GERHARDUS JAKOBUS LOTZ: (sworn states)
EXAMINATION BY ADV BOOYENS: Mr Lotz, you are applying for amnesty in this matter, is that correct?
MR LOTZ: That is correct, yes.
ADV BOOYENS: And the application commences on page 79 of the first volume?
MR LOTZ: Yes.
ADV BOOYENS: Do you confirm the correctness of what appears on page 1 and to you confirm your history in the Police which appears on page 80?
MR LOTZ: That is correct.
ADV BOOYENS: In the first paragraph you give a short personal overview of where you were born, your age, etc, etc.
MR LOTZ: Correct.
ADV BOOYENS: You say that during your time in the Security Police, you were exposed to contacts, that you were involved in shooting incidents on the border and you were also injured and wounded at some point?
MR LOTZ: Yes.
ADV BOOYENS: Do you confirm further that you as a Security Policeman were very focused on protecting and maintaining the previous government and that that was in line with your personal political convictions?
MR LOTZ: That is correct.
ADV BOOYENS: Were you as mentioned on page 81, were you also convinced that the ANC/SACP alliance were trying to overthrow the government?
MR LOTZ: That is correct.
ADV BOOYENS: You also mention of the escalation of the struggle?
MR LOTZ: Yes.
ADV BOOYENS: And that you were involved in the South African Police in their efforts to counter this movement?
MR LOTZ: Yes.
ADV BOOYENS: Did you have any prior knowledge regarding the planning of the elimination of the deceased?
MR LOTZ: No.
ADV BOOYENS: On page 82, you describe how you were requested by the applicant, Nieuwoudt, to on the night of the 14th of December 1989, to remain behind at the office and how he instructed you to take a certain white Volkswagen Jetta to the Motherwell intersection, correct?
MR LOTZ: Yes.
ADV BOOYENS: When you arrived there, you found Snyman, Ras and Nieuwoudt there. Messrs Ras and Snyman are also applicants here in this case?
MR LOTZ: That is correct.
ADV BOOYENS: Did you at that stage know what the nature of this operation was to be?
MR LOTZ: No, I wasn't aware.
ADV BOOYENS: Some time afterwards another kombi arrived on the scene and the deceased Mgoduka, Faku, Mapipa and Charles Jack got out, is that correct?
MR LOTZ: That is correct.
ADV BOOYENS: You then took this kombi which they arrived in, back to Louis Le Grange square, correct?
MR LOTZ: That is correct.
ADV BOOYENS: And a short time afterwards you heard about the explosion, correct?
MR LOTZ: That is correct.
ADV BOOYENS: You immediately went back to the scene?
MR LOTZ: Yes, that is correct.
ADV BOOYENS: And you saw the vehicle which you had driven, had exploded.
MR LOTZ: That is correct.
ADV BOOYENS: I suppose you were quite unhappy when you realised that you were driving with a bomb on board?
MR LOTZ: Yes.
ADV BOOYENS: On page 83 you mention people that you saw there after you went back to the scene, on page 83. Do you confirm the rest of page 83?
MR LOTZ: Yes.
ADV BOOYENS: You then contacted Colonel Roelofse?
MR LOTZ: Yes.
ADV BOOYENS: Were you at any stage afterwards told by Captain Nieuwoudt that this operation was an official one?
MR LOTZ: Yes.
ADV BOOYENS: What did he tell you further?
MR LOTZ: He said it was an official operation, and that it had been cleared by head office.
ADV BOOYENS: By whom?
MR LOTZ: By Brigadier Gilbert.
ADV BOOYENS: Were you satisfied that because this was an operation which had been cleared with head office, that is was official and that it was according to head office and your colleagues, that it was essential for maintaining the government or protecting the government?
MR LOTZ: Yes.
ADV BOOYENS: You were charged with the Motherwell bomb incident and you were found not guilty, is that correct?
MR LOTZ: That is correct.
