Amnesty Hearings

 

ADV ARENDSE: Mr Chairman, it remains for me to deal with the application of Mr Mabala, should I start now or should in the morning?

CHAIRPERSON: Let’s start now please.

ADV ARENDSE: Mr Chairman, again written statements have been made available, I will read that into the record and also - I will read it into the record and ask Mr Mabala to confirm and also ask him a few more questions around some of the aspects raised in the written statement.

CHAIRPERSON: Certainly.

ADV ARENDSE: Mr Mabala?

CHAIRPERSON: Swear him in?

ADV SANDI: Mr Mabala, stand up to take the oath.

 

ZOLA PRINCE MABALA: (sworn states)

EXAMINATION BY ADV ARENDSE: Mr Mabala, you say in your statement which is unsigned

"I the undersigned Zola Prince Mabala, do hereby make oath and say that I’m an applicant in this matter, I’m 28 years old and was born in East London. I am unmarried. I passed standard 7 at school and I joined the PAC in 1987 through AZANYO. I joined APLA in 1990 while in Tanzania. I received military training in Tanzania and Uganda, I returned to South African in 1992.

I was involved in four APLA operations before the Heidelberg Tavern incident. The first one was in Boipatong in Gauteng, the second one was in Heilbron in the Free State and then lastly the Nyanga East army base and Lingelethu West police station attacks. At all times the targets to be hit were only made known to me as a unit member on the day of the attack.

The affidavit of Gqomfa has been read to me and I confirm it’s contents insofar as it relates to me. In regard to the Heidelberg Tavern attack, I was supposed to throw a hand grenade but I did not do so. At the time I did not think it

wise to do so because I would almost certainly have killed my comrades as they were retreating from the attack on the tavern.

I was however part of the unit which attacked the tavern and which caused the death of four people, I therefore take responsibility for what happened. I deeply regret causing the loss of life and causing grief to the families of the victims involved, I am sorry and I ask for their forgiveness. I believe however in the cause that I was fighting through APLA because at time the country was still being governed by a White minority.

This White minority had taken the land of the African people by force and in my view and in the view of APLA as I understood it, we were to take the land back by force. I carried out the instructions of APLA to attack the Heidelberg Tavern and other targets, I did not question these instructions. I respectfully submit that my application complies with the requirements of the Act and that I have made full and proper disclosure to this Committee of my involvement in the Heidelberg Tavern incident. I respectfully request that my application for

amnesty be granted.

Can you confirm that what’s been read to you is - accords with your instructions?

MR MABALA: Correct Sir.

ADV ARENDSE: I will then just proceed to ask you a few questions which arise from your statement.

MR MABALA: You can proceed.

ADV ARENDSE: Thank you. Can you remember in which year it was that you passed standard seven or did you pass standard 7 immediately before you joined AZANYO?

MR MABALA: It was December 1989.

ADV ARENDSE: That you left school?

MR MABALA: Yes.

ADV ARENDSE: How did you end up in Tanzania?

MR MABALA: When I passed standard seven I left for Lesotho, I was going to join the liberation organisation APLA. I then went to Tanzania, that’s where my training started.

ADV ARENDSE: What did you receive military training in?

MR MABALA: In Tanzania?

ADV ARENDSE: Yes.

MR MABALA: That’s where I was trained as a soldier, in Tanzania.

ADV ARENDSE: Well, which aspects of the military did you receive

training in - on how to use guns, how to shoot them, on what ammunition is and so on or did you also receive other kinds of training?

MR MABALA: I was trained in the basic course military discipline, also to use ammunition to kill, that is what I learnt there.

ADV ARENDSE: By the time - you said in your statement you returned to South Africa in 1992, was your military training complete by that stage?

MR MABALA: I’d finished at the time.

ADV ARENDSE: And your return, was it - did you return voluntarily or were you instructed to return to South Africa?

MR MABALA: The time had come for me to come back, that is why I came back.

ADV ARENDSE: Now, if we could just come to the Heidelberg Tavern incident - I don’t know Mr Chairman, should I deal with the other incidents in which Mr Mabala was involved - Boipatong, Heilbron and the other two or should I leave that to the Committee to ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: My feeling in the matter is that those will have to be canvassed on another occasion.

ADV ARENDSE: Thank you Mr Chairman.

JUDGE WILSON: Well, if you can simply tell us so that we don’t

waste time, has he asked for amnesty in respect of them?

ADV ARENDSE: Can I ask Mr Mabala?

Mr Mabala, the Boipatong incident, the Heilbron incident and also the other two, Nyanga East and Lingelethu West police station, did you apply for amnesty in respect of those incidents?

MR MABALA: All the operations in Johannesburg, I’ve asked for amnesty. The Nyanga incident, army base and the Heidelberg also I’ve asked for amnesty.

ADV ARENDSE: I see on page 30 Mr Chairman, of the record which is the first page of Mr Mabala’s amnesty application - Mr Mabala, on page 30 at paragraph 9(a) at the bottom you refer to Heidelberg, Heilbron and Vanderbijlpark, do you see that?

MR MABALA: I’ve mentioned in all these operations, Hillbrow, army base, Vanderbijlpark, Heidelberg Tavern as I was filling the application forms - I don’t know why they’re not before you. This is not my only application for amnesty, I made others as well - I think twice, I filled in these application forms twice.

ADV ARENDSE: This particular ...[intervention]

MR MABALA: I mentioned all these incidents when I made the applications, I don’t know why they are not here in this form.

JUDGE WILSON: We ought to look for them because the form I’ve got - I don’t know what yours is like Mr Arendse, the next page is

completely blank and so is the - he gives no reasons or any of the other requirements. There must be - it seems to me there must be another form somewhere which ...[intervention]

ADV ARENDSE: I was going to ask Mr Mabala to tell the - as the Chairman pointed out Mr Mabala, the - page 31 if you turn to it, is blank and then there’s some detail on page 32 and then there’s a signature at the bottom left of page 32. Do you see that? Did you - the question is, did you complete - did you fill in this form, is this in your handwriting or is it someone else’s handwriting?

MR MABALA: It’s not my handwriting, somebody filled in the form for me - comrade Plathele filled in this form.

ADV ARENDSE: You also mentioned that there’s some other form which you filled in, did you fill it in yourself or was it also filled in by someone else and if so who was that person?

MR MABALA: An attorney from the legal aid from Free State that the party - members of the party in the Free State had sent, this was done before the cut-off date. I went and filled in these forms and I divulged all.

ADV ARENDSE: Is it your evidence that more detail - certainly a lot more than what’s not in this application, is more detail provided in that application form?

MR MABALA: Perhaps it is so because after I applied before the cut

off date, there was confirmation that my application form has been received. I was given a letter or a paper - a confirmation that my application has been received by the Commission. This letter was brought by this attorney that had helped me fill the forms in.

ADV ARENDSE: Thank you. Let’s get to the Heidelberg - should I proceed Mr Chairman?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, is there very much more that you have to ask in your evidence in chief?

ADV ARENDSE: There’s quite a few questions and some of them are quite important.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I’ve received a note from some others on the staff. We will take an adjournment at this stage and resume at 9H30 punctually tomorrow morning.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

ON RESUMPTION - 29 OCTOBER 1997

ZOLA PRINCE MABALA: (s.u.o.)

CHAIRPERSON: While we’re about it Mr Prior, will you be kind enough to prepare a key to this sketch plan?

MR PRIOR: Mr Chairman, a key has been prepared, I apologise that I have not distributed it and could two copies be made or a copy be made to the ...[inaudible]

Mr Chairman, may I just say that or add that the key - the plan was extracted from the police investigation docket and the key as well, so the key and the plan come from the police investigation - the original investigation.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. For the purposes of the present record, this key will be B1 because the sketch plan we’ve numbered as Exhibit B.

MR PRIOR: As the Commission pleases.

JUDGE WILSON: Now the key that you’ve given us refers to photographs 1 to 43.

MR PRIOR: Mr Chairman sorry, could I just have a moment to ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR PRIOR: Mr Chairman I apologise, it would seem that the key that was extracted - and I didn’t check it, was the key to the photographs that were - if you would allow - if I could then just retrieve what we’ve been handed out and the proper key be retrieved.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR PRIOR: I do apologise.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, well we’ll keep this and we’ll return the key to you.

JUDGE WILSON: The key does in fact cover the photographs that we were given. If you look at the key it has got A and then sketch plan and photos 1 to 2 and 22 b, c, d, all the way down to n which is what appears on the photo isn’t it?

MR PRIOR: I must now conceded that that is so, it just shows you - I didn’t study it before it was handed up Mr Chairman.

JUDGE WILSON: What the key appears to indicate in the plan that was handed in is where cartridges were found outside and where bodies were found and cartridges were found inside.

MR PRIOR: That is so Mr Chairman, it doesn’t seem to indicate distances of - and we’ve been at pains to get that, we haven’t been able to locate the key relating to distances - if any were taken.

CHAIRPERSON: There probably wasn’t one.

MR PRIOR: No, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well, we’ll do with it, thank you.

MR PRIOR: Thank you Mr Chairman.

ADV SANDI: Mr Mabala, we are just reminding you that you are still under oath, you will continue with your evidence led by Mr Arendse, your attorney.

ADV ARENDSE: Thank you Mr Chairman, members of the Committee. Can I just start off by apologising for my colleague Miss Goza not being here on time, there’s some unavoidable domestic matter which has detained her, she’ll be here though, thank you.

ADV ARENDSE: Mr Mabala, you remember yesterday I read back to you a prepared statement and you confirmed the contents of that statement?

MR MABALA: That is correct.

ADV ARENDSE: I just want to ask you a few questions leading on from that written statement, I started that yesterday afternoon and then we adjourned until this morning. Now, in your written statement you have indicated that Gqomfa’s affidavit had been read to you and you confirm the contents of his affidavit and you’ve also heard his evidence, is that correct?

MR MABALA: That is correct Sir.

EXAMINATION BY ADV ARENDSE: (cont)

Now, Gqomfa had said both in his written statement and in his evidence before the Committee, that he had disclosed to members of the unit - and it’s common cause that you were a member of that unit, for the first time on the 30th of December - that is the same day that the Heidelberg attack took place, he disclosed to you and other members of the unit for the first time that you were going to attack the tavern, is that correct?

MR MABALA: That is correct.

ADV ARENDSE: He also said in his statement that you and Sibeko earlier that evening stayed behind while he, Madasi, Jantjie and Maxeba had gone out to look for a car for the operation, is that right?

MR MABALA: That is correct Sir.

ADV ARENDSE: They then returned a little later that evening with this - as we now know, bottle green Opel Record, do you remember that?

MR MABALA: Yes, I remember Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: It has changed colour since yesterday, I thought it was a blue Opel Record?

ADV ARENDSE: It’s a blue Opel Record, thank you Mr Chairman - I must be colour blind today.

Sorry, just for the record Mr Mabala, I meant a blue Opel Record not a bottle green Opel Record.

MR MABALA: Yes, Sir.

ADV ARENDSE: Now, we also heard from Gqomfa that you and Sibeko, you were waiting and that the arms and ammunition were kept in a suitcase, is that right?

MR MABALA: That’s correct Sir.

ADV ARENDSE: And that in this suitcase were four R4 rifles, two AK47 rifles, one rifle grenade, two M26 hand grenades and two magazines for each of these weapons?

MR MABALA: That is so, Sir.

ADV ARENDSE: And then Gqomfa goes on to say that for the first time now he was briefing you - that is now they’ve returned with the blue Opel Record and now he’s briefing you for the first time about what you’re going to do at the Heidelberg Tavern.

MR MABALA: That is so, Sir.

ADV ARENDSE: According to Gqomfa, he was going to spring the attack by shooting first with his AK47, Jantjie would follow him with his R4 rifle, Sibeko would follow Jantjie with an R4 rifle, you would throw a hand grenade before Madasi shoots his rifle grenade as a withdrawal signal and that Maxeba would be the driver.

MR MABALA: That is so, Sir.

ADV ARENDSE: Now my question is then, those instructions which Gqomfa gave to you and to the others - firstly in your case, did you do what you were told to do at the Heidelberg tavern?

