CHAIRMAN: It is the 3rd of July, 1997. We are proceeding with the same matter of
Sehlwana, Erwee and others.
I notice Mr Black is not here. Although we agreed yesterday that we would
start at nine o'clock, it is past nine o'clock, it is nearly ten o'clock and I think we should
proceed.
Colonel, you are still under oath.
ANDRIES JOHANNES GERHARDUS ERWEE: (still under oath)
ADV VISSER: Mr Chairman, before we commence with the continuation of Mr
Erwee's evidence, you will allow me to make a statement. Those of the members who
had the misfortune of watching the news on television news last night, concerning the
report of the evidence of Mr Erwee yesterday, would have been struck by the
inaccuracy of that report.
Mr Chairman, we feel that it is necessary in view of what we are trying to do
here, we are trying to establish a complete a picture as possible of gross violations of
human rights, during the conflicts of the past and it has struck us very forcefully that
this type of journalism which we saw on TV last night, is not conducive to you being
able to render your task sufficiently.
If you hadn't seen that news report Mr Chairman, may I just tell you that ...
CHAIRMAN: I personally didn't, but I assume my colleagues did not. Do you mean
the eight o'clock news?
ADV VISSER: Yes.
CHAIRMAN: No, I didn't watch it.
ADV VISSER: May I just tell you what was stated? The sum total of what was stated
Mr Chairman was that Mr Erwee admitted "to firing 30 shots into a combi which was
carrying six cadres, MK - well six cadres and that this was done during an ambush by
the Security Forces of these people."
Not a word was breathed Mr Chairman about the background, about the fact
that Mr Erwee stated that it was a question of returning fire after the SADF officer
was wounded. Mr Chairman, apart from the fact that Mr Erwee was made out quite
clearly as the villain of the situation, it goes much wider than that.
Your efforts here to establish the truth Mr Chairman, is seriously jeopardised
because if witnesses feel that they are going to be allowed to be misquoted this way, it
may very well jeopardise them coming forward, their willingness to come forward.
I will take it no further, I just want to place it on record and I want to invite the
SABC to rectify their poor and inaccurate reporting tonight with the same prominence
as they did last night and apart from that, I don't want to say anything more about it
Mr Chairman.
Mr Erwee, is still under cross-examination. Mr Chairman, there is just one
issue which we feel we should draw to your attention. Ms Khampepe, yesterday
afternoon just at the close of the proceedings, put a question ...
CHAIRMAN: I remember it, yes.
ADV VISSER: And my Attorney tells me, he was listening to the Afrikaans
translation, I didn't have my earphones on, so I don't know, but in so far as there might
be some confusion as to what was translated, without reflection on the interpreter at
all.
We wondered whether we could impose on Ms Khampepe to put those
questions again, so that we can get absolute clarity about what was asked and how the
question was answered. I may inform you Mr Chairman, that I didn't discuss this with
Mr Erwee at all, because I thought it would be improper for me to talk to him while he
is under cross-examination, so whatever his answers were, Mr Chairman, I didn't
discuss with him.
But if Ms Khampepe wouldn't mind, just putting those questions again and I
can remind you if you don't remember what it was, it had to do with the question of
reasonable force and it had to do with the question of whether it fell within the ambit
of the instructions, I think that was the point. If you don't mind, Ms Khampepe.
MS KHAMPEPE: Thank you Mr Visser. I may not be able to ...
CHAIRMAN: Sorry, let me just interrupt. Mr Visser, you are saying that because
you didn't quite follow the answers, I suppose, though if I were the applicant I would
have been happy with the answers that I had given, but any way, let he continue with
the questions.
ADV VISSER: Again Mr Chairman, we are here to discover what actually happened,
what the truth is. Whether it was in his favour or if they were the correct replies, we
are confused as to what the answers were.
MS KHAMPEPE: Thank you Mr Visser. I think my questions that I will put to
Mr Erwee, will not be the same word for word, that is as yesterday, because I didn't
have them written out, but I think your problem is with regard to the two last
questions which were put to him with regard to the kind of force, reasonable force
which he applied in the incident.
