Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — 1998-05-13

MR PRETORIUS: At that time they were living in Nancefield Hostel, Mr Chairman, yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Now we know that there was a meeting that was called or it had been said that there was a meeting that was called of the residents in Nancefield Hostel by the Indunas and you say you were not aware of that?

BETHUEL MONDLI ZUMA: Yes, my Lord, I was not aware but I do not deny the fact that there might have been meeting or meetings in different areas.

MR PRETORIUS: What was the view of the King with regard to the forthcoming election etc. as on the 28th March 1994?

BETHUEL MONDLI ZUMA: Maybe because I was observing the political development at that time very closely, I was also as a Zulu confused because it was the position - it was alleged to be the position of the King that the King wanted his authority to be recognised by the South African Constitution.
	But I'm saying I was confused because those views were articulated by the IFP all the time not the King himself.

MR PRETORIUS: Do you or what was the view of the King with regard to the elections specifically?  Did he want the election?

BETHUEL MONDLI ZUMA: The King - I'm not in a position now to say what was the personal view of the King but I can say the view which was articulated on radios on T.V.'s, on print media was that the election should not take place - that was said to be the King's view but articulated by the IFP.

MR PRETORIUS: Do you deny that that view was also articulated by the Indunas?

BETHUEL MONDLI ZUMA: That might be the case but I don't know if Humphrey Nglovu is an Induna and Themba Xhosa.

MR PRETORIUS: Mr Zuma, I did not refer you to Humphrey Nglovu nor to Themba Xhosa.  I refer you specifically to the Zulu Indunas.

BETHUEL MONDLI ZUMA: It is for this reason that I said to you I was monitoring closely the political situation and the reason why I mention these two is because they were the ones who were articulating this position and it was also the spokesperson of the IFP, Sibajiani at the time who was articulating these views and I never heard any Induna articulating that - it is for this reason now that I'm telling you I do not know whether you are saying they were Indunas.  If they were Indunas, then I agree.  If Sibjiani's an Induna then I agree.

MR PRETORIUS: I repeat - I do not refer to Themba Xhosa or Humphrey Inglovu - and I'm going to repeat my question.  Do you deny that that viewpoint of the King was also articulated by the Zulu Indunas?

MR LAX: Mr Pretorius, perhaps you should be a bit more specific.  You know there are Indunas all over the country and in particular in KwaZulu Natal, there are thousands of Indunas.  On the Reef I'm not sure how many Indunas there are.  What specific occasions are you referring to that are relevant to these proceedings and maybe you can narrow the question and give him an opportunity to be more specific?

MR PRETORIUS: As it will please the Honourable Member.  The Zulu Indunas at Nancefield - prior to the march and the meeting on the 28th March 1994.

BETHUEL MONDLI ZUMA: I have already explained that I was not staying in Nancefield Hostel so I was not in a position and I was not a member of the IFP so I wasn't in a position to go to that meeting, I was not also in a position to know what was discussed at Nancefield Hostel so I'm not in a position to answer that question.

MR PRETORIUS: I therefore take it that you will not deny it that the objectors were Zulus who attended meetings called for by the Indunas at Nancefield Hostel during which meetings the view of the King was explained to them and it was explained to them that in support of their King there will be a march and a meeting held on the 28th March 1994?

BETHUEL MONDLI ZUMA: I am sure you are not saying I agree with you because I'm saying to you I'm not in a position to comment on that because I was not there and I did not know of a particular meeting in Nancefield Hostel and furthermore if you're talking about the Zulus, I'm not sure if those marchers were all Zulus.

MR LAX: Sorry, Mr Zuma, just answer the question.  Can you deny that that happened or not?  If you weren't there you can't deny it surely?

BETHUEL MONDLI ZUMA: Yes that's why I'm saying I cannot say because I was not there, I cannot deny.

MR PRETORIUS: Thank you.  Mr Zuma, do you deny that any of the objectors or the dependants of the objectors which I represent are Zulus?

BETHUEL MONDLI ZUMA: They might be Zulus.

MR PRETORIUS: Now Mr Zuma, can you assist me please - you testified today during your evidence in Chief that you still maintain that there was a person with an AK47 that shot at the group, that is the guards, was at that stage on the corner of King George and Plein Street.  Is that you view or not?

BETHUEL MONDLI ZUMA: That is part of my view.  Let me explain - my view or the picture that I have in my mind of that day, that there was a person with an AK47 within the marchers were firing, but whether he was firing in our direction or not, has been shown by the ballistics - that I mean the fact that I remember that he fired in our direction is not proved by the ballistics so I say - I said to you I concede that I might be wrong in recollection of evidence but that is the only way I recollect the event.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Zuma, on the day in question, what did you observe this man with an AK47 do with his AK47 forgetting for one moment about what the ballistics suggest.

BETHUEL MONDLI ZUMA: I observed that he was firing and I believed he was firing in our direction and I still believe he was firing in our direction but I can prove by the objective evidence that he might have fired in a different direction.

CHAIRPERSON: What made you believe that he was firing in your direction?  At the time now - forgetting about what the ballistics suggest now.

BETHUEL MONDLI ZUMA: Because the barrel was facing our direction but the minute it happening it was a matter of a few seconds so I cannot just be specific and take it out of context.  I'm subject to correction, as I said I might be wrong as I have been proved by the ballistics, you know, that he was not firing in our direction so I might not be completely correct in putting it that way.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you.

MR PRETORIUS: Mr Zuma, can you explain exactly what happened when, with this picture in your head, how is this picture in your head, what did you see happen regarding this man with the AK47 that shot at you?

BETHUEL MONDLI ZUMA: He was firing in our direction and he fired first, we responded by firing warning shot and for the second time he fired and we were given an order to fire into the crowd.

MR PRETORIUS: Was he in the front of the crowd when he fired the shots - can you just explain exactly what you observed?

BETHUEL MONDLI ZUMA: The crowd would open up for him, he'd come to the front, shoot and then they'll dance and then he'll be in the crowd mixed with them and he will come out again and shoot.

MR PRETORIUS: What you are saying is that he was not in front of the crowd, he was somewhere within the crowd then the crowd would open up and make way for him and he would shoot at you and then the crowd would close again so as to protect him to a certain extent and then they would open up again and he would come to the fore again and shoot at you again, is that correct?

BETHUEL MONDLI ZUMA: I don't know whether it was as to protect him or it was just as to dance as they were doing, you know?

MR PRETORIUS: Save for that portion of the statement I've made to you is the statement as I've put it correct or not?