Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — 1999-04-13

MR MILLER: Well I think that all the counts would fall within the same ambit, that they were all - if you accept my argument on the murder, that it was something that had been in the course of a politically motivated robbery, then the same argument I think, would apply to all the counts.  And I can add this, it might be against what my client has said, but obviously if the Committee is so inclined, there has been no application for amnesty in regard of the robbery of the firearm and if the Committee is so inclined to grant amnesty, then I think maybe the Committee should consider that count also.

CHAIRPERSON: You may right, I'll have to think, we'll have to think about that, but it's a fair comment.  Is there anything else you'd like to ...?

MR MILLER: Nothing further.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Thabete, have you got any submissions?

UNKNOWN: Yes, Mr Chair.
	Mr Chair, on behalf of the victims, I would argue that it is my submission that the applicant be refused amnesty on the basis, number one, that his act was not political and there was no political motive.
	I would like the Committee, or I request the Committee to consider the evidence of the witness, the fact that according to his testimony, when the applicant and his friends approached them, they did not request for a firearm, they only requested the car keys.  Somehow this was not mentioned by the applicant in his affidavit, he safely only mentioned the fact that they ordered a firearm.  I would like to regard that, to consider that as well.
	Further, Mr Chair and Honourable Members of the Committee, the applicant spoke about the fact that, or in his affidavit he states that the deceased lifted up his firearm with an intention to shoot at him.  And it's been the evidence of the witness, which I would like the Committee to consider as the true evidence that the deceased did not lift any firearm.  Actually the applicant also admits to the fact that the deceased never lifted up a firearm.  
	It's also the evidence of the witness that the situation of the firearm on the deceased's body was not visible to anybody who would have been outside, more especially to the friend of the applicant who was seated at the left-hand side.  And it appears that the firearm was not visible.
	Further, Mr Chair, on the argument of the motive for having killed the deceased, I would like to argue that if the applicant says he had no intentions to kill, then we wouldn't be talking about murder here, we would talk about culpable homicide, because then he would be arguing that he was killed by mistake, it was negligent killing and that doesn't amount to murder, it amounts to culpable homicide.
	It's my submission, Mr Chair, that the applicant's motive was criminal inasfar as the shooting of the deceased was concerned.  Thank you, Mr Chair.  I don't know whether you would like me to address you on any issue or aspect.

CHAIRPERSON: No, that's okay.  We will take time to consider this decision and we will hand it down in due course.  I see it is a quarter to four already, we've hardly got a chance to finish another witness.  We'll adjourn to 9 o'clock tomorrow morning.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS