Amnesty Hearings — Bloemfontein — 1998-08-20

MR MBANDAZAYO: I'm not talking about the applicants, the applicants never gave evidence.  I'm talking of the people who gave evidence in the trial.

MR P DE CASTRO: Well to my knowledge there was three that was taken to hospital and there was another one there which was slightly injured, but there was no need to go to hospital or anything.

MR MBANDAZAYO: So that is why you are saying that there were only four people who were injured?

CHAIRPERSON: He did not say, he said three injured and one very slightly, he's drawn a distinction.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Mr Chairman maybe myself I did not make myself clear, I'm saying that that is why in his second statement he said that there were only four people who were injured, it's because the one was slightly injured.

CHAIRPERSON: You're now talking about his second statement?

MR MBANDAZAYO: His second statement.

CHAIRPERSON: You realise you're now being asked about your second statement, not the evidence you gave here or anything, where you did say that four people were wounded.

MR P DE CASTRO: I'm aware of that.

MR MBANDAZAYO: And you did not say that the one was slightly injured?

MR P DE CASTRO: No I didn't put it into detail on the statement, but I'm giving you the details now.

MR MBANDAZAYO: You also mentioned in your evidence in chief that these people were not wearing any uniform?

MR P DE CASTRO: That's right.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Were you expecting them to wear a uniform?

MR P DE CASTRO: Well they say they're soldiers.  I means soldiers must wear a uniform to identify themselves.

MR MBANDAZAYO: According to yourself if a person is not wearing a uniform he's not a soldier?

MR P DE CASTRO: Well to my knowledge yes.  When you go to do battle or when you go to fight your enemies, you must have a uniform on.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Now coming back to your question of saying that the only thing, they only went there to rob.  You indicated that you had a large amount of money in your supermarket.  Don't you think that if it was only that specific purpose they would have searched and looked for that money knowing, as you indicated that they went there knowing that it's only a month end and it's a busy day?

MR P DE CASTRO: Well to my knowledge I think that things didn't work out the way that what they planned.

ADV SOGODI: Sorry Mr Mbandazayo, let's just get from Mr De Castro, how much money was lost?

MR P DE CASTRO: It was + R8 700,00.

ADV SOGODI: Thank you.

MR MALAN: Was part of that money comprising of cheques?

MR P DE CASTRO: That's right.

MR MALAN: Do you know more or less what the division was, cheques/cash?

MR P DE CASTRO: It was about 50/50, 50 cash and 50% cheques.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Thank you Mr Chairman.  Now am I correct to say that the reason you are saying that it was not political motivated is because they also took money?

MR P DE CASTRO: Well as I said previously, when they came into the shop they screamed they want money.  Only when they realised that there was so much people in the supermarket at the time and then they started shooting, but it took them a while to shoot, to start shooting at people.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Would I be correct if I'm saying what you are saying is just you are speculating?

MR P DE CASTRO: No it's not speculation, all the victims over there will support me on that.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Mr De Castro is it not also true that during the trial it transpired that you were not sure what actually was said, people who were in the shop were not sure what actually what was uttered by the people who entered the supermarket?

MR P DE CASTRO: No I wouldn't know.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Exact word which were said.

MR P DE CASTRO: Well I wasn't at the trial, as I pointed out I was when I gave evidence and the day of the Sentences.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Now it's because in the Judgment it says that people were not sure of the exact word which were uttered.

MR P DE CASTRO: I'm not aware about that.

MR MBANDAZAYO: And now it seems as if you are clear that everybody who was there will support what you are saying.

MR P DE CASTRO: Well I don't know what you're trying to point with that or, I wouldn't know.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Now if somebody goes to a place, a soldier as I, as you have already indicated that soldiers are supposed to wear a uniform and now what they did was to rob, they killed people and robbed so that's the reason you are saying that it was not politically motivated.  Now if a South African Defence Force goes to Angola and attacked the enemies and thereafter they take ivory and come back with the ivory, would you regard that as a robbery?

MR P DE CASTRO: Yes I would, because he's doing it for - unless he was doing it with instructions or he was in a war, but in a war it doesn't say you must steal.

MR MBANDAZAYO: No.  You qualified that unless he's doing it with instructions that he must do that, then you won't qualify that as a robbery if he does that with instructions?

MR P DE CASTRO: No didn't put it that way, what I'm saying is when you're fighting war what are you actually fighting, you're fighting another group or a government or whatever so you're not there to steal, you're there to fight a war, not to go and steal.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Mr De Castro I was just following your answer that I asked you if South African Defence Force goes there, they did war with Angola and they come back with ivory would you regard that as a robbery?

MR P DE CASTRO: Well I, that to me - if you steal that's a criminal act, to steal is a criminal act.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Let me leave that one, let me leave it at that point.  Would you - you know what's happening in the country, the farmers are being attacked daily and they are saying that that is political, there's political motive behind it.  Do you agree with that statement.  They are attacked and their properties are robbed, after that taken away.  Would you agree with their statement that's it political motivated?

MR P DE CASTRO: That's exactly what I wanted to tell you just now, which I forgot but I will tell you now, that previously or while the other government was in power everything that was done was political, whether it was robbery, whether it was politically motivated it was all attached to political parties or to organisations.  Now that another government has taken over the country those things don't get attached to organisations anymore, so where's it going to stop and now you're telling me that this was political, where people went to rob money, that doesn't make sense to me.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Mr De Castro I don't know whether I'm getting your correctly, my question was that do you agree with the statement - I'll follow up your answer - do you agree with the statement by the farmers that that is political motivated that they are attacked?

MR P DE CASTRO: Well they've had something like that in the newspaper but I also listen to the news every evening and it was yesterday or the day before disclosed, on the news, that it's not political, it's criminals that's doing it.

MR MBANDAZAYO: I agree with you fully, that's what comes from the government's side, but I was asking you about the farmers, the farmers are saying it's politically motivated.  Do you agree with that?

MR P DE CASTRO: If I agree with it?  No I don't agree with them whatsoever.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Okay thanks.  Now coming to your answer, you said that during the previous government everything that was done by political organisations was political, robbery and everything?

MR P DE CASTRO: No no I said by individuals.  Everything was then taken as a political deed, but now after there's no more excuses to ...(indistinct) to political organisations now it's a crime on it's own.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Okay I do get your point.  Now as a follow up to that, were you in agreement with those statements during the time the previous government that what was done by individuals at the time, as you put it, it was political?