MR BOOYENS: Sorry Mr Chairman I apologise, in fact I think I jumped the gun. The Committee hadn't indicated whether they finished with the previous witness.

CHAIRPERSON: Finished.

MR BOOYENS: I call Mr Lotz, page 10 to 19.

GERHARD LOTZ: (sworn states)

MR BOOYENS: May I ask for an amendment Mr Chairman, paragraph 13, right at the top of the page the 1(a):

Thank you Sir.

Mr Lotz, check the amnesty application before you. On page 10, is there anything else you want to add?

MR LOTZ: No.

MR BOOYENS: Page 11?

MR LOTZ: No, Mr Chairperson.

MR BOOYENS: Page - when we arrive at page 12 at 9(a), is there anything you want to add there?

MR LOTZ: No, Mr Chairperson.

MR BOOYENS: What - in 1985 when this incident took place, what exactly was your function?

MR LOTZ: I was a field worker at the security branch Mr Chairperson.

MR BOOYENS: With the rank of?

MR LOTZ: Warrant Officer.

MR BOOYENS: What was your field work, what did it ...

MR LOTZ: I was - I had to identify and find activists.

MR BOOYENS: And where did you operate, in other words where did you work?

MR LOTZ: From Port Elizabeth but in the whole Eastern Cape Region or division as it was known at that time.

MR BOOYENS: Can you tell us the situation at grassroots level as you've experienced it?

MR LOTZ: Mr Chairperson, if I could give some background about myself and certain incidents that influenced my life. After I matriculated I went directly to the police force and after six months of training I was in count-insurgence where I was at the station for a month.

From there I went to Ovambuland when I was 19 years old and for the first time I encountered terrorism. After that I returned ...[intervention]

MR BOOYENS: Not to go into too much detail, if you talk about terrorism in Ovambuland, what do you mean?

MR LOTZ: At that time when the police were also sent to the border because of SWAPO and the liberation of South Africa ...

MR BOOYENS: And what was your involvement there, what did you do? Did you do normal police work?

MR LOTZ: No, we made war there, to put it that way.

MR BOOYENS: And in this war? Can you briefly state, were you involved in any attacks?

MR LOTZ: During the first time when I was there I was involved in skirmishes and after that I returned to normal police station work. And during 1981 I went to Koevoet and from there, I worked from there and we were involved with skirmishes with terrorists.

Just to add, during that time, because of problems at home at my parent's home, I returned to Port Elizabeth and my service period was there.

MR BOOYENS: You say in paragraph, the 2nd paragraph on page 12:

Can you just tell us some details so we can get some understanding of this.

MR LOTZ: I would just like to go a step backwards Mr Chairperson. In 1983 I was on a course in Pretoria, it was the same time when the Church Street bomb exploded. The same day that this happened I was at the scene and it made a gruesome impression on me because of the manner in which people were killed.

One one side I put it this way but at that stage, if one could say the liberation fighters, the ANC, I hated them because of what they did to us. And this incident up to now - because we saw limbs lying all over and the circumstances of that incident would stay with me for the rest of my life.

Afterwards we were in Port Elizabeth itself in several skirmishes with terrorists in Motherwell, Veëplaas, New Brighton, where people were killed Mr Chairperson.

MR BOOYENS: Can you paint a picture for the Commission from the eyes of a police person, the situation at grassroots level as you experienced it in '84?

MR LOTZ: During that time there were consumer boycotts, school boycotts, and those actions were the order of the day. The fact that in the eyes of those organisations that human lives meant nothing. I speak under correction, I approximately encountered 120 necklace murders just in Port Elizabeth.

And day and night you would see a vehicle burnt or smoke, you would think there's another person who was necklaced. How they attacked us with petrol bombs, the shooting incidents that happened, I think the normal person on the street would never understand the circumstances under which we lived at that time.

There were stages where the normal police could not go into the townships where members of the security branch went in to do their work during that time Mr Chairperson.

MR BOOYENS: You've mentioned Port Elizabeth and earlier you said you worked in the whole Eastern Cape and you painted a picture in the rural areas for us.

MR LOTZ: We were - at several times we went to Cradock where there was unrest and we helped to re-establish and we helped to re-establish order so that normal people who were not part of the political activities, that they could carry on with a normal life in those.

In those instances we were shot at and we were thrown with stones, general policing came to a stop.

MR BOOYENS: You've mentioned Cradock, were you ever at any other places? Just now just let's talk about strikes and throwing of stones.

MR LOTZ: We were at Fort Beaufort, Grahamstown it was ...[indistinct] for our division.

MR BOOYENS: If you have to guess today, in how many incidents were you involved where there was throwing of stones, petrol bombs or shooting at you, do you know?

MR LOTZ: It's difficult to say because after some time you stop counting because it was just about a daily occurence. I cannot say how many times it happened, I can really not say.

MR BOOYENS: Give us some more detail, you say you were at the terrorist tracking desk.

MR LOTZ: That's correct.

MR BOOYENS: What was your job there?

MR LOTZ: My primary duties was the identification of persons who left the Republic of South Africa to receive military training abraod and we had to identify people who had military training and we returned to the RSA to come and make war. That's how I saw it. And then to eliminate them, or not to eliminate ...

MR BOOYENS: You've mentioned Cradock. Any of the deceased, did you see them? Did you know them by seeing them personnaly?

MR LOTZ: Mr Chairperson, I've seen during the times at Cradock, I speak under correction, when they were question I cannot say with 100% surety who, some of the decease in this matter, I cannot state pertinently who or who not.

MR BOOYENS: I did not mention questioning, who of them did you see?

MR LOTZ: Ten to one it's Mr Goniwe and Mr Calata and Mkhonto.

MR BOOYENS: You apply, on page 12, 13, under paragraph 9(a) you set forward the details, is that correct?

MR LOTZ: That's correct Mr Chairperson.

MR BOOYENS: Let's get to the facts of this matter, how did you become involved?

MR LOTZ: Mr Chairperson, at some stage before the 27th, I do not remember the precise date, Captain van Zyl approached me to ask me or instructed me to become involved in an operation to eliminate persons.

MR BOOYENS: What was said to you in this instruction, who, what?

MR LOTZ: The whole operation would be primarily revolving around Mr Goniwe and his cohorts and people who were actively involved with him.

MR BOOYENS: Mr Goniwe's name was mentioned, do you remember if other names were mentioned?

MR LOTZ: Mr Chairperson, other person's names were mentioned, amongst others the deceased. I speak under correction to say if the time when Mr Mhlawuli's name was also mentioned - I cannot say exactly when this happened.

MR BOOYENS: The name of Mhlawuli, did you hear this before the 27th or on the 27th, what is your position on that?

MR LOTZ: I would believe that it was on the 27th Mr Chairperson, that he - if I can put it, the 27th Captain van Zyl confirmed to me the four persons or the deceased and I think that's where it ended, where my involvement would have ended.

MR BOOYENS: This position - after you received the instruction, were you aware who was with you, involved in this operation?

MR LOTZ: Yes, Captain van Zyl did tell me that Taylor would also be involved in this operation. That was the only persons that I knew of that would be involved in this operation. I believed and I assumed that a senior of Captain van Zyl would have given him the instruction. Who the person was I would not know.

MR BOOYENS: Did you ask?

MR LOTZ: Mr Chairperson no. I don't think during such instructions or operations you ask those type of questions, who, what where and when or who decides and those types of questions, you didn't do that.

MR BOOYENS: Mr Lotz, from the instance when Mr van Zyl gave the instruction, in the time before the 27th to the 27th, what if any did you do to prepare for this operation?

MR LOTZ: Because of my work circumstances which was the identification of persons who left the country Mr Goniwe's name came to the fore, Mr Calata's name, Mr Mkhonto's name and I knew of this.

MR BOOYENS: You say - in the investigation of people who left the country you mentioned these three names, just explain.

MR LOTZ: This was around the recruitment of these people, recruitment of people to leave the country that was done by these three persons.

MR BOOYENS: The nature of this information, how did you get it?

MR LOTZ: Mr Chairperson, if the persons left the country they usually applied for political asylum in neighbouring countries, Botswana, and then we received information again as to which country it would be.

And it happened oftern that some of these persons who wanted to leave the country were arrested before they could leave the country and that questioning that was given to them, here from their names came.

MR BOOYENS: In this concern, was this before the instruction from Captain van Zyl or afterwards, do you know?

MR LOTZ: It was before the instruction.

MR BOOYENS: During this time, after you had received the instruction, before were eliminated, what did you do then?

MR LOTZ: Primarily, and I can mention that I'm talking under correction, it happened a long time ago, about 2400 refugess were in the Eastern Cape. I looked at the refugees from Cradock and the possible involvement in Port Elizabeth and the environment from where people skipped the country from there and tried to determine whether some of the names which were put forward during disucussions with van Zyl, whether that was not mentioned.

MR BOOYENS: You are referring to names coming from Captain van Zyl, how many names had come from van Zyl?

MR LOTZ: Mr Chairman, I'm talkging under corerction but I think there were six names. I think Makahula, Madora Jacobs and I think there was also another name, I can't remember that. It was perhaps Melelo Goniwe, but I can't remember exactly.

MR BOOYENS: Did you obtain any information from those files?

MR LOTZ: From these files Sikelu came to the fore and it was a possible indication, it could have been Mhlawuli, I couldn't confirm that. During that time I spoke to people right across the country who did they same type of work, who did this type of work.

CHAIRPERSON: How many people around the country would you have consulted?

MR LOTZ: I think I spoke to people from the Western Cape, I spoke to people in Pretoria, I spoke to people in Ladybrand. I'm speaking under correction, I can't remember exactly whom but I tried to establish whether they couldn't assist me in identifying those people but we couldn't get anymore information.

CHAIRPERSON: Even from Oudsthoorn?

MR LOTZ: I'm not sure, there was nobody I knew in Oudtshoorn. If I can explain, during those times we held conferences regarding the identification of refugees and the poeple I met during those conferences I contacted them because I knew them. I don't think there was anybody at Oudtshoorn at that stage.

MR BOOYENS: You mentioned the Sikelu, and what happened then? You obtained information, what did you do with this information?

MR LOTZ: I handed this information to Captain van Zyl. It was not confirmed information but the information I did obtain was handed to him.

MR BOOYENS: We've heard from the previous witness about confirmed and unconfirmed information, please explain to us what the difference is.

MR LOTZ: Mr Chairman, unconfirmed - to have confirmed information, that is a fact, unconfirmed information I would not say is a fact, if I can put it like that. If I had more than one source of information who supported one another, I would say that that was confirmed information. The information came from two various sources.

MR BOOYENS: And how ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: And that would be a fact? If two people told you the same thing, that would be a fact?

