MR MTHEMBU: Thank you Mr Chairman. I will now call applicant Petrus Tapelo Mohapi.
PETRUS TAPELO MOHAPI: (sworn states)
EXAMINATION BY MR MTHEMBU: Mr Mohapi you are one of the applicants in this matter is that correct?
MR MOHAPI: That is true.
MR MTHEMBU: And is it further correct that at the trial you were convicted and sentenced for murder and robbery?
MR MOHAPI: That is true.
MR MTHEMBU: Now at the time of the commission of this offence to which political organisation did you belong to?
MR MOHAPI: Mr Mthembu and the Chairperson, what I would say that when I committed this offence I was a member of the African National Congress Youth League. What I would explain is that I was on the verge of defecting from that organisation Mr Chairman to tell you the honest truth. That's why I joined the task force. So even though I had a membership card of the ANC, but I was in the process of leaving the African National Congress. The only thing which made tell those in the leadership within the organisation, to tell them of my desertion for me to write there that I am a member of the African National Youth League is for me to put it clear to the Committee, that when they investigate it should be found that I was a member of the African National Congress but didn't receive any instructions from that organisation. For me to explain it clearly that I should come here before this Committee to tell the truth and only the truth and nothing else but the truth.
MR MTHEMBU: Still on that issue I would refer you to your application form, page 6 paragraph 11B. You have stated therein that
"As the Secretary General I had an absolute power to conduct such operation and I briefed my executive committee. Therefore a Mr Koloane J, Chairperson and Mr Kort Mbiga, deputy Chairperson".
CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, can you tell me, you say it's paragraph 11 on page 6?
MR MTHEMBU: Paragraph 11 Mr Chairman and page 6, just above paragraph 12. I think paragraph 11 starts on page 5 but the rest of the portion of 11B continues on page 6 of the application and page 6 of the bundle as well.
CHAIRPERSON: You are reading from the application as far as page 6 is concerned?
MR MTHEMBU: That is correct Mr Chairman.
CHAIRPERSON: Which is paragraph 11B?
MR MTHEMBU: Correct Mr Chairman.
CHAIRPERSON: Please put your question.
MR MTHEMBU: Now Mr Mohapi if you were on the brink, on the verge of defecting why was it necessary for you to contact your chairperson and your deputy-chairperson?
MR MOHAPI: Mr Mthembu and Mr Chairperson ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: Don't address Mr Mthembu, you must address the Chairman and members of the Committee.
MR MOHAPI: Thank you Mr Chairman, sorry for that. Mr Chairman that depended that when I said I met Mr Mbiga and Mr Gwalale what did I say to them when I said I briefed them, it depends as whether maybe you understand that as to say Comrades I am going to defect from the African National Congress or ...(intervention)
MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Mohapi I am going to interrupt you because you are not responding to what your counsel has put to you.
MR MOHAPI: Okay.
MS KHAMPEPE: Why was it necessary for you to contact Mr Gwalale and Mr Mbiga?
MR MOHAPI: Okay it was necessary to contact Mr Mbiga and Mr Gwalale because sometimes I worked with them in the executive committee of the ANC.
MR MTHEMBU: Now is it further correct Sir that you were present at a meeting that was attended by Mr Mdluli, yourself and Mr Mtjikelo?
MR MOHAPI: That is correct Mr Chairman.
MR MTHEMBU: Would you tell the Committee what transpired at that meeting?
MR MOHAPI: Could you be more explicit Sir.
MR MTHEMBU: Would you please tell this Committee what actually took place at that meeting Sir?
MR MOHAPI: What I may tell this Committee today is that we were at home, it was myself, Tapelo Mohapi, Mr Abel Khotle, Mr Paulus Mtjikelo and Mr Mose Ndluli. What I would tell this Commission is that for those people to be present at home it came this way. At home I was staying with my other sister or brother, we were staying at a four-roomed house. I regarded them as my comrades and to tell the truth is that Mr Mdluli I didn't know him before, it was for the first time I saw him on that particular day. The person I knew was Mr Mtjikelo who is the commander of the task force unit and Mr Abel Khotle, we knew each other at school because I was with him at school at a particular time, I know shortly that about that meeting which was held at my place.
CHAIRPERSON: You have uttered a lot of words.
MR MTHEMBU: My question is, Mr Mohapi, would you tell the Committee what took place at that meeting Sir, because you attended that meeting, you were present?
MR MOHAPI: What I may tell this Committee is that as we were four what I heard being discussed, of which I was part of that meeting was in regard to the struggle. As in that year, 1993, was declared as the Year of the Great Storm, that is to say it was upon the comrades on that time that they should see to it that the struggle continues and in which way.
And the other thing which I may tell the Commission is that Mr Mdluli said to us you should continue with the struggle on condition that your targets, it will be upon you to choose which target you may attack and when and who should do the job. And then it would only depend, the decision about the targets and the times would depend on the unit commander. The operations were intended to disarm and secondly to fund-raise, to kill even if there is a necessity to do so. ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: Just repeat that again, to kill what?
MR MOHAPI: To kill because we were fighting and could take whatever valuable in the promotion of the struggle of the African people.
So shortly I would say ...(intervention)
MR MTHEMBU: Mr Mohapi before you proceed Sir, it has been brought to my attention that you are making the task of the translators difficult by switching from one language to the other. Either you address the Committee in English or you address the Committee in seSotho, what do you elect to do?
MR MOHAPI: Mr Chairman I have a problem because I am used that when I speak, I am used to speak this way. I would request that be patient with me.
MS KHAMPEPE: You see Mr Mohapi it's not a question of not being patient with you, we have records of what you are saying and the translator's have to translate so you either elect to choose a particular language for purposes of transcribing this record, because otherwise it really gets mixed up. So it's not a question of not being patient with you. I know it's difficult to stick to a particular language like Sotho all the time, but if you would like to address us in English you can do so. Or if you want to use seSotho you can do so and use English quite sparingly to make the task of the translators and the transcribers much easier.
MR MOHAPI: Okay.
CHAIRPERSON: Try and avoid using another language just speak in one language if you can.
MR MOHAPI: Okay. Shortly I would use my language which is seSotho. I request Mr Mthembu to repeat your question, what did you say?
CHAIRPERSON: You were asked what were the discussion and you mentioned, one, two, three, four items being the points that were discussed.
MR MOHAPI: Okay. As I explained to Mr Chairperson that it was to disarm which were the issues which were discussed in that meeting. Secondly, was to see to it that how do we fund-raise for the organisation. Thirdly, is that if possible, or if it's necessary we should kill the enemy. Fourthly, was we should take each and every available item for the purpose of continuing with the struggle or maybe the objectives of the organisation.
That is shortly what I would explain that what has happened in that meeting, though there may be other issues which were discussed, but I don't remember them well now because this thing has taken place a little bit long ago. I will not be able to remember all the details of that meeting.
MR MTHEMBU: Now Mr Mohapi you mention the question of fund-raising, now precisely for which organisation were you going to fund-raise for?
MR MOHAPI: Okay. Mr Chairperson I am trying to explain....(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: Do you want an explanation or do you want an answer?
MR MTHEMBU: An answer Mr Chairman.
MR MOHAPI: Shortly I would say when you look inside my application for amnesty that is where I explained that I was fund-raising the organisation which I represented because it's not specific now, we were raising for the Pan Africanist Congress so that it should continue with its struggle for liberation.
MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Mohapi we are going to request you to again to confine yourself please to questions which are posed to you.
MR MOHAPI: Okay. What I would say shortly is that we were fund-raising for the Pan Africanist Congress of Azania.
MR MTHEMBU: Now in the planning of this operation were you also involved?
MR MOHAPI: What I would explain is that in regard to the targets what I would tell you Mr Chairperson is that I was present. I know about when we discuss about targets.