ADV BOOYENS: Your knowledge what you knew as a police officer of the explosion, you did not reveal that?
MR LOTZ: Correct.
ADV BOOYENS: Why not?
MR LOTZ: Captain Nieuwoudt's instructions were that it was an official operation and I believed that it wasn't necessary to reveal what I knew.
ADV BOOYENS: In other words, you deliberately omitted to mention that?
MR LOTZ: Yes.
ADV BOOYENS: On page 86 you deal with the political objectives.
MR LOTZ: That is correct.
ADV BOOYENS: And do you confirm the political objectives?
MR LOTZ: Yes.
ADV BOOYENS: Did you later hear that the purpose of this whole operation had to be to eliminate these people because they were double agents or spies?
MR LOTZ: That is correct.
ADV BOOYENS: As far as you personally were concerned, could you associate yourself with the operation and did you commit the offences for that reason, for a political reason?
MR LOTZ: Correct.
ADV BOOYENS: Do you confirm what is mentioned in the rest of your application?
MR LOTZ: Yes.
ADV BOOYENS: If the Commission would bear with me for one moment. During your trial you pleaded not guilty and you said you had no knowledge of the case and you were found not guilty?
MR LOTZ: Yes.
ADV BOOYENS: Thank you Chairperson.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY ADV BOOYENS: .
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Hugo?
MR HUGO: I have no questions, thank you.
NO CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR HUGO: .
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lamey?
MR LAMEY: Mr Chairman, I would just like to get instructions on this aspect from Mr Snyman. Could I request that my colleagues proceed further if they have any questions to ask.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, do it in the meantime because we are going to come back to you now.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY ADV JANSEN: Thank you Mr Chairman, I do have some questions. Mr Lotz, on page 4 of your application, paginated page 82, I read. On my arrival at the pre-arranged place I saw Captain Nieuwoudt and two other people whom I know now as Marthinus Ras and Lionel Snyman.
Is that your evidence that you didn't know Mr Ras at that stage?
MR LOTZ: I did know him.
ADV JANSEN: You were both members of Koevoet, is that correct?
MR LOTZ: Yes.
ADV JANSEN: You were actually quite friendly, you knew each other quite well?
MR LOTZ: Yes.
ADV DE JAGER: Did you know Mr Snyman?
MR LOTZ: No sir, I did not know him at all.
ADV JANSEN: I know it is on record that you say you were a Warrant Officer, I just want to clarity that due to the confusion. You were a Warrant Officer at that stage?
MR LOTZ: Yes, that is correct.
ADV JANSEN: How long had you been a Warrant Officer at that stage, can you recall?
MR LOTZ: It was approximately two years.
ADV JANSEN: As the Commission pleases, I have no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY ADV JANSEN: .
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lamey, have you now obtained instructions?
MR LAMEY: I have obtained instructions, yes Mr Chairman, thank you.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR LAMEY: Mr Lotz, I am going to ask you questions to clarity the matter, because it was mentioned in the affidavit of Mr Snyman but before I make this statement to you, I must put it to you that my instructions are that Mr Snyman's memory on this aspect is not quite so clear any more, but I want to ask you whether you at any stage took part in the placing of the explosives in the vehicle in which Mr Waal du Toit and Kok were mainly involved?
MR LOTZ: No, I wasn't involved.
MR LAMEY: Were you also not involved in a certain house or farm where Mr Snyman was?
MR LOTZ: No.
MR LAMEY: Thank you, I have no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR LAMEY: .
MR CORNELIUS: I have no questions thank you Mr Chairman.
CHAIRPERSON: I think we have been requested that each time a legal representative take his turn, he must place his name on record.
MR CORNELIUS: I am sorry, it is Cornelius for Vermeulen, there is no further questions from this side, thank you.
NO CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR CORNELIUS: .
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Kemp?
MR KEMP: It is Kemp on behalf of the fifth and sixth applicants, no questions Mr Chairman.