I will proceed then to put that question to Mr Erwee. Mr Erwee, I think what
I asked you yesterday was whether in your planning, since you had anticipated some
kind of resistance from the six cadres, in an endeavour to arrest them, my question was
whether you had taken any measures to ensure that minimum force was used by you
and your members in defending yourselves against the attack by the six cadres in that
minibus, that was my first question. At least the first of the last two.
MR ERWEE: Chairperson, I think I have understood the question correctly. When it
was said to me that the insurgents are busy crossing the border and that they were
carrying bags with them, the observation post didn't notify me whether the people had
their firearms outside and that reassured me that the planning would fall within the
framework of our planning, because it would have been an unheard of thing for
insurgents to drive around, showing their firearms openly.
It would have been very risky. For that reason, I believed that when we
stopped the vehicle and threw the hand grenade to cause shock and confusion, that by
the time the insurgents have taken out their firearms, cocked them, etc, that they at
that stage already would have realised that here is an armed vehicle and weapons are
aimed at us, uniformed people surrounding us etc.
That is why I believed that we will be able to arrest the insurgents without
them really offering any resistance and then when I saw through the window how the
passenger in the left front shot through the window and that Captain Born collapsed,
and I then also heard a short volley of shots, it is true we are trained, I myself am
trained in the case of contact with insurgents, you deliver maximum fire power to
protect your own life and not as in the normal situation. You are trained in that
situation, to give the maximum fire until there is no resistance left.
I must also mention it to the Chairperson, that when I started firing, I fired at
the combi and at the passengers.
There was teargas so I couldn't see very clearly, I couldn't see very clearly
where each person, each passenger was sitting, I just fired.
MS KHAMPEPE: And in your opinion, do you think that you then were able to
carry out the instructions which were given to you by Mr Van der Merwe or by Mr
Coetzee, who both were your superiors at the time?
MR ERWEE: If I understood the question correctly, I believed when I started
shooting, that I had exceeded the bounds of my instruction, namely that I should arrest
first and then should we encounter fire, only then fire back and that we shouldn't
endanger our lives.
Then that is correct, when I started shooting, I shot to protect our own lives.
MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Visser, I think in short that would be the context of some
of the questions which were put to Mr Erwee, but your concern was mainly with
regard to the two last questions, which were put to him and I hope that really satisfies
your concerns. Do they meet your concerns?
ADV VISSER: We do appreciate it Mr Chairman. I was clearly wrong, and my
Attorney was correct in his recollection of what the evidence was, thank you Mr
Chairman.
CHAIRMAN: I should have mentioned that Mr Black has since come in. I assume he
has obviously some good reason why he was late and we will accept in advance that
explanation. You found us busy already Mr Black, because we couldn't wait.
If I could just ask you - the person who survived and later died, was
questioned and he did give some information like for example he said they were to
meet somebody in Pietersburg at the station, and he described the kind of clothing that
would distinguish that particular person.
MR ERWEE: That is correct Mr Chairperson.
CHAIRMAN: And was he also asked where they were from?
MR ERWEE: I did not get an interpretation.
CHAIRMAN: Was he also asked as to where they were coming from? I just want to
confirm that with you, because there was some evidence that he was asked where they
were coming from and then he said they were coming from Botswana, I just want to
confirm whether that is in fact also your evidence or your recollection.
MR ERWEE: I can't remember, but I assumed that he came from Botswana. The
questions which I pertinently put to him were where are you going and then he said the
railway station and then I asked now, who are you supposed to meet there, why the
railway station and he then said to me, I have to meet somebody there wearing a
yellow shirt or a yellow bag or something.
This person would familiarise themselves further with accommodation and so
on. But this person wasn't fully conscious, it was almost a dying declaration because
he was muttering and he kept losing consciousness and coming to again and that is
why after about three or four minutes, I asked the Medic from the Defence Force to
inject him to stabilise him because it was important to determine who this person was
who was waiting at the railway station.
When I got to Alldays, my first action was to contact Colonel Willem van der
Merwe and to tell him that the incident had not turned out well and that the person had
died on the way. And that he had given this information about the railway station.
