Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — 1998-05-11

GEORGE BIZOS: Were Makarovs available to people in Johannesburg or in South Africa at the time, not necessarily lawfully acquired?

GARY JOHN KRUSER: Makarovs, like AK's was a fairly freely available weapon, as we know from our Intelligence Department and from what we know of criminal acts committed in South Africa around that time, they were fairly freely available.

GEORGE BIZOS: And there was also a shotgun was there?

GARY JOHN KRUSER: Can you explain, shotgun where?

GEORGE BIZOS: ...[inaudible] shotgun on the corner?

GARY JOHN KRUSER: On the corner there was no shotgun.

GEORGE BIZOS: Was there a shotgun on the parapet?

GARY JOHN KRUSER: That's correct, there were shotguns on the parapet.

CHAIRPERSON: Were you armed?

GARY JOHN KRUSER: That's correct.

CHAIRPERSON: With what?

GARY JOHN KRUSER: I was armed with a 9mm parabellum.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you use it?

GARY JOHN KRUSER: I did not use it.

GEORGE BIZOS: Was there any reason why you did not use it?

GARY JOHN KRUSER: I felt as the Commander I needed to try and remain as objective as possible and I thought if I do not fire I will have a better control over the situation.

GEORGE BIZOS: Now that the ballistics evidence has become available, you attached to your amnesty application a supplementary affidavit which appears on page 29(b) of bundle A.

GARY JOHN KRUSER: That's correct.

GEORGE BIZOS: In paragraph 6 on page 29(c)
"I respectfully disagree with many of the findings of the Inquest Court.  It is appropriate here to re-iterate in particular that I did not at any time intend to bring about the unlawful killing of or injury to anyone.  I still believe that at the time I gave the order to repel, the marchers were in the process of attacking Shell House with the intention of damaging it and killing and injuring as many of its occupants as possible, including members of the leadership of the ANC.  However, I do accept that certain aspects of the objective ballistic and medical evidence presented during the inquest are in conflict with portions of my evidence, in particular, I accept that most of the deceased were shot after they had turned back and that the gunfire which I heard coming from the marchers and which I believed was fired in my direction, was directed elsewhere.  I accept further that one or more of the marchers may have been killed or injured as a result of my order to repel.  Particulars concerning such persons do not fall within my personal knowledge.  I understand that my legal representatives have for some time attempted to obtain particulars about injured persons from their legal representatives, but without success.
	9.	I believe when I gave the order to repel and when I gave evidence in the joint inquest that the shooting was justified, that it was not excessive and that my order was to cease fire was given timeously.  However, I have been advised by my legal representatives that the criminal or civil court may find otherwise and hold that my actions were neither justified nor reasonable in the circumstances.  Albeit on a prima facie basis, the Inquest Court has already done so.  Accordingly I request that if the Amnesty Committee is satisfied that my acts or omissions constitute an offence and/or the delict of wrongfully and negligently bringing about the death or the injury to on one or more of the marchers, I be granted amnesty in respect thereof."
Do you confirm the correctness of your supplementary affidavit?

GARY JOHN KRUSER: That's correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Bizos, could we give this volume a designation?  We have the two volumes that you mention A and B.  Is this a continuation of A or is it a continuation of B or what?

GEORGE BIZOS: It's a continuation of A, it's interleaved. We have interleaved ours so that we have the supplementary affidavit of each of the applicants as ...(intervention)

MR LAX: Sorry, is it not in fact an extra part of the original bundle which contains the applications and the affidavits handed in at the inquest and the finding and all that stuff that we got, which is the first document we would have received?

GEORGE BIZOS: Yes, it is the same, I'm sorry, we, in preparing our bundle A we have interleaved these supplementary affidavits so that the Committee has all the documents relating to the particular applicant together.  In the index of bundle A it shows the interleaving, Mr Chairman, if you look at the second page of bundle A.

CHAIRPERSON: ...(inaudible) that A is the application, this document here, and we've not referred to it at all today.  It contains the 10 applications, then you've got Lancet Hall incident and the applications of the three applicants.

GEORGE BIZOS: Is that the only one that we have, what is the markings of ...(inaudible)

CHAIRPERSON: We've marked bundle A, the documents ...(intervention)

GEORGE BIZOS: ...(inaudible)

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

GEORGE BIZOS: This should be C, this is in bundle C.  Make that C1 and we will put the supplementary affidavits together because it's not as easily interleaved in you papers as it is in ours, as bundle C2 and if we could make this supplementary affidavit the first in the bundle that is going to be called C2.  Are you able to follow it, Mr Chairman?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes....[inaudible] was indexed to supplementary affidavits is marked by us as C2.

GEORGE BIZOS: We will arrange our papers accordingly as well so that there is no misunderstanding.

CHAIRPERSON: ...(inaudible) does this have a key to it or is it supposed to go in without any key?

GEORGE BIZOS: No, we've said Johannesburg city blocks for easy reference Mr Chairman.  Mr Chairman, it may be easier if we made copies of this plan that we've now got which was the main, which has got the whole city centre including Library Gardens and the various buildings.  It may make your task easier Mr Chairman, and at an appropriate time, we have a very big one which we hope to get something to put it one so that both the witness can point and that you can see Mr Chairman.  We will put those up and they will be ready for tomorrow.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

GEORGE BIZOS: Mr Chairman, there's a lot of paper here, we would like to take stock and I don't think that we will be very long with Mr Kruser tomorrow.

CHAIRPERSON: Do I understand that we are in the position to carry on until you finish with his evidence in chief now?

GEORGE BIZOS: ...(inaudible) if that suits the Committee, Mr Chairman, yes.  If we've left anything out, we may seek leave to just supplement it tomorrow, but let me.
	Mr Kruser, it has been suggested we heard, that you did not have any political objective in mind when these events took place.  Would you like in your own words, to tell the court why you did what you did and what was the political context in which you did it?