Amnesty Hearings

CHAIRPERSON: Good morning everybody. I would like to commence by just introducing my Committee. On my right is Ms Sisi Khampepe. On my immediate left is Mr Johnny Motata and on my far left is Mr Jake Moloi and I am Selwyn Miller, who will be chairing here.

I would like to ask the legal representatives also please to put themselves on record.

MR WILLS: Thank you Mr Chairperson. My name is John Wills, Attorney of Pietermaritzburg. I represent Mr Brian Mkhize, Mr Romeo Mbambo, Mr Israel Hlongwane and Mr Bertwill Ndlovu.

MR STUART: Thank you Mr Chairman, I am Angus Stuart from the Durban Bar instructed by the Campus Law Clinic at the University of Natal in Durban. I represent three of the applicants, Dalaqolo Luthuli, Bekhisiso Khumalo and Zweli Dhlamini.

MR HEWIT: Mr Chairman, I am Jeff Hewit of the Durban Bar, instructed by Mr Falconer of Larson, Broadman and Falconer. We represent various persons whom we have been informed may well be implicated in the evidence of the applicants.

Shall I read the names of those persons, it is quite a large...

CHAIRPERSON: I don't think it is necessary at this stage.

MR HEWIT: May I draw your attention Mr Chairman, to the fact that two of the persons on this list, we have been informed, they are actually deceased.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Perhaps you can mention those few persons Mr Hewit.

MR HEWIT: The first person is at the top of the list on the letter dated the 24th of March 1998, which was sent by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission to those instructing me. The first person is Lucky Mbuyasi, who is on the top of that list, and the second person is number two on that list, that is Nhlanipo Matenywa. We are informed that that person is also deceased.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Hewit.

MR HEWIT: Sorry Mr Chairman, there is also one other aspect that I should draw the Committee's attention to at this stage, that is on this list there is a certain Mr Xele, we have been unable to ascertain who this person is, and therefore we do not represent.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I think perhaps in that connection Mr Hewit, when we have a break if you could speak to the evidence leader, Mr Mpshe and he might be able to give you some information as to who that Mr Xele is.

MR HEWIT: We have already Mr Chairman, been given what information is available, and unfortunately we still are unable to identify that person, or to trace him.

So the position is at this stage it appears he has not been notified, whoever this Mr Xele is, it appears that he has not been notified of these proceedings.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you Mr Hewit.

MR NGUBANE: Thank you Mr Chairman, my name is Emvuseni Ngubane. I am representing the victims and the families of eSikhawini.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MR BOOYENS: May it please the Committee Mr Chairman, Kobus Booyens from the Pietermaritzburg Bar, instructed by Francois van der Merwe of the firm Van der Merwe and Bester of Port Elizabeth.

We appear on behalf of Colonel Louis Botha who have received notification in terms of Section 19 of the Act, as well as on behalf of the South African Defence Force.

I have been requested to place certain aspects as far as the Defence Force is concerned, just on record before the matter proceeds, so if I may just be given an opportunity once the other legal representatives have announced their appearance, just to place that on record.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, certainly, thank you Mr Booyens.

MR MPSHE: Thank you Mr Chairman and members of the Committee, Mpshe J.M., leader of evidence, duly assisted by evidence analyst Mr Nathilala.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Mpshe. Mr Booyens?

MR BOOYENS: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Chairman, we have been instructed by the South African Defence Force that they, in this matter, the training of certain people in the Caprivi by the Defence Force, would be in issue. It is not disputed by the Defence Force that those people were trained in fact, although it is disputed that it was with a malicious intent.

The notification was sent by fax to the South African National Defence Force (indistinct), and they have informed us that although Brigadier Van Niekerk, Colonel Swart and Colonel Breytenbach are mentioned in the papers, that they were unable to trace those people, and accordingly they have not received notice.

Furthermore they wish to place on record that the documents were only received by the Defence Force on the 2nd of April 1998 and in the available time, they couldn't trace the persons mentioned. However, our instructions are just to place this on record, and not at this stage to ask for an adjournment or anything, but just to reserve the rights if necessary.

Then there is also mentioned by the South African Defence Force that one Cloete and one J.P. Opperman who testified in what is now commonly known as the Magnus Malan trial, were also erstwhile members of the Defence Force, were also implicated in this matter, and these two persons we know as a fact, did not receive indemnity against prosecution, but they haven't been notified by the Defence Force either.

It is apparent that they are also mentioned. So those are the facts which I have been asked to place on record, Mr Chairman, on behalf of the Defence Force.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you Mr Booyens. I think we can just put it on record as well, that we have before this Committee seven applications for amnesty.

MR MPSHE: Mr Chairman, may I disturb you a little bit Mr Chairman. May I disturb you before we move to that one, to round up the issue of legal representatives?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, certainly.

MR MPSHE: I have before me Mr Chairman, a letter from the firm Jan Wagenaar, Miller and Du Plessis, the law firm representing the SAPS, but they have indicated to me that they will not attend, but they have given me a letter and the last paragraph of their letter enjoins me to read this into the record, so that the Committee should know of their position.

If the Chair allows me to read the letter into the record.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, you can go ahead.

MR MPSHE: I will hand the copy to the Chair. It is from the firm Wagenaar, Miller and Du Plessis, re amnesty hearing, 6 to 20 April, IFP hit squad. Kindly note the following: (1) the applicants in this matter were members of the so-called Caprivi trainees, this group was thoroughly investigated during 1992 to 1993 by the Goldstone Commission when certain allegations were made inter alia against individual members of the South African Police, who are clients of ours. During 1997 the human rights violations committee also conducted a hearing dealing with the subject, and where we represented amongst others the following individuals, Mr A.J. Vlok, General P.J. Coetzee, General J.V. van der Merwe, Major General J.A.P. Berger, Major General G.N. Erasmus, Major General B. Steyn and Brigadier A. Laas.

Paragraph 3, I have now received the present applications herein and have noted that not one of the above-mentioned clients are specifically mentioned or implicated therein. However, I have been approached by Mr Steenkamp and Mr Peens, who are mentioned in the applications with a request to protect their interest in this regard.

As you have already once again failed to comply with the provision of Section 19(4), we find it impossible to do so in a proper way. I am going to address that one, Mr Chairman, as they are not directly implicated, my instructions are not to appear before you on their behalf, but to put on record that should their rights in any way be infringed upon, we expect to be notified immediately in order for us to respond in an appropriate way.

Some of the applicants herein also apply for amnesty in respect of crimes committed as part of the so-called Black Cats of Ermelo. As you are aware, we represent certain individual Policemen who have in the past, falsely been implicated in this regard.

In the present applications they are not directly implicated, but should that become the position at your hearing, their rights are also specifically reserved. The same applies in respect of my clients mentioned in paragraph 1.2 above. These are the names I have just mentioned.

You are kindly requested to read this letter into the record at the commencement of your hearing on the 6th of April 1998. Signed by Jan Wagenaar.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Mpshe.

Do you have anything to say about it? You said during the course of reading ...

MR MPSHE: Yes, Mr Chairman, there is a sentence here that says as you have obviously once again failed to notify us, this is a very, very untrue statement because myself and the firm, we agreed that both of us will sit down and check if there is anybody implicated and come to an agreement, then issue the said notices. Hence he had to peruse the applications himself and hence he wrote this letter.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. As I said before that letter was read, we have got seven applicants, and in the bundle of documents that has been made available to all of us here, they haven't been numbered, so I think just for convenience purposes, if I could place on record, the numbering of the applicants.

The first applicant will be Mr Dalaqolo Wordsworth Luthuli, the second applicant will be Mr Bekhisiso Alex Khumalo. The third applicant will be David Zweli Dhlamini. The fourth applicant will be Bertwill Bekhi Ndlovu. The fifth applicant will be Romeo Mbuso Mbambo. The sixth applicant will be Brian Quna Mkhize, and the seventh applicant will be Israel Neyoni Hlongwane.

I think it will be convenient if during the course of the proceedings, the applicants could be referred to by making reference to their numbers.

MR STUART: Mr Chairman, by way of opening remark, if I might have an opportunity to mention, last year I appeared on behalf of a number of people before a Human Rights Violations Committee at the same venue and similarly they were submitted with notices that there was a strong likelihood that they would be implicated by witnesses who would testify.

Mr Chairman, if I may mention at this early stage, we have a concern in the sense that the names with which we have been submitted, of people who may become implicated, is significantly shorter than that with which we were previously submitted, and having regard to the documentation which we have, it would appear that a number or persons who I previously represented, are again mentioned, and have not received notification.

I mention this, because we will obviously, if they are implicated, possibly have to obtain instructions from them and assess what manner we will treat it in.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you. Obviously if somebody is implicated who hasn't been given notice, we will have to deal with that when it comes, the Act makes provision for that and we obviously are not going to interfere with any implicated person's rights in so far as this hearing is concerned.

MR HEWIT: Mr Chairman, if I just may add to what those instructing me have said, one of the persons on the list whom we represent is a Mr M.Z. Khumalo. I just want to place on record that all the testimony which we gather is going to be led in this trial, was led against Mr M.Z. Khumalo in a protracted trial where he was acquitted of all the charges which basically will be referred to, or the offences which will be referred to in these hearings.

Although we represent him now, representation of him to a large extent will be academic because although he will be named in these proceedings, he certainly is not in any jeopardy in the light of his acquittal of all the charges concerned. I just want to place that on record so if in our cross-examination of any witnesses, we don't pay much attention to Mr M.Z. Khumalo because - on that evidence Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Hewit. Mr Stuart, with regard to the now numbered applicants, you are appearing for the first applicant, are you ready to proceed?

MR STUART: That is so Mr Chairman, thank you. Perhaps immediately before doing so, if I might respond to my learned friend Mr Hewit in the last statement, of course it is true that Mr M.Z. Khumalo was acquitted of all the charges that were brought against him in the case of S v Msani, commonly known as the Malan trial, it is not true that all the evidence which will be led here, was led there because it wasn't most particularly that of Mr Luthuli, the first applicant.

And secondly, of course the charges in that case were restricted, and the evidence in these proceedings cover a much broader range of incidents and so on, so in my submission it is not simply the case that it is academic, but I am sure that can be dealt with as we go along.

MR HEWIT: I must reply to that Mr Chairman. The charges against the 20 accused in the trial that became known as the Magnus Malan trail, did not only relate to 13 counts of murder in relation to what has also become known as the KwaMakutha massacre, but also involved a conspiracy charge, the planning and conspiracy to commit acts of murder and mayhem in the Province of Natal generally, covered a lengthy period of time, which also covers all the events in Mr Luthuli's statement.

So, we stand by what was stated earlier on that Mr Khumalo has been acquitted of all these events.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry Mr Stuart, just before you start, if I could just make a brief comment. We note from the documentation given to us, that the information contained in the various affidavits submitted by the applicants together with their applications, that - just bear with me - that 56 incidents have been identified and are contained in the schedule.

I am not sure if that contains each and every incident in respect of which all the applicants are intending to apply for amnesty, because in the application form it is merely said in response to the question, in respect of which incidents are you applying for amnesty, it just refers to the affidavit which is - all of them are voluminous excepting in one instance, affidavits.

I would then request when we are dealing with matters that are not involved in actual incidents, or which have already been identified, or which will be identified by those representing the applicants, that if we can keep the evidence of matters outside that, as brief as possible and not go into too much detail.

I don't know if there is any application, because it is not specified, relating for instance to the training of the persons in Caprivi. Now, obviously you will be referring to that, it is quite evident from Mr Luthuli's affidavit, but I would request if possible, to keep the detail out of that and keep it as short as possible without placing any undue hinderance on the presentation of your case, if you could just keep that in mind because I think we have ahead of us a very long hearing and we would like to use our time as sufficiently as possible. Thank you.

MR STUART: Thank you Mr Chairperson. On that, it is my intention after discussion with the first applicant, to restrict the oral testimony to a certain extent and to nevertheless rely on everything which is contained in the statement, the sworn statement which is part of the application.

It is of course true that various charges of conspiracy as well as sedition could arise out of the training in the Caprivi and it is also true that the training in the Caprivi as well as the first applicant's political history, relate very closely to the question of whether he was motivated politically in the subsequent incidents and also to what extent that was part of the programme of any political organisation or former political structure.

But Mr Chairman, certainly my intention is to cover things in a broad sweep.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Stuart, you may commence.

MR STUART: If I might then call the first applicant.

DALAQOLO WORDSWORTH LUTHULI: (sworn states)

MR STUART: Thank you Mr Chairperson. One of the issues which will bear on just how much detail we go into, is just who has an interest in the present proceedings, the position of my client, the first applicant, Mr Luthuli is that if there are people here who have a particular interest, having been affected by particular incidents, or areas, then he would like to deal with those in more detail and rather than others.

Would it be convenient then Mr Chairperson, if we might ask whether there are people here from the areas of firstly Mpumalanga, secondly Claremont and thirdly eSikhawini?

CHAIRPERSON: I think Mr Stuart, as far as possible, obviously if the need arise, we will allow a witness to be recalled if something occurs, but I think that the best approach would be for a witness just to give his testimony, rather than deal with it in a piece meal basis.

Perhaps I could ask here for what it is worth, because I - it is not actually essential that their physical presence be here to make it relevant or less relevant, do you want me to ask the people in the audience?

MR STUART: Yes.

MS KHAMPEPE: Maybe we do not understand the import of your enquiry, as the Chairperson has indicated it is not relevant for people to be present at this kind of enquiry for purposes of giving a testimony of this nature.

We might have missed the import of your enquiry. If you want to further clarify.

MR STUART: Thank you. The motivation behind the enquiry is simply this, that one of the purposes in my submission, of these hearings, is not only the question of technically whether the requirements of amnesty have been met, that could be done behind closed doors, one of the purposes is to facilitate a reconciliation, and the way in which that is best done in the view of my client, is to be able to explain to the affected people, what it is that he did that affected them.

As I have explained, our intention is not to traverse every incident through more than 100 pages of affidavit in detail, but if for example there is a contingent here who have arrived from KwaMakutha because, or rather from Mpumalanga because they have a particular interest in the events that the first applicant was involved in there, then we would traverse those incidents in a little more detail rather than others.

It is not a question of piece meal, it is just a question of fulfilling that additional purpose of these hearings.

We are of course in the Committee's hands in that regard.

CHAIRPERSON: Perhaps if I could ask from the people who are in attendance here, are there any persons here from Mpumalanga region, Woody Glen, yes? And from Claremont? And eSikhawini? Not a great deal, but there are people present from each of the areas mentioned by yourself Mr Stuart. You may proceed.

EXAMINATION BY MR STUART: Thank you Mr Chairperson. Mr Luthuli, you are familiar, are you not, with your affidavit which forms part of your amnesty application?

MR LUTHULI: (No translation)

MR STUART: And Mr Luthuli, do you confirm the contents of that affidavit?

MR LUTHULI: (No translation)

MR STUART: And you rely on all that is set out on that affidavit for this application?

MR LUTHULI: (No translation)

MR STUART: Mr Luthuli, is it right that you are a descendant of Chief Albert Luthuli?

MR LUTHULI: (No translation)

MR STUART: And that your father was a staunch member of the African National Congress?

MR LUTHULI: (No translation)

MR STUART: And that you in turn became a member of the African National Congress and the Umkonto weSizwe in particular?

MR LUTHULI: (No translation)

MR STUART: Will you tell us briefly Mr Luthuli, how it came about that you became part of MK?

MR LUTHULI: (No translation)

MR STUART: Mr Luthuli, excuse me interrupting you, is it right then that following that, you left the country and were trained as a soldier in Umkonto weSizwe?

MR LUTHULI: (No translation)

MR STUART: And that included training at Odessa in the former Soviet Union?

MR LUTHULI: (No translation)

MR STUART: Where were you deployed for MK?

MR LUTHULI: (No translation)

MR STUART: Did you fight in the war to liberate Rhodesia?

MR LUTHULI: (No translation)

MR STUART: And is it right that you were arrested and charged and sentenced?

MR LUTHULI: (No translation)

MR STUART: Where did you serve your sentence?

MR LUTHULI: (No translation)

MR STUART: And who were some of the people with whom you served on Robben Island?

MR LUTHULI: (No translation)

MR STUART: Upon being released from prison, how did it come about that you joined Inkatha?

MR LUTHULI: (No translation) ... at that time there was no enmity between the ANC and Inkatha. The ANC encouraged its members to join Inkatha because its leader was a close person to the ANC.