I made a request that Colonel Willem should send out people to the railway
station.
CHAIRMAN: The impression I got from the evidence of Mr Sehlwana was that after
this person gave some information, and just after he had given all this information
which looked important, he was shot dead.
MR ERWEE: That is definitely not the case Mr Chairman.
CHAIRMAN: Were you really here to save his life?
MR ERWEE: Yes, definitely. That is why I called the Medic because I could see this
man was very, very seriously injured and there was very little hope of his survival. He
lost his consciousness the second or third time, I realised that ...
CHAIRMAN: Did you make arrangements that an ambulance be sent with equipment
from Alldays, maybe to meet the bakkie on the way?
MR ERWEE: No, Chairperson.
CHAIRMAN: Well, shouldn't you have if you were concerned about his survival?
MR ERWEE: If I think about it today, yes, I suppose we should have got an
ambulance and met it half way.
CHAIRMAN: Why was the helicopter not called back to come and pick him up?
MR ERWEE: The helicopter had already left 15 - 20 minutes before, and most
probably close to Pietersburg already and that is why I decided not to recall it. I
believed that it would be another 5 - 10 minutes before it would land at Pietersburg.
CHAIRMAN: Did that Medical corp drive in the bakkie with the injured person?
MR ERWEE: I can't remember whether he accompanied the vehicle, I can't
remember. I didn't give him a specific instruction to go along.
CHAIRMAN: Do you really think that he did travel with the corpses, the Medical
officer, together with the injured person? I think you would be able to recollect that,
wouldn't you?
MR ERWEE: I can't give you a negative or a positive answer, I can't remember, it is
too long ago.
CHAIRMAN: Did this bakkie have a canopy?
MR ERWEE: It did not have a canopy. I can state that as a fact, because I loaded
the man onto the bakkie with help.
CHAIRMAN: So this badly injured person was being transported with some of the
corpses in an open bakkie on a gravel road?
MR ERWEE: It was a gravel road. Whether all the corpses were on this bakkie or
whether there was equipment, or whether one or two corpses, I can't recall. All I can
recall is that I loaded him onto the bakkie and I supported him so that he would be
comfortable, because there was no other immediate transport available for us.
CHAIRMAN: Well, how did you make anybody in that condition comfortable in an
open bakkie on a gravel road?
MR ERWEE: I am assuming that he didn't lay directly onto the metal, that we put
down bags or some kind of covering to transport him, because I did lay him down on
something, but I can't remember whether it was a blanket or a bag or what.
CHAIRMAN: Well, another question which I should ask you and I am not trying to
be funny, you said you planned to take him to Alldays Day Clinic?
MR ERWEE: I can't say whether there is a Clinic, I just said take the person to
Alldays because I was aware that there would be medical help there, I didn't know
whether it would be a hospital or a Clinic, but I knew some for of medical help would
be available in Alldays.
CHAIRMAN: Of what kind, if you didn't know if there was a hospital or a Day
Clinic, of what kind? Medical help of what kind?
MR ERWEE: I expected there to have been a Doctor at least who would then further
stabilise the injured person and he could then perhaps be further evacuated to
Pietersburg, which have better facilities.
CHAIRMAN: You didn't have any particular Clinic in mind, you didn't have any
particular hospital in mind, you didn't have any particular Doctor in mind in Alldays,
did you?
MR ERWEE: No, I didn't have anybody specific in mind. That is why I originally
said that the person to take this wounded person to Alldays would be members of the
Security Branch whether from Louis Trichardt or Messina and not from Pietersburg,
because these people would be more familiar with the area.
CHAIRMAN: You said the purpose was to arrest these people?
MR ERWEE: That is correct.
CHAIRMAN: And then do what with them after arresting them?
MR ERWEE: After the arrest, Colonel Strydom and Colonel Dreyer would have
dealt with the particular case dockets and they would have been charged with the
promotion of terrorism and promoting the aims of ...
CHAIRMAN: What about the cover of Sehlwana and your informer on the Botswana
border, would their cover not have been blown?