MR MTHEMBU: Were you also present when a reconnaissance of that farm was done on the 19th of July?
MR MOHAPI: The reconnaissance was done by the commander and Mr Oliphant.
MR MTHEMBU: But were you not the second-in-command of that unit?
MR MOHAPI: That is true Mr Chairperson.
MR MTHEMBU: Now would you tell the Committee about your participation in the killing and the robbery of the Smith's.
MR MOHAPI: Thank you Sir. What I would explain to this Committee now is that yes I accept that I took part in the killing and I ...(intervention)
MR MTHEMBU: Before you proceed, when you went to Wesselsdal Farm were you armed and if so with what were you armed?
MR MOHAPI: When I went to Wesselsdal I was armed by the unit commander and I had a knife with me at that time.
MR MTHEMBU: Did you not have a firearm with you?
MR MOHAPI: Not at all Sir.
MR MTHEMBU: Thank you, you may carry on Sir.
MR MOHAPI: As I explained to that on the 24th of July 1993 it was on a Saturday we left Botshabelo. We went to the place called Van Staden's Rest, in a farm called Wesselsdal. When we left Botshabelo we knew very well what was going to happen. We knew exactly how many people were staying on that farm, how many houses are there in that farm and the distance between those houses. We left having a full picture of the farm the way we were informed by the chief commander who went before to do reconnaissance.
It is true we left with a taxi and we alighted at the crossroads of Van Staden's Rest. We had intention why we had to alight at that particular place at night. We walked on foot up to the place. We left at night Mr Chairperson. When we arrived there we came nearer the house. We were able to see that there are an extra two cars. We were told that there were only two cars, in other words there were four cars at that farm. The idea was to kill, but because we found that the situation has changed the unit commander called off the operation because he was surprised that there are other extra two cars present at the farm and then we left.
We went to a different place where we sat down then we discussed what should be done. What I would explain that it was in the morning at dawn or when the sun rose, as I was second in command the unit commander informed me that we should go to that place and try to find out or enquire what is happening. When I say there, I mean at Mr Smith's place, or Mr Smith's farm.
What I can explain to the Commission is we knew where we were going because we were going to Mr Oliphant's sister who is Sophie Oliphant. For us to go there was to gather information about the people who came there. It might be people from other farms.
We went there. We met Sophie Oliphant. We looked for the information in such a way that it could not raise suspicions about those people who were there. She informed us that it is the son and the daughter of Mr and Mrs Smith.
And then again we found another information that the people in that area they would leave and go to church. We found that valuable information which would inform the unit commander and other comrades about the true picture of the situation in that area. Therefore if that is the information we gathered we were able to determine the time to attack.
We returned then we gave them the whole information. Whilst we were there we saw one car leaving, a red car. After that one a white bakkie left. Inside that bakkie was a certain White child behind the bakkie. I called them Boers, maybe you will be happy if I say White people.
After they left then we went to the house. Those who went to the house were four. It was myself, it was Mr Mtjikelo, the unit commander, he was supposed to be there so that he should give instructions of what to be done and what not to be done, and Mr Mabitsa, Mr Wa-Nthoba and Mr Mabitsa. It seems we made mistakes that I said it is myself, Mr Mtjikelo and Xhiba, I have added another names, that is to say Mabitsa and Nthoba, we left them at the storeroom.
CHAIRPERSON: This is very, very confusing, please just start again.
MR MOHAPI: Okay.
CHAIRPERSON: There were four of you who went to the house.
MR MOHAPI: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: Yourself, your commander and who else?
MR MOHAPI: John Xhiba.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes.
MR MOHAPI: And Simon Oliphant. That is to say we left John Wa-Nthoba and Mr Mabitsa at the storeroom. Yesterday I learnt that it is a storeroom. I don't as what's the difference a shed and the storeroom. We left them there.
When we arrived there I knocked at the door together with my comrades and a White lady came, that is the wife to Mr Smith. We asked her where was her husband, we are there to request petrol. She told us that we should wait for a while, she will go and call her husband. We waited there and then she went back inside the house.
What I would explain is that whilst we were still waiting there we didn't wait for a long time Mr Smith appeared and when he arrived I informed him that we are asking or requesting petrol, the car we are using is stuck there. He took us to the garage. He just said to us, follow me. When we arrived at the garage he sent Mr Xhiba to the storeroom, to the shed. When he came back, when Mr Xhiba came back he sent him to collect - I don't know as to whether it's a hosepipe or a container but he sent him there, when he returned he gave him what he was sent to collect.
CHAIRPERSON: Instead of saying he gave him, we don't know who you are talking about. You told us that Xhiba was sent to the shed to fetch something whether it was a hosepipe or whether it was a container he comes back, now then tell us what happens instead of saying he gave him.
MR MOHAPI: Mr Xhiba gave Mr Smith what he was sent to collect. What I would tell you is that I was behind Mr Smith whilst we were in the garage. Besides me on my left-hand side was Mr Oliphant. On that side of Mr Oliphant was Mr Mtjikelo. What I would tell you Sir is that what was happening in front I am not able to tell you because I was behind him, but what I may tell you is that I know that the purpose was to give us petrol. But to say at that time he was opening or putting in I am not able to tell you what he was doing because I was behind him.
Then I looked at Mr Mtjikelo, who is the unit commander, then from there he gave me a sign. That sign was to say I should attack. I didn't waste time. I took my weapon which was on my waist, then I raised my hand, then I stabbed him at the back. What I may tell you is that, yes, I stabbed him, I stabbed him once. Immediately at that time I went outside.
When I left the garage that is where then I met the wife to Mrs Smith, a White woman who is Mrs Smith. She had a weapon. I didn't waste time. I went straight to her. Even when I am trying to remember I don't remember how I came to go to her knowing that she had a gun. She had a gun this way, it showed that this person knows how to shoot and the gun is dangerous, but the most dangerous person is the person behind the gun. I was not afraid of the gun, I was afraid of her because the gun cannot control itself.
I went ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: He doesn't have to go around into those little details about whether the gun is more lethal than the individual.
MR MTHEMBU: Thank you Mr Chair. Mr Mohapi don't tell us about lethal the gun is, just tell us of your participation, what happened during the attack.
MR MOHAPI: Okay. So I will tell you Mr Chairperson is that I struggled with this woman with this gun. At that time this woman had her finger on the trigger whilst we were struggling. Then there was a gunshot immediately. Whilst I was struggling with her, that's at the time when Mr Mtjikelo appeared from the garage. It happened that he was able to take the gun from Mrs Smith. He was able to grab the gun and then at the end of that process he gave that gun to me.
After he has given me the gun ...(intervention)
MR MTHEMBU: Will you tell the Committee the shot that rang out do you know where it came from? Did it come from the ensuing struggle for the gun between yourself and Mrs Smith or did it come from another source?
MR MOHAPI: I explained Sir that it seems as if her finger was on the trigger and because of that whilst we were struggling for the gun, at that time that is where it seemed as if she pressed the trigger and then the bullet rang. I was able to hear that gunshot then whilst we were struggling. That is the bullet from her gun.
MR MTHEMBU: Then Mr Mtjikelo appeared on the scene and he took the gun away from Mrs Smith, what happened then, thereafter?
MR MOHAPI: For him to give me the gun it was because he had a gun with him. I didn't waste time. I shot her. I shot her this way. I was not looking whether it's a (...indistinct) 3.8, that is an automatic gun. There is no way you can (...indistinct) it. My intention was to point at her to make her scared and stand there then it happened that I pulled the trigger then I shot her.
What I may inform this Committee is that I shot her somewhere where in Afrikaans they say it's a "lies"(?). I don't know what that "lies" Mr Chairman.
MR MTHEMBU: A "lies", "lies" Mr Chairman. A "lies", I think it's some part, I think the uppermost part of the stomach, the flesh that covers the stomach I think.
MR MOHAPI: That's how the Afrikaner people call it that way. I am not talking about a cow ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: I would like him to tell us. Forget what the Afrikaner people call it, what does he call that part of the body where he shot her?
MR MTHEMBU: Mr Mohapi tell the Committee which part of the body did you shoot Mrs Smith?
MR MOHAPI: What I may tell you Sir is that I knew later that that is the part called "lies" in Afrikaans where I shot her. What I would explain is that in no way did I see where I shot her at that time. Even today I am not able to show where I shot her.
MR MTHEMBU: But Sir at the time was it not demonstrated or shown to you in photographs or in physical description where exactly the second shot hit Mrs Smith?
MR MOHAPI: What I would explain is that I was never shown those photos by the magistrate's court or any official of the Department of Justice. There is nowhere in court where I was asked about the photos.
It happened that way. After I shot her Mr Mtjikelo appeared then he went with this White woman to the house. I am not able to inform you what they did in the house because I was outside all the time with that gun. Up to the point, whilst I was standing outside I heard a gunshot, I heard four gunshots. When I tried to look I found out that it came from Mr Xhiba. I am not able to tell in which direction he was shooting because I don't know. At that time then I thought that maybe the situation has changed, maybe this person, he has seen people because he couldn't have just shot without any threat. It happened that at that time I went inside the house. When I arrived in the house I met Mrs Smith. What I may tell you that I just told her that she should give me the car keys. She told me that there are two cars. The other one is Honda Ballade, the other one is a Mercedes Benz. She told me that the Honda Ballade doesn't have petrol. She gave me the keys for the Mercedes Benz. I found her in the bedroom then I went with her to the kitchen if I remember well.
MR MTHEMBU: Mr Mohapi before you demanded or asked for the keys from Mrs Smith did you do any other thing to her or not?
MR MOHAPI: I would come to that point. She went with me in the kitchen and gave me those keys. It came to my mind that I am going to the car now. What I am supposed to do is to take out the car and put it in front so that when the comrades have finished they would find me ready waiting for them.
There is something which in court called, in English they call it Annexure R which shows the list of things which were taken. I took that thing which is called "groen gereite jas". That "groen gereite jas" is something which looks like it is for rain or something but I took that with the intention of - if it is estimated it may bring quite an amount which is required, then I took that thing and left with it to the garage with the car keys.
In the garage on top of the Honda there were case, if you look at that Annexure R there is "bosse sleutels" ...(intervention)
MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Mohapi we don't have an Annexure R so just tell us what you took. Confine yourself to what you are saying. Annexure A?
MR MOHAPI: I found those keys there then I went with them to the car. I started, I ignited the engine then I left, then I parked it in front. After that I sat down. Whilst sitting inside those cars waiting for my comrades they arrived and they said to me I should open the boot. They put in those things which they had with them.
During that moment I left the area until we were arrested, until I had to appear in court.
MR MTHEMBU: Mr Mohapi I want to take you back to the time when you were in the house. My question to you earlier was, before demanding the keys from Mrs Smith did you do anything to Mrs Smith or not once in the house?
MR MOHAPI: What I can explain to you Sir when I approached Mrs Smith I beat her on her chest, even on her shoulders, even when we were in court it revealed that she had internal injuries because I was beating her thoroughly and apparently she gave me the keys.
MR MTHEMBU: Do you know who cut off the telephone wires?
MR MOHAPI: What I can remind you Sir, I still remember I was the one who cut off the wires. I cut the telephone wires in her house. In that case Sir I appeal to you just to forgive me because it's a long time the way things have happened. I entered into the house and cut the wires of the telephone, after that I took the keys and beat her and then left. I took the "groen geruite jas", go out to the car, that is where I managed to have the keys and start the engine and I parked the car in front of the house and the comrades were there and we decided to leave the area. It was about plus/minus 65 kilometres and then after that we were arrested. That is shortly Sir, that I can explain to you exactly what has happened on that similar day.
MR MTHEMBU: Now how did you think that the coat that you removed would either advance your cause or would assist you in your fund-raising campaign?
MR MOHAPI: You see comrade as I have already explained to you the way I looked at things I just thought it's going to make some money for us if I had, if you can sell it at the black market, we are selling things in order to get some money. For logistical purposes, sorry Sir, under certain circumstances our soldiers you must remember where they were during those days. It could have happened that Mr Mdluli might come together to the committee commander so that they can use that. They might wear it whether to resell it or do something about it for certain purposes.
MR MTHEMBU: Do you know or did you see who removed the ammunition from the safe?
MR MOHAPI: What I can explain to you is that if you had been listening to me thoroughly and just concentrate on the part that I S Tapelo have played, ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: Just answer the question ...(intervention)
MR MOHAPI: I am trying to explain ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: No, no, you were asked, you were asked who removed the ammunition. If you don't know who removed it you just say so. You don't have to give a lengthy explanation.
MR MOHAPI: Thank you for your answer Sir, no, I don't know.
MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Mohapi I think your counsel is trying to lead you in order for you to give us relevant evidence which is material to your application, so I think you must listen to him and simply respond to his questions. He is representing you.
MR MOHAPI: Shortly Mr Mthembu I didn't see who had taken the keys or even the ammunitions.
MR MTHEMBU: But you are aware that the ammunition formed part of the loot that was removed from the house?
MR MOHAPI: I am aware of that Sir. I have realised that.
MR MTHEMBU: And are you aware that the ammunition ...(intervention)
MR MOHAPI: Sorry Sir can you please not use the similar words the "loot" one. "Loot" is something that has been stolen in a fighting. I will request you not to use that word of "loot", can you please use another word apart from that one.
MR MTHEMBU: Alright, I'll use another word. Are you aware that the two boxes of ammunition do not form part of the list that was tendered in court as Annexure A?
MR MOHAPI: I am aware of that Sir.
MR MTHEMBU: Now in that regard would you say that this list formed a precise list of all the articles that were removed?
MR MOHAPI: Immediately indicates that there are some certain things which were in the car and even at the court. It shows clearly that there are some certain things that have been added. I don't even know what does this (...indistinct) stands for. It shows clearly that somebody has drafted this list in order to empower this case Sir. This is the duty of the police. In order to empower the case they make a point that those people need to be treated fairly. I could have told you that I have been sent to death sentence long before I appeared in court, proven by the court whether I am guilty or not. This is one of the things that have been added for their own benefit. If you have realised the Whites appear to be much better you see, even if you go to the shops I can't even find those things, where are those guns or even the bullets but in court they were there and we know about those bullets.
MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Mthembu I still do not have an answer to your question if you would mind just please also taking control of your client, you know giving us the right and relevant evidence.
MR MTHEMBU: Thank you Committee member. Mr Mohapi did you understand my question? Please Sir do not give the Committee lengthy explanations. If an answer needs a yes, say a yes. If I want you to explain I'll say explain. Do you understand me?
MR MOHAPI: I do understand Sir. But you can't just say yes out of nothing, whereas you have to provide with suitable evidence, but I promise I am going to respond in answering yes or no.
MR MTHEMBU: Do you still remember my question?
MR MOHAPI: Yes I do.
MR MTHEMBU: What is your answer to that?
MR MOHAPI: My answer is that according to my understanding as you have already explained about this issue of bullets of which is not part of those who have been taken in that area. This shows clearly that this was just a tricking(?) so that this case may be exaggerated because I didn't realise the guns or even the bullets there but I have seen them in the car and even in court.
MR MTHEMBU: Mr Chairman on a point of clarification the translators have just furnished me with what a "lies" is and it says here
"The point between the abdomen and the waist or the midriff".