NO CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR KEMP
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Ford?
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY ADV FORD: Thank you Mr Chairman. Ford on behalf of Mrs Mgoduka and Mrs Faku. Mr Lotz, your senior officer, who did you report to?
MR LOTZ: At that stage?
ADV FORD: At that stage yes.
MR LOTZ: Colonel Roelofse.
ADV FORD: And how many people reported to Colonel Roelofse? How many people were in the section which he controlled?
MR LOTZ: Approximately 10 to 12. I am not entirely sure.
ADV FORD: Now Mr Lotz, you testified at some length in the trial in which you were acquitted, and of course you denied any knowledge of the bombing as such, is that right?
MR LOTZ: I did not testify.
ADV FORD: I am sorry, I am talking about the Goniwe inquest, my apology. The Goniwe inquest you testified in it?
MR LOTZ: That is correct.
ADV FORD: And you were cross-examined at some length?
MR LOTZ: That is correct.
ADV FORD: And of course we must accept then that much of what you said in that evidence, was untrue?
MR LOTZ: That is correct.
ADV FORD: And you have now decided that in this application you are going to reveal the true facts and all the facts?
MR LOTZ: That is correct.
ADV FORD: In order that all of those who were involved, both before and after this bombing, should be brought to justice, is that right?
MR LOTZ: That is correct.
ADV FORD: Now, who was the Investigating Officer of the bombing?
MR LOTZ: Captain Van Wyk.
ADV FORD: And to whom did he report?
MR LOTZ: Colonel Roelofse.
ADV FORD: Was he a competent Investigating Officer in so far as you were aware Mr Lotz?
MR LOTZ: I believe so, yes.
ADV FORD: And Colonel Roelofse, was he a competent Security Policeman in your experience?
MR LOTZ: That is correct.
ADV FORD: Was he involved in investigations, ongoing investigations relating to covert operations, relating to counter-insurgency and the like?
MR LOTZ: I think so, he was the Unit Commander if one can put it like that, so he should have been aware of that, but I can't say for sure he was or he wasn't involved.
ADV FORD: How did you come to be available to Mr Nieuwoudt that night?
MR LOTZ: I maybe wrong, but it was just before the 16th of December and all the members were on duty in our Unit. I was doing administrative office work at the time.
ADV FORD: Were you aware that you were going to be summoned by Mr Nieuwoudt to assist?
MR LOTZ: He said that he might need me, yes.
ADV FORD: The motor vehicle which you drove to the scene where the explosion took place, that was a motor vehicle from your section, do I understand that correctly?
MR LOTZ: No, it was not.
ADV FORD: It was from Captain Van Vuuren's section?
MR LOTZ: Yes, Nieuwoudt's Unit.
ADV FORD: I see, oh, I am sorry, that was the untrue evidence given in the Goniwe inquest that it was from Van Vuuren's section?
MR LOTZ: I don't know exactly how the Unit functioned at the time, but the vehicle belonged to Nieuwoudt's Unit.
ADV FORD: Where did you pick up the motor vehicle or fetch the motor vehicle from if we may put it that way?
MR LOTZ: At Louis Le Grange square.
ADV FORD: And who furnished you with the keys?
MR LOTZ: The keys were in Captain Nieuwoudt's office, in the drawer near the telephone.
ADV FORD: Was Colonel Roelofse aware that you were going to be assisting Nieuwoudt in this operation?
MR LOTZ: I don't know.
ADV FORD: Did you question at all when Mr Nieuwoudt asked you to participate, to assist him in this way?
MR LOTZ: No, sir.
ADV FORD: When you drove the motor vehicle, were you aware at all of what was to take place?
MR LOTZ: No.
ADV FORD: You were not aware that you were driving a motor vehicle heavily loaded with explosive obviously?
MR LOTZ: No, I did not know.
ADV FORD: After the explosion had taken place, you were then very well aware that you had been driving such a motor vehicle?