MR ERWEE: I believe that they would have been exposed to a certain extent.
CHAIRMAN: Didn't that worry you? Were you prepared to accept that situation
that they could be arrested, taken to trial, possibly the cover of Mr Sehlwana and the
other informer be blown? Were you prepared to go with that?
MR ERWEE: That would contain calculated risks.
CHAIRMAN: Then why didn't you accept that risk with regard to the inquest? Why
didn't you disclose the truth at the inquest if you are not scared of the cover being
blown because I thought one of the reasons why you said you misled the inquest, was
that you were afraid certain disclosure would be made?
MR ERWEE: That is correct. I believed that after all six people died, it would not be
necessary that it in fact wouldn't influence the Presiding Officer at the inquest.
CHAIRMAN: Colonel, isn't it so that look Sehlwana transported this people, he runs
in a roadblock with them, then it is clear, it would have been clear to these people that
Sehlwana was in fact selling them out, wasn't that just a death warrant to these people,
silence them once and for all, no problem with the cover, blowing the cover of your
informers and your agents?
If they are silenced and all killed, there would be no problem about anything
being blown?
MR ERWEE: Let me put it this way, I am quite honest when I say this, it was
important for us to arrest these people and if we really believed that these insurgents
should be shot dead summarily, there surely would have been other easier ways of
doing it, ways which did not entail so much risk.
For instance in this river bed which is quite wide, we could have shot them
dead there. I could have requested the police's Special Task Team and the Defence
Force, we could have requested these teams to shoot the people dead.
At the time that we threw in the gas grenade, we could have also have thrown
in a bigger hand grenade or some other explosive device to just destroy all the people.
CHAIRMAN: Well, I am asking you this question Colonel because we have heard
similar evidence in other matters of a light nature, in which we were told that virtually,
it may not apply in your case, but we have learnt that in instances where the identity of
an informer would be disclosed, once it would be discovered by somebody, detained
or arrested that so and so was in fact working with the police, that amounted to a
death warrant to that person.
And it troubles me that you should say that you misled the inquest because you
were concerned with the cover of some of your people, but then at the same time you
say that you wanted to arrest the deceased and then bring them to an open trial.
MR ERWEE: If I may answer that, I concede that there were calculated risks in
respect of Sehlwana and the informer and other people who operated along the border,
to expose them in case these insurgents were arrested.
I believed that Brigadier Coetzee and Warrant Officer Van den Berg and
Sergeant Sehlwana would have consulted with the informers as to how they could to
some extent protect these people, because you would remember Mr Chairperson, that
there was even a press statement released that the seventh person had escaped and this
was done to protect Sehlwana and the agent.
CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Mr Visser, did you want to put any more questions in
relation to the questions that had been asked?
EXAMINATION BY ADV VISSER: Only in regard to questions put this morning
Mr Chairman. Please give the Committee an estimate of how far this place where the
incident took place, was from Pietersburg?
MR ERWEE: I would say approximately 150 - 180 kilometres.
ADV VISSER: And how far is that from Louis Trichardt?
MR ERWEE: I am not quite sure how far it is from Louis Trichardt, but I think 80 to
100 kilometres.
ADV VISSER: As far as you knew, was Alldays the closest place where medical aid
would be available?
MR ERWEE: Yes, that is correct.
ADV VISSER: To a question put by Judge Ngoepe, you said that with hindsight you
should perhaps have arranged for an ambulance to come from Alldays to meet you
halfway with this wounded person.
If we talk about hindsight, then one could perhaps also say that you should
have taken an ambulance from Louis Trichardt or Pietersburg - what however was the
purpose with which you confronted these people?
MR ERWEE: Chairperson, yes, it was not customary for an insurgent to walk around
with his firearm openly exposed. For that reason we believed that we would take them
by surprise and wouldn't really encounter significant opposition.
So, for that reason we didn't really arrange for ambulances and all that kind of
equipment.
ADV VISSER: You at all times believed that you would be able to perform a
successful arrest?
MR ERWEE: Yes, that is correct.