MR MPSHE: And to assist the Committee further, according to the record, the transcript in court, on page 89 of the bundle, line 18, Mrs Renee Smith was shot on the left leg, on the left side. I will just quote what is said on the record in Afrikaans,
"Linker been aan die linker side getreff"
That is the left leg, that is where she was shot. Page 89, line 18.
MR MTHEMBU: Mr Mohapi my next question would have been exactly on line 18 page 89.
MR MOHAPI: This is self-explicit.
MR MTHEMBU: No Sir, you don't know the nature of my question, don't anticipate it please.
MR MOHAPI: I thank you Sir.
MR MTHEMBU: Line 18 of the record apparently Mrs Smith was shot on the left leg, on the left side. From the record it appears Mrs Smith was only shot on one occasion, not on two occasions like you have testified.
MR MOHAPI: To answer your question Sir, actually it's not an answer it's just an explanation, I didn't say Mrs Smith was shot twice. Will you please look at your notes, I didn't say that Mrs Smith was shot twice. It appears that she has pulled her finger on the trigger and that shot wasn't to her but I managed to take the gun and shoot her once. I don't know whether I am making my own story here Sir.
MR MTHEMBU: No thank you Mr Mohapi. Sir is there any other thing that you wish to add or is this your case or your application?
MR MOHAPI: What I would like to explain or to add Sir, I will appeal to the members of the Commission to understand the prevailing circumstances during those years in our country. I will request them to use their own discretion if these people who were called Blacks were oppressed during those times what was their expectations concerning those people if those people had bad feelings I will explain to the Commission that it was okay about what has happened. But if they were supposed to be positive according to the situations because they were so under oppression, but if they were supposed to feel wrongly - I will request the Committee because use their own discretion.
Another thing I would like to say concerning this amnesty if I am being pressed on my toes by somebody who regards himself as White I don't want to consider that as a mistake and told him that I could realise that your feet is on top of mine, no that is not a mistake at all. What I am trying to explain here is that this person has pressed me on my toes so I need to explain to him will you please remove your foot from my toes. I will quote in English Sir if you allow me:
"Where there is suppression and oppression there will always be resistance. Where there is an action there is a reaction. And where there is reaction there is resistance".
But not in this case which are appealing in our country and those people who claim as bosses they do whatever they want to do with us.
Ladies and gentlemen apartheid is a sin and it's wrong in such a way that we cannot compare it with anything in the world. If it wasn't wrong it was not supposed to be approved. It was supposed to be here today. What I am trying because explain our history told us that in 1973 the United Nations made a special committee against apartheid isolating the apartheid which was prevailing in South Africa in 1973. The history told us that there was a United Nations International Convention on the suppression and the punishment of apartheid, it was called crime against humanity, that is crime. That is why they have scrapped apartheid. They appealed to us that we must forgive them about what they have done. This has happened for so many years, I am not talking about 18 or three years time in this case.
What I would like to explain because you is that we are the ones who have felt the pains and we know it exactly. For example, gentlemen, we have been staying in Because and you know the houses, even the toilets just go to Because, even here in Manaung where Black people are being situated, you will see hunger, those people are very hungry, just enter here around us in this area, there is prosperity Sir, there is life in those areas. It means that - there are so many bicycles, tricycles and the motor cars but in the area where I am staying I can't see a single bicycle, I can say it's very rarely. The only thing that you can see on our streets is that a wheelbarrow. Maybe it's the issue of our colour being black we are always carrying these five litres of paint just to paint our own people.
Honourable members we were not being oppressed by mistake, this was a real purpose. Mr Verwoerd is the architect of apartheid. This has been planned, it's not a mistake to our Black people in this country. This was intentional. If you have to react they say you are wrong. According to the laws which represented them perhaps the issue is that we were Blacks. Even in front of court that is wrong. I can't remember where in the Bible, I can't even remember comrades, that God have explained that people, especially the Black people should be oppressed. All this has been done intentionally, we are the victims of apartheid. ...(intervention)
MR MTHEMBU: Mr Mohapi won't you sum up Sir.
MR MOHAPI: I am here to explain what happened.
MR MTHEMBU: Yes but you have explained your participation for the offence that you are applying for amnesty for. The Committee has heard how you feel or felt about apartheid then.
MR MOHAPI: What I would explain to you Sir is that for the benefit of reconciliation in South Africa I would request even to the family of Mr Smith that I say from the depth of my heart, I would request them to forgive me. Let us forget what has happened in the past. But when I say to them they must forgive me they must not understand me wrongly that there was no apartheid in South Africa. They must not mistake my information that our people were oppressed. For the benefit of peace and reconciliation I ask them to forgive me.
I would ask the Commission again, please consider forgiving me. I want because make a contribution to South Africa which I fought for. Please consider forgiving me.
MR MTHEMBU: And that's your case, your application Sir.
MR MOHAPI: ...(intervention)
MR MTHEMBU: Mr Mohapi we could sit here and listen to you the whole day Sir.
MR MOHAPI: I am responding Sir.
MR MTHEMBU: That is your application?
MR MOHAPI: Yes that is my application.
MR MTHEMBU: Thank you Mr Chairman, no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MTHEMBU
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mpshe.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR MPSHE: Thank you Mr Chairman.
Mr Mohapi do you agree with me that in your application the formal form that you completed from the TRC office, including your annexure to the application consisting of seven pages, nowhere do you mention how this offence was committed, not even a single word about the offence itself, do you agree?
MR MOHAPI: Okay. I fully agree with you Sir and I will explain why, if you request me to do so Sir.
MR MPSHE: Yes I want your explanation.
MR MOHAPI: If you refer us to page 29A1 to 3, are you referring to that page, page 2?
MS KHAMPEPE: You are now at page 2 and you want to find out if Mr Mpshe is asking you about paragraph 9A and Roman figure I, II, III up to IV?
MR MOHAPI: Yes.
MR MPSHE: I am not yet there. I am saying to you the whole application, your annexure consisting of seven handwritten pages there is nothing said about the offence itself as you explained in such details today, nothing has been said in your application, do you agree?
MR MOHAPI: Can you explain that Sir.
CHAIRPERSON: I think that is very simple. Nowhere in your application does it say what exactly you did when you committed the offence, that's all.
MR MOHAPI: That is true Sir.
MR MPSHE: Right. And as a, that's my opinion, as a learned applicant, you knew very well that in an application for amnesty full disclosure is one of the requirements?
MR MOHAPI: I will request you not to mention me as learned, I am not learned.
MR MPSHE: How are you?
MR MOHAPI: I am still in that process to learn myself.
MR MPSHE: To learn yourself? You say you are in the process to learn yourself?
MR MOHAPI: I am in the process to learn.
MR MPSHE: Now when you filled in the application form did you know what is required in order to be granted amnesty?
MR MOHAPI: What I know shortly, yes I knew that.
MR MPSHE: And you knew at that time that full disclosure is one of the requirements for you to be granted amnesty?
MR MOHAPI: During that time Sir this issue of full disclosure I didn't know anything about it.
MR MPSHE: Alright let us - just answer my question. Let us go back, what is it that which you knew should be satisfied to get amnesty?
MR MOHAPI: What I knew is that as we have this amnesty Commission I am supposed to reveal the truth about what has happened.
MR MPSHE: That's it. To reveal the truth about what has happened and this has to be in your application form, not so?
MR MOHAPI: Yes Sir.
MR MPSHE: Now is this in your application form what has happened, the truth?
MR MOHAPI: Sir let me explain it in this way. Will you please look at my application again.
MR MPSHE: I know it.
