=====================================================================
&#9;TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION COMMISSION
=====================================================================
&#9;TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION COMMISSION 

&#9;AMNESTY HEARINGS

 

DATE:&#9;&#9;&#9;JULY 1996

HELD AT:&#9;&#9;&#9;PRETORIA

NAME:&#9;&#9;&#9;MR VAN EYCK

CASE NUMBER:&#9;&#9;&#9;

DAY:&#9;&#9;&#9;&#9;1

________________________________________________________

MRS VAN DER WALT CALLS: 

JOHAN VAN EYCK: (Duly sworn, states).

EXAMINATION BY MRS VAN DER WALT: Mr Van Eyck, you were also sentenced on the 18th of February 19 ... to 18 years imprisonment which you are currently serving in the Zonderwater Prison in Cullinan, as a result of the murder of the deceased.

MR VAN EYCK: Yes, that's correct.

MRS VAN DER WALT: Mr Van Eyck, you also joined the Police when you were very young. Is that correct?

MR VAN EYCK: That's correct, I joined the 20th of March 1970, I served in Brakpan. 

MRS VAN DER WALT: How old were you then?

MR VAN EYCK: I was 16 years old. I served in Brakpan before going to the Police College in 1971, where I received training. I was then transferred to the Benoni Police Station. I was in the uniform branch. In 1973 I received training at Groblersdal in the combating of terrorism. Thereafter I was sent to the Caprivi, where I performed my border duties. 

&#9;During my training at Viljoenskop, we were made aware of the armed assault aimed against our country, and that was the reason why we were serving in the Caprivi, to avert this onslaught.

&#9;In 1974, I performed border duty on two different occasions, in the then Rhodesia, which is now Zimbabwe. My duties were still the same, the combating of terrorism.

&#9; When I arrived back in the country I was transferred to another police station where I worked for a time. Before I was approached by officers in the Police and asked whether I wanted to join Murder and Robbery. Initially I didn't want to, because I enjoyed my work, but they persuaded me and I joined the detective branch. 

&#9;My duties entailed the investigating of crime and I there encountered the various methods of interrogation, amongst others, the use of shock machines, sacks pulled over the head, et cetera. 

&#9;In 1976 I was also involved in the combating of riots in the Black townships. We encountered violence on a daily basis. Vehicles were damaged, burnt. The people who were regarded as police informers were killed. 

MRS VAN DER WALT: Mr Van Eyck, you are now testifying that you were involved in violence. Can you tell us whether this violence related to ordinary criminal activities or what was the case?

MR VAN EYCK: Honourable Chairperson, the violence in the Black areas was aimed at the Government. Various organisations were responsible for this; youth organisations as well as political groupings. 

&#9;I was appointed as branch commander in Witfontein. That was quite an achievement for me at such a young age. That was due to the work which I had performed. I could perhaps mention that I did not receive instructions from officers to make use of interrogation methods, but I believed that they approved of these methods, since in the time that I was there, certain charges of assault were made against me and I could refute the complainants' case by means of statements which I made and the result of that was that the Attorney-General declined to prosecute. It was clear to me that these officers were well-aware of my actions and my conduct.

MRS VAN DER WALT: During that period, Mr Van Eyck, the period in which there was a lot of violence in the Black areas, were there any statements made by the leaders of the country, of which you were aware?

MR VAN EYCK: Yes, that is correct. Chairperson, statements were made by the then President of the country, as well as by various Ministers, Ministers of Police. The statements made were that the onslaught had to be countered ruthlessly.

MRS VAN DER WALT: Are you now referring to which President?

MR VAN EYCK: The President P W Botha, and the Ministers were Minister Louis le Grange, Hernus Kriel, Adriaan Vlok.

MRS VAN DER WALT: When these statements were made, that these assaults and onslaughts had to be tackled, very harshly, how did you understand that?

MR VAN EYCK: I believed that these statements also supported the kind of methods that I used. 

MRS VAN DER WALT: The organisations which you mentioned, who were involved in the violence, now were you aware what their objectives were?

MR VAN EYCK: Yes. The period which I am referring to is the late Seventies, but I wasn't then so closely involved with the riots, because I was then still in the detective branch. In the beginning of the 1980s, a couple of us were told to go to Tembisa to help combat the riots and violence reigning at the time. I was there for a couple of months. I then went back to Benoni. &#9;Approximately a month thereafter I received an instruction, myself and a colleague of mine, Warrant-Officer Kruger, to go to Daveyton. Certain police dwellings had been burnt down. When we arrived there that afternoon, we were immediately attacked. Our vehicle was damaged, the vehicle was stoned. We had to make use of Land Rovers and quite a few homes of policemen were burnt down. We were told that very same night to stay in the residential area to investigate all incidents of violence in the area.

&#9;There were also members of the Defence Force and the uniform branch operating in the area, but we were instructed to investigate these incidents of violence. As a result of our investigations we came into contact with many of these organisations and their members. A state of emergency was declared at some point. I attended various meetings where the Police, Defence Force and the various town councils were present and there it was planned how these riots and incidents of violence could be combated. 

&#9;Amongst other things, instructions were given as to how funerals should be conducted in these townships. Prior notice was given to the family and the organisers of the funeral as to how the funerals should take place. It happened that some people took no notice of these state of emergency regulations. On one occasion Archbishop Desmond Tutu was present as well. On one of these occasions when people ignored the state of emergency, but after talks with 

the Archbishop buses for the people going to the funerals were arranged. 

&#9;I also contacted Penny Moshoego, a secretary of the UDF, after she had resigned from the UDF, and she told me that their aim with the violence, boycotts, strikes, et cetera, was to paralyse the government, and to enable the UDF and the ANC to topple the government.

MRS VAN DER WALT: You then at some stage resigned from the Police?

MR VAN EYCK: Yes. I was on sick leave for nine months as a result of permanent headaches. I believe it was as a result of the incredible stress under which I worked. I then decided to resign from the Police and I started up my own business.

&#9;As a result of increasing thefts which took place at my place of business, I closed the business and went to work for Fidelity Guard as an investigating officer under Mr Gerber, he was my boss. I already knew him from the East Rand.

MRS VAN DER WALT: Was this during May 1988?

MR VAN EYCK: Yes, that is correct. Yes, that is correct, I started working for them in May 1988. 

&#9;It soon became clear to me that the same methods used in the Police during investigations and interrogations also applied here. It was very clear that the co-operation between the investigating officers who were all former policemen and the Police, that this co-operation was very close and very good. I also liaised with various divisions and branches of the Police and with various investigating officers. I thereby could gain information just by picking up the phone. I could just phone Murder and Robbery with the information branch and just obtain the information which I needed.

