Amnesty Hearings — Mmabatho — 1998-09-22

ONTLAMETSE BERNSTEIN MENYATSOE: I've explained to you yesterday that if you are in a situation of war, as to whether people were in what position or as they were lying down, if you are in a situation of war, if a person moves anything can happen.  I said to you that one of these people moved, that is why I shot them.

CHAIRPERSON: On that, Mr Menyatsoe, if that person hadn't have moved, would you have shot them in any event?

ONTLAMETSE BERNSTEIN MENYATSOE: It will be difficult for me because I will not know how I would respond thereafter.  I don't understand how I could have acted.  That is history, it wouldn't be possible for me to think what I could have done if that person did not move.

MR VAN DER BERG: Mr Menyatsoe, the way I understand your evidence which you gave yesterday, is that one of the AWB members moved his hand towards his hip, is that correct?

ONTLAMETSE BERNSTEIN MENYATSOE: That is correct, I said so yesterday.

MR VAN DER BERG: Did I also understand you correctly yesterday in that that was the reason why you shot and killed them, because you thought he may take out a weapon?

ONTLAMETSE BERNSTEIN MENYATSOE: The main reason is that we were in a situation or war and then again that person moved.  I thought he was pulling his gun.  Anything could have happened to me at that time.

MR VAN DER BERG: Mr Chairperson, if you could just give me a moment.  As it pleases you, Mr Chairperson.
	Mr Menyatsoe, I want you to page to page 19 of the bundle.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you have it, Mr Menyatsoe?  It's the statement made by one, Andy Johan de Kocker and it's on the third page of that statement.

ONTLAMETSE BERNSTEIN MENYATSOE: I don't have it, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: It's part of the bundle of papers.

MR HENDRICKSE: Mr Chairman, it seems that my attorney doesn't have it before him.  May Mr Mpshe just borrow his bundle?

UNKNOWN: ...[inaudible] bundle, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: You'll get it back straight away, Mr Mpshe.
	Do you have that document now, Mr Menyatsoe?

ONTLAMETSE BERNSTEIN MENYATSOE: Yes, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: You may proceed Mr van der Berg.

MR VAN DER BERG: As it pleases you, Mr Chairperson.
	Mr Menyatsoe, is we look at the first paragraph on page 19, I will read it to you.  This is what de Kocker said under oath:
"My mamba vehicle stood on the opposite side of the road. I stood with my vehicle. I could however see the whole scene.  At this stage the situation was under control.  No shots were fired.  There were a lot of media personnel at the scene".
Can you comment on this?

ONTLAMETSE BERNSTEIN MENYATSOE: Mr de Kocker is saying what he saw, what he experienced.  I don't dispute what he is saying but I say I did not see any person around there.  I don't dispute what de Kocker says, that the situation was under control.  According to him the situation was under control.  According to me, Mr Menyatsoe, the situation was not under control.  That is why I said it was a situation of war.
	I don't dispute what de Kocker is saying, that is way he experienced the situation and that is how he observed and thought about that situation.  I don't dispute what he is saying.  Any person has his own perspective of analysing a particular situation.

MR VAN DER BERG: What according to you was under control?

CHAIRPERSON: No, he says according to him it was not under control.

ONTLAMETSE BERNSTEIN MENYATSOE: ...[no English translation]

MR VAN DER BERG: I understood it in the same say but the question I'm asking is what was then under control?  What does it mean if you say: "The situation was not under control"?

ADV SIGODI: With respect, Mr van der Berg, where is line of questioning going to take us, because what we are looking for, what is your main objection to this applicant?  Are you attacking the political objective or are you attacking the full disclosure?  Because we'd like to see some structured form of questioning here.  We'd like to know where exactly, what point you're trying to make and if you have any point then put it to the applicant.

MR VAN DER BERG: Mr Chairperson, the applicant emphasises the fact that there was a situation of war and he pertinently said that there was shooting, and according to his version it stopped, the shooting that is.  And where the AWB members were lying at that stage there was no shooting and that is why I'm asking this question, to find out if there was truly a situation of war.  That is why we have to clear this up in order to find out if the situation was under control.

CHAIRPERSON: But haven't we gone over this about five or six times already?  He said that's his perspective of it.  We know that the people were lying on the ground etc.  I'll allow this just this one time again, but please don't go back and ask him it again, Mr van der Berg.
	The question was, why do you say that the situation was not under control at the time that you shot those three people?

ONTLAMETSE BERNSTEIN MENYATSOE: For me to say the situation was not under control or it was a situation of war, I've explained that.  The way I was, my emotions were very high, I was afraid.  The first minute which I started to shoot these people, I said to myself this is the time that we should fight until I kill them.

MR VAN DER BERG: Mr Menyatsoe, let us go back to where the AWB men are lying on the ground.  You did not see anybody else, in other words you just looked at them, is that correct, or what did you do?

CHAIRPERSON: He said that already, Mr van der Berg.  We don't want to keep on repeating it.

MR VAN DER BERG: Mr Menyatsoe, can you specifically remember where the AWB men's hands were while they were lying on the ground?

ONTLAMETSE BERNSTEIN MENYATSOE: I said to you yesterday that I do not remember as to the position of the three AWB members.  I said so yesterday.

MR VAN DER BERG: But Mr Menyatsoe, you could remember that one of them moved his hand, is that not correct?

ONTLAMETSE BERNSTEIN MENYATSOE: When you are in a situation of war, any movement of your opponent, you should observe each and every movement of your opponent because you are in a situation of war.
	What I was trying to observe is they should move and that movement I observed.  As to how they were lying on the ground, I didn't care about that.  I was only trying to be alert as to where the danger would come from.

MR VAN DER BERG: Mr Menyatsoe, I know you said, and I will ask it again to you today, could you describe or explain the movement you saw?

CHAIRPERSON: Have you forgotten what it was, Mr van den Berg, or are you trying to get him to do something different now or what is the intention?  Why must we keep on repeating questions?

MR VAN DER BERG: Chairperson, it's not that I forgot it but it's important that we go over this again because I'm going to offer other evidence now.

CHAIRPERSON: Alright, if you can just show it again.
Can you just describe how that man moved his hands, Mr Menyatsoe because Mr van der Berg wants to see it again.

ONTLAMETSE BERNSTEIN MENYATSOE: Chairperson, Mr van der Berg is confusing me.  I've explained to him.  I even pointed with my hand how that person moved.  If you don't have any questions, just tell the Chairperson that you don't have further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: He indicated by moving his left hand down to his waist and towards the back, the middle of the back.

MR VAN DER BERG: Thank you Chairperson.
	Mr Menyatsoe, when he moved his hand to his hip, was that the moment you shot him?

ONTLAMETSE BERNSTEIN MENYATSOE: I've explained, yes.

MR VAN DER BERG: Did you shoot the person who moved his hand first?

ONTLAMETSE BERNSTEIN MENYATSOE: I explained yesterday that I don't remember as to with whom did I start and ended with whom.

MR VAN DER BERG: But you shot all three of them.

CHAIRPERSON: We know that, Mr van der Berg.  Please, Mr van der Berg, we don't want to sit here for days and days.  It's quite clear to everybody in this room that he shot them.