ADV VISSER: Mr Erwee, we are speculating now, but the question has been put to
you and I think you have already answered, if your purpose was simply to kill these
insurgents, just to shoot them dead, would this place where you have erected the road
blockade, would that have been the proper place for it? Would it have been the ideal
place for it or where do you think should it have been done?
MR ERWEE: I believe that if we simply wanted to execute this people so summarily,
we would have done so in the riverbed, when they crossed the border because it would
have been a lot easier to do so with a sharp shooter, there would have been fewer
risks.
ADV VISSER: Yes, you would have needed six shots and that would have been that?
MR ERWEE: That is correct.
ADV VISSER: And if you really wanted to act in a sinister way, you could have just
buried the bodies in the river bed?
MR ERWEE: Correct yes.
CHAIRMAN: Speculation Mr Visser.
ADV VISSER: We are busy ...
CHAIRMAN: And I could ask him whether that could still have looked like self
defence, could it? If they had killed them and buried them there and hidden the bodies,
that could not have looked a bit like, it wouldn't have looked for a minute anything like
self defence.
MR ERWEE: Yes, of course not.
CHAIRMAN: It depends on what the plan is and it depends on what in the mind of
the person is and I don't think we really, well you can go on putting those questions to
him, but at the same time you - I don't know where we are getting to because
questions will be put to those speculations and then they just appear to be nothing else
but speculations.
ADV VISSER: Mr Chairman, the only reason why I am putting these questions is
because I thought these are the questions you put to him, I may have misunderstood
you.
But is really a question of argument in any event and if this end comes up, I
can cover it in argument, so I will leave that Mr Chairman.
One other aspect, the question which now arises is if they don't shoot and you
arrest them, what would be the outcome of that?
You said that the would be processed and ...
CHAIRMAN: Sorry, can I interrupt you there, because I would like you to, as far as
possible, the last word though that is not necessarily the case, but the point you have
just asked him something, I think I must make a follow up on it about the question of
calling an ambulance and the like.
Was it not your evidence and you must tell me if I misunderstood you, was it
not part of your plan that the helicopter or a helicopter would be at hand in case some
of your people were injured, then it would lift them? Was it not in the plan?
MR ERWEE: The reason why the helicopter was there, was to help with the
possibility of somebody escaping, the helicopter would have been able to follow the
tracks of the escaping person, so we could arrest him.
CHAIRMAN: ... as to how to rush any of your people to hospital, should they be
injured?
MR ERWEE: No, Chairperson.
ADV VISSER: Just to get back to the last question Mr Erwee, you mentioned the
possibility of the people to be put on trial and be prosecuted, there are also other
possibilities and that is that - well, perhaps you can tell us what these other possibilities
are.
MR ERWEE: If we arrest an insurgent and we receive good co-operation from him,
we would then try to get him to work with us, perhaps to be a witness for us. It is not
a necessity to prosecute him or one and all.
Attempts would have been made to do other things.
ADV VISSER: Lastly Mr Erwee, you may have forgotten this because it has happened
11 years ago, but it is also so that at that stage, that is now the 10th of July, it wouldn't
have been possible or it wouldn't have been necessary to prosecute these people in a
court of law, because there was a general state of emergency in existence at the time
and you could have just have detained them, so it wouldn't have really been necessary
to reveal the identities of the informers or Sehlwana?
MR ERWEE: That is correct, yes.
ADV VISSER: Thank you Mr Chairman.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY ADV VISSER.
CHAIRMAN: Mr Visser, let's deal with that speculation. We must because when I
asked the witness what did you want to do with them eventually, he didn't say I don't
know what we were going to do, there would be many possibilities, he didn't.
He chose one direction and he said, we are going to arrest them and then
charge them. Now, you are putting to him other possibilities and I think I must ask
him in relation to that too, I mean you can't keep a person in detention for ever, could
you?
You couldn't have kept anybody in detention under emergency regulations for
ever, at some stage you would have to take him out of detention?
MR ERWEE: No, you can't keep him indefinitely.
