Amnesty Hearings — Boksburg — 1999-02-23

CHAIRPERSON: What I've said Mr Cachalia, whatever he says about, you've said, do you expect us to believe that in, within a very short time, a matter of minutes, the group grew from 100 to 400.  If he says yes, or if he says no, it's not going to make any difference to us here I can assure you, because we don't know that all the group were around his house.  That 100 people.  I mean there could have been 300 people on the soccer field, and a hundred come down to his house.  That doesn't mean that that group of a hundred suddenly grew to 400, they just came from nowhere down from the hills or anything.  And he only saw a hundred around his house, there might have been 400 there but they were out of his view, so it's not attacking his credibility, whatever he says.

AZHAR CACHALIA: I want to put to your Mr Sithole, thank you sir, I want to put to your Mr Sithole that there were nowhere near 400 people in the ANC group at any time on that particular day on the soccer field or around the soccer field, sir.

MR SITHOLE: I am saying they could have easily made 400.

AZHAR CACHALIA: Was that the same group that came round your shack on that particular day?

MR SITHOLE: The one group that surrounded my shack or my house could have been 100 according to my estimation.  And after having spoken to them they left as a group, but when they came towards the sports field they were far much more than that, they were now around 400.

AZHAR CACHALIA: Mr Sithole you told us that what had occurred on that particular day was spontaneous and that here was no instruction to do what you had done.

MR SITHOLE: Yes.

AZHAR CACHALIA: I am saying to you, I'm asking you what was the, was there a political objective in the act that you had committed on that day?

MR SITHOLE: I wanted to find out from the ANC people was to why they were attacking me.  They did not advance any explanation.  We ended up fighting without me knowing why I was being attacked.

AZHAR CACHALIA: What you are saying is that there was no, when you shot at them you didn't intend to attain any political objective.  Is that correct?

MR SITHOLE: I meant to protect myself.

AZHAR CACHALIA: For the last time sir I'm just going to put it.  Did you have when you shot at this people when you killed this people when you injured this people, did you have a political objective in shooting and killing this people.

MR SITHOLE: I had a political objective because they were the ANC and I was a member of the IFP.

AZHAR CACHALIA: And was it your intention to kill all members of the ANC?

MR SITHOLE: It was not my intention to kill all of them.  My intention was to protect myself.

AZHAR CACHALIA: So am I then correct in saying that in protecting yourself you shot them but there was no political objective in killing any particular member of the ANC?

CHAIRPERSON: I don't think I could answer that question.  I wouldn't understand it.  What would you like him to say?  I mean, I shot them so that there would be one vote less in the election or what?  I mean, if you've got a situation that was, what he said from his evidence, whether it's disputed or not I don't know, but there was a highly volatile situation brought about by the political differences of the various communities of that, of Zevenfontein.  They were being attacked, that's his version, and he shot in defence of it because he was IFP they were ANC.  So when he pulled the trigger, I can't understand how anyone can answer well what was the political objective to be obtained.  Or attained.  There wasn't anything obviously on the evidence to be attained by the shooting other than defending himself.  On his version.

AZHAR CACHALIA: That is what I'm going to argue to this Committee, sir.

CHAIRPERSON: It's a question of argument.  It's a question he can't answer.

AZHAR CACHALIA: Before I could argue it I thought I must give him an opportunity to answer that particular question.  Now obviously what kind of answer it is would be difficult for him to answer but it's the kind of matter that I thought I need to argue before you but in fairness to him give him the opportunity to answer, sir.  Only purpose sir.
	Mr Sithole, the last issue that I want to deal with you is, that if I am at Mr Magwaza's house and if 400, on the assumption that that is the correct figure, of ANC members are approaching you, the alternative that was available to me was to run in the opposite direction towards the river and when the river was not crossible because there was too much water in it run along the banks in either northerly or southerly direction you would be running from your home, from Magwaza's direction in an easternly direction you could have run towards the river and run away from there rather than confronted them and shoot them.

MR SITHOLE: We could have taken a different route because they were all over the place and we were in the middle.

AZHAR CACHALIA: Mr Sithole the position of Zevenfontein it is a slight hillside going into a river and on the hillside, on the slopes if the squatter camp of Zevenfontein, and the majority of people re living higher up from the soccer field, not towards the river.  Is that correct sir?

MR SITHOLE: Yes they used to stay around the river before.  They moved after the fighting.

AZHAR CACHALIA: Mr Sithole the crowd that was coming was coming from the top end of Zevenfontein coming towards the river, is that correct?

MR SITHOLE: That is correct.

AZHAR CACHALIA: Now there was no crowd of ANC people coming from the bottom and from the riverside to Mr Magwaza's house, is that correct?

MR SITHOLE: Yes, there was no group that was approaching from the river towards Magwaza.  The entire group came from that, from the north.

AZHAR CACHALIA: Let's call it the top side because we might be mistaking the directions.

MR SITHOLE: Thank you.

AZHAR CACHALIA: Now Mr Sithole I'm putting to you if the crowd that has this malicious intent of wanting to harm you is coming from the one direction, you are rushing towards it when you have an option of running on the opposite direction.  Why did you do that sir?

MR SITHOLE: We had nowhere to run to except to cross the river, because the place is as I illustrate.  You have this river running this way and you have the houses on the other side, and they were coming from the different sides of the houses.

AZHAR CACHALIA: Mr Magwaza I want to suggest to you that there was no objective that you intended, your only objective on that particular day was to go and kill and hurt and injure other people and that's in fact why you approached them instead of taking the easier option of going towards the river and when you find the river is overflowing run along the river in either direction of the river.  My apologies I called you Magwaza.
	Mr Sithole let me put the question again to you, I'm sorry, it's just been brought to my attention that I called you Magwaza.  I am saying that you Mr Sithole only did what you did because you had a criminal intent of killing Mr Dastile and the other deceased on that particular day without any political objective and the easier position for you was to run away from where they were approaching from towards the river and when you found it to be so full Mr Sithole, you could either run along its banks in either direction, and avoid the crowd in that way, or at least attempt to avoid the crowd.

MR SITHOLE: There was nowhere to run to.  The river was overflowing.

AZHAR CACHALIA: Thank you very much sir.

ADV SIGODI: Mr Cachalia, can I just get this clear from you.  Are you then saying that the ANC was attacking the IFP?  If you are saying that he should have run away?