MR LOTZ: That is correct, yes.
ADV FORD: You at no stage questioned your involvement in this operation, you weren't aware what it was about and what was going to be required of you other than driving the motor vehicle to the scene?
MR LOTZ: If I remember correctly, before the explosion?
ADV FORD: Yes?
MR LOTZ: No.
ADV FORD: And as you were driving away, if we understand your evidence, you heard the explosion take place behind you?
MR LOTZ: That is correct.
ADV FORD: How far were you away at that stage?
MR LOTZ: It could have been a kilometre. I stand to be corrected, I didn't measure the distance.
ADV FORD: Did you have your radio on?
MR LOTZ: Yes.
ADV FORD: Were you alerted to the explosion by the sound of the explosion or by what was broadcast on the radio?
MR LOTZ: I think I first heard the explosion and then I heard the report on the radio.
ADV FORD: By all accounts, it was a substantial explosion which you would have heard clearly?
MR LOTZ: That is correct.
ADV FORD: And what was then broadcast over the radio?
MR LOTZ: It was Captain Nieuwoudt speaking on the radio and he mentioned the explosion which had taken place and everything surrounding that.
ADV FORD: What was your reaction?
MR LOTZ: I was shocked.
ADV FORD: Were you aware what had happened at that stage, which car had been blown up?
MR LOTZ: No. No, I wasn't sure when I heard the news, which car it was.
ADV FORD: Did you contact anybody, or endeavoured to contact anybody?
MR LOTZ: I turned round and went back and I then saw what had happened.
ADV FORD: It was then, I assume, immediately clear to you that it was the Jetta motor vehicle which you had driven, which had blown up?
MR LOTZ: That is correct.
ADV FORD: And it was practically or in the near vicinity of where you had handed it over, is that correct?
MR LOTZ: Yes, about 50 to 100 metres further on.
ADV FORD: What was Mr Nieuwoudt doing at that stage when you returned?
MR LOTZ: He was on the scene, he walked around. I don't know exactly what he was doing. Whether he was perhaps just determining what had happened.
ADV FORD: Were there other people present when you arrived at the scene?
MR LOTZ: When I got as far as the bluegum trees, Mr Snyman and Mr Ras were also there.
ADV FORD: And what were they doing?
MR LOTZ: They were also just standing there.
ADV FORD: Did you asked what had happened?
MR LOTZ: Yes, they said as I said in my application, Captain Nieuwoudt said that it was an official operation and he instructed me to take those two people to where their vehicle was parked and then to go back to Louis Le Grange square.
ADV FORD: So at that stage there was no doubt in your mind that these persons, your colleagues, had been killed by their own men if we can call it that, by Mr Nieuwoudt inter alia?
MR LOTZ: That is correct.
ADV FORD: Did you question that at all?
MR LOTZ: No, not at that stage, I was too shocked.
ADV FORD: You then telephoned, or did you telephone or did you contact by radio, when you arrived at Louis le Grange you telephoned Colonel Roelofse, is that right?
MR LOTZ: That is correct.
ADV FORD: He was your Commanding Officer?
MR LOTZ: That is correct.
ADV FORD: Presumably you would have to report to him all operations in which you had been involved?
MR LOTZ: That is correct.
ADV FORD: Did you report to him what had happened?
MR LOTZ: Yes, I did report to him what had happened.
ADV FORD: That this was an operation in which your colleagues had been killed by their own men?
MR LOTZ: No, I did not tell him that.
ADV FORD: Why not?
MR LOTZ: Captain Nieuwoudt told me that I shouldn't mention anything about this matter.
ADV FORD: Mr Nieuwoudt was not your Commanding Officer, was he?
MR LOTZ: No, he wasn't.
ADV FORD: You were aware that you were now implicated in a serious crime?
MR LOTZ: That is correct.
ADV FORD: And you still didn't see fit to convey this to your Commanding Officer?
