Amnesty Hearings — Cape Town — 1997-10-27

MR JANUARY: Mr Mqweso was your liaison who would check that you had reinforcements and you mentioned earlier that he was a member of APLA.  Was it your understanding that he was a soldier and that he would be connected to local units of APLA?

HUMPHREY LUYANDA GQOMFA: Let me explain this.  Siphiwo Mqweso, I know him from exile.  I did not know that he was in Cape Town or what he did in Cape Town.  However, in the way that I was ordered, was that in case of any reinforcement, I would contact Siphiwo as I knew him and he also knew him.  Is that clear?

MR JANUARY: Okay, I don't have any further questions at this point, Mr Chairman, thank you very much for the opportunity.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR JANUARY

MR PRIOR: Mr Cornelius.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Cornelius?

MR CORNELIUS: That's right.

CHAIRPERSON: (Indistinct)

MR CORNELIUS: I do.  Mr Chairman, I am going to read a piece from my opposement to this application, plus the question.

CHAIRPERSON: I would rather you put your question, because you will have an opportunity to make a statement at the end of these proceedings, if it is convenient at that stage.  So put your questions at this stage.

MR CORNELIUS: Mr Chairman, the question is and I am looking at each one, every single one of you now, directly across this table, I want to know from each one of you and your leaders, to explain to us why this was done, if there  was any logical reason for what you have done to launch a senseless terrorist attack on a pub with young, cheerful, innocent students in at a time in South Africa's history when we were already on the road to democracy after you had all accepted and taken part in the accepting of an interim constitution on the 3rd of December?  Is there any reason, sensible reason why you had to still continue with something like that, could you not think for yourself?

HUMPHREY LUYANDA GQOMFA: I will request to answer this question as follows:  Firstly, I understand that it is the way he was brought up and indoctrinated that he refers to me as a terrorist, I am not a terrorist.  I am a freedom fighter.
	Secondly, it is the person who is in a position of oppression that feels the oppression.  He refers to this as having been senseless, it is because he did not feel the pain that we were under.   If he was in my shoes, he would not speak the way he is speaking now.

CHAIRPERSON: I think he is asking you the question, he is asking you the question because of the pain he is feeling as a result of what you have done.  That is why he is asking these questions, isn't it?

MR CORNELIUS: Mr Chairman, can I just add again.  I said it was after the time when it was politically accepted to have done senseless acts like this, this was after we had already agreed to go onto the road to democracy, after an interim constitution was accepted.

CHAIRPERSON: The main purpose of this question, why was this done at a time when negotiations for a settlement were well on their way, why was it done at that time.  I think that is the main purpose of this question.
	Can you answer that to his satisfaction?

HUMPHREY LUYANDA GQOMFA: As I said before, firstly as members of APLA, we were also members of the PAC.  The APLA subordinates from a political leadership.  The political leadership declared war against the enemy, we were the soldiers.
	We had to continue the war until the political leadership, our political leadership, PAC, gave a command that we must stop fighting.  Our political leadership had not given the command that we must stop fighting.  I think that should be clear, this is why we acted the way we did.  We were not subordinated to the ANC or the National Party, we were subordinated to the PAC.  This is how I propose to answer the question.

CHAIRPERSON: Any other questions?

MR CORNELIUS: Mr Chairman, I will keep my questions until ... (intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: You may ask any other questions you may have.  I will afford you an opportunity to make a statement or give evidence under oath, if you wish to.

MR CORNELIUS: Your Honour, I do have another question and this relates to earlier on when they were specifically talking about that night, that attack, whether they were inside or not.
	I was sitting with two of the deceased at a table that was well within the Restaurant, and you could not get through.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, put your question to him.

MR CORNELIUS: I just echo the question that Mr Prior had earlier on, were you inside the Restaurant and were you aiming directly at people that you could see?

HUMPHREY LUYANDA GQOMFA: Please repeat the question, I did not hear clearly.

CHAIRPERSON: The question is it is being put to you that you were in fact inside the Restaurant where you opened fire, and you could see the people that you were shooting at, that is the question.  Am I right?

HUMPHREY LUYANDA GQOMFA: I did not go inside the Tavern, however, I could see the people inside the Tavern.  The people that I shot, I could see.

JUDGE WILSON: Did I understand you to say that where you were sitting, the table you were sitting at was well inside and could not be seen from the door?

MR CORNELIUS: That is correct.  It was in fact, you had to turn right through another doorway to actually see where we sitting.

JUDGE WILSON: Do you understand what is being put to you that the table he was sitting at with his friends, could not have been seen from the door, you had to turn right and go through another doorway?  As I understand it, what he is putting to you, it was impossible to have shot the people sitting at the table I was sitting at, from outside the door?

CHAIRPERSON: Will these photographs help in any way to show where you were?

MR CORNELIUS: No.

JUDGE WILSON: I am going to ask Mr Prior, if he could arrange when we adjourn this afternoon, because I understand the Tavern is still there, for someone to go and make a quick sketch of the Tavern, the door, the windows,  things of that nature, so those of us who have not visited it, will understand more about where people were and things of that nature.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, put your question.

MR CORNELIUS: Mr Chairman, I could explain from this very first picture that the side door was actually the only open entrance and not the front that you see here.  You had to go through the side door and turn right into the actual Pub and Restaurant where we sat.  And you could see that from this picture 1, these double doors were actually never open.
	On the video you can still see that they were locked as well, from the inside, so you had to come from the side, turn right through passed some of these pillars, to actually shoot at where we were sitting.

JUDGE WILSON: We have just been given a sketch map, have you got one too?  The side door that you are referring to, is that just above (e)?

MR CORNELIUS: No, the (h).

JUDGE WILSON: Which door did we see in the video?

CHAIRPERSON: Please have a look at the photograph, let the witness see what we are talking about.  The applicant, do you have these photographs in front of you?

HUMPHREY LUYANDA GQOMFA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Have a look at that top picture.  Do you see that door, not the main entrance door, but to the left of it, there is another door, do you see that?

HUMPHREY LUYANDA GQOMFA: Yes, I can see it.

CHAIRPERSON: Now, it is being said that that is the door through which you entered, because the main double door, that appears in the centre, was closed at the time?  Is that correct?

HUMPHREY LUYANDA GQOMFA: I do not agree, nobody entered the Tavern.  Especially from the position I was standing at, he is not the person I was particularly aiming at.

JUDGE WILSON: Can you tell us, looking at the sketch - have you got the photograph as well - now that door, the double door there with glass in it, where would that be on the sketch plan?

MR CORNELIUS: (g) and (f).

JUDGE WILSON: (h) is the door that is swinging open?

MR CORNELIUS: That is the side door.