Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — 1998-08-07

CHAIRPERSON: He in fact was withdrawing the objection that he had notified us of.

UNKNOWN: Yes he was.

MR SANDI: There's just one problem for me Mr Landman.  When were these Heads drafted?  I see that it says 18 February 1998 at the bottom there.  I'm sure that is a typist's mistake.

MR LANDMAN: Mr Chairman as - or rather Adv Sandi I must confess that on the 18th of February 1998 I didn't even know about this application at all.  It just goes to show why it's important to brief members of the bar, they're just so clever.  Mr Chairman I don't know where my typist got that from but I certainly will ask her.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Prior?

UNKNOWN: Thank you Mr Chairman.  Mr Chairman there are just a few points I wish to mention.  Obviously in the light of Mr Wagner's withdrawal of his objection on behalf of his clients, it is not up to the evidence leader to, and quite frankly having listened to the argument of Mr Landman, a lot of what Mr
 Landman has said is factually and legally correct in terms of the act, however, I submit that on behalf, or representing the process a whole, I think that the Committee must not forget that despite or notwithstanding the legitimacy of the operation and the attack, there was a loss of human life.  We are presented with the stark facts that - all be it policemen, young policemen, four young men lost their lives in a horrible way.  Mr Kgoele said that the bomb that he planted was in the order of about 100 kilograms of explosives which was detonated when these policemen were within the killing field.  
	In addition hereto we also have injury to civilian and damage to civilian property.  My submission is that in the granting or not granting of the amnesty application that cognisance be given and effect be given to those victims who are, who were and will still be affected by this event, less the wrong message be sent out that civilians in any armed conflict situation are merely expendable commodities caught in the crossfire between opposing political or military opponents.
	And then lastly Mr Chairman there's just some concern, although the planning went with some military precision, as we've heard, the target was situated in a public place where civilians of all walks of life and as the list of injured also indicated, Black people who either through no choice of their own, were forced to attend that edifice or that symbol of apartheid.  And in that respect I would ask the Committee to also consider the aspect of gravity of the act which was set out in Section 20, Sub Section ... (intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Proportionality?

UNKNOWN: Mr Chairman yes, it's a factor which also should be considered with proportionality.
	Mr Chairman may I also then in conclusion urge that in the final analysis ... (intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Before you go on Mr Prior, this was in fact part of a civil war was it not?

UNKNOWN: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Where civilians are in danger.  How many civilians were killed by members of the South African Police Force during attacks on neighbouring territories?

UNKNOWN: Yes I accept that but I think for the - each case on it's own factual merits ... (intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: ... inevitable consequences of a civil war?

UNKNOWN: I agree to a certain extent, but where one is going to adopt the attitude that because there were atrocities on one or both sides that the one justifies the other, to whatever extent ... (intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: We're not talking about atrocities, we're talking about deliberate acts where we have atrocities of bodies being roasted on braaivleises it's a different matter.  I know it was a deliberate attack aimed at a section of the armed forces.

UNKNOWN: I accept that, I have no difficulty with that, I'm simply saying that the Committee should not lose sight of the fact that within this conflict, innocent people were affected and I think the amnesty process mustn't exclude cognisance of that fact and that they and the victims of those deceased persons should be catered for in the decision or referred to in the decision, less the impression be gained that it is not a process about victims at all and that they're merely expendable in the situation.  That was the point that I was simply making Mr Chairman.
	Mr Chairman may I then in conclusion urge the Committee that in the final analysis that the victims and the injured persons and persons who sustained damage as set out in the bundles, quite clearly be found to be victims in terms of the application as victims and be referred to the Reparations Committee Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: ... (inaudible) who Mr Prior?

UNKNOWN: Mr Chairman it's quite clearly set out in both documents.

CHAIRPERSON: As I said during the course of discussion earlier, is Anglo American - are they to be classed as a victim who we refer to the Reparations?

UNKNOWN: Well Mr Chairman in terms of the acts if persons who sustain damage are victims in terms of the act then certainly property owners may well be victims.

CHAIRPERSON: Have those sort of property owners made any attempt to claim any form of compensation?

UNKNOWN: I'm unaware of that Mr Chairman.  They certainly haven't approached the Amnesty Committee.  Well may I ... (intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: If you look at the list of buildings damaged, none of those people as far as you have informed us have approached the Amnesty Committee or taken any steps (indistinct)?

UNKNOWN: Yes that is so Mr Chairman.  Mr Chairman I was simply trying to assist.  Apparently there is ... (intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: You refer to individuals who were injured and that is a different matter completely.  If one is to start talking about compensation for everybody who suffered loss, I have some difficulty in accepting that, where they have no desire for such compensation.

UNKNOWN: Mr Chairman may I then amend what I've asked the Committee to consider.  Certainly on page 1 of the bundle the victims and next-of-kin were set out, those of the deceased persons and the injured persons.  I think that's common cause that all those policemen were either killed or injured and then as far as the persons that were injured, including the civilian persons, that's set out in the second bundle.  Simply to refer those names to the Reparation Committee Mr Chairman.  I understand that it facilitates the reparations process if the Amnesty Committee has made a ruling in that respect.

CHAIRPERSON: Well it will facilitate our process if you were to let us have a list of the persons that you consider to fall into this category and we can then apply our minds to that.

UNKNOWN: Thank you Mr Chairman.  There are no further submissions.

CHAIRPERSON: I take it you have no objection to that Mr Landman?

MR LANDMAN: Mr Chairman I have no objection to that.  I just wish to point out there was a particular gentleman who was present throughout the hearing who has suffered damage and who has taken a particular interest in the matter.

CHAIRPERSON: I think his name was placed on record wasn't it, at the commencement of proceedings and he quite clearly falls into a different category?

UNKNOWN: Yes Mr Chairman, that's Mr Erasmus and he is present today.  Certainly his name will be included on the list that I will submit to the Committee in due course.

CHAIRPERSON: Not only his name, I take it you've had discussion with him and you can supply details.  Mr Erasmus can you talk to Mr Prior after we've adjourned.  Thank you.

MR LANDMAN: I have nothing further Mr Chairman.