Amnesty Hearings — Cape Town — 1997-10-28

HUMPHREY LUYANDA GQOMFA: Now I understand clearly.  I think you will also remember that this prevailing situation at the time, the political situation - just to refresh your memory, there was Codessa 1 and Codessa 2.  The PAC realised that this was not a genuine platform where we could negotiate about the country matters.  First of all there were too many shortcomings in that Codessa, as a result you will remember the stand the PAC took - you could not be a player and a referee at the same time.  The PAC then demanded a neutral venue under a neutral Chairman.  The approach to Codessa 1 and Codessa 2 proved the stand and the reservation of the PAC ...[intervention]

INTERPRETER: Could the speaker repeat the last three sentences please.

HUMPHREY LUYANDA GQOMFA: What I was saying is, firstly you will remember well the political situation at the time.  The PAC took a stand that they needed a neutral Chairman under a neutral value where these negotiations would take place.  Our position was, they could not be players and referees at the same time - this was done by the racist regime.  They were negotiating and supporting third force elements at the same time and innocent African people were being killed.
	There was no sincerity from the South African Government, that is why the PAC took the stand that it did.  The White people - we wanted the White people to understand that we are not blood-thirsty.  We realised that our liberation would end up being the liberation of the White man.  We needed to remove that stigma that Azanian people had, we take them as our fellow countrymen.  
	The reservations and the fears of PAC were such that Codessa was not a genuine platform to negotiate about the South African situation that ended up a failure - I think history proved us right.  I hope that everything is clear.

JUDGE WILSON: Thank you for the moment.

MR PRIOR: Mr Chairman, there are three matters that - with permission of the Committee I simply want to put to the applicant, that arise out of Judgement which forms part of the bundle.  It relates specifically to matters raised by Judge Wilson regarding the ammunition found at the scene - with permission of the Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR PRIOR: Mr Gqomfa, I want to refer you to the Judgement.
	Unfortunately when I cross-examining, the witness had for a substantial time my copy of the bundle.  I don't know if there's an additional bundle been prepared Mr Chairman - well, he may be shown that.   
	At page 51 of the bundle - that is the Court Judgement, the following appears from lines 22 to 30 and I'll read it out for you - it is in Afrikaans:

HUMPHREY LUYANDA GQOMFA: I do not have this document in front of me.

MR PRIOR: Do you not have the bundle?

CHAIRPERSON: Just let him have this.

MR PRIOR: Well it's in Afrikaans.  May I proceed Mr Chairman?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.
MR PRIOR
"After the shooting incident at the Heidelberg Tavern, the official police photographer Paul van Zyl collected 92 x 5.56mm spent cartridges which was handed to Warrant Officer Compion.  He is an expert with regard to the microscopic investigation of amongst others, marks which firearms leave on cartridges.  He came to the conclusion that the spent cartridges were fired in three different firearms, these were R type rifles which would be R4, R5 or R6"
I want to refer you to another portion of the record, page 60 of the paginated bundle, at the bottom of the page lines 28 onwards - I quote:
"The Heidelberg Tavern cartridges all 5.56mm ...[intervention]

HUMPHREY LUYANDA GQOMFA: Which page are you on Sir?

MR PRIOR: Page 60.

HUMPHREY LUYANDA GQOMFA: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Where on page 60?

MR PRIOR: From line 28 onwards Mr Chairman.  I'll repeat the quotation
"The Heidelberg Tavern cartridges, all 5.56mm were fired in three different firearms.  One of these firearms is the same as that which was also used in a unrelated crime".
	Just for you comment, according to the Judgement there were no 7,62mm or AK47 cartridges found at the scene.

HUMPHREY LUYANDA GQOMFA: In connection with the cartridges that were found there?

MR PRIOR: According to the Judgement - you were at the trial, the evidence was unchallenged, there were only 5,6 sorry, 5,56mm - that is R type weapons, no AK47 cartridges were found on the scene.  Is that correct?

HUMPHREY LUYANDA GQOMFA: As it was written here but as I did it - I'm going to have a problem because I do not remember carrying an R6, I don't know what an R6 looks like.

MR PRIOR: My final reference to the record - page 43 of the bundle ...[intervention]

JUDGE WILSON: One reference ...[inaudible]

INTERPRETER: The speaker's mike is not on.

JUDGE WILSON: On further reference before you go on, at page 61, line 18
"This is with regard to the 13 x 7.62 cartridges, with regard to which Sergeant Kruger says in his - say nothing in his report, however in a later report dated 31st of October '94 he states that he investigated a 7.62mm cartridge under Woodstock certain number and that this was fired by the same firearm as that which was used during the attack on the Lingelethu police station attack".

JUDGE WILSON: ...[inaudible]

INTERPRETER: The speaker's mike is not on.

JUDGE WILSON: There was an AK47 used in the attack on the police station, did you remember that evidence?

HUMPHREY LUYANDA GQOMFA: Yes, that is correct.

JUDGE WILSON: But not at the tavern.

HUMPHREY LUYANDA GQOMFA: AK47?  There was an AK47 used at the Heidelberg Tavern.

MR PRIOR: Thank you Mr Chairman.  I just want to make one final reference to the record.  Page 43 of the Judgement at the last paragraph, the Judge was summarising the evidence and he says, I quote
"Ciska du Plessis, a Captain in the South African police's section of community relations was at the Heidelberg Tavern with two doctor friends.  While standing and speaking with Doctor Johan Stoffberg at one end of the bar, she saw two Black men enter at the front door. All that she can recall with regard to them is that one was shorter than the other.  She could not see whether they were carrying anything in their hands. Immediately afterwards she heard sound similar to firecrackers and then there was chaos in the tavern".
Insofar as that refers to the attack, what is your comment - that two persons, Black persons entered the tavern, one shorter than the other immediately before the shooting?

HUMPHREY LUYANDA GQOMFA: I think as my attorney read the statement, I'd already mentioned that - I saw no people entering that tavern from the position that I was standing.  I dispute the fact that he said he saw two people, I saw no two people entering the tavern.

MR PRIOR: Thank you Mr Chairman.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR PRIOR

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Arendse, are there matters which you would like to cover under re-examination at this stage?

NORMAN ARENDSE: None Mr Chairman, safe to say that I would prefer as far as the other applicants are concerned, that Mr Prior shouldn't use the opportunity to get another opportunity at cross-examining the applicants when he's already had that opportunity.  Some of the questions don't ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Arendse, I don't think you should tell me what my job is.

NORMAN ARENDSE: As you please Mr Chairman.