Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — 1998-05-20

MR PRETORIUS: Mr Chairman with all due respect, he - on page 3363, that is what my learned friend is referring to, he set out at the top as combined proposition then he's questioned about that and just 3 lines from underneath that learned Judge Nugent asked him this question:  "Is that what you thought?",  that is now whether Shell House was under attack.  You can read it from:  "But I mean is that what you thought was going to happen, that Shell House is now coming under attack?", "I beg yours?".  "When you fired those shots?", "Yes".  "Is that what you thought in your head that Shell House is now being attacked?", "It is not what I thought", so he did not think at that stage that Shell House was under attack:  "That is what I'm asking you, when you fired those shots it is not because you're worried about Shell House, it is because you are worried, and you said it, about yourself?", "Yes".  It is precisely what I am putting to this witness now.  It is clear from the record.

MR TIPP: Mr Chairman with respect, it is not clear from the record.  The record goes on when Mr Mangena at 3363, line approximately 16 to 17 says:  "I do not know maybe how, can I make the distinction between the two?".  That is in the context where, notwithstanding the learned judge's questions at that inquest, he has clearly said, beginning at page 3362:  "Is that correct?", he is asked "you were concerned for your own personal safety?".  The answer is yes.  "You did not fire shots because you thought that Shell House was under attack?", "I do not know, maybe can I just try to explain this thing because when the shots were fired at me because I was also, Shell House was behind me so when I was hit and died at the same time, I think maybe a certain part of the marchers would have got access into the building".  If there is anything that can be a clearer statement of the two concerns present in the witnesses mind then I fail to understand it.

JUDGE NGCOBO: I think what is being put to this witness is what he said later on when he was specifically asked whether - did you think at the time and he says no.  We understand what the record reflects and the context in which the questioning occurred.

SISI KHAMPEPE: Mr Tipp you have actually referred us to page 3362 at the bottom right up to page 3363, but omitted to read further from where he says:  "But now for protecting myself it automatically meant that I'm even protecting the structure behind me".

MR TIPP: I had thought that I had gone that far, if I omitted it certainly not intended but that is part of the very point that I'm respectfully trying to make.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Ngcobo counsel is trying to suggest from the passages in your evidence at the inquest that upper most in your mind as your reason for firing was that you felt that your life was threatened.  Now that seems to be the main reason and he says that today in your evidence in chief, you gave a lot of other reasons why you fired.  You mentioned that you thought it was your duty to provide security for Shell House and the leaders and you felt that the action of the marchers might prejudice the elections and so on, you understand.  Now counsel, in fairness to his clients, is putting it that if one reads your evidence at the inquest, your emphasise seems to have been rather on the fact that you fired because your life was threatened.  Do you understand?

MATHEDI SAMUEL MANGENA: Yes I do understand sir.

CHAIRPERSON: Is there any way in which you can clear that up?

MATHEDI SAMUEL MANGENA: I thought I explained this fully by saying even if my life was in danger, but that was not the main reason for me to shoot.

SISI KHAMPEPE: Would you please come again, I'm not sure whether I heard the translation properly?

MATHEDI SAMUEL MANGENA: My response to that question was that even if the fact that my life was in danger, that was in my mind, I'm not able to make a distinction between protecting my life and protecting the building.  When I was shooting all those reasons I took into considerations.

MR PRETORIUS: Mr Chairman I'm just going to read one more passage, it's in that same line of questioning.  I referred the court to the fact that it actually took up to line, or page 3365 where Mr Justice Nugent particularly wanted to know why this applicant fired.  If we can conclude at page 3365 if one reads as from line 6 or 7 it starts:  "If that is the reason, well then we must sort this out because yesterday in your evidence you said that you shot in self defense, you felt afraid?", "Yes".  If that is the reason then I ask you why did you not just turn around and go around the corner into Shell House.  You did not need to shoot them, but now you say to me well it is to defend Shell House.  I asked you a minute ago is that what was in your head when you shot of defending Shell House and you said no.  You have got to make up your mind.  Is it to defend you or is it to defend Shell House or is it just because everyone started shooting and you shot as well?", "No it was not because of that that everyone started shooting and then I shot".  "Well then explain to me why were you shooting?", "I shot because my life was threatened, that is why I had to open fire".  "Because your life was threatened?", "Yes".  That is the conclusion, that was the end of that line of questioning so after he went through everything, his final conclusion was that that is why he shot Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: You made the point, can we carry on.

MR PRETORIUS: Mr Mangena on that particular morning, the morning of the 28th of March 1994, where were you posted and what were you supposed to do at Shell House?

MATHEDI SAMUEL MANGENA: I did not have a particular point where I was posted.  I was only told to go outside and defend Shell House, I was not deployed to a particular position.  They did not explain me to be deployed on a particular position.
In other words I would say I was not in one position.

MR PRETORIUS: Were you instructed to patrol around Shell House and to observe what was going on?

MATHEDI SAMUEL MANGENA: The section I was given was that to deploy outside Shell House.

MR PRETORIUS: Isn't it true that in fact what you did was to patrol outside Shell House, in King George Street as between roughly Plein Street and De Villiers Street?

MATHEDI SAMUEL MANGENA: Can you repeat your question sir?

MR PRETORIUS: Isn't it true that you patrolled that day in King George Street, roughly between Plein Street and De Villiers Street?

MATHEDI SAMUEL MANGENA: I say maybe we don't understand this word patrol the same way.  May you explain to me how you understand patrol?  When I speak of patrol then I'll explain to him what kind of patrol I'm talking about.

MR PRETORIUS: I speak of walking up and down ... (intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Perhaps just tell us precisely what were you told to do when you went outside Shell House.

MATHEDI SAMUEL MANGENA: I was told to go outside Shell House and deploy there.

CHAIRPERSON: Were you told to walk around or just stand in any one place?

MATHEDI SAMUEL MANGENA: No I was not told anything else except to go out and deploy outside.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, do carry on.

MR PRETORIUS: When you originally heard the sounds of the marchers, who were then in De Villiers Street, where were you?

MATHEDI SAMUEL MANGENA: Sorry can you just refer your question?

MR PRETORIUS: When you originally heard the sounds of the marchers, that is the chanting, sounds of gunfire and the other noise you spoke about, when you originally for the first time heard that where were you?

MATHEDI SAMUEL MANGENA: For the first time I heard that I was at the 7th floor.

MR PRETORIUS: Did you then go down the 7th floor through to the foyer?

MATHEDI SAMUEL MANGENA: Can you just come again?

MR PRETORIUS: Did you then come down from the 7th floor to the foyer of Shell House?