Therefore whilst we were at Robben Island, when there were discussions about organisations in the (indistinct), Inkatha was not an organisation that we would discuss in detail as an organisation that could become a danger to the ANC. So I can say that it was an organisation that was an ally. When I was released from prison, I arrived home and discovered that my father was a member of Inkatha. I then joined Inkatha as well.

There was no enmity between the ANC and IFP at that time.

MR STUART: Were you and your father members of both, Inkatha and the ANC?

MR LUTHULI: That is true.

MR STUART: Did you have contact with the then banned ANC while you were involved in Inkatha?

MR LUTHULI: That is also true.

MR STUART: And is it right that at some stage, you lost contact with the ANC?

MR LUTHULI: That is correct.

MR STUART: How is that?

MR LUTHULI: When the Boers attacked Lesotho and Swaziland, I then lost contact with the ANC.

MR STUART: When was it that you became very active in Inkatha?

MR LUTHULI: I started in 1985.

MR STUART: And why did you become very active in Inkatha?

MR LUTHULI: At that time, I met other men from Prince Msheni, where they were staying. These men were members of the KwaZulu government or the legislature of KwaZulu and they had been sent to Durban to form a union UWUSA.

They then organised IFP members, who were COSATU members to leave COSATU and join UWUSA which was an ally to IFP objectives.

It was at that time when I really started working for the IFP.

MR STUART: How was it that you came to be the political Commissar of the Caprivi trainees?

MR LUTHULI: When the parliamentary wing of the IFP was formed, some people decided that the trainees couldn't undergo training, without somebody who had experience, somebody who would really see that the training was appropriate.

These men came to me, one of them was Siegfried Bengu, who was a member of MK, but at the time he was a member of the Central Committee of the IFP. He came with Mr Monxo to tell me that I was supposed to go to Ulundi to Mr M.Z. Khumalo.

They discussed with me the reasons for this summons to Ulundi, that there was this para-military wing of the IFP that they were going to form, and they asked me to become the political Commissar of the para-military wing.

MR STUART: What was the purpose of this, what you described at para-military wing?

MR LUTHULI: These men explained that as it was clear that the ANC and Umkonto weSizwe were no longer directing their war activities against the Boers, or the government of the Boers, the IFP was then becoming part of the Boers and they would not be able to protect themselves from the ANC or Umkonto weSizwe, therefore there was a need to form this para-military wing of the IFP.

MR STUART: What was the purpose of the training in the Caprivi?

MR LUTHULI: The main objective of the training was to fight the ANC.

MR STUART: And briefly, Mr Luthuli, what was the nature of the training?

MR LUTHULI: It was exactly like the training I received in the Soviet Union, although this training in the Caprivi was only six months, but it was exactly like the one in Soviet Union.

They were training in urban guerilla warfare and sabotage, kidnapping, torturing, assassination and many other military activities.

MR STUART: You said in your statement that at the end of the period of training, there was a passing out parade at the Caprivi. Tell us about that passing out parade.

MR LUTHULI: When the trainees were completing their training, M.Z. Khumalo came to me and said Baba, the Honourable Chief was going to arrive and he will be with Magnus Malan and they will be coming to the passing out parade.

When the day came, Mr Malan and the Chief came with Brigadier van Niekerk. I then asked why the Chief was not there and I was told that because the Chief had previously been seen with Magnus Malan or if he was seen with Magnus Malan, it would jeopardise his political career.

So Magnus Malan and the Chief ultimately did not arrive.

MR STUART: Just on a point of clarity, Mr Luthuli, who was it that told you about why Chief Buthelezi did not come to the passing out parade?

MR LUTHULI: M.Z. Khumalo.

MR STUART: And at that time, what position did M.Z. Khumalo hold?

MR LUTHULI: At that time he was a Personal Assistant to the President of the IFP. That means he was the closest to the President.

MR STUART: And at that passing out parade, you said that certain parts of the training were demonstrated. Tell us what was demonstrated.

MR LUTHULI: When they completed the training, there was Jerry, a Boer boy, that was a sudu name. He made video recordings that would be used to show the Chief on what was going on at the training.

Like the offensive group which was used to attack, they went and showed us how to for instance, ambush a person and a car, or if you are going to raid a house, how you would do it, or maybe if there was an attack or if they were involved in a confrontational war, how they would do it.

All these demonstrations were taped on video.

MR STUART: On returning from the Caprivi to South Africa, you mention in your statement that you attended a meeting of the Planning Committee. Tell us what was that Committee.

MR LUTHULI: When we returned, we then parted ways because there was no provision for what the trainees would do after they returned.

I was then taken by M.Z. Khumalo who asked me to go with him to a meeting. We went to 121 Battalion. The people whom I remember present there were Brigadier Van Niekerk, Louis Botha from the Special Branch, J.P. and Jerry. The last two men mentioned were also instructors at Caprivi.

What we discussed was that the trainees were back. In what way were they going to work and their safety was also an issue because they would be working covertly. How were they going to be protected?

This was discussed in detail. We then discussed that they should get contra-mobilisation and then we decided that we should open bases for them all over KwaZulu Natal so that they would be working in collaboration with the defensive group that used to pick up all troublesome individuals in the community.

Secondly, the offensive group was supposed to stay in a particular area, because it wasn't supposed to meet with the other groups, because it was only used for attacks.

We found a base for them at Port Dunfort where they stayed. We then discussed that since they had no identification, I was then asked with M.Z. Khumalo to talk to Brigadier Matte, so that identity cards or documents could be made for those trainees.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry to interrupt Mr Luthuli, you say Brigadier Matte, who was he?

MR LUTHULI: Brigadier Matte, at the time was the Head of Security in the Central Committee of the IFP. We went to him as a full member of the IFP.

MR STUART: Did Brigadier Matte also have a position in the KwaZulu Police?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is true. He was in authority in the KwaZulu Police.

MR STUART: At that time, was it intended that the people who had been trained in the Caprivi, would actually become KwaZulu Policemen?

MR LUTHULI: At the time, we were just looking for a way for them to hide. We hadn't discussed whether they would join the KwaZulu Police.

MR STUART: Upon leaving that Planning Committee meeting, how did you feel about the involvement of the SADF and the South African Police Special Branch in the planning and deployment?

MR LUTHULI: We discussed this in detail when we left Mtubatuba with M.Z. Khumalo. I asked if these Boers know everything that the IFP is involved in, whereas the IFP doesn't know what they do on their own.

Don't you think this will ... (tape ends) ... let's work with them because they help us financially and it is also difficult to run away from them because we had already discussed this matter previously.

Because we had asked them to train the trainees in Israel, but the Boers on hearing this, informed us that they knew and they told us that they could help us with the training, so he said to me that we should work with them for the time being because there was no other way.

MR STUART: How did you feel about that?

MR LUTHULI: I wasn't happy about it, and I expressed this unhappiness by not going to other meetings, subsequent meetings. M.Z. will then attend and report to me, but I did not physically go to subsequent meetings of this nature.

At 121 I was asked or requested to become the Political Commissar, a person who would be responsible for the political side and I would be working with the contra-mobilisation, but at the meeting, it was discovered that because the Commander of the Caprivi trainees was not physically well, and he was not respected by the Caprivi trainees, I was then asked to take on both positions, Commander and Political Commissar.

I then started to be Commander of the Caprivi trainees.

MR STUART: Who did you report to as Commander and Political Commissar?

MR LUTHULI: The closest person to me was M.Z. Khumalo.

MR STUART: How regularly did you have contact with him after that?

MR LUTHULI: We were usually together. We didn't spend a lot of time apart.

MR STUART: Did the Planning Committee, to your knowledge, meet or continue to meet after that first meeting?

MR LUTHULI: That is true. They did meet.

MR STUART: You were not part of it?

MR LUTHULI: No.

MR STUART: Is it right that the trainees were then brought back together again for a welcoming home or welcoming back ceremony?

MR LUTHULI: That is true.

MR STUART: Where was that ceremony?

MR LUTHULI: It was at Hlongwane.

MR STUART: Who attended that ceremony?

MR LUTHULI: We went there to be welcomed by the President of the IFP, Dr M.G. Buthelezi.

MR STUART: So did he attend?

MR LUTHULI: That is so.

MR STUART: Did he speak to everyone?

MR LUTHULI: He addressed everyone.

MR STUART: What did he say?

MR LUTHULI: When we arrived, it was shortly after the arrest of some MK members who were laying ambush for him between Nongoma and Mahlabatini. He talked about that incident, telling everyone that the ANC was after him, after him, that they wanted to kill him.

He said that he was hopeful that after our return, he would be protected. Those were his words. He said a lot of things, but he said that he was happy that we had returned and that we were there to protect him.

MR STUART: Did he say anything in addition about the role of the trainees on their return?

MR LUTHULI: No, he didn't explain.

MR STUART: Did you speak to him personally?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, for several times.

MR STUART: What did he say to you?

MR LUTHULI: We did not discuss the training or he didn't talk about training.

MR STUART: What did he talk to you about?

MR LUTHULI: It was the matter of the ANC plotting to kill him and how the ANC and the IFP were at each other, the enmity between them, and the reason for the IFP for not working with the ANC because the ANC wanted to use the IFP as its internal wing, whilst he wanted to use Inkatha as an organisation that would use peaceful means of resistance - the ones that were used by the old ANC.

MR STUART: You have said that you were initially deployed in Mpumalanga, this is the period 1986, 1987. What was the condition in Mpumalanga at that time of the IFP?

MR LUTHULI: When we returned from Caprivi, there was an unpleasant situation in Mpumalanga. The situation dealt mainly with contradicting policy, the one of violence and peaceful resistance.

MS KHAMPEPE: Sorry Mr Dalaqolo, whose policies are you referring to here?

MR LUTHULI: I am referring to the policies of the IFP that were contradictory because they would talk about peace, but covertly they would be speaking about violence.

So there was that contradiction between the members of the IFP. There was already violence in Mpumalanga but the person responsible for that was Zakhile Mkehle, an IFP member. He was also a member of the Central Committee of the IFP and Chairman of the IFP, Mpumalanga branch.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry Mr Luthuli, could you just repeat his name please?

MR LUTHULI: Zakhile Mkehle. This contradiction was an internal struggle of the IFP. There were members who were not in favour but Zakhile Mkehle would say that it should be done.

At that time the IFP used to attack UDF members, so there was also this struggle within the IFP from members who were not in favour of killing UDF members.

MR STUART: On finding that situation in the IFP in Mpumalanga, what was your role?

MR LUTHULI: When I arrived, I tried to reconcile this two groups. The one supporting Zakhile Mkehle and the one supporting Mrs Qolo.

Unfortunately I stayed in Mrs Qolo's side. This side had more members and those people who used to run away from violence stricken areas, would come to this side.

When I tried to reconcile this two sides, I got a message that I was required at Ulundi, together with Mrs Qolo. We then went to Ulundi, we found Zakhile Mkehle already there.

The President of the IFP asked me the question is it true that you let my people be killed by the UDF, you are telling them not to defend themselves, because Zakhile has said that you have brought this to Hammersdale, that people shouldn't defend themselves.

I then explained that I am trying to build up the IFP in Mpumalanga because its image was not good, it was really bad. They were involved in very bad activities, and I mentioned those.

He then asked if it is true and Mr Mkehle admitted that some of the members did do this or were undisciplined. So the President said I was right, and instructed us to go back and fix things. We then came back in order to fix matters.

I then organised meetings, ward by ward, trying to install a sense of discipline in the IFP, that if they did corrupt activities, they wouldn't really be able to convince people to join them.

If they were involved in corruption, people wouldn't be able to join them.

MR STUART: What activities did you regard as legitimate activities for defending the IFP in that area?

MR LUTHULI: Can you please repeat the question.

MR STUART: You have said that you had to dissuade people from corrupt activities, I am asking you what activities were legitimate or proper activities to defend the IFP in that area?

MR LUTHULI: I can say that if maybe there is a boy in one house, who is a member of the UDF, then people thought that they should go and destroy the entire house.

In the evenings people would be forced to go to camps, going to places going to Ngoze, if the elders of that house refused to let their children go out at night, that house would have to be attacked or if maybe that house is suspected that maybe the members are likely to be UDF members, then they would be attacked.

Sometimes they would be attacked because they are economically well off, maybe people just want to steal from the house. I was just trying to fix such things.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Stuart, when it is a convenient time, we are informed that tea is ready, so we can take the tea adjournment, but - would this be a convenient time or are you still on this point?

MR STUART: I have just one further question on this point Mr Chairperson, thank you. The meeting that you have spoken about Mr Luthuli, where you say the President of the IFP was there and he spoke to you and Mr Mkehle, what meeting was that? Who else was there?

MR LUTHULI: The entire Cabinet was there.

MR STUART: The Cabinet of KwaZulu?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR STUART: Thank you Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: We will now take a short adjournment for tea, let's say 15 minutes.

COMMISSION ADJOURNS

DALAQOLO WORDSWORTH LUTHULI: (still under oath)

EXAMINATION BY MR STUART: (continued) Thank you Mr Chairperson. Mr Luthuli, you have told us about the various practises that you found in Mpumalanga which you found to be improper and that you wanted to root out. What tactics did you embark upon with the Inkatha people there, to strengthen Inkatha?

MR LUTHULI: I can say that when I arrived there, Inkatha youth members used to act like they were entitled to killing people. There were cars that were known to the community that if you happen to see that car, you would be killed.

Or if there was an attack, they would act that they had the legitimate right to do so. To such an extent that people would be able to identify the people who say killed or burnt down their houses.

I then decided that it would be better to do this operation or to carry out this operations in a covert manner and most instances, they would boast that even the Police were members of the IFP.

They wouldn't tell them that they shouldn't carry out the activities in the open. They thought that they could do anything and everything in public and in broad daylight.

I was then advising them or advised them to do things in more appropriate ways.

MR STUART: Do I understand you to be saying that there were attacks which you encouraged, but that they happened at night?

MR LUTHULI: That is true yes, because I was trying to teach them not to do things openly.

MR STUART: And was this strategy discussed at that meeting of the Cabinet which you told us about?

MR LUTHULI: No. I went to the Cabinet meeting because Mkehle had complained that I do not allow for people to be killed.

But I did not agree with the manner in which it was done.

MR STUART: I am now going to move on Mr Luthuli, to some events in Claremont. How was it that you came to work with Mr Yamile, Samuel Yamile of Claremont?

MR LUTHULI: It happened that Yamile was attacked with hand grenades. I was then called by M.Z. Khumalo who said I should go to Claremont urgently to protect Mr Yamile.

Mr Yamile would then explain to me whom he suspected to be responsible for this attack. I left Ulundi and went to Claremont.

When I was already in Claremont, some Caprivi trainees arrived. They were ferried by kombi's. The reason for this was that Mr Yamile owned certain properties that had to be guarded.

MR STUART: What was Mr Yamile's position in Claremont?

MR LUTHULI: At the time he was the Chairman of the IFP in Claremont.

MR STUART: Did he have a position in the KwaZulu government at that time?

MR LUTHULI: At that time he was not yet the Deputy Minister, he was just an MP.

MR STUART: Was it identified for you who was alleged to be behind the attack on Yamile?

MR LUTHULI: The main person that he mentioned was Mr Zazi Khuzwayo. He mentioned a few others, but he seemed to have a main problem with Mr Khuzwayo and that they had made many attempts on his life, but never succeeding.

He wanted Mr Khuzwayo to be killed first.

MR STUART: Was this discussed with M.Z. Khumalo?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is true. When I went to Mr Yamile, I had previously spoken to M.Z. Khumalo to discuss why I was being sent there, that is to protect Mr Yamile to give him guards who would protect his properties, because they were being burnt and he was not free to move in the area. He had to be escorted so that he could move around and address meetings.

MR STUART: Will you tell us briefly about the murder of Zazi Khuzwayo and your involvement in it?

MR LUTHULI: The death of Zazi Khuzwayo was initiated by M.Z. Khumalo. He sent me to meet Mr Yamile. Yamile would then give me the names of all the people who had to be killed in Claremont, but the most urgent person who had to be killed, was Zazi Khuzwayo.

When I arrived at Yamile's house, I already knew that the person to be killed most urgently was Zazi. When I arrived there, Yamile complained mostly about Zazi Khuzwayo. He said that if we could kill Mr Khuzwayo, it would be easy to convert Claremont into an IFP area.

MR STUART: Who was involved with you, in the incident to kill Zazi Khuzwayo?