MR LOTZ: No, Mr Chairman, not two people, I said two sources. A person and perhaps something technical. I wouldn't say two, actually I'm saying more than one. In some instances there were informers who provided facts and somebody else would come and they confirmed that, that was called confirmed information.

MR BOOYENS: And if you refer to technical, do you mean if you tapped the telephones and those types of things?

MR LOTZ: That is correct Mr Chairman.

MR BOOYENS: You said this information was conveyed to van Zyl, how did you do that?

MR LOTZ: I contacted him personally.

MR BOOYENS: No, but I mean, did you write reports to him, did you convey it to him orally?

MR LOTZ: I conveyed it to him orally.

MR BOOYENS: Did you and Mr Taylor also talk to one another at this stage?

MR LOTZ: Yes, Mr Chairman.

MR BOOYENS: Specifically with reference to this case and the information, did you discuss that?

MR LOTZ: Yes, that is correct Mr Chairman.

MR BOOYENS: What was the eventual purpose of this information gathering exercise during this period between van Zyl gave you the instruction and the eventual elimination? Why did you gather information?

MR LOTZ: For me, Mr Chairman, it was to do research about these people, their movements, to estblish a pattern, to see whether we could establish a pattern from their various movements to get this operation going and to handle it accordingly.

MR BOOYENS: In other words it was about how you would execute the elimination, is that what you're trying to tell us?

MR LOTZ: That is correct Mr Chairman, depending on the information we would obtain. One can speculate this way or that way but we could say: "If this would happen you could do that", or otherwise.

MR BOOYENS: In other words, did you decide - you were interested in their movements and the purpose was to determine how they moved so that you could get hold of them in one or other way?

MR LOTZ: That is correct, yes.

MR BOOYENS: And the method you used, how would that be done?

MR LOTZ: We would have made it appear to be a vigilante attack. During that time there was a fight between the UDF and AZAPO, where these people fought against one another, they had a vendetta against one another. They attacked people, the killed people, they burnt people and various methods were used at various times.

But primarily they attacked people with sharp objects and killed them afterwards, and sometimes, while the people was still alive, to burn them.

MR BOOYENS: The burning of bodies, was that a certain significant aspect?

MR LOTZ: Yes, that was the way they acted.

MR BOOYENS: Do you want to add anything to what happened before the 27th, do you want to add anything which you've not said before?

MR LOTZ: Mr Chairman, I myself personally did gather much more information, it came primarily from Lieutenant Taylor. The information I had about th recruitment of these people, I provided that information.

MR BOOYENS: Tell us, what happened then on the 27th?

MR LOTZ: I'm talking under correction, as far as I can remember what happened that day, Captain van Zyl came to me, he confirmed that this operation would take place that evening, we would execute the operation.

And he confirmed that the operation should appear like a vigilante attack and we had to prepare ourselves. That entailed that we had to take knives with us to kill those poeple.

MR BOOYENS: You expected to kill a person or persons with a knife?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR BOOYENS: Good, what were your instructions?

MR LOTZ: At 5 o'clock that afternoon we had to gather at Algoa Park.

MR BOOYENS: Who were: "we"?

MR LOTZ: It was Captain van Zyl, myself and Taylor.

MR BOOYENS: Go on.

MR LOTZ: After we had gathered there, I and Lieutenant Taylor left in his vehicle, van Zyl drove his own vehicle. We drove in the direction of Olifantskop Pass when we came to a suitable place.

That is from where we could watch the traffic coming from Port Elizabeth on it's way to Cradock.

MR BOOYENS: You mentioned knives, did you have a sharp object with you?

MR LOTZ: Yes, I did.

MR BOOYENS: What?

MR LOTZ: It was an old bayonet I had. I brought that from Ovambuland.

MR BOOYENS: And then when you came to Olifants Pass, did you stop there?

MR LOTZ: That is correct, yes. We stopped one behind the other and while we were waiting, that was around about - till 11 o'clock that night, I saw a vehicle passing.

At that stage I was standing outside the vehicle together with a guard who was sitting in the vehicle and on the opposite side of the road - I went to the opposite side of the road without the approaching vehicles being able to see me.

MR BOOYENS: Did you know for which you were looking out?

MR LOTZ: We were waiting for a Honda Ballade.

MR BOOYENS: Yes, the vehicle passed you then, what happened?

MR LOTZ: Then I went back and reported it to van Zyl and Taylor. I told them, and then we left and we followed that vehicle. I'm talking under correction about the distance, it could have been 8 - 10 kilometres, I'm not sure.

And we followed this vehicle till we saw there was no traffic from either side. We put a blue light on our vehicle and we pulled that vehicle off the road and we told them that we were going to arrest them.

MR BOOYENS: You said: "us", who were the people who put up the blue light?

MR LOTZ: It was me and Taylor.

MR BOOYENS: It was you and Taylor who put up the blue light?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR BOOYENS: And then? You told the people you were arresting them?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR BOOYENS: Did you recognise any of these people?

MR LOTZ: I immediately recognised Mr Goniwe and the other two people coming from Cradock. I recognised - we had a description of Mr Mhlawuli and I ascertain that it was Mr Mhlawuli, I recognised him. I've see a photograph of that person which was in Captain van Zyl's file.

MR BOOYENS: What did you do then?

MR LOTZ: Two persons were put into van Zyl's vehicle, they were handcuffed, another one was put in Taylor's vehicle and the other one we asked to remain behind in the Honda.

We turned around and drove back to Port Elizabeth. I drove the Honda Ballade till we came near Oliphantskop Pass where there was a certain point on the mountain. We stopped there, we checked the handcuffs to see whether everything was in order, then I took number plates from van Zyl's car and put it on our car.

MR BOOYENS: Why were these number plates there? Why did you attach new number plates?

MR LOTZ: Mr Chairman, to use other number plates was to hide the identity of the car because we were returning with this vehicle to Port Elizabeth.

MR BOOYENS: How did you attach these number plates?

MR LOTZ: I'm talking under correction, but I think I just used elastic to fix it over the other number plates.

MR BOOYENS: You checked the cuffs, you attached the false number plates?

MR LOTZ: And then we left on our way for Port Elizabeth. When we came to the St George's turnoff we went to the beach and parked in the bushes. The person in my vehicle, I handed him to Taylor. He was still handcuffed.

I think van Zyl did the same. I and Captain van Zyl then left in the Honda and his own vehicle and we went near the racing course. Captain van Zyl took petrol from his vehicle and I cut the petrol pipe from the Honda and I set the vehicle alight.

MR BOOYENS: You said Mr van Zyl took petrol from his vehicle, you cut off the petrol pipe, what happened to the petrol being in van Zyl's vehicle?

MR LOTZ: We threw that feul over the vehicle and then we set it alight.

MR BOOYENS: After you set the vehicle alight, what did you do then?

MR LOTZ: We departed from there and returned to Lieutenant Taylor. We told him that we had set this vehicle alight. Captain van Zyl ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Where was Taylor when you told him that, that you had set the car alight?

MR LOTZ: I think he was standing outside his own vehicle after we've come back.

CHAIRPERSON: And the people you people had in custody, where were they?

MR LOTZ: They were inside the vehicle.

ADV POTGIETER: When you then arrived there, Taylor was standing outside the vehicle?

MR LOTZ: No, only when we arrived there he got out of the vehicle, when we arrived there he got out of the vehicle and the other person remained sitting in the car.

MR BOOYENS: You and Mr van Zyl arrived there, what happened then?

MR LOTZ: I spoke to Taylor, I think van Zyl could have been there, I'm talking under correction. Captain van Zyl then took one of these detainees from the car and put him into his car. At that stage I was not sure what the purpose of all this was because he left.

It was strange - I've spoken to Taylor about that, I think at that stage we were still standing outside the vehicle and the detainees were in the vehicle, but he could not give me a clear answer about why van Zyl had left.

MR BOOYENS: And Mr van Zyl did not give you an explanation at that stage?

MR LOTZ: No.

MR BOOYENS: He left with that person, what did you do in the meanwhile, you and Taylor?

MR LOTZ: We were next to the vehicle all the time, we were speaking to these people. The persons, according to me, were not uncomfortable. I don't think they suspected anything at that stage.

MR BOOYENS: How long did van Zyl stay away?

MR LOTZ: Mr Chairman, I can only guess that it happened a long time ago, it could have been an hour or an hour and a half, I can't say with certainty.

MR BOOYENS: When he came back, was he alone or was there anybody with him?

MR LOTZ: After he had returned two other people, Faku, Shepherd who was an Askari and Duka were in the vehicle ...[intervention]

ADV POTGIETER: I'm sorry, while van Zyl was not there, what were you doing, where were you?

MR LOTZ: I was standing with Lieutenant Taylor near the detainees.

ADV POTGIETER: Were you standing in the bushes?

MR LOTZ: We were standing there where we had parked the vehicles, there near St George's beach.

ADV POTGIETER: Were you standing there among the bushes?

MR LOTZ: That is correct, yes.

ADV POTGIETER: Outside the vehicle?

MR LOTZ: We could have been in the vehicle at a certain stage, we could have got out of the vehicle, it was a long time ago. To say that I'd been in the vehicle for a long time or standing outside is difficult to say now.

ADV POTGIETER: There were four people in the vehicle?

MR LOTZ: No, there were three people, one of them had left with van Zyl.

ADV POTGIETER: Why would they sit - where were they sitting in the vehicle?

MR LOTZ: All three of them in the rear seat.

ADV POTGIETER: ...[No English translation]

MR LOTZ: I could have been sitting in the vehicle, it was cold at that stage. I could have been standing outside, I'm not sure.

ADV POTGIETER: And Taylor?

MR LOTZ: The same, he could have been in the vehicle or standing outside. Inside or outside, I can't say 100% where he was at that stage.

ADV POTGIETER: And the people who were arrested?

MR LOTZ: They were in the vehicle.

ADV POTGIETER: The whole time?

MR LOTZ: All three inside the vehicle.

ADV POTGIETER: You can remember that distinctly?

MR LOTZ: Yes, I can remember that.

ADV POTGIETER: Thank you.

MR BOOYENS: You mentioned three people who came back with van Zyl, who were they? You said the one was an Askari, who were the others?

MR LOTZ: The other was Sergeant Faku who worked with me, I'm talking under correction, and Glen Kaduka. I think he worked with Lieutenant Taylor.

MR BOOYENS: These other three people who came back with van Zyl, were they attached to the security branch?

MR LOTZ: Yes, they were all members of the security branch. The Askari, I can't say he was a member of the security branch, he did work with us.

MR BOOYENS: They were associated with the security branch.

MR LOTZ: That's correct.

MR BOOYENS: What happened then?

