Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — 1992-05-12

MR DORFLING: Did you at the time of making application foresee the possibility that a court of law, whoever is to decide on that might find that your actions were unjustified on the day?

GARY JOHN KRUSER: My own opinion was that my acts were justified, I was advised by my lawyers that a court of law might find differently.

MR DORFLING: Why would your actions not have been justified if that possibility existed?

GARY JOHN KRUSER: As I explained, my legal representatives explained to me, my lawyers explained to me that our case was one of self defence and the issue of self defence they said under those circumstances, the objective facts might be very different to what I have seen it and based on that I think which is quite sound advice in hindsight is even more sounder.  I followed the advice.

MR DORFLING: So the advice amounted to you receiving advice of the possibility that objective evidence might show that on the day you exceeded the bounds of self defence and therefore committed a crime, is that right?

GARY JOHN KRUSER: If the court found it would be a crime, that's correct.

MR DORFLING: Would you agree with me that that gives even further reason for you disclosing all relevant facts so that when an Amnesty Committee considers it, all those facts should be properly considered and properly placed before an Amnesty Committee?

GARY JOHN KRUSER: I think I submitted the documents which I thought were the facts at that stage.

MR DORFLING: So your position with regard to your application for amnesty was quite different from that of you with regard to your evidence at the inquest is that correct?

GARY JOHN KRUSER: I don't think there's any difference.

MR DORFLING: You already under examination by my learned friend Mr Pretorius conceded that at the time of you giving evidence or up to the time of you giving evidence at the Shell House you were of the opinion you should not disclose the names and identity of your comrades, to use your words, correct?

GARY JOHN KRUSER: Until they gave their consent or until it reached court, ja that's correct.

MR DORFLING: Was that also the position you maintained with regard to your amnesty application?

GARY JOHN KRUSER: I don't think so.

MR DORFLING: Am I correct then in saying that as far as your Amnesty Application is concerned your position was different, you were prepared in your Amnesty Application to disclose all the relevant facts for purposes of consideration?

GARY JOHN KRUSER: Ja, I'm disclosing - I've disclosed all the facts in front of the Amnesty Committee.

MR DORFLING: Now sir, can we look at your application for amnesty as contained in the papers as it was submitted on the 10th May 1997?  It's in bundle C Mr Chairman at pages 1 - 29 is the actual document that was submitted on the 10th May.  Mr Kruser, why aren't the names reflected of those guards that you perceived fired shots or might have fired shots at the marchers, why are all those peoples names not mentioned in your Amnesty Application?

GARY JOHN KRUSER: I think I'm applying for amnesty for myself, I think they would apply for amnesty by themselves.

MR DORFLING: But why wouldn't you disclose to the Amnesty Committee who the shottists were on the day, sir?

GARY JOHN KRUSER: It was not requested from me if it were requested from me I would submit it to them.

MR DORFLING: Would you say that that evidence or information is irrelevant for the Amnesty Committee to take it's decision?  As the Committee pleases, Mr Chairman.
	Do you agree with me sir that that information is not contained in your application?

GARY JOHN KRUSER: I don't think they were contained, all the names are not contained in that, some are I think.

MR DORFLING: I want to revert back to a line of questioning by my learned friend, Mr Pretorius.  It specifically relates to the firearm register kept on the 28th March 1994 at Shell House.  With leave of the Committee I've prepared a bundle with four copies of documents which I intend to utilise during my examination of this witness.  May I beg leave to hand it up?
	I might just at the outset indicate to the Committee, Mr Chairman, that all these documents form part of the record of proceedings at the Shell House inquest and I trust that all my colleagues are or have access to these documents, I haven't made copies for all of them on all the documents.

CHAIRPERSON: ...[inaudible]

MR DORFLING: Indeed so, Mr Chairman.  I'm not aware of whether they've already been submitted in front of the Committee for consideration and that's why I took the effort of having another set made up.   As the Committee pleases.

GEORGE BIZOS: ...[inaudible] but the record here and we anticipated that our learned friends would not have the full record and this is why when we put documents in like the bundle, we gave them copies.  Merely a copy of those in order to follow the cross-examination.  If there is at least one available, Mr Chairman.  No that document.

CHAIRPERSON: This document?

GEORGE BIZOS: This document, yes Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Don't we have a copy?

MR DORFLING: Mr Chairman, no, as far as we refer to documents contained in the inquest proceedings, we haven't ourselves also received copies of these documents.  It's taken as given that the parties have access to these documents so thus far we haven't received copies of all the documents that was referred to by Mr Bizos either.
	Mr Chairman, I suggest that we number it the next alphabet being Exhibit B.   Mr Chairman, I would agree to that and I would think that the number should then be 258 in bundle B if my memory serves me correctly.

GEORGE BIZOS: If any member those teams has a copy can't they share one between two of them so that we may have one and I don't know whether the witness has been given a copy of the documents, Mr Chairman.

MR DORFLING: Mr Chairman, I haven't even got a spare copy for myself.  I've just made four copies because they all form part of the documents in the record.

SISI KHAMPEPE: Mr Bizos, may I offer you my copy and I can share with my colleague and I think it's up to 270 not 269.

MR DORFLING: Mr Chairman, I beg my apologies, I would make further copies during the lunch adjournment and make them available after lunch.  May I in the meanwhile proceed on the documents placed before the witness?
	Mr Kruser you've got a copy of the document in front of you?

GARY JOHN KRUSER: That's correct.

MR DORFLING: Could you look at the very first two pages of that document for purposes of the Committee's background?  This is an extract from the firearm register of Shell House pertaining to the happenings of the date of the 28th March 1994, Mr Chairman.

GARY JOHN KRUSER: Mr Chairman, I have difficulty unless I get the books because this things runs over two pages the register itself normally runs over two pages the whole thing, it's very difficult for me to look at one page and get - which book, there were also two books which were handed in to the intelligence officer and to the inquest.  On this alone I think will be very difficult for me to answer questions.  It's four years ago, it becomes very difficult.  There were two books handed in and I know the books were written over two pages.

CHAIRPERSON: Alright you are being told that this is a ...[inaudible]

MR DORFLING: Mr Chairman I've got the actual copy that was handed in at the inquest proceedings which runs over two pages which I may beg leave to hand to the witness.

CHAIRPERSON: ...[inaudible] as extract from the register, all right?  You may put your questions.

MR DORFLING: Do you agree sir that on the first page is reflected the names of a number of ANC security guards which was issued with firearms by yourself as against their signatures and as against firearms numbers on the 28th March 1994?

GARY JOHN KRUSER: I don't see a signature of any guard here.