MR MOHAPI: It's written in Afrikaans. What I can explain to you I have a serious problem about Afrikaans, I can show you even in that document why this application has been written in such a way and how did I understood it until I met one of the Boers whom I request to help me with something as this was his language. There were some certain problems, I didn't know exactly the way things have been done I did encounter some problems. Let me explain Sir, if you look on page 3, no.4. At school I did Afrikaans as my second language, where I have written (...indistinct) Sir, there is some exceptions in that case. This application requests me so many things like F and others I have encountered some problems in this case. I realised it later what was still expected out of me and the paper and the application have already been sent. I have a serious problem about Afrikaans.
MR MPSHE: Right. Let's move to your annexure that was - did you write this annexure, these seven handwritten pages?
MR MOHAPI: Yes Sir.
MR MPSHE: Right. Now that is written in English not so, which you understood very well not so?
MR MOHAPI: Here and there.
MR MPSHE: But you wrote it in English not so?
MR MOHAPI: Yes Sir.
MR MPSHE: Now why didn't you in your annexure consisting of seven pages disclose in your annexure as to what happened? There is nothing about the incident, absolutely nothing.
MR MOHAPI: I thought that in order for a person to be called at the amnesty of the Commission this is where the person is supposed to reveal everything that has happened. That is why I didn't take any initiative to write exactly what has happened on that day, at what time, where. I thought that everything will be requested when we are here at the Commission.
MR MPSHE: Now why did you refer this Committee to page 2 and paragraph 9? Why did you specifically single out those pages?
MR MOHAPI: It's because Sir, I have realised that there was a mistake in these things here.
MR MPSHE: What mistake has happened here?
MR MOHAPI: The mistake is that Sir on page 2.9, 1-3 in that case I didn't explain as I have already been explaining this morning to you what I was supposed to do, so I do appeal to the Commission about those mistakes.
MR MPSHE: So you know and you knew what was supposed to be said under paragraph 9. I, II, III and IV?
MR MOHAPI: I knew that later on when I looked at another paper which was written in English and my own document have already been sent and I could realise that I was supposed to write some certain things of which I didn't include in my paper. Just have a look in 9A, that is a lengthy, lengthy issue, even if you had to go through it, it is very complicated. Really I can't understand it personally.
MR MPSHE: Now you testified that at the time when this offence was, or the acts were perpetrated you were about to defect from the ANC, why did you defect from the ANC?
MR MOHAPI: What I would explain is this. Everyone has eyes and is able to see. I found out that the way ANC is doing its political work it seems it will never liberate the oppressed masses because they said they were going to engage themselves in negotiations with the oppressor and then I found out that it was important that I should look the other way.
MR MPSHE: You further testified as you were led by my learned friend about a meeting in your house, you mentioned certain points that were to be dealt with by your unit commander, and the third one, the third one says, "to kill if there is necessity to do so", then you repeated that in Sotho you say, "to kill if it's necessary". Will I be correct to say that it meant, if you come to a situation, to launch an attack or to carry out an operation and the situation changes and becomes volatile and offensive towards you then the killing can take place, is that correct?
MR MOHAPI: Mmmm.
MR MPSHE: Now can you explain to this Committee as to any incident at Mrs Smith's place that caused you to kill?
MR MOHAPI: Okay. What I would say Sir is this. In a war situation when there is a fight there are reasons which you need to fight against or what type of war you are engaged in then you need to use these logistics. What I would say that the war we were fighting or engaging ourselves in it was a guerilla warfare. When we hit here Whites would concentrate on a particular point and we are at some other point attacking, which means it's a hit and run strategy. That is to say there are factors which need to be considered. That is why we were explaining it has a two-pronged approach.
MR MPSHE: I think once again you are digressing. The question that has been put to you is, just listen to me until I have finished the question, right at the time whilst you were there at the house of the Smith family, what caused you to kill? Why did you kill Mr Smith?
MR MOHAPI: Because I was told to, I was ordered to. Order is an order no matter how bitter or sour it is. You don't have to argue the order, you will have to comply with the order.
MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Mohapi that is not the evidence you have given us. I think Mr Mpshe has actually quoted you to some extent, verbatim. You said,
"The operation was intended to disarm, to fund-raise...."
and you then went on to qualify the operation further, "to kill if there is a necessity to do so".
MR MOHAPI: Yes.
MS KHAMPEPE: I have tried actually to take down what you said, verbatim. Now what he wants from you is to explain what caused you to kill on that day because your instructions were to kill if it was necessary to do so?
CHAIRPERSON: In other words when you went there, four of you, nothing happened, there was no attack on you, there was no danger that you were confronted with and yet you killed. Now what was the reason for that?
MR MOHAPI: I would answer, I will try to answer all the questions ...(intervention)
MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Mohapi let me again try and assist you, it is just one question.
CHAIRPERSON: It is in a different fashion ...(intervention)
MS KHAMPEPE: Is there anything which caused you to kill? That's the question.
MR MOHAPI: That is why I am trying to explain that, according to the Mr Chairperson it seems there was no danger or we were not in danger for us to kill, that is why I said at that time when we were there it was necessary that that should happen.
CHAIRPERSON: What made it necessary?
MR MOHAPI: To show that - that's why I said it was necessary for you to understand me further until I have finished and what has influenced the situation that it should be that way. That is why I need to explain that the situation that has forced us to do that is because we applied a tactic, we applied this tactic that there is nothing we need to talk to this person. What would happen to him is that he should be killed. For us at that time it was necessary that he should die, at that time.
MR MPSHE: I hear you Mr Mohapi, but what I want from you and this is what has been canvassed to you by the three Committee members, I want the things that made it necessary, those things or occurrences that made it necessary for you to kill him. That's all what I am looking for.
MR MOHAPI: Are you talking about occurrences or examples?
MR MPSHE: I will repeat my English, events or occurrences that made it necessary for you to kill.
MR MOHAPI: What I would say is that the way we saw the situation it was necessary that we should kill.
MR MPSHE: Please give us this situation, what kind of situation was that?
MR MOHAPI: The situations which prevailed at that time it was a normal situation at that time, during that incident. But I would explain is that the way the situation was we wanted the situation to be like that because when we did those things we applied a tactic of ambush which is SSS, "surprise, silence and speed". If you look at the sequence of events this person was surprised. He didn't know that we will be there. That is why this has happened.
MR MPSHE: You know your answer - okay I am not going to analyse it. But what you are trying to tell us is that it was so calm that the calmness made you to kill, is that the cause? Is that what made it necessary to kill?
MR MOHAPI: It doesn't give that ideas.
MR MPSHE: You know if you could learn just to answer the question then you will get yourself disentangled from all this language of yours.
MR MOHAPI: It doesn't give that idea that the calm situation has resulted in the killing. The decision has already been taken. We couldn't regress from that decision, that had to happen no matter the situation, we had to kill.
MS KHAMPEPE: May I interpose Mr Mpshe. You see Mr Mohapi you have given us evidence that your instructions were to the following. You must disarm, you must fund-raise and you must kill only if it is necessary for you to do so. This is the evidence that you have tendered before this Committee. Mr Mpshe wants to know why it was necessary for you to kill on this occasion, because you have said your instructions were not to kill. It was qualified, you only had to kill if it was necessary, only if it was necessary for you to do so. That is the evidence that you gave is it not, which is different from the evidence given by the other applicant?
MR MOHAPI: I explain that at that time it was necessary that that kind of a person should be killed because the only opportunity which we would have we would be in danger. Maybe you will understand it if I put it that way. Or you want things which have forced me to do that, I don't understand.
MR MPSHE: I want things which have pushed you to kill.
MR MOHAPI: I was pressurised by the situation that I should kill.
MR MPSHE: What was the situation?
MR MOHAPI: The situation was that in the way that if we can leave him, the situation was tense at that time, then we ended up killing him.
MR MPSHE: Do you agree with me that it is evidence that Mr Smith did nothing inasfar as the attack is concerned, you are the person yourself who stabbed him first, you agree on that part?