MR MABALA: Yes, I did what I was told to do.

ADV ARENDSE: Just be clear here, you were told to throw a hand grenade.

MR MABALA: I was told to launch a hand grenade however I did not do that because I saw Madasi entering the tavern, I then thought I could not throw the - launch the hand grenade whilst Madasi was inside.

ADV ARENDSE: So in other words, you did not do as you were instructed to do by Gqomfa who was the commander of the unit?

MR MABALA: Yes Sir, that is so.

ADV ARENDSE: Because that’s also what you said in your written statement and under oath, that you were supposed to throw the grenade but you did not do so.

MR MABALA: That is correct, Sir.

ADV ARENDSE: Now, I don’t know - you’ve still got those photographs there in front of you or in the packet there? Can you just take them out Mr Mabala?

Mr Chairman, here I just want to refer to the photographs which are before you and which is Exhibit A.

You look at the first set of photographs on the first page, the ...[intervention}

MR MABALA: I can see them.

ADV ARENDSE: The car was driven by Maxeba, is that right?

MR MABALA: Correct Sir.

ADV ARENDSE: Where did he stop the car - if you can just indicate on the photograph there, the first one which is Exhibit 1a.

MR MABALA: As there were two doors, the car was parked in front on number 1 in the picture - won’t you ask the question again? Repeat the question please?

ADV ARENDSE: The car that Maxeba was driving and in which you were a passenger, where did he pull up or where did he park the car? Can you indicate on the first photograph where he parked the car?

MR MABALA: In front of the Heidelberg Tavern - on the first photograph.

ADV ARENDSE: Can you just mark it? Mr Mabala, you have indicated that the car was parked sort of - is that on the side of the curb that you see there on the photo?

CHAIRPERSON: You say: "on the side of the curb", are you saying alongside the curb?

ADV ARENDSE: Alongside the curb, yes.

CHAIRPERSON: That curb or the one on the other side of the road?

ADV ARENDSE: Yes, thank you Mr Chairman.

You see a curb there, was the car parked alongside that curb - and I take it that there’s another curb on the other side of the road, was it alongside that curb?

MR MABALA: It was on the side of the road.

ADV ARENDSE: Yes, but there’s a curb there, was it parked alongside that curb?

MR MABALA: Yes, it was on the road along the curb of the pavement.

ADV ARENDSE: That curb and that pavement that we see on the photograph? Is that the curb and pavement you’re referring to?

MR MABALA: I cannot hear clearly.

ADV ARENDSE: The curb and the pavement that you’ve referred to, is it the one that we see on the photograph - the first photograph?

MR MABALA: This is the pavement but the car was parked on the road.

JUDGE WILSON: Next to that pavement that you can see? Was the car parked on the same side of the road as the tavern?

MR MABALA: Yes, it was parked there.

ADV ARENDSE: Thank you Mr Chairman.

JUDGE WILSON: Mr Arendse, can I interrupt for a moment? Mr Prior I’ve had a chance at looking at this key that you’ve handed in and it seems to me if these photographs were available to us, it may save a lot of time. There are a lot of photographs, they may show things that counsel want to refer to. Is there any possibility of getting them?

MR PRIOR: Yes, Mr Chairman, I’ll endeavour to have them available at the tea adjournment.

ADV ARENDSE: I’ve actually had a look at all the photographs, they were made available to me by counsel who appeared at the criminal trial and I agree I think it will be useful if all of them could be made available and then we could use this key ...[inaudible]

We’re clear now that the car was parked there alongside that curb alongside that pavement that we see on that photograph, are we clear about that now?

MR MABALA: That is correct.

ADV ARENDSE: Now, when the car pulled up there, who got out first and when did you get out or did you get out?

MR MABALA: It is Luyanda who got out first, I was the last one to get out.

ADV ARENDSE: Where were you sitting in the car?

MR MABALA: I was sitting at the back seat behind the driver, I was the second one from Jantjie behind the driver.

ADV ARENDSE: Who was sitting in front?

MR MABALA: Maxeba was the driver, Madasi was sitting next to Maxeba.

ADV ARENDSE: And at the back?

MR MABALA: Luyanda, Sibeko, myself and Jantjie - there were four in the back seat.

ADV ARENDSE: Did you see where Gqomfa went when he got out - you say he got out first, did you see where he went and could you indicate on - we’re still on that photograph, could you indicate where he went and where you saw him if in fact you saw him?

MR MABALA: Gqomfa went towards the right, Monwabisi on the left, that’s all I saw.

ADV ARENDSE: Is Monwabisi, is him and Jantjie the same person that you’re talking about?

MR MABALA: Yes.

ADV ARENDSE: Those doors that you see there on the first photograph, they are closed as you see them there, can you remember whether they were closed as you see it there or were they open? Can you remember?

MR MABALA: I can’t remember, I cannot remember.

ADV ARENDSE: Can you remember whether Gqomfa and Monwabisi or Jantjie - one and the same person, can you remember whether they entered the tavern at all?

MR MABALA: I don’t remember Sir.

ADV ARENDSE: Can you remember anybody entering the tavern? Did you enter the tavern?

MR MABALA: As I said, I was meant to throw or launch a hand grenade - I saw Madasi going in.

ADV ARENDSE: And when you say you saw him going in, can you indicate - still on that photograph, where did you see him go in?

MR MABALA: Yes, Sir.

ADV ARENDSE: Now, can you indicate on the photograph? There’s a double door there and then you see a door that’s open, where did Madasi go in?

MR MABALA: He entered on the small door, the one small door on the picture.

ADV ARENDSE: The one that’s open?

MR MABALA: Yes.

ADV ARENDSE: Did you expect him to go in?

MR MABALA: No, I was the one who was meant to launch a hand grenade, Madasi then went in - I was not expecting him to go in, that’s why I didn’t launch the hand grenade.

ADV ARENDSE: Did you launch the hand grenade at any other stage?

MR MABALA: Yes, when I was taught, I used to launch it when I was taught to launch hand grenades.

ADV ARENDSE: No, no sorry, I meant that evening or during the operation or after the operation, did you launch it at all that evening? I’m sure you must have launched one before.

MR MABALA: No, not that particular night.

ADV ARENDSE: Did you see Gqomfa and Jantjie, did you see them shooting?

MR MABALA: As I said Gqomfa and Jantjie were by the second door, I heard shots - I did not see what they were doing, I just heard the sounds from their weapons.

ADV ARENDSE: Can you remember which weapon Gqomfa was firing with?

MR MABALA: I cannot remember now, I had to focus on my position at the time.

ADV ARENDSE: Were you able to see Madasi - you’ve told us that he went inside and that you didn’t expect that but from where you were standing, could you see him firing?

MR MABALA: I can’t be sure, it was at night however there were shots being fired, there were bangs the whole time.

ADV ARENDSE: Tell us, where were you - you said you got out of the car last, where were you positioned? Is it possible to indicate - I know there’s no car there, but is it possible to indicate where you were positioned on that photograph?

CHAIRPERSON: At what stage?

ADV ARENDSE: Immediately Mr Chairman, he got out of the car and perhaps he could also tell us whether he moved his position after that.

You got out of the car last, right?

CHAIRPERSON: Where did you go to when you out of the car?

MR MABALA: I was meant to take my position by the door, I saw Madasi - after I saw Madasi, I looked the side.

ADV ARENDSE: Which side?

MR MABALA: I want to clarify this, the principles I have learnt as a soldier are such that as Madasi went inside and next to the targets - the victims, I was left looking the other side behind.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you understand what he’s saying Mr Arendse? When he says he was looking behind, where’s that, do you know?

ADV ARENDSE: I think Mr Mabala, if you could just tell us a bit more, where exactly were you looking? You were looking behind you, is there anything in particular you were looking at?

MR MABALA: Sir, Madasi was going towards the target - if you’re going to carry out an operation, you don’t just look at the victims or the target, you have to look all around and see if we are not going to attack. I had to look to defend the other comrades to see if there’s no-one wanting to attack us as the unit. I don’t know if you’re understanding what I’m trying to say.

CHAIRPERSON: I think that let’s just clear this up please, I’m getting a bit confused. Where was Madasi when you got out of the car, where was he?

MR MABALA: Madasi left the car before me first, he went straight ahead.

CHAIRPERSON: Where?

MR MABALA: He went towards the second door.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you then go towards that door as well?

MR MABALA: No, I did not Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: You saw Madasi enter the door?

MR MABALA: Yes Sir, I did see him.

CHAIRPERSON: And did you enter the door after he did?

MR MABALA: No, I did not Sir.

ADV SANDI: Which direction did you take Mr Mabala?

MR MABALA: As the car was parked outside, I was towards - I was at the back of the car, next to the right hand side of the door - the car door, so I was standing behind the car on the right side.

ADV ARENDSE: Is that the driver’s side, the side of Maxeba or the other side - the passenger’s side. You were standing - yes?

MR MABALA: I was standing by the right hand side back door of the car.

ADV SANDI: Do you mean to say that in that way the car was between yourself and the tavern?

MR MABALA: Correct, Sir.

ADV ARENDSE: From what you’re saying, it seems to me that you were - as you got out of the car - because you were sitting on that side of the car behind the driver, right?

MR MABALA: Yes, I was sitting directly behind the driver.

ADV ARENDSE: So as you got out, that’s almost where you remained and that’s where you were positioned, is that what you’re saying?

MR MABALA: That is so, Sir.

ADV ARENDSE: Did you ever move from that position?

MR MABALA: No, I did not move.

ADV ARENDSE: And you can correct me if I’m wrong, so I also understand you to say that you also - you were also a kind of a lookout, looking around you to see if there was anyone else or anyone else that may have affected the operation.

MR MABALA: That is so, Sir. Please repeat the question, sorry.

ADV ARENDSE: It’s not really a question, I just want to get my understanding right that you were also - it seems to me from what you’re saying that you were also serving a purpose as a kind of a lookout while the operation was going on, you were also a lookout to see if anyone else was coming, if anything else was - any other person was coming to sort of interrupt the operation as it were.

MR MABALA: That is so, Sir.

ADV ARENDSE: Maxeba who was the driver, did he stay in the position in the front seat at the wheel or did he get out at all?

MR MABALA: He was in the car.

ADV ARENDSE: Where was Sibeko?

MR MABALA: I cannot remember where Sibeko was positioned.

ADV ARENDSE: In your estimation, for how long did the attack last?

MR MABALA: It didn’t take too long a time, it was a quick thing - maybe two minutes, it was just a quick thing.

ADV ARENDSE: Now, at what stage did you get back into the car?

MR MABALA: When I heard Madasi shouting I went back to the car.

ADV ARENDSE: What did he shout?

MR MABALA: He said we should retreat or he shouted: "retreat".

ADV ARENDSE: Is that the same thing as withdrawal?

MR MABALA: Yes, that is so Sir.

ADV ARENDSE: And you then say that you ended up not throwing the grenade as you were instructed to do?

MR MABALA: Correct, Sir.

ADV ARENDSE: Who got into the car last?

MR MABALA: Gqomfa, because when he got into the car the car was already in motion.

ADV ARENDSE: Can you recall whether Maxeba switched off the car when you got to the tavern? Was it on all the time, can you remember?

MR MABALA: The car was slightly in motion - that time the car was already in motion.

ADV ARENDSE: Just to complete the picture there ...[intervention]

ADV SANDI: Sorry Mr Arendse, can I clarify something? I think he said in Xhosa - did you say: "the car was idling"?

MR MABALA: Yes, it was idling already, it was idling ready to move. We did not go there to just sit there, we went there to do a job. We could not switch off the car, the car was idling the whole time.

INTERPRETER: I beg your pardon, that was the interpreter’s mistake.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Arendse, I think that this infinite amount of detail - I want you to lead that evidence if you think it’s really essential you know.

ADV ARENDSE: As you please Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: We’re getting long answers to simple questions on minute details and you can lead that evidence if you think that it is relevant to your client’s application, I’m not going to stop you.

