Amnesty Hearings — Vereeniging — 1999-01-22

RUBEN MAGANGA TEBOGO MAGUBANE: I would not dispute what he said, maybe he saw them together, maybe the time that I saw them they had already dispersed.

MR MALINDI: In order to take revenge for what happened to your family in Sharpeville, why didn't you recommend that Sharpeville be attacked rather than Boipatong?

RUBEN MAGANGA TEBOGO MAGUBANE: If we had transport I would suggest that we go and attack Sharpeville.  I would fight and tell them that we should go to Sharpeville but now because we did not have a transport, it was difficult for us to go there so we decided to attack these people next to us because they also participated in attacking us.

MR MALINDI: But the Boipatong people had not participated in the burning of your house in Sharpeville, is it not so?

RUBEN MAGANGA TEBOGO MAGUBANE: The people living at Boipatong are also supporters of the ANC.

MR MALINDI: And you did not have information that every resident of Boipatong was a member or supporter of the ANC?

RUBEN MAGANGA TEBOGO MAGUBANE: You will not live in the township if you are not in the support of the ANC.

MR MALINDI: Well your parents left Sharpeville and went to Boipatong, and you said they were not politically involved.

RUBEN MAGANGA TEBOGO MAGUBANE: That is correct, I said so.

MR MALINDI: And there must have been many other residents who were not politically involved in Boipatong?

RUBEN MAGANGA TEBOGO MAGUBANE: When they arrived in Boipatong, they participated in politics.

MR MALINDI: On page 91 of the bundle, in your affidavit, you state that the people who were in control of the meeting of the 17th of June 1992 before you left to attack Boipatong, were Mkhize, Damarra and other Indunas.  Could you give the Committee the names of the other Indunas who were in control of this meeting?

RUBEN MAGANGA TEBOGO MAGUBANE: The other Indunas were Malankana, he was also a co-accused but he was acquitted.  We used to call him Malankana.  He was from KwaZulu Natal.  I don't know whether from Nonkoma or where.  The other one, there's another big man, I forget his name.

MR MALINDI: Any other Indunas?

RUBEN MAGANGA TEBOGO MAGUBANE: I don't remember others.

MR MALINDI: Was Malankana acquitted or was he discharged at the end of the State's case?

RUBEN MAGANGA TEBOGO MAGUBANE: Yes, he was acquitted, he was found not guilty.

MR MALINDI: Thank you, Chairperson, no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MALINDI

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Cambanis?

MS CAMBANIS: Nothing, thank you, Mr Chairman.
NO QUESTIONS BY MS CAMBANIS

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mapoma?

MR MAPOMA: Thank you, Chairperson, I have no questions.
NO QUESTIONS BY MR MAPOMA

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.  Any re-examination?

MR STRYDOM: No re-examination, thank you.
NO RE-EXAMINATION BY MR STRYDOM

MS PRETORIUS: No questions, thank you.
NO QUESTIONS BY MS PRETORIUS

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MR DA SILVA: Mr Magubane, during your cross-examination you stated on two occasions that, with reference to the military vehicle that you saw, that you would fight back and that they would run away.  I get the impression when you state that, that you were confident that if you had to enter into a fight, and when I say "you' I mean it in the plural, I mean the group, that if you had to enter into a fight with the military vehicle you would have no doubt of victory, do you agree with that?

RUBEN MAGANGA TEBOGO MAGUBANE: We would  not claim victory but we would fight and maybe they would arrest us, but after a struggle.

MR DA SILVA: Do you believe that a single military vehicle would be able to arrest the group of people that was crossing the road, a group of about 300 or 200 people?

RUBEN MAGANGA TEBOGO MAGUBANE: No, they would not.

MR DA SILVA: Now if that was so obvious, wouldn't that be obvious to the people in the military vehicle as well? ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Mr da Silva, are you expecting this witness to express an opinion as to what was going on in the mind of the people who were in the army vehicle?  Isn't it sufficient for him just to tell us what his perception of the situation was.  I mean surely, we are not here to listen to his opinion as to what was going on in the mind of the army.

MR DA SILVA: I'll leave that question, I won't take it further.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR DA SILVA: You testified earlier that the vehicle that you saw was in the vicinity of the robots, and I understood your evidence to be that the group crossed at the footbridge, are you able to estimate the distance between the group and the vehicle?

RUBEN MAGANGA TEBOGO MAGUBANE: The car has already passed the bridge when we passed.  It was at a distance, the car was parked at a distance.

MR DA SILVA: Would you agree with me that on your explanation, the distance between the robot and the footbridge is in excess of 100 metres,  or can't you say?

RUBEN MAGANGA TEBOGO MAGUBANE: You say 100 metres?

MR DA SILVA: Yes, 100 metres, more than 100 metres.

RUBEN MAGANGA TEBOGO MAGUBANE: If 100 metres can equal this hall twice, then I would agree.

MR DA SILVA: Well we've measured the hall, it would be in excess of three times the length of this hall, would you agree with that?

RUBEN MAGANGA TEBOGO MAGUBANE: Yes, I would do.

MR DA SILVA: My instructions are that the military vehicle never saw people carrying goods while they were crossing the bridge or crossing the road, do you have any comment in that regard?

RUBEN MAGANGA TEBOGO MAGUBANE: If they say so, I would agree because where we were it was dark but where they were there was light.  I would agree if they say they did not see people.

MR DA SILVA: I'm sorry, perhaps I didn't understand your answer properly.  The point put to you or the question put to you was that they saw nobody carrying any goods, would you dispute that?

RUBEN MAGANGA TEBOGO MAGUBANE: We were in a group and then we crossed very fast.  As to whether they turned and looked around, if they did not see, they did not see and then I would agree because if a person passes you at the back, you are not able to see.

MR DA SILVA: Now a further question was put to you in regard to whether you were aware of any initiatives being taken by the military vehicle to arrest you, and you say you were not aware of such initiatives, so you would not dispute that in fact steps were being taken at that time, is that correct?

RUBEN MAGANGA TEBOGO MAGUBANE: I would not agree or disagree because the road we used we had no obstacle or no hindrance in our movements.  Even in Court we heard that the soldiers entered in the grass and then they shot in the air.  I heard in Court.  I did not see them, even under the bridge I did not see them.

MR DA SILVA: Are you aware that at a later stage more military vehicles were in the vicinity, were called to the vicinity?    Do you have any comment in that regard?

RUBEN MAGANGA TEBOGO MAGUBANE: Do you mean the following day?

MR DA SILVA: After the group had crossed the road, a few minutes after that, say an half an hour after that there were more military vehicles in the vicinity.

CHAIRPERSON: Is there any indication how many military vehicles were there at that stage?

MR DA SILVA: There were several vehicles at different stages, Mr Chairman, it's difficult for me to say precisely at what stage.  The question is a general question, whether the witness is aware of further military vehicles after they had for instance, entered KwaMadala hostel.

CHAIRPERSON: Well it's just that I wanted clarity because I had understood what put to the other witness, that there were only two vehicles that were available at that particular time ...(intervention)