CHAIRMAN: And if you wanted to, if you would have had in mind to use them as
your informers, what if they refused, what would you have done with them if they
refused to work for you? What would you have done?
MR ERWEE: Obviously, we would have charged them.
CHAIRMAN: Yes. What I am saying to you is that in the end, because you are
carrying out your lawful duties, you would have to follow the legal processes in order
to act lawfully, isn't it? Any way, thank you Colonel.
Mr Rossouw, did you want to put questions?
MR ROSSOUW: I have no questions.
NO CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR ROSSOUW.
CHAIRMAN: Mr Black, do you want to catch it by the tail?
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR BLACK: There are just two little issues, I just
want to clarify.
CHAIRMAN: Yes, just don't repeat what we covered this morning in your absence.
MR BLACK: No, I just want to put it to you Mr Erwee, that when Brigadier
Coetzee testified, he said he received the information about the yellow shirt and the
meeting at the station from Captain, as he called him, Dreyer.
And you say you are the one, you conveyed this to Colonel Van der Merwe
and he conveyed that?
MR ERWEE: I heard the evidence of Brigadier Coetzee. It is 11 years ago that it
was Captain Dreyer who transferred the message that the six insurgents had died, I
conveyed the message that five insurgents had died and that two people were
wounded. One insurgent and one Defence Force member and that the insurgent had
died on the way to Alldays.
MR BLACK: Fine. And the other issue just to, you say that you cannot recall
whether all the corpses were placed in the back of the bakkie when you loaded the
wounded man on the bakkie.
Now, I just want to put it to you that all the corpses must have been on that
bakkie, because as I understand your evidence, that was the only available transport
left other than the casspir and you cleared the scene of all the corpses and the whole
scene as soon as possible.
So this wounded man must have been transported with all other five corpses?
MR ERWEE: It was 11 years ago, indeed, I can remember when I loaded the person
onto the vehicle, I made him comfortable. There were some of the deceased on the
bakkie, but it is possible that some other vehicles came from Alldays to help, but I can't
remember that.
MR BLACK: And in fairness to you I must still say that according to my notes when
you testified yesterday, one of the reasons given by you for the use of the helicopter
was in case wounded people had to be transported and in the event of people also
being arrested.
That's just on record, thank you. I have no further questions.
CHAIRMAN: Mr Black, at some stage I thought that that is what he said and that is
why I put a question to him in that regard a few minutes ago, but is your recollection
that he in fact said so?
MR BLACK: Yes, according to my notes, that was one of the reasons for having the
helicopter, was in case they had to transport wounded people and also to assist in the
event of people being arrested.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR BLACK.
CHAIRMAN: Any way I suppose the record will show, because one of my
Committee members tells me that that is also her recollection.
Do you want to comment on that Colonel?
MR ERWEE: Yes. The helicopter was primarily to be present in case one or two of
the insurgents tried to escape, but I concede that the helicopter could also have
assisted us if any other problem cropped up on the scene.
For instance somebody was injured, it could have been any kind of help.
CHAIRMAN: Well, in that case I would have thought that, precisely because you
open fire on the combi and before allowing the helicopter to leave with Captain Born
or was it Captain Born, before allowing the helicopter to leave the scene with Captain
Born and because you knew you had shot those people there, I would have thought
you would delay the helicopter to see whether there were any survivors.
Particularly if your intention was not to kill them, to see whether there was any
survivors there. You must have been they would be injured at the very least. And
then put them on the helicopter as well?
Why was that not done?
MR ERWEE: That is correct. You must remember that when I jumped out of the
casspir after the seize fire, the teargas overwhelmed us and I ran away for about 80 to
100 paces. When I could not longer smell the teargas, I could see the helicopter and
then Colonel Dreyer came running with Captain Born to the helicopter and then when
we got to the helicopter, I helped him load the injured person onto the plane.
Some of the teargas had already permeated our clothes and it was also hanging
in the area, and the helicopter had to take off very quickly because the flight engineer
told the pilot we have to be very quick, we will have trouble with the teargas
otherwise.
And then I went back to the combi and the casspir.