MR LOTZ: Captain van Zyl then took another person from the vehicle. One of the black members left together with him. If I can come back to something, after they had arrived there Captain van Zyl told Taylor about the person who tried to escape and that something had gone wrong and he had to shoot the person and he decided then to go and fetch the black members.

I can only mention that that afternoon before we had left he mentioned that there were black members on stand-by if something would possibly go wrong.

MR BOOYENS: While we are talking about people who were there, at that stage there were six people of the security branch of Port Elizabeth, was there anybody else involved in this operation, physically present when this operation took part besides the six of you?

MR LOTZ: No, no other people.

MR BOOYENS: Do you know Eric Winter, the Commanding Officer at Cradock?

MR LOTZ: I know him.

MR BOOYENS: Did you see him at any stage that evening?

MR LOTZ: No, not at all.

MR BOOYENS: Mr van Zyl - and you said he and some of the black members left with another deceased.

MR LOTZ: Please excuse me I just want to mention here and I'm talking under correction once again, during this time Captain van Zyl, when he returned, he explained to us that he would take these persons away one by one and then would eliminate them and this is why he had taken the first person away. But because of the problems which had developed, he decided to involve the black members.

MR BOOYENS: In this offence?

MR LOTZ: In this offence. He also said, if it depended on him he did not want myself and Taylor to be involved in the elimination, he wanted to do that himself.

MR BOOYENS: Mr van Zyl then left with some of the black members, do you know how many?

MR LOTZ: I'm talking under correction, I'm not certain, I think it was Faku and the Askari who could have gone with him. I'm not sure who went with him.

MR BOOYENS: They stay away for a while and then came back?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR BOOYENS: And the person whom they had taken away, was he not with them anymore?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR BOOYENS: Mr Chairman, I see it's nearly a quarter to, this may be an appropriate time - quarter past.

CHAIRPERSON: How long are you going to be still?

MR BOOYENS: I think we're looking at about another 15, maybe 20 minutes or so Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Well do so, we'll finish his evidence in chief.

MR BOOYENS: Okay.

Mr van Zyl then returned?

MR LOTZ: That is correct, I ...[intervention]

MR BOOYENS: Pardon?

MR LOTZ: No, you can go ahead.

MR BOOYENS: What happened then?

MR LOTZ: I then took one of the persons out of the vehicle while he was still cuffed and made him walk ahead of me. I had a steel spring with me which I brough along. While the person walked ahead of me I hit him on the back of the head with the spring after which he appeared to be unconscious or dead, he wasn't moving.

MR BOOYENS: This steel spring, was it a flat spring?

MR LOTZ: No, it was a round spiral spring.

MR BOOYENS: Of thick metal?

MR LOTZ: Approximately as thick as a writing pen, that would have been the thickness of every spiral.

MR BOOYENS: Approximately 5mm?

MR LOTZ: Approximately.

MR BOOYENS: And how long was this spring?

MR LOTZ: I estimate about 50 to 70cm.

MR BOOYENS: And you then hit the man, did he fall?

MR LOTZ: Yes, he fell to the ground, as I said, unconscious.

CHAIRPERSON: Where did you get this spring from?

MR LOTZ: I think I brought it along with me from my home.

ADV BOSMAN: Mr Lotz, might I interrupt? Was any sign given to you that it was now your turn or did you spontaneously get up and take the person? I don't understand.

MR LOTZ: Well, I'm speaking under correction. Captain van Zyl may have instructed me, I would almost say that he would have said: "It's your turn" but it wasn't exactly that, it would have been something similar upon which I reacted.

ADV BOSMAN: Before there was any agreement, final agreement on how things would take place ...[intervention]

MR LOTZ: I don't understand that aspect.

ADV BOSMAN: Captain van Zyl told you that he wanted to take the persons individually, one by one.

MR LOTZ: That was after he returned and the person had escaped, he left that plan.

ADV BOSMAN: Did he at that stage indicate to you that there should be a positive participation from your side?

MR LOTZ: That's correct, that's how I interpreted it and that's why I went ahead.

ADV POTGIETER: WHy did you bring the spring along?

MR LOTZ: To knock the person unconscious first before he would be stabbed with a knife.

ADV POTGIETER: But you would not have participated in the activities.

MR LOTZ: Well, at that stage I did not know that van Zyl wanted to eliminate the individuals alone. Before we seperated I would have participate that's why I brought along the knife.

ADV POTGIETER: Whose idea was it to knock the person unconscious? Where does that come from?

MR LOTZ: I'm speaking under correction, I'm sure they said to bring along a baton or something like that. I didn't have a baton and that is why I brought along this steel spring, I thought it would be an appropriate weapon with which to knock a person unconscious.

ADV POTGIETER: Did they say why you had to bring a baton along?

MR LOTZ: In order to knock the person unconscious.

ADV POTGIETER: So you were told?

MR LOTZ: Yes.

ADV POTGIETER: By whom?

MR LOTZ: I think it was Captain van Zyl but I'm speaking under corretion.

ADV POTGIETER: So he told you to bring along a baton with which to hit the person unconcscious, what would you do then?

MR LOTZ: And after that they would be stabbed with knives and burnt with petrol.

ADV POTGIETER: So all those things were agreed upon before the time?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

ADV POTGIETER: And that is why you brought along the spring?

MR LOTZ: That's correct.

ADV POTGIETER: And what did Taylor do? What did he bring?

MR LOTZ: I don't think he brought anything along.

ADV POTGIETER: Why not?

MR LOTZ: I don't know.

ADV POTGIETER: Wasn't he also told to bring along a baton to knock someone unconcscious with?

MR LOTZ: It might have been so but I don't know why he didn't bring anything along.

ADV POTGIETER: When he took the spring from you, didn't you ask him: "Well, where's your weapon"?

MR LOTZ: No, I didn't.

MR BOOYENS: Just in terms of the questions which Mr Potgieter just asked you, at the stage when you received your instructions from Mr van Zyl, did you know that the black members would be participating or did you expect to do the stabbing alone?

MR LOTZ: No, I expected to undertake this alone or at least I believed that I would.

MR BOOYENS: I know that we're jumping ahead again but we are now at the point where you hit the person, he fell down, he was either unconscious or dead.

MR LOTZ: That's correct.

MR BOOYENS: What happened then?

MR LOTZ: The black members then stabbed the person with knives, it was with their own knives. On thing that I can recall is that Sergeant Kaduka didn't take part in the stabbing and why that was I don't know but he did not participate but the other two did.

MR BOOYENS: Did you also stab?

MR LOTZ: No, I did not.

MR BOOYENS: Then, when you were finished there?

MR LOTZ: In the time that I had taken the person out of the vehicle I did not know that Lieutenant Taylor had followed me, and after I had hit the person and saw that the black members had stabbed him I turned around and saw Lieutenant Taylor diagonally behind me.

And by nature of the fact, he obviously must have been watching what had been happening and what I'd done, upon which he took the spring and walked back to the vehicle upon which he removed the other person from the vehicle and I watched from a distance how he hit the person with the spring. I'm speaking under correction, I don't know if it was on the head or on the neck.

MR BOOYENS: On his upper body in either case?

MR LOTZ: Yes. He hit him and then I turned around, walked back to the vehicle. I did not see which members stabbed the second person.

MR BOOYENS: Very well. What was done after that?

MR LOTZ: To be honest, my recollection of that is extremely vague. I know that the persons were then set alight and the evidence which I have heard regarding what happened. I cannot remember, I think it happened -I think at that stage I entered a state of shock, to put it that way. Lieutenant Taylor left a short while after that.

MR BOOYENS: And Mr van Zyl ...[intervention]

MR LOTZ: The black members also left and there were radio conversations and that kind of thing but exactly what happened there is extremely vague.

I assume that this entire episode was quick a shock for me. It was an extremely unpleasant order which I carried out. I ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Why didn't you go and fetch the remaining person in the motor vehicle and do the same to him as you did to the one before?

MR LOTZ: Chairperson, to put it this way. In order to establish a connection between the persons, that the one wouldn't turn around and say: "Well, those two people murdered these persons", for that reason everyone was involved and everyone participated in the incident.

CHAIRPERSON: So it was a type of culture that had developed amongst the security policemen who indulged in this type of activity?

MR LOTZ: I wouldn't call it a culture, I just think that it was done in order to protect everyone involved, that one person couldn't say: "Oh, but I never participated, I wasn't there, I wasn't involved", possibly later turn around and tell.

ADV POTGIETER: No-one made it compulsory for you to do it. MR LOTZ: From the very beginning the order was issued I accepted that I would be participating in the elimination of the persons involved.

ADV POTGIETER: But you were not obliged to do what you said you have done at the scene.

MR LOTZ: I don't understand your question, obliged to do what?

ADV POTGIETER: To take the person, to hit him with a steel spring until he was dead or unconscious.

MR LOTZ: I was not compelled but I did it.

ADV POTGIETER: So you took a decision.

MR LOTZ: Yes, because it was part of my orders to eliminate the person and that's why.

ADV POTGIETER: But at the scene, did anybody tell you: "Lotz this is enough, kill him"?

MR LOTZ: No. Chairperson, to take the life of another is not just the question of doing it.

ADV POTGIETER: That's my question, you told us it was so difficult and that you entered a state of shock and that you are vague regarding what happened and that's why I'm asking you, did someone tell you: "Do it", or did you take the decision yourself to eliminate the man?

MR LOTZ: As I've said before, I imagine that Captain van Zyl, after he returned, said that I should take that person and I did it.

ADV POTGIETER: You imagine?

MR LOTZ: No, I imagine that he gave me the order to take that person.

MR BOOYENS: I still don't understand what you're imagining, are you imagining that there was an order or what the content of the order was? I still don't understand.

MR LOTZ: After Captain van Zyl had returned he said: "Go, take the person and eliminate him". Those were not his express words but it was something in that line.

MR BOOYENS: Okay. You were telling us that you are very vague regarding what happened after that, the burning of the bodies and so forth. You were telling us how you felt about it, could you expand or elaborate?

Let me put it this way, I think you were telling the Chairperson, that it wasn't easy to commit such an act, and that you entered a state of shock and then the - one of the panel members asked you a question. Can you remember what you were going to say after that?

MR LOTZ: Chairperson, for me it was a very traumatic event or experience to have taken a person's life and to live with that knowledge for the rest of your life. In Ovamboland and in Port Elizabeth I was involved in a number of incidents where quite a number of people were shot dead, but that didn't have nearly the impact that this incident had on me - that person's blood is on my hands.

The fact that I was not personally involved with the stabbing, was always like a relief to me, in comparison with that which I had done, that I didn't have to be involved with the stabbing.

MR BOOYENS: How do you feel today, it is 13 years on down the line?

