Amnesty Hearings — Cape Town — 2000-06-15

MR P DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, I may just say that these are facts to my disposal, so I am putting it to the witness, it can be checked on my files.
	And that your indemnity application in terms of the current Act, 34 of 1990, the documents are in front of the Commission, and these documents are based on the first application documents, in terms of the 1992 Act, is that correct?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: That is correct.

MR P DU PLESSIS: The same declaration that is used in front of this Commission, was used in your first application, is that correct?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: That is correct.

MR P DU PLESSIS: And that declaration is dated November 1990, if I remember correctly, the documents are also in front of the Commission.

ABRAM VAN ZYL: Wasn't it February?

MR P DU PLESSIS: It is indeed the 15th of November 1990, it is in front of the Commission.  The point that I am actually trying to make is that Basson, Maree and Burger at that stage were clients of the firm Havenga's and they were represented by Adv Flip Hattingh?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: That is correct.

MR P DU PLESSIS: And that they, their applications in terms of the previous Act upon which their current applications are also based, had only been done on the 28th of March 1991, four months later than your statement, would you admit to that?  The documents are available, I am not going to waste time with that.

ABRAM VAN ZYL: I do accept that it could have been.

MR P DU PLESSIS: At that stage they were in any case not clients of my firm where you had been at that stage?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: That is the case, yes.

MR P DU PLESSIS: They were only represented from 1995, 1996 by the same firm, or by my firm who represented you at the stage when you applied for amnesty?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: That is correct.

MR P DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, I think that is all, if I could just check my notes for a moment.  Thank you  Mr Chairman.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR P DU PLESSIS

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.  Mr Martini?

MR MARTINI: Thank you Mr Chairperson.  Mr van Zyl, just to start off with the Early Learning Centre, the R30 000-00 that you were questioned on, that was approved and authorised expenditure for that project, correct?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: That is correct.

MR MARTINI: I want to clarify one of the issues taken up with the Commissioner, as to the point at which you were standing at the centre when observing, according to your evidence, the people leaving the parking area.
	You will recall your evidence was there was a point at which you stood at, when you detonated, when the bomb was detonated, was approximately 32 paces after the car had already reversed a car's length back, is that correct?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: That is so.

MR MARTINI: Now, were you at that point, were you stationary  in the car at that point, when people were leaving the parking area, when you were observing the people leaving the parking area?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: No.

MR MARTINI: Were you at some other ...

MR HOCKEY: Mr Chairman, just a factual error that was made, maybe, it was 42 paces that were paced out yesterday.

CHAIRPERSON: No, but he is talking about after having reversed back the car's length, then it is about 32, he has taken the 10 off to be the one length, shorter than 42, one car length shorter than 42.

MR MARTINI: Yesterday at the inspection, Mr Chairman, I heard you say 32 paces approximately, so ...

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, approximately 10 paces.

MR HOCKEY: A long car?

MR MARTINI: Possibly a long car.

CHAIRPERSON: A long vehicle, well ...

MR MARTINI: Let me rephrase it then, so that there are no disputes.  When you were stopped at the point of approximately 42 paces, before reversing back, forget even reversing back, were you at that point when people, when you were observing people leaving?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: No, at that stage the people had already left the premises.

MR MARTINI: So were you at another point when you were observing the people leaving, at a totally different point?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: That is correct.

MR MARTINI: Do you recall where that point was, at yesterday's pointing out?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: No, I cannot remember or point out the exact place.

MR MARTINI: Do you recall there was a road that ran parallel to the Early Learning Centre, before you got to what you called the little block, were you on that road, the road, if we can put it this way, you can picture being there yesterday, in the parking lot, facing away from the Early Learning Centre, on the left, there was I think a Civic Centre building with the road running along it, do you recall that road?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: I cannot remember the specific street and places where we were parked, it is impossible for me.  All I could do and could reconstruct yesterday, is the place where we stood when the bomb was detonated, that is the only thing that I can help with, unfortunately.

MR MARTINI: But you certainly weren't at the 42 paces point when the people were leaving, had the people left when you got to that point?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: Correct.

MR MARTINI: Now, you heard the argument being posed that it will be argued that you intended to kill the members of the Kewtown Movement who were meeting in the centre that night, do you deny that?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: I deny that, it was not my instruction and also not my intention.

MR MARTINI: Now Mr van Zyl, Mr Williams put to you that Gakkie had walked into the centre, actually I think he said he spoke to him and Gakkie walked back out to report to you, do you recall that evidence?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: I can.

MR MARTINI: Did Gakkie then report to you that the people were in the hall, when he walked out there?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: That is correct.

MR MARTINI: Did you detonate the bomb at that point, when he told you that they were in the hall?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: No.

MR MARTINI: If you wanted to kill them, could you have detonated it at that point, since by then according to what was put to you, Gakkie advised you that people were in the hall?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: I could have done it then.

MR MARTINI: But did you do it?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: No, I didn't.

MR MARTINI: We also heard hypothesis being put to you, including certain suggestions by the Commissioners, as to if you didn't want to hurt or injure anybody, you could have placed the bomb at two in the morning or on the outside.  Your plan, did that provide for putting the bomb inside the hall?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: That is so.

MR MARTINI: Did it also provide for letting it detonate at a certain time of the evening, not two in the morning?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: At a time, after the meeting had broken up and the people had left the premises.  The time would have been approximately nine o'clock the evening.

MR MARTINI: And that is the decision you took?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: That is correct.

MR MARTINI: Isn't it correct that factually your decision proved to be correct?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: That is so.

MR MARTINI: Were any people killed?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: No, no one.

MR MARTINI: You have heard that maybe two, possibly three, were slightly injured, correct?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: That is so.

MR MARTINI: So your decision factually, was the correct decision, not to kill anybody, to detonate it at that time?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: I believe so.

MR MARTINI: Now, your plan, and your authority that you had, the way I understood your evidence, for the planting of the bomb, was to attempt not to have any persons killed or seriously injured, your plan provided for that?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: That is correct.

MR MARTINI: So your plan in detonating the limpet mine at the time that it did, was effectively carried out, because there were no injuries or deaths?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: That is correct.

MR MARTINI: Sorry let me rephrase, no serious injuries or deaths?  Correct?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: I agree.

MR MARTINI: Now, you also heard some evidence or it was put to you that Judge Levi in the Namibian inquest, somehow implicated you in his inquest findings, do you recall that?

ABRAM VAN ZYL: I do.