MR LUTHULI: People who murdered Zazi Khuzwayo were Pumlani Mshengo, Nosboo Bengu. Alex Khumalo and Wela Quno were to guard and assist those who were supposed to kill Zazi.

The guns that were used by the two Nosboo Bengu and Pumlani Mshengo were given to them by me. I gave them 38 Special's. The reason for this was that they do not leave empty cartridges on the scene that could be traced by the Police.

Alex Khumalo and Wela were given 9 mm pistols and they had to stand guard.

Yamile then had to - because we didn't know Zazi Khuzwayo, the person who knew Zazi was Yamile. Yamile then gave us somebody by the name of Masizi Hlope. This person knew Zazi Khuzwayo well.

When he recognised Khuzwayo, he would inform those who were supposed to kill him, of his whereabouts. We planned this at Yamile's house. Then it happened Masizi got into the car driven by Yamile's son, Hleganpani. The reason for this was that we didn't know Claremont well.

Hleganpani was the only person who knew the area well. When they left Yamile's house, it was Hleganpani driving. Masizi Hlope was going to identify or point out Zazi Khuzwayo.

They then left ...

MR STUART: Did you go with them?

MR LUTHULI: No, I remained at Yamile's house.

MR STUART: What do you understand happened?

MR LUTHULI: Two people went into Zazi Khuzwayo's property. I was told by the people who murdered him. I then thereafter heard that the two people that I have already mentioned, went into the shop and killed him.

MR STUART: What further involvement did you have in that incident?

MR LUTHULI: After they killed Mr Khuzwayo, they fled to Hammersdale. I received a telephone call from Hammersdale to leave the area. I then told them to remain where they were. The reason for this was that I was apprehensive that when the UDF heard that Mr Khuzwayo had been killed, they will retaliate and attack Yamile's house.

I then went to fetch them and returned with them. But Nosboo Bengu and Pumlani Mashengo were left at Hammersdale because it could happen that they were seen because they had not camouflaged or hidden their faces, so I advised them to remain at Hammersdale, to hide there and not to go to Claremont.

MR STUART: Mr Luthuli, moving on, there was a time when you went to the home of Nkosi Nqobo in the Mafunzi area. Why did you go there?

MR LUTHULI: I received instructions from M.Z. Khumalo that chiefs or amakozi from the Pietermaritzburg area were complaining that they had a problem, that they were being attacked by the UDF.

So then I was asked to send Caprivi trainees to the area. I went around (indistinct) Ntombela's area as well as to Nkosi Nqobo's area.

MR STUART: What was the difficulty that the people had with Nkosi Nqobo?

MR LUTHULI: When I arrived at Nkosi Nqobo, I found a team that had been sent from Ulundi, it was headed by Nkosi Kaula. There was also another hit squad, headed by Captain Hlengwa of the KwaZulu Police that we already found in the area.

Therefore the trainees that I had gone with, were those belonging to the contra mobilisation. Captain Hlengwa and Captain Kanyela who headed the BSI in KwaMashu were heads of the BSI of the KwaZulu Police.

Therefore the relationship between myself and them, was not hidden. When I found them at Nkosi Nqobo's house, I realised that there was a problem. Nkosi Nqobo was under pressure, being questioned why his area was an UDF area.

He was then asked to call a meeting. This is the discussion that went on in Nkosi Nqobo's house where there were MP's from Ulundi, headed by Nkosi Kaula.

I distinctly remember (indistinct) Ndlovu being there, (indistinct) Bengu was also there and others. Therefore the inkozi was told to call a meeting of the community. Those who did not attend the meeting, would have to leave the area and move to areas which were controlled by the comrades.

I realised that the inkozi was in trouble because he was put in a situation where he didn't really belong in. He was being forced to call a meeting.

Those who didn't attend these meetings, would be killed by hit squad, the Hlengwa hit squad in the night. In Mr Hlengwa's hit squad there was one Caprivi trainee, Bigboy Ndlovu who was born and bred in Pietermaritzburg.

He would take the group - I remember it was one reported that there was a Counsellor who had refused to come to a meeting and he had made it known that he was an UDF member. At that time, Hlengwa was asked if he understood what this Counsellor was saying.

He then told his group to go with the induna to go attack this Counsellor. They then did so in the night, and came to report the following morning that they had done so.

I have forgotten the Councillor's name.

MR STUART: Did this group of Hlengwa attack, conduct other attacks as well?

MR LUTHULI: This was a very active group in Pietermaritzburg.

MR STUART: At that time when you were there?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, at that time.

MR STUART: Were you involved in those attacks?

MR LUTHULI: No, I was not.

MR STUART: What was your role when you were staying there at Nkosi Nqobo's place?

MR LUTHULI: Because I had come with the contra mobilisation group, it was to accompany the Nkosi when he went to meetings in different districts.

Then the contra mobilisation would educate the youth about Inkatha and at the same time, they will train the youth on how to protect themselves and in the handling of guns so that they could assist the Nkosi when we left.

MR STUART: Were Hlengwa's group involved in the seizing of cattle?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is true. They would use the name Amaqabanyana to refer to this cattle.

This referred to cattle that were seized from UDF areas. They would collect this cattle and bring them to the Nkosi. When we were at the Nkosi's house, we used to slaughter this cattle.

MR STUART: What was the political objective of such activity?

MR LUTHULI: It was to show the strength of the IFP in the area and to discourage people from joining the UDF, to encourage them to join the IFP.

MR STUART: Mr Luthuli, I am going to take you back to Mpumalanga now in a later period, in the period when you were there in 1987, 1988.

What was the situation there at that time between Inkatha on the one hand, and UDF/ANC on the other?

MR LUTHULI: I can say the situation was bad, but the people who were involved in the violence at the time was Inkatha.

MR STUART: Were there some areas that were controlled by one grouping, and the other areas controlled by another grouping?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, there were areas that were controlled by the UDF and areas that were controlled by the IFP. But the ones that were controlled by the IFP were very few. The reason being that people were fleeing the area, fleeing the violence.

They were choosing to become UDF members instead of joining the IFP which was involved in killing, kidnapping, rape, stealing, burning and the shooting of, killing of people in broad daylight.

Those activities led to the fleeing of a lot of people from the area, to go and join the UDF.

MR STUART: What was your role when you returned there in 1987, 1988?

MR LUTHULI: Firstly I was supposed to clean up in the IFP, to help them remove themselves from those activities.

At Mpumalanga at the time, the UDF was not yet involved in bad activities that they were carrying out in other areas. Therefore there was no reason for the IFP to react in the same manner that they would react to in other areas.

Therefore my role was to try and regroup or rebuild the organisation.

MR STUART: There was a time when there was an attack on the house of Walter Ntalani. Do you recall that?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I do. Mr Ntalani was one of the Caprivi trainees.

MR STUART: Was someone killed in that attack?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, his sister.

MR STUART: And who did you think perpetrated that attack?

MR LUTHULI: It was the UDF because they did this in broad daylight, then they were seen and identified.

MR STUART: What did you do about that attack?

MR LUTHULI: I spoke to other Caprivi trainees who stayed near the area where Mr Ntalani's sister was killed, that they should go and retaliate urgently, because the people were known.

One house was also mentioned. Other houses belonging to UDF members, were also mentioned. I remember Dan Molefe, Topia, Vivian Qobane, Ntalani, Zweli Dhlamini and other Caprivi trainees, Sibisi and one Qolo boy and others that I cannot recall correctly.

MR STUART: What did you do with them?

MR LUTHULI: I collected them one night so that they could attack the house that had been already mentioned. A person who knew that house was Walter Ntalani.

On our way to that house, we don't know what happened, but Dan Molefe - he actually fired the gun that he had with him.

We were then not sure whether to proceed.

MR STUART: Just to clarify, there was a lull in the translation. Were you saying that he accidentally fired the gun?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR STUART: And then what transpired?

MR LUTHULI: We continued although we were conscious that the shots had already been heard. When we arrived at the house, it was pointed out to us and the boys threw petrol bombs at the house.

Some people came out of the house running, they were shot at, we don't know whether they were killed or not. I then said that we should then proceed. I left the matter with David Ndlamini, Sibisi Nqolo for them to proceed.

They later told me that there were other houses that they attacked, although I don't have details of those attacks.

MR STUART: Were you, yourself, involved in other attacks in Mpumalanga at that period?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, there are many.

MR STUART: And they were in one way or the other, similar to the attack you have told us about?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR STUART: There came a time when you were arrested by Detective Warrant Officer Van Vuuren of the South African Police in Pietermaritzburg, do you recall that?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I do.

MR STUART: How did that come about?

MR LUTHULI: A Policeman by the name of Nkupeni Gumedi came to me. He was staying at Bopela. He said that there was an IFP member called Qwamanda who stayed in an area called Sangonya. He told me that this person was dead and he had been killed by the UDF.

They had removed him from a bus on his way to or from work, I cannot remember. These people were known or their whereabouts were known. He asked me to assist him with equipment.

I then gave him equipment, although I cannot remember how many AK47's I gave him, short guns as well, 9 mm pistols. I gave him those weapons.

They then went and carried out this operation. At the scene, AK47 empty cartridges were found. Investigators then went to Zakhile Mkehle and asked for the AK that was used in the attack to be thrown away somewhere so that they could pick it up and report it.

This Policeman came to me and asked me to give the AK that I had given to the people who had carried out the murders at Sangonya.

They told me that they had been informed by Zakhile Mkehle. I was surprised because Zakhile had told me that Van Vuuren's group were members of the IFP.

How did it come about that they were now asking me about AK47's? Our discussion became tense to the point that they told me that they know that I am an MK member and that they knew that the weapons that I was using, belonged to MK.

Then I told them that I knew these people as members of the IFP. I told them that I had left Umkonto weSizwe a long time ago and the guns that they were talking about, belonged to the IFP.

They asked me to prove what I was saying. I took them to M.Z. Khumalo in Ulundi. After having spoken to Zakhile, Zakhile said that I should go with them to Ulundi. When we arrived at Ulundi, on our way there we had picked up Fourie who was in the KwaZulu Police, either at Umlazi or KwaMashu and he accompanied us.

When all this happened, I was already arrested. When we arrived at Ulundi, M.Z. Khumalo told them that we were in a war situation and that the AK47 belonged to him but he wouldn't give the guns to them.

He told them that the guns were not with him, and he wouldn't give them to the Police. The Police said that they would keep me in custody, when he brought the AK47, then they would release me because I had given the guns to the boys.

Those boys had already confessed that the person who had given them the guns, was (indistinct). Then we came back, and I was detained.

MR STUART: Were you subsequently released on bail?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I was.

MR STUART: Did you hear about that charge again later?

MR LUTHULI: No, that was the end of the whole crime.

MR STUART: There was a time when you were sent into hiding by the Planning Committee, do you remember that?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I do.

MR STUART: Were you called to a meeting of the Planning Committee?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is true.

MR STUART: Where was that meeting?

MR LUTHULI: The meeting was in Durban, in one of the hotels although I cannot remember the name of the hotel.

M.Z. Khumalo, Louis Botha of the Special Branch, Van Niekerk, JP and Kevin were present. It was discussed that because the trail was not going well, or this charge was not good, I wouldn't go back to report at Webber Police station as per bail arrangements.

I was to be taken into hiding. In the meantime they would be trying to destroy this charge, to get rid of the charge.

MR STUART: What did they fear would happen if the charge against you persisted?

MR LUTHULI: It would emerge that the IFP possessed AK47's, that would lead to the disclosure of the Caprivi training.

MR STUART: Whereabout did you go into hiding?

MR LUTHULI: I was taken into hiding in the mountains at a place called Catkin Peak, towards Escort, in the mountains of Lesotho.

There was a base that was controlled by the Military Intelligence. At this base I found the following people, the Lesotho Liberation Army that was trained there, but I was going to go under cover as a person from Rhodesia, Ndabele.

MR STUART: Were you subsequently moved to another camp?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I was removed and taken to another base, Umkozi.

MR STUART: How long were you there approximately?

MR LUTHULI: I do not remember correctly, but it was a few months.

MR STUART: Were there other people there who were also in hiding from the Police?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, there were.

MR STUART: Who were amongst them?

MR LUTHULI: There were those involved in the case, the (indistinct) case and Nuni Hlongwane. There was also Wela Nqono and others that were in hiding or were involved in crimes.

MR STUART: Was Zweli Ndlamini there as well?

MR LUTHULI: Zweli Ndlamini came when I was already there.

MR STUART: Whose camp was this Umkozi camp?

MR LUTHULI: This camp was built by the Military Intelligence, by the owner of the camp was M.Z. Khumalo.

The Commander was Captain Langeni.

MR STUART: What was the purpose of the camp?

MR LUTHULI: It was a base for the Caprivi trainees, where they would collect and then they would be dispersed to different areas.

But people who were at the camp were the contra mobilisation, and the defensive group. The offensive group had its own base at Port Dunfort, that is Empangeni.

MR STUART: During the period 1989, 1990 you say in your statement that you returned to Mpumalanga, do you remember that?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I do.

MR STUART: What was the situation in Mpumalanga then between the IFP and ANC?

MR LUTHULI: The situation was quite bad because Zakhile Mkehle had been killed. There was a vacuum that was left open.

M.Z. Khumalo said I should go and assist there, because the IFP was being wiped out in the area.

MR STUART: What were your objectives there?

MR LUTHULI: It was to rebuild the IFP by trying to control the attacks, to regain the places or the area that had been taken by the UDF.

MR STUART: Did you have contact at that time, with Military Intelligence?

MR LUTHULI: No, I did not. When I arrived, the first person I met was Sipho Mlaba. When I went to his house, there were some men that I didn't know.

He explained to me that these men were soldiers and were given to him to be his body guards.

MR STUART: What was Sipho Mlaba's position at that time?

MR LUTHULI: He was the Chairman of One North Branch.

MR STUART: Unit One Branch North of Mpumalanga?

MR LUTHULI: Of the IFP, yes.

MR STUART: You were starting to tell us about these soldiers that you met there, who were they?

MR LUTHULI: When I talked to them, I discovered that all of them were under the Military Intelligence. They used to guard certain areas. I will mention those that I remember, Sipho Mlaba's house, Mkehle's house, and also at Ward 7, some Policeman's house which, whose name I cannot recall now.

They used to guard those areas. Sipho then told me that he had been informed that I was coming and then the person in authority, had requested a meeting at Pola Poni. I then went to meet this person.

When we got there, he introduced himself as Major Paul Berry.

MR STUART: Do you know if that is his real name?

MR LUTHULI: I am not sure whether that is his real name. They tried to explain that he knew M.Z. Khumalo and he knew about our training at Caprivi.

He was laying a background to show that he was a close person to the IFP. When we left that meeting, I told Sipho Mlaba or I asked him how he got involved with this people.

He then told me that the people came to him, they were with Zakhile Mkehle and they told him that they were going to guard him or protect him. He didn't enquire where they were coming from or who they were.

Paul Berry explained that he was trying to collaborate with us because the situation was bad in Mpumalanga.

I would have to help him or he would help me, if there was an area I wanted to attack so that he could inform his colleagues in the SAP before any attack was carried out.

MR STUART: How did you feel at that time about this involvement with Military Intelligence?

MR LUTHULI: At the time, I did not really care because I had seen the involvement between the Military Intelligence and the IFP.

I just had to accept and participate.

MR STUART: At one time, you were involved in planning an attack on a shack area called R25, do you remember that?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I remember that.

MR STUART: Did you see Major Paul Berry in connection with that attack?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, we went to him and we told him that we wanted to attack R25. This area was (indistinct) in Georgedale, from where UDF attacks would be launched and they would attack Sipho Mlaba's area.

We had already identified it as the safe house of the UDF. We told Paul Berry that we were going to attack this area.

He would have to remove the Police and the SADF personnel as usual. He then told us that some of his men were there and he would have to remove them first, before we got into the area.

MR STUART: What did he mean by some of his men were there, was he referring to SAP and SADF?

MR LUTHULI: He meant that there were others who were like the guards for Sipho Mlaba, belonging to the Military Intelligence.

MR STUART: What were they doing there?

MR LUTHULI: Can I expantiate a little bit, because I cannot answer the question briefly. When Paul Berry told us that he had to remove his personnel first, I asked him that I thought that we had a good relationship, what did he mean when he said he had his own people there?

What were they doing there, because those were the people who were responsible for attacking us. He said that the strategy that they were employing is that in an area where they identified Inkatha as being weak, and the UDF as being strong, they used to try to remove the IFP that was present in the area.