MR LOTZ: Chairperson, unfortunately one cannot predict the future. If I had known then what I know now, the incident probably would never have happened. I was not involved with the initial issuing of the orders for the elimation of these persons. If one could look into the future, I don't think that any of these incidents would ever have occurred.

It was the time and I felt that we were in a state of war. He was my enemy and on that foundation, I participated in the elimination of the persons.

MR BOOYENS: You said that you hated the ANC and the liberation movements?

MR LOTZ: After the Church Street bombing.

MR BOOYENS: After the Church Street bombing? These persons who got murdered, did you see them as part of the liberation movement?

MR LOTZ: Yes, that is correct and I believe that today the family will surely hate me for what I have done.

MR BOOYENS: How do you feel personally, you have told us why you had done it at that time. You said that it would never have happened if one could have looked into the future?

MR LOTZ: Chairperson, after the facts, I am sure the only thing that one can say is I am sorry. I don't think that it would be accepted, I am sorry about what happened.

It was a very difficult time, it was a very difficult order and it was carried out. After the facts, the only thing that remains to be said is I am sorry about what happened.

MR BOOYENS: Is there anything else that you would like to say regarding the matter?

MR LOTZ: No, I have nothing further to say.

MR BOOYENS: Then, if we can just return to your application. You have given additional political motivations, but do you confirm then the full content of your statement?

MR LOTZ: Yes, I do.

MR BOOYENS: Chairperson, subject to my discovery that I might have omitted something, this is the evidence that I intend to lead. I think that I have led everything.

CHAIRPERSON: Would anybody be inconvenienced if we start at nine o'clock tomorrow? Nine o'clock?

MR BOOYENS: Certainly Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, we will adjourn till nine o'clock tomorrow morning.

ON RESUMPTION ON 05-03-1998:

GERHARDUS JOHANNES LOTZ: (still under oath)

EXAMINATION BY MR BOOYENS: (cont)

Mr Chairman, I indicated yesterday afternoon that I thought I had covered everything, I noticed however there is one aspect that I didn't deal with so with the Commission's permission I would just like to deal with that aspect.

Mr Lotz, will you go to page 13 of your application?

MR LOTZ: I am there Chairperson.

MR BOOYENS: Underneath the nature and details, the description begins at the 27th of June, is that correct?

MR LOTZ: Yes, that is correct.

MR BOOYENS: You testified yesterday however, regarding aspects which occurred before the 27th, which are related to this, is that correct?

MR LOTZ: Yes, that is correct.

MR BOOYENS: Why does the application begin on the 27th, could you please explain to the Commission?

MR LOTZ: Chairperson, at the time when we compiled the statements, Chris McAdam was present. He first discussed it with Lieutenant Taylor and worked through his statement with him, compiled his statement, and after that, he came to me upon which he and I compiled a statement, and we began on the day that the operation would be executed.

That is why I began my statement by saying on the 27th, although other things had happened before, we began on the 27th in compiling the statement.

MR BOOYENS: Thank you Mr Chairman.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR BOOYENS.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR MTSHAULANA: Mr Chairman, my name is Mtshaulana. As my learned friend, Mr Bizos has said, I will begin with Mr Lotz on behalf of the family.

Mr Lotz, can you turn to page 13 of your application?

MR LOTZ: I have it Chairperson.

MR MTSHAULANA: Did I understand correctly that you added something on (b)? Did you add something yesterday on (b), did you amend (b) to add something?

MR LOTZ: That is correct Chairperson.

MR MTSHAULANA: Can you read what you added?

MR LOTZ: It has not been added to my section.

MR MTSHAULANA: Don't you have it from your counsel next to you?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: I would like you to read what has been added?

MR BOOYENS: Mr Chairman, what was added and it wasn't added to 1(b), it was added to 1(a) - it is the amendment I asked for and I think it should read "or any other misdemeanour which may emanate from this incident". I actually thought it up myself, I didn't write it in.

CHAIRPERSON: You know Mr Booyens, what concerns me is that if that is so, then it is not the actual application of the applicant.

MR BOOYENS: In what sense Mr Chairman?

CHAIRPERSON: That what is added as I understand is to cover all legal possibilities.

MR BOOYENS: Flowing from this incident, yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. I would have expected that the applicant would understand that.

MR BOOYENS: Mr Chairman, it is not a question of the applicant not understanding it, I mean it is like a matter of pleading, I take instructions from a client, I draw up, I deal with the technical aspect, that is purely a technical aspect.

When I consult with my client and I say to him well, it becomes apparent to me during consultations that for example there may be something like say a conspiracy or something like that, then surely where I am here to do the legal technical aspect, it is not for the client to do the legal technical aspect.

The same frequently happens in practice when one is dealing with your pleadings in any civil matter.

CHAIRPERSON: May I ask you then this, that should by chance or by some reason, a crime or an activity which is covered by what you inserted, become relevant at some stage, are you then going to argue that the applicant has in fact applied for amnesty in respect of that other crime?

MR BOOYENS: Provided that it is covered by the facts, yes. In other words, Your Lordship is no doubt aware of the section in the Criminal Procedure Act from another side, where if you have got a situation where the evidence would prove another offence, the prosecution can apply for an amendment.

The facts must still be there.

CHAIRPERSON: It gives me trouble - your approach, but I am not going to argue about the matter. If and when such an occasion arises, we will have to deal with it then.

MR BOOYENS: Yes, I said initially it was just done ex abundanti.

CHAIRPERSON: But I think I must bring it to your attention, that in such an event, one would then have to question whether the applicant, who doesn't understand that, and yet applies for that indemnity or amnesty for that crime, really made a full exposure.

MR BOOYENS: Mr Chairman, with respect. How many applicants know what a delict is?

CHAIRPERSON: I am not going to argue about the legal technicalities Mr Booyens. I am just pointing it out.

MR BOOYENS: Certainly Mr Chairman.

MR MTSHAULANA: Thank you Mr Chairman, that what has been added is part of your affidavit, is that correct?

MR LOTZ: That is correct Chairperson.

MR MTSHAULANA: So you are applying for any other delicts which are connected with this one?

MR LOTZ: That is correct Mr Chairperson.

MR MTSHAULANA: Have you been advised that when someone is applying for amnesty, you don't get amnesty, blanket amnesty, but in respect of an act for which you have applied?

MR LOTZ: That is correct Chairperson.

MR MTSHAULANA: You know that?

MR LOTZ: Correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: Mr Lotz, you gave evidence in the second inquest, is that correct?

MR LOTZ: That is correct Mr Chairperson.

MR MTSHAULANA: And if I could sum up your evidence, then it was briefly that that morning of the 14th of December you borrowed a car from Mr Niewoudt?

MR LOTZ: That is correct Mr Chairperson.

MR MTSHAULANA: That you returned the car?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: And that by some coincidence that evening you were doing some overtime work?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: And that by some coincidence at about eleven o'clock, whilst you were doing overtime, a telephone came in Mr Roelofse's office, is that correct?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: And that because Mr Roelofse was by some coincidence not in his office, you answered the telephone?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: And that by some coincidence, Mr Niewoudt was calling, wanting the car which you had used that morning?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: He then asked you to bring the car?

MR LOTZ: Correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: And he gave the car to some other people?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: And ten minutes later the car exploded?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: And in that car, the people who were in that car were Faku, Mgoduka and Sepathi?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: And these people had been with you coincidentally by the way, these are the same people who had been with you killing Goniwe and his colleagues?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: I will come back to that. I want us to go to the scene. Did I understand you correctly as saying you don't know which of the four people you killed?

MR LOTZ: Mr Chairperson, at that stage when I made the statement, I wasn't sure who I had killed.

MR MTSHAULANA: But do you know now who you have killed? But do you now know who you killed?

MR LOTZ: Mr Chairperson ...

MR MTSHAULANA: Who did you kill?

MR BOOYENS: There is a problem with the microphone Mr Chairman.

MR MTSHAULANA: Mr Lotz, do you hear me?

MR LOTZ: Yes.

MACHINE SWITCHED OFF - ON RESUMPTION:

GERHARDUS JOHANNES LOTZ: (still under oath)

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR MTSHAULANA: (continued) I was saying that I would like to take you to the scene. Do you now know who you killed?

MR LOTZ: That is correct Chairperson. If I can just explain, when I made the statement I wasn't one hundred percent sure who I killed. During consultation with Mr Booyens, and Mr Taylor and Van Zyl, it came to light, there were photo's of the scene, that were shown to us and after Mr Taylor then said that he killed Mr Calata, that I killed Mr Goniwe.

MR MTSHAULANA: Now, I would like you to describe to the Committee how this incident took place. I would like to start with Mr Van Zyl has come back, he has given you expressly or impliedly an order to take out one of the people. Just describe what happened.

MR LOTZ: After that I took one of the people from the vehicle. I let him walk in front of me, then I hit him with this iron object over the head.

MR MTSHAULANA: As he ...

CHAIRPERSON: That motor vehicle from which you took him out, how far was that from the place where you hit him?

MR LOTZ: Chairperson, to say it was 15 or 20 metres is very difficult. It happened 13 years ago and I really cannot say in all honesty that it was 20 metres or 15 metres. I really can't say that to you.

CHAIRPERSON: Carry on.

MR MTSHAULANA: Thank you. Can you take Exhibit E and turn to page 10 of Exhibit E.

MR LOTZ: I've have the place.

MR MTSHAULANA: I see two spots, I assume those are the places where the corpses were, is that correct? In the middle of that horse shoe where there is no growth?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: And I take it that Mr Goniwe's body is the one on the right if you are looking there, is that correct?

MR LOTZ: I accept it like that.

MR MTSHAULANA: And the body next to the bush is Mr Calata, is that correct?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: Now, unfortunately when the photo was taken, your car had already left?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: Can you estimate about where the car was?

MR LOTZ: It is going to be very difficult to say. I really cannot remember where the vehicle was.

MR MTSHAULANA: Mr Lotz, from what direction had you come there?

MR LOTZ: I cannot give you those answers, I really cannot remember.

MR MTSHAULANA: You have no idea where the car was? I am not saying exactly the spot, but it could have been somewhere out of the photo?

MR LOTZ: It could have been at any place as far as I can remember.

MR MTSHAULANA: Okay, let us just make assumptions. Assuming that it is on the right hand side, where would it be about?

MR LOTZ: I don't know. I would imagine that it would not have been on this open spot, that it would have been on the left hand side behind the bushes.

MR MTSHAULANA: On the left hand side behind the bushes?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: So in other words you moved with this person for some distance away from the car?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: And at that time, you moved with both persons, is that correct?

MR LOTZ: No, just the one person went with me. Lieutenant Taylor took the other person later.

MR MTSHAULANA: And then when you were there, at that spot there, with whom were you?