ADV ARENDSE: I think we’ve had enough of that.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

ADV ARENDSE: I agree. Now, as I understand it, the car that was - it was parked alongside the pavement and was facing in the wrong direction because this is a one-way street, is that right? In other words, the car was facing the robots which would be on the right hand side of that picture as you look at it? You can’t see it on the picture there but the robots is there on the corner - the car was facing the robots, is that right?

MR MABALA: That is correct, Sir.

ADV ARENDSE: Now, as you were sitting in the car you drove back to - according to Gqomfa, to Site C. Is that right - in Khayelitsha?

MR MABALA: That is so, Sir.

ADV ARENDSE: He then instructed - when you got to Site C, he instructed Madasi and Maxeba to go and abandon the car the get rid of the car?

CHAIRPERSON: Shouldn’t you ask him along what he did rather than what Gqomfa said to others what to do? We’ve heard Gqomfa’s evidence, I’m concerned about what he did and I think you should ask him what he did.

ADV ARENDSE: Thank you Mr Chairman, I want to get to that. It’s just that he refers to Gqomfa’s statement in his statement and I just wanted to ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: ...[inaudible]

ADV ARENDSE: Yes.

Mr Mabala, that evening before - listen carefully, before, during and after the operation, was there any other car involved in the operation that you can remember?

MR MABALA: No.

ADV ARENDSE: Was the blue Opel Record the only car that was involved in this operation, that you can remember?

MR MABALA: That is correct Sir.

ADV ARENDSE: What did you do after the operation was completed? What did you do that evening and the next day?

MR MABALA: I stayed. Please repeat your question?

ADV ARENDSE: What did you do ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Where did you go after the incident - after you got out of the car, where did you go to?

MR MABALA: We went back home or to the house where we were staying. Madasi and Maxeba went to abandon the car, we went the place where we stayed.

ADV ARENDSE: And you slept there?

MR MABALA: That is correct, Sir.

ADV ARENDSE: And the next day, what did you do? Did you go anywhere?

MR MABALA: I stayed put in the house, I was waiting for Madasi to come back - I don’t know where they’d gone to.

ADV ARENDSE: Now Mr Chairman, if I may then just continue to read from the prepared statement you have in front of you, I think I stopped at - or if I remember, I think I read the whole statement yesterday.

CHAIRPERSON: You have.

ADV ARENDSE: Thank you.

Mr Mabala, you were arrested together with Madasi at Elliot, is that correct?

MR MABALA: That’s correct, Sir.

ADV ARENDSE: Did you wear a cap at all that evening, the evening of the attack - before, during or after the attack, did you wear a cap?

MR MABALA: I can’t remember Sir.

ADV ARENDSE: You remember that there was evidence in court - in the criminal case in which you were in, there was evidence that I think a blue cap was found in the car afterwards? Do you know anything about that blue cap?

MR MABALA: No Sir, I have no knowledge of such a cap. There was such evidence but I don’t know anything about this cap.

ADV ARENDSE: Just in your own words, can you tell us how do you feel now about what happened? What happened was that four young people were killed - we now that. They were not members of the security forces, they were there enjoying a drink - we know that in fact only one of the four deceased was White. Now with those facts in front of you, how do you feel about what happened?

MR MABALA: As we were fighting - after all these people died, they lost their lives, that is tragic because we are not created to kill others. I ask for forgiveness. I would not like this to happen as it did then, however we must bear in mind that circumstances were such that we ended up involved in such actions. I ask for forgiveness to the parents and the next of kin of those who lost their lives.

ADV ARENDSE: Just one last aspect that I want to deal with, who did you get your instructions from in regard to the operation itself - what to do, when to do, where to do it, where did you get those instructions from?

MR MABALA: My commander was Luyanda, that is all I know.

ADV ARENDSE: Do you know a person by the name of Xuma?

CHAIRPERSON: How do you spell that?

ADV ARENDSE: It’s X-u-m-a, Mr Chairman.

MR MABALA: I don’t know the name Xuma but I’m sure if I would see him I would be able to recognise him.

ADV ARENDSE: Just one last question, do you know a person by the name of Sipho Polite?

MR MABALA: Yes, I know him.

ADV ARENDSE: How do you know him?

MR MABALA: He was a member of the High Command in Transkei, I actually know him from the Transkei.

ADV ARENDSE: Do you know whether he had anything to do with this - with the operation, with the Heidelberg Tavern operation?

MR MABALA: No, I don’t know. I don’t think he had anything to do with this, we are the people who were involved.

ADV ARENDSE: Thank you Mr Chairman, I’ve got no further questions.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY ADV ARENDSE

JUDGE WILSON: Before you start Mr Prior, can I just try to clarify?

You were in the Transkei, were you?

MR MABALA: Correct Sir.

JUDGE WILSON: And who told you that you had to go and become a member a unit that was to carry out operations in the Cape?

MR MABALA: Nonuba.

JUDGE WILSON: Did he tell you personally?

MR MABALA: Nonuba took me from where I was staying and he took me to Luyanda’s place, he told me that I’m going to Cape Town. I did not know at the time what I was going to do in Cape Town.

JUDGE WILSON: Thank you.

ADV SANDI: Sorry Mr Prior, just one question to clarify something from the applicant.

When you say you do not know Mr Xuma, ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: He says he doesn’t know the name.

ADV SANDI: Have you heard of him?

MR MABALA: First of all, a lot of nicknames are used - I don’t know that particular name Sir.

ADV SANDI: When you came down to Cape Town for this particular mission, was it the first time that you came to Cape Town?

MR MABALA: Correct Sir.

ADV SANDI: You have not been in Cape Town before in your life?

MR MABALA: No, that was my first time.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR PRIOR: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Mabala, can I accept that you understand what a full disclosure means in your amnesty application?

MR MABALA: Please repeat the question - elaborate?

MR PRIOR: Do you understand what is meant by a full disclosure, to tell this Committee the truth and all the facts as they occurred in connection with the attack?

MR MABALA: Yes, I understand well Sir.

MR PRIOR: All right. You say if you see Mr Xuma you’ll be able to say whether you know him or not?

MR MABALA: I told this panel that it is this name Xuma that I don’t know, I don’t know the name Xuma.

MR PRIOR: I understand Mr Chairman, that Mr Xuma is present as an implicated person, may he possibly just stand that the witness can maybe identify him?

CHAIRPERSON: Is Mr Xuma present? Will you just come forward Mr Xuma? What are your full names? What are your full names?

MR XUMA: I’m Bulelani.

CHAIRPERSON: I asked you for your full names, you just said Bulelani.

MR XUMA: Yes, I’m saying my name is Bulelani Sipho Xuma.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MR PRIOR: Thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you know this gentleman - Mr Xuma?

MR MABALA: I know this comrade.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes thank you, you are excused, you can go back.

MR PRIOR: Thank you Mr Chairman. Is it correct that Mr Xuma was at the time of the Heidelberg attack, the Director of Operations for APLA?

MR MABALA: The person who brought me to the Heidelberg Tavern was Nonuba only - I know Nonuba in connection with this.

JUDGE WILSON: Will you answer the question. The question was - had nothing to do with taking you to the Heidelberg Tavern, it was whether at the time the gentleman you’ve just identified was the Director of Operations for APLA.

MR MABALA: He was a member of the High Command at the time.

MR PRIOR: Was he Director of Operations at that time?

MR MABALA: He was the member of the High Command. He was member of the High Command at the time when I came to the Heidelberg Tavern.

MR PRIOR: Did you see Mr Xuma at any stage before you arrived in Cape Town or while you were in Cape Town, that is just prior to the attack at Heidelberg?

MR MABALA: No, I did not see him Sir.

MR PRIOR: Mr Chairman, the statement of Sipho Bulelani Xuma which was circulated, it was handed by his legal representative, may I have it marked as Exhibit C - I intend to refer to the detail of the statement?

CHAIRPERSON: This document which has been handed in as being the statement of Mr Xuma will be Exhibit C.

MR PRIOR: Thank you Mr Chairman. I want to read to you the contents of paragraph 11 of the statement, please listen carefully

"On behalf of the High Command of APLA in my capacity as the member or members of High Command of APLA, the Deputy Director of Operation and Head of Special Operations, I have nothing to hide, affirm unashamedly with pride that Brian Vuyisile Madasi who happened to be Unit Commander, Humphrey Luyanda Gqomfa and Zola Mabala, in an order group attended by myself and late comrade Sumiso Nonuba were given clear and loud orders to conduct attacks in Cape Town"

Is that correct?

MR MABALA: What is your point Sir?

MR PRIOR: Would you answer the question, is that correct - the passage I’ve read out to you, is that true?

MR MABALA: I cannot dispute it.

MR PRIOR: So now do you admit that before you arrived in Cape Town, you attended an order group together with Mr Madasi, Mr Gqomfa, comrade Nonuba and the Director of Operations or the Deputy Director, Mr Xuma and there you were given clear orders to go and conduct attacks in Cape Town, is that what you’re admitting?

MR MABALA: Correct, Sir.

MR PRIOR: And I want to put to you what appears in paragraph 12 - he goes further, he says that

"Suffice to say that the Heidelberg Tavern was attacked as a result of orders given by me in my capacity as APLA’s Head of Special Operations. According to intelligence reports prior to the attack, we learnt that the Heidelberg Tavern was a regular relax-in for South African police members"

Is that true?

MR MABALA: I cannot answer that because I do not know about it. I got an order from Luyanda, I don’t know about that statement - I got all my orders from Luyanda.

MR PRIOR: Mr Xuma certainly makes no mistake when he says that Brian Madasi was the unit commander to go to Cape Town to carry out certain attacks, now that is completely different to your evidence and the evidence of Mr Gqomfa as well as Mr Madasi. Can you explain?

MR MABALA: This is the commander I know - this commander that I’m pointing at is the one I know, I got orders from this person.

JUDGE WILSON: I think it should be recorded he was pointed at Mr Gqomfa.

Why did you tell us a moment ago as I understood your evidence, that you didn’t see Mr Xuma before you came to Cape Town?

MR MABALA: I did not see Mr Xuma, I used to see him in the Transkei but just before I came to Cape Town I remember vaguely. I don’t remember clearly, I did not see him just before I came to Cape Town.

JUDGE WILSON: You have just agreed that he at a meeting - at a meeting attended by you and him, you were given clear directions to conduct attacks in Cape Town. You’ve just told us, you cannot dispute it - you admit it. I find difficulty in reconciling the two versions, that one moment you say you didn’t see him before you came to Cape Town and now you say you were at a meeting - he was at a meeting where you were directed to go to Cape Town and conduct attacks.

MR MABALA: No English translation.

CHAIRPERSON: What is it?

MR MABALA: I did not hear clearly, I would like to communicate to you that that paragraph be read again - when I admitted to it, I did not hear clearly.

JUDGE WILSON: You admitted to it without any hesitation, you didn’t ask for it to be read again but now when it’s embarrassing you say you don’t know, you didn’t hear it. Is that what you’re now saying?

CHAIRPERSON: I think he ...[intervention] Give ...[intervention]

MR MABALA: No English translation.

CHAIRPERSON: Give him a copy.

MR MABALA: Sir, I did not understand clearly.

CHAIRPERSON: I think that - let him read that paragraph, give him a copy of it and let him read it before we ask him any further questions. Have you got a copy of the statement of Mr Xuma? Just have a look - can you hand this to the witness and let him read it.

You can read English?

MR MABALA: I will read it - can somebody read it out for me please?

CHAIRPERSON: Do you understand it? Have you read it?

MR MABALA: I would like somebody to read it for me because I don’t understand English clearly.

CHAIRPERSON: I’m sorry. Will the interpreter please read it to him slowly?

ADV SANDI: Are you reading this paragraph for the applicant?

INTERPRETER: Yes, we’ve begun reading the paragraph.

MR PRIOR: Sorry Mr Chairman, there’s no sound coming through.

INTERPRETER: We are reading the paragraph in Xhosa, we are interpreting the paragraph to the witness.

CHAIRPERSON: Do carry on.

INTERPRETER: We have finished reading the paragraph for the witness.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you agree with the contents of that paragraph?

MR MABALA: Yes, I agree with it.