MRS VAN DER WALT: Mr Van Eyck, when you say that there was close contact and liaison between yourself and the Police, could you tell us was that just liaison between yourself as a former policeman asking favours from the Police or did it actually involved Fidelity Guards?

MR VAN EYCK: It actually involved the whole crime situation in the country and the onslaught, directed at financial institutions in the country, it included the whole lot.

MRS VAN DER WALT: Can you tell us did the Police ever assist Fidelity Guards in their investigations, their internal investigations?

MR VAN EYCK: Yes, we formed the internal investigations because we were familiar with the systems in place. For an outsider to perform an investigation would be very difficult, because he would not be familiar with the systems. We assisted them with the initial investigation. It depended on the seriousness of the crime. That would determine at what stage we would hand over our statements and investigations to them. 

MRS VAN DER WALT: Brig Daan van Wyk, did you know him whilst you were in the Police?

MR VAN EYCK: No, I only got to know him after he joined the Fidelity Guards.

&#9;At one stage Brig Van Wyk approached me and asked me whether I knew of an informer that they could use to infiltrate a gang in the Eastern Cape. I approached one of my informers - he was familiar with the Eastern Cape - and he was prepared to help us. This informer, together with Jack and Julius, who were my investigating officers, departed for Port Elizabeth and whilst they were there, Brig Daantjie van Wyk also went to Port Elizabeth. When they came back they told me that they had indeed infiltrated the gang. Jack entered into an affair with one of the gang members' family members, and he then liaised with me as well. At some stage I heard they were planning - that is Brig Van Wyk

and Jack and Julius and Oosthuisen, they were planning to purchase AK-47s to provide this gang in the Eastern Cape with these rifles. 

MRS VAN DER WALT: Mr Oosthuisen is accused number 1 in the case.

MR VAN EYCK: That is correct.

&#9;Oosthuisen het my ook meegedeel dat hy met kol Eugene de Kock van Vlakplaas gereël het om die AK-patrone met plofstof te laai en sou hierdie bendelede hierdie vuurwapens nou met daardie plofstof gebruik, sou dit noodlottige gevolge gehad het vir die een wat dit gebruik. Hy het ook dan aan my patrone op 'n stadium getoon en my meegedeel dat die patrone afkomstig is ... (tussenbeide). 

MRS VAN DER WALT: Wat gebeur - hoekom sę u dit sal noodlottig wees?

MNR VAN EYCK: Want die plofstof sal ontplof. Hy het ook op 'n stadium vir my patrone getoon wat hy gesę het wat hy van kol De Kock ontvang het.

EINDE VAN DAG 1 - BAND 3

BAND - DAG 1 - BAND 3 - KANT B (MIDDEL VAN BAND)

MEV VAN DER WALT: ... u getuienis.

MNR VAN EYCK: In hierdie tyd wat ek uit die Polisie was, wat ek ook nie by Fidelity Guards gewerk het nie, maar vir myself, was ek ook genader deur die ondersoekmense wat in Daveyton werksaam was, om hulle te help met hulle ondersoek daar, aangesien ek lank daarby betrokke was en kennis gedra het van die omstandighede.

ADV DE JAGER: Mnr Van Eyck, kan u dalk die luidspreker bietjie nader aan u trek. 

MNR VAN EYCK: Dit was op daardie stadium ook baie moeilik om enige beriggewers te werf, aangesien hulle gevrees het vir hulle lewens en hulle was dan ook, sou hulle dan inligting gee, vermoor. 

&#9;Gedurende 1991 in Maartmaand, was daar 'n roof by Fidelity Guards, Hillbrow, waarin een van die werknemers van Fidelity Guards doodgeskiet was. Ek was die betrokke aand nie op die toneel nie, en het die volgende dag daarvan verneem. Ons het baie geskakel met Brixton Moord en Roof, en mnr Gerber het ook met veiligheid, John Vorster geskakel, aangesien daar stokgranate gevind was op die toneel.

&#9;Die inligting wat ons bekom het, wat ek bekom het, het meestal afkomstig, was meestal afkomstig van mnr Gerber. Ons as ondersoekers was ook betrokke by die ondersoek deur te skakel met die Polisie sowel as met beriggewers. Dit was ook aan my bekend dat een van die rowers tydens die roof blykbaar deur sy kollegas doodgeskiet was. Die oorledene was nooit geïdentifiseer nie, wat vir my 'n aanduiding was dat hy nie plaaslike, van die plaaslike bevolking was nie, maar dat hy moontlik van 'n ander plek af soontoe gekom het. &#9;As gevolg van die aanslag teen die land, en die vryheidsvegsters se tekort aan fondse, was dit vir my duidelik dat hierdie voorval moes gewees het ter stawing van hulle fondse, as in ag geneem word die bedrag geld wat geneem is. 

&#9;Gedurende Mei of voor daardie tyd, gedurende Mei het ek eendag by die kantoor gearriveer, en ek het die oorledene by mnr Gerber in sy kantoor aangetref. Van my kollegas wat ook ondersoekbeamptes was, was ook teenwoordig. Mnr Gerber het my meegedeel van die omstandighede waaronder hy die oorledene vroeg die oggend daar aangetref het. Hy het my ook meegedeel van 'n telefoonoproep wat hy die nag ontvang het. Aangesien hierdie aangeleentheid deur Brixton Moord en Roof ondersoek was, hulle was nog besig met die ondersoek, het ek Brixton Moord en Roof gekontak om hulle in te lig. Hy het toe aan my gerapporteer dat sers Dempsey sowel as luit Steyn hom meegedeel het dat ons kan voortgaan met die ondervraging van die oorledene. 

&#9;Jack, Julius en Oosthuisen was deur mnr Gerber aangesę om die oorledene uit die gebou te neem na 'n plek oorkant die Johannesburg Mark. Hy het my ook meegedeel om hulle te volg na die toneel toe, wat ek toe gedoen het.

&#9;Nadat ons op die toneel was, het mnr Gerber daar opgedaag en hy het ons meegedeel dat daar mense in die omgewing was en dat ons die oorledene na Cleveland toe moet neem om hom daar te ondervra. Ons het toe na Cleveland toe gegaan.

MEV VAN DER WALT: Mnr Van Eyck, kan ek u miskien net daar onderbreek. Ek vra om verskoning. Daar by die eerste plek waarheen u nou vir die oorledene geneem het, dit was nou u en Jack en Julius, het julle enige ondervraging daar gedoen spesifiek toe mnr Gerber nie by was nie?