MR LOTZ: I walked on my own and all three black people were there, and then they stabbed the person afterwards with the knives, after I had hit him.

MR MTSHAULANA: But when you were walking, you walked with them?

MR LOTZ: They were behind me. The person walked ahead, in front of me.

MR MTSHAULANA: You were walking with this (indistinct)

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: And then suddenly the fatal blow, you delivered the fatal blow?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: Can you remember Mr Lotz how you hit Mr Goniwe?

MR LOTZ: I hit him from the back over his head.

MR MTSHAULANA: In your application you say "oor die kop"?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: Can you demonstrate to the Committee did you hit him from the top?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: From the top?

MR LOTZ: Yes, I hit him from the top.

MR MTSHAULANA: Where do you think you hit him?

MR LOTZ: On his head.

MR MTSHAULANA: Yes, the head is big?

MR LOTZ: I would have hit him in the middle of the head, there abouts. I am not ...

MR MTSHAULANA: But the blow was such a heavy blow, that the man collapsed like a pack of cards?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: It must have been a heavy blow?

MR LOTZ: It was.

MR MTSHAULANA: And the other person was according to your evidence, some 15, 20 metres away?

MR LOTZ: Which person?

MR MTSHAULANA: Mr Calata?

MR LOTZ: Yes, he wasn't near.

MR MTSHAULANA: No, yesterday you said he was 15, 20 metres away.

MR LOTZ: Approximately.

MR MTSHAULANA: Yes.

MR LOTZ: At the vehicle.

MR MTSHAULANA: Approximately means 15 or 25?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: But he didn't hear this big blow?

MR LOTZ: I don't think he would have heard it.

MR MTSHAULANA: And this man collapsed like a sheep, he didn't even make a grin so heavy was the blow?

MR LOTZ: As I said yesterday, I thought after I had hit him, that he was either dead or unconscious.

MR MTSHAULANA: How did you come to this conclusion?

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lotz, if that blow that you had given him, if that had caused the death, would you have been surprised?

MR LOTZ: No.

CHAIRPERSON: So you say you hit him hard enough to possibly kill him?

MR LOTZ: I think so.

CHAIRPERSON: Would you have expected injuries?

MR LOTZ: As a result of the blow itself?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes? What kind of injuries?

MR LOTZ: I don't know whether his skin was opened up, I didn't really look afterwards.

CHAIRPERSON: And his skull?

MR LOTZ: I don't know.

MR MTSHAULANA: Thank you Mr Chairman. But any way, what made you come to the conclusion that he must have been dead?

MR LOTZ: Because he was laying still, he didn't move at all.

MR MTSHAULANA: So after you hit him, whilst you were walking, he fell like a pack of cards, he did not move?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: Mr Chairman, I beg leave to hand in a copy of the English medical report, post mortem report.

CHAIRPERSON: Is this a translation of the Afrikaans, official one?

MR MTSHAULANA: No, Mr Chairman, there were two reports made, one by Mr Botha from Johannesburg on behalf of the family and one by Mr Knobel.

CHAIRPERSON: II?

MR MTSHAULANA: II, Mr Chairman. Mr Lotz, in your application, or in the amnesty application, I would like you to turn to page 165, 155, I am sorry. Are you there?

MR LOTZ: Yes, I am.

MR MTSHAULANA: Now, somewhere at the bottom next to the signature, do you see there they say that the causes of death - could you read that?

MR LOTZ: Could you please repeat?

MR MTSHAULANA: What is written there?

MR LOTZ: At (b) multiple injuries and the result thereof.

MR MTSHAULANA: Can you make any comment about that in the light of what you have just said to Mr Chairman?

MR LOTZ: Chairperson, I am not a Medical Practitioner, that is what I thought at that stage had happened.

If that was the cause, then I did not kill him, but only hit him unconscious.

MR MTSHAULANA: Yes, in fact, according to this if this is correct, you should only apply for amnesty for a lesser - any way turn to 156 Mr Lotz, do you see there somewhere in (indistinct) and where it starts with head and neck, do you see that?

MR LOTZ: Yes, I do.

MR MTSHAULANA: What does it say there?

MR LOTZ: Skull, nothing abnormal was found.

MR MTSHAULANA: Nothing abnormal was found? No sign of a beating?

MR LOTZ: That was their finding.

MR MTSHAULANA: Yes. Can you read number 9 - neck structure?

MR LOTZ: It also says nothing abnormal was found.

MR MTSHAULANA: The Doctors did not find any sign of a blunt object in the head or in the neck.

MR LOTZ: No, I don't think it would have been in the neck.

MR MTSHAULANA: Yes, any way in the neck, not? Now, the picture you've painted Mr Lotz, of how you killed Mr Goniwe, is a very civilised way of killing, you hit the man and he died peacefully, is that correct?

MR LOTZ: That is what happened Chairperson.

MR MTSHAULANA: And therefore if Mr De Kock says that Mr Goniwe fought, you would say that is not correct?

MR LOTZ: That is not correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: I said to the Chairman that there were two medical reports made, one on behalf of the family and one by the State. The one we just read was by the State Pathologist.

Can you turn to page 9 of II, the one we've just submitted now, I would like you to read the comment there.

MR LOTZ: The immediate cause of death was stab wound which transfixed the right ventricle of the heart resulting in massive (indistinct) bleeding, the body was burnt after death.

MR MTSHAULANA: Yes. Can you turn to page 3 of II. Head and neck, what does Dr Botha find there?

MR LOTZ: Head and neck. (5) Eyes, no abnormality detected.

MR MTSHAULANA: And can you read number 9 on the following page?

MR LOTZ: Skull. The skull is intact, there is no evidence of sub or neurotic haemorrhage on (indistinct) of the skull.

MR MTSHAULANA: And the neck, number 11?

MR LOTZ: No abnormality detected.

MR MTSHAULANA: And Mr Lotz, do you insist that there was a big blow by a blunt object on either the head or the neck, on the head?

MR LOTZ: On the head, yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lotz, could you give us an indication how heavy that iron was?

MR LOTZ: Mr Chairman, it is difficult. I would have to give an estimation.

CHAIRPERSON: Please.

MR LOTZ: Three, five kilograms.

CHAIRPERSON: Would you be satisfied with an estimation of three to five kilograms?

MR LOTZ: It could have been heavier, it is difficult to say.

CHAIRPERSON: But at least three kilograms?

MR LOTZ: At least, yes.

MR MTSHAULANA: I was still saying that the picture you have painted, is a picture of killing someone in a very civilised way, hitting him once to avoid pain. Is that correct?

MR LOTZ: Chairperson, I would not say that the primary reason was to prevent him from having pain but to immediately start stabbing him, could have resulted in screaming and a noise, and the other people would have heard that, and that could have caused further problems.

MR MTSHAULANA: That is what I mean by civilised.

ADV SIGODI: Sorry, may I just ask Mr Lotz, when you took Mr Goniwe out of the car, did you tell him where you were taking him?

MR LOTZ: No, I didn't say anything to him.

ADV SIGODI: You just took him out of the car and you led him into the bush?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

ADV SIGODI: And was he just walking normally?

MR LOTZ: There was nothing abnormal about his walking, he walked in a normal way.

ADV SIGODI: And did he have his hands cuffed to the back, his hands to the back?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

ADV SIGODI: Was he cuffed on the legs?

MR LOTZ: No.

ADV SIGODI: So he was just walking normally?

MR LOTZ: Yes.

ADV SIGODI: He could have run away if he wanted to?

MR LOTZ: No, I don't think that he would have done it at that stage, he could if he wanted to, but with hands cuffed behind his back, it would be quite difficult to try and run away with your hands cuffed. It didn't happen.

ADV SIGODI: Then can you show me how you held this iron, did you hold it with both hands?

MR LOTZ: Yes, with both hands.

ADV SIGODI: And can you just indicate how you hit him, the amount of force which you used?

MR LOTZ: I hit as hard as I possibly could.

ADV SIGODI: With both hands?

MR LOTZ: Yes, with both hands.

MR MTSHAULANA: Mr Lotz, can you stand up and demonstrate how you delivered this fatal blow?

MR LOTZ: Can I demonstrate it on him.

MR MTSHAULANA: Yes, don't hit him too hard.

MR LOTZ: He was shorter than me, and I hit him in this way.

MR MTSHAULANA: But you say you hit him as hard as you could?

ADV POTGIETER: I am sorry. Mr Lotz, you demonstrate almost like a blow with an axe, is that correct?

MR LOTZ: Yes, it could be something like that, yes.

ADV SIGODI: Sorry, and how far was he from you when you delivered this blow?

MR LOTZ: Approximately a meter or a meter and a half in front of me.

MR MTSHAULANA: How long was the steel spring? Just indicate with your arms?

MR LOTZ: Approximately ...

MR MTSHAULANA: About a meter?

MR LOTZ: No.

MR MTSHAULANA: Less than a meter?

MR LOTZ: Yes.

MR MTSHAULANA: Then he was less than a meter away from you, is that not correct?

MR LOTZ: Yes, if I straighten my arms, then it would be approximately a meter.

MR MTSHAULANA: When you were delivering this fatal blow, where are the vultures, where are the vultures, the blacks?

MR LOTZ: They were behind me as far as I can remember.

MR MTSHAULANA: They were behind me?

MR LOTZ: Behind me.

MR MTSHAULANA: As soon as he fell, they went for him?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: And what were you doing as they were stabbing, standing there?

MR LOTZ: At one stage I was watching, then I turned around.

MR MTSHAULANA: Yes, you couldn't look at this vicious stabbing?

MR LOTZ: Yes.

MR MTSHAULANA: You let the black people to do the dirty job?

MR LOTZ: If that is so, then yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Of course they were willing to do so, not so?

MR LOTZ: Yes, they were not forced to do it.

MR MTSHAULANA: Did you have a knife yourself?

MR LOTZ: Yes, I did.

MR MTSHAULANA: Have you ever stabbed someone before?

MR LOTZ: No.

MR MTSHAULANA: You hadn't done so then and now?

MR LOTZ: No.

MR MTSHAULANA: Can you stab someone?

MR LOTZ: Depending upon the circumstances.

MR MTSHAULANA: That is a difficult thing for you to do?

MR LOTZ: Yes, it would be.

MR MTSHAULANA: I want to go back to the picture you have painted. You are painting a picture of a big blow which made the man to collapse and yet the medical evidence does not indicate that there was a big blow.

Mr Lotz, I want to put it to you this is a lie. This man was slaughtered like a sheep by a group of vultures that stabbed him from all directions, what do you say to that?

MR LOTZ: Chairperson, I was there, I hit the man and that is what happened.

MR MTSHAULANA: You know what is funny Mr Lotz, is that I want you to turn to the medical report if you can, 156.