CHAIRPERSON: If you agree with it’s contents, then it is being put to you that the evidence you are giving does not coincide with that paragraph so we are having a contradiction in your evidence and you are being questioned about that.

MR MABALA: Sir, please repeat that, what evidence of mine are you talking about that is contradictory to this paragraph?

JUDGE WILSON: You said you did not see Xuma before you went to Cape Town.

MR MABALA: I would like to put this this way, I saw Nonuba before I came to Cape Town, he took us to our transportation - I saw Nonuba.

JUDGE WILSON: You have just said you agree with this paragraph where Mr Xuma says that at an order group - that he attended an order group with comrade Nonuba where Madasi, Gqomfa and Mabala were present, you’ve said you agree with that.

ADV ARENDSE: Mr Chairman ...[intervention]

JUDGE WILSON: That’s where you were given orders to go and conduct attacks in Cape Town.

MR MABALA: Sir, please repeat that.

JUDGE WILSON: The paragraph has been read to you where Mr Xuma says

"Madasi who happened to be Unit Commander, Gqomfa and Mabala in an order group attended by myself and the late comrade Nonuba, were given clear and loud orders to conduct attacks in Cape Town"

You say you agree with that?

MR MABALA: Correct, Sir.

JUDGE WILSON: Well how can you say you did not see him before you went to Cape Town?

MR MABALA: Sir, when I was coming this way I was focused on the matter that we’re about, I saw Mr Xuma. You must remember that this happened a long time ago, I cannot remember every detail.

ADV ARENDSE: Mr Chairman, sorry to interrupt Judge Wilson if he’s going to ask, I was trying to help. If we could maybe just find out from Mr Mabala when he saw Xuma - he’s admitted that he saw him, he was at a meeting, can we just hear from him when that meeting took place and how shortly before he left for Cape Town did this meeting take place.

CHAIRPERSON: Right now - you will have an opportunity to re-examine him, I think he should be questioned, let him answer the questions that are put to him.

May I ask you a question, I’m told - I read here from this paragraph that Mr Xuma says that on that occasion when you were together he gave orders that you should go to Cape Town, is that correct?

MR MABALA: Correct, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. I think you better just proceed with the rest of your cross-examination.

MR PRIOR: Thank you Mr Chairman. Did you ask perhaps at that occasion what these attacks were going to be or what targets were going to be attacked?

MR MABALA: I did not ask, I did not know who the targets were - I could not ask any questions.

MR PRIOR: Did anybody ask what the attacks or who the attacks, sorry - against whom the attacks were going to be launched?

MR MABALA: If an order from a commander is stipulated, one should just obey the order.

MR PRIOR: Is it not also correct that in terms of APLA policy, cadres could participate and ask questions regarding directives or orders that effected their safety or security or welfare?

MR MABALA: If there’s an order saying that you should go to a specific place, you just go to that place.

MR PRIOR: Were you unaware that there was such a policy ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Prior, I think he didn’t ask any questions and that’s that isn’t it?

MR PRIOR: Well, we’re testing whether that’s in fact true, with respect.

CHAIRPERSON: Whether he’s aware of policies or not, he didn’t ask questions.

ADV SANDI: Can I also try and help here Mr Prior? I think as I understand the applicant, he says there was this general order that some operations were to be conducted in Cape Town and they didn’t ask for details of targets, where etc., this was just an order to be complied with.

MR PRIOR: Yes, I don’t want to engage in an unnecessary debate, the enquiry is simply whether that in fact is true or not and that’s part of the enquiry of full disclosure. I’m going to suggest later on why that’s improbable if I be given an opportunity.

CHAIRPERSON: Carry on.

MR PRIOR: When you arrived in Cape Town, did you see any of your comrades that participated in the attack? In other words, did you stay with them or any of them?

MR MABALA: I saw then.

MR PRIOR: Who? Can you just tell us who they were?

MR MABALA: I saw Luyanda, Maxeba and Jantjie.

MR PRIOR: And you were all on friendly terms, is that correct?

MR MABALA: These are my comrades.

MR PRIOR: And was there any discussion at that stage whether - what the targets were going to be?

MR MABALA: No.

MR PRIOR: Were you not interested to find out where you were going to fight, who you were going to fight?

MR MABALA: I’m a soldier, I anticipate and am always waiting for orders from my commander.

MR PRIOR: On the evening in question, what were your orders specifically? What were you supposed to do when you got to Heidelberg, that is Heidelberg Tavern?

MR MABALA: I was supposed to launch a grenade.

MR PRIOR: Is that all?

MR MABALA: Correct.

MR PRIOR: Is in not correct that you were also armed with an AK47?

MR MABALA: AK47?

MR PRIOR: Yes, an AK47, were you not armed with such a weapon?

INTERPRETER: Could Mr Prior wait for the interpretation please.

MR MABALA: I had a grenade with me, that’s the order that was given - I was supposed to launch the grenade.

JUDGE WILSON: Were you armed with an AK47?

MR MABALA: I only had a grenade.

MR PRIOR: I put that to you because I seem to have a note of Mr Gqomfa’s evidence saying that you had an AK47.

ADV ARENDSE: That’s wrong Mr Chairman, there’s no such evidence.

MR PRIOR: I’m referring to evidence in chief, I ...[intervention]

ADV ARENDSE: I don’t think it’s fair to put something to a witness which wasn’t ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Will you verify that?

MR PRIOR: I’ll move on Mr Chairman, if I’m mistaken I apologise.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR PRIOR: But that is my note.

Did you see Mr Gqomfa firing at the tavern or into the tavern at any stage on that evening?

MR MABALA: I was not focusing on Gqomfa’s action but there were bullet sounds at that time.

MR PRIOR: You are unable to tell us whether he was armed with an AK47 or an R4 rifle, is that correct?

MR MABALA: I can’t say, I was focusing on my position.

MR PRIOR: Was it not your orders to immediately lob or toss the grenade into the restaurant, that is before the rifle grenade was to be launched?

MR MABALA: Yes, it is an order I received to launch a grenade.

MR PRIOR: And were you focused on that order?

MR MABALA: I was focusing on that order however it happened that Madasi was in the way so to speak, this is why I could not launch this hand grenade because I was going to kill my comrade.

INTERPRETER: The speaker’s microphone.

JUDGE WILSON: Mr Mabala told us that an attorney had come to see him and prepared another amnesty application form for him which had been duly filed and he received notification to that effect.

ADV ARENDSE: I remember that Sir.

JUDGE WILSON: I asked Mr Prior to make enquiries as to that because the present file as - the present application as we agreed yesterday, is totally inadequate but he tells me that they cannot find any record of it, so I wondered if when the adjournment comes, if you could speak to your client about it and see if we can obtain any more information as to who the attorney was - he may well have a copy of it. Or you may - I don’t know if you know who the attorney was, whether enquiries could be made from him as to whether a copy is available.

ADV ARENDSE: I’ll do my best to assist in that way Mr Chairman.

JUDGE WILSON: Thank you.

ADV ARENDSE: All I know is that there have been logistical problem in trying to trace some applicants and that’s just based on my experience in other applications. Mr Chairman will recall Lambisa for example - in the St James matter, he was adamant that he had filed one and then it was found at a very late stage.

JUDGE WILSON: Rather than say it’s not here, if the attorney could possibly give dates and references.

MR PRIOR: When you got out of the vehicle, did you move towards the entrance to the restaurant?

MR MABALA: To do what by the door of the restaurant? What was I going to do there?

CHAIRPERSON: Just answer the question please.

MR MABALA: I did not go Sir.

MR PRIOR: Did anyone else go into the restaurant with Mr Madasi?

MR MABALA: I saw Madasi only.

MR PRIOR: You see at page 43 of the paginated papers, the bundle and in the Judgement - I’m referring to the Judgement, at your trial there was evidence was on Ciska du Plessis that two persons entered the tavern immediately before the attack and one was taller than the other, one was a short person and one was a taller person. I want to ask you, are you taller than Mr Madasi?

MR MABALA: I’m taller than Madasi.

MR PRIOR: Did you not go into the tavern?

MR MABALA: I did not enter the tavern, I did not enter the tavern.

MR PRIOR: Did Mr Sibeko enter the tavern?

MR MABALA: I don’t know, I wasn’t really looking at him.

MR PRIOR: Weren’t you focusing on the door or the entrance to the tavern while you say you were trying to - you were conscious of protecting the unit?

MR MABALA: I want to tell you one thing Sir, I was focusing on my position - it just happened that Madasi went in, then I had to shift my focus for their own safety.

MR PRIOR: Do you agree no-one was shooting back at you - your life wasn’t threatened at that stage or at any stage?

MR MABALA: I can’t say nobody was shooting at us, we couldn’t know if there were people looking at us. I couldn’t be sure whether we would be attacked all of a sudden or not. Somebody could be armed, somebody amongst the victims or anybody else - I can’t say that we were protected as such because nobody was aiming at us.

MR PRIOR: Is it correct that there was a balcony above the entrance to the Heidelberg Tavern, in other words there was a second story?

MR MABALA: I couldn’t remember that Sir.

MR PRIOR: Can you remember whether any fire was directed to above the entrance of the tavern?

Mr Chairman, at page 1 of Exhibit A, one sees a second storey - not very clearly, but I understand that there is a veranda that runs along the top and it also housed a restaurant.

CHAIRPERSON: Let the witness look at that photograph.

MR MABALA: What is your question Sir therefore?

MR PRIOR: Was there any fire directed at that veranda above the Heidelberg Tavern?

MR MABALA: Sir, I cannot remember, all this happened within a very short span of time - I can’t remember.

MR PRIOR: I want to refer you to Exhibit B and Exhibit B(1) - the sketch plan and the key.

I understand that the defence have copies, could the applicant be given a copy please. May I enquire whether they have - I understand from your secretary that copies were made available.

CHAIRPERSON: For?

MR PRIOR: I simply want to ask the applicant to look at Exhibit B.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Do you have a copy in front of you of this document?

MR MABALA: No, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: Well ...[intervention]

ADV ARENDSE: Mr Chairman, I don’t think it’s simply a matter of semantics, it’s very important - certainly I speak for myself at this point, that we shouldn’t be referred to as the defence. It’s very important for this process and I’m concerned about that because Mr Prior is also acting for the victims. We are not here to defend what the applicants did, we are here to assist the application ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I understand.

ADV ARENDSE: So that it complies with the requirements of the Act.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I think the word: "defence" must not be used.

MR PRIOR: I apologise, it’s simply a slip of the tongue.

CHAIRPERSON: Will you have a look at this document?

Now, put your question Mr Prior.

MR PRIOR: If you look at the sketch plan, there’s a motor vehicle marked CA674119 at point K, that is opposite the entrance to the tavern - not exactly opposite but almost diagonally opposite, now there’s evidence that that vehicle which is unrelated to any interested party at these proceedings was damaged by a bullet. Are you able to give us an explanation as to how possibly that vehicle was damaged?

MR MABALA: I can’t explain that matter, I was not there to be looking at cars that are being shot - I can’t explain that.

MR PRIOR: Were you at some stage ...[intervention]

JUDGE WILSON: Mr Prior, I don’t know if you have seen the photographs that have been made available to me at my request?

MR PRIOR: No, Mr Chairman.

JUDGE WILSON: ...[inaudible]

INTERPRETER: The speaker’s mike is not on.

JUDGE WILSON: I think it’s almost time for an adjournment and you might like to look at them there is in the bundle of photographs that’s now available, a photograph of this motorcar and of what appears to be numerous bullets marks in the building behind it and you might like to look at that if you’re going to ask the witness questions - the applicant questions.

MR PRIOR: And possibly also the legal representatives of the applicants to have sight of those photographs because ...[intervention]

JUDGE WILSON: Well I understand they have had sight of them and it was Mr Arendse ...[inaudible] agreed that it would be convenient for the photographs to be available to everyone participating. They are available for him to look at again but he is - as far as I can gather, the only person who’s taken the trouble to look at them up to now.

MR PRIOR: Thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: We’ll take the short adjournment at this stage.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

ON RESUMPTION

ZOLA PRINCE MABALA: (s.u.o.)