And then where the IFP was strong, they would try to remove the UDF. The strategy assisted them in monitoring the area because in an area where there were these two groups simultaneously, it became difficult to monitor the area.

I then told Mlaba that we should let him do as he says. When we were at Mlaba's house, I then said to him that it is clear that the war is not just between the IFP and the ANC. I told him that from what the Major had been saying, it is clear that the Military Intelligence was behind the attacks.

They were responsible for killing the members of the ANC or the IFP or the UDF. In the process they were using us, to kill each other.

I then advised him that we should go speak to the UDF leadership, because we had heard that we are being destroyed by the Military Intelligence.

We then did so. By then we embarked on a peace initiative.

MR STUART: Mr Luthuli, if you will just give the Interpreter time to keep up with you. In what way did you embark on a peace initiative?

MR LUTHULI: The people who were responsible for the initiative, were Mr Mbambo from the IFP who had a funeral parlour in the area.

And his friend Boy Maqinga Majola, those are the people who started the peace initiative because they were friend.

MR STUART: Was his friend from the ANC/UDF camp?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so. Through their discussions, we told Mbambo that he should keep Majola with him, because we were also wanting to talk to him. Whilst they were busy with discussions, we also arrived. Majola was surprised to see us there but he trusted me because he is actually an uncle of mine.

He asked me if we were there to kill him and I told him that we were there to discuss or to add on to the discussions, and he complained that he was the only one from the ANC or the UDF camp, but we explained ourselves.

He then said that he should go and consult his colleagues. He did try, although it was difficult because some of the people were not prepared to accept this initiative.

But Sipho Mlaba and Michek Radebe managed to carry this through, although it was difficult, but they managed to carry the initiative through.

MR STUART: What was the attitude of the IFP structures outside of Mpumalanga to that peace process?

MR LUTHULI: It was very bad, because IFP members from the IFP - the people who were half ANC members and half IFP members, and those were called Inqaqa.

MR STUART: Did Sipho Mlaba have to address a conference on this?

MR LUTHULI: Yes. I remember about this peace initiative. He, Sipho Mlaba played a dual role.

He will speak peace at the top, but at the grassroots they will be speaking war. He was not happy about the initiative. I can say that he found himself in great difficulty, because when the leaders of the IFP talked peace, but when you carried out peace initiatives they would not agree with you, or they would oppose you.

You would then be in trouble, because you wouldn't really know what was expected from you.

The peace initiative in Mpumalanga was organised by the Mpumalanga community because they were tired of killing each other. That is the reason why the initiative succeeded, not really because the IFP showed its commitment or encourage Mlaba to pursue the peace process.

There was a time when a meeting was called, where the President of the IFP was called, and Mlaba was then asked to explain what was going on in Mpumalanga.

He was asked to explain what the peace initiative was about when people were being killed because there was an uneven situation.

He was being questioned because there were areas that were still under violence.

MR STUART: One of those areas was eSikhawini, do you agree with that?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I do.

MR STUART: What was your involvement subsequent to the peace in Mpumalanga in the violence in eSikhawini initially?

MR LUTHULI: After the peace initiative in Mpumalanga, M.Z. removed me from there and said that because there had been peace, there are still areas that were under seize, therefore I had to go and try to fix things in those areas, like eSikhawini, Inkatha was being wiped out, therefore I should go there to assist.

MR STUART: What did you do?

MR LUTHULI: I went to eSikhawini. There was a rally at which an incident occurred. I arrived there late. When I arrived, houses were on fire, people were running in every direction.

I managed to get to the grounds where the rally was being held.

When I got off the car, I met Prince Gideon Zulu. If he could, he would have beaten me, because he was extremely angry, but I didn't know what was going on.

He asked me why I was arriving so late and said they were being attacked by the comrades and were not there to protect them.

He told me that there should be a meeting to solve the situation in eSikhawini. I then tried to contact other Caprivi trainees in the area, to enquire about what had happened.

MR STUART: Before you go on, what position did Prince Gideon Zulu have at that time?

MR LUTHULI: At the time he was already a Minister, although I don't remember what position he held.

MR STUART: You said that Prince Gideon Zulu said there must be a meeting to discuss the situation, did that meeting take place?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, the meeting took place.

MR STUART: What transpired?

MR LUTHULI: People who were present at the meeting, that I recall, were Bebebeyela, the Mayor, Mrs Mbuyasi, Mr Mkhize, Nkosi Mtaba and others from the leadership in eSikhawini.

MR STUART: What position did Mrs Mbuyasi have at that time?

MR LUTHULI: She was a member of the community of the IFP and a member of the Womens' Brigade of the IFP.

MR STUART: What was discussed at that meeting?

MR LUTHULI: Prince Gideon Zulu spoke first about Captain - I forget his surname, but he headed the Riot Unit in the ZP at eSikhawini. I will remember his surname, it was Captain Masinga.

He said you see this donkey, Captain Masinga must die because the situation is what it is in eSikhawini because of him. The comrades are doing this, because of him. At the time, he was looking at me directly.

I then said, I hear you, I will try to fulfil your wish, but you must give me time to plan this properly. I told him it is going to take a lot of time. I subsequently tried to identify people that I could use from the Caprivi trainees that were in the area.

At the time the Caprivi trainees were now members of the KwaZulu Police. The person I thought of first, was Zena Mkhize. I thought that I will contact him first, and see if we can discuss this because he was already a Policeman at the time.

I tried to contact him, and I got hold of him. I asked him if he was a Policeman or an Inkatha member. He said he was both. I told him that Masinga was causing a problem, Prince Gideon had ordered for him to be killed.

When I told him this, I had already heard that Zena Mkhize was a close friend of Captain Masinga. He said I should give him time to contact some people, but he wasn't sure whom to contact because most of the trainees were now drunkards. I told him that I would also use some of my own guys.

I asked him to put Zweli Ndlamini and Banyoni in the group that he would be organising.

MR STUART: Banyoni, are you referring to Hlongwane?

MR LUTHULI: That is right, Israel Hlongwane. It was clear that he knew this people. There was another meeting shortly thereafter, held at the eSikhawini hall.

This matter was also discussed there, that there should be people that I should use to assist. Prince Gideon then told me that there were boys from Johannesburg, sent by Themba Xhosa that would arrive in the area.

There was another meeting that was supposed to take place in a few days, in that hall - oh, sorry, the same meeting. I then discovered that there were boys that were coming to come from Johannesburg that were supposed to help in the eSikhawsini area.

MR STUART: Did this group then form the basis for the eSikhawini hit squad?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is true.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Stuart, when it is a convenient time we can take the lunch adjournment.

MR STUART: Thank you Mr Chairperson. And were they also known as the eZipokhi?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that was the name that was given to them, because they used to operate in the night.

MR STUART: What does that mean?

MR LUTHULI: It means people who work under the cover of darkness.

MR STUART: Thank you Mr Chairperson, that will be all for now.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. We will now adjourn for the lunch adjournment.

COMMISSION ADJOURNS

ON RESUMPTION

CHAIRPERSON: I think if we can just wait for all the applicants to get into the hall. Thank you, Mr Stuart, you may continue.

DALAQOLO WORDSWORTH LUTHULI: (still under oath)

EXAMINATION BY MR STUART: (cont)

Thank you Mr Chairperson. Mr Luthuli, you have spoken just before the long adjournment to the formation of the eSikhawini hit squad, and you will know from the applications of some of the other applicants in these proceedings, that they deal with many incidents that they were involved in. You are familiar with that?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I am.

MR STUART: After the formation of that hit squad, who had control of their activities from day to day or from week to week?

MR LUTHULI: The person who was the Commander was Captain Langeni but they were working under the eSikhawini leadership, where it was Mrs Mbuyasi, Prince Gideon Zulu and Bebebeyela who were in charge.

MR STUART: Were you involved on an ongoing basis with that grouping?

MR LUTHULI: No, I was not. I only had the responsibility of building the group up.

MR STUART: It came about that in 1991 you gave testimony to the Goldstone Commission, is that right?

MR LUTHULI: That is true.

MR STUART: With whom did you plan what you would say at the Goldstone Commission?

MR LUTHULI: The people I spoke to were M.Z. Khumalo, M. Armzemela who was the Secretary of the KwaZulu legislative assembly, Mr Mkhize, those are the names that I remember.

MR STUART: The Commission was investigating the allegations that appeared in the Weekly Mail as it was then called, about the Caprivi training?

MR LUTHULI: That is true.

MR STUART: What did you decide about how you would respond to those allegations?

MR LUTHULI: I decided that we should deny all these allegations. We were not supposed to admit to anything.

We were supposed to deny that there was ever training that was received by the trainees from the Eastern Block countries. We were supposed only to mention that they were being trained as part of the Police Force.

MR STUART: Was that true that they were trained only to be part of the Police Force?

MR LUTHULI: No, it was not.

MR STUART: Who encouraged you to take this stance in the Goldstone hearings?

MR LUTHULI: The IFP because Mr M.Z. Khumalo was the one who was very close to the IFP President.

MR STUART: You are of course aware that what you said there was not the truth, why did you not tell the truth before Goldstone?

MR LUTHULI: That is true. What I said at the Goldstone Commission were blatant lies. It was clearly indicated that we should tell all sorts of lies so that nobody should know the truth as to what was happening and therefore I still remember also that they also asked me at the Goldstone Commission, whether I knew Yamile and I said no, I have never seen him at all.

MR STUART: You have subsequently come in this application and indeed before this application, to tell a different story about what happened in Caprivi and subsequently. Why is it that at that time, of the Goldstone Commission, you could not tell the proper story?

MS KHAMPEPE: We had a problem, we did not get any interpretation of what the witness has just said.

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct. I could not have divulged the truth because I would have been killed.

MR STUART: Sorry, where were you living at that time?

MR LUTHULI: I was living at Ulundi.

MR STUART: And who were you scared would kill you?

MR LUTHULI: The IFP.

MR STUART: Subsequent to that time, some members of eSikhawini hit squad were arrested, are you familiar with that?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR STUART: How did it come about that they were arrested?

MR LUTHULI: I discovered this as I was told by Captain Langeni that some members have been arrested and that the one that was still at large was Zena Mkhize.

They then asked me to go and speak to him because they thought we should take him into hiding. That is exactly what I did. He was at Nqutu if I am not mistaken, at Nqutu Police station.

I then told him that he was being wanted and we thought that he should go into hiding, but you are wanted at the Headquarters so that we can discuss this issue as to what we are going to do about this situation.

Indeed we went to Ulundi, myself and him, there was Captain Langeni and M.R. Mzimela and he then said I think it will be better if you were to take me home because I don't find the idea of going into hiding appropriate because how long is it going to take for me to be in hiding.

They then said Mzimela was also present, even though you can be arrested, we will try some means so that this case must just disappear. We will also try to get hold of a lawyer to represent you.

Indeed I took him to his home at Mpolweni, that is where I left him.

MR STUART: Did he subsequently hand himself in?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I think so because he was arrested at the station where he was working.

MR STUART: What was done about arranging legal representation and assistance for him?

MR LUTHULI: I found difficulties because no one wanted to get closer to me and closer to them, and I concluded that I should get closer and on getting closer, I went to Mzimela and M.Z. Khumalo, pleading with them to assist.

They pushed me from pillar to post, I ended up loosing courage.

MR STUART: Did you come to explain this to Zena Mkhize?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I went to them at Ntinzeni and told them that as far as I am concerned, for you to get out of this mess, try to speak to Goldstone and explain everything as it is.

Now that we heard rumours about possible reconciliation, you too, should apply so that you can get amnesty, but you will not get amnesty if you haven't spoken first, divulging what you were doing, what acts you were engaged in so that I, myself if I were the one who sent you, you should also say that.

MR STUART: When it was subsequently reported in the Goldstone Commission, published, the information that Zena Mkhize and others had given, what was the attitude that you and the other people you were working with, took?

MR LUTHULI: I was called one day, there was Gideon Zulu and M.R. Mzimela and Captain Langeni. On entering M.R. Mzimela said do you see this statement, this is the statement that was made by Zena at the Goldstone Commission - what do you know about this statement?

I got shocked, I got a fright that they were now lending me into trouble, because I was the one who said, because now that I have realised that there is no way that they can escape this problem, apart from committing themselves to the Goldstone Commission, there is no way they can get out of this mess and I too pretended not to know what had become of the situation and them in particular.

But I also suspected that there must be information that I had already said to them, that they should talk. That is where I stood.

MR STUART: Was it the case that you used to attend meetings of the Central Committee of the IFP?

MR LUTHULI: Yes. It is true, I used to attend such meetings as a person who was working at the IFP Headquarters at Ulundi.

All members who were working at the Headquarters, used to attend as staff of the IFP Headquarters. I too, being present, used to attend in that capacity.

MR STUART: Did it come about that you were then expelled?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, it did. It happened that I was expelled in one of the Central Committee meetings. Mr Duma came and he was the Head of the Department. He called me from the meeting and he said Mhlandulu follow me and he went into his office.

On entering the office, he was reading a book and he said what happened, are you in conflict with the king? He was referring to the IFP President, and I said why, and he said the letter actually that I am reading here, indicates that I should inform you that as of today, you should never, ever be seen in the Central Committee meetings.

MR STUART: Was it made clear to you why that was so?

MR LUTHULI: I was suspecting because there were already several rumours going around. Rumours being spread by the very same M.Z. Khumalo to the effect that he has defected, so that as you see him, the very same car he is driving, was bought by the ANC, those were blatant lies. I still insist those were lies.

I bought the car myself. No organisation bought me the car, and although expelled, I concluded that the very same rumour had got into the, within earshot of the king that I was working for the ANC.

MR STUART: Did you subsequently come to have discussions with the ANC?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, and no because there was no time where we sat down because things were so swift. I myself was fleeing, and therefore I cannot say there was a situation where we sat down, having enough time to discuss with the ANC as to how I find the ANC myself, and what I am intending to do.

I saw them now that I am under this protection programme.

MR MOTATA: May I just come in here Mr Stuart. Mr Luthuli, I appreciate your answer when this question was posed to you. You said you could say yes or no. Let's suppose there was no formal meeting, did you come into contact with ANC people prior to you being put under this protection scheme?

MR LUTHULI: No.

MR MOTATA: So the answer to the question asked by your counsel did you ever have discussions with the ANC, is no longer yes or no, it is a pure no?

MR LUTHULI: No.

MR MOTATA: Thank you.

MR STUART: Mr Luthuli, I am not sure that you are understanding the time period that I am addressing.

Will you turn to your application, you have it before you. Do you have a copy of the application before you?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR STUART: Will you turn to page 324. Is yours numbered with those numbers? It will be page 114 of the affidavit, page 324 of the papers before this hearing.

MR MOTATA: And it would have paragraph 39.

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I have located the page.

MR STUART: You will see there that you have set out some discussions you had with someone called Mohadla and questions of organising for a funeral. That was Kaye's funeral and then in 39.8 you say a series of meetings took place between Mohadla and I and as a result thereof, I had a meeting with Jacob Zuma.

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR STUART: Now, will you explain that in the light of the answer you gave to the Committee member, Adv Motata a few minutes back?

MR LUTHULI: This Kaye, that is Magahle, he was already an Investigating Officer. Kaye was actually in love with my nephew and he was also a member of the IFP branch in Mpumalanga.

He was very close to my family and I personally. Therefore Magahle used to use Kaye who was in love with my niece so that he could get information about me. And then Magahle would also say that Kaye is an ANC member and he would want me to meet him.

I could not have met Magahle, I couldn't meet him and the only time I met him, was when we were making funeral arrangements, that is my nephew's funeral. That is where I had a discussion with Magahle.

With reference to Jacob Zuma, there is no secret that I had a discussion with him. The IFP President himself knew about this, because I told him that Jacob Zuma wanted to see me.

Therefore there was no secret when I met Zuma because he knew already that I was going to see him. That was before everything else happened.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you say that was before the time that you were expelled?

MR LUTHULI: I would say round about the same time.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry to interrupt Mr Stuart, just one point, when you say that you were expelled, you said that you were expelled and that you were told that you should never, ever attend the Central Committee meetings again.

When you use that word expelled, are you saying that you were actually expelled from the IFP itself or just from attending those Central Committee meetings?

MR LUTHULI: Just form attending meetings, I was expelled from attending the meetings only.