MR LOTZ: I have it Mr Chairperson.

MR MTSHAULANA: Now, you see number 3 it is written that...

ADV SIGODI: Sorry, I didn't get the page?

MR MTSHAULANA: Page 156. The second sentence of number 3 "the limbs show heat rigor mortis from the muscles, the body is in the general position of the fighting attitude, struggle attitude. How do you explain that fighting attitude?

MR BOOYENS: Mr Chairman, perhaps my learned friend should look at the document handed in by himself, Exhibit II 3(iii).

CHAIRPERSON: I think the point Mr Booyens is trying to make mr Mtshaulana, is that on your own documentation it seems that that fighting position would be a natural result of being burnt.

MR MTSHAULANA: Mr Chairman, unfortunately the photo copy machine is working very slowly. I am hoping that in the course of my cross-examination, I am going to produce the other medical reports. In the mean time we can look at the others and I do want to ask this witness this question, I will leave it to the Doctor across to explain later on argument that the probabilities. In the mean time I do want to put it to this witness in the light of Mr De Kock's evidence, because as I say if the probability is as my learned friend argues, then why is this posture not present in the other bodies which were also burnt?

CHAIRPERSON: You can argue that.

MR MTSHAULANA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: I think what Mr Booyens is pointing out to you is that by the evidence of the document that you produced, I assume it is drafted by the Doctor appointed by the family, that it would seem that as a result of heat, this posture is a natural result of the heating of the body.

But it doesn't preclude an argument at the end.

MR LOTZ: I beg your pardon Chairperson, I just want to ask a question. May I please have the opportunity to study this document?

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lotz, I think that your Attorney has set matters straight. If it is necessary you will be granted the opportunity later, to study the document.

MR MTSHAULANA: Mr Lotz, I was saying that in the light of Mr De Kock's evidence that Mr Goniwe fought, can you explain, are you in a position to explain, let me put it that way, the coincidence between Mr De Kock's evidence about what he was told by Mr Van Zyl and what Mr Van Zyl did not contradict and the medical evidence, are you in a position to explain?

MR LOTZ: Chairperson, all that I can say is that Mr De Kock was not there. I was there and I know what happened.

What I have explained, is what I will abide with, that is what happened.

ADV POTGIETER: I am sorry. Mr Lotz, when the Advocate put it to you that what you actually wanted to do or what you had in mind, was to use a very humane manner to commit this action and to minimize the pain, but you said that was not actually what it was about.

Can you tell us what the basic idea was then?

MR LOTZ: As I have explained, I said that that was not the sole reason. If the person had been stabbed without being hit over the head, it would have led to a lot of screaming and the other persons were not far away enough that they would not have been able to hear it. That would have caused a great deal of noise.

If I think back, it was a more humane manner to spare the person all the pain, I can understand that.

ADV POTGIETER: But your primary consideration was to prevent that the person would make a noise and attract attention?

MR LOTZ: That is correct, our orders were to kill those people.

ADV BOSMAN: Mr Lotz, can you clarify the following for me please. You were at the scene where the incident occurred, on the assumption that Captain Van Zyl would kill these persons one by one, is that correct?

MR LOTZ: After he had returned, after the shooting had occurred at (indistinct) ...

ADV BOSMAN: Let me put it to you differently, originally you had the idea that Captain Van Zyl would kill these people individually, one by one?

MR LOTZ: No. Then we wouldn't have been told prior to the incident to bring knives.

ADV BOSMAN: Then I don't understand Captain Van Zyl's testimony.

MR LOTZ: Chairperson, if I may put it this way, during the two to three weeks prior to the incident, when we discussed it, we were told or we decided that the incident would resemble a vigilante attack and we were told to bring knives along, and Captain Van Zyl was so to speak the leader of the group, and he also would have brought along a knife.

ADV BOSMAN: At which stage did he tell you that he wanted to do it alone, one for one?

MR LOTZ: After he had returned.

ADV BOSMAN: At which did you discuss the idea that there should not be any noise, and also the consideration that you should perform it in such a manner that there would not be too much pain?

MR LOTZ: That was before the time.

ADV BOSMAN: When before the time, before you killed them or when you began the operation?

MR LOTZ: Before we began the operation.

MR MTSHAULANA: Mr Lotz, can you take Exhibit O. Just the page outside, do you see (e) there?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: I understand you pointed that to the people of the Truth and Reconciliation Committee?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: Now, I don't know Port Elizabeth, you know it, you have been walking Port Elizabeth in the middle of the night, in the dark, in the bushes, but what I have understood is that where (e) is, is in town?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: Round about the area of Mbeki Avenue?

MR LOTZ: Yes, it could be any place in Port Elizabeth.

MR MTSHAULANA: In town?

MR LOTZ: Yes.

MR MTSHAULANA: That is where the blacks were waiting?

MR LOTZ: No.

MR MTSHAULANA: What does (e) indicate?

MR LOTZ: May I explain?

MR MTSHAULANA: No, I asked a question. What does (e) indicate?

MR LOTZ: If one looks inside, that is where Captain Van Zyl picked up the black members, Brighton police station, it is definitely not in Mbeki Avenue in the inner city.

MR MTSHAULANA: Mr Lotz, I asked you a question and that was is (e) in the town, and you said yes, is that correct?

MR LOTZ: If one consults the map ...

MR MTSHAULANA: I asked you a question, is (e) in town, and you said yes, is that correct?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: And I asked another question, is (e) the place where Mr Van Zyl was going to meet the blacks?

MR LOTZ: If one considers the black neighbourhoods, where they are on this map, then yes.

MR MTSHAULANA: Mr Van Zyl met the blacks at (e), yes or no?

MR LOTZ: No, Chairperson. This map is too small to indicate that. If we could find a bigger map, I would be able to indicate clearly where allegedly he picked them up.

The point is New Brighton police station, which is quite far from Mbeki Avenue which you mentioned earlier.

MR MTSHAULANA: I told you I don't know PE, but I understand that the Donkin Reserve is in the town, do you agree with me?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: And the point you pointed out on the map, is a point not far from Donkin Reserve?

MR LOTZ: It is far, I am speaking under correction, approximately 10 kilometres, I am not certain of what the distance is.

MR MTSHAULANA: What I understand Mr Lotz, is that New Brighton is somewhere between (e) and (d) round about the area where there is R334, R368, somewhere there?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: But that is not where you have pointed out Mr Lotz?

MR LOTZ: Chairperson, on this map as I have explained just now, it is very difficult to point out the neighbourhoods and residential areas in PE. If we had a larger map it would be much easier in order to indicate New Brighton and these other areas.

MR MTSHAULANA: Did the blacks have a radio?

MR LOTZ: Yes, they would have had a radio.

MR MTSHAULANA: They had a radio?

MR LOTZ: They always had radio's.

MR MTSHAULANA: And you were in constant communication with them?

MR LOTZ: No, I was not.

MR MTSHAULANA: Was Mr Van Zyl in communication with them?

MR LOTZ: He may have been, but I wasn't in his presence when he spoke to them.

MR MTSHAULANA: Yes, so as far as you know, there was no radio communication?

MR LOTZ: I don't know.

MR MTSHAULANA: You don't know? As far as you know?

MR LOTZ: I can't say, I didn't hear them talking.

MR MTSHAULANA: I am asking about what you know.

MR BOOYENS: Mr Chairman, with respect, he has answered the question.

MR MTSHAULANA: I am asking as far as you know there was no radio communication?

MR LOTZ: No, there were no radio conversations.

MR MTSHAULANA: As far as you know?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: So at the point at which the blacks must have been waiting, must be one point, unless there was communication?

MR LOTZ: They must have been waiting at some point, where exactly it was, I can't say.

MR MTSHAULANA: Can you take Exhibit N.

MR LOTZ: Is it this map?

MR MTSHAULANA: Yes, that map. Do you see point DE?

MR LOTZ: Yes, I do.

MR MTSHAULANA: Mr Van Zyl moved from that point, to point (a) with Mr Mkonto, is that correct?

MR LOTZ: That is how I understood it.

MR MTSHAULANA: Yes, and then from there he moved from this point which suddenly changed somewhere between New Brighton and Port Elizabeth?

MR LOTZ: That is correct, that is how I understood it.

MR MTSHAULANA: And then from there, he went back to (a) with the blacks?

MR LOTZ: That is how I understood it.

MR MTSHAULANA: How long was he away?

MR LOTZ: As I said yesterday, an hour to an hour and a half, I can't say exactly.

MR MTSHAULANA: Your estimation is about an hour, that is what is in your application and I will keep it at that.

According to what he told us, at the time when he went to fetch the blacks, he had already shot the man, Mkonto, you heard him saying that?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: And then he went to this point which nobody knows where it is, to fetch the blacks?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: He came back with the blacks, and they stabbed him?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: So will I be correct in saying that if we assume that is correct, as we must, because he was alone, the cause of when they came with the blacks, when he came with the blacks, the men must have been dead?

MR LOTZ: I could accept that.

MR MTSHAULANA: Mr Chairman, I beg to hand in Exhibit JJ and that is the other medical report by of Mr Mkonto.

Can you turn to page 165 of your application? Can you turn to 165?

MR LOTZ: I have it Chairperson.

MR MTSHAULANA: And I would like you to read (b) there at the bottom, the cause of death.

MR LOTZ: A bullet wound through the head and a stab wound to the heart.

MR MTSHAULANA: So the cause of death was both the wound, stab wound and a bullet?

MR LOTZ: That is what it says here.

MR MTSHAULANA: Yes. Can you read the last page comment of the Exhibit JJ.

MR LOTZ: Death was due to multiple injuries, the most significant being a gun shot that sound or found to the head and the two stab wounds through the heart.

The deceased could not have survived any of these three injuries. The absence of carbon (indistinct) material in the respiratory tract indicates that the body was burnt after death.

MR MTSHAULANA: Yes. I suppose there is not much you can say because you were not there, I just wanted to draw your attention to the fact that again the findings of the Doctor seem to be not exactly the same as we were told, but that is not your problem.

ADV SIGODI: Sorry, Mr Lotz, can you tell me where was Mr Mkonto burnt?

MR LOTZ: The precise place I do not know, I wasn't there.

ADV SIGODI: You were not there?

MR LOTZ: No.

DR TSOTSI: Mr Lotz, Mr Van Zyl asked you to bring knives with you, is that correct?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

DR TSOTSI: And that was for the purpose of stabbing the deceased, is that right?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

DR TSOTSI: Did you bring the knife with you?

MR LOTZ: Yes.

DR TSOTSI: Did you use the knife to stab the deceased?

MR LOTZ: No, I did not.

DR TSOTSI: Why not?