CHAIRPERSON: Yes Mr Prior?

ADV SANDI: Mr Mabala, we just would like to remind you that you’re still under oath.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR PRIOR: (cont)

Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Chairman, may I correct a submission or a statement that I put to the last - to the witness, regarding photograph 1a of Exhibit A, that there was a fire directed at the top of the Heidelberg Tavern as one can see there’s a balcony - I was under that impression, however having studied the photographs 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22(L), 23 and 24 of the new bundle - that is which relate to the ...[intervention]

MR MABALA: Excuse me for a moment, I don’t have that document.

CHAIRPERSON: I think that the question about whether there was firing at the balcony or above the balcony was denied - he had no knowledge of it.

MR PRIOR: I’m simply explaining - I was under the misapprehension that it was in that direction, it was in fact opposite - the building opposite to the tavern, and I’m going to direct my questions in that regard.

CHAIRPERSON: Anyway Mr Arendse, it’s quite clear you understand? The question wrongly directed to this witness about firing being aimed at the top of the Heidelberg Tavern balcony - that was a mistake and the witness’s answer was that he knows nothing about the firing in that direction. Let us just carry on from there.

MR PRIOR: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Mabala, it’s come to my attention that shooting was directed at the premises - that is the building opposite the tavern, the Heidelberg Tavern, either at the same time as the attack on the tavern or shortly after the attack of the Heidelberg Tavern, do you know anything about that?

MR MABALA: I cannot answer that.

MR PRIOR: My information is that fire was directed at patrons who were on the balcony at a night-club called: "The Planet" and if you look at photographs 17, 18 ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: ...[inaudible]

MR PRIOR: There are two bundles that are being prepared, one is for the ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Will you please before you put questions, at least make sure that he has these photographs in front of him.

MR PRIOR: I beg your pardon Mr Chairman. Could I ask Mr Arendse whether the bundle that was - that he has be shown to ...

ADV ARENDSE: Mr Chairman, could I just for the record say in as much as I did have sight of those photographs, I did not discuss them with any of the applicants. I did not do so now during the break for the simple reason that he’s under cross-examination. This is however a new matter and I would have thought that I would have been given that opportunity but I don’t intend to do so - he as there and he must tell, he must answer the questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Quite right, yes. A new bundle or rather a bundle with many more photographs are now placed in front of you and questions are going to be asked about some of those photographs, so please have a look at them.

And Mr Prior will you direct his attention specifically to each photograph when you put your questions? This bundle will be Exhibit D. Yes, Mr Prior?

MR PRIOR: Mr Chairman, save to say that I’m at a disadvantage, I don’t have a bundle. I’ve simply recorded the numbers of the photographs and which depict damage to the opposite side of the street and my question is in that general nature regarding all the damage that one sees on all the photographs.

JUDGE WILSON: I will bundle that we had available to Mr Prior, perhaps for questioning. Could I also put on record merely to avoid confusion, that the numbers in the new bundle Exhibit C, are not the same as the numbers in the original bundle Exhibit A. For example photograph number - on page 2 of the bundle A is photograph 8 in the new bundle and so it goes on. The first photographs that we’ve all been referring to on page 1, is photograph 11 in bundle D.

MR PRIOR: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Mabala, will you please look at photograph number 17? Now, I’m informed that that photograph depicts the building opposite the Heidelberg Tavern in Station Road. I also want you to look at photograph 18 and can you see the marks on the building which are linked to the letter J by certain black lines?

MR MABALA: I see them, Sir.

MR PRIOR: My information and my instructions are that these are bullet marks or marks caused by bullets. Let me put the other photo - allow you to look at the other photographs if I may, photograph 19 which shows the first floor at ground level of Mable’s which is a coffee bar, photograph 22 - could you turn to page 22, do you see the letter L on the left hand side of the photograph?

MR MABALA: No English translation.

MR PRIOR: And do you see that there are two black lines ...[intervention]

INTERPRETER: Could Mr Prior wait for the interpretation please?

The witness said yes, he could see the picture.

MR PRIOR: And do you see the places to which spot L or mark L refers - to the walls of the balcony in the vicinity of the Dulux sign?

MR MABALA: Yes, I can see that.

MR PRIOR: Please turn to photograph 23 and 24, I’m instructed and I’m informed that these photographs depict the building opposite the tavern and that the marks depict ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Which photographs - 23 and 24?

MR PRIOR: 23 and 24 and ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Not the others?

MR PRIOR: Yes, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: All these that you’ve referred to 17, 18, 19, 22, 23, 24?

MR PRIOR: Yes, Mr Chairman. Mr Mabala, so as to avoid any confusion, all these photographs I’m referring to you depict the buildings opposite the tavern that is on the other side of the road of Station Road, do you understand?

MR MABALA: I understand.

MR PRIOR: On pictures or photographs 23 and 24, those marks against the building I’m informed are bullet marks, are you able to comment on that?

MR MABALA: There is nothing I can say about that.

MR PRIOR: And my information further is that those bullet marks were caused by people responsible for the Heidelberg attack who shot in that direction.

MR MABALA: I don’t remember, I can’t remember.

MR PRIOR: And I’m also informed that at that time there were people on that balcony at the club called the planet and as a result of that shooting they took cover. Can you comment on that?

MR MABALA: No, I cannot comment on that.

MR PRIOR: Would you agree that if this is so, the clubhouse sorry, or the night-club: "The Planet" was certainly not identified as a target by your group for attack on that evening, would you agree?

MR MABALA: I cannot answer that question.

MR PRIOR: What is the difficulty?

MR MABALA: I only know about the tavern.

MR PRIOR: Is it possible you never saw anyone of your group shooting at across the street because you were inside the tavern at the time, is that a possibility?

MR MABALA: I don’t remember.

MR PRIOR: Was there any discussion later on after the attack as to any other building or any other person who had been shot at, other than the Heidelberg Tavern?

MR MABALA: No, Sir.

MR PRIOR: Mr Mabala, I want to suggest to you that you are not telling us everything that happened on that evening.

MR MABALA: Sir, I have told you what happened. All these things that you are talking about, I don’t remember them. I don’t remember them, I was there and I have told you what I do remember - I can’t remember everything.

CHAIRPERSON: Just let’s ...[inaudible] one thing clear for me - when a question is put to you, you can either deny it to say it didn’t happen or you say I can’t remember. When you say you can’t remember it means that it may well have happened but you have no recollection of it. Now you’ve given us answers to say you can’t remember, do you understand? Now I’m giving you a chance, are you going to say that this did not happen or is it that you can’t remember it happening?

MR MABALA: I can’t say it did not happen, I don’t know about it. If you’re asking a question that perhaps some of my comrades shot there, I can’t answer that because I don’t know.

MR PRIOR: I want to simply put it to you that as part of this unit that was sent out to attack the Heidelberg Tavern, it’s unlikely that you would not have known about it.

CHAIRPERSON: I don’t think that question is clear to him.

MR PRIOR: Well, I don’t know how better to put it to him Mr Chairman. I’m suggesting to him that what he’s saying is improbable, that as a cadre tasked with attacking a specific target in that place in Observatory, would unaware or would not remember that any other place would have been attacked at the same time, in other words the night-club across the street.

MR MABALA: What are you saying?

MR PRIOR: I’m saying you’re not telling us everything that happened on that evening.

MR MABALA: What do you mean because I have answered you all your questions. I’ve answered your questions, I tell you when I don’t know anything about what you’re asking.

MR PRIOR: Yes, well I’m also going to suggest to you as I do, that if that is the case that you shot at another target then you can’t claim that you were simply acting on orders to attack the Heidelberg Tavern.

MR MABALA: Please repeat the question.

MR PRIOR: If that is the case that your unit shot at the people across the road from the tavern at the Plant Night-club, then what you say about strict orders to attack Heidelberg Tavern can’t be true.

MR MABALA: I got an order to attack at the tavern, if there is somebody who shot elsewhere I don’t know about it. I know - the only thing I know is that we were sent to attack the tavern, somebody else could have used his own initiative and shot at where you’re talking about but I only know about the tavern.

JUDGE WILSON: Mr Mabala, as I understand your evidence and please correct me if I’m wrong, your car parked - and you showed us on the photograph, in the front of the tavern between the two doors and you got out of the right hand rear door and stood there in the road. Is that correct so far?

MR MABALA: That is correct.

JUDGE WILSON: So if anybody shot at the building on the other side of the road, they must have either shot over you or from just in front of where you were standing on the road close to the building, do you agree with that?

MR MABALA: Please repeat that Sir.

JUDGE WILSON: If anybody shot at the building on the other side of the road which has been pointed out to you by counsel and the various photographs he has shown you, they must have either shot over you or shot from in front of you - from between, they must have been between you and the building they were shooting at. And so you must of have seen or been aware of the fact - if the bullets were whistling over your head you must have known it, wouldn’t you have known it?

MR MABALA: Sir, I know clearly about my actions, I did what I was supposed to do. Please remember that there was very limited time, I could not focus on everything - it was also at night. I don’t know how else to answer this question.

CHAIRPERSON: Maybe we’ll simplify it. You’ve seen those photographs which depict damage to the buildings across the road, now it is being to you that that damage was caused by you or by your friends that night. Do you understand, that is the question that is being put to you? Now, you react by saying: "I can’t remember", it’s being said to you that that answer is not convincing because that damage could only have been caused by your colleagues, do you understand?

MR MABALA: I understand. Let me answer you as follows, I cannot dispute that - maybe they did shoot but I cannot dispute it.

CHAIRPERSON: Well now then, the next question is, if your directives - if your orders were to attack the Heidelberg Tavern as you’ve told us that was the orders, then somebody exceeded those orders and went beyond those orders by attacking buildings across the road - that is the question, do you understand?

MR MABALA: I understand Sir, that perhaps there’s somebody who shot there. The person who shot across the road must have been someone who took his own initiative and shot but I focused on what I was meant to focus on.

CHAIRPERSON: All right, I think you can’t take it very much further.

MR PRIOR: Thank you Mr Chairman. When you eventually left the scene and drove to where you parted company with Mr Madasi and Mr Maxeba and when they returned - as we have heard their evidence, was there a de-briefing, was there a discussion about the attack in order that you could report to the APLA command about what happened?

MR MABALA: No, Sir.

MR PRIOR: In the car driving away from the Heidelberg Tavern, were there any discussions about how the attack went and who did what during the attack?

MR MABALA: When we were going to the Heidelberg Tavern? Please repeat the question Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: No, after the ...[intervention]

MR PRIOR: Going away from the tavern.

MR MABALA: What did you say happened? Could you start your question from the beginning please.

MR PRIOR: The question is simply, when you were driving away from the scene of the attack at the tavern, was there any discussion in the vehicle who had done what, whether it was a successful mission, anything in that respect?

MR MABALA: No, Sir.

MR PRIOR: Did you ever at any stage discuss the attack with any of your colleagues, any of your comrades at any stage before you left for the Transkei?

MR MABALA: No, Sir.

JUDGE WILSON: I have a little difficulty with this - you had been given and order to do one thing and one thing only at the attack, hadn’t you?

MR MABALA: Correct, but please repeat the question.

JUDGE WILSON: That was the question and you’ve have replied - you had been ordered to do one thing and one thing only, that was to throw a hand grenade. Is that correct, do you confirm that?

MR MABALA: Correct Sir.

JUDGE WILSON: Well did Luyanda you commander, not ask you: "Why didn’t you throw the hand grenade"?

INTERPRETER: Could the witness put the answer more clearly please?

JUDGE WILSON: I don’t think I can ask it ...[intervention]

INTERPRETER: The witness please.

MR MABALA: Luyanda did ask me why I did not launch the hand grenade, I replied and gave him the explanation.

JUDGE WILSON: So there was a discussion afterwards, why have you just told us a minute ago you did discuss the attack with anyone?

MR MABALA: You asked if Luyanda had asked me why I had not launched the hand grenade, I therefore gave him the answer.

JUDGE WILSON: Mr Prior asked you immediately before then, whether there was any discussion while driving away and you said you didn’t discuss the attack with anyone afterwards. Now you say Luyanda did come and ask you why you hadn’t thrown the hand grenade and you explained - there was a discussion.