CHAIRPERSON: So you were still a member of the Inkatha Freedom party?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR STUART: At about that time CODESA had been sitting at Kempton Park and it was also the time of the transitional executive council. What was the IFP's attitude to those developments?

MR LUTHULI: Let me start off with CODESA. The IFP did not participate in any way in CODESA. It was against CODESA and also when CODESA started to grow into becoming the Transitional Executive Council, the IFP also did not partake of those activities.

Also when the elections were being prepared for, the IFP was not prepared to be part of the elections.

MR STUART: What was your attitude to the Transitional Executive Council?

MR LUTHULI: The stand that was adopted by the IFP as far as I was concerned, was a stand that I was opposed to because there were points where I personally could have gained from, like for example every organisation, military organisation, of these organisations be it the AWB, ANC, IFP itself, if there was a time for them to come together and identify themselves, at that time, then the IFP just indicated that they did not have a para-military structure.

That is when we parted ways in so far as opinions are concerned.

MR STUART: The TEC established a task force to investigate para-military training in KwaZulu and at least two of the people involved there, were Fink Huysam and Howard Vanni. Did you come to have contact with either of them?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct. One person that I contacted was Howard Vanni.

MR STUART: Did you say you contacted him?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I used Magahle.

MR STUART: Why?

MR LUTHULI: I had already realised that things were not shaping up in my life.

I concluded that if I did not make use of the opportunity and continue to refuse and refuse to cooperate, and deny that there is no military para-military structure for the IFP, I may end up in trouble myself.

MR STUART: How did you then come to speak to Colonel Frank Dutton?

MR LUTHULI: I would say I found him at a time when I was really fleeing because I have already indicated that there were rumours by M.Z. Khumalo. When the Military Intelligence soldiers came to me at Ulundi, where they told me that M.Z. Khumalo was here in Durban requesting that I be killed, because he had already found out that I had gone back to the ANC, I then realised that if I didn't do a thing, M.Z. was indeed going to kill me.

Because the very same military intelligence indicated that go and tell him that we said (indistinct) that indeed I went back to him and told him that the Zulu's were here, and they are saying that you said I should be killed, because I had gone back to the ANC.

He denied everything. Thereafter he came back to Durban to inform the leaders of the ones who told me that these ones have compromised me. The very same people also told me that he had done it again, he came back to say we have told you. I then went to him and asked him how, because we discussed the matter, how then could you go back there?

He denied everything and we parted ways in a bitter way because the staff itself, must have realised that there was a fight going on between myself and him. I then banged the door and left. Thereafter I phoned Mr Howard Vally indicating that I am now getting into the protection programme and I indicated to him that as of this moment, and he told me to hold on, he wanted to know as to whether it was okay with my life.

Indeed, I met them at the Holiday Inn, the very same boys who accompanied me, the boys who were using me, who actually were guarding me without knowing that they were actually protecting me, they left me there and told them that after five minutes, they should come back to check on me. They left and at that very same time, I took Dutton and that is how I disappeared.

MR STUART: And did you then come to make a statement to Colonel Dutton?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR STUART: And you have been on the witness protection programme in one form or another, since then?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR STUART: And was that very early in 1995, when that took place?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR STUART: Why have you seen it as important to tell the whole story now in the way in which you have told it?

MR LUTHULI: I can say shortly after the TEC spoke about this issue, I found it timeous that we should divulge everything to the fact of the existence of the para-military structure of the IFP, that is how it emerged, and it was indicated what its activities were. It should not only end up by saying they are just criminals, killing people. And I realised that if I did not appear and say things as they were, so that there should be reconciliation or forgiveness between or among the South African people, black and white, and otherwise, because now it had emerged that this is the opportunity where people should divulge the truth as it is.

Myself as Luthuli, saw an opportunity to come forward and say what information I knew as it was, so that I can be forgiven by the people of South Africa by divulging the whole truth.

MR STUART: In your statement to Colonel Dutton, did you divulge all the information that you had, that may have been of relevance?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct. But I also indicated in the statement that it might happen that some of the things I left out not by mistake, I am sorry, some of the things that I might have left out, by mistake, and some of the things when emerged as they were, I would own up to them as they appear.

MR STUART: There are people here today who lived in some of the communities that were affected by your activities and by the Caprivi trainees under your command. Do you have anything to say to them today?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct, I would like to say something to them.

I can say myself, Luthuli, have done certain bad things. Some of these things I did see, and some I did not and therefore as I stand here before them, I would strongly, strongly unreservedly ask for forgiveness because truly the situation that prevailed was such that it required a person of wisdom.

I myself, being human, have made mistakes as I have indicated. Mistakes that I was not supposed to have done unto my people and there is nothing however small, on my part, that I benefitted from those activities apart from loosing my livelihood and the livelihood of the people of South Africa.

I cannot think of any more wise way of asking for forgiveness.

MR STUART: Mr Chairperson, will you bear with me for just a second?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, certainly Mr Stuart.

MR STUART: No further evidence at this stage, in chief Mr Chairman.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR STUART: .

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Stuart. Mr Wills, do you have any questions you would like to put to the witness?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR WILLS: Yes, indeed, thank you Mr Chairperson. Mr Luthuli, from the general tenor of the evidence that you have presented today, I get the impression that there was a very intensive war that was existing in certain areas in the townships in KwaZulu Natal, in the late 1980's and early 1990's, but that was mainly between the ANC and the IFP?

MR LUTHULI: That is correct.

MR WILLS: Now, my instructions from the persons that I represent, is that this was in fact a very ruthless war, would you agree with that?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: And that to a certain extent, certain killings were authorised even though the identity of those persons were not even known, it was simply because a person was an ANC member that he would be killed?

MR LUTHULI: (No translation)

MR WILLS: Now, this type of activity was particularly bad, as I understand it, in Mpumalanga, is that correct?

MR LUTHULI: (No translation)

MR WILLS: You have alluded to the political divide between was it Mrs Khumalo and Zakhile Nkeli?

MR LUTHULI: Mrs Qolo.

MR WILLS: Sorry, Mrs Qolo, thank you. You have indicated that it was Nkeli's faction of the IFP that was the faction that was particularly interested in the violent option?

MR LUTHULI: (No translation)

MR WILLS: And Mrs Qolo was wanting at that stage, to negotiate solutions to the problems?

MR LUTHULI: (No translation) That is correct.

MR WILLS: Now, is it also true that this same Nkeli was a very powerful and dominant Inkatha member over the IFP youth that resided in the Mpumalanga area?

MR LUTHULI: (No translation) That is correct.

MR WILLS: Now, the seventh applicant, Mr Hlongwane, Yoni, are you aware that he was in the group of IFP youth that were controlled by Mr Nkeli?

MR LUTHULI: (No translation) That is correct.

MR WILLS: Concentrating a little bit more on the nature of the warfare, you alluded to it in your evidence very briefly, but I would like to get more clarity on it, my understanding is that in the main, the townships were divided in different areas, there were ANC areas and IFP areas, or should I rather say UDF areas and IFP areas?

MR LUTHULI: (No translation) Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: And is it also true that if you were an IFP person, it would be impossible for you to live in an UDF area?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: Is it also true that, the converse is true that if you were a UDF person, you couldn't live in an IFP area?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: Now, it seems from your evidence that one of the political objectives that you were involved in, and I refer you specifically to page 206, members of the Committee of the bundle, but paragraph 10(a) of your amnesty application, the actual form, and subsection 3, you use the phrase to eradicate political opponents of the IFP.

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: Now, the four persons who I represent, are obviously more junior to you or were more junior to you in the IFP at that stage.

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: Now, they also got the distinct impression and in fact were told, that this was one of the things that they had to do, they had to eradicate all opposition to the IFP in certain areas and at certain times, is that correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: Would that be consistent with your ...

MS KHAMPEPE: May I interpose Mr Willis. When you say they were told to eradicate, they were told by whom?

MR WILLS: Thank you Ms Chairperson, I am, at this stage I am just going through general instructions. I will lead this evidence in more detail if you would require it.

My understanding is that part of their training for example, Mr Mkhize, will testify to the effect that when he was trained in Caprivi, that a large part of the propaganda aspect of that training was that the ANC were the hated enemy and they must be obliterated at all costs.

Would you say that that would form part of the training that he received, or the political indoctrination that he received?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct because he was in contra-mobilisation, yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: Now, it seems to me that a characteristic of the political violence was that there was very little political tolerance exhibited by the ANC, sorry by the IFP for persons of a different political persuasion and by that I specifically, I want to harp on this point, that if you didn't, if you particularly if you were in a rural area, in an IFP supporting area, if the Chief was an IFP supporting person, you simply had to belong to the IFP?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: And you described that in quite graphic detail in the example that you give in your affidavit. If the Committee will just bear with me, yes, page 253 to 259 of the record, when you deal with the issue of Nkosi and the support you gave to Nkosi (indistinct)?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: Now, am I to understand from this, that if a person lower down in the ranks of the military wing of the IFP, were to commit acts that were directed at UDF people or ANC people, and those acts were simply directed at those people because they were ANC or UDF persons, that that would in fact be sanctioned by persons such as yourself and persons even higher up in the IFP hierarchy?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: In fact, it went further than that, didn't it Mr Luthuli? The persons who were particularly savaged and or from another point of view, successful in the attacks and those very brave warriors who were very successful were singled out and congratulated by certain persons, not so?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: And is it also not so that three of the applicants I represent, that is specifically applicants 5, 6 and 7, Mr Mbambo, Mr Mkhize and Mr Hlongwane, that they were frequently congratulated by yourself, by M.Z. Khumalo, by Captain Langeni because they were so efficient and so successful in their operations?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: They were also regarded very highly by people who formed part of the local leadership in eSikhawini for this very reason, and by that I refer specifically to Mayor Bebebeyela and Mrs Mbuyasi?

MR LUTHULI: That is correct, yes.

MR WILLS: In fact, one could go as far as saying that you being the political, or sorry their Commander, their Military Commander, only received good reports in relation to the activities of these three persons?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: And by good reports, I mean they were very successful on a military basis and they were fearless people who were very successful in military operations?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: Now, the applicants whom I represent, have committed many human rights violations. You are obviously aware of that?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: Do you know of, sorry and their operations were also widely known by not just yourself, but by a lot of persons who were connected to the IFP?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: By that I refer to the IFP leadership locally?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: And to be specific, I am referring to eSikhawini at this stage, and this would be again Mrs Mbuyasi, Bebebeyela?

MR LUTHULI: That is correct.

MR WILLS: The activities would also be known, not so?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: The activities would also be known by the KwaZulu Police and people senior in the KwaZulu Police, specifically at Ulundi, I mean at eSikhawini?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: It is true there that Brig Mzimela was I think the Station Commissioner of the KwaZulu Police station, sorry I think he was District Commissioner of the KwaZulu Police but he was stationed at eSikhawini at the stage that this hit squad was operating, is that correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: And he knew what these people were up to?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: It is also true that Brig Matte was aware of these incidents that were going on?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is true.

MR WILLS: And the activities of the three I am referring to?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: Now, it must have been known by these persons and I refer specifically now to the Police persons that I have mentioned, that is Matte and Mzimela, that eSikhawini at the time was suffering as a result of an enormous amount of violence?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: Do you know of any instance when any authority in the IFP called any of the persons whom I represent, to sanction them and say no, you mustn't attack indiscriminately, you mustn't attack the ANC areas, you must only attack specific targets?

MR LUTHULI: No, I would be telling a lie, I don't know.

MR WILLS: Yes, because the truth is that the more they attacked the ANC, the more they were congratulated by those persons in senior positions in the IFP?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct, they used to be appreciated and praised for that deeds.

MR WILLS: My understanding is that the modus operandi of the hit squad that I represent, that is the eSikhawini hit squad, was it was multi-faceted, but there are two main areas of operation. The one is that certain individual targets were identified and these targets would be communicated through Mkhize in fact, to the rest of the hit squad and then Mkhize would have the responsibility of deploying his hit squad in order to execute that operation?

MR LUTHULI: That is correct, yes.

MR WILLS: That was the one, and then the other one was the modus operandi of what I would phrase as just general terror, and that is that the hit squad would be asked to react to a certain event possibly and just go into an ANC area and make that ANC area realise that the IFP was strong, and that they mustn't, that people in that area mustn't mess with them?

MR LUTHULI: That is correct.

MR WILLS: And for this purpose, I mean, obviously firearms, and murder and all kinds of violent means would be adopted?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: That was part as I see it, that formed part of the political strategy of the IFP to dominate certain areas?

MR LUTHULI: That is correct, yes.

MR WILLS: If the Committee will just bear with me - it wasn't only according to my instructions, the IFP and the KwaZulu Police that sanctioned these activities. There were also other organisations that sanctioned these activities, and by that I refer specifically to the South African Police and the South African Defence Force.

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: I mean you have given evidence to the effect that the South African Defence Force provided all the training for you and the means of getting all the way to Caprivi?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: While I am on that point, you remember that Mr Mkhize was one of your trainees at Caprivi, do you confirm that?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: And there are certain people in certain areas, certain Policemen in certain areas who used to assist in operations?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: And to that extent I will refer to, I think you have mentioned him earlier, a person by the name of Van Vuuren in the Mpumalanga area?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: Mr Hlongwane also details certain Policemen who used to assist in his operations in the Wesselton area outside Ermelo. Were you aware of the fact that certain Policemen were sympathetic to the activities of the IFP in that township?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: I see and I refer to page 223 of the record, of the bundle, that you make a statement there which is interesting to me because it confirms with what Mr Mkhize tells me. He regarded himself more as a soldier after his Caprivi training that a Policeman?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: You make the statement to the effect that there was military training and all the recruits regarded themselves as soldiers and not as Policemen?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: You also make the statement at page 224, which again is important in the application of my applicants, of the persons that I represent, that the primary aim of the Caprivi training was the give Inkatha the capacity to launch attacks to wipe out all of those, opposed to them?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: You have indicated how your own life would have been in jeopardy had you compromised any of the secrecy?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: Now, isn't it also not so that a member of hit squad, if he decided after let's say the first operation, if he decided no, he didn't want to be a part of this any more, it was literally impossible for him to leave unless he ran the very real risk of himself being killed?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: It is one of those situations that once you are in this hit squad, there is nothing you can do, you have to stay. If you try and leave ...

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: And there are examples in fact of persons who tried to get out and were in fact killed?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: It is interesting to note as Mr Mkhize informed me that the code word for killing somebody, would you like to tell the Committee what that was?

MR LUTHULI: I would say a person who was trying to withdraw, there was this word that was known that he would ride the first bus. And if it was said that he should be made to ride the first bus, it meant the person should be killed.

MR WILLS: Yes. I see that you indicate that at page 228 of your affidavit. It was quite interesting, Mr Mkhize indicated the same phrase to me.

The other aspect which I want to cover briefly, which you mention in your affidavit which Mr Mkhize and Mr Mbambo and in fact Mr Hlongwane were involved in, was the training of other people.

MR LUTHULI: That is correct.

MR WILLS: As I understand this military structure, or military struggle, certain people received training like for example Mr Mkhize was trained in Caprivi and in Koeberg and at Mkuze camp and at various other camps, by various people, the SADF?

MR LUTHULI: That is correct.

MR WILLS: The SAP at Koeberg?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: And by Inkatha people at Mkuze camp?

MR LUTHULI: That is correct.

MR WILLS: But the policy of the IFP was that these people must be transferred into various townships and they must gather loyal and staunch younger IFP persons and give them similar training?

MR LUTHULI: That is correct.

MR WILLS: So when both Mr Mbambo and Mr Mkhize give evidence later to the effect that they were involved in setting up of another hit squad and specifically trained other persons and specifically people like Mkhana Lipo, Matenywa, Ben Mlambo, Lucky Mbuyasi, that these activities were done in the full knowledge and they were in fact part of the IFP policies at the time?

MR LUTHULI: That is correct.

MR WILLS: That wasn't against any policy or orders of the IFP?

MR LUTHULI: No.

MR WILLS: And again, this was well known by the leadership and encouraged by the leadership?

MR LUTHULI: That is correct.

MR WILLS: Now, unfortunately I am not in a position to know how high that leadership went, but to be specific, I know for example or I am told for example that this was encouraged by persons like Bebebeyela and Mrs Mbuyasi in eSikhawini?

MR LUTHULI: That is correct.

MR WILLS: The way certain specific targets were identified, was also varied, but you mentioned something that Mr Mkhize alludes to in his affidavit, and I refer you to page, I refer the Committee to page 231 of the bundle.