MR LOTZ: The black members did that after I had hit the person.

DR TSOTSI: Did I hear you to say that the blacks used their own knives to stab the deceased?

MR LOTZ: Correct.

DR TSOTSI: Why didn't you give them your knife, why did they have to use their own knives to do so?

MR LOTZ: I simply accepted it as that, if I would have had to use my knife, I would have used my own knife, not somebody else's.

DR TSOTSI: Did the blacks know beforehand what role they had to play in this murder?

MR LOTZ: I do not know what was said to them, I was not present.

DR TSOTSI: But after you had hit Goniwe, and he fell down, you called upon them to proceed with the stabbing, is that?

MR LOTZ: I didn't call them, they came of their own accord and commenced with the stabbing.

DR TSOTSI: So you didn't say anything to them, you just hit the deceased around the back, he fell down, and the blacks just attacked him and stabbed him with their knives?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

DR TSOTSI: Is it a coincidence that I think three of the people had stab wounds in the heart? You don't know, were the blacks given instructions to stab the deceased in the heart?

MR LOTZ: No, I can't say for certain.

DR TSOTSI: So as far as you are concerned, it is purely coincidental, is it?

MR LOTZ: Yes.

MR MTSHAULANA: Just by the way, Mr Lotz, just by the way, does this following name say anything to you, Tungatha?

MR LOTZ: Which one are you referring to?

MR MTSHAULANA: Are there many?

MR LOTZ: There are two that I know.

MR MTSHAULANA: Can you tell me a little bit about both of them?

MR LOTZ: The one is Butler Tungatha and the other one is Emay Tungatha.

MR MTSHAULANA: How do you know them?

MR LOTZ: Both were members of the Security Branch.

MR MTSHAULANA: And where are they now?

MR LOTZ: Butler I think he is at Kamegapark police station. I don't know if he is with the uniform or Detective, I don't precisely know what he does there.

And Sergeant MA Emay Tungatha, he could be a Warrant Officer or Inspector now, and he has been transferred to Kimberley, that is what I heard.

CHAIRPERSON: Is Butler Tungatha employed with the South African Police Services?

MR LOTZ: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: For how long now?

MR LOTZ: As far as I can remember, always.

CHAIRPERSON: Please correct me if I am wrong, but I seem to recollect that he was convicted of some serious crimes?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: A few years ago?

MR LOTZ: Yes, I can't remember when, but I remember that there was a court case where he was involved.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, and he was convicted of dishonest behaviour?

MR LOTZ: I cannot say for sure what it was.

CHAIRPERSON: And after that, he was still employed by the South African Police Services?

MR LOTZ: That is correct, he is still there today as far as I know.

MR MTSHAULANA: And he was a member of the Security Branch?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: I mean he is?

MR LOTZ: He was at that stage, he isn't any more.

MR MTSHAULANA: I thought that you just said that he is?

MR LOTZ: No, he was, he is now at Kamegapark. I don't know if he is with the Detective or the uniform branch, I am not quite sure.

MR MTSHAULANA: He was not involved in this incident?

MR LOTZ: No, he was not.

MR MTSHAULANA: I will leave it there for the time being. Now, let me come to the simple stuff.

Did I understand you correctly yesterday to be saying when Mr Van Zyl came to give you the order, and I want to use your words, I don't believe that you ask who gave the order. Did I hear you correctly?

MR LOTZ: Yes, something alone those lines.

MR MTSHAULANA: Yes, something in those lines. When he gave the order, he did not give explanations, he did not need to give explanations, am I correct, is that what you mean?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: Because in the Police Force, it is not normal that Commanders give explanations, is that correct?

MR LOTZ: I would not say in the Police Service - in the Security Branch it was different.

MR MTSHAULANA: Yes, an order was an order, am I right?

MR LOTZ: Depending on what the order was.

MR MTSHAULANA: Oh, there was room for flexibility?

MR LOTZ: As I said depending on what the order was.

MR MTSHAULANA: We will discuss that later. But Mr Van Zyl was not in the habit of giving unofficial orders?

MR LOTZ: No, not to me.

MR MTSHAULANA: Yes, therefore you had no reason to want him to explain to you, you just took the order?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: I would like to take you to page 14 of your application, the second paragraph.

CHAIRPERSON: Before you carry on with that, never mind who gave the order, who is responsible for it. Do you know where the idea of killing Mr Goniwe and his colleagues, was born?

MR LOTZ: I have no idea. I don't know where it originated from.

CHAIRPERSON: You were one of the people who worked on the ground as you put it.

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: Thank you Mr Chairman. Now you write in your affidavit as far as I have knowledge, I was informed by Captain Van Zyl, that this was an authorised operation.

That cannot be correct in the light of what you have just told us? He was not in the habit of giving explanations for his orders, and as he was not in the habit of giving orders that were not unauthorised, so that cannot be correct?

MR LOTZ: As I have said earlier, that was 13 years ago. When I did this statement ...

MR MTSHAULANA: It was true then, but not any more?

MR LOTZ: He didn't tell me that Colonel Snyman had said, or that person had said that this was the instruction that we received, he didn't tell me that.

MR MTSHAULANA: I am putting it to you Mr Lotz, that that sentence in the light of what you have just said, was deliberately inserted to mislead the Commission?

MR LOTZ: No. This statement was compiled by myself and Mr McAdam of the Truth Commission, how could he then mislead the Truth Commission?

MR MTSHAULANA: Mr McAdam was not there when this thing was happening, so he only wrote what you said and you signed? Or am I correct, were you with him?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: When you killed Goniwe?

MR LOTZ: No sir.

MR MTSHAULANA: So what he wrote, was what you told him and you signed?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: I am saying that sentence cannot be correct in the light of what you have just told us, what do you say to that?

MR LOTZ: As I have explained, that is how I saw it at that stage, it is 13 years ago that it occurred. To now recall Mr Van Zyl's exact words, is impossible.

MR MTSHAULANA: Are you saying that 13 years ago, he explained to you, he told you that he had - that this was an operation which was authorised, but now he did not say? I don't understand it.

MR LOTZ: No, I am not saying that he did not say it.

MR MTSHAULANA: I am asking you about that sentence, I am saying that sentence cannot be correct if what you have just said that when you were given orders, you acted - you did what you were told, because your Commander was not in the habit of giving orders that were not authorised?

MR LOTZ: If I can refer to my statement, in the beginning I said as far as my knowledge goes. As far as I know, that is what I could recall at that stage.

MR MTSHAULANA: What I am then saying is, it cannot be correct.

MR LOTZ: I could have interpreted it that Mr Van Zyl would not have given me an illegal instruction or order to go and kill people.

MR MTSHAULANA: We will leave it there Mr Lotz. You told the Committee yesterday that it was Mr Van Zyl who told you about the operation, is that correct?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: Did I understand you correctly that this was about two, three weeks before the incident?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: Did I understand you correctly that when he told you, he also requested you to assist or independently collect information about the people?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: In fact, Mr Taylor told us that in the course of the three weeks, you shared information together, is that correct?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: And yourself, yesterday you said I discussed it with Taylor, is that correct?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: Information gathering in the sense in which Mr Taylor was involved, was not really your speciality in the Anti-Terrorist Unit, am I correct?

MR LOTZ: No, it is not the same but information gathering remains the same.

MR MTSHAULANA: Yes, your information gathering is more in the sense of reconnaissance for a specific order, for a specific operation?

MR LOTZ: No.

MR MTSHAULANA: But you were doing some information gathering any way?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: And the information gathering for this particular operation that you did, you shared information with Taylor?

MR LOTZ: Taylor and Van Zyl, that is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: Had you been involved in information gathering about these people before, about his specific people, or was this the first time that you were involved with the collection of information about them?

MR LOTZ: Everybody handled the informers.

MR MTSHAULANA: Excuse me?

MR LOTZ: Everybody handled the informers, people who worked in the Security Unit, the field workers.

MR MTSHAULANA: Did you handle informers regarding to Goniwe?

MR LOTZ: No. I just want to explain. All the members of the Security Branch, handled informers.

If the informer brings information to me about another case which is not specifically relevant to what I am doing, then I would give the information to the person who is working with it.

MR MTSHAULANA: Okay. Before you got the instruction from Mr Van Zyl, you were not involved with Goniwe or anyone of the people, were you?

MR LOTZ: With regard to people who left the country, I did.

MR MTSHAULANA: You had some information that related to recruitment?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: I am going to ask you in the three weeks before this terrible incident, what information did you obtain about I am going to start one by one, Mr Calata?

Did you get any information in that three weeks about Mr Calata?

MR LOTZ: If I can explain. When we got the order, the first thing that you would do ...

MR MTSHAULANA: Can you answer the question now?

MR BOOYENS: Mr Chairman, if my learned friend gives him the opportunity, he will, but if my learned friend persists to interrupt him, he will not do so.

CHAIRPERSON: Answer this question. From the time you knew what the plans were till the eventual execution of these people, did you get any additional information about Mr Calata?

MR LOTZ: That is what I want to explain and then I will explain what my position was.

MR MTSHAULANA: Why don't we start by answering the questions before we give the explanations?

CHAIRPERSON: Carry on.

MR LOTZ: When I was informed about these people, about their personal backgrounds, I didn't have much. I went to the files, I scanned through the files and there was the history and memorandum and I would have made copies of that.

That I would have gone through, all the information contained in there, it would have been new information that I would have given to Mr Van Zyl. That is also a way of getting new information, it was new information for me.

For other people it could have been old information. With all the people on the list, Goniwe, Calata, all the other two, three people, who were also additional there, we had information about all those people, we gathered the information, we got photo's and we then gave it to Mr Van Zyl.

That is the starting point. If you don't have that basic background, it doesn't help to go outside, because you don't know who the people had contact with and if you say okay, we are planning an operation and you go to the informers and you ask them what can you tell me ...

CHAIRPERSON: That explanation explains what the Security Police had.

MR LOTZ: That was new information to me.

CHAIRPERSON: I accept that. Now, let me put it differently. Did your reconnaissance expedition produce further information about Mr Calata?

MR LOTZ: What was there, no. I didn't get anything new.

MR MTSHAULANA: So after this long story, your answer is you personally did not get any new information about Mr Calata in the three weeks, or am I understanding you incorrectly?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: Accept for the old, rotten information which everybody had access to in the file, which Mr Van Zyl could also look at?

MR LOTZ: I was the junior at that stage, and I had to do that, that is how it works. I took the files, and I got the information that was contained in there to get a better picture of the person.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lotz, I think the question is not aimed at finding out what you personally knew or did not know about Mr Calata. As I understand the question, it is aiming at finding out what the Security Police or then at least those who were involved with the operation, what did they find out, new information about Mr Calata in preparation of the killing of Mr Calata?