MR MABALA: I was answering your question - I was answering your question because you said when Mr Gqomfa asked me why did not launch the hand grenade, I then gave him the answer.

CHAIRPERSON: I think that besides that question that was put to you, were there any other questions asked and answered by you all when you were in the car driving away - was anything else asked and answered?

MR MABALA: In the car we did not talk about anything.

ADV SANDI: Can I ask the interpreters to get ready, I’m going to ask my question in Xhosa.

ADV SANDI: Mr Mabala, is there something else that you discussed in connection with the attack besides the ...[intervention]

INTERPRETER: Could Mr Sandi please wait for the interpretation? Could the speakers wait for the interpretation please - the speakers are not waiting for the interpretation.

CHAIRPERSON: ...[inaudible] please answer your question so that the interpreter can have time. What is the answer?

MR MABALA: Could the question be asked again?

INTERPRETER: The speakers are not waiting for the interpretation.

ADV SANDI: On the same day ...[intervention]

ADV GOZA: Excuse me Mr Chair, we have a concern that there may be a reply that did not get interpreted, the interpreter complains that the speakers are not waiting for the interpreter and I am of the view that there is a response elicited which has not come through by interpretation. I would request that the Chairman directs that Mr Advocate Sandi directs his question again.

ADV SANDI: I will start from the beginning Mr Mabala, you said that you did not at all discuss about this matter ...[intervention]

INTERPRETER: The witness is not waiting for the interpretation. I think the witness and the speaker on the panel are speaking directly to each other without waiting for the interpretation - they must ask for a pause.

CHAIRPERSON: Please understand, he’s talking to you in your language - the question is being interpreted for our benefit in English and with the result that you are talking too quickly without the interpreter having a chance, so when Mr Sandi asks you questions, just wait a while so the interpreter can interpret for us and then you answer. Do you understand?

MR MABALA: I understand. Please repeat the question, Sir.

ADV SANDI: After I have asked you the question please pause such that the interpretation can come through, do you understand Mr Mabala? The question is - you did not have any other discussion in connection with this attack?

MR MABALA: No, we did not have a discussion.

ADV SANDI: You’ve answered this question only.

MR MABALA: I cannot hear, what are you saying Sir?

ADV SANDI: No English translation.

MR MABALA: No English translation.

MR PRIOR: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Mabala, we heard evidence from Mr Gqomfa that at the robots - that is on the corner as we understand at Station Road and ...[intervention]

ADV GOZA: I am sorry to have to come in again Mr Chair, we’re seeking to ensure that it has come out through interpretation that the question that the applicant is saying, was asked by Mr Gqomfa - that was asked when they were they were back in the house or hut wherever they were. We just wish to seek and ensure that that has come through interpretation, I am not sure that it did.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you get that?

MR PRIOR: I follow it yes.

CHAIRPERSON: You follow it? The question as to whether or why he didn’t use the hand grenade was a question that was not asked in the car but at a later stage - all right?

MR PRIOR: As the Chair pleases.

CHAIRPERSON: As part of the answer to the question: "Was there a discussion in the car"?

MR PRIOR: Yes, thank you Mr Chairman. So was this discussion or the question - was there any discussion further about the attack in the house - that is after you had arrived in the car?

MR MABALA: After we arrived - we went straight to the house, Comrade Luyanda asked me why I did not launch the hand grenade the previous day - the previous night.

MR PRIOR: And you told him?

MR MABALA: Yes, I told him.

MR PRIOR: Any of your other comrades - sorry, was there any other general discussion about the attack at that time?

MR MABALA: No, we did not.

MR PRIOR: Did you see the person that was shot by Mr Gqomfa at the robots - that is now before you left the area - completely left the area?

MR MABALA: Before we left the place of the incident I heard a bang, comrade Luyanda was shooting - I am almost positive that he shot that person because I heard a sound, a bang - he was shooting at the time, that’s comrade Luyanda.

MR PRIOR: My information at this stage is that the person he shot - Mr Cerqueira was not armed but had simply come out of his restaurant to see what was going on, are you able to comment at all?

MR MABALA: I cannot comment on that Sir. I heard a sound, I did not know from which direction the sound came from and comrade Luyanda was shooting at that time - whether this man was armed or not, I cannot say.

MR PRIOR: Thank you. The hand grenade that you had in your possession, did it have wire nails glued to it?

MR MABALA: Yes Sir, it did have.

MR PRIOR: And did you glue the nails onto the grenade?

MR MABALA: No, I received this grenade already with these nail wires.

MR PRIOR: From who, who did you receive it from?

MR MABALA: I found the hand grenade at time we were supposed to leave.

MR PRIOR: Was that in the suitcase?

MR MABALA: Yes, it was in the suitcase.

MR PRIOR: Because Mr Madasi gave similar evidence yesterday, he said the rifle grenade that he was to shoot into the tavern - when he took possession of it, it already had wire nails adhered to it or glued to is, is that correct?

MR MABALA: That is correct.

MR PRIOR: I want to refer to a portion of the Judgement - page 38 Mr Chairman, of the bundle, paragraph ...[intervention]

MR MABALA: Which page?

MR PRIOR: Sorry, it’s the bundle of documents and the Judgement is in Afrikaans, so I’ll read out the ...[intervention]

MR MABALA: I don’t have that document.

INTERPRETER: The witness asked for the page as well.

MR PRIOR: Page 38.

MR MABALA: Paragraph?

MR PRIOR: At the top of page 38, that small paragraph (b) - small (b) in Afrikaans. Do you understand Afrikaans?

MR MABALA: I don’t understand Afrikaans, I will need an interpretation.

MR PRIOR: All right, I’m going to quote from that portion of that ...[intervention]

INTERPRETER: The passage will be interpreted.

MR PRIOR

"To the left behind on the floor of the vehicle a certain number of nails were found which according to Sergeant du Plessis, appeared as thought they had been coated with a jelly like or glue like material - he also collected these nails".

Now, the reference is to the blue Opel Record that was found by the police. I also want to refer you in the same vein, to page 39 of the bundle from lines 23 to 29 where Captain Judith Allen who analysed these nails. And again at page 41 there’s a reference at lines 3, 4 and 5 where she compared the glue on the nails to bostick clear where she came to the conclusion further on at lines 6 to 8, is that the adhesive was bostick clear.

Now, with that in mind, my question is that loose nails were found in the vehicle that you had used to travel to the tavern and what I’m going to suggest to you that from that evidence it appears that the nails were glued to the grenades and the rifle grenade in the car shortly before the attack. Do you agree with that?

MR MABALA: We found the grenade already with these nails.

MR PRIOR: I also refer to page 37 of the record - that is of the bundle, where a cap - I refer to paragraph (a) at the bottom of the page Mr Chairman, a cap was found in this blue Opel and apparently hair samples were discovered and after your arrest hair samples were taken from you and those hair samples that were taken from you after your arrest matched the hair samples in the cap. Do you remember that evidence being given at your trial?

MR MABALA: I remember that evidence.

MR PRIOR: And did you see the cap when it was presented at your trial?

MR MABALA: They just spoke of the evidence, I did not see the cap. They said they found the cap and they also said they found my hair samples but I did not see all this.

MR PRIOR: And on the night of the attack you were in fact wearing a cap, is that correct?

MR MABALA: I was not wearing a cap, however in court it was said that the cap had my hair on it - I was also quite shocked.

MR PRIOR: Because the witness Sibaya in his statements refers to one of the people leaving the dark coloured car entering the white Audi, that one of them had said something to the effect that he had left his cap behind. Do you want to comment on that?

MR MABALA: That’s probably Sibaya’s cap, it’s not mine.

JUDGE WILSON: Are you suggesting Mr Sibaya was in this car?

MR MABALA: Sibaya can answer that, I cannot comment on that.

MR PRIOR: Finally, this gentleman Mr Cerqueira who was shot by Mr Gqomfa as you were leaving - the man at the robots, do you know why he was shot?

MR MABALA: I said Sir, when I was by the car before the car reached the robot, there was a sound and Luyanda was shooting - I said that already.

MR PRIOR: Did you see the person who Mr Gqomfa was shooting at? Did you see his face for example or anything about him?

MR MABALA: No, Sir. Luyanda shot but I did not see anyone.

ADV GOZA: Mr Chair, there’s something that didn’t come across clearly in translation, the applicant said there was gun fire and then Gqomfa shot - if it can be cleared up because it could be important.

MR PRIOR: Thank you Mr Chairman, I have no further question.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR PRIOR

CHAIRPERSON: We accept that.

MR PRIOR: Sorry Mr Chairman?

CHAIRPERSON: That the shooting by - according to this witness, the shooting by Gqomfa took place after this witness had heard a shot.

MR PRIOR: Well, I hear what he says, I don’t accept the veracity of that and I ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Anyway, that’s the evidence that was not interpreted properly.

MR PRIOR: Yes, I accept that that is the interpretation.

CHAIRPERSON: Have you finished?

MR PRIOR: Yes, Mr Chairman. Similarly to the procedure yesterday, I have not yet enquired whether any of the victims wish to answer any questions.

CHAIRPERSON: No, as far as you’re concerned?

MR PRIOR: As far as I’m concerned, yes.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR PRIOR

ADV ARENDSE: Mr Chairman, just for the record also - I don’t recall Mr Prior challenging Mr Gqomfa’s evidence that he had - in fact it’s in the statement

"That shots were fired in my direction and I responded by firing shots out of the window"

CHAIRPERSON: That’s a matter for argument.

ADV ARENDSE: Well, it concerns ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: I understand that.

ADV ARENDSE: Yes?

CHAIRPERSON: We have that on record.

Are there people present who are directly involved as victims or dependants who have questions to ask of this witness? Will you come forward please? Do sit down. What are you full names?

MR JANUARY: My full names are Michael January, Mr Chairman, I was a victim in the Heidelberg Tavern.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes Mr January?

MR JANUARY: I have quite a few questions Mr Chairman, I will direct to Mr Mabala.

You said you were sitting in the back of the car and Mr Madasi was sitting in front with Mr Maxeba, so that would mean you were sitting next to Mr Sibeko in the car, is that correct?

MR MABALA: Correct, Sir.

MR JANUARY: So you confirm Mr Sibeko was at the Heidelberg Tavern?

MR MABALA: Yes.

MR JANUARY: Did you know if Mr Sibeko had a rifle, was he given a rifle to use in the attack?

MR MABALA: Yes, he had a rifle.

MR JANUARY: Okay, you have further testified that you returned to Khayelitsha after the attack and you returned to a house there, do you know whose house this was?

MR MABALA: It was our meeting point where we usually gathered.

MR JANUARY: You don’t know to whom the house belonged?

MR MABALA: I don’t know whose house it was.

MR JANUARY: Was there any people at this house waiting for you when you returned from the Heidelberg Tavern?

MR MABALA: No, it was only us.

MR JANUARY: When you returned the weapons to - I think you - I think the evidence you’ve given earlier was the weapons were received from Mr Siyolo, did you - was the weapons returned to Mr Siyolo after the attack?

MR MABALA: I can’t answer about the weapons, it is Luyanda who will answer in connection with the weapons.

MR JANUARY: Mr Chairman, will I be allowed to question Mr Gqomfa regarding the return of the weapons and to who he returned the weapons to?

CHAIRPERSON: Just finish the questions you have to ask of this witness.

MR JANUARY: Thank you Mr Chairman, I have no further question to this particular witness Mr Chairman, thank you.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR JANUARY

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Is there anybody else who wishes questions to be asked of this witness? Please state your full names for purposes of the record.

MR CORNELIUS: Quinton Cornelius.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes Mr Cornelius?

MR CORNELIUS: Mr Chairman, I’d like to ask Mr Mabala - you acknowledged that Mr Gqomfa was shooting from outside the vehicle back at somebody in the street, what rifle - what type of rifle was he using?

MR MABALA: I can’t remember what kind of rifle he was using but I know that he was the one who was shooting - I can’t remember Sir.

