Amnesty Hearings — East London — 1998-10-07

MR SMUTS: Was there any change prior to the 13th April 1993 to that approach of the African National Congress?

FUNDISILE GULENI: No.

MR SMUTS: Then how did you believe that by attacking white people you were furthering the interests of the African National Congress?

CHAIRPERSON: If, Mr Smuts, given the fact that they had taken a decision to commit murder, it could hardly be expected that they would kill a black person in the circumstances could it?  It wouldn't serve their purposes, even if we disagree with their purposes.

MR SMUTS: Well, with respect Mr Chairman, when a significant number of supporters of the African National Congress were shot and killed at Bisho, they were shot and killed by black people.  The opposition to the African National Congress did not extend exclusively from within the white ranks.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Smuts I don't want to get into the massacre, there's lots to be said about the Bisho massacre but still, the point I'm making is that he's being confronted with the racial connotations attached to this event.  I don't think anybody can deny there was some racist undertones.  All I'm asking you is, can it be expected that in those circumstances when Mr Hani was killed by a right-winger, is it to be expected that it could be otherwise and whether the killing of a black person would have served their purposes, be it right or wrong?

ADV SANDI: Maybe we can find out from him what his attitude was to the kind of act they committed?
	Did you regard the act you committed on that day as an act of racism?

FUNDISILE GULENI: No.

CHAIRPERSON: Why would the white man be chosen then, any white person as a target in retaliation to the assassination of Mr Chris Hani?

FUNDISILE GULENI: It's because the way we felt after finding out that Chris Hani has been killed by the killers of him and we felt we must identify the people whom we associated the right-wingers that are for destabilisation.  So our belief was that in the area we went to would find those people.

ADV SANDI: If Mr Hani had not been assassinated on that particular day would you have selected anyone for attack, would you have killed any white person in that area?

FUNDISILE GULENI: No.

MR SMUTS: If there had not been rumours and suspicions going around, would you have killed any white person in that area?

FUNDISILE GULENI: No, not in that area.

MR SMUTS: What would have happened about those investigations?  Let us suppose Mr Hani had not been assassinated, what would have happened to the investigations you are talking about?

FUNDISILE GULENI: We would compile and submit a report to our upper structures of the organisation as we did because we reported the information, the hearsay information we gathered to the regional office of the ANC there.

MR SMUTS: When you took the decision to attack and kill these holidaymakers, was it your attitude that you did not care whether or not those suspicions and rumours were accurate?  What was your attitude to that?

FUNDISILE GULENI: It's not that we did not care but after we got the information that Chris has been assassinated, we had a feeling that we felt like doing something.  Then the question arises as to where do we do that.  Then we identified the area where we encounter problems most of the times.

ADV SANDI: If this thing ...[intervention]

ADV DE JAGER: Where you encountered problems most of the time - I've asked you what problems did you encounter and you couldn't give me a single example of any problem that you encountered there.

FUNDISILE GULENI: I've indicated that I've got no specifics.

CHAIRPERSON: You people decided that a white man should die in retaliation to the assassination of Mr Hani.  Had you not had the benefit of these complaints about the AWB activities in the area, can you perhaps tell us where would you find prospective target and on what basis would you people have determined that?

FUNDISILE GULENI: You can come again sir?

CHAIRPERSON: If there was no rumours or suspicions or complaints or reports about the AWB activities at the beachfront and in Port St Johns, your group had made a decision to kill a white person in retaliation to the assassination of Mr Hani, do you understand so far?

FUNDISILE GULENI: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Where would you have found this target then in the absence of those rumours?

FUNDISILE GULENI: Because in our planning we have interested, at that stage of assuming as to where would we find a target.  Up to now I cannot tell but we were disturbed by the killing of Comrade Chris.

CHAIRPERSON: No, we all know that.

FUNDISILE GULENI: Okay.

CHAIRPERSON: The bone of contention here is why the victims were in fact killed.  You say that they were unfortunate victims because based on the information that you local people had received, the AWB activities in Port St Johns was such as to give you problems and they were conducting their planning and they ran a base at some coastal resort one of which you visited the day of the killing.  Now if there were no complaints by the people from the villages and the local people at Port St Johns about activities of the AWB and you did not have any information about bungalows and resorts at the coastline, who would you then have targeted?  Which white man or white people to retaliate and protest against this assassination of Mr Hani.

FUNDISILE GULENI: I think we will target any area where the blacks are experiencing problems of being killed time and again in South Africa.

ADV SANDI: In other words, just to make sure that I follow you, you would still have killed a white person, any white person, is that what you're saying?

FUNDISILE GULENI: Not any white person but who were reasonable suspect that they are having something to do with killings or they are perpetrating violence in that area.  We would target that area.

ADV SANDI: Yes but whatever the reason for the killing of such a person would have been but it would be a white person, not so?

FUNDISILE GULENI: If that person is associated with that violence, yes.

MR SMUTS: Why didn't you target somebody that you knew to be associated with violence rather than random people driving along a road?

FUNDISILE GULENI: Talk to them, how?

MR SMUTS: Target them.

CHAIRPERSON: Were they in the circumstances random targets?

MR SMUTS: It's probably a question for argument, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: The evidence as I understand it that they were suspected of being party to these AWB activities because they lived or were present in that area.  As flimsy as the connection may be, that's how I understand the evidence.

MR SMUTS: There's no evidence of any violence in the area, Mr Chairman, none whatsoever.

CHAIRPERSON: Why did you not target somebody that you knew to be associated with violence?

FUNDISILE GULENI: Can you come again with the question?

MR SMUTS: You said that had you not had these complaints, these rumours, in targeting a suitable victim you would have targeted a white person in an area where violence had been committed against Black people, is that correct?

FUNDISILE GULENI: Yes.

MR SMUTS: Why didn't you in any event target somebody that you knew to be committed to violence rather than someone about whom you had no information whatsoever.

FUNDISILE GULENI: It's because at that time we had the information about that area we went to.

MR SMUTS: Information which included not a single act of violence perpetrated in the area, correct?

FUNDISILE GULENI: Yes.

MR SMUTS: Wasn't it in fact, Mr Guleni, simply enormously convenient to go to an out of the way area and target some defenceless white people on holiday who could never have expected an attack and would be easy prey for your attack?

FUNDISILE GULENI: No, we didn't think about that at that time.