MR LOTZ: No.
ADV FORD: Didn't you trust him?
MR LOTZ: I did trust him.
ADV FORD: If you were to, you were aware that he had, or did I understand you correctly that he had agreed to you being available for Mr Nieuwoudt?
MR LOTZ: No.
ADV FORD: He didn't agree to that? My apologies. Mr Van Wyk, the Investigating Officer, did you speak, you went to pick him up as well?
MR LOTZ: Colonel Roelofse picked me up and we then went to pick up Van Wyk.
ADV FORD: Were you aware that he was going to be the Investigating Officer at that stage?
MR LOTZ: No.
ADV FORD: Do you know why he was picked up?
MR LOTZ: No.
ADV FORD: Your evidence is then that you in no way suggested to or told either Mr Roelofse or Mr Van Wyk of the true facts surrounding this incident?
MR LOTZ: I told them nothing. No, I didn't tell them anything.
ADV FORD: You were subsequently charged with involvement in the very least in this bombing? This was always a possibility was it not?
MR LOTZ: That is correct.
ADV FORD: Did you believe you acted improperly in being involved at all?
MR LOTZ: Yes, I do believe that.
ADV FORD: I am not asking you about now, then, at the time, did you believe what you did, you ought to have done, you should have done?
MR LOTZ: They asked me to do it and I did it. That is why I believed that what I had done, was right.
ADV FORD: If you had been asked to drive that motor vehicle there, knowing that four of your colleagues were to be blown up, would you have done it?
MR LOTZ: I don't know. It is a very difficult decision to make.
ADV FORD: But you didn't hesitate once you knew that they had been blown up, to conceal the relevant evidence surrounding their deaths?
MR LOTZ: Yes, I think there is a difference between driving the vehicle beforehand and to take that risk and what happens afterwards.
ADV FORD: You made a statement to the Investigating Officer?
MR LOTZ: That is correct.
ADV FORD: In which once again, you did not tell the truth?
MR LOTZ: That is correct.
ADV FORD: Did you and Mr Nieuwoudt discuss at all what story was to be told?
MR LOTZ: That is correct.
ADV FORD: Were you aware that members of the Security Branch were executing people?
MR LOTZ: There were many rumours and stories in that connection, yes.
ADV FORD: You were not involved in any such operations, other than this one?
MR LOTZ: Where policemen were involved?
ADV FORD: Anyone, where persons, citizens were executed, killed by members of the Security Forces?
MR LOTZ: I was involved.
ADV FORD: And did you believe it justified?
MR LOTZ: That is correct.
ADV FORD: Why did you believe it justified?
MR LOTZ: We were trying to ensure our survival.
ADV FORD: Did you, when you were required to participate in such operations, did you do it without question or did you ascertain for yourself that the actions you were undertaking, were justified?
MR LOTZ: Certain instructions and orders were given to me, and I complied with those.
ADV FORD: You never questioned?
MR LOTZ: No.
ADV FORD: Did you have, you knew very well, you knew Mr Mgoduka, Mr Faku, Mr Mapipa, Mr Jack, you knew those persons?
MR LOTZ: That is correct.
ADV FORD: Had they given you any problems?
MR LOTZ: No, not as far as I am aware.
ADV FORD: Did you have any reason to doubt their loyalty?
MR LOTZ: I didn't know what they were busy doing or what they were involved in, I couldn't say. No, I couldn't.
ADV FORD: And did you accept what Mr Nieuwoudt told you without question?
MR LOTZ: That is correct.
ADV FORD: Thank you Mr Chairman, I have no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY ADV FORD: .
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Brink?
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR BRINK: Yes, thank you Mr Chairman very briefly. Mr Lotz, I am not quite sure I understand your application. Your evidence is that you took no part in the planning of the death of these four people.
MR LOTZ: That is correct.
MR BRINK: That you had no part in any conspiracy to kill them?
MR LOTZ: That is correct.
MR BRINK: That all you did on the evening in question was to follow orders by taking this motor car to Motherwell, which car, unbeknown to you, was full of explosives?
MR LOTZ: That is correct.
MR BRINK: And then you followed orders to leave the car there, take a kombi and go back to Louis le Grange?
MR LOTZ: That is correct.
MR BRINK: And what you did thereafter concealing the truth, and that sort of thing, might be a different aspect, but you are applying for amnesty for the death of these people.
MR LOTZ: According to my legal representative, we discussed it and he said to put the whole, full picture on the table, I should apply for amnesty in this connection.
MR BRINK: But at no stage have you ever been guilty of having killed them or plotting to kill them?
MR LOTZ: Yes.
MR BRINK: Thank you Mr Chairman.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR BRINK: .
ADV DE JAGER: But you did actively conceal these acts?
MR LOTZ: That is correct.
ADV DE JAGER: And in so doing you committed the offence of obstructing the course of justice?
MR LOTZ: Correct.
ADV DE JAGER: But you are not applying for amnesty in that connection?
MR LOTZ: That is why I am applying for amnesty.
ADV DE JAGER: I think you might have to take this up with your legal representative again, because as far as I can see, that does not appear from your application.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Booyens, maybe you operated on a principle that you can ask for more, if you can ask for more, you can always ask for less, but you can just apply your mind to that and then present proposals or amendments if any.
ADV BOOYENS: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: And then give them to us, even if it is tomorrow I think.
ADV BOOYENS: Mr Chairman, yes, I think the way it was seen initially was that he was applying as an accessary after the fact in all probability, because he was a policeman, he had a duty to disclose.
And I agree that it does seem that included, I think the way it was seen in fact it was not so much defeating the ends of justice, but being an accessory after the fact, in other words being an accessory after the fact in the sense that he defeated the ends of justice not to do his job. But I would ask for an amendment in that regard, and let you have something in writing by tomorrow.
ADV POTGIETER: Mr Lotz, at the Motherwell crossing, did you wait there for a while before the kombi arrived on the scene?
MR LOTZ: That is correct.
ADV POTGIETER: And you saw Mr Ras there, whom you knew well, he was a former Koevoet colleague of yours and Mr Nieuwoudt, is that correct?
MR LOTZ: Snyman, Ras and Nieuwoudt, that is correct.
ADV POTGIETER: And the other man you didn't know?
MR LOTZ: No.
ADV POTGIETER: Did you then suspect that this was some kind of an operation?
MR LOTZ: Yes, I did, but I wasn't sure what it was about.
ADV POTGIETER: Did you ask what it was about and what they were doing at the crossing?
MR LOTZ: You don't ask that kind of question.
ADV POTGIETER: You don't ask that kind of question?
MR LOTZ: No.
ADV POTGIETER: Why not?
MR LOTZ: Because they were busy with some kind of an operation. If it was necessary for me to know, then they would have told me what it was about.
ADV POTGIETER: Did you then begin to suspect that it could be something illegal?
MR LOTZ: I had no idea what it was about.
ADV POTGIETER: No, I know that you had no idea, but did you suspect that it could be something unlawful?
MR LOTZ: It might just as well have been a lawful operation, I had no idea.
ADV POTGIETER: So, you associated yourself with the fact that it could possibly be an illegal action?
MR LOTZ: Yes.
ADV POTGIETER: And you decided you weren't going to ask any questions?
MR LOTZ: Yes.
ADV POTGIETER: What were they busy discussing at the scene?
MR LOTZ: Nothing out of the ordinary. I spoke to Nieuwoudt, he thanked me for the vehicle and I think I went to say hallo to Mr Ras, I hadn't seen him for quite a while.
There was - nothing else was discussed.
ADV POTGIETER: Where was Mr Ras stationed at that time?
MR LOTZ: At Vlakplaas.
ADV POTGIETER: As far as your knowledge was, you were aware of that?
