Amnesty Hearings — Pietersburg — 1997-07-03

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: After Colonel Erwee phoned me in November last year and told me that he had become aware of an investigation which had been launched by the Attorney General into this incident, even then I said to him that I hadn't done anything wrong and I couldn't see why I should apply for amnesty.
	He then told me that I should be aware of the fact that they also were investigating the fact that I administered the oath when he made a statement in front of me and that the statement wasn't entirely true and that that could amount to defeating the ends of justice.
	I spoke to many people about this and I received advice and also arising from press statements and things said by Bishop Tutu, namely that should there be any doubt as to whether we had committed any offence, we should apply for amnesty, and that made me feel that I should apply for amnesty for any offence which I might have committed in the execution of our orders.

ADV VISSER: Mr Van Dyk, in consultation with you I didn't cover this aspect with you, but in view of the fact that we possibly will not call Mr Dreyer or Mr Swarts, I just want to ask you do you know anything about the following up of the identity books and what the results of that were?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: I didn't personally follow it up.  I think that Swarts or Dreyer did it.  I know that those ID books, although they contained photographs of the deceased, were falsified books, they were forgeries.

ADV VISSER: Yes.  So, that would be the explanation as to why only three could be identified at the end of the day and that was on the basis of finger prints?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: Correct yes.  The ID books had no identification value.

ADV VISSER: Thank you Chairperson.

ADV VISSER: .

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Rossouw?

MR ROSSOUW: Thank you Mr Chairman.  Mr Van Dyk, I have only one question.  You listened to Mr Sehlwana's evidence that a shot was indeed fired by Mr Fuchs.  Can you possibly give any explanation why he would have fabricated such a story?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: I really don't know, because it did not happen?

MR ROSSOUW: The question is can you think of any reason why he did so?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: I can't think of any reason.

MR ROSSOUW: I have nothing further Mr Chairman.

MR ROSSOUW: .

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Black?

MR BLACK: Thank you.  Just to start off, after the hand grenade you say  you saw, you clearly saw the hand grenade being thrown into the vehicle.  Not - sorry, the teargas grenade, being thrown into the vehicle, is that correct?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: That is correct Chairperson.

MR BLACK: And subsequent to that, you actually heard and you saw how it effected Mr Erwee and I think you said Swarts who were outside the combi vehicle.  They in fact were so badly effected that they were running away and coughing?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: That is correct.

MR BLACK: How long after the grenade being thrown in, did you see them, was it a matter of seconds, minutes did you see them running?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: About a minute I would guess.  A minute and a half.

MR BLACK: Okay.  Can I deduce from that that these grenades are very effective within a very short space of time?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: I would accept that.

MR BLACK: So the occupants of the combi must have been obviously more severely effected and with almost within seconds of the grenade landing in the combi, would you agree with that?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: No, not in total.  The teargas has a different effect on different people.  I have seen in my career people walking up to a teargas grenade, where they have picked it up and thrown it back to the police.
	I myself are heavily effected by teargas, but some people are not that severely effected.  It is a burning thing, it is a powder that burns and you would have people actually picking it up and throwing it back at the police not effected at all.

MR BLACK: Okay, without getting into the medical aspects of it, would you agree with me, you must agree with me obviously that the occupants of the combi, would have been, should they been susceptible to being effected by teargas, would have been effected within seconds of the grenade being thrown into the combi?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: That was the purpose of the gas grenade.

CHAIRPERSON: They were not like somebody who is standing in the street, a tear gas canister is thrown at him and he picks it up and throws it back.  Here we are talking about six people who were inside a combi.

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: With only one window open, so surely it must have effected them, it is a very enclosed area.

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: You are correct when you are saying that it was in the combi, but the one window was open, the one door was open, both front doors were open and the side door was also opened.
	So one can't say that the combi was entirely closed.

CHAIRPERSON: Even so, surely even so, I mean if it could effect adversely people who were some metres away, what about people who are sitting in a combi?  Surely it must have effected them?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: It must have effected them.

MR BLACK: If I may just return to this tape recording.  Before I get to that, could you please just tell us who did you consider to be your senior or seniors to whom you had to report, your immediate seniors to whom you had to report what the results were of the tasks which you had been assigned and that task I refer to as being information gathering, and activating the information system, I think it is referred to as that?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: Are you referring to this specific incident or in general?

MR BLACK: No, to this specific incident.

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: Colonel Coetsee and Colonel Van der Merwe.

MR BLACK: Right.  I assume that immediately or shortly after this incident, you would have told them that you have taken these notes or let's put it this way, did you actually take down written notes at the scene?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: I made notes at the Alldays police station of the clothes, objects, bodies and the bags.

MR BLACK: That is after the shooting?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: That is correct, yes.

MR BLACK: Before you went out there, your primary function was to ensure that all relevant information surrounding that operation would be gathered I understand.

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: I don't quite understand the question?

MR BLACK: Before this operation took place, your primary task which was assigned to you, was to ensure that you would observe and gather all relevant information which related to the actual carrying out of the operation, is that correct?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: Not quite, Chairperson.  I don't we should play with words here.  My task was to write a report afterwards, about the facts of what had happened.
	There was no information surrounding the operation which I had to write down somewhere or had to take note of.  There was no information surrounding the operation.  The only information which came from the operation was the questioning.

MR BLACK: No, let's put it this way.  You felt it necessary that even before the shooting started, when the operation was set into action by the blowing of a whistle, you taped, you found it necessary to tape record that, you found it necessary to tape record what took place during the shooting and subsequent to that, you tape recorded the interview of the wounded man.
	So in other words I am putting it to you that your function, one of your functions was to ensure that you gathered all possible information relating to activities which were taking place during the carrying out of the operation because you had to write a report?

JOHANNES HENDRIK VAN DYK: Yes, I had to write a report about what had happened, yes.

MR BLACK: Now, did you actually observe or make notes of where various bodies were and people were laying immediately after the shooting?