Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — UNKNOWN

JUDGE NGCOBO: This is now the second video, for the purposes of clarity is there a possibility that perhaps you can identify these videos, like video 1 or video a.

GEORGE BIZOS: Yes, video 1 is Mr Ndlovu at Library Gardens.  Video 2 is going to be an extract of a statement made by Mr Ndlovu at Vosloorus.  We are going to ask the Committee to hear the news representor, because it is really Mr Ndlovu's response to the information gathered by the news representor and the purpose of showing this, Mr Chairman and members of the Committee is the attitude of Mr Ndlovu to the possession of firearms generally and AK47 in particular, and his view as to whether or not the Police have any right to seize firearms in the possession of hostel dwellers, Mr Chairman.  We submit that the relevance of this is that information will be placed before you by Mr Berger as to how many fire inter alia - as to how many firearms were seized by the Police on that day from marchers, so that we will ask you to put these two bits together in order that you may or may not draw the influences to whether or not there were arms on the day in question.

CHAIRPERSON: What is the date of this video 2?

GEORGE BIZOS: Mr Chairman I think that the date, it's in October '93, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Pardon?

GEORGE BIZOS: I thought that it was January '94, but I hear sounds from my right that it was October, but can we - I am told that my recollection is correct, that it was January '94, Mr Chairman, but we will confirm the fact because I was speaking from memory and obviously prima facie there was ...(inaudible), but it was before the Shell House, the 28th of March.  Could you please start showing video 2.
	There's a very short scene which shows Mr von Eggedy, the person whose evidence we have handed in and which we contend was common cause, and whose statements have been handed in.  It is a result of this video being shown before the inquest that his identity was established and we got the statements, belatedly, but - and you will see his condition and which may give you, we will submit, some idea of what it was like at that moment in front of Shell House.

MR DORFLING: Mr Chairman, may I perhaps just before we proceed with this video, with reference to the first two videos that were shown, I do not know what use Mr Bizos will put it to at the time of his argument, but I can foreshadow what he might like to argue in due course.  I'm just concerned that nobody at present is representing the interests of Mr Humphrey Ndlovu.  These videos might have a negative effect on him and I think he should be informed of this evidence and he should have the right to, in terms of the act as it's set out in act, have the right to respond to this evidence.  Should he wish to place other evidence before the Committee, I would just think that that should be done and that Mr Humphrey Ndlovu, should he so wish, be granted the opportunity to respond.

CHAIRPERSON: You are speaking on his behalf?

MR DORFLING: I cannot speak on his behalf, I carry no mandate to speak on his behalf.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, the Committee will then decide that when the time comes, whether we think it necessary to call him or not.

MR LAX: Perhaps Ms Patel can tell us whether he's had a 19(4) or not.

MS PATEL: If I may just respond Honourable Chairperson, most interested parties have been sent notices timeously.  In fact a specific notice has been sent to the offices of the Inkatha Freedom Party.  If I may just inform my learned colleagues that prior to the hearing commencing several meetings were held between our offices and representatives of the IFP, and they are fully aware of these proceedings and what evidence may be or may have come to light here.

CHAIRPERSON: We will consider that in due course whether we want to hear ...(intervention)

UNKNOWN: In particular, was a section 19(4) notice sent to Mr Humphrey Ndlovu?

MS PATEL: If I can just refer to my notes ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, please do.

MS PATEL: I'll confirm that.

CHAIRPERSON: Can we see this in the meanwhile while you're busy.

GEORGE BIZOS: May I just place on record what the Committee does not know, is that Mr Ndlovu was shown these videos during the inquest, he knows about them and I'm merely placing that on record, we don't want to take any part as to whether he has a right.  He was represented by counsel at the inquest, and I'm reminded that the transcript that we have produced because we didn't want any arguments about translation, that there was an agreed translation which was agreed with his counsel, and these are the agreed transcripts.  So he's not a stranger to this, nor will he be surprised by their contents.
	Mr Chairman, unfortunately this short clip from the video had no sound, no fault of ours, this is how it came to us and we ask the Committee to see video 3 of Mr von Eggedy in front of Shell House near or at the corner of King George and De Villiers Streets.
	We could not definitely identify, but it was probably a foreign news gathering crew that must have come there after the event, Mr Chairman.  Those are the three videos that we wanted to show.  I would ask the Committee to receive a document from us, copies of which are available, and my learned friend, Mr Burger will identify the document and couple them with the ballistics evidence that has been placed before you.  We realise that it is of a technical nature and it is really explained in the documents so that the - which we ask you to receive as information and we really want to ellucinate the matter.  Mr Berger will carry on.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Mr Berger?

MR BERGER: Thank you Chairperson.  Chairperson, we've put the documents into a new bundle which we've called bundle "D" and we've numbered it through from page 1 through to page 53.
	What the bundle seeks to do is to put the ballistics evidence which was led at the inquest, and which is not disputed by any of the parties, before the Committee so that the evidence which has been led and further evidence which may be led can be seen in its context.  The memorandum itself, Chairperson, is very short, it runs for the first six pages.  In going through the memorandum I will refer the Committee to the various annexures and I will just highlight the various parts of those annexures to help the Committee read through the memorandum.  I'm not going to go through each annexure in detail.
	What we say in the memorandum is that the ballistics evidence essentially falls into two categories.  The first category concerns the observations of the experts at Shell House and Lancet Hall and the conclusions drawn from those observations.  The second part concerns the exhibits which were picked up, seized by the Police immediately after the shooting at Shell House, which were analyzed by Superintendent Du Plessis, and as a result of his analysis certain conclusions can be drawn.
	I deal firstly with the observations at Shell House.  Superintendent Du Plessis conducted an investigation at Shell House on the day after the incident, the 29th of March.  His report is contained in a document called Exhibit "Y2", and that's already been shown to the Committee, you will recall photographs of King George Street and the Woburn Pharmacy and the Cobbler's shop and all of that, that is the Exhibit "Y2" that ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: ...(inaudible)