MR MOHAPI: Mmm, yes that is true.
MR MPSHE: You have answered me.
MR MOHAPI: That is why that as you said I did that, that shows that if he looked at me he could have made the situation to be tense.
MR MPSHE: I did not ask for all what you are volunteering, I didn't ask for that. Do you agree with me that the fact that you stabbed first Mr Smith triggered the events that followed?
MR MOHAPI: What do you mean when you say "it triggered"?
MR MPSHE: Put those things you will listen to the Sotho and save us time.
MR MOHAPI: I'd request that you should explain what you mean by "triggered".
MR MPSHE: Do you agree with me that the stabbing by yourself of Mr Smith caused the happenings that followed?
MR MOHAPI: I agree with you.
MR MPSHE: Do you agree further that the necessity then to kill was caused by yourself?
MR MOHAPI: Yes I do.
MR MPSHE: Then we can proceed. I want you to turn to your application and have a look at page 8 thereof, that's your annexure.
MR MOHAPI: Page 8?
MR MPSHE: Yes. The second paragraph Mr Chairman and members of the Committee, I am just going to read the first three lines of paragraph 2.
MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Mpshe there is no page on mine - would that be the first page of the annexure.
MR MPSHE: The first page of his annexure, it's numbered 1 by himself. Thank you.
Mr Mohapi I am going to read from paragraph 2, only the first three lines. I quote:
"Actually, according to me there had been no progress or substantial changes since Mr de Klerk 2nd February 1990 statement".
What do you mean thereby?
MR MOHAPI: It's self-explanatory because it continues by saying it shows the reasons thereafter because there was no change, what kind of change since Mr de Klerk made his statement in 1990, it is self-explanatory after that sentence. I don't know whatever I have explained that as well it shows changes that our people were killed, that's how I explain.
MR MPSHE: This date, the 2nd February 1990, what does it remind you of?
MR MOHAPI: The 2nd February reminds of de Klerk when he proposed that he should release Mr Mandela from prison.
MR MPSHE: When was Mr Mandela released Sir?
MR MOHAPI: It was on the 11th Sir, if I remember well.
MR MPSHE: Is it not on the 2nd the very same date you are referring to?
MR MOHAPI: I can't remember that.
MR MPSHE: You remember that political organisations were unbanned by Mr de Klerk, when was that done?
MR MOHAPI: I can't remember.
MR MPSHE: Now if I put it to you that this statement of yours is incorrect because certain things did happen like the ones I have just mentioned to you, would you agree with me?
MR MOHAPI: I mean according to your own perspective, yes, but I didn't see them the same way, I didn't see them as changes, it was the way of deceiving our people.
CHAIRPERSON: The unbanning of the organisations was designed to deceive the people?
MR MOHAPI: You won't say people have been unbanned when you harass them and again you orchestrate law on the other side. I don't know as whether we would call that unbanning whilst other people were detained and others were arrested.
CHAIRPERSON: I am talking about the organisations which were previously unbanned and couldn't work openly, now the fact that that law was taken away and the organisations could now work openly, you don't regard that as a change?
MR MOHAPI: That's why I explained that if that law was repealed it shows that those people who were arrested, they could have been harassed after and those who were supported could not have been harassed. That is why they tried that they should harass the people. I don't know if you would call that, that was complete liberation while people were detained and harassed and there were hit squads ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: We are not talking about complete liberation, I mean don't confuse the issues. We are not talking about - we are talking about the organisations that were unbanned, previously they couldn't work legally now they were unbanned, you don't regard that as a change? That's the question.
MR MOHAPI: May you please repeat your question Sir.
CHAIRPERSON: I have asked you, this is the third time. Organisations had been banned and could not work openly, they are now unbanned, they can work openly, you don't regard that as a change?
MR MOHAPI: I say to you Sir that yes, verbally they were unbanned, but in practice if you look closely so I would not regard that as change because people were not doing their political work freely.
ADV SANDI: The unbanning of those organisations was it not an important step in the direction of where we are today?
MR MOHAPI: That is why I say it could have been that that was the best step to take us to where we are now if it was the only thing which has made us to be here. That is why I say it's not only act, there are many things which we have done which has brought us to where we are now.
MR MPSHE: Thank you Mr Chairman. Now turn over to page 9, paginated, the numbering of the annexure will be page 2, paragraph 3 line 5. I will just read one sentence and want your comment.
"But apartheid had assumed a reformist posture".
what did you mean there?
MR MOHAPI: In terms it was in the way that it has given our people a carrot so that they are changing, but they were not changing. They were trying to change apartheid from a situation to a different situation. They wanted to better the apartheid system.
MR MPSHE: No I want you to tell us those things which you regarded as making-up a reformist posture, those events.
MR MOHAPI: May you please look at page 14.
MR MPSHE: Page 14 where? Where on page 14?
MR MOHAPI: 14, paragraph 3.
MR MPSHE: Where it starts with "it was clear"?
MR MOHAPI: Ja, "it was clear". May you please read that as from there so that other people will be able to hear.
MR MPSHE: "It was clear that by "negotiations" de Klerk's regime meant collusion, not a dialogue between equals but a monologue between master and servant. De Klerk thought that apartheid could be reformed but the condemned system was incapable of being reformed just like Satan cannot reform himself. In de Klerk's "negotiations" there was no impartial chairman or mediator. He, de Klerk was a player and a referee, the prosecutor and the judge, a candidate and examiner".
MR MOHAPI: Then it goes up to the very same paragraph.
MR MPSHE: Let me tell you that as well.
MR MOHAPI: Yes, on that page, first paragraph.
MR MPSHE: The only difference was that Mr de Klerk has defected ...(intervention)
MR MOHAPI: "...had perfected"....
MR MPSHE: Is that "perfected"?
MR MOHAPI: Yes "perfected".
MR MPSHE: "....has perfected his art of oppressing Africans with the smile of a saint and fantastic manifestos. He was doing in a more sophisticated and deceptive manner what Botha contemplated doing."
MR MOHAPI: I would ask you to stop there.
MR MPSHE: Is that the answer to my question?
MR MOHAPI: Yes.
MR MPSHE: Thank you. Now let's turn to page 12 numbered from a letter 5 by yourself.
MR MOHAPI: Page 12?
MR MPSHE: The fourth paragraph.
"December 1990 - 1993 began without fundamental changes having taken place except for....."
that's where my question will come -
"...for massive killings of Blacks on a genocidal scale. It is estimated that about 18,000".
Now my question is where did this happen? How did it happen?
MR MOHAPI: Okay. What I would also explain is that it is self-explanatory that during that time when these things were happening there was violence in South Africa and this violence was not a mistake they were done deliberately so that it will weaken our struggle for liberation. And then again maybe if it would happen that we would go to elections we Black people would arrive there without strength. When you make enquiries about human rights commissions it is estimated, it is not like that, it says approximately 18 people died as from 1990 to 1993. Those people could have been part and parcel of the democratic South Africa.
MR MPSHE: Let's go to the next page of your annexure, page 14 of the documents Mr Chairman and Committee members, the last paragraph thereof. I will quote for you. My final question is this regard is that, I quote
"As I was oppressed by the Whites and their government how was I supposed to feel?"
do you see that? Will I then be correct if I say to you that because of the oppression by the Whites you thought it wise to commit this crime? The oppression by the Whites you thought it wise to commit this crime?
MR MOHAPI: Yes.
MR MPSHE: And you regard it a crime?
MR MTHEMBU: While you regard it as a crime, you ...(intervention)
MR MPSHE: No I am asking you whether you do.
MR MOHAPI: No I don't regard it as a crime.
MR MPSHE: I see. What is it?