MNR VAN EYCK: Dis reg, ons het hom ondervra toe ons daar gekom het.

&#9;By Cleveland bos, of by die mynhoop, het mnr Gerber 'n tou en 'n skokapparaat uit sy motor gehaal, die oorledene se voete was met die tou vasgemaak. Daar was reeds op daardie stadium 'n seilsak oor sy kop. Hy was aan sy voete aan 'n boom opgehang. Mnr Gerber het die skokapparaat aan sy vinger en sy geslagsdeel vasgemaak en hom geskok met die apparaat. Ek het self ook die apparaat gehanteer, sowel as my kollegas, almal van ons wat daar teenwoordig was.

&#9;Mnr Gerber het 'n klomp blare en fyn takkies onder die oorledene se kop aan die brand gesteek, wat rook veroorsaak het. 

MEV VAN DER WALT: Kan u net vir die Kommissie sę, wat was die doel daarvan, weet u?

MNR VAN EYCK: Dit was, die doel van die rook was om dit vir hom ongemaklik te maak en dit was ook om te kyk of hy nie maar bereid was om die inligting of om inligting aan ons oor te dra nie.

MEV VAN DER WALT: Mnr Van Eyck, u sę dat dit was om hom ongemaklik te maak. Kan u vir die Kommissie sę was die oorledene se kop toe nog toe met die sak?

MNR VAN EYCK: Dis korrek, sy kop was nog toe met die sak.

MEV VAN DER WALT: En die sak waarvan u praat, wat se tipe sak was dit?

MNR VAN EYCK: Dit was 'n seilsak, Edele, agbare Voorsitter.

MEV VAN DER WALT: En as u nou praat van ongemak, wat bedoel presies daarby?

MNR VAN EYCK: Die rook wat in die sak ingetrek het. Daar was nie vlamme nie, sou daar vlamme gewees het, dan sou die sak gebrand het.

&#9;Terwyl die oorledene aan die boom gehang het, het Oosthuisen sy pistool uitgehaal en in die rigting van die oorledene geskiet. Ek het hom onmiddellik aangespreek, want dit was vir my baie belangrik dat hierdie oorledene nie gedood moes word nie, want dan sou ons glad nie in ons doel geslaag het om die inligting te kry waarna ons gesoek het nie.

&#9;Die twee Swart lede wat saam met ons was, het gaan koeldrank koop en ons het gedrink. Die rede hoekom ons gedrink het, was vir ons gewete.

MEV VAN DER WALT: U praat dat u, dat hulle koeldrank gaan koop het en u het gedrink. Wat het u gedrink?

MNR VAN EYCK: Ons het sterk drank gedrink. Ek kan ook meld dat dit praktyk was om te drink tydens hierdie ondervragings. 

&#9;Nadat die Swart lede vertrek het, het ons die oorledene van die boom afgehaal. Mnr Gerber het hom meegedeel om daar op en af te loop, wat hy toe ook gedoen het. Hy het daar eenkant gaan sit. Ek het gesien dat Oosthuisen hom skiet en hy het op my afgestorm en my vasgegryp. Hy het baie gebloei en ek het hom van my af weggestamp. Hy wou my in my bakkie geklim het, en ek het hom verhoed, aangesien hy baie gebloei het en my bakkie vol bloed sou wees.

&#9;Hy het weggehardloop, waarna mnr Gerber op hom geskiet het. Mnr Gerber en Ooshuizen is toe af in die rigting waar hy gehardloop het en ek het by die voertuig gebly.

&#9;Ek het toe gesien dat die oorledene weer weghardloop en mnr Gerber weer twee skote op hom skiet. Ek het toe soontoe gegaan, waar hulle was by die oorledene en gevind dat die oorledene reeds dood was. 

&#9;Ek het onmiddellik besef dat ons nie in ons doel geslaag het nie, want my doel was om inligting by die oorledene te kry, om hierdie mense wat betrokke was of hierdie organisasies, aan die lig te bring, om sodoende ook aan hulle te toon dat ons oor inligting aangaande hulle beskik. Aangesien my bakkie die beste vervoermiddel was vir die liggaam, was die liggaam agter in my bakkie geplaas en bedek met 'n spons. Ek en Oosthuisen sou van die liggaam ontslae geraak het.

&#9;Langs die pad het ek gemerk dat Oosthuisen nie meer saam met my was nie, en ek was alleen met die liggaam. Ek het gery na 'n bos by Benoni, waar ek die liggaam op die spons geplaas het, petrol oor hom uitgegooi het en hom aan die brand gesteek het.

ADV DE JAGER: Ekskuus tog. Was u en Oosthuisen in dieselfde voertuig of het hy ...

MNR VAN EYCK: Aanvanklik was ons, toe ons uit Cleveland uitgegaan het, was ons in my voertuig en hy het sy voertuig, 'n Fox-voertuig by Hillbrow gekry en toe sou ons saam gery het.

&#9;Ek het hom aan die brand gesteek en onmiddellik gery. Ek het nie gekyk hoe hy gebrand het nie. Toe ek by my huis kom was Oosthuisen en 'n ander onbekende man reeds by my huis. Ek het Oosthuisen meegedeel dat ek die liggaam uitgebrand het en hy is toe daar weg. Later die aand het Gerber my gekontak telefonies, om ook te verneem van die liggaam en ek het hom meegedeel dat ek hom uitgebrand het. Ek het hom ook meegedeel dat my bakkie vol bloed was, waarop hy gesę het dat ek die volgende dag my bakkie moet laat skoonmaak, wat ek toe ook die volgende dag gedoen het.

&#9;Die dag daarna toe ek by die kantoor was, het 'n kollega van my, Piet Niemand, my meegedeel dat ons na die toneel toe moet gaan waar die liggaam was, om te kyk of hy uitgebrand het.

MEV VAN DER WALT: Hierdie Piet Niemand, hoe het hy kennis gedra van die voorval?

MNR VAN EYCK: Agbare Voorsitter, ek weet ne, ek neem maar aan dat hy deur Oosthuisen of Gerber meegedeel was.

&#9;Ek en hy het toe na die toneel toe gegaan waar die liggaam gelę het. Die een hand van die oorledene was nie gebrand nie. En hy het voorgestel dat ons die hand afkap. Ons het na 'n winkel gery waar hy 'n byl gekoop het. Ons is terug en hy het die hand afgekap. Ons het toe gery met die hand en langs die pad weggegooi. 

