Amnesty Hearings — Cape Town — 2000-11-18

UNKNOWN: Yes, but it has ...(sound cut off) ... Mr Alexander was a member of both Kewtown Youth Movement and the Cape Youth Congress.  They were affiliated.  He was a representative of Kewtown Youth Movement on the Cape Youth Congress.  And then furthermore, they were then affiliated to other organisations eventually affiliated to the UDF.  So I'm not trying to make the point that anyone was entitled to harm these people because of their political motivations, but once again one must see the full picture, the context of the time, Emergency Regulations, etcetera, etcetera.  You cannot take this piece by piece and say if you look at their political profile, they're small fry, Kewtown Youth Movement is not the Cape Youth Congress, they weren't having secretive meetings, etcetera.  One has to look at the full picture, all the elements as listed in (3) of Section 20.
	And furthermore, one has to say this then also in favour of the applicants, that yes, in fact the people who were in the building were Cape Youth Movement and they were not supposed to be there - well, not supposed to be there, but they didn't have a planned meeting, they only decided on that meeting that very same evening, minutes before they gathered.  And it is common cause that the Kewtown Youth Movement adjourned early and they were going home and they did in fact go home and only then did the Cape Youth Movement meet in the boardroom.
	Now I submit that if Van Zyl was acting on information by Hardien and Hardien got the information of the Kewtown Youth Movement's meeting and he saw them going home, that he wouldn't know about the Cape Youth Movement and their meeting.  Now it is so that there's evidence about cars parked, etcetera, but also in my heads I refer to this whole situation saying that one must remember that these people met at Kriek(?) and from there they would then decide where they would have their meetings, to escape the attentions of the police.
	Now I cannot see for the life of me if you are so secretive, why you would take your car and drive from Kriek a couple of metres or - it was indicated on the map, and go and park all the cars of the people involved, right in front of the place where you are meeting.  And it is clear from Mr Alexander's evidence that those people in fact walked over from Kriek to the ELC.
	Now I'm making these submissions just to indicate that this is not a cut and dried cases where one can say that Hardien definitely knew about these 15 people in the boardroom, but there in fact, it's common cause that there were at least soccer players there.  But then we had the evidence referred to earlier, for instance, that the hall was locked.  
	Now my submission is that it cannot be said that these people were in fact planning to kill persons gathering in a hall.  If the hall was for instance, on the statements we saw, at that stage locked.  Although Hardien didn't say that he noticed that it was locked, that I also concede, but the fact of the matter is at the end of the day, can it be found as a fact that they intended killing the people gathered in the ELC.
	I then further refer to the Omar and Evans matters.  I submit that at least, which can be accepted, is that Mr Omar had a high political profile, it was not contested at all that he was a high profile leader in the United Democratic Front, they were banned in terms of the Emergency Regulations, and it was never contested nor, I think will it be, that the UDF was a front organisation for the ANC, nothing more than that.  And it is borne out by the fact that immediately after the election Mr Omar was appointed as Minister of Justice.  But ...(intervention)

GEORGE BIZOS: ...(indistinct - no microphone) the ANC, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: I think he said there was evidence.

UNKNOWN: What I'm saying is, the evidence ...(intervention)

GEORGE BIZOS: ....(inaudible - no microphone) deciding this matter on the evidence.

UNKNOWN: Mr Chairman, if what is said by the applicants is considered as not evidence, not to be taken into consideration as evidence, there's no evidence.  But the fact of the matter is that the applicants sat here, all of them, giving evidence that the UDF was a front organisation for the ANC, and no-one disputed it.  That's evidence.  Or if ...(intervention)

GEORGE BIZOS: What I wanted to ask is, where is the common cause that the UDF ... because that was the statement that was made.

UNKNOWN: Yes, that's something quite different.  I'll retract that.
	The fact of the matter is there's evidence, Mr Chairman, and it's never been disputed.

GEORGE BIZOS: ...(inaudible - no microphone)

UNKNOWN: Well if it's not disputed actually it should be common cause, but I'll leave that there.
	But what is important is that, which should be taken into ...(intervention)

GEORGE BIZOS: ...(inaudible - no microphone)

CHAIRPERSON: Carry on, Mr du Plessis.