MR CORNELIUS: As I was lying on the floor inside the tavern, I heard definite and separate fire from two different rifles inside the

tavern. There were six of you in the attack, you at the vehicle, Gqomfa and Jantjie outside, Madasi inside and the driver - that accounts for five, where was the sixth person?

MR MABALA: Please repeat that question Sir.

MR CORNELIUS: From my recollection which is quite clear as I did not faint or anything inside, I heard two separate rifle fire shots shot from two separate rifles inside the tavern very, very close from us. There were six of you, five have more or less been accounted for, yourself outside by the vehicle, the driver, Gqomfa and Jantjie in front of the tavern, Madasi inside, where was the sixth person?

MR MABALA: The driver is the sixth person.

MR CORNELIUS: That’s the fifth. The driver ...[intervention]

MR MABALA: Let me count for you, it was myself Gqomfa, Monwabisi, Sibeko ...[intervention]

MR CORNELIUS: Monwabisi - what was his other name?

MR MABALA: Jantjie.

MR CORNELIUS: Right.

MR MABALA: It was myself, Gqomfa, Monwabisi, Sibeko - myself, Gqomfa - okay, myself, Madasi, Maxeba the driver, Monwabisi, Sibeko, Luyanda - six.

MR CORNELIUS: I do not understand where Sibeko was.

CHAIRPERSON: What is the question you wish to put?

MR CORNELIUS: The question is, where - what was Sibeko’s location?

MR MABALA: I can’t remember where Sibeko was positioned but he was the sixth person that you’re referring to.

MR CORNELIUS: Thank you Mr Chairman.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR CORNELIUS

CHAIRPERSON: Are there any other persons wishing to put questions? Yes, please come forward and just place your full name on the record.

MR FOURIE: Mr Chairman, my name is Johan Fourie and my daughter Lindy Anne was murdered in this incident. Please pardon my ignorance of legal terms but I would like to refer to the interpretation of the words in paragraph 2 of Mr Mabala’s affidavit. Amongst others it says

"Less the context states otherwise"

I’m at a loss, I don’t understand what that means.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, I think this witness won’t be able to answer that, the attorneys will be able to explain that to you.

MR FOURIE: Okay. In paragraph 4 of his affidavit he refers to other attacks in other parts of the country - I know they don’t concern this incident but I would like to know anyway about the vehicles used in these attacks.

Whose vehicles were used and how did you get them?

MR MABALA: Sir, please repeat the question.

MR FOURIE: I’d like to know from you - were the vehicles that you used in previous attacks like in Boipatong, Heilbron and other places and more specifically here in the Western Cape, did you obtain the vehicles that you used in other attacks in the same manner as you obtained the vehicle to use in the Heidelberg attack?

CHAIRPERSON: Let’s go through one by one - in the Boipatong matter, was there a vehicle used?

MR MABALA: No, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: In Heilbron, was a motorcar used?

MR MABALA: No, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: And Free State?

MR MABALA: I have counted only two places.

CHAIRPERSON: Oh, that’s Heilbron.

MR MABALA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Nyanga East, was there a vehicle used?

MR MABALA: Yes, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: What vehicle was that?

MR MABALA: It was a Toyota Conquest.

CHAIRPERSON: You may put your question about ...[intervention]

MR FOURIE: Whose Toyota Conquest did you use?

MR MABALA: It belonged to a firm "Operation Hunger".

MR FOURIE: Did you steal the vehicle in order to do that?

MR MABALA: Yes, it was stolen.

MR FOURIE: Thank you. And in the other attack in Lingelethu, did you also use a vehicle?

MR MABALA: The same ...

MR FOURIE: Did you use the same vehicle?

INTERPRETER: Could the speaker wait for the interpretation?

CHAIRPERSON: Just hold it, the interpreter hasn’t finished yet - Lingelethu was the same vehicle?

MR MABALA: That is correct, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MR FOURIE: Thank you. Referring to your request for amnesty - sorry, I must just go back one, in paragraph 7 in your affidavit you say

"At the time I did not think it wise to do so"

Do you recall writing that or stating that? It refers to why you did not throw the hand grenade.

CHAIRPERSON: What is the question?

MR MABALA: Please repeat the question.

MR FOURIE: I’m jogging his memory Mr Chairman, because he stated in paragraph 7

"At the time I did not think it wise to throw the hand grenade because it would almost certainly have killed my comrades as they were retreating from the attack on the tavern?

Do you remember saying that?

MR MABALA: Yes, I remember that.

MR FOURIE: I have a problem with this as with many other of the statements that you’ve made. Could it be that you didn’t throw the hand grenade because you were afraid for your own safety?

MR MABALA: What do you meant I was afraid for my own safety? I was meant to launch the hand grenade inside, not outside the tavern - Madasi was ahead of me inside, this is why I did not launch the hand grenade.

MR FOURIE: I understand what you’re saying to me, then what you also are saying to me that you were afraid that you would injure or kill some of your comrades inside the tavern?

MR MABALA: Madasi was inside, I could not launch the hand grenade.

MR FOURIE: Okay, how far inside? Do you remember?

MR MABALA: No, I don’t remember.

MR FOURIE: This is now something which I might disturb Mr Chairman, but I’m going to ask it anyway.

Alternatively, did you perhaps see that the people in the tavern were not the people that you say you should have expected to see in the tavern?

MR MABALA: Sir, the order was such that we should go to the tavern.

MR FOURIE: I hear what you’re saying but I’m also wondering if your reluctance to throw the hand grenade is because - possibly because you might have seen that the people inside the tavern were not the kind of people that were described to you by those you say sent you.

MR MABALA: I wouldn’t put it that way Sir, I was going to launch the hand grenade if Madasi had not taken the position that he took - I was going to launch the hand grenade.

MR FOURIE: Thank you. I’m going to go back again to your request for amnesty - how can you say that you obeyed orders which were to shoot and kill people which you say you did and then in the same paragraph refer to being told that you should kill Whites, but you ended up killing people who are not regarded as White? Could this be regarded as a botched or messed up operation? I’m asking, do you think it could be regarded as a botched or messed up operation?

MR MABALA: Sir, I cannot comment on that, we were told to go to the tavern - I don’t know how to respond to your statement.

MR FOURIE: I have one or two others. I refer to the statement read by Mr Prior as written by a Mr Xuma and I must say in my mind it gave me rise - it gave rise to conflict because I wonder why you appeared a little upset and agitated when Mr Prior asked you questions about Mr Xuma - when you saw him or when you didn’t see him. I’m just giving you a little bit of space to perhaps clarify your position because it worries me greatly, I’m not clear in my mind why this caused you such consternation.

MR MABALA: First of all, Nonuba was the one who led to our coming here ...[intervention]

MR FOURIE: I’m just giving you some space okay, because I’m not certain in my mind right now. I’ll tell you why I’m worried if I can help you, should I help you?

CHAIRPERSON: What’s the point of your question, I think ...[intervention]

MR FOURIE: Mr Chairman, regarding Mr Mabala’s not remembering whether he saw Mr Xuma in the then Transkei or not, I have a problem because - I’ll read my statement and then I’ll leave it to him to answer if he wishes to.

You keep telling us that you are or you were a soldier trained to carry out orders and that you were told to do certain things including killing people, you claimed to have been involved in various operations and you remember the details of them. My question now is why can you not now remember a simple detail yet a very important one regarding remember when you saw Mr Xuma and where and under what circumstances?

MR MABALA: Sir, I said Mr Xuma is a member of the High Command, however it is comrade Nonuba who sent us to Cape Town - Nonuba takes order from comrade Xuma.

MR FOURIE: Okay, why then when you were asked about him and specifically whether he was Director of Operations or not - tell me if I’m right here or if I’ve misunderstood something, but you did not - you seemed not to want to answer that question whether he was Director of Operations or not, can you tell me why please?

MR MABALA: Who was the Director of Operations? Repeat the question please.

MR FOURIE: I’d like to ask again, did I misunderstand something or did I miss something when I perceived you as not wanting to answer the question whether or not Mr Xuma was Director of Operations?

MR MABALA: Mr Xuma is the leader, the member of the High Command - Nonuba received orders from Mr Xuma.

MR FOURIE: And now I’ll tell you why I have a problem ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: ...[inaudible] I think the witness wants to know whether Xuma was the Director of Operations. You’ve told us he was a member of the High Command, was he a Director of Operations?

MR MABALA: Yes.

MR FOURIE: Thank you very much, you’ve answered my question and the question that Mr Prior put to you earlier and now I would like to say why I have a problem with this finally. Very soon after this discussion regarding Mr Xuma, other questions were put to you - many more questions and particularly what impressed me was the speed at which you spoke and the detail which you delivered in that very fast speech, told me that you remember details very, very well because you could speak so quickly and with such great detail so I’m asking you: "Are you choosing to have a selective memory here or not"? In other words, are there things that you want to remember and others you don’t want to remember?

MR MABALA: Sir, I do not have selective amnesia, I’m speaking under oath.

MR FOURIE: Thank you and I must commend you on your - on restraining your apparent agitation this time but previously I noticed that you were very, very, distressed. Thank you Mr Chairman.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR FOURIE

CHAIRPERSON: Are there any other persons wishing to put questions - implicated persons or victims? Will you place your full name on the record please?

MR BRODE: My name is Benjamin Brodie, I would like to put a question to Mr Mabala.

Mr Mabala, you said that you did not see Mr Cerqueira when he

was shot at, is that true?

MR MABALA: Sir, I said I heard a noise, when I heard a noise I didn’t know where the noise was coming from. Comrade ...[indistinct] was shooting but I couldn’t see where he was actually shooting but what I know he was actually shooting at a person but I didn’t see that person.

MR BRODE: Okay, you said that you didn’t see that person, then did you see any other persons when shots were fired at Mr Cerqueira?

MR MABALA: I didn’t see anybody, it was dark - you must remember that it was very dark, it was in the evening, you can’t see everything that’s happening during the night.

MR BRODE: When you heard a shot, what did you do?

MR MABALA: What sound are you talking about, what noise? What sound are you talking about Sir?

MR BRODE: The sound that came before Mr - what’s the other gentleman’s name, before Mr Gqomfa fired?

MR MABALA: You mean - I was in the car, there was nothing I could do, I was in the car. I would be also shot but there was nothing I could do, I was in the car when I heard the noise.

MR BRODE: Mr Mabala, you are saying that - I’m asking if it was just Mr Gqomfa that shot when you heard the noise?

MR MABALA: I heard a loud noise Sir - just hear me out - I heard a noise, it was a gunshot. Just before Mr Gqomfa could shoot there was another shot, when I heard that shot comrade Luyanda started to shoot - began to shoot but I don’t even know where this noise or this gunshot was coming from - maybe he knows, I don’t know.

MR BRODE: So, from what I’m hearing that you’re saying there was a noise and then there was another noise? So that second noise could have come from one of your comrades shooting from inside the car?

CHAIRPERSON: ...[inaudible] is that he heard a sound which sounded like gunshot, Mr Gqomfa his companion - he then heard Mr Gqomfa firing in the direction from which that sound came.

JUDGE WILSON: No, he said he heard a second shot before Gqomfa fired.

CHAIRPERSON: I didn’t hear that.

Let’s just clear that up - I’m sorry, I don’t want to be unfair to the witness.

MR FOURIE: Could I repeat that or ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Just let’s clear it up.

MR BRODE: Or re-repeat?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

Just listen to me, when you were in the car and you were moving away - before you saw your colleague Mr Gqomfa fire, how many shots did you hear?

MR MABALA: I heard a gunshot, it’s only one that I heard.

CHAIRPERSON: That’s right. Yes, next question?

MR BRODE: Were the windows of the car rolled down or rolled up?

MR MABALA: I can’t remember Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes?

MR BRODE: Okay, I’ve got no further questions to Mr Mabala, thank you.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR BRODE

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

UNKNOWN PERSON: The next witness who wants to put a question to the applicant is Roland Palm.