&#9;Mnr Gerber het my gesę dat ek nie bekommerd hoef te wees oor die voorval nie, aangesien hy reeds aan Brixton Moord en Roof gerapporteer het dat die man weg was. Ek het tydens my verhoor op die klagte van moord geen getuienis gelewer nie. Die rede hiervoor is omdat ek bewus was dat ons nie ons doel geslaag het om die inligting te bekom nie; dat my kollegas en ekself moontlik vrywaring kon kry. Ek het geglo dat sou ek getuienis gegee het, en my betrokkenheid by die bekamping van hierdie aanvalle en geweld en my skakeling, noue skakeling met die Polisie, sou dit bekend geword het, sou dit met die oog op die komende verkiesing vir die Nasionale Party 'n verleentheid gewees het. Ek het myself beskou as 'n instrument van die Regering. Ek was lojaal teenoor die Regering en teenoor die Polisiemag vir wie ek so lank gewerk het. 

&#9;Ek wil ook net aan die familie van die oorledene, indien hulle teenwoordig is, my verskoning aanbied vir ons optrede, sowel as my familie wat my nou bygestaan het in hierdie tyd wat ek in die gevangenis is, en ook die tyd wat ek verhoorafwagtend was, want dit was vir hulle net so 'n skok.

MEV VAN DER WALT: Toe u nou hierdie misdaad gepleeg het, die politieke klimaat wat daar geheers het op daardie tyd in die land, wat se invloed het dit op u gemaak, met betrekking tot hierdie voorval?

MNR VAN EYCK: Agbare Voorsitter, dit was vir my baie duidelik dat hierdie organisasies enige metode sou aanwend om die land onregeerbaar te maak en om die gesag met geweld oor te neem, sou dit nodig wees.

MEV VAN DER WALT: Nou u praat nou van die organisasies. Na wat se organisasies verwys u?

MNR VAN EYCK: Ek verwys na die ANC, PAC, SAKP.

MEV VAN DER WALT: Mnr Van Eyck, hoe bring u hierdie organisasies en hulle doelstelling by Fidelity Guards en u werksaamhede daar; hoe verbind u dit?

MNR VAN EYCK: Agbare Voorsitter, dit was reeds geruime tyd bekend dat hierdie organisasies finansiële instellings insypel, hulle aanval om die fondse te bekom om hulle stryd voort te sit, en sou hierdie optrede van ons suksesvol gewees het, dan sou ons hierdie organisasies 'n nekslag toegedien het.

MEV VAN DER WALT: U sę u was 'n instrument van die Regering. Hoekom sę u so?

MNR VAN EYCK: Ek het myself en ons groepe beskou as 'n komponent van die Regering, van die Polisie, as gevolg van ons noue verbintenis met hulle, ons werksaamhede saam met hulle en ons doel om hierdie aanslag en ook die misdaad wat daarmee gepaard gaan, om dit te bekamp.

MEV VAN DER WALT: Toe u 'n polisieman was, u het gesę u was 'n lid van die Nasionale Party en u gesindheid teenoor die Regering, hoe was dit?

MNR VAN EYCK: Ek was lojaal teenoor die Regering. Ek meen, ek was 'n lid van die Nasionale Party en ek het gestem vir die Regering, en dit was my plig as polisiebeampte en ook nadat ek uit die Mag uit was, het ek dit beskou as my plig om dié Regering in stand te hou.

MEV VAN DER WALT: En toe u nou die Polisie verlaat het, het u met daardie selfde gevoel voortgegaan?

MNR VAN EYCK: Presies dieselfde.

MEV VAN DER WALT: Mnr Van Eyck, u het in u getuienis gesę dat toe u die stokgranaat, bewus geword het van die stokgranate, met die roof gedurende Maart, het u besef daar is 'n aanslag op die land. Hoekom sou stokgranate nou vir u daardie besef gee?

MNR VAN EYCK: Stokgranate was nie beskikbaar, vryelik beskikbaar in die land nie, sowel as AK-47-gewere nie. Dit was slegs gebruik deur die bevrydingsorganisasies.

MEV VAN DER WALT: Die stokgranate, van waar is hulle oorsprong?

MNR VAN EYCK: Die stokgranate was deur PAC-lede die land ingebring.

MEV VAN DER WALT: Weet u miskien die land van herkoms?

MNR VAN EYCK: Ek weet nie waar dit vandaan kom nie.

MEV VAN DER WALT: Die dag van die ongelukkige voorval, het u - was u bewapen gewees? 

MNR VAN EYCK: Ek was nie bewapen nie, ek het nie 'n wapen gehad nie.

MEV VAN DER WALT: Nadat die oorledene van die boom afgehaal is waar hy opgehang was, het u enige kopbeserings aan hom gesien?

MNR VAN EYCK: Ek het geen kopbeserings aan hom gesien nie.

MEV VAN DER WALT: Want daar was stellings gemaak aan mnr Gerber dat die oorledene se kop was gebrand tot op die kopvel?

MNR VAN EYCK: Agbare Voorsitter, die oorledene het 'n seilsak oor sy kop gehad. Die sak was op geen stadium van sy kop afgehaal nie, deur die dag nie, en dit was eers afgehaal nadat hy van die boom afgehaal is, en daar was geen beserings aan sy kop nie.

MEV VAN DER WALT: En weet u wat was die Hof se bevinding tydens u verhoor met betrekking tot die kopbesering?

MNR VAN EYCK: Ja, ek praat onder korreksie, maar ek dink die Hof het 'n bevinding gemaak dat daar wel beserings aan die kop was.

MEV VAN DER WALT: En die nadoodse ondersoek kon niks wys nie, want die lyk was verbrand?

MNR VAN EYCK: Dis korrek.

MEV VAN DER WALT: Ek het geen verdere vrae nie. Dit is dan die getuienis.

GEEN VERDERE VRAE DEUR MEV VAN DER WALT

ONDERVRAGING DEUR ADV MPSHE: Mnr Van Eyck, was u opgelei teen terrorisme?

MNR VAN EYCK: Dis korrek, agbare Voorsitter.

ADV MPSHE: Wanneer was dit gewees?

MNR VAN EYCK: 1973, plus/minus 1973.

ADV MPSHE: Tydens die opleiding, was u opgelei om hoe moet u met die terrorisme of hoe moet u terrorisme behandel?

MNR VAN EYCK: Dis korrek.

ADV MPSHE: Wat was aan u gesę?

MNR VAN EYCK: Herhaal, asseblief?

ADV MPSHE: Wat was aan u gesę betreffende die behandeling van terroriste?

