Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1999-07-28

MR MOERANE: Do you know in what direction his fire was?

PAUL JACOBUS VAN DYK: It was in our direction, I would not say directly at us, but I could see the flames.

MR MOERANE: I take it none of you were injured?

PAUL JACOBUS VAN DYK: No, nobody was injured.

MR MOERANE: Did any of you, any of your party have a search light?

PAUL JACOBUS VAN DYK: Yes, there was a light.  As far as I know, Mr Botha had it.

MR MOERANE: At the time of the shooting, was it on?

PAUL JACOBUS VAN DYK: At the start of the shooting, no, but only later on.

MR MOERANE: Mr Chairman, I have no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MOERANE

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Moerane.  Ms Lockhat?

MS LOCKHAT: I have no questions, thank you Chairperson.
NO CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS LOCKHAT

CHAIRPERSON: Adv Gcabashe?

ADV GCABASHE: Just one aspect relating to the shooting that I don't quite follow.  Are you saying that before you shot, the people on the other side, shot at you?

PAUL JACOBUS VAN DYK: No, I was the person who shot first.

ADV GCABASHE: You were the first.  Having shot, you then had fire returned from the other side?

PAUL JACOBUS VAN DYK: That is how I observed it, yes.

ADV GCABASHE: And this person was close to you, on the passenger side of the motor vehicle?

PAUL JACOBUS VAN DYK: I wouldn't not say, the vehicle was between six and ten metres, I heard the previous witnesses said between 20 metres and further, but we were maximum, it was just on the opposite side of the road, so the person fired from that side, it seemed as if one was at the back and one was more to the door side.  But I cannot say whether it was the one in the front who was shot or the one behind, but they were close to each other at that stage.   I imagine that the other person was on the other side, one on this side and one on the other side of the vehicle.

ADV GCABASHE: Yes, but you see you imagine, you did not actually see the other chap on the other side of the vehicle?

PAUL JACOBUS VAN DYK: It was dark, I could just see the movement.

ADV GCABASHE: But you could see the one on the nearest side, on the side that was closer to you?

PAUL JACOBUS VAN DYK: Yes, it was very dark, there was no moon, so I would not say that I saw the person clearly.

ADV GCABASHE: What you are saying is that it is possible that the other one was not there, he had gone off to pass water or whatever, it is possible?

PAUL JACOBUS VAN DYK: It is possible, I don't know.

ADV GCABASHE: So we are really looking at what you saw and that is one person who was about to get into the motor vehicle?

PAUL JACOBUS VAN DYK: Yes, I would concede that.

ADV GCABASHE: And this person would have had his back to you because he is getting into the motor vehicle?  I am just trying to understand, to picture this?

PAUL JACOBUS VAN DYK: I would not be able to say whether he was with his back to me, because it was too dark to see whether it was the back of him or the front of him.

ADV GCABASHE: So you wouldn't be able to say he definitely had a firearm in his hand either, it was too dark to see?

PAUL JACOBUS VAN DYK: Not at that stage, but I accepted that he did have a firearm, because when the vehicle stopped, we heard them cocking their weapons.  I don't know what was the reason therefore, whether they were just testing it, but they were armed.

ADV GCABASHE: Yes, but my difficulty with that is those were the four who where then found with AK47's on the other side of the border, so I assumed from the evidence, I understood those were the people, from the evidence that has been led, who had the AK47's, not necessarily the escorts who were on the Swaziland side of the border and who didn't know anything was afoot?

PAUL JACOBUS VAN DYK: We accepted that they were armed because of the arms being taken out there and the weapons being cocked.  The people who took those people over the border, were armed, we assumed that they were all armed.

ADV GCABASHE: And as soon as you started firing, your colleagues started firing?

PAUL JACOBUS VAN DYK: That is correct.

ADV GCABASHE: So with the experience you have, the person who was getting into the car, would have had very little chance of whipping around and shooting back at four people firing at him?

PAUL JACOBUS VAN DYK: Yes, but that person had not been in the vehicle yet, he was just standing there.

ADV GCABASHE: Yes, I understand that, I am just trying to imagine this person trying to get into the car, or not suspecting you were anywhere near there, and yet being able to shoot back at you, not just one shot but quite a few shots, shooting at four people who had been completely obscured from his vision, who had no clue you were anywhere in the vicinity?  You understand, I am just trying to get a picture of this in my mind, to understand it.

PAUL JACOBUS VAN DYK: Chairperson, as I have said it was so dark, one could only see the silhouettes of these people and it was not clear, but weapons we were convinced that they were armed.  I could not go and ask them, that is what happened there.

ADV GCABASHE: At the end of the day you found one Makarov pistol, you say?

PAUL JACOBUS VAN DYK: That is correct.  But the other person, we don't know what weapon he had.

ADV GCABASHE: Yes, but you see again our difficulty, it is yours and mine, you don't even know if he was there, if he shot back at you at all.  You can only speculate, you don't know?

PAUL JACOBUS VAN DYK: Much later reports that came through, that he was there and that he had run away.

ADV GCABASHE: No, we are talking about the shooting, whether he returned fire, that is what I am trying to understand.  You can only speculate on that?

PAUL JACOBUS VAN DYK: Yes, we can only speculate.

ADV GCABASHE: By the time the shooting started here, the pick up point where the other Lieutenant was picking up the four, was a distance away so they would have left already by that time?

PAUL JACOBUS VAN DYK: The persons who took the persons away, would have taken them to the vehicle and then they would return, so the vehicle would have been gone already.

ADV GCABASHE: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Malan?

MR MALAN: Mr Van Dyk, the evidence of Mr Ras and Mr Tait referred to two persons who returned, your evidence is also that with reference to the silhouettes?

PAUL JACOBUS VAN DYK: That is correct.

MR MALAN: Are you certain that two persons returned?

PAUL JACOBUS VAN DYK: I am very certain.   As Mr Tait said, the two people were talking when they returned.   As one could see the silhouettes, it was two persons.

MR MALAN: After you had fired the shots, you said that it happened very quickly, how long did you wait after the cease fire before you went to the vehicle?

PAUL JACOBUS VAN DYK: When we ceased fire, the light was already on and we moved towards the vehicle and we lit it around and we didn't see the other person and that is when we quickly set the vehicle alight and we left.

MR MALAN: Were you not afraid that the person would fire at you?

PAUL JACOBUS VAN DYK: We discussed it amongst each other but as I say, we had to take the chance because we could not leave the vehicle, whether there were explosions and weapons in the car that could be used at a next opportunity.

MR MALAN: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Van Dyk, we have heard from both Mr Ras and Mr Tait that the plan was that you would wait until these people got in the vehicle and then shoot.  It is clear that you started shooting before they were in the vehicle, is there any reason for that, why you didn't obey your own order?