MR LOTZ: I am not sure whether I knew it at that stage, maybe I did know that he was at Vlakplaas, but I am not sure. I hadn't seen him since our time in Ovamboland.
ADV POTGIETER: So you didn't ask him where he was stationed at that particular time?
MR LOTZ: I might have. I am not sure.
ADV POTGIETER: This explosive device was activated at some stage, apparently not during the time that you were actually driving the car. Did you see that?
MR LOTZ: No.
ADV POTGIETER: Was it possible that the explosive device was activated whilst you were on the scene?
MR LOTZ: It is possible.
ADV POTGIETER: Would it have been possible for them to do it without you being aware of it?
MR LOTZ: I don't know how they did it, but I suppose they could have done it in that way.
ADV POTGIETER: Was Ras an explosives expert or don't you know?
MR LOTZ: I think he is. I think he is.
ADV POTGIETER: Were you in his company all the time?
MR LOTZ: I might have been. I went to Nieuwoudt, I went to him.
ADV POTGIETER: So you did not get the impression that they were busy activating an explosive device?
MR LOTZ: No.
ADV POTGIETER: Thank you.
ADV DE JAGER: Were you a member of the Security Branch at that stage?
MR LOTZ: Yes, I was.
ADV DE JAGER: In the Security Branch, was there discussion of members who were disloyal?
MR LOTZ: Not that I know of.
ADV DE JAGER: Had you ever heard about double agents and people who worked with you whom you did not trust?
MR LOTZ: No, I don't know.
CHAIRPERSON: In the course of your duties, did you normally get instructions from Mr Nieuwoudt?
MR LOTZ: From Mr Roelofse.
CHAIRPERSON: But on that day, regarding this particular operation, you got instructions from Mr Nieuwoudt and not from Mr Roelofse?
MR LOTZ: That is correct.
CHAIRPERSON: Did that surprise you?
MR LOTZ: No.
CHAIRPERSON: Why not?
MR LOTZ: Often they would come and ask you help me with this or that, that was not strange. Some times members from one section would assist members from another section.
CHAIRPERSON: He didn't even have to approach Mr Roelofse first?
MR LOTZ: No.
CHAIRPERSON: And his men were not available during that time, were they on leave or something?
MR LOTZ: Which people are these?
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nieuwoudt's team, the people that he normally worked with?
MR LOTZ: I don't know, I don't where they were.
CHAIRPERSON: Do you want to re-examine Mr Booyens?
RE-EXAMINATION BY ADV BOOYENS: Just one aspect. You were asked about disloyalty. The deceased and you, did you work in the same section?
MR LOTZ: Sergeant Faku worked with me, Mapipa worked with me. Sehati was an ascari, he worked now and then. Mgoduka, I did not know.
ADV BOOYENS: Thank you. Thank you Mr Chairman, I have got no further questions and I have got no further witnesses that I can assist the Committee with at this stage unfortunately, Mr Chairman.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY ADV BOOYENS: .
CHAIRPERSON: I notice it is just about to be quarter to four. Did you say that you don't have the next witness ready yet?
ADV BOOYENS: The only further witness I intend calling for my side, is Nieuwoudt and he is not available today as I indicated earlier on to you, so unless you want one of my colleagues to assist you Mr Chairman, I can't any further unfortunately.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you very much. Well, we will adjourn now, it is about quarter to four, we will adjourn now, but I think we should stress the point that we work on the basis that each of the applicants are ready, or has since been ready, for some time to proceed with their applications and I think that we simply have just to proceed with whoever is available tomorrow and if none of the applicants is willing to get into the witness box, we would just have to direct that so and so should come and should not proceed.
I would suggest that you sort this out amongst yourselves to avoid that kind of situation. Before everybody leaves, I assume that they will leave the earphones on their chairs, so that they can be taken back to be serviced tonight. We will adjourn until tomorrow half past nine.
COMMISSION ADJOURNS