MNR VAN EYCK: Dit sou afhang van die omstandighede. Sou dit in 'n skietkontak wees, dan moes jy jouself verdedig deur die mense dood te skiet. Sou dit 'n terroris was wat ingesypel het en hy kon gearresteer gewees het, dan moes hy gearresteer gewees het en hy moes aangehou gewees het.

ADV MPSHE: Was dit aan u gesę betreffende 'n terroris wat nie met geweld teenoor u optree, hoe om hom te behandel?

MNR VAN EYCK: Dis korrek, hy moes aangehou gewees het en dan sou hy ondervra geword het.

ADV MPSHE: Was tydens die opleiding, gebruik van geweld aan u gemeld?

MNR VAN EYCK: Nee, dit was nie tydens my opleiding aan my gemeld nie, maar dit was algemene praktyk in die polisie.

ADV MPSHE: Algemene praktyk om geweld teenoor die persoon te gebruik?

MNR VAN EYCK: Dis korrek.

ADV MPSHE: Nou hierdie gewelddadige geweld waaroor u getuig het, het dit enige manier u beïnvloed op die dag van hierdie voorval?

MNR VAN EYCK: Dis korrek, ek het in 'n kultuur van hierdie tipe ondervraging, het ek, kan u maar sę groot geword, van my, sę 18de verjaardag af, was ek gemoeid met hierdie goed of betrokke by hierdie goed, tot by hierdie ongelukkige voorval.

ADV MPSHE: Goed. Wat het in u gedagte voorgekom die dag toe u met die oorledene gehandel het?

MNR VAN EYCK: Soos ek reeds gemeld het ... (tussenbeide). 

ADV MPSHE: As gevolg van hierdie geweld?

MNR VAN EYCK: Soos ek reeds in my getuienis gesę het, was dit vir my baie belangrik om die inligting te kry. Dit was nooit my idee of ek het nooit voorsien dat hierdie oorledene gedood sou word nie.

ADV MPSHE: Goed. En u sal saamstem dat die inligting wat u gesoek het was betreffende die gewapende roof alleenlik, né?

MNR VAN EYCK: Nee, die inligting wat ek gesoek het was, het betrekking gehad op die gewapende roof, maar in geheel gesien, was dit die aanslag om hierdie geld te bekom, hetsy by Fidelity Guards, hetsy by 'n bank of 'n ander finansiële instelling, dit was my motief, om hierdie mense vas te stel wie hulle was, om 'n herhaling van hierdie roof by enige ander instelling te voorkom.

ADV MPSHE: Goed. Met ander woorde as ek u mooi verstaan, die inligting wat u in geheel gesoek het, was betreffende die kriminele aangeleenthede oor die - in die ander banke. Is dit reg?

MNR VAN EYCK: Nee, dit was, die inligting wat ek gesoek het was om vas te stel wie hierdie mense is wat hierby betrokke was, want soos ek reeds in my getuienis gesę het, die aanslag teen die Regering was gemik teen finansiële instellings te beroof, om fondse te bekom, en dit was my groot motief om hierdie inligting by hierdie oorledene te kry.

ADV MPSHE: Goed. Fondse te bekom om wat daarmee te maak?

MNR VAN EYCK: Fondse te bekom ter bevordering van hulle aanslag, die bevrydingsorganisasies se aanslag.

ADV MPSHE: Ja. Dit is op rekord dat met hierdie "hulle" u verwys na ANC, PAC ensovoorts.

MNR VAN EYCK: Dis korrek.

ADV MPSHE: Mnr Van Eyck, sal u saamstem dat hierdie "hulle", die ANC, PAC en andere, was op die 1ste van Februarie 1990 ontban deur die Staatspresident.

MNR VAN EYCK: Dit is korrek, ek is bewus daarvan.

ADV MPSHE: Goed. En u stem saam verder dat die aangeleentheid, hierdie voorval het plaasgevind na 1990?

MNR VAN EYCK: Dis korrek, dit het daarna plaasgevind.

ADV MPSHE: Goed. En u sal verder saamstem dat dit was dan onnodig vir "hulle", dit wil sę die ANC, PAC en andere, om aanval te maak teen die Regering, want die was nou bevry gewees?

MNR VAN EYCK: Nee, ek sal nie saamstem daarmee nie. Want ek glo dat die aanslag of die aanvalle het nog voortgeduur nog lank na 1990.

ADV MPSHE: Ja, maar die aanslag was gedoen voor die politieke organisasies ontban kon word. Is dit reg?

MNR VAN EYCK: Nee, die aanslag het voortgegaan nadat hierdie politieke organisasies ontban was, het die aanslag maar nog voortgegaan. Dit het nie 1990 onmiddellik gestaak nie.

ADV MPSHE: Kom ons praat bietjie oor hierdie Nxana-bende van Oos-Kaap. 

MNR VAN EYCK: Dis korrek.

ADV MPSHE: Het hierdie bende in enige manier met politiek te doen gehad?

MNR VAN EYCK: Agbare Voorsitter, ek sal nie weet nie. Ek was net genader om 'n beriggewer beskikbaar te stel om kontak te maak met hierdie mense en hulle te infiltreer, wat ek ook gedoen het. Ek was nooit in die Oos-Kaap om eerstehands kennis op te doen oor die omstandighede daar nie. Dit was gedoen deur brig Daantjie van Wyk en soverre die patrone en die gewere aangaan, dit was gereël ion Johannesburg deur brig Daantjie van Wyk en ek was maar net geken en van my dienste was gebruik gemaak, waar nodig.

ADV MPSHE: Mnr Van Eyck, seker as opdrag of bevele aan u gegee word om 'n sekere organisasie te infiltreer, seker u was gesę hoekom dit gedoen moet word. Nie so nie?

MNR VAN EYCK: Agbare Voorsitter, ek was nie aangesę om enige bende of iemand te infiltreer nie. Ek was aangesę om 'n beriggewer beskikbaar te stel wat die Oos-Kaap ken om die mense daar te infiltreer. Ekself was nooit daar nie en ek was nooit opdrag gegee om hulle te infiltreer nie.

ADV MPSHE: Niks was aan u gesę betreffende hierdie bende nie.

MNR VAN EYCK: Nee, dit was net ...

ADV MPSHE: Wat doen die bende, hoekom moet hulle - hoekom moet u 'n beriggewer bekom?

MNR VAN EYCK: Nee, hulle het net vir my gesę of die inligting wat ek gekry het, was dat hierdie bende betrokke was ook by rowe en gewapende rowe in die Oos-Kaap. Wat hulle motief daarvoor was, weet ek nie.

