Amnesty Hearings — Pretoria — UNKNOWN

JAMES WHEELER: That is correct, for the reason that they helped black people there and that also substantiated that the ANC had once again recruited or incorporated Bophuthatswana into South Africa.

UNKNOWN: What I'm putting to you, as I understand what I heard of the AWB, they act on principle, there is a cause they believe in, they are principled that they base what they do on, they don't make general assumptions?

JAMES WHEELER: It was indeed so with the case of Bophuthatswana, but in the case of our own country, in terms of the 1994 elections, it was a different story.   How else?  Because there is no other way to determine which people would be IFP or ANC, seeing as black people were the majority, how would we distinguish between who would be an IFP or an ANC follower, as well as white people in this case who supported other organisations?

MR MOLOI: How would your conduct then, if I may jut in, how would your conduct then of shooting these people you couldn't identify have assisted you in achieving the political objective of eliminating your enemy, your enemy, and in so doing derail the course of the elections?

JAMES WHEELER: We must not forget that this period, during which people proclaimed that we were part of a large-scale resistance power or movement, that we would put the country into a state of war.   It was our view that we would have been part of this, not only us, but that there were also other people who were doing the same sort of thing, and which, at the end of the day, did not transpire, as such.

MR MOLOI: ...say indiscriminate action against whomsoever would achieve the objective you sought to achieve, namely to derail the elections by endangering or killing your enemy, the ANC and the SACP supporters?

JAMES WHEELER: At that stage I believed this, and I stood firmly by what I believed.   However, today I have a completely different viewpoint.

UNKNOWN: Were you a registered member of the AWB?

JAMES WHEELER: That's correct.

UNKNOWN: And you joined them in 1993?

JAMES WHEELER: That is correct.

UNKNOWN: How many AWB meetings did you attend between the time you joined in '93 and the 27th of April 1994, just roughly, I don't want exactly?

JAMES WHEELER: Approximately 10 to 15.

UNKNOWN: And on the basis of having heard the AWB leadership talk about, I'll call it the total onslaught, you decided that you did not need any further authority before taking your gun and going out to shoot the enemy?

JAMES WHEELER: It was said that we would be one collective power, that there were many others who would incorporate their activities in the maintenance of South Africa.

UNKNOWN: Now, looking at the action of shooting the victims on that night, it was because you believed in a cause, it was a principled action, you say?

JAMES WHEELER: That is correct.

UNKNOWN: Now, you did not stop to see if you had achieved your objective of killing these people, correct?

JAMES WHEELER: That is correct, as I have said, I looked in my rear-view mirror and saw that the taxi had not sped or rolled off the road, and from that I made the inference that no-one had died or had been wounded.

UNKNOWN: And yet, having not achieved your political objective, I mean the taxi just veered off the road, you didn't go on to another incident and another one, to make the point you felt you had to make on that day?

JAMES WHEELER: No, we didn't.

UNKNOWN: But you had set out to achieve a particular political objective, you weren't sure that you had achieved it after that first shooting?

JAMES WHEELER: That is correct, as I said today, I was certain that we had not achieved it, because at that point we were not part of the larger force which was protecting our Afrikanerdom, in fact, to tell you the truth, we were part of nothing.   So if others were part of or did the same thing that we did, it would have created a completely different viewpoint regarding that period in time.

UNKNOWN: Well you were part of nothing, this is really the point that I am trying to understand, you were part of nothing at that time, you did not even go to Mr De Bruin's house after the act to say, "We have done X, what can we do next?", you were part of nothing?

JAMES WHEELER: Let us once again look at the events preceding the election, what was said, we all know it, we felt so strongly for our cause that we decided to harm these people.  However, at the end of the day, as I have said, on the radio and television nothing appeared which would substantiate the political objective which they were talking about, and one could say that they had left us alone, no-one assisted us.

UNKNOWN: Coming to your day in court, you took the oath to tell the truth, yet you did not tell the truth?

JAMES WHEELER: That is correct.

MR PRINSLOO: If I may just intervene, I didn't get that question, but I understand that the question implied that my client testified.   I just want to correct that, he has never testified at any proceedings preceding today.

UNKNOWN: My apology.   I really am thinking more of the bail application, of the evidence that has come from that, in terms of what was said, and yes, other people gave testimony at the bail application.   Thank you, Mr Prinsloo.  But the point really is that the people who did give evidence misled the Court, this is what you are saying?

JAMES WHEELER: Yes, that's correct.

UNKNOWN: And one of the reasons you are saying is that you were worried about the death penalty?

JAMES WHEELER: Yes, correct.

UNKNOWN: A death penalty which, at the time, and I'm happy to be corrected, had already been rescinded by the then President De Klerk, it was actually done away with under his government?

MR PRINSLOO: No, I think there was a moratorium that existed in the, putting such sentences into effect, it was still in existence and on the books at that time.

JAMES WHEELER: Yes, because if we look at the court records, it was also mentioned in court.

UNKNOWN: Again, the point, the point, however, being that if you were a principled member of an organisation, if you were a member who believed in your cause, you wouldn't mind either the death sentence or life imprisonment for the cause, for your cause?

JAMES WHEELER: Let's look at it this way, we had time to reflect on it, and there wasn't a lot of right wing resistance against the taking over of the government, the handing over of political power from white to black, so my reasoning was, why should I decide, or I thought I should decide, should I continue or should I look at my family's interests, that was at the stage after we moved into the new South Africa, and based on these considerations, I decided that I would not follow the political route.

UNKNOWN: Finally, my difficulty really is with that political objective, as has obviously become the crucial discussion in today's hearing.   I am concerned and what I don't understand is why you have waited all of this time to actually say, "We did it for our cause, you know, there was a political objective"?

JAMES WHEELER: In the first place, I considered my family's welfare, and for that reason I didn't want to receive the death penalty, and for me, who was part of an organisation who was supposed to take part in the toppling of a government, I felt that I could at least try to contribute to reconcile people.   I didn't do this thing simply just for the sake of doing it, I reflected on this matter for a long time and ultimately I decided that this was the right thing for us to do, not only for us, but also for other people, also whites like ourselves who are opposed to this, just to demonstrate where it actually gets you, and that's why I'm here today.
	Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Advocate Bosman, do you have any questions you'd like to ask?