CHAIRMAN: But that is exactly my question Colonel. Why was the helicopter not
delayed for a short while so that you could satisfy yourself whether there were people
in the combi who needed that kind of help?
MR ERWEE: Yes, that is so, but as I said there were teargas very close to the
helicopter and in the helicopter, so it had to take off very quickly.
CHAIRMAN: So it is the teargas that is the important issue here, is that the reason
why only the Captain was evacuated and not also one of the injured persons? So it is
the teargas that is the crucial thing?
MR ERWEE: Yes. Yes, nobody could get close to the combi at that stage.
FURTHER EXAMINATION BY ADV VISSER: Just a short question arising
from what you have just said. When Born was loaded into the helicopter, did you at
that stage when the helicopter took off, determine whether any of your men were
injured who could also have been transported by helicopter?
MR ERWEE: No, I didn't do that.
ADV VISSER: Thank you Chairperson.
NO FURTHER EXAMINATION BY ADV VISSER.
MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Erwee, I could be mistaken, but I seem to recollect that
your evidence was that it took approximately 10 minutes before Captain Born could
be loaded onto the helicopter. Would my recollection be correct?
MR ERWEE: It could have been that time, yes.
MS KHAMPEPE: So, if it took approximately 10 minutes, would it not have
been possible for you by that time to have ascertained if there were any injured people
inside the combi?
MR ERWEE: When I got to the helicopter, I stayed there, I didn't go. They came to
me with Captain Born. I didn't know beforehand where the chopper would land.
I also don't know who summoned the helicopter, I just heard that it was
already airborne. It is only when they came running with Captain Born that I realised
that one of the Security men had been wounded and when we loaded him, the teargas
was already there.
Immediately after we loaded him, I went back to the bakkie and the casspir
because the teargas had at that stage, dispersed somewhat, it wasn't quite so bad.
MS KHAMPEPE: How long did it take for the teargas, the smell of the teargas to
become reduced to enable you to come to the minibus?
MR ERWEE: After the helicopter took off, I moved back to the combi. And when I
got there, there were already members there, so I would say from the time that I fled
the teargas until the time we loaded Captain Born and I went back, it was
approximately 8 - 10 minutes.
CHAIRMAN: Thank you Colonel, you are excused.
MR ERWEE: Mr Chairman, I would like to ask before I am excused, the question
now arises why am I here today.
And I would like to say to the Commission that firstly I am making this
application for amnesty in the spirit of national unity and the promotion thereof, in
order to find peaceful solutions and also to promote reconciliation.
And also to move away from violent resistance politics in the future. The
offences about which I have doubt whether I was competent or whether it was lawful,
are firstly that I believe that when we were shot at, I acted lawfully and that I had the
authority to fire back.
But, that I have doubt and I am in an ambivalent situation regarding the
question of whether I exceeded my bounds. This doubt is based on the fact that Dr
De’Oliviera thought it necessary to investigate the matter and Archbishop Desmond
Tutu has said on many occasions, where you have any doubt, you should rather apply
for amnesty in the spirit of reconciliation to put all the facts on the table.
The National Commissioner also thought it necessary to arrange a special
occasion in Pretoria to put it to us that if we should have any doubt, that we should
rather apply for amnesty in the spirit of national unity and reconciliation.
Further Chairperson, from experience I know that courts take days and weeks
to hear matters and it takes trial within a trial to determine whether we exceeded the
bounds at a shooting incident, for instance. And as far as a possible charge of
obstructing the course of justice is concerned, I am very honest when I say to the
Commission, that the handling of the inquest docket, I did not include all the
(indistinct) of sequences in this docket, because I believed that that which I did include
in the docket, in the inquest docket, was sufficient to enable the Presiding Officer to
make a finding in this inquest.
And if it should be found that I committed an obstruction of justice, I ask for
amnesty for that in the spirit of the promotion of national unity and reconciliation.
ADV VISSER: Thank you Mr Erwee.
ADV VISSER 1 A.J.G. ERWEE
PIETERSBURG HEARING AMNESTY/NORTHERN PROVINCE
