Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — 1998-10-15

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN ZYL: I told him that he was mad.  I didn't go there to kill people.

CHAIRPERSON: And Mr Holder?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN ZYL: He told him not to be silly.

CHAIRPERSON: So you dissuaded him from this?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN ZYL: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: And did he listen to you and did he agree with you?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN ZYL: I beg your pardon?

CHAIRPERSON: Did he agree with you?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN ZYL: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: And he then also accepted that the operation could not be executed?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN ZYL: Yes, that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Prinsloo.

ADV GCABASHE: Mr Prinsloo, one minute.  Then the matter of the propaganda to kill them for propaganda purposes, was this part of this discussion you have just testified on?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN ZYL: Yes.

ADV GCABASHE: Where did that fit in to the original plan as you understood it, what you were dissuading him to do, to shoot the guards and take the weapons?  Where did the propaganda aspect fit in?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN ZYL: When we were in Pretoria, in front of the building.

ADV GCABASHE: I may have lost you in the conversation.  I understood you to be saying that the idea from Mr De Meillon was you would take these weapons, deal with the guards if you had to, yes?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN ZYL: That is correct.

ADV GCABASHE: And you refused to do this because the odds were against you essentially?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN ZYL: That is correct.

ADV GCABASHE: Then when did the propaganda issue come in, because I understood that to be a separate issue.  Did he then afterwards say let's do it anyway for propaganda purposes, just kill them?  I just want clarification that?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN ZYL: That is correct, after ...

ADV GCABASHE: But explain it in your own words, I am just trying to put the pieces together, you were there, explain exactly what the sequence was.

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN ZYL: First he wanted us to eliminate the guards and we said no.  Then he said that we should eliminate them for propaganda reasons, but we still refused to do that.

ADV GCABASHE: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Who had, when Mr Holder had these ideas, what did you think of his outlook, what did you think of him as a person, what sort of person was he?  He saw that there were a number of guards there and you said to him, no, it is not going to work, and he said well, let's shoot them for propaganda reasons.  What did you think of him when he said that?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN ZYL: I thought he was mad, because it was dangerous amongst all those people there.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.  Mr Prinsloo?

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Van Zyl, you had a shotgun in your boot, Mr De Meillon had a pistol and Mr Holder had a revolver.  How did you think you were going to take on guards who were armed with automatic firearms?  Did you think that it was a viable option?
	Do you understand the question?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN ZYL: No.

MR PRINSLOO: Do you think that you could have taken on those guards with a pistol and a revolver?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN ZYL: Yes Chairperson.

MR PRINSLOO: But they  had automatic firearms, are you being serious?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN ZYL: Yes.

MR PRINSLOO: You are simply saying yes, what do you mean by that?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN ZYL: If they had hidden away ...

MR PRINSLOO: But if they had started shooting and there having been six of them, do you think you could have defended yourself against them simply with a pistol?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN ZYL: No.

MR PRINSLOO: I am putting it to you that Mr De Meillon never said that these people were to be killed for propaganda reasons and that the only reason was to obtain weapons?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN ZYL: No, he had propaganda reasons.

MR PRINSLOO: And coincidentally you used the same words as your co-applicant in this application.
	I put it to you that when you arrived at Devon, Mr De Meillon made it clear that he knew the place, and that there were weapons to be obtained from the guards who were on duty there, automatic weapons?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN ZYL: No.

ADV GCABASHE: Just one small point of clarification Mr Prinsloo, Mr Van Zyl, were these white guards who were outside, the six who were there, were they all white?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN ZYL: No.

ADV GCABASHE: They were a mixture of black and white, or just black?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN ZYL: And coloureds as well.

ADV GCABASHE: So black and white, just a general mix, thank you.  The first two you found, were white?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN ZYL: Coloureds.

ADV GCABASHE: Okay, then the others who joined, were a mixture of both black and white?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN ZYL: Yes.

ADV GCABASHE: Thank you.

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Van Zyl, what was your school qualification?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN ZYL: Standard 9.

INTERPRETER: Speaker's microphone not on.

MR PRINSLOO: The question was what was your school qualification and the answer was standard 9.  Just a moment please.  No further questions thank you.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR PRINSLOO

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Prinsloo.  Mr Van Schalkwyk?

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: Mr Van Zyl, did De Meillon ever indicate to you at the Air Force Headquarters, that he didn't want to shoot the guards because there were white and coloured guards there as well?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN ZYL: No.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: So his order there was also to shoot white guards, in order to obtain their weapons?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN ZYL: No Chairperson.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: Was his order to shoot the guards for propaganda reasons regardless whether they were white or black?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN ZYL: He didn't mention race.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: In other words, did he simply tell you shoot the guards?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN ZYL: Yes, he wanted the weapons, the automatic firearms.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: At the Devon base, if you had stolen this arsenal of weapons, how would you have taken it away from there?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN ZYL: Well, it would depend upon the amount of weapons that there were.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: Well, let's say that there was 500 kg or 100 weapons, how would you have taken these weapons?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN ZYL: We would have gone back with a bakkie or a larger vehicle than mine.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: Was it arranged that a bakkie was on standby?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN ZYL: No, those were my own ideas.  It was not mentioned.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: Were you aware of any person who would be ready and waiting to come and help load?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN ZYL: No.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: The entire operation was executed by means of your vehicle.  Who paid for the petrol?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN ZYL: I paid for it myself.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: Before this operation, did you fill up your tank or did you fill it up on the way to the operation?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN ZYL: On the way.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: I will shortly put it to you that you said that the only time that you stopped, was on the way back when you urinated.  Why didn't you tell us that you also filled up the tank?

MR COETZEE: I must object, Honourable Chair, the question was during the journey from Pretoria to Secunda, was there any moment when you stopped, and this question is not within context?

CHAIRPERSON: That is correct, perhaps you should put it in that light.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: I accept it as such.  Sir, I would like to state to you that it was a very long time from four o'clock to eleven o'clock, did you stop somewhere to eat anything?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN ZYL: No sir.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: I would like to state to you that in the initial court case and in your identifications, etc, with the police, you never mentioned that you had stopped and urinated along the road and that you were discussing things for about three quarters of an hour along the road?

WILLEM JOHANNES VAN ZYL: Well, I was asked to point out where the incident had taken place, and that was only in Devon.