That is to the effect that the IFP leadership on the ground, would determine who the problematical UDF persons were?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: And that that would be communicated back to you and you would send the defensive group in?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: Now, Mr Mkhize speaks in his affidavit of a meeting at the Hlangelani hall in eSikhawini where you weren't present, but where a grouping of the eSikhawini IFP leadership were, and again that included Mrs Mbuyasi and Bebebeyela, where certain problematical people were identified. Would you regard this as being consistent with your experience of the general nature of the identification of targets?

MR LUTHULI: No, that is not correct. They used to use the normal procedure.

MR WILLS: If Mkhize is to say for example that and I will just turn to that section if you will just bear with me - I am sorry, if I can just return to that point later, I can't find that immediately.

My understanding is, I will continue with that point, my understanding is that the local leadership if they found somebody that was problematical, they would list that person and by that I don't necessarily mean that it was a written list, but they would compile a list of UDF or ANC people that they wanted to get rid of?

MR LUTHULI: That is correct.

MR WILLS: And that this list would be filtered into the system and then action would be taken by various hit squads in response to those people and the chances are that they would be attacked?

MR LUTHULI: That is correct.

MR WILLS: Thank you. I just want to go through some of the aspects of the affidavits of the individual persons that I represent very briefly.

You know, I want to deal firstly with the fourth applicant, Mr Mbambo, you know Mr Mbambo?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I know him very well.

MR WILLS: Is it not so that he was brought to a meeting in Ulundi by Mr Mkhize, the fifth applicant?

MR LUTHULI: That is correct.

MR WILLS: And it was then that the hit squads were described to him? You were present at that meeting?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: And M.Z. Khumalo was also present at that meeting?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: And Langeni was also present at that meeting, Captain Langeni?

MR LUTHULI: That is correct.

MR WILLS: You are more commonly known by the name of Mhlanduna?

MR LUTHULI: That is correct.

MR WILLS: And do you have another code name?

MR LUTHULI: Several names, yes.

MR WILLS: Mbambo refers to the name Nikky, were you known by that name?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is also one of the names I used to use.

MR WILLS: Do you remember an issue where a decision was taken to assassinate a person by the name of Teliwe Makwanasi?

MR LUTHULI: No, I don't.

MR WILLS: Do you remember a meeting at Ulundi at Prince Gideon Zulu's house, let me just go through the details. You must be careful when you answer the questions Mr Luthuli, you must wait for me to finish, because this is important.

MR LUTHULI: Okay.

MR WILLS: It is claimed by the applicants, the applicants I represent, in fact by the fourth and fifth applicant, that at one stage they attended a meeting at Ulundi when you were present, and Prince Gideon Zulu was present at Prince Gideon Zulu's house, where there was a debate about how the fourth applicant, Mr Mbambo, had been - the UDF had attempted to frame him in some stolen vehicle saga, do you recall a discussion of that nature?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I remember that saga.

MR WILLS: And at that meeting Prince Gideon Zulu gave the order that the person in the UDF who was supposedly motivating this frame up of the fourth applicant, was a person known as Nathi Gomedi, that that person should be killed, because the whole hit squad operation must not be exposed? Is that correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: And then, can you recall as a direct consequence of that meeting, that Prince Gideon Zulu organised a car from Ulundi and that this car was in fact delivered to Mr Mbambo and the fifth applicant, Mr Mkhize in order for them to conduct this operation?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: At the same time of that meeting, I don't know if you will recall but my instructions are that there was also an issue discussed where a male nurse was going to be killed, and that was a person by the name of Khumalo who worked at the Eshowe hospital. Is that correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: Now turning to Mr Hlongwane the seventh applicant very briefly, he confirms what you say in your affidavit, that he was taken to Mkuze camp to be hidden from the South African Police, you have mentioned that?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: He also indicates that it was largely as a result of your intervention and your orders in fact, that he be sent to assist the Black Cats in Ermelo?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: And that by that assistance he interpreted that as he must go to Ermelo and he must sort out the UDF and use any means possible to get rid of the UDF in that townships around Ermelo?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: And he had your authority to do this?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: Then after a while, you asked him to come back to eSikhawini is that not correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: So it was directly again as a result of your intervention that whilst he was operating in Ermelo, you asked him to come back to eSikhawini because he was needed there?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: And then you posted him at Mayor Bebebeyela's home?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: And you indicated to Mkhize and to Hlongwane that Hlongwane would join Mkhize's unit and strengthen them up?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: And you were happy because you knew that Hlongwane was a loyal and fearful soldier?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: You wouldn't have sent somebody there who wasn't very successful in military operations?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I would not have.

MR WILLS: You also know, sorry I have got the numbers mixed up Mr Chairperson, I am terribly sorry, when I have been referring to the fourth applicant, I have actually been meaning the fifth applicant.

The fifth applicant is Mr Mbambo, the fourth applicant is Mr Ndlovu, do you know him?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I do.

MR WILLS: When did you meet him?

MR LUTHULI: From Caprivi, I met him when he came from Caprivi at Hammersdale.

MR WILLS: Now, he claims in his application that he was operative in that Hammersdale, Mpumalanga area under your instruction?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: He claims that you provided him with a firearm, a 9 mm pistol I think?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: And he claims that you specifically asked him or ordered him together with Mr Zakhile Mkehle to eliminate a person by the name of Mr Msome, who was reputedly an ANC leader at Mpumalanga?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: Now, Mr Ndlovu says that he was operative in a couple of areas. I don't know if you are aware of this, he claims he was operative in Mpumalanga, in the Pietermaritzburg area and then also just outside of KwaMashu?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: Now, he claims when he was in these areas, that he was involved in the IFP's military onslaught against the UDF? That is correct?

MR LUTHULI: That is correct.

MR WILLS: The last area I want to cover is an area that you have touched on. That is I want you to refer your mind back to the time Gideon Zulu was holding a rally in eSikhawini and the information suggests that he was very embarrassed and cross because the ANC had attacked, or the UDF had attacked that rally and he was very, very cross about that?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: Now, the fifth applicant, Mr Mbambo says that he was with Gideon Zulu at the time of that attack, in close proximity to him and he says that Gideon Zulu was so cross that a meeting was called after that rally, amongst the IFP leadership to specifically discuss what strategies to adopt after that. Are you aware of this meeting?

MR LUTHULI: I would not say no.

MR WILLS: But you can't remember it specifically?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: I don't know if you are in position to comment on this, and if you can, please do so, but the information that I've got from the fifth and the sixth applicants, that is Mbambo and Mkhize, is that as a direct consequence of this attack, Gideon Zulu gave the specific orders to say that we must act like the ANC attack, and just go and attack the ANC areas generally, can you remember anything to that?

MR LUTHULI: No, he also indicated that to me as well, apart from them about that event at the rally.

MR WILLS: Just to be clear, it seems and sorry if I have confused you, my instructions aren't that you were at that meeting but that as a result of that attack and he was so cross, Zulu, Gideon Zulu told these people to just literally attack all of the ANC areas. You confirm that you were subsequently told the same thing by Gideon Zulu, that he had reported this to the persons there?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: Thank you. Mr Chairperson, I have no further questions at this stage.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR WILLS: .

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much Mr Wills. Mr Ngubane, do you have any questions that you would like to put to the witness?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR NGUBANE: Mr Luthuli, I want us to start briefly with the background. You say that you were released from Robben Island in 1979, is that correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR NGUBANE: And when did you join the IFP?

MR LUTHULI: I would say in 1980 if I am not mistaken.

MR NGUBANE: You only became active in the IFP in 1985, is that correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR NGUBANE: Now my understanding of your joining the IFP is that the ANC leadership in Robben Island regarded the IFP as the home so to speak, of the people who had believed in the aims and objectives of the ANC, is that correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR NGUBANE: In other words it was perceived as an internal wing of the ANC at the time when it was banned?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR NGUBANE: So when you joined the IFP, you were an ANC man at heart, is that correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR NGUBANE: When the UDF was formed, you knew exactly that its aims was to advance the aims and objectives of the ANC?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR NGUBANE: But when you became active in the IFP, you wanted to eliminate the UDF, is that what you said?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR NGUBANE: Now, can you advance the reason why you had to eliminate the UDF whereas you were ANC at heart?

MR LUTHULI: I would say there was now a misunderstanding between these two parties and I had to take it upon myself to decide as to on which side do I fall.

MR NGUBANE: And what influenced you to make a choice to join the IFP rather than the UDF?

MR LUTHULI: At that time I was a very staunch Zulu supporter and the organisation itself being Inkatha and its founder, being a person who spoke Zulu, I came at a point where I wondered as to whether the UDF was fighting the person because he was Zulu speaking.

MR NGUBANE: But Mr Luthuli, you were a long standing member of the ANC, you knew the objectives of the ANC, you knew something about non-racialism and non-tribalism, is that correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR NGUBANE: And you believed in that, is that correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR NGUBANE: But all of a sudden you turn to Inkatha just because it had this Zuluness in it, is it correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR NGUBANE: Is it not the position that you turned to Inkatha because Inkatha had money?

MR LUTHULI: No.

MR NGUBANE: Is it correct that since your release from Robben Island, you did not have any source of income?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR NGUBANE: And when you decided to be active in Inkatha in 1985, was the money issued discussed at any stage?

MR LUTHULI: No.

MR NGUBANE: But when you decided to be active in Inkatha, you knew exactly that that involved the killing of people, is that correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR NGUBANE: And you want us to believe that you wanted to undertake this mammoth task without any financial benefit?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR NGUBANE: Were you ever paid for your activities in Inkatha?

MR LUTHULI: I would say I was getting the monthly salary as a person who was working in the Inkatha offices.

MR NGUBANE: When did you get paid for the first time by Inkatha?

MR LUTHULI: When I was at Caprivi.

MR NGUBANE: And did that make your position better, financially?

MR LUTHULI: No, I was not shaken financially because my father is known to be owning properties and therefore I was not a burden to him.

I too, did not have a financial problem.

MR NGUBANE: If you say that you had no financial problem, did your father give you a monthly income or what was the position?

MR LUTHULI: No, he would give me money any time.

MR NGUBANE: And was that ...

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry Mr Ngubane, if I could just ask one question on the point that you are on. You say that you got a monthly salary from the IFP, was this a consistent amount each month, did you get a salary slip, tax deductions, that sort of thing?

MR LUTHULI: No, I did not have a pay slip.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MR NGUBANE: And you talk about big fishes in the ANC, do you know anything about that, people referred to as the big fish?

MR LUTHULI: Big fish?

MR NGUBANE: In the ANC, yes?

MR LUTHULI: I would actually say maybe you are referring to ...

MR NGUBANE: Well, during your days of activity in the IFP, were you familiar with that term?

MR LUTHULI: I got lost a little bit Mr Chairman.

MR NGUBANE: The term big fish, referring to some ANC people, are you familiar with that term?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I know that term.

MR NGUBANE: You sounded a little bit hesitant later on, can you explain what you understood by that term when it was used?

MR LUTHULI: It was actually referring to people who were important.

MR NGUBANE: I see, and when those big fishes were killed, did you receive any financial handshake?

MR LUTHULI: No.

MR NGUBANE: You just received a pat, that you have done a good work and there was no money paid to you, is that what you are saying?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: Now, Romeo Mbambo, (indistinct) Mkhize and Israel Hlongwane, when did you meet them for the first time?

MR LUTHULI: I met (indistinct) in Caprivi and on coming back, when I was at Hammersdale I then met Israel Hlongwane. When I formed the Empangeni hit squad, he was brought to me that is (indistinct) Mkhize.

MR NGUBANE: Did you give them specific instructions to target certain people, specific people?

MR LUTHULI: That was done by the eSikhawini leadership, people like Bebebeyela and Mrs Mbuyasi, Chief Mataba, Prince Gideon Zulu and other leadership in eSikhawini.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, I think the question was Mr Luthuli, did you ever give instructions for them to hit a specific target?

MR LUTHULI: No.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MR NGUBANE: Thank you Mr Chairman. And your policy at that stage is it correct that when you sent this hit squad people, you mentioned certain people to be eliminated?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR NGUBANE: It was not your policy that the people who formed the core of the hit squad should attack at random and kill sometimes, innocent people?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, such things did happen as well.

MR NGUBANE: Well, I don't want you to misunderstand yourself. I want, I also don't want me to misunderstand you. Do I understand you correctly as meaning that your policy was all embracing, it gave specific instructions to the hit squad members to kill, not only the ANC people but also the innocent people at large?

MR LUTHULI: No, I don't agree with that.

MR NGUBANE: Now, let me put my initial question. Did you at any stage instruct the hit squad members to kill people other than specific targeted people?

MR LUTHULI: No.

MR NGUBANE: Your answer has covered a lot of what I wanted to ask from you. Mr Chairman, at this stage may I just point out that I was approached at tea time by Mr Khuzwayo of Claremont and Mrs Mkhize of Claremont and they asked me to ask certain questions about the Claremont incident.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you Mr Ngubane.

MR NGUBANE: Thank you. Now, when you undertook a certain operation, did you make sure that the person that you wanted to kill was an ANC or an UDF member?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR NGUBANE: What investigations did you make about Khuzwayo that he in fact was an ANC or UDF member and he was active at Claremont?

MR LUTHULI: There is nothing that we did, except to say that we were told by M.Z. Khumalo and Yamile himself.

MR NGUBANE: Did it occur to you that if you attacked without cross-checking the information that you had received, there was a possibility that you would kill innocent people who had nothing to do with UDF or the ANC?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR NGUBANE: And what did you do about that?

MR LUTHULI: We would not continue with the operation, we would just stop.

MR NGUBANE: No, my question is not whether you did at some stage ascertain that this man was not an ANC man or an UDF man, my question is if you didn't make thorough investigations about the target, did it occur to you that you might without cross-checking the correctness of the information, hit a person who has nothing to do with the ANC or the UDF?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, such things would happen.

MR NGUBANE: You didn't care to cross-check?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, if we received instructions from a person who was a leader in that area, telling you that this person is such a thing or belonging to this or that organisation, you would not ask or investigate to ascertain as to whether the person is indeed a member of that organisation.

MR NGUBANE: Now, Nicholas Mkhize of Claremont, do you know that, does that name sound familiar to you?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR NGUBANE: Did you participate in his killing?

MR LUTHULI: No.

MR NGUBANE: Did you participate in the killing or in the conspiracy of his killing?

MR LUTHULI: No.

MR NGUBANE: Do you know who killed him?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR NGUBANE: Was that man under your command?

MR LUTHULI: No, but we were connected in so far as work is concerned, we were keeping in touch.

MR NGUBANE: Right. As far as you know, was the killing of Mr Mkhize a political killing?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR NGUBANE: Now, can you tell the Honourable members of the Committee as to who killed Mkhize?

MR LUTHULI: Mkhize was killed by Jerry Mbanda and he was with Zweli Dhlamini, not this Zweli Dhlamini.

And the instruction came from Captain Kanyele of BSI here at KwaMashu.

MR NGUBANE: Thank you. Now I will go to the eSikhawini incidents, just for you to give us an overview of the whole thing.

Did you know specific targets at eSikhawini?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR NGUBANE: Can you recall them?

MR LUTHULI: People like Bongani Msomi and Professor I am not sure if it was Nduli and other leaders, COSATU leaders. I just cannot recall the names very well.

MR NGUBANE: You say these people were popular, is that correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR NGUBANE: Did you participate in their injury or in their killing?

MR LUTHULI: No.

MR NGUBANE: All that you are saying is that whatever might have happened to this people which is injurious, was the work of ... rings any bells?

MR LUTHULI: No.

MR NGUBANE: Does the name Nafta Nqomalo, does it ...

MR LUTHULI: No.

MR NGUBANE: And Detective Sergeant, do you know anything about him, sorry Detective Sergeant Khumalo?

MR LUTHULI: Yes. Yes, just a little bit, I know something a little.

MR NGUBANE: Well, you know a bit about him, you didn't participate in his killing?

MR LUTHULI: No.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Ngubane, when you use the word participate, do you mean actually in regard to the actual killing or do you include planning or handing down an order that had come from the local leadership? Perhaps you should make that clear.

MR NGUBANE: Thank you very much Mr Chairman. Did you order anyone to kill Detective Sergeant Khumalo?

MR LUTHULI: No.

MR NGUBANE: And did you order anyone to kill a gentleman known as Nathi Gomedi?

MR LUTHULI: No.

