Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — 1998-05-14

MR DORFLING: Pages 1971 lines 3 to 8. Mr Dias, D-i-a-s, page 3550 lines 2 to 4. Mr Stevens page 2505 lines 6 to 14 and the same witness Stevens page 2555 lines 2 to 6. The witness von Eggedy page 4279 and also page 4284 lines 11 to 17. Those are the specific extracts I want to include.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MR DORFLING: Mr Chairman I accept that a copy of this record has been made available to the Honourable Committee.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes we have.

MR DORFLING: We specifically make mention of this and submit a copy of this portions of the evidence to the Committee members. I just confirm that, that is the position, it is available.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MR DORFLING: Now Mr Singaram I act on behalf of 9 people that were injured on that day in the proximity of Shell House on the corners of King George and de Villiers Street. I want to put their version to you. I want to put it to you that the 9 objectors on whose behalf I act will deny that there was any attack on the security guards at the time when the shooting commenced. Would you like to respond to that?

MARAINSAMY SINGARAM: Well each one is fair to their own opinion and they can say the way they want to put it but I can only speak under oath here before the Honourable Committee as I saw it.

MR DORFLING: They would furthermore say that they never formed part of any plan to attack Shell House but that their intention was to attend a meeting on behalf of the Zulu king.

MARAINSAMY SINGARAM: That may be so but what I saw was an attack.

CHAIRPERSON: ... do not know who his clients were in any case.

MARAINSAMY SINGARAM: That is true Honourable Chair.

MR DORFLING: The 9 objectors on whose behalf I act will deny that they had any firearms in their possession at the time when the shooting commenced. And I am talking of firearms, the majority of them had various sorts of traditional weapons in their possession.

MARAINSAMY SINGARAM: That may be so because I did not see any firearms.

MR DORFLING: The objectors on whose behalf I act will also state if they give evidence in front of this Committee that there was no justification for the security guards of the ANC to shoot at them at the time when the shooting started.

MARAINSAMY SINGARAM: That is the way they see it but I saw it different.

MR DORFLING: I have got no further questions. Thank you Mr Chair.

MR DORFLING: .

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MR PRETORIUS: Mr Chairman, with regard to the video footage that was shown and the debate which took place now about how soon after the event the video was taken, with the leave of the Chairman and the Honourable Committee I would like to place certain facts which can be observed on the video, on record. Because that would be material at the end when we address the Committee and the Honourable Chairman in our argument in so far as how soon after the event took place this particular video footage was taken. With your leave I would just like to place those facts on record.

CHAIRPERSON: You say that that is what emerges from the video itself?

MR PRETORIUS: Indeed.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes will you please draw our attention to there?

MR PRETORIUS: As it pleases Mr Chairman. Mr Chairman it appears from the video footage that as the camera approaches the particular corner there are for all practical purposes no marchers visible. There are no policemen visible. There are no ambulance people or medical people visible. The only person visible on that video at that stage is Mr von Eggedy was amongst the injured and dying people trying to assist them. If one continue with the video one observe that after a while the people, and that is now people that I refer to now. In other words ambulance people, police, medical people, etc, arrives at the scene as to try and assist anybody there. Mr Chairman that is indicative of the fact and I am putting it to this witness and to the ANC so that they know exactly what we are going to argue. That is indicative of the fact that, that video footage was taken so soon after the event that even before anybody arrived at the scene that video was taken. Which means Mr Chairman that it was taken in an extreme short period after the event.

CHAIRPERSON: And the fact that the video does not focus on any policemen does not mean that there were no policemen in the vicinity.

MR PRETORIUS: Mr Chairman you can see the whole corner there. The video is taken as the person runs towards, the cameraman runs towards the corner. One can see the whole corner. In fact if one look at the street it is taken in practically every direction. One can see there is no policemen, one can see there is no marchers, one can see there is no medical people. It is obvious that there is nobody near that scene there except Mr von Eggedy. Thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Just to afford you an opportunity. You heard the points that were being made about the possibility that this video was taken shortly after, soon after before the ambulance and the police arrived. Are you able to make any comment on that?

MARAINSAMY SINGARAM: Honourable Chair the actual shooting lasted seconds. So soon after could be anything. But I have heard what has been mentioned.

CHAIRPERSON: You have heard what was said yes. Who is the next person who wishes to put questions to this witness? Mr Dorfling has finished. Have you all finished? Thank you. No questions. Any re-examination?

MR TIPP: Thank you Chairperson. Just one question.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR TIPP: Mr Singaram could you tell the Committee whether the gun that you used during the shooting was handed in to the
police for ballistics testing?

MARAINSAMY SINGARAM: It was during the inquest I handed over my weapon and it was taken for ballistics and the promise by my legal people was that they will give it back to me in a month and it took something like 6 months.

MR TIPP: Do you confirm that your gun was eventually handed back to you by the police after it had been subjected to ballistic testing?

MARAINSAMY SINGARAM: That is so.

MR TIPP: Thank you Chairperson I have no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR TIPP

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you (...indistinct)

MR LAX: Just one question Chairperson. Was a ballistics report in respect of your gun ever produced at the inquest or handed in as part of the general ballistics information? Are you aware of that?

MARAINSAMY SINGARAM: I should think so but my legal advisor may be able to......

MR TIPP: Chairperson the position is that all the guns that were handed in for ballistic testing were in fact tested and none of them were linked to any of the exhibits recovered from the scene or recovered from the bodies.

MR LAX: My only question was if his was handed in during the course of the inquest some of the reports would have been already been prepared by that stage so I was just trying to make sure but I think......

MR TIPP: What actually happened was that the ANC witnesses testified I believe it was in July, the police ballistic expert, Mr du Plessis only gave his evidence much later. By the time he gave his evidence all the guns had been subjected to ballistic testing and no links were able to be drawn.

JUDGE NGCOBO: As I understand your evidence Mr Singaram, when you moved to the corner there was general fire. Is that right?

MARAINSAMY SINGARAM: That is so Honourable Committee member.

JUDGE NGCOBO: What do you mean by that?

MARAINSAMY SINGARAM: Honourable Committee member what I heard was a firing. It was lots of noise. It was quite highly charged situation and there was just firing. I cannot give directions and I was under that charged sort of emotional stage that I could not distinct any weapon from the other.

JUDGE NGCOBO: I understand that but could you make out at the time the direction from which this fire emanated?

MARAINSAMY SINGARAM: Honourable Committee member not.

JUDGE NGCOBO: Did you hear the order to repel as you call it being issued?

MARAINSAMY SINGARAM: I did.