ADV MPSHE: Goed. Kom ons keer terug na die voorval, ag, die toneel van die voorval. Dié wat u saam met Gerber en Oosthuizen en andere gedoen het, het u dit gedoen as gevolg van enige opdrag van enige persoon?

MNR VAN EYCK: Wel, ek ... (tussenbeide). 

ADV MPSHE: Of laat ek direk wees, was dit 'n opdrag van enige politieke organisasie of party?

MNR VAN EYCK: Nee, dit was nie in opdrag van enige politieke organisasie of party nie, maar ek het dit my plig geag om dit te doen ter beskerming van die regering van die dag.

ADV MPSHE: Goed. So u het op u eie opgetree, is dit korrek?

MNR VAN EYCK: Dis korrek, ek het opgetree soos wat ek geglo het deur die regering van my verwag was.

ADV MPSHE: Mnr Van Eyck, die voorval, is daar of kan gesę word, kan dit gesę word dat daar enige verwantskap ontstaan het tussen die voorval en die politiek?

MNR VAN EYCK: O, beslis. Soos ek in my getuienis gesę het, hoe ek die verband bymekaar bring, is ek wou inligting by hierdie man gehad het. Dit was vir my uiters belangrik om inligting by hierdie man te kry. Om die totale aanslag, wat daardie tyd geheers het, die hoof te bied.

ADV MPSHE: Het u al miskien bevestig dat die oorledene 'n lid van enige politieke organisasie was?

MNR VAN EYCK: Dit was aan my gemeld dat hy betrokke was by PAC-bedrywighede. Hoe ver dit waar is kan ek nie sę nie.

ADV MPSHE: So u het teen hom opgetree sonder dat u daardie aanmelding aan u bevestig het? U het net aanvaar dat dit die geval is en ... (tussenbeide). 

MNR VAN EYCK: Die oggend toe ek by mnr Gerber se kantoor was, het hy my meegedeel dat hy oor inligting beskik dat hierdie man wel 'n lid van die PAC is of 'n ondersteuner van die PAC is. Ek het dit nie nodig geag om dit by ander mense navraag te doen nie, want mnr Gerber was my onmiddellike hoof en dit is inligting wat hy aan my verskaf het. Ek het geen rede gehad om die inligting wat hy aan my verskaf het, in twyfel te trek nie.

ADV MPSHE: U het getuig dat hierdie aangeleentheid, die gewapende roof was op daardie tyd deur die Moord en Roof ondersoek. Is dit reg?

MNR VAN EYCK: Dit is korrek, agbare Voorsitter.

ADV MPSHE: En u was ook bewus van die feit dat daar 'n sekere ondersoekbeampte besig was om die saak verder te ondersoek by Moord en Roof?

MNR VAN EYCK: Dis korrek, agbare Voorsitter.

ADV MPSHE: En is dit korrek dat die ondersoekbeampte was ene Dempsey?

MNR VAN EYCK: Dis korrek.

ADV MPSHE: Goed. Nou as u geweet het dat die saak deur Moord en Roof ondersoek was, en verder u geweet het wie die ondersoekbeampte was, hoekom was die oorledene nie aan die ondersoekbeampte oorhandig vir verdere ...

MNR VAN EYCK: Agbare Voorsitter, soos ek reeds getuig het, was die ondersoekbeampte die oggend in kennis gestel en hy het gesę dat ons moet voortgaan, aangesien hy besig was. En as gevolg van my verbintenis met hulle en die samewerking wat ons gehad het, het ek dit ook my plig geag om voort te gaan met hierdie ondersoek.

ADV MPSHE: Ja, maar u het geweet op daardie tydstip dat die aangeleentheid nou geheel in die hande van die Polisie was, nie so nie?

MNR VAN EYCK: Agbare Voorsitter, soos ek gesę het, ons het baie nou saamgewerk. En die man het, die ondersoekbeampte het vir ons gesę gaan voort. Wat vir my 'n aanduiding was dat ons kan voortgaan. Anders sou hy dit nie gesę het nie. Anders sou hy vir ons gesę het bring die man na my kantoor toe laat ek hom hier aanhou of wat ook al die geval mag wees, maar hy het gesę gaan voort met die ondersoek, en op grond daarvan het ons voortgegaan.

ADV MPSHE: Kom ons gaan bietjie ... (tussenbeide). 

REGTER WILSON: U het die man na die bosse geneem en die hele dag hom daar in die boom gehang?

MNR VAN EYCK: Dis korrek, dis korrek, agbare Voorsitter.

REGTER WILSON: En was hierdie polisieman, was hy besig vir die hele dag, het julle probeer om met hom weer te praat?

MNR VAN EYCK: Agbare Voorsitter, ek het glad nie die dag met hom gepraat nie, mnr Gerber het met hom gepraat en ... (tussenbeide). 

REGTER WILSON: En hy het niks verder gedoen nie, hy het daar by die bosse gebly vir die hele dag?

MNR VAN EYCK: Dis korrek. 

ADV MPSHE: En volgens u kennis geen poging was aangewend gedurende die dag om die ondersoekbeampte op te spoor of om hom te sę wat nou aan die gang was?

MNR VAN EYCK: Nee, agbare Voorsitter, ek dra nie kennis daarvan nie.

ADV MPSHE: Nou kom ons keer 'n bietjie terug na Benoni toe. Toe u die liggaam aan die brand steek, was die liggaam nog in geheel gewees?

MNR VAN EYCK: Dis korrek. Dis korrek.

ADV MPSHE: Nou hoekom was dit nodig vir u asook Piet Niemand, om die hand af te kap?

MNR VAN EYCK: Dit was om die identiteit van die oorledene te verbloem.

ADV MPSHE: Te?

MNR VAN EYCK: Te verbloem.

ADV MPSHE: Was that the only way you could do it?

MR VAN EYCK: That was the only part of the body that didn't burn, that's why.

ADV MPSHE: How did you remove the arm or in which way?

MR VAN EYCK: As I have indicated, Piet Niemand and myself went to a shop. Piet bought an axe and we chopped off the hand with the axe.

ADV MPSHE: The photos I have just caused to be tabled are not the original photos. I could not lay hands on the original photos. My apologies for that. Could you have a look at the photographs? Let's look specifically at photograph number 3.

MR VAN EYCK: I assume that is the arm of the deceased. The photograph I have here is not very clear, but it does suggest an arm.

ADV DE JAGER: Is it very unclear?