MR NGUBANE: If any person were to come to this Committee and tell the Committee that you ordered the killing of Taliwe Makwanasi, Nafta Nqomalo, Detective Sergeant Khumalo, Nathi Gomedi, that person would not be telling the truth?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR NGUBANE: Thank you Mr Chairman, no further questions.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR NGUBANE: .

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Ngubane. Mr Hewit, do you have any questions to put to this witness?

MR HEWIT: We do Mr Chairman, but there are various document that we wish to go through before we commence our cross-examination. I don't know whether my learned friend Mr Booyens, might be in a position to proceed.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, let me ask Mr Booyens. Mr Booyens, do you have any questions that you would like to put to this witness? Sorry Mr Booyens is sitting without a microphone.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR BOOYENS: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Luthuli, you testified before Judge Van der Reiden in the Supreme Court after you decided to come out with the truth, is that correct?

MR LUTHULI: I don't know the Judge, will you please explain.

MR BOOYENS: Where you testified against Mr Mbambo, Mr (indistinct) Mkhize, Mr Israel Hlongwane, when they were charged with murder in the Supreme Court here in Durban?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR BOOYENS: And would I be correct if I assume that you told the truth then?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR BOOYENS: You say you were present at the meeting at Gideon Zulu's when the killing of Nathi Gomedi was discussed?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR BOOYENS: Why didn't you say so in that court?

MR LUTHULI: I would not have said so without being asked.

MR BOOYENS: But you were you see. And I eventually had to drag it out of you, and you merely conceded to it as a possibility, I can read to you the question and the answer if you want to.

Now, you distinctly remember it. How did that happen Mr Luthuli?

MR LUTHULI: If I had forgotten something, just like now, isn't it that I had forgotten the name of Captain Masinga now, but later on I remembered. You are able as a person to remember something at a later stage.

MR BOOYENS: Yes. And it is also correct Mr Luthuli, and if necessary I will hand in the record of your evidence in that trial, that you conceded that your memory was extremely faulty and extremely unreliable in that case, is that correct, do you remember that?

MR LUTHULI: No, I cannot remember.

MR BOOYENS: Very well. You can't even remember that you made that concession?

MR LUTHULI: No.

MR BOOYENS: Maybe I should just read a few passages to you.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Stuart, you've got no objection to this, it is a court record?

MR STUART: No Mr Chairman, no objection.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MR BOOYENS: For example let us deal with the - now Mr Luthuli you have told me that there were many meetings ...

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry Mr Booyens, I think if you can just for purposes of the record, make reference to the page number that you are reading from.

MR BOOYENS: Certainly Mr Chairman, I am referring to page 1698, line 15.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry Mr Booyens, sorry again to interrupt, I have just received a message, if you could speak a little bit slower for the interpreter please.

MR BOOYENS: Will do Mr Chairman. Now Mr Luthuli, you have told me that there were many meetings, many things were discussed and you cannot remember all the detail. Your answer was yes.

Then I asked you is it possible that the accused may indeed be correct, that the involvement of Nathi Gomedi was discussed at the meeting and it was suggested at the meeting that because of the fact that he was involved in the ANC role to get accused 1 into trouble, that an instruction was given that he should be eliminated, with which you went along, and just before you answer that, and you might forget that or may have forgotten about that, and your answer was, it is possible.

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR BOOYENS: Well, today you distinctly remember that meeting?

MR LUTHULI: I have just indicated that one is able to remember.

MR BOOYENS: At page 1679 and that could be presumable when it was discussed, that the ANC used various sorts of tactics to attain their goals, your answer yes. Next question, you could even have used the spray at the stage before you went to Gideon Zulu's house for the Eshowe meeting, well, I cannot remember that.

I am not going to waste time, but your answers under cross-examination and the record is I understand available to the Committee, consisted of uncertainties, concessions of possibilities, you were not certain of many things. Would you agree with that summary of your evidence before Judge Van der Reiden?

MR LUTHULI: No.

MR BOOYENS: Well, I think the record will speak for itself Mr Luthuli.

Now, let me get to what I want to ask you. You have implicated Colonel Louis Botha on two occasions, is that correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR BOOYENS: What was his rank when you met him?

MR LUTHULI: I cannot remember very well whether he was a Major or a Captain.

MR BOOYENS: Very well, and let's deal with the meeting at 121 Battalion. What contribution if any, did Mr Botha make?

MR LUTHULI: He was supposed to take care of cases and also make sure that those cases disappeared or were erased.

He was just going to deal with the Police.

MR BOOYENS: In other words are you saying that he covered up, that was his job? He was supposed to cover up your hit squad activities?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR BOOYENS: But your hit squad members that he was supposed to protect, was subsequently - had to flee, they were pursued by the Police and they were ultimately prosecuted, is that correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR BOOYENS: Is it not possible that the fact that Mr Botha whether or not Mr Botha attended the meeting, may also be one of those things where you may be making a mistake?

In other words, maybe somebody suggested that they should speak to Botha, but he wasn't present at 121 Battalion?

MR LUTHULI: No, that would be a mistake, he was there.

MR BOOYENS: Okay. I asked you what, you say he was supposed to cover up if I understand you correctly. What did Mr Botha himself contribute to the meeting, if anything? Did he say anything, can you remember anything that he said?

MR LUTHULI: No, I cannot remember.

MR BOOYENS: Can you remember whether he spoke at all?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I remember he did speak.

MR BOOYENS: You don't know about what?

MR LUTHULI: I would say the matter under discussion was what was going to happen if the Caprivi members were to be arrested and what is it that was going to be done so that they are not discovered not to be Police members.

That is what I can remember.

MR BOOYENS: Sorry, the last bit of your answer I don't have. What is going to be doing when it is discovered that they are not Police members, sorry I am not quite with you. What do you mean by that, I just don't understand what you are trying to tell me. Maybe it is the interpretation, I don't know, but I don't understand.

He said what will happen if they are going to be arrested, that bit I understood, but what is it about this if it is discovered that they are not Police members, perhaps you can just clarify that for me please.

MR LUTHULI: Something had to be done, they had to be given something that would identify them as Police so that they could not be easily arrested when they were up and down the streets, say with guns.

MR BOOYENS: Oh, I see, no thank you. Well, I am not going to go into detail apart from putting to you that Mr Botha informs me that he never attended a meeting at 121 Battalion, where you were present. You obviously join issue with that?

MR LUTHULI: Which meeting did he admit to having attended with me?

MR BOOYENS: I didn't admit, say that he admitted, I say that he denied that he ever attended a meeting with you at 121 Battalion, that is the one meeting you spoke about.

CHAIRPERSON: What is your comment on that?

MR LUTHULI: I know him very well. I would not have seen a different person, a white person, and say that is Botha, I know him very well.

MR BOOYENS: And similarly, you also gave evidence about a second meeting at a hotel here in Durban, do you remember that?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I remember that.

MR BOOYENS: What was Botha's contribution there?

MR LUTHULI: He is the one who said he was going to speak to the Investigators of the case and after the case had been dropped, I would be told to come out of hiding.

MR BOOYENS: Very well. Well, Botha also denies that that happened. He said he was never at such a meeting, he wasn't involved in something like that.

MR LUTHULI: He was indeed there, he is telling a lie.

MR BOOYENS: Yes. Thank you Mr Chairman, I've got no further questions.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR BOOYENS: .

MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Luthuli, just on a follow up question on what Mr Booyens has asked you with regard to the meeting at 121 Battalion, in your affidavit at page 229 you actually stated that Mr Louis Botha was a member of the Planning Committee?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MS KHAMPEPE: What was the function of the Planning Committee with regard to the future activities of the Caprivians?

MR LUTHULI: I can say as they were coming back, there was nothing already arranged and prepared for them inside, in the first Committee, that is where it was decided that now that they are back, what is it that they are going to do, how are they going to work? That is where it was decided that they should be contra-mobilisation and offices were set up all over Natal and Botha himself was there, and this first group had to stay in Port Dunfort, it should not leave the place.

And attempts should be made to bring along appointment cards that would be given to the Caprivi strip members, because they were to be moving up and down with guns, so that Police should not give them trouble or arrest them, and it was indicated that Mhlanduna and this other person, should speak with Matte so that they can prepare the cards and give them to the people so that they should not be arrested and when they actually were arrested, that is when it transpired that this is indeed the underground movement of the IFP.

Botha himself was present when this was being discussed.

MS KHAMPEPE: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Hewit, I see that it is now five to four.

MR HEWIT: Would this be a convenient stage, unless there are any other persons with questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, I think what I intend to do is I will give you an opportunity to cross-examine and I will give Mr Stuart an opportunity with regard to re-examination and then after that, I will ask the members of the panel if they have any questions, and then again after that, whether there is any questions arising out of the questions put by members of the panel.

So, you are next in the queue for questions.

MR HEWIT: So would this then be a convenient stage to adjourn?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. And also I will be asking Mr Mpshe if, well perhaps Mr Mpshe, do you want to at this stage, have you got any questions you would like to ask?

MR MPSHE: Mr Chairman, I would appreciate it if I do it after every member has ...

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I think that is what normally happens as well, but before the re-examination?

MR MPSHE: Before the re-examination, yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you. Until what time shall we adjourn tomorrow morning, will half past nine be convenient?

MR HEWIT: 09h30 Mr Chairman, we've made fairly good progress.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. We have now come to the end of today's proceedings, and we will be adjourning and will reconvening here again tomorrow morning at 09h30.

COMMISSION ADJOURNS

CHAIRPERSON: Good morning everybody, at the close of proceedings yesterday, Mr Hewit was about to commence with his questioning of the witness, Mr Luthuli. Mr Hewit, are you ...

MR HEWIT: I am ready Mr Chairman, thank you.

DALAQOLO WORDSWORTH LUTHULI: (still under oath)

MR HEWIT: May I proceed Mr Chairman?

CHAIRPERSON: Certainly Mr Hewit.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR HEWIT: Mr Luthuli, do you have in front of you the affidavit which you deposed to and which you put up in support of your present application for amnesty?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I think so.

MR HEWIT: There doesn't appear to be any translation.

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I think so.

CHAIRPERSON: I've got translation on mine, Mr Hewit. Have you put your volume up?

MR HEWIT: What was your answer to that question Mr Luthuli?

MR LUTHULI: I said I think so.

MR HEWIT: Right, now please turn to page 340 of the papers before you. That is the handwritten page 340 and the typed page 129 of your affidavit. Do you have that?

MR LUTHULI: Just a moment.

MR HEWIT: In particular I want you to look at paragraph 50.5 at the foot of that page. It is the third last page from the end of your affidavit.

CHAIRPERSON: It is on the typed page number 129 of your affidavit, page 340 of the bundle, paragraph 50.5, right at the bottom of the page.

MR LUTHULI: Okay, yes I did locate it.

MR HEWIT: Okay, on paragraph 50.5 you state under oath Ii am able to read, write and speak English fluently, do you see that?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR HEWIT: Do you confirm that?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I do.

MR HEWIT: Right, now I want you to turn please to page 341, that is the following page, and in particular to paragraph 50.7 where you state all the various criminal acts which I have committed and which I have mentioned were motivated by political ends.

I have not been involved in any of them for any personal interest, and I have not received any personal reward. Do you see that?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR HEWIT: Do you confirm that here today?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR HEWIT: Right, now I want to refer to the very beginning of your affidavit, and in particular page 207.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Hewit, page 207 is the application form.

MR HEWIT: The actual typed questionnaire to which you have responded with certain answers, do you see that?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR HEWIT: Now, on the typed page 5 under the sub-paragraph (c) at the top, the question is did you benefit in any way financially or otherwise, do you see that question?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR HEWIT: And do you see that the answer which you have given is no?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR HEWIT: And this was the same question that was asked to you yesterday by my learned friend for the victims, namely Mr Ngubane on my right hand side? Do you see that?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR HEWIT: Now please turn to page 222 of the affidavit.

CHAIRPERSON: That is page 13 of the affidavit, typed page 13, page 222 of the bundle.

MR HEWIT: Do you have that?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR HEWIT: I want you to look at paragraph 5.27 where you say the trainees each received a monthly salary, each month M.Z. Khumalo arrived at the camp and paid us. I received a salary of about R400-00 to R500-00 per month. Is that correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: Why did you then say in answer to that first question, the earlier question that I asked you that you received no remuneration, you didn't benefit in any way financially?

MR LUTHULI: I replied yesterday that the question was if you were doing your work, were you doing it because you were rewarded or not. And I said I was receiving my monthly salary just like anyone else.

MR HEWIT: Right, I want you now to go to page 330 of the record, which is typed page 119.

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR HEWIT: I want you to look at paragraph 44.1 which reads as follows: from the time that I arrived at the Caprivi with the trainees, I was paid a salary. My salary was initially between R400-00 and R500-00 per month. After returning from the training my salary was increased to R2 200-00 per month. I used to receive an annual bonus of about R2 000-00.

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR HEWIT: So in effect are you saying that you received a thirteenth cheque of about R2 000-00?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: That salary, the moment you returned from the Caprivi, did you go up from R400-00 or R500-00 straight away to R2 200-00?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: And were there any increases of that salary from the time you returned from the Caprivi until the time we know you started going to the ANC? From the time that you went to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and started talking to Mr Vanni.

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR HEWIT: Are you saying that your salary at that point in time, when you were going to speak to Mr Vanni was still R2 200-00 per month?

MR LUTHULI: No.

MR HEWIT: Well, what was your salary at the time that you went to see Mr Vanni?

MR LUTHULI: It was R3 187-00.

MR HEWIT: So, in fact from the time you came back from the Caprivi your salary then was increased during the period you were in KwaZulu Natal?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: Is there any particular reason why you omitted this higher salary of in excess of R3 000-00 per month from your affidavit?

MR LUTHULI: I would not know, but if you look at it, look at the time that I spent at Caprivi and on coming back here, that was the time when I left as you pointed out, to join the ANC.

The salary by then had already been increased.

MR HEWIT: Please now turn to page 245 of your affidavit, which is typed page 36.

MR LUTHULI: Page what?

MR HEWIT: Page 245, handwritten page 245 and typed page 36.

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I can see that now.

MR HEWIT: Now, up to paragraph 13.10, that section of your affidavit is all dealing with the murder of Zazi Khuzwayo which starts on page 243 at 13.1, do you agree with me?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR HEWIT: Now, dealing with the events immediately after the murder of Zazi Khuzwayo, you say in paragraph 13.10 Yamile was delighted with the success of the operation and rewarded all of us, by giving us a cash amount of a couple of hundred rands each.

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: Why did you accept money other than your salary for assassinations or murders?

MR LUTHULI: I would like to explain.

MR HEWIT: Please do.

MR LUTHULI: At the time when I was at Ulundi, speaking to Mr M.Z. Khumalo about the killing of Zazi Khuzwayo at Claremont, there was no indication that I was going to be paid.

At the time that I went to Yamile saying that we should kill Zazi for him, he too did not indicate that he was going to remunerate us. Resulting from his excitement on receiving the news that Zazi had died, he found himself going to his safe, taking out money which he gave to us.

He did not say that I am now thanking you because you had killed Zazi Khuzwayo, that is my answer.

MR HEWIT: You were in receipt of a salary and it was over R2 000-00 a month at least on your own version by the time you say you were sent to Yamile to deal with the Zazi Khuzwayo problem, isn't that correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: Now, isn't your case that you were being paid the salary, this higher salary than the other Caprivi trainees, because it was your duty to coordinate assassinations, murders and generally cause mayhem where UDF people were concerned, isn't that your case?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: And you were receiving your salary for doing just that?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: So weren't you being remunerated in any event for killing people like Mr Zazi Khuzwayo?

MR LUTHULI: Would you please complete?

MR HEWIT: That is the question, weren't you being remunerated in any event, for duties or carrying out instructions as you put it, killing people like Mr Zazi Khuzwayo?

MR LUTHULI: I was explaining to you that Yamile on excitement about what had happened, he gave us money. There was no way I could have refused the money, because that was not money he had promised to give us on the death of Zazi.

MR HEWIT: You are not answering my question, I am going to repeat my question to you, until you do answer it.

MR LUTHULI: Will you please repeat the question?

MR HEWIT: The question is this once again, were you not already receiving money for doing political assassinations like the one which we know now was carried on Mr Zazi Khuzwayo before you went to Yamile's home?

MR LUTHULI: Who could have given me that money?

MR HEWIT: Please answer my question.

