Amnesty Hearings — Aliwal North — 1998-04-28

HUMPHREY LUYANDA GQOMFA: I ...(indistinct) problem about this white which you are using, but let my try and accommodate you as you understand the way you do.   Firstly, there is a difference between hatred, killing a person because you hate him, because we hate him as he is.  There's also a difference when you kill a person because you associate him and at the same time he takes part in the situation at the time.  When I explain it further about your question whether a white, we were not killing this person because we hated him as a white person per se because the nature of our struggle was not a racial struggle, but the orientation of whites is that because they were the ones who were killed, they thought that it was a racial struggle, because we didn't define in any ...(indistinct) because her or his colour as it is written in our books that you do not hate the "sjambok", but you hate the man who is using it.  You can't say that you are hating the "sjambok", not the person who is using the "sjambok", because if the "sjambok" is just laying down there, it is harmless, but the source of pain is the person who takes that "sjambok" and hits you with it.
	On the question of obeying orders, in each and every operation - I'm sure Mr Lax is aware of this, because it seems as if he has a military background - that in each and every operation there should be an order.  An element of order was there and also an element of commitment.

MR PRIOR: Finished?

HUMPHREY LUYANDA GQOMFA: Yes, I'm finished.

MR PRIOR: He was killed, Mr Smit was killed, are you saying because he represented the oppressor, or what the oppressor stood for, or is that not close?  You say you never killed him because he was just a white man, you killed him because of something else, was he part of - did he represent the oppressor to you in that situation?

HUMPHREY LUYANDA GQOMFA: Mr Chairperson, let us put it this way, I would like you to follow me in all these angles.  I've given you the political background and the historical background, that firstly, politically, how was this person a victim, that he was the manager of the unjust laws.

MR PRIOR: Alright, he was the manager of unjust laws.

HUMPHREY LUYANDA GQOMFA: Of unjust laws.  I'll go back, I think I have explained that when you take this back from the forced removals when the land was taken from the Africans by people like you at the time, we were taken as people who did not belong here.  We were Bantu's and we were taken to the Bantu areas or the so-called reserved areas.  This South Africa was for the whites.  Even if you stayed twenty or thirty years, or you were born in that area, you did not belong there.  If you were Xhosa speaker you would go to Transkei or Ciskei, if you were Sotho speaker, you were taken to Qwa-Qwa.  What happened is that the whites tried that they were - there was a competition at the time of black unskilled labourers, because they were also unskilled labourers.  But because the capitalists who were building the factories, they found out that the pressure that was exerted by whites because these people were supposed to be given high wages, because of their status - there is something that they call the colour-bar.  They say "my kleur is my val" - that my colour is my status.  The African whether he is qualified, he will remain a Kaffir.  They said that these people had to be taken to the reserved areas so that they cannot come to South Africa, so that they can build industries in the areas that these people are staying, or near to them, because there would be a surplus of a work force and they would get low wages.  That is an exploitation, because the capitalist was more interested in profit.  A white man was supposed to be in a managerial position.  Even when a black person is educated, but a white man would be a manger.  When I am saying that they were administering the unjust laws, they were administering the influx laws.  The question would come now, that at the time the apartheid law was crashed, the law was crashed in the books, but practically it was not removed.  As the Africans were not fighting against apartheid per se, but were fighting against our land for the whole nation.  I don't know whether you understand it.
	On a military point view, the time I was killing these people, these people were trained personnel, even though before the operation I did not have their profile, because it was not part and parcel of the recognisance of the target.

MR PRIOR: At the time Mr Smit was killed, for the reasons you have now given ...(intervention)

HUMPHREY LUYANDA GQOMFA: Yes.

MR PRIOR: You say although you never saw the profile of the people in that car, you accept that your superiors who had done the intelligence work would have had that profile that Mr Smit and his colleagues in that vehicle were all militarily trained, is that what you're telling us?

HUMPHREY LUYANDA GQOMFA: No, don't misinterpret me.

MR PRIOR: Are you saying you accepted that Mr Smit and the other occupants of that vehicle, the white people there, were all militarily trained?

HUMPHREY LUYANDA GQOMFA: When you say all of them, how many were there?

MR PRIOR: Four, and one was an African man - a black man.  So we're excluding him, because you excluded him.  The three other occupants, the white people that were in that vehicle, are you saying you accepted that they were militarily trained?

HUMPHREY LUYANDA GQOMFA: I'm saying that before I did not know that they were trained, but at the time we were shooting ...(intervention)

MR PRIOR: Do you accept in you mind, although you never knew the detail of their profile, did you assume, did you accept that they must have been militarily trained?

HUMPHREY LUYANDA GQOMFA: I don't understand your question.

MR PRIOR: I don't know how other to put it, Mr Chairman.  Maybe the Committee can assist.

ADV SANDI: Okay let me, can I come in then?  Mr Gqomfa, did you personally know these people who were in the car, these white people?

HUMPHREY LUYANDA GQOMFA: No, I did not know them.

ADV SANDI: Did anyone say to you he knew those people, that is before you went to this operation?

HUMPHREY LUYANDA GQOMFA: No.

ADV SANDI: You had no information whatsoever about these people, is that correct?

HUMPHREY LUYANDA GQOMFA: Yes.

ADV SANDI: Does that answer you, Mr Prior?

MR LAX: It doesn't answer what Mr Prior was putting to him, and he himself in his earlier answer implied that the people who were his Commanders in the attack and who had done the reconnaissance would have been aware, that's how he put it, they would have been aware of the profile of these people, and that they were militarily trained, that's how he put it.  So, that's why Mr Prior asked him did he know that that was their profile - he said "no".  The next logical question was, did you assume that they were militarily trained, and that's the answer we're waiting for.

MR PRIOR: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

MR LAX: Have I put it correctly, Mr Prior.

MR PRIOR: Yes, precisely.

HUMPHREY LUYANDA GQOMFA: Don't put words in my mouth.

MR LAX: Mr Gqomfa well then help us, if you think, if you say we're trying to put words in your mouth, put the position correctly.

HUMPHREY LUYANDA GQOMFA: I'm saying that I did not know the profile of these people.  What I was telling you was my understanding.  Before the operation I was not given the background of these people, and as I have already said, I was not part of the reconnaissance of the target, but when I was shooting them at that time it was when I took a conclusion that these people were trained because of the way they were manoeuvring from the fire that was directed to them.