MR LOTZ: Chairperson, there was a lot of new information that came to light. To say what it was now, I can't do that.

CHAIRPERSON: In those three weeks?

MR LOTZ: Things came to the fore that we didn't have previously.

CHAIRPERSON: I think that is the point, the question.

MR LOTZ: I am sorry, I understood that to be myself, that I in fact produced new information.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you understand now?

MR LOTZ: Yes.

MR MTSHAULANA: Can you tell the Committee what new information emerged in this three weeks about Mr Calata?

MR LOTZ: I really cannot, in no way I can say that, I cannot say that this was added or whatever, we had thousands of files that we worked with and to say now what it was, I really cannot and also not with respect to the other people, I can't do that.

MR MTSHAULANA: The problem with that answer is the following: I am going to put it to you that in the month before he was killed, Mr Calata was not in the Eastern Cape. That is going to give you problems.

I am going to put it to you that Mr Calata was not in the Eastern Cape, and if it is necessary, we will call witnesses to say where he was and that is why it becomes important for you to tell me what information you got about Mr Calata.

MR LOTZ: I can't tell you.

CHAIRPERSON: Did I understand it incorrectly? I thought that you said that there was nothing new that emerged in the last three weeks, in the three weeks that you monitored?

MR LOTZ: Things emerged, but from me personally no.

CHAIRPERSON: In the context of the Security Police, or rather those who were involved in the operation, was there anything new that emerged in the three weeks monitoring that you did not know of prior to first finding out about the plan?

MR LOTZ: There would have been new information, definitely. New information would have emerged. If you have a specific target and you concentrate, then obviously new information would emerge.

MR MTSHAULANA: Did you get information that Mr Calata was not at home, in those three weeks?

MR LOTZ: I can't say that.

MR MTSHAULANA: So if we called Mr Winter to give evidence that on the 27th of May, when he had a round-up at Mr Calata's home, Mr Calata was not at home?

MR LOTZ: He can say that, I can't say that.

MR MTSHAULANA: If we called a Physiotherapist to say that in those weeks up to the Saturday before he was killed, Mr Calata was undergoing medical treatment in Johannesburg, what would you say to that?

MR LOTZ: That could be possible. If the person is going to testify it, well ...

MR MTSHAULANA: And therefore the only new information you could have found in that weeks about him, is that he was sick if you got information at all?

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lotz, please correct me if I am wrong. During this whole trial, I understood it that the three weeks' monitoring, was to find out what the three or four people did to prepare for their killing?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: The decision concerning information why they should be killed, was already in the hands of the Security Police and those decisions had already been taken?

MR LOTZ: Yes, that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: And that is why the statement is important that if the monitoring was done only to find out how Mr Calata, where he drives to, what his habits are in preparation for killing him, then the statement made by the Advocate becomes important, because he says that Mr Calata was not in the Eastern Cape at that stage, or for most of that time.

MR LOTZ: But the fact remains I cannot say whether he was here or not, but if we had picked it up, then it would have been new information.

The fact that they came down to Port Elizabeth on the 27th, confirms that that was new information. I don't want to say that we now got new information to motivate the operation.

The order was already given, whether new information was given or obtained that they were busy organising, whatever, that would not have played a role in the fact that they had to be killed.

The instruction had already been given, but there would always be new information emerging.

MR MTSHAULANA: Especially in the line of reconnaissance as I said before, where he is, how can we get him, but any way I will leave that. I want to go back to this information gathering.

In relation to Mr Calata you told the Committee that you went to the files. Let's take a second person, Mr Mhlauli. You went to the files as well, did you find anything?

MR LOTZ: No he didn't have a file, Chairperson.

MR MTSHAULANA: So, how did you find information about Mr Mhlauli?

MR LOTZ: He had an index card.

MR MTSHAULANA: So you saw the index card?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: Was it amongst the files?

MR LOTZ: No.

MR MTSHAULANA: Where was this index card?

MR LOTZ: The index cards are kept in a separate filing system, that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: When does a person qualify to have a formal file, I understand there are formal and informal files? When does a person qualify to have a file such as Mr Goniwe had and not only to be mentioned on an index card?

MR LOTZ: On the Eastern Cape, I can put it to you this way, what I worked with, let's say for example we get information about a person that is going to leave the country, and then - I can't remember the specific file reference - but all the information is then put in a general file.

If the person is positively identified that he had left the country, that he applied for political asylum, then a formal file is opened.

It is sent to Pretoria, it gets a specific number and they inform you what this number is and then there is a formal file on this person. In the organisations, if a person I don't know what his activities should have been, but if he emerges prominently in the sense, not that he is now a leading figure, but that he is now moving in that direction, then a file would be opened.

I cannot give you the precise details, but that is more or less how the files are opened.

MR MTSHAULANA: Mr Mhlauli did not have a file, he only had these index cards?

MR LOTZ: In PE only the index card, yes.

MR MTSHAULANA: How big are these cards?

MR LOTZ: Half a folio page more or less?

MR MTSHAULANA: An A4?

MR LOTZ: No, half of that.

MR MTSHAULANA: Oh, half of that? How many of these cards for Mr Mhlauli?

MR LOTZ: It could have been one or two. As information is added, a photo, then it would be added to the ...

MR MTSHAULANA: I know how the system works, but I just want to know, Mr Mhlauli, how much information did you have and how many cards was that information?

MR LOTZ: I could be incorrect, it could be one or two, I am not sure.

MR MTSHAULANA: Can you make an estimation?

MR LOTZ: I said one or two.

MR MTSHAULANA: One or two?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: There was not much information, or was there a lot?

MR LOTZ: You can write quite a lot on a card, but how much information it was, I cannot say.

MR MTSHAULANA: Mr Mhlauli had two loose cards, that was all that there was about him?

MR LOTZ: I said one or two.

MR MTSHAULANA: It could have been more? Can it be more?

MR LOTZ: No, I doubt it, one or two.

MR MTSHAULANA: So there were two loose ...

MR LOTZ: No, they are stapled together so that they keep together.

MR MTSHAULANA: So there were two pieces of papers, cards, was there no photo?

MR LOTZ: Yes, there was a photo. The photo is added to the back.

MR MTSHAULANA: That is a third thing that you have, isn't it?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: And when you were given this order, this was about two, three weeks back, when you went to look for information, that is all you found?

MR LOTZ: That was all that I found.

MR MTSHAULANA: That was about two, three weeks before the incident?

MR LOTZ: Yes, that is what I found yes.

MR MTSHAULANA: That was two, three weeks before the incident?

MR LOTZ: Yes, that is correct.

ADV SIGODI: Can you remember what information was contained in the index?

MR LOTZ: No, I can't remember.

MR MTSHAULANA: But you also shared information with Mr Taylor and Mr Van Zyl?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: Now, when they came with this information, didn't you - did they add an extra card?

MR LOTZ: No. I took the card, took the information off the card, I left the card there.

MR MTSHAULANA: Where did you leave it?

MR LOTZ: I left it in the filing cabinet.

ON RESUMPTION:

GERHARDUS JOHANNES LOTZ: (still under oath)

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR MTSHAULANA: (cont)

Mr Lotz, I understand and appreciate that is 13 years ago and I can thus imagine that you might have forgotten certain things.

What I want us to do is to try to imagine about these cards. These cards of Mr Mhlauli, they were not blank cards?

MR LOTZ: No, they were not.

MR MTSHAULANA: They were full of information, they had information?

MR LOTZ: I wouldn't say that it is information, I might be able to describe if I could explain it in the form of references, they were references in the form of reports which were placed in files.

If one would consult his index card, there would be a reference number of a file on it, and there would have been a date on it of when the report was written.

Then there would also be information such as his name, his address if available, an identity number in order to identify the person to put it that way.

And there would be references to other files where his name appears or regarding the subject if the subject didn't have a file. If he had a file ...

MR MTSHAULANA: Why don't we stop and talk about, I mean I asked you a question you said he did not have a file?

MR LOTZ: I am trying to explain if a person had a file ...

MR MTSHAULANA: Let's talk about Mr Mhlauli.

MR LOTZ: Mr Mhlauli did not have a file.

MR MTSHAULANA: What we are asking then is what was on the index card or cards?

MR LOTZ: That is what I have just explained.

MR MTSHAULANA: When you spoke you spoke in general terms, you say it will contain references. Are you saying that the index cards of Mr Mhlauli were making references to reports that had been made about him?

MR LOTZ: That is correct. That is what I am explained. I am not saying what was specifically contained on his card ...

MR MTSHAULANA: In Mr Mhlauli's cards, you say there were references to reports that had been written about him?

MR LOTZ: Yes, that is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: So there had been reports written about him?

MR LOTZ: Yes, by nature, other wise it wouldn't have appeared on the card.

MR MTSHAULANA: I take it that on the card, if he did not have a file, on the card there was also his name?

MR LOTZ: Correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: His profession?

MR LOTZ: If it was available?

MR MTSHAULANA: Yes, where he stays or where he normally engaged in activities?

MR LOTZ: No, that is - I do not want to say that is too much information, but the primary information on the card would be in order to identify the person, a name, a surname, an ID number, a possible residential address.

MR MTSHAULANA: Yes, that I understand, but if the index card is only an index card as I understand an index card, then it is a reference to some file? There must be somewhere where there is information about him to which the index card refers?

MR LOTZ: That is correct. One or more files, it might have been various files.

MR MTSHAULANA: And in those cards, in those files which the index card was referring to, there was then the information about Mr Mhlauli?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: And I assume that the information that would be in those files to which the index cards were referring, was information about his name, his profession, where he stays or normally engage in activities?

MR LOTZ: Chairperson, I can't remember, but it would have been more about his political activities.

MR MTSHAULANA: If there was no information on the card about the G-plan, then the index card would refer to some file where Mr Mhlauli is connected to the G-plan?

MR LOTZ: That is correct.

MR MTSHAULANA: And therefore, when Mr Mhlauli dies, and the Security Police are told that a certain Mr Mhlauli is dead, they would then take the index cards and go to the files to which it was being referred and they will get the information, is that correct?

MR LOTZ: I can't understand, I don't understand your question, why would they consult the files?

MR MTSHAULANA: I will put it differently. Let's take Exhibit HH. In fact GG Mr Lotz, I am sorry.

If the Security Police, you see the last page there, C(1) for information.

MR LOTZ: I can see it.

MR MTSHAULANA: If the Security Police in PE had information about Mr Mhlauli and his activities, why would they request Cradock SWD to give them information about him? Can you explain that?

MR LOTZ: I don't know if they required any further information or whatever the case was, I cannot speak for the persons.

MR MTSHAULANA: You see, can you read that, can you see that sentence?

MR LOTZ: C(1) for information.