Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — UNKNOWN

JUDGE NGCOBO: Do you deny this evidence Mr Simelane, that is Mr Potgieter's evidence?  Was he referring to another incident and not the one that you're referring to you or the one ...(intervention)

SMANGALISO PATRICK SIMELANE: That is correct, Chairperson.

JUDGE NGCOBO: Is it possible, Mr Simelane, according to your knowledge or your recollection that the gate was broken into by somebody or some people - the marchers were forcefully trying to gain entry?

SMANGALISO PATRICK SIMELANE: That is correct.

JUDGE NGCOBO: Now, could you please just explain that the gate was broken - how was it broken, in what manner, can you just explain?

SMANGALISO PATRICK SIMELANE: This gate is a two-way gate.  It opens - it's a two-way gate that opens from inside and both gates come back together again.  It's an electronic gate and if you try to push it, it will not get open unless you use extreme force.  Then if you use extreme force it tends to cut out the electric with the electronic workings of the gate, because you've forcefully opened it and the machinery or the electronics of the gate get tampered with.

CHAIRPERSON: ...(inaudible) anybody, any Policeman entering that gate that morning?

SMANGALISO PATRICK SIMELANE: I never saw him with my own eyes, but as I've been reading the judgement at the inquest I saw that type of evidence.

CHAIRPERSON: ...(inaudible) what the judgement says and what the record says, just concentrate, we're concerned with what not what others say.  You were in the basement the whole time as I understand your evidence, is that not so?

SMANGALISO PATRICK SIMELANE: Yes, that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: A Policeman attempted or tried, and succeeded in getting through that gate, is there any reason why you wouldn't know about it?

SMANGALISO PATRICK SIMELANE: I did not see any Policeman coming through that gate, I don't remember such an incident and there is no such Police who did that, that is the evidence I'm giving before this Committee.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well, carry on.

MR PRETORIUS: Mr Simelane, are you aware that Mr Chonco was also shot in the back?

SMANGALISO PATRICK SIMELANE: I heard that when the ballistic reports were read, but according to my knowledge I never saw him and I never saw any of what you're referring to.

MR PRETORIUS: Mr Simelane, this Committee has heard about three incidents where shooting took place outside ANC offices that day, and particularly where people were injured or killed.  I'm going to put this to you to try and give an explanation to it, or if you want to forward an explanation.  The one is, outside Shell House where the majority of the people that died were shot in the back, are you aware of that?

CHAIRPERSON: You say, are you aware of that, do you mean, were you told about it?

MR PRETORIUS: Correct, was he told about it.

SMANGALISO PATRICK SIMELANE: Yes, I did not know that before, I've just heard it before this Committee as it's been explained throughout.

MR PRETORIUS: The second incident was at the front entrance of Jeppe Street where the two Mr Dlamini's were also shot from behind.  Are you aware of that?

SMANGALISO PATRICK SIMELANE: I did not know that before and I did not see it, but I can hear it as you try to explain it.

MR PRETORIUS: The third incident is the one outside the garage door where Mr Chonco got killed, and he also got killed from a shot from behind.

SMANGALISO PATRICK SIMELANE: Yes, I did not personally know it until after the ballistics as well as the medical evidence was read.

MR PRETORIUS: On those three occasions, or in regard to all three occasions, the defence of the ANC guards are that these people attacked them.

CHAIRPERSON: Are you asking him to comment on the evidence we've heard.

MS MORAKA: Perhaps, I'm sorry that I'm interrupting, with relation to the death of Mr Chonco, there is no evidence before this Committee, there was no evidence before the inquest, that Mr Chonco was shot by any member of the ANC, so again, when my learned friend asks a question, he must be very specific.

MR PRETORIUS: Mr Chairman, I'm putting it to this witness and I'm laying a foundation to put it to him on that basis that the ANC guards are telling a blatant lie about people attacking buildings, as it is quite apparent that on all three occasions the people were shot in the back.

CHAIRPERSON: I understand that to be the common argument, that gives rise to all the questions that were put, that's hardly a question you are putting to him now, is it?

MR PRETORIUS: I'm merely putting it to him for him to try and give an explanation if he wanted to, Mr Chairman.

JUDGE NGCOBO: Did you hear the question?

SMANGALISO PATRICK SIMELANE: I don't know whether it's a question or a comment or what, I don't know what Mr Pretorius is saying, it's just not clear to me as to what he's saying.

JUDGE NGCOBO: What is being said is that the people who died or who were shot, it has been discovered that they had been shot from the back.  Now the ANC guards allege that the time that they shot, they shot at people or a group who were attacking.  Now what Mr Pretorius is explaining is that, if people were shot from the back and had been injured at the back, it means these people were either retreating or running away, and not attacking as it has been alleged, therefor the ANC as well as its guards are not telling the truth when they say that they were shooting at people who were actually attacking.  Do you understand what I'm saying?

SMANGALISO PATRICK SIMELANE: Yes, I do understand that explanation, but what I'm not in agreement with is - what I can just say is that I do not agree with what he's saying.

MR PRETORIUS: Mr Simelane, why is it that only after the inquest had been going on for some time and His Honourable Judge Newgent insisted and told the ANC that he insisted they bring the guards forward that shot at Lancet Hall.  Why is it only then that the guards, after all those years, were prepared to come forward and identify themselves?

GEORGE BIZOS: Mr Chairman, there is lengthy correspondence, Mr Chairman, between the Investigating officers and the Attorney-General's office.  It is not correct to put that there were such persistent requests in relation to Lancet Hall, they almost invariably referred to Shell House.

CHAIRPERSON: ...(inaudible) a chap who was working in the basement and so on, what would he know about all these efforts and how will he be able to give any sensible answer a question like that?

MR PRETORIUS: Mr Chairman, I'm going to argue that they were in fact and indeed are even doing it now, hiding the true facts and that is the reason why they do not want to come forward.

CHAIRPERSON: Well you may say that, but to ask this witness about it, that's my question.

MR PRETORIUS: In regard to my learned friend, Mr Bizos's remark, may I please read to you page 1086 of the record ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Please, you will address us when the time comes, really.  Mr Bizos and you both can address us at that time.  Let's just deal with the questions you want to put to this witness so we can dispose of him.

JUDGE NGCOBO: Mr Pretorius is it your suggestion to this witness as well that he did not come forward earlier on because he, together with the other security guards, were trying to hide the truth?

MR PRETORIUS: Indeed sir.  That is what I'm putting to this witness.

MR LAX: Do you understand, Mr Simelane, it's being said to you that you and other witnesses deliberately hid the fact of your involvement, and that's why you didn't come forward.  Have I put it correctly, Mr Pretorius?

MR PRETORIUS: Indeed, sir.