Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — 1998-05-11

GEORGE BIZOS: Bundle B, page 254, Mr Chairman.  Because the plan is also germane to the question and answer in paragraph 14 on page 9
"That King George Street does not continue in a southerly direction beyond Plein Street, and that it is not suitable for the movement of a large number of people."
This is responded to on page 96, paragraph 1.7.  The objectors admit that King George Street does not continue in a southerly direction beyond Plein Street, but they deny that it is not suitable for the movement of a large number of people.  
	In relation to paragraphs 13 and 14 Mosselson's reply is at page 116 and 117, paragraph 21 on 116:
"The position and number of concrete barriers positioned in King George Street between De Villiers and Plein Streets appear from the photographs and video footage depicting the scene of the incident.  It is admitted that these documents correctly reflect the position at the time of the shooting.  No further admissions are being made by the objectors in this regard."
And in paragraph 14 at page 117, paragraph 22:
"It is admitted that the photographs as well as the video footage depicting the scene of the incident correctly reflect the position with regard to King George Street.  No further admissions have been made in regard to the objectors, in this regard by the objectors"
We will, unless an admission is forthcoming, we will have to show the video and produce the photographs, Mr Chairman.
"That the",
Paragraph 15, 
"That the number of marchers which converged at the intersection of King George and De Villiers Streets was in the region of 1000 - 1500."
The answer to that is to be found on page 96, paragraph 1.8 by Dr van Wyk:
"The objectors do not admit the number of marchers, but do admit that there was a large number of marchers who converged at the intersection of King George Street and De Villiers Street."
And in paragraph 23 on page 117, Mosselson says:
"The objectors are not in a position to either admit or deny that the number of marchers that converged at the intersection of King George and De Villiers Streets were in the region of 1000 - 1500."
They do not say how many they say there were.

CHAIRPERSON: No, Mr Bizos, fine details as to how many people where there and so on, are they going to be relevant in deciding whether amnesty should be granted or not?

GEORGE BIZOS: Suffice to say that there was a large group of people, but - a large group is a relative term ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: ...(inaudible) carried out as to how many people there were, so I think that the words "large group" will be adequate for present purposes, isn't it?

GEORGE BIZOS: For whatever purpose it may be, but, Mr Chairman, "large" is an amorphous word.  It could be hundred in particular circumstances or a thousand in other circumstances.  What we thought was, this is why we put it in an approximate basis, we didn't ask them to count them or to give us precisely how many there were, so that the Committee could get some idea of what sort of group they were involved with.

CHAIRPERSON: You're dealing with an approximation yourself.

GEORGE BIZOS: Yes.  And 16, Mr Chairman
"That the marchers were armed with a variety of dangerous weapons, including some firearms, amongst which were AK 47s"
This is paragraph 16, 1.9 by Dr van Wyk.  The objectors deny the contents of this paragraph.  They were armed with so-called traditional weapons only.
And on page 117, paragraph 24, Mosselson's says:
"The individual objectors on whose behalf we act, deny that they were armed with any firearms and/or AK47 rifles.  It is admitted that a number of the marchers carried a variety of traditional weapons."
Mr Chairman, we will have to prove by viva voce evidence and video material that there were such firearms, including AK47's.

CHAIRPERSON: ...[inaudible]

GEORGE BIZOS: I beg your pardon?

CHAIRPERSON: ...[inaudible]

GEORGE BIZOS: By the group that we say attacked Shell House Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: The answer given on behalf of some of the objectors is a fair answer.  They are saying that on behalf of the people they represent they won't know whether there were people, they didn't say there were some people that carried arms.

GEORGE BIZOS: They don't say they were traditional weapons, not arms Mr Chairman.  Yes, traditional weapons, not arms.

CHAIRPERSON: ...(inaudible) to the knowledge of their clients.

GEORGE BIZOS: Except Mr Chairman, that the Committee will not only, with respect, be concerned with the knowledge of their clients.

CHAIRPERSON: That's understandable, we are going to be looking at the totality of the evidence.

GEORGE BIZOS: Yes, but what I am saying is this, that evidence is available which doesn't emanate from us, about how some of the persons that were in the immediate vicinity of Shell House at the relevant time were armed.

CHAIRPERSON: We will hear that when the evidence is led.

GEORGE BIZOS: In the absence of an admission that that was so, then we will have to lead the evidence, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

GEORGE BIZOS: Then at paragraph 17, Mr Chairman
"That as the marchers were leaving Park Station some of them fired shots from heavy calibre weapons."
Now, Mr Chairman, we will also have in due course maps of the whole area in order to show the distance between Park Station and Shell House so that - it's denied by Dr van Wyk, page 97, 1.10 and Mosselson says on page 118, paragraph 25, that they have no instructions.
"that as the marchers moved from Park Station in the direction of Shell House some were knocking over bins, smashing cars, shouting and screaming and making violent gestures."
	Page 97, paragraph 111, Dr van Wyk says the objectors admit that they moved from Park Station in the direction of Shell House.  They however deny that they were aware of the whereabouts of Shell House and state that they merely marched behind their Indunas.  Save ...[indistinct] the objectors deny the contents of this paragraph.  Mosselson's say that they have no instructions, on page 118, paragraph 25,
"That these groups of marchers were not accompanied by police escorts of independent monitors."
	Paragraph 19 on page 9, Dr van Wyk says that they have no knowledge of page 97, 1.12, and Mosselson say that they have no instructions, at page 118, paragraph 25.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Bizos, I've been reminded that we're about to take the customary adjournment, is there very much further that you are going to go along these lines?

GEORGE BIZOS: I'm finishing off with one page on paragraphs 20, 21, 22, 23 and 24 in relation to this matter.  There are other matters that I will have, but it will not be inconvenient in any way to just continue after the adjournment.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, very well, we will take a short adjournment ...[inaudible] this morning.  We'll take a short adjournment and if it is at all possible, let's try and make a short adjournment.  We will resume, it's 12h00 now, we will - can we resume in not more that 15 minutes from now.  We will resume at 12h15.
HEARING ADJOURNS
ON RESUMPTION