Amnesty Hearings — Pietermaritzburg — 1997-02-10

JUDGE WILSON: And also, if you look at the judgment page 2, dealing with Peter's evidence, second paragraph
"He testified they were busy making a fire in his house when they heard shots from outside.  When
3B - 13.2	they/...
MS THABETHE	240	ADDRESS
they went out they heard the shots coming closer to their house".
Page 3:
"Pakamile Nqobo says she heard shots in the direction of the Zulu kraal".
That would support the idea that there were groups coming towards the Nqobo kraal from further away via the Zulu kraal who were firing shots.

MS THABETHE: It would suggest that they were coming from wherever they were coming from, coming towards the Nqobo kraal where the incident actually happened.

JUDGE WILSON: ... little boy came out because he would have gone and spoken to his brother.  But now I am beginning to wonder, was his brother perhaps in the house.   I don't know.

MS THABETHE: I don't know, but my opinion would be that if they were chasing the people and they could see where they were going, I would assume that they went to the Nqobo kraal because they saw them, they were chasing them and they went there because they saw them going in there.  I don't know if it can be assumed that they went to the Nqobo kraal because they saw these two people that they were chasing go into the Nqobo kraal.  That would be my assumption.

JUDGE WILSON: And the trial Judge did not, it appears, which I hadn't had full regard to before, convict on the basis that he believed the evidence of Peter that the applicant fired shots from the doorway.  He convicted the applicant on the basis of common purpose.   Can we now reject the applicant's evidence as to how he fired the shots and say Peter's evidence must be preferred, that he was in the room, he wasn't firing blindly through the window?
3B - 13.2

MS THABETHE: /...
MS THABETHE	241	ADDRESS

MS THABETHE: I am not sure if it would make any difference whether he was firing inside the house or outside the house.  The fact is he fired and people were shot.  And as to the question of whether they went inside the house, I think that is what we can never know, maybe we can assume, it is probable that they went inside the kraal that is in the yard.  But we are not sure because there were so many houses, if maybe they went into the house that the applicant thought they were going into.  I think that's what is not clear.

JUDGE WILSON: If they merely fired thinking they were firing at the people they had been pursuing and by chance they hit these other people, isn't that an act with a political objective?  If they fired thinking they were firing at the IFP enemy.

MS THABETHE: That's what the applicant says.

JUDGE WILSON: Yes,  but I was suggesting to him when I was questioning him on the bullets and the injuries that it can't be true that he merely fired blindly.  He must have been aware of what he was firing at.  Once one can find that he was aware of that, or that he is not being frank with the Committee on that, then one rejects the application.  But is that a valid conclusion, in the light of what I put to you?

MS THABETHE: Actually I think it is.  If he had in foreseeing, and his political objective was to kill the IFP that were inside, yes, then maybe such a political objectivity.

CHAIRPERSON: ... if he stood in the doorway without going into the house and he could see the people in the room, he could see there were women and children and he opened fire on them, that would be the end of any political objective,
3B - 13.2	isn't/...
MS THABETHE	242	ADDRESS
isn't that so?

MS THABETHE: Yes, it would.  On the other hand, if he says he stood outside because there were shots coming inside and then he shot because he was supposedly shooting at the people who were shooting at him, then I am not sure if it doesn't discard political objectivity.

CHAIRPERSON: At least, in his favour it can be said that there is no evidence to contradict his version that there were people who did fire from within the house.

MS THABETHE: Unfortunately there isn't.

JUDGE WILSON: We don't know if such evidence was led at the trial.  All we have before us is the judgment.  It may be that there was such evidence.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much.

MS THABETHE: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Kuboni, thank you for your assistance in this matter.  The Committee will consider this application in due course and make its decision known.  You will convey that to your client.

MR KUBONI: Thank you very much.

CHAIRPERSON: This is the end of the hearing of this session of the Amnesty Committee.  It will now adjourn.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS