Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — 1992-05-12

CHAIRPERSON: You are reminded that you are still under oath, you realise that?

GARY JOHN KRUSER: (s.u.o.)

MR PRETORIUS: Mr Chairman, Honourable Members of the Committee, the legal representatives of the objectors came to some arrangement in regard to the sequence in which they will cross-examine.  In regard to this particular witness the arrangement is that I will proceed that is now with the leave of the  Chairman and the Honourable Members of the Committee.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, you may do so.

MR PRETORIUS: Thank you Mr Chairman.
	Mr Kruser, I first want to understand the nature of your application for amnesty to this Committee.  Do I understand it correctly that you maintain that there was an attack by the marchers on Shell House on the 28th March 1994?

GARY JOHN KRUSER: That's correct Mr Chairman.

MR PRETORIUS: In the words of Mr Bizos in his address to court is the nature of your application therefore that the shooting may have continued too long and you may have exceeded the bounds of self defence?

GARY JOHN KRUSER: That is correct.

MR PRETORIUS: Thank you Mr Kruser.
	Now, Mr Kruser, am I correct that everything that could be detrimental to the elections, the free and fair elections during April, March - April 1994 was of the utmost importance to you?

GARY JOHN KRUSER: The elections was very important to me yes and my organisation.

MR PRETORIUS: You would therefore be aware of what the position was that the Zulu King took with reference to the elections as on the 28th March 1994?

GARY JOHN KRUSER: I am aware of the IFP's position in terms of the election.

MR PRETORIUS: Were you or were you not aware of the position that the Zulu King, the stand that he took with reference to the elections?

GARY JOHN KRUSER: The information at my disposal was that the King's version was the position of the IFP.

MR PRETORIUS: It is therefore, let me put it to you this way, the King at that stage encouraged people not to participate in the elections because he wanted his position set out in the Constitution, wanted his position entrenched in the Constitution, is that correct?

GARY JOHN KRUSER: I am just aware of the position of the IFP at that stage, I'm not aware of any individual position of the King itself.

MR PRETORIUS: But you just said that the position of the King and the IFP is the same?

GARY JOHN KRUSER: That's correct as I say  it's the position of the IFP, I don't know if it's the King's individual position, I assume they're the same.

CHAIRPERSON: Presumably they were the same to the extent that they were both against the elections but for different reasons?

MR PRETORIUS: I will accept that Mr Chairman.
	Now in so far as the particular marchers from Nancyfield is concerned are you aware or do you deny the fact that they were traditional Zulu people?

GARY JOHN KRUSER: I don't know.  I don't know people from Nancyfield Hostel.

MR PRETORIUS: Are you aware of the tradition among the traditional Zulus, that the Indunas in other words the leaders of the Zulus, would call a meeting of their followers and inform them or direct them in so far as the wishes of the Zulu King is concerned?

GARY JOHN KRUSER: I'm not au fait with Zulu culture.

MR PRETORIUS: I take it therefore that you wouldn't deny it either?

GARY JOHN KRUSER: I can't, I'm not au fait with any Zulu culture.

MR PRETORIUS: I put it to you that with reference to the objectors that I represent in particular, they were traditional Zulus that were informed at Nancyfield Hostel by the Zulu Indunas that on this particular day, the 28th March 1994, there will be a meeting in support of the Zulu King, point one - and point two, they should attend that meeting.  I take it you don't deny that?

GARY JOHN KRUSER: What I can say is that information that we had at our disposal that the IFP was organising and mobilising people to come to the city to start the anti-election campaign.  That's information which was at my disposal - that included Nancyfield Hostel.

MR PRETORIUS: Do you therefore deny the statement that I've just made that the Zulu Indunas called a meeting at Nancyfield Hostel and informed the traditional Zulu people there that there would be a meeting on the 28th March 1994 and that they were supposed to attend this meeting to support the King?

GARY JOHN KRUSER: I can't deny they were.

SISI KHAMPEPE: Mr Pretorius, maybe for me to be same wavelength with your line of questioning, what do you mean by traditional Zulus?

MR PRETORIUS: I mean people who according to Zulu traditions were loyal to their King and would follow the wishes of their King.

SISI KHAMPEPE: Are you therefore saying that these people who were resident of the Nancyfield Hostel?

MR PRETORIUS: I beg your pardon?

SISI KHAMPEPE: Were these traditional Zulus you are referring to residents of the Nancyfield Hostel?

MR PRETORIUS: Yes inter alia they are the objectors that I act for.

SISI KHAMPEPE: Thank you.

MR PRETORIUS: Now, on the 28th March 1994, I want you to understand that what I'm asking you is the knowledge you had on the 28th March 1994, not what you obtained later in reconstruction of what happened.  On the 28th March 1994 immediately before you gave the order to shoot, let's take it first the warning shots or the first shots were fired.  What convinced you - I want you to relate all the factors that this was an actual attack that is taking place at that moment.

GARY JOHN KRUSER: Mr Chairman I think the first and probably one of the most important factors that we received information that the IFP was to attack Shell House with the possibility of killing some of leaders - that was foremost in my mind.  The events of the day after coming from Lancet Hall and reports were received from other activities around the...[inaudible] itself.  The fact that these marchers were not accompanied by police unlike the other marchers, the fact that these marchers moved in a very different manner, instead of moving they were in my impression stationery and doing some type of chanting at the corner, the fact that gunfire emanated or my impression was that gunfire was emanating from the crowd itself and the impression I got that the shot hit the window to the right of myself, I think all these factors together convinced me that this was an attack being launched both at us and the headquarters of the ANC.

MR PRETORIUS: The information you had received, was that information pertaining to this specific group, in other words that this specific group of people would attack Shell House?

GARY JOHN KRUSER: The information was to the fact that Inkatha would use the march to attack Shell House.  There was no specific group.

MR PRETORIUS: So it was just information in general, not specific information relating to this group?

GARY JOHN KRUSER: As I said the information was the IFP was going to attack, it didn't make a differentiation between which group, we didn't know how they would plan the attack itself.

MR PRETORIUS: We already heard that various other groups marched past Shell House on that particular day.

GARY JOHN KRUSER: That is correct.

MR PRETORIUS: So according to the information you had, the attacks could also have been launched by these other marchers?

GARY JOHN KRUSER: That's very correct.

MR PRETORIUS: I put it to you that in so far as the information is concerned that you allegedly received - at the very utmost it could have put you on the guard to be on the look out, in other words to intensify the security etc. just to take care that the march is not used as a decoy to attack Shell House, is that correct?

GARY JOHN KRUSER: I don't understand your question, could you please repeat it?