MR MOHAPI: I regard it as a fight against the oppressor. And I regard it as a part of the struggle fighting against the criminal supremacy of the Whites.
MR MPSHE: And that which you have just said - will I be right if I say it is a revenge on the oppression that was existing?
MR MOHAPI: Well if you are talking in terms of an oppression okay - if you say it is oppression it gives another idea which you cannot see ...(intervention)
MR MPSHE: I am quoting you Mr Mohapi, the word that you used.
MR MOHAPI: Okay, that's why I say I would enlighten you on that regard, that what oppression is what and who has been affected by oppression. I don't want you to regard it as a revenge against oppression, we were fighting against oppression. What did I do to oppress other people? I was not paying back injury with injury.
I was fighting what was evil.
MR MPSHE: Now actually what is it that you were fighting?
MR MOHAPI: Okay, I was fighting against those who were maintaining apartheid. I was fighting against those who were making it possible, the prospects of apartheid. I was fighting against those who were oppressing the Africans. I was fighting those against who wanted to be respected whilst we respect other people in other countries.
MR MPSHE: Thank you Mr Chairman no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MPSHE
CHAIRPERSON: This might be a convenient stage to take the adjournment.
MR MPSHE: Thank you Mr Chairman, I was not aware.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
ON RESUMPTION
PETRUS TAPELO MOHAPI: (s.u.o.)
CHAIRPERSON: You have told us this morning that you intended to defect from the ANC to the PAC, when did you in fact defect?
MR MOHAPI: Immediately I became a member of the task force I have already defected to the Pan Africanist Congress.
CHAIRPERSON: Can you give us the date?
MR MOHAPI: What I will tell you is that I joined the task force unit in June. I defected in 1992 if I remember well.
CHAIRPERSON: And before that what position did you hold in the ANC?
MR MOHAPI: I was a member and also the secretary.
CHAIRPERSON: Secretary of what?
MR MOHAPI: Do you mean, secretary for what?
CHAIRPERSON: Secretary of what?
MR MOHAPI: The secretary of the ANC branch in Because.
CHAIRPERSON: When were you elected secretary?
MR MOHAPI: It was in 1991, my apologies, in 1990.
CHAIRPERSON: And did you write a letter officially to the ANC saying that you are now resigning from the ANC?
MR MOHAPI: No I didn't write any letter.
CHAIRPERSON: As the secretary of the organisation don't you think it's necessary to officially write to say you are now defecting?
MR MOHAPI: That is why I explained it was necessary but I was not brave enough to tell people whom I worked for so long. I knew that, I thought I couldn't have the courage to do that. That is why I used the word "defect" and then ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: Yes in other words you didn't resign you defected?
MR MOHAPI: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: I understand. Your application form, have you got it in front of you, at the end of the application form is that your signature?
MR MOHAPI: Yes that is true.
CHAIRPERSON: And it is dated Tuesday 1996?
MR MOHAPI: That is true.
CHAIRPERSON: What month?
MR MOHAPI: I don't remember the month well. I don't remember the month well.
CHAIRPERSON: Did you leave that out just accidentally, was that an oversight?
MR MOHAPI: As I explained that I didn't leave it deliberately, I thought maybe they need a day, I did it deliberately. In short I would say I made a mistake that I should write - I didn't know that as well they need a day or a date.
CHAIRPERSON: Well it says here the date, 26th, then they say "van" means "of which month".
MR MOHAPI: Okay.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes.
MR MOHAPI: I thought maybe they are speaking of the day.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes.
MR MOHAPI: It was not deliberate that the month was deleted or not written. Maybe on the word "van" there were brackets and then explain us where they need a month or what.
CHAIRPERSON: I understand. And the document which appears as annexure that's in your handwriting is it?
MR MOHAPI: That is true.
CHAIRPERSON: That also bears no date.
MR MOHAPI: It is because of these things you fax them from prison. I think that when it was faxed it would appear when it was faxed.
CHAIRPERSON: No but this is written, it's not faxed.
MR MOHAPI: Okay. I gave that to a prison official.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes but underneath where you sign,
"Yours in chains - Mohapi Petrus Tapelo".
you don't put any date there, was that an oversight? The membership card number you have 2007795 do you have that card with you?
MR MOHAPI: I beg your pardon Sir.
CHAIRPERSON: Your membership card of the ANC you give here on the form as 2007795 on the first page of the form, do you have your card with you?
MR MOHAPI: Yes I do.
CHAIRPERSON: Can we have a look at it? It says here that you joined on the 12th of February 1991.
MR MOHAPI: That is for the Youth League.
CHAIRPERSON: I want you to look at page 4 of your application form. Have you got it in front of you?
MR MOHAPI: Ja.
CHAIRPERSON: And this is all in your handwriting.
MR MOHAPI: That is true.
CHAIRPERSON: Will you read the last paragraph, the bottom, the last paragraph after the word "so-called Blacks".
MR MOHAPI: Okay.
"So I wanted to fund-raise for my organisation as I was the Secretary General of the ANC I understood that money was needed in order to run such a big organisation, for example, to have telephones, transport and many..."
it was supposed to be "many" not "any",
"...other vital resources that will keep the organisation...."
CHAIRPERSON: What you wrote down here is that the truth?
MR MOHAPI: Excuse me?
CHAIRPERSON: What you wrote down here is that the truth?
MR MOHAPI: That is true, but I would request that I should explain.
CHAIRPERSON: No just tell me is that the truth?
MR MOHAPI: Yes that's the truth.
CHAIRPERSON: So you were here raising money for the ANC, and you was then the Secretary General of the ANC?
MR MOHAPI: No...
CHAIRPERSON: That's what your words say here.
MR MOHAPI: Yes I was the Secretary General of the ANC but I was not raising money for the ANC.
CHAIRPERSON: No first of all I understand that you were not the Secretary General of the ANC, you were just a secretary of the branch, now you call yourself Secretary General of the ANC, that's not correct.
MR MOHAPI: What is your question Sir?
CHAIRPERSON: You describe yourself as the Secretary General of the ANC, you were not the Secretary General of the ANC, is that correct?
MR MOHAPI: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: So this is - you have described yourself wrongly by saying you were Secretary General?
MR MOHAPI: I was the secretary general of the branch.
CHAIRPERSON: No it says you were secretary general of the ANC, it doesn't say that you were secretary of the branch.
MR MOHAPI: That is how we used to talk.
CHAIRPERSON: That's how you used to talk, oh.
MR MOHAPI: So it's a mistake.
CHAIRPERSON: It's a mistake?
MR MOHAPI: Yes. I could have explained that I was secretary general of the branch.
CHAIRPERSON: And the money was needed in order to run such a big organisation, that is the ANC?
MR MOHAPI: That is why I requested that I should explain.
CHAIRPERSON: No I am just looking at the words as they stand, first of all let's get the wording clear, that's correct isn't it, as it is written?
MR MOHAPI: The statement is true as it is written. To say to run such a big organisation, yes it is true.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes. And the big organisation that you are talking about is the organisation of which you were the secretary general?
MR MOHAPI: No that is not the organisation that I was talking about.
CHAIRPERSON: Well that's what it says here.
MR MOHAPI: Yes I understand that it appears there, that is why I requested that I should explain my statement.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes please explain, as briefly as possible.
MR MOHAPI: As you see clearly that I was, I am not - I was, as I was shows that I - as I was the secretary general of the ANC there is a need for fund-raising to have telephones or logistics for information services. It gives you the picture of the experience that I had whilst I was the secretary of the ANC branch I know what was needed for fund-raising and again to run the organisation.
CHAIRPERSON: Anybody reading this document won't understand it in that sense.
MR MOHAPI: The way I explain it is the idea I have as I am the writer of that statement.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, but I mean you have written a very lengthy statement which shows that you are a learned man, you don't have difficulty with the English language. You may have difficulty with Afrikaans but not with the English language.
