Amnesty Hearings — Durban — UNKNOWN

MR BRINK: Yes I am, I am Mr Chairman. It's a Mr Purshotam from the Legal Resources Center here in Durban. He is present. I wonder if possibly Mr Wilkson wouldn't mind just moving down  ... [intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Purshotam ?

MR BRINK: Just moving down just a ... [intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Will you step forward, please? Would you place on record who you represent, the name of the person that you represent.

MR PURSHOTAM: Yes, Mr Chairperson, I represent the victims and their families who were the target of the attack which has been the subject of the proceedings this morning.

CHAIRPERSON: Which of the victims? Because I understand that there are some who are present here who have an attitude which might be different from others in connection with this application.

MR PURSHOTAM: Mr Chairman, the Legal Resources Center discovered almost by accident that these proceedings were going to be heard today.  Most of the victims and their families live in the outlying rural areas of this province, and it has been less than a week in which attempts have been made to make contact with them, but from the mandate which we did receive to commence civil proceedings it would be clear in my view that they would oppose any application for amnesty by the applicants.
And therefore I am here today to represent their interests. There are a few victims and their families present this morning and I would submit and ask that these proceedings not be concluded until all the victims, at least the living victims, and their families are heard on the applications which are before your Committee.

CHAIRPERSON: Are you in a position to tell us who the victims are that you represent here today?

MR PURSHOTAM: Do you want me to tell you the names of the people who are here today?

CHAIRPERSON: Those whom you represent here today.

MR PURSHOTAM: Well, I can give you a list of all the people who we are representing in the civil proceedings.

CHAIRPERSON: No I'm talking about here in these proceedings.

MR PURSHOTAM: [Indistinct] there's two individuals [Indistinct] - there's two individuals who I have already come across who are here this morning and their names are Sipho Jeremiah Mabaso and David Pele and I would respectfully ask that the Legal Resources Center be given an  opportunity to make contact with the other victims and their families, in order for them to come before this Committee and tell the Committee about their attitude as well.

CHAIRPERSON: Is it not possible to get a representative view instead of getting all of them coming to express the same view?

MR PURSHOTAM: Mr Chairman I'm sure it is possible to get a representative view except that one has to put all the victims and their families together in one room before one can reach consensus on that aspect.  And that's the opportunity which we are asking for this morning.

CHAIRPERSON: Are you then in a position to proceed with putting questions this morning to witnesses who might be giving evidence.

MR PURSHOTAM: Yes I can, I can  lead the witnesses who are present this morning.

CHAIRPERSON: And are you in a position to question witnesses who are in fact - or applicants who are giving evidence?

MR PURSHOTAM: Well, I have been making notes this morning and I would like to put questions to Mr Botha.

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: ...[inaudible] what you're really saying.  I think you should put the Committee on a proper footing with regard to these proceedings. I think the Chairman asked you whether you are now representing people who are in opposition to the applicant's application for amnesty.
It should be understood that the basis on which you could - you could possibly - the only basis on which you could ask questions of this witness, would be on the basis that you represent people who oppose the applicant's application for amnesty. I cannot conceive of any other basis on which you - you could be putting questions to the witness. Are you in fact saying to us that you are representing these two people, and that these two people oppose the applicant's application for amnesty, is that what you are saying?

MR PURSHOTAM: Well the victims who I have spoken to this morning do oppose the applications for amnesty, yes.

CHAIRPERSON: In that case, on behalf of your clients you may ask questions of the applicant.

MR PURSHOTAM: Thank you Mr Chairman.
	Mr Boha,  you outlined in your evidence the problems which the Afrikaner people and the suffering which they underwent in the early parts of the century, and you mentioned that you had to go to an English language school and obviously you were not very keen on engaging in that language in your education.
And you felt that you had to engage in a struggle.  And as you grew up you saw that the National Party, the PAC and the ANC were going against the wishes of the Afrikaner people of whom you were a member. And that is how you decided that you had to ... [intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: We have had all this on oath. I think if it is possible for you to formulate your question, it will save a great deal of time.

MR PURSHOTAM: Thank you, Mr Chairman.
	I put it to you, Mr Botha that the only reason why you did not attack the minibus taxi was that there were too few people in that taxi and that you wanted a target such as a big bus in which there were a lot of people involved and that is why you shot up the Putco bus.

MR BOTHA: Mr Chairman, that is not correct. If one approaches it logically, the minibus taxi was full. I can't say there might have been fifteen or twenty, I didn't count, but let's assume that a minibus taxi fully laden, is fully laden, let's say there were fifteen people in sight in a relatively small vehicle compared with a Putco bus.
If we'd fired at that with two automatic assault rifles, then I am quite sure all fifteen people would have died. If one shoots at a larger vehicle with the same number of weapons, although there were more people in the bus, there would also be more room to miss. I believe that if we'd attacked that minibus taxi, the death figures would have been much higher than seven.

MR PURSHOTAM: Well it's strange that you talk about logic. There wasn't - there wasn't anything logical about killing people in a bus. And you mentioned yourself that if it's a larger target there's greater ability - or there's a greater chance of your killing people if there's a bigger target, isn't that logical since you are a follower of logical thinking?

MR BOTHA: Could you please explain to me again what the question is that you're putting to me?

MR PURSHOTAM: Well I mentioned that since you were going for a bigger target, and since the Putco bus was fully lit at that time, you saw that it was fully occupied and there were more chances of you killing Black people in the Putco bus rather than killing people in the minibus taxi.

MR BOTHA: Mr Chairman, when I followed the taxi, the bus was not in view. It was after, after we had abandoned the attack that we had planned against the taxi, after we'd already decided to go home, that we happened upon the bus while we were drinking a cold drink. It's not as if we made a choice of alternatives between the taxi and the bus, I used the target that was available to me.

MR PURSHOTAM: You mentioned that you underwent military training. Wasn't it part of your curriculum during that training to teach you about the principles of the Geneva Convention?

MR BOTHA: I had never received instruction about those Conventions and I also believe that that particular Convention, as far as I know, only deals with prisoners of war and the waging of war in general. There are three types of war - a conventional war, a guerrilla war and counter- insurgency war.
We were involved in the guerrilla war. Something that was unprecedented as far as those - the people who put together that Convention were concerned, so I don't think it was applicable.