MR VAN EYCK: Yes, Chairperson.

ADV MPSHE: This problem, I wish not to take any further point on these photos because he cannot see them clearly. I won't even tender them as evidence at all.

JUDGE MALL: Any further questions?

ADV MPSHE: Yes, Mr Chairperson, just one moment, please. You testified that there were no head injuries to the deceased?

MR VAN EYCK: Yes, that is correct.

ADV MPSHE: Are you assuming that there were not head wounds or did you actually see that there were no wounds and no injuries?

MR VAN EYCK: Are we talking after the time the deceased had been removed from the tree? He had no wounds to his head at that stage. I saw that.

ADV MPSHE: How far was the deceased's head from the ground when the fire was made?

MR VAN EYCK: Approximately one metre.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY ADV MPSHE

JUDGE WILSON: Mr Van Eyck, do I understand you correctly when you say that you had nothing to do with the murder?

MR VAN EYCK: Yes, that is correct. I had no firearm with me on that day.

JUDGE WILSON: And you did not know that the other two would shoot the deceased?

MR VAN EYCK: No, as I said in my testimony, I was actually disappointed that he had been shot. I had not foreseen it at all. It seemed to be a defeat, as far as I am concerned.

JUDGE WILSON: And you did not assist in the shooting at all?

MR VAN EYCK: No, not at all.

JUDGE WILSON: But you did not testify and the Judge therefore did not know that you had not assisted in the shooting?

MR VAN EYCK: That is correct. Had I given evidence during the trial the possibility would have been that I would not reveal the true facts as I have done so today, and I don't know what the Court's attitude would have been in that case. 

JUDGE WILSON: But must we now accept these as the true facts, and say that you did not commit murder?

MR VAN EYCK: That is correct, honourable Chairperson.

JUDGE WILSON: And therefore you cannot ask for amnesty because you did not commit the murder?

MR VAN EYCK: Well, I disposed of the body.

JUDGE WILSON: Yes, but that's something different. Thank you.

JUDGE NGOEPE: You can listen to the interpretation in Afrikaans. Actually, how did you dispose of this hand?

MR VAN EYCK: We discarded the hand whilst driving in the vehicle. We threw the hand out of the vehicle whilst we were driving.

JUDGE NGOEPE: What did you want, what information did you want from the deceased?

MR VAN EYCK: Chairperson, I wanted to determine the identity of the people involved in the robbery at Fidelity Guards.

JUDGE NGOEPE: And for what purpose?

MR VAN EYCK: That was to ascertain which organisations were involved in this onslaught.

JUDGE NGOEPE: And you did not get that information?

MR VAN EYCK: No, Chairperson, I did not obtain the information.

JUDGE NGOEPE: So to date you don't know which organisations were involved because you did not get that information?

MR VAN EYCK: That is correct. I believe though that it must have been one of the liberation movements, but which one I cannot say.

JUDGE NGOEPE: And because the deceased did not give the information you wanted, to this day you don't know whether he was connected with any of the so-called liberation movements?

MR VAN EYCK: Chairperson, as I have already testified, Mr Gerber informed me that the man had been a member or a supporter of the PAC and I had no reason to doubt that.

JUDGE NGOEPE: Didn't Mr Gerber in your presence, question the deceased as to whether the deceased was a member of any such organisations?

MR VAN EYCK: That is correct. During the interrogation it was put to him or he was asked whether he was a member of that organisation or any organisation.

JUDGE NGOEPE: Did he admit that he was any such member or did he deny it?

MR VAN EYCK: I never heard him admitting it.

JUDGE NGOEPE: Thank you.

MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Van Eyck, you have given evidence about the Police having been involved in the selling of AK-47s to the Mala Gang. Is that correct?

MR VAN EYCK: Honourable Chairperson, they were not involved. All that I said in my evidence was that Brig Daantjie van Wyk had made enquiries at police headquarters and also at John Vorster Square. He wanted to obtain funds to buy these firearms but I doubt very much whether he obtained these funds.

MS KHAMPEPE: According to your information, where would he have bought the firearms, from where would he have bought the firearms?

MR VAN EYCK: He would haved used an informer to buy these firearms in Soweto.

MS KHAMPEPE: Now what period are we talking of here; are you talking about the period early 1991 or prior to 1991?

MR VAN EYCK: Honourable Chairperson, it would have been during the first couple of months of 1991, between January and approximately March.

MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Van Eyck, AK-47s, were they available to the members of the community and also could be bought from the Police from the members of the community in Soweto?

MR VAN EYCK: Chairperson, they were not freely available but if you had the right contacts you - the right contacts in Black areas you could then obtain these weapons.

MS KHAMPEPE: Now who in Black areas were known to sell or at least to have possession of such arms?

MS KHAMPEPE: Honourable Chairperson, as far as I know these weapons were only available amongst the people who smuggled them into the country and the only way in which you would be able to obtain them would be by means of an informer.

MS KHAMPEPE: But they were available to people who wanted to have them?

MR VAN EYCK: Honourable Chairperson, I believe that if you tried hard enough and you had the right contacts you could have obtained them, but it certainly was no easy task.

MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Van Eyck, when did you become aware of the onslaught by the PAC and the ANC against their financial institutions and the country as a whole, as you have given evidence?

MR VAN EYCK: Honourable Chairperson, I was aware of this onslaught since the time I had undergone training in the combating of terrorism.

MS KHAMPEPE: And when was that, Mr Van Eyck? The date?

MR VAN EYCK: This was during 1973, Chairperson. From that period onwards, I was aware of the onslaught against the country.

MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Van Eyck how many Blacks were employed by the Fidelity Guards company where you were working at Hillbrow?

MR VAN EYCK: I think approximately 100 people.

MS KHAMPEPE: And according to the information you received from the various sources of informers, how many of those people were members of both the ANC and the PAC?

MR VAN EYCK: Honourable Chairperson, I would estimate about half.

MS KHAMPEPE: Thank you, Mr Van Eyck.

JUDGE MALL: Mr Prinsloo, have you any questions to ask of this witness?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY ADV PRINSLOO: As it pleases, Mr Chairperson. Mr Van Eyck, on your own version which you have submitted to the Commission, on your version you would have been guilty of murder as an accessory after the fact?

MR VAN EYCK: That is correct.

ADV PRINSLOO: And did you reconcile yourself with the death of the deceased?

MR VAN EYCK: Yes, that is correct.

ADV PRINSLOO: You also took no steps to prevent Gerber or Oosthuisen killing the deceased?

MR VAN EYCK: No, I didn't.