MR MOHAPI: That is to say you need to understand that those are mistakes because this is not my mother tongue.
CHAIRPERSON: No but anybody reading this and the lengthy statements you have made ...(intervention)
MR MOHAPI: It will depend how do I explain this, I will explain it the way - the explanation needs to be revealed from me...
CHAIRPERSON: No why must it be revealed because it is self-explanatory here. It says you are a member of the secretary - you are the secretary general of the ANC. "I understood that money was needed in order to run such a big organisation..."
and all this is written years after you had left the ANC.
MR MOHAPI: That is why I am explaining that as I was, I am not saying I was, please don't forget that "as I was".
CHAIRPERSON: Yes but the talking of fund-raising, you use the word fund-raising.
MR MOHAPI: I have used the term, what is your question in that case?
CHAIRPERSON: My question is on a plain reading of this document, when I first read this document and I read your lengthy statement I formed the impression that you are a very articulate man, capable of expressing his thoughts very clearly, and when I first read this I thought well here is a man who is a secretary general of the ANC and this is what he is doing on behalf of the ANC. And only when you gave your evidence today when you said that you had defected from the ANC some time before you wrote this document, you wrote this document in 1996 and you had already defected from the ANC in that time.
MR MOHAPI: Which document are you referring to that I have written it in 1996?
CHAIRPERSON: I am referring to that (microphone not switched on)
MR MOHAPI: Do you call the application the document?
CHAIRPERSON: (The speaker's microphone is not activated Sir). The annexure to your application.
MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Mohapi didn't you write a document which you attached to your application reading
"My points while I want to be amnestified or rather indemnified...."
which is part of the application and you wanted us to consider that document together with the application form which you were required to complete? Now why are you saying what document is the Chairperson referring to?
MR MOHAPI: What the Chairperson is saying I don't understand him clearly what he was saying.
CHAIRPERSON: What is the difficulty, am I using big words in English or am I using simple words?
MR MOHAPI: You are not using big words but I was not catching what you were saying. I couldn't understand exactly what you were saying.
ADV SANDI: Mr Mohapi, when you were completing the application forms for amnesty why did you not say that at the time of the occurrence of all the events you have spoken about this morning you were acting to further the interests of the PAC and not the ANC, why did you not say that in the application form?
MR MOHAPI: I thought that as I made the application I knew I would be called or subpoenaed to explain what I did because I was a member of the task force and together with my comrades within that unit I knew that I would be called here.
CHAIRPERSON: It's not a question of you knew, why didn't you mention it? It's not difficult, it's not a secret.
MR MOHAPI: Because I thought I would come here and tell you straight.
CHAIRPERSON: So you come here and you present us documents which say one thing, and then you come here and on oath you say something else.
MR MOHAPI: It's not so Sir because those things are able to be seen hand-to-hand.
CHAIRPERSON: Your application form was made on oath before a Commissioner. The evidence you have given before us is on oath. Do you realise the importance of giving evidence on oath? Do you realise the importance of giving contradictory evidence on oath, do you realise that?
MR MOHAPI: I don't see any contradiction.
CHAIRPERSON: But if one does make a contradictory statement you understand that that amounts to perjury?
MR MOHAPI: May you repeat that, I didn't hear you clearly.
CHAIRPERSON: When a man makes contradictory statements on oath do you know that that amounts to perjury, which is a criminal offence?
MR MOHAPI: I know that if you have committed a crime.
MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Mohapi let's understand you properly. When you were asked why there was the secretary general on page 4 your explanation was that you were trying to explain what you were then which you were no longer at the time when this commission, at the time when the murder and the removal of certain items from Mr Smith's house was committed. Now if you check - do you have your application with you?
MR MOHAPI: Yes.
MS KHAMPEPE: Now on page 1 you are asked a question, that question you see at paragraph 7, you have that. Now paragraph 7 requests of you to
"State what, if you were an officer or member or supporter of any political organisation, institution, body or liberation movement, state the name thereof".
Now you have put in -
"Youth League of the African National Congress".
you understood the question?
MR MOHAPI: Yes I did.
MS KHAMPEPE: Now why did you not include the organisation of which you were then which was the PAC?
MR MOHAPI: That is why I explained that at that time I had the membership which is in front of you today. My membership has not yet expired but I have already made a decision to defect to the PAC. And then for me to write that is that the Commission to see that what organisation I belonged to because I didn't have my new membership card with my new organisation.
MS KHAMPEPE: Okay fine. You go further. At paragraph 7B, same paragraph
"State capacity in which you served in the organisation, institution, body or liberation movement concerned".
and then you again say "I was a member with card number....". you give us the card number of the ANC which you have just handed up to us. That still was an oversight. Will you turn to page 4, you have already been referred to that, you see there again you speak of no other position in which you held in any organisation but you mentioned specifically the "secretary general of the ANC", those are your words.
And you go further Mr Mohapi, you are not just explaining the organisation of which you were, in this paragraph you are explaining the position which you occupied when you committed the offence and the reason why the offence must be seen as an offence associated with a political objective. You give your justification as having to fund-raise for a big office you were running because you wanted to buy telephones, fax machines, transport and many other vital resources that were needed by your organisation to function in order to bring apartheid to its knees. Do you see that?
Now turn to page 5. Now again at paragraph 10D you see that? Now paragraph 10D says, you are first required at 10A to state the political objective which you sought to achieve which is the response that you gave and you say in your response -
"You wanted to achieve the establishment of the majority rule in South Africa".
and then paragraph D says, you have to state -
"If so explain the nature and the extent of the benefit".
This must be incorrect. I am trying to read paragraph 10D in English. Now you are required to explain the nature of your offence and you state -
"As I was running the office we had very serious financial constraints and we were financially bankrupt".
This is, you are further elaborating on the financial difficulties that your organisation, of which you were general secretary was experiencing.
And then you still have your document?
MR MOHAPI: Yes.
MS KHAMPEPE: See at 10C, at 10C this is what you said when you were asked to state whether any benefit accrued financially or otherwise and if so to explain the nature and the extent of that benefit. You stated as follows
"Yes. In order to pursue the principle of ANC financially...."
and then you say "etc, etc".
And if you could page finally to page 6, and that's paragraph 11B, now there you are asked the following:
"Was the act committed in the execution of an order of or on behalf of, or with the approval of the organisation, institution, liberation movement".
and your response is the following:
"This was performed on behalf of the in-stated(?) organisation".
I am sorry - I am now, your response is -
"As the secretary general....."
now you start by again stating your office.
"As the secretary general I had an absolute power to conduct such an operation and I briefed my executive committee".
Then you go on to give us the names of the people that you briefed being your chairperson, a Mr J Kgwalane and a Mr Orta Mbiga who was the deputy chairperson of the ANC. Now what was so difficult in you stating here that the order was given by your unit commander who was Mr Mtjikelo?
MR MOHAPI: Okay. If you look at it clearly the task force is an underground cell, it doesn't - it means whatever is done there should be exposed in that way so that everybody should know what happened.
CHAIRPERSON: But you are making an application for amnesty in which you are required to make a full disclosure.
MR MOHAPI: I have a problem, my problem is it seems I am dizzy.
CHAIRPERSON: I think this is the appropriate stage for you to decide. If your client is not well to answer questions then it's another matter.
MR MTHEMBU: Mr Chairman I do not think that he has fully recovered well now to answer questions, that's why I am starting in the meantime to call Mr Khotle. Thank you Mr Chairman.
CHAIRPERSON: Please tell him that he is excused for the time being because you are going to call another witness.
MR MOHAPI EXCUSED
MR MPSHE: For the Chairman's information he is already out, this is another witness on the stand Mr Chairman.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
