened to the tape, would have heard that.

ADV DE JAGER: If that shot was recorded?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: Yes, that is correct.

ADV DE JAGER: Can you remember when you switched off the tape recorder?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: I switched it off when Mr Erwee picked up the person.

SISI KHAMPEPE: Mr Van Dyk, in that case, were you present when Mr Erwee gave instructions to someone to pick up the injured person and load him onto the bakkie?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: Chairperson, if I remember correctly, Mr Erwee picked him up himself.  I know that someone helped him to carry the person, because the person couldn't walk.  I can't remember who helped him, but I think he picked him up himself.

SISI KHAMPEPE: And were you present when he gave an instruction to a Mr Gerber to transport the injured person to Alldays?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: If I said that I was present when he spoke to Gerber, I would be speculating.  I know he gave an order to somebody.  Later in discussion it came out that it could possibly have been Gerber, that is possible, but I can't say for sure that I remember that he told Gerber to take the man away, but I was present until the time when the person was loaded onto the bakkie.  But then I didn't know whether he was still alive.

SISI KHAMPEPE: So you wouldn't say whether that person was still alive when he was loaded onto the bakkie?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: No.

SISI KHAMPEPE: Thank you.