ADV PRINSLOO: And on that basis you would also have been an accomplice to the murder of the deceased?

MR VAN EYCK: That is correct.

ADV PRINSLOO: Mr Van Eyck, are you aware that during the so-called onslaught against the country, use was made of all sections of the community to combat this onslaught and attacks by terrorists?

MR VAN EYCK: Yes, that is correct. I may mention that in 1986 I performed border duty at Cumberland, that is in the district of Thabazimbi, and part of my duties was to perform farm patrols and to inform the farmers in respect of the combating of terrorism, I had to get their co-operation in this.

MR VAN EYCK: Mr Van Eyck, I just want to quote something to you and ask you whether you are familiar with this. It is from a statement of the Committee of the AfricanNational Congress, dated 17th August 1988, Lusaka, Zambia. I would like to quote this to you -

&#9;&#9;" ... when he warned that the revolutionary effort had reached an extremely dangerous phase and that the Permanent Force and the present number of national servicemen could no longer guarantee the protection of the White population. It has therefore become imperative that each of us should be involved in one way or another in the process of countering the onslaught, he said".

Are you aware of that?

MR VAN EYCK: That is correct. An appeal was made on various occasions to the entire population to assist in combating this onslaught.

ADV PRINSLOO: A further quote from the same statement- "... one of the principal tasks of the commandos and every member is instructed to keep an eye on local events. Farmers and businessmen are expected to monitor their Black employees and report any out-of-the-way occurrences. Commandos, and also the Police and regular SADF units at roadblocks, patrol areas in which guerillas are expected to be operating and carry out pacification operations to suppress the resistance in Black townships and settlements. Many of the men mobilised for commando service are farmers, a section of the population which has been targeted for special attention by the SADF. Gen Viljoen has stated that residents of rural areas should be involved in military activities 365 days a year and that agriculture has to be seen as the part of the State's total strategy. Farmers are expected to make political as well as a military contribution."

Was that your experience as well?

MR VAN EYCK: That is correct, yes, Chairperson.

ADV PRINSLOO: And as far as the business sector was concerned, what was their involvement? How did you regard them?

MR VAN EYCK: Chairperson, an appeal was made to the entire community to assist and that includes all members of the public.

ADV PRINSLOO: Mr Van Eyck, are you familiar with the siege which took place at Silverton when a siege was held to a bank by members of the ANC? They were later convicted. These were James Silole, Marcus Motsaung, Telem Choradie. They were executed on the 9th of June 1983, as a result of that.

MR VAN EYCK: Yes, I am aware of this act.

ADV PRINSLOO: Just a moment, Chairperson. I would also like to refer you to a statement delivered by Comrade President O R Tambo, on 16th of December 1986 and I quote from that statement, which reads as follows:

&#9;&#9;"It is within this context I now present you, our glorious People's Army with your battle orders of the day. I order train, arm and lead our people into battle, defend our people in town and countryside, sever the enemy's lines of communication and power, disperse and immobilise the enemy forces, destroy the enemy's economic resources. Attack enemy on all fronts and annihilate his forces. Make people's war flourish in all its dimensions in every part of our country."

Were you at all aware of these aspects, did you have first-hand experience of these?

MR VAN EYCK: Chairperson, as I have already said, it was known that there was this total onslaught. 

ADV PRINSLOO: What I have just read to you, was it your impression that each and every member of the community saw himself as an agent of the State and was dutybound to fight against this onslaught?

MR VAN EYCK: Yes, it was expected of each and every member of the public to become involved in the combating of this onslaught.

ADV PRINSLOO: Thank you, Chairperson, no further questions.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY ADV PRINSLOO

JUDGE MALL: Mrs Van der Walt, do you wish to re-examine your witness?

MEV VAN DER WALT: No, Chairperson.

NO RE-EXAMINATION BY MRS VAN DER WALT

JUDGE MALL: Thank you. 

JUDGE NGOEPE: Can I just ask you about these so-called Silverton case referred to. I don't know whether you are able to remember whether, what these people were convicted of?

MR VAN EYCK: No, Chairperson, I don't know.

JUDGE NGOEPE: Because my recollection would be that they were not convicted of robbery.

MR VAN EYCK: Chairperson, I am not aware of the circumstances and what they were convicted of.

JUDGE NGOEPE: Thank you, Chairperson.

JUDGE NGOEPE: Mr Mpshe?

FURTHER CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR MPSHE: Thank you, Mr Chairperson. Mr Van Eyck, just to be fair to you. The contention made to you by my learned friend of the ANC pamphlet, is on a pamphlet dated the 7th of August 1988, and the one allegedly made by Mr Tambo is dated 1986. Will you agree with me that all these were said before the unbanning of political organisations?

MR VAN EYCK: That is correct, Chairperson, that is before these organisations were unbanned.

ADV MPSHE: Do you know whether after 1990 or even during 1990 itself, no such provocative statements were issued by any political organisation?

MR VAN EYCK: Not that I am aware of. Not that I am aware of, Chairperson.

ADV DE JAGER: Did you hear about the logo "one settler, one bullet"; when was that issued, at what point?

MR VAN EYCK: Yes, there were slogans like that going around, I remember that.

JUDGE MALL: Very well, you may stand down.

MR VAN EYCK: Thank you.

WITNESS EXCUSED

JUDGE MALL: Do you wish to call any other witnesses?

MEV VAN DER WALT: If you would just give me a moment. Chairperson, I would like to ask for a short adjournment. I would just like to reconsider my position before I close the applicant's case, if you will perhaps grant me a short adjournment.

JUDGE MALL: Adjournment granted.

MRS VAN DER WALT: Thank you very much.

COMMISSION ADJOURNS

ON RESUMPTION:

MRS VAN DER WALT: I would, if you would give me the opportunity I would like to attempt to either place documentation before the Commission or to call a witness who will answer some of these questions. If you would perhaps grant me an adjournment until tomorrow, I will give you the assurance that we will be prepared to argue the case tomorrow and we will not waste any further time tomorrow, if you will grant me this indulgence.

JUDGE MALL: Mr Mpshe, will you be inconvenienced if this matter is stood down until tomorrow morning?

ADV MPSHE: Mr Chairman, I will not be inconvenienced.

JUDGE MALL: Mrs Van der Walt, your application for an adjournment has been considered and I am prepared to grant you the indulgence you ask.

MRS VAN DER WALT: Thank you, Mr Chairperson.

JUDGE MALL: The hearing is adjourned until tomorrow morning, 10 o'clock tomorrow morning.

COMMISSION ADJOURNS