MR PALM: Mr Chairman, for the record I’m Roland Palm, I became a victim because my daughter was brutally murdered in my presence in the Heidelberg but before I put a few questions to the accused, I would just like to put this on record - my statement to the TRC is accurate as of the fatal night of the 30/12/93. The statement is in Mr Prior’s possession which has not been read out as yet, it does highlight my doubt about APLA’s alleged involvement at the time, it also highlights my suspicions then and now.

CHAIRPERSON: I’d rather you deal with that at some other stage but just now I’d like to get done with this witness, please put your questions to him.

MR PALM: Okay, first I’d like to state that by attending this hearing in this week, it has become apparent that the accused are the people

who have committed this horrific crime. Now the questions I’d like to put to the applicants - I’m not going to dwell on - around the case, I just would like to know from them what is APLA’s objectives today?

MR MABALA: Sir, at the time when we were fighting but now we are the same Government - we are in the same Government with the old regime, we should unite now. We don’t talk about the past now, we are talking about democracy.

MR PALM: I think the question was: "What is their attitude today"? I’m not talking about the past, I’m not talking ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: He says: "Now we’re in a democratic Government" - that is what he’s trying to say.

MR PALM: Okay, it’s been expressed here they show openly their hatred towards the White race, is this still the case?

MR MABALA: It’s not like that anymore Sir, at least we can unite. I can be your visitor, we can chat like one person, we can chat like brothers - it’s not like before. I can pay you a visit and please don’t think about those things that this is an APLA member, he’s going to kill me - I’m a person, I’m like the other human beings. I don’t have all those ideas like I had before.

MR PALM: So in other words, you are satisfied with the Government of today?

MR MABALA: Yes Sir, I’m satisfied with the Government of today Sir because it is the one who - I’m satisfied, there’s nothing else that I can do. I’m going to obey instructions and orders from the Government.

MR PALM: Thank you Mr Chair, that’s all for now.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR PALM

CHAIRPERSON: Is there anybody else who wishes to put questions?

MR FOURIE: Thank you Mr Chairman. When Mr Brode was speaking my memory was jogged a little and I just have one question for Mr Mabala.

Did you refer to "Ikiwa" when a question was put to you about Mr Cerqueira, the person who was shot and killed outside the tavern?

MR MABALA: No English translation.

MR FOURIE: Did you use the word "Ikiwa" or "Amakiwa"?

MR MABALA: No Sir, no.

MR FOURIE: You didn’t use the word?

MR MABALA: No.

MR FOURIE: The only reason why I asked is because I do believe it has rather derogatory implications or rather meanings and I just wanted to clarify if I heard it or if I heard incorrectly but if you didn’t hear it, I’m very glad you didn’t use it. Thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MR JANUARY: Mr Chairman, Michael January again

...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: ...[inaudible] we can’t go on and on, do you understand? When you’ve got a chance to put questions, please put all your questions once and get done with it.

MR JANUARY: Thank you Sir. My question is really related to the situation regarding Mr Mabala’s knowledge of Mr Xuma and I’m still not satisfied that we’ve heard the end of that but I thought maybe again if I could just give the applicant space to answer that question.

CHAIRPERSON: The question has already been asked, I don’t know whether there’s any purpose served.

MR JANUARY: I do have a specific questions to ask him Mr Chairman.

Mr Mabala, you indicated that you did not know the name Bulelani Xuma yet you recognised the face when Mr Xuma came forward. Did you know him by any other name?

MR MABALA: That’s correct, Sir.

MR JANUARY: Do I understand that to mean that you do know him by another name?

MR MABALA: Yes, Sir.

MR JANUARY: What other name do you know Mr Xuma by?

MR MABALA: It’s Billy.

MR JANUARY: Thank you Mr Mabala.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I trust that there’s nobody else who wishes to put questions? Have you any questions in re-examination?

ADV ARENDSE: Just one or two, I won’t be long.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, proceed.

RE-EXAMINATION BY ADV ARENDSE: Mr Mabala, you left for the - you left the Transkei for Cape Town from Nkobo in the Transkei on the 13th of November 1993, is that right?

MR MABALA: Yes Sir, that’s correct.

ADV ARENDSE: Now, how many days before that - was it on that day, was it a day before that, a week before that, a month before that, give us an idea of when you were in this meeting - you’ve admitted you had a meeting with comrade Xuma, when was that, was it on that same day or was it before that day and if so, when?

MR MABALA: What I would like to rectify here Sir is this, I met Mr Xuma when I went there for refreshing when I was about to come to Cape Town with him, it’s not during the attack it was during the refreshing when Mr Nonuba was deploying us there, that’s where I met Mr Xuma. It’s not during the Heidelberg - it’s not before the Heidelberg attack.

CHAIRPERSON: What is this Mr Arendse, what is he talking about a refreshing?

ADV ARENDSE: Yes, I want to come to that.

You recall that Gqomfa your comrade made reference to you and him and Maxeba and Jantjie attending a refresher course in October 1993 at Tsolo, is that the refresher that you are talking about?

MR MABALA: That is so.

ADV ARENDSE: So, with the answer to the question: "When did you meet Xuma before you left for Cape Town", would that answer be in October 1993 at Tsolo before you left for the Transkei?

MR MABALA: That is so, Sir.

ADV ARENDSE: Just for the record, did Xuma give you any specific instruction in regard to Heidelberg - did he mention Heidelberg tavern to you?

MR MABALA: Xuma never mentioned that but he told us that we are coming to Cape Town, it’s only Nonuba who told us our trip to Cape Town but I didn’t even know where exactly we were going to in Cape Town.

ADV ARENDSE: Thank you Mr Chairman, I’ve got no further questions.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY ADV ARENDSE

CHAIRPERSON: We’ll take the adjournment now and resume at 2 o’clock.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

ON RESUMPTION

HUMPHREY LUYANDA GQOMFA: (s.u.o.)

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Gqomfa, I believe there’s a gentleman who has indicated he wants to ask you a question, will you take the oath?

Just swear him in.

ADV SANDI: Mr Gqomfa, you’re going to take the oath. There’s a gentleman that would like to ask you questions but we are going to swear you in first.

HUMPHREY LUYANDA GQOMFA: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: Mr January, you wanted to ask a question of applicant number one, is that correct?

MR JANUARY: Yes, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, please do.

MR JANUARY: Mr Chairman, thank you very much for all the courtesy extended to me to ask these questions, it is greatly appreciated - I’ll get straight to the point.

Mr Gqomfa, my questions relate to the return of the weapons after the attack. When you returned the weapons, to whom exactly did you return the weapons?

MR GQOMFA: We gave them back to comrade Dala.

MR JANUARY: Sorry, I didn’t hear the interpretation.

MR GQOMFA: We gave them back to comrade Dala.

MR JANUARY: Thank you. Was there anyone else present with Mr Dala when you returned the weapons?

MR GQOMFA: No, he was the only one at the house.

MR JANUARY: Did Mr Dala check the weapons when you returned it to him?

MR GQOMFA: I don’t know because we just went to leave the weapons there, I don’t know whether he checked them or not.

MR JANUARY: So you left the closed suitcase with Mr Dala?

MR GQOMFA: What suitcase are you talking about?

MR JANUARY: I understood that you returned the weapons in a suitcase.

MR GQOMFA: Yes, the weapons were in a suitcase when we returned them.

MR JANUARY: Okay thank you. And Mr Dala did not open the suitcase to verify that the weapons were in the suitcase?

MR GQOMFA: I wouldn’t know.

MR JANUARY: Thank you very much for answering those questions Mr Gqomfa.

Thank you again Mr Chairman, for the opportunity.

MR GQOMFA: Thank you.

ADV SANDI: Mr Mabala, I just have one or two questions to ask you to ensure that we have a clear picture as to what you are talking about. Let us start off with the military training you received. Yesterday afternoon when you started giving evidence, you said amongst the things you were taught whilst undergoing military training was military discipline, can you explain very briefly what you mean by that?

MR MABALA: When I refer to military discipline - as a soldier you know how you stand for example in a parade, when I refer to military discipline it is referring to perhaps when you are standing in a parade how you’re supposed to stand - the decorum thereof. I’m not sure whether that is clear to you.

ADV SANDI: You also said you were taught to kill - you were trained to kill, who was to be killed?

MR MABALA: You must remember that I did not join APLA to just kill anyone - you must remember how it was before, something within me evoked such, every Black person who was oppressed must have felt the same way. When I joined APLA I went to be trained and also to learn the skill and use it, I went to learn the skill that was used to free the people.

ADV SANDI: I will refer you to a statement by Sandile Gerald Nchikelana, do you know that name?

INTERPRETER: We were just requesting the witness to move further away from the mike.

MR MABALA: Could you repeat the question please?

ADV SANDI: Can you provide him with the bundle - the record, page 81. Have you got page 81 in front of you?

MR MABALA: Yes.

ADV SANDI: I’ve just asked you if you know the name Sandile Gerald Nchikelana?

MR MABALA: No, I don’t know this name.

ADV SANDI: Maybe you know him by some other name but he says he was one of the people who were involved in the higher echelons - it would appear from his statement, in the higher echelons of APLA. Now he says at paragraph 16 - can you see paragraph 16?

MR MABALA: Yes, I see it.

ADV SANDI: I’m going to read it to you and I want you to confirm if that is your understanding as well, as a member of APLA

"These attacks which took place were primarily aimed at Whites, South African police, military, informers of the police"

Was that your understanding as a member of APLA?

MR MABALA: Sir, I’m not going to answer that.

ADV SANDI: Let us go back to 1992 when you returned to the country, you came back to the country in 1992?

MR MABALA: That is correct.

ADV SANDI: And as far as I can recall you said you came back because time had come for you to come back - I’m trying to quote the exact wording, did anyone tell you to come back or was it your own decision that you should go back home now?

MR MABALA: Please remember Sir, that when you go away you live under orders, you must remember that is was a command that was elicited that led to my coming back, therefore these people must have seen that I was ready to come back and fight - it was time for me to come back home.

ADV SANDI: Did you have a specific or a general order for coming back? Was there anything you were told you’d have to do when you come back?

MR MABALA: As I had completed my training I was supposed to come home and then I was supposed to be told here at home what is going to happen thereafter.

ADV SANDI: Am I correct to think that when you were given the order that you should take part in the attack at Heidelberg Tavern, you’re going to be attacking Whites there?

MR MABALA: Sir, it is the man who gave the command who - please repeat the question.

ADV SANDI: When you were told to be part of the group that was going to do this attack at the tavern, was it your understanding that Whites were going to be killed there?

MR MABALA: What I’m going to say is, I just received an order from my commander - I just knew that I was going to Cape Town, I did not know specifically where in Cape Town that I was going to go. When he arrived he just gave me that command when we’re going to go to the tavern.

ADV SANDI: Is that to say that you did not know who or what was to be attacked and why?

MR MABALA: Sir, as we were deployed, it is the commander who knows the specifics - he was given more details, he can answer that question.

ADV SANDI: Thank you Mr Mabala, no further questions.

JUDGE WILSON: Following on that, you took part in the attack on the military camp didn’t you?

MR MABALA: Even though I was there I did not take part in it.

JUDGE WILSON: But you were one of the unit that did attack the military camp?

MR MABALA: I was one of the people that were there Sir.

JUDGE WILSON: And who were the targets there, did you know? Where they any particular racial group?

MR MABALA: It is the police that were being attacked - the soldiers.

JUDGE WILSON: So that same held good on the attack on the police station, you were just attacking policemen in general, is that so?

MR MABALA: If you’re ordered to do something, you’re ordered to do that - that is all I can say.

JUDGE WILSON: Mr Mabala, don’t keep coming back to talk about orders, orders, orders, I’m just asking you for the facts - were you simply there to attack policemen?

MR MABALA: That is correct, Sir.

JUDGE WILSON: Thank you.

WITNESS EXCUSED

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you very much.

Mr Arendse, are you calling any other witnesses?

ADV ARENDSE: Thank you Mr Chairman. We do not propose to call any witnesses or lead any further evidence in support of the applications Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mbandazayo, what is the position as far as you are concerned?

MR MBANDAZAYO: Mr Chairman, at this stage we are not going to call our client, our client is not going to give ...[indistinct] evidence.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Mr Prior?