MR LUTHULI: I don't understand, would you please repeat your question.

MR HEWIT: You have told us that you received an increase in salary upon your return from the Caprivi where you went from R400-00 to R500-00 per month, to in excess of R2 000-00 per month?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: And you were continually receiving this increased salary of R2 200-00 a month or whatever it was, right up until the time you say you received an instruction to go to see Yamile about Zazi Khuzwayo problem, is that correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: So, you were receiving money to perform those kinds of duties on your version?

MR LUTHULI: I would explain yet again.

MR HEWIT: Is the answer yes to my question?

MR LUTHULI: I cannot do that because you have asked me a question and I must give you an answer.

I am saying the money that you are talking about is money that used to be my work salary as a person who was working at the Inkatha offices.

This is not connected in any way with the money that I was given by Yamile. This is not associated and the money that I was being paid as my salary, was not a money to go and kill people.

MR HEWIT: Oh, so is your evidence that this salary of R2 200 per month was a salary given to you by Inkatha Military Intelligence or whatever else, for performing clerical type duties at the Inkatha offices?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: So, the salary then of R2 200-00 a month in the early days, was not a salary to be a Commander of an armed wing which would attack people?

MR LUTHULI: No, that is your way of seeing things.

MR HEWIT: No, I want to know from you and I want you to deal with this issue now, because it reflects upon whether you were just a simple criminal and a hit man who did this for money or whether you were really acting for reasons of ideology and furthering political views?

We will deal with this again. Was your salary of R2 200-00 a month when you came back from the Caprivi a salary which you received for performing clerical duties for the party?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: So in receiving that salary, you were not, that salary did not take account of any assassinations which you were to carry out?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: That salary would not encompass any duties where you led attacks on UDF people?

MR LUTHULI: I don't understand, would you please repeat your question.

MR HEWIT: You weren't being paid R2 200-00 per month to throw petrol bombs in houses?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: It didn't cover that kind of extra function?

MR LUTHULI: That is correct, yes.

MR HEWIT: Your R2 200-00 a month was not being paid to you because you were to organise and coordinate the Caprivi trainees so that they would attack successfully the UDF people?

MR LUTHULI: Listen to me, let me explain to you. You should not associate things that are not connected.

The salary and the work that I was doing, are not connected as you are putting it. The Caprivians were getting salaries, I was not the only one who was getting a salary.

M.Z. Khumalo himself was getting his monthly salary. Yes, there were those payments, the salaries, and there were duties that I had to carry out as per Inkatha instructions, like being the Commissar going around killing people. Do not separate these two, because you will get lost.

MR HEWIT: I don't think I am getting lost. Let us find out what your duties were to earn your R2 200-00 a month when you returned from the Caprivi.

MR LUTHULI: I would say the whole Natal, every area that had an IFP office, you would find Caprivians in those offices. It was my duty to contact and communicate with them and find out what problems they were experiencing in those areas.

I would connect them with the Kings or the Chiefs and the Chairmen of the IFP in the area, and I would also explain to them that these are the people you should use when you are in trouble. And therefore I was not office bound as I am sitting here now.

The office was in Ulundi, that is my office, but I used to travel around so that at the end of the month I would get my salary.

MR HEWIT: So to earn your R2 200-00 a month, although you weren't office bound, you were required to travel the length and breadth of KwaZulu Natal, just identifying problems, but not actually dealing with them, is that what you are saying?

MR LUTHULI: No, I was trying to explain to you that that is working itself. As I was going to these areas, I would not get there standing and look and just leave without doing anything. I would spend perhaps a week or two weeks in that very same area.

MR HEWIT: What were your duties to earn your R2 200-00 a month?

MR LUTHULI: I have already explained that that was my salary as a member of Inkatha working at the IFP offices in Ulundi.

MR HEWIT: Yes, so it was a salary for performing administrative organisational functions, is that what you are saying?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I have already explained that is so.

MR HEWIT: So it was not a salary that you received for killing people, perceived opponents?

MR LUTHULI: I would repeat, I have already indicated that I received this salary as an employee. Let alone what you have just said, that was my duty. Just put aside the office work.

MR HEWIT: Were you expected to kill people on your salary of R2 200-00 a month, that is what I want to know, it is a simple question?

MR LUTHULI: Your question is confusing. I have just explained that when you are working and getting paid at an office, one other thing that you do may not necessarily mean that you should get an extra salary because the training itself that we did, that we underwent at Caprivi was such that when we came back here, people were going to die.

The reason that we did that was so that when we came back, people were going to die, and there was no where where it was indicated that we are going to give you an office salary - every time a person had died, you are going to get so much.

MR HEWIT: Is your answer to my question that you believed that in return for your salary of R2 200-00 a month, you were supposed to organise sufficiently the killing of opponents of the Inkatha Freedom party?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: All right. Now, Mr Zazi Khuzwayo, he was perceived to be an opponent or a threat or an enemy of the Inkatha Freedom party, according to what we have heard from you, is that correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: And he would fall into the category of those persons that you were required to eliminate or orchestrate the elimination of in return for your salary of R2 200-00 a month, it may have been more then, but I am just being kind to you by saying that it was R2 200-00, I don't know. Isn't that right?

MR LUTHULI: No, that is not correct.

MR HEWIT: Was he not a person that you would be expected to kill or to eliminate, neutralise for your salary of R2 200-00 per month?

MR LUTHULI: Maybe I am such a fool, I am not wise enough, because I have already answered your question several times that the money that came as a salary for being an employee, and things that I did outside, are not connected.

Continue, let me not disturb you.

MR HEWIT: Had you finished your answer, without a long speech that is?

MR LUTHULI: You can continue. I thought I made a mistake, you may continue.

MR HEWIT: Was the murder of Mr Zazi Khuzwayo outside the field or the sphere of your employment?

MR LUTHULI: No.

MR HEWIT: Was the murder of Mr Zazi Khuzwayo then within the sphere of your employment for which you received a salary of R2 200-00 a month?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: So, in carrying out your duties of eliminating Mr Zazi Khuzwayo, you shouldn't have received more than your salary, correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: Why then, did you accept a private payment from a private individual, Mr Yamile, for this particular job?

MR LUTHULI: I have already explained that he was excited. I could not have stopped him from giving me the money and as he was giving me the money for being excited, I did not say no, I accepted it. But that was not part of the agreed upon payment that after the death of Zazi I am going to give you so much.

MR HEWIT: Did you not say to Mr Yamile, Mr Yamile, I am only doing my duty?

MR LUTHULI: No, I did not say that.

MR HEWIT: Did you not say to Mr Yamile, I am already paid more than the other Caprivi people for doing this work?

MR LUTHULI: No, I did not say that.

MR HEWIT: Did you go to your superiors, superiors as you have told us, did you go for example to Mr M.Z. Khumalo and say that I am making money, extra money out of killing people for which I receive a salary from you or Military Intelligence or whoever?

MR LUTHULI: No, I did not.

MR HEWIT: Did you, is there a particular reason why you didn't report back to Mr M.Z. Khumalo and tell him that you are making a bit on the side for these extra jobs?

MR LUTHULI: I did not have time so that if a person gave me money, I had to rush and inform Mr M.Z. Khumalo that such a person gave me money. There was no need for that.

There were many people who gave me presents, I didn't rush to inform him, and because of that, I did not see any reason why I should rush to inform a person that Yamile gave me money.

If he was indeed paying me, I would go to M.Z. Khumalo to inform him that now that we have killed Zazi, he had now paid us so much for his death. Who told you that I want so much if I was supposed to kill Zazi, because I am the one who is supposed to come up with a decision of how much I wanted, who gave him that decision on how much I should be paid? That is what I would have said.

MR HEWIT: Have you finished that answer?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR HEWIT: Wasn't your evidence yesterday that it was in fact Mr M.Z. Khumalo who told you that you should eliminate Mr Zazi Khuzwayo?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: So he is the man who gave you the instruction to do so?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: It seems to me that that was the kind of instruction then, which was within the course and scope of your, the sphere of your normal duties for which you were getting the salary of R2 200-00, correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: Do you think that had you told Mr M.Z. Khumalo afterwards that you had made a bonus, Mr Yamile had given you some extra money, he would have been annoyed?

MR LUTHULI: No, he would not.

MR HEWIT: Do you think he would have had something to say about it?

MR LUTHULI: No, that would be up to him, I cannot answer to that.

MR HEWIT: But we know that you never told anybody about this? You never told Mr Khumalo about it?

MR LUTHULI: No, I did not.

MR HEWIT: All right, you told us that you have received many presents and lots of other presents and gifts for work you had done?

MR LUTHULI: No wait, I am answering on the question of Zazi Khuzwayo, let us just concentrate on Zazi Khuzwayo.

MR HEWIT: No, you will not tell me what questions I can ask you. I am asking you now to deal with what you have just said in answer to dealing with Zazi Khuzwayo, that you received lots of other presents and gifts during the course of your duties, is that correct, do you confirm that?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: Well, I would like to know now about these presents and gifts. Let us start off, which other person, name all the persons that gave you presents and gifts for us please?

MR LUTHULI: I cannot enumerate them all. I cannot enumerate also the kind of gifts that I received.

MR HEWIT: Can you tell us of some of them, what was the nature of these presents and from what category or what persons gave them to you?

MR LUTHULI: Like Prince Gideon for example, he gave me an animal skin. He said to me Mhlanduna, here is a skin. Such kinds of gifts.

MS KHAMPEPE: Was that gift, may I interpose Mr Hewit, may I interpose? Was that kind of a gift given to you by Prince Gideon Zulu given to you as a result of one of your successful operations that you had committed on his behalf?

MR LUTHULI: I would say we are neighbours. Now, it was just a present that was not associated with any work well done, but as a person that he knew within Inkatha and a person whom he knew that was working hard for the organisation. A person whom he liked. He saw it fit to give me a present.

MS KHAMPEPE: I am still not clear whether you had understood the ambit of my question. What I wanted to know was whether the gift that you were given by him, was as a result of an operation that you had conducted either on his behalf or on behalf of Inkatha, even if it was not at his own instance?

MR LUTHULI: I would say he was just giving me a gift to appreciate and thank me for working so hard for Inkatha.

MS KHAMPEPE: In your capacity as the Commander of the para military wing?

MR LUTHULI: That is correct.

MR HEWIT: Well, we won't worry too much about an animal skin, but let's hear about something a bit more attractive than an animal skin. Name some other person for us who gave you a reward or gift?

CHAIRPERSON: I think Mr Hewit, if you can make it clear, we are not really interested in what he might have got for Christmas or a birthday present, it is as a result of performing ...

MR HEWIT: Yes, obviously we are not interested in friends' gifts that are normally exchanged at times like Mr Chairman has mentioned, Christmas, birthdays, that sort of thing. We are talking about special recognition for outstanding work done for which you claim you have certain skills, killing people. Tell us about gifts and presents and money that you received over and above your salary for killing other people?

MR LUTHULI: I do not remember.

MR HEWIT: Is that because there were so many occasions where you received money or gifts for killing people?

MR LUTHULI: No, that is not so.

MR HEWIT: How many occasions would there have been when you received a gift or money for killing someone, while in the employ of the KwaZulu government or Inkatha as you say?

MR LUTHULI: I do not remember.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, could you say was it dozens, scores, hundreds, one or two?

MR LUTHULI: I can say that a gift that is not associated with being requested to go do something, then I would give you this, that is something that has never happened.

But if you meet a dignitary, maybe at a rally, and maybe he gives you R2-00 for cold drink, I wouldn't remember such incidents. Or maybe let's go and eat dinner at a certain hotel, I wouldn't remember all of it. But it used to happen which show that the authorities knew that I was around and they appreciated me. I can put it like that.

MR HEWIT: Are you suggesting now that when I started asking you why you took a couple of hundred rands from Yamile for the murder of Zazi Khuzwayo and you then answered so what, I have received lots, many gifts from other people, are you suggesting that when you made that comment, that you were referring to innoxious incidents, like someone buying you a cold drink?

MR LUTHULI: I don't know how to respond to your question, because I have already mentioned that there are gifts that you receive and you don't really put them into your mind. It is just like that.

MR HEWIT: You see, I clearly understood your answer to be that the murder of Zazi Khuzwayo was not the only time I received payment in the form of gift or money from a grateful person for a murder, but there were other occasions when I received money or gifts from a grateful person for committing a murder. Isn't that what you were trying to convey to this Committee?

MR LUTHULI: No, that is not what I am saying.

MR HEWIT: Are you saying that all you were trying to convey is that you have during your life time, received gifts in the form of someone buying you a cold drink or a gift at Christmas, something innoxious like that?

MR LUTHULI: Let me make an example about the President of the IFP. I would sometimes maybe receive a tie as a present, sometimes it would be a scarf. Those are things that I do not really count as associated with the killing of people.

It is things like those, there could be more gifts that he gave to me that I do not remember now. But he used to give me gifts.

MR HEWIT: Well, let me ask you this directly, have you ever received money from someone, over and above your salary for killing someone?

MR LUTHULI: No.

MR HEWIT: Are you saying that the only occasion that this ever happened, was when Yamile gave it to you for the murder of Zazi Khuzwayo?

MR LUTHULI: No.

MR HEWIT: So there have been other occasions then where you received money over and above your salary, for the murder of other persons, other than Zazi Khuzwayo?

MR LUTHULI: No.

MR HEWIT: Well, I am afraid those two answers cannot stand together, because they both contradict each other.

MR LUTHULI: As I have said earlier on, that you are associating two different things.

CHAIRPERSON: I think, sorry Mr Hewit, if I can just intervene here. Perhaps you can clear it up with the witness, but the witness is saying that when you say have you received any money for killing, he might be interpreting that as a prior agreement, you go and kill X and I am going to give you R1 000-00, he is saying that that didn't happen, that he received money from Yamile when Yamile was acting in excitement after the event, and it wasn't a prior agreement.

I think that might be what is causing the confusion here.

MR HEWIT: Let's deal specifically with this area that you might, being kind to you, find ambiguous. We want to know whether in your entire career as the supreme Commander of the Inkatha military wing as you put it, other people other than Mr Yamile was so grateful that after the killing that you orchestrated or committed, performed, gave you money?

Were there other people, other than the Zazi Khuzwayo incident, where you received money?

MR LUTHULI: I wouldn't remember that because when they performed these incidents, or when they did these deeds, they wouldn't come to me and tell me that they had received these gifts or not. It could happen that they did, and did receive payment or gifts.

MR HEWIT: No, I am talking about you receiving gifts, not other people, I am talking about you.

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I have never been

given by an IFP superior for that person to tell me to kill somebody and promise to remunerate me with so much money.

MR HEWIT: Well, your answer deals with an IFP superior giving you money afterwards. I want to know whether any person whether IFP superior, whether IFP subordinate to you or whatever this person is, I want to know whether you have ever been paid money by way of thanks or gratitude by someone after someone has been killed, other than this Zazi Khuzwayo incident?

MR LUTHULI: No.

MR HEWIT: Have you ever been given gifts or presents by any persons after someone has been killed?

MR LUTHULI: Except for Yamile, I don't remember any other person.

MR HEWIT: And did Yamile only ever give you money for the murder of Zazi Khuzwayo?

MR LUTHULI: Except for the one that I have mentioned, but he never promised us the money beforehand.

MR HEWIT: Is the answer yes, you have received money from Yamile for other services rendered?

MR LUTHULI: I don't really understand the question.

MR HEWIT: We know that you received money from Yamile, a couple of hundred rand, for killing Zazi Khuzwayo, right?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct, he was grateful.

MR HEWIT: Did you ever receive any money from anybody else for doing your duties?

MR LUTHULI: No, that is not so.

MR HEWIT: Was that the one and only time that Mr Yamile ever paid you?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR HEWIT: Well, please have a look at page 247 of your affidavit. Now, I want you to look at paragraph 14 in your affidavit. They deal with an entirely different incident to the Zazi Khuzwayo incident, do you agree with me?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: They deal with an incident with the strange title of the Clover Remark. Correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR HEWIT: In paragraph 14.3, there you state we drove back to Yamile's house and reported the shooting to him. Do you see that?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I do.

MR HEWIT: Then you say he, being Yamile, was pleased about this and again rewarded us with a cash amount of a couple of hundred rand.

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR HEWIT: Do you confirm that that is another occasion now that Mr Yamile gave you a couple of hundred rand for doing your duties for which you received a salary any way?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: So was your earlier answer to this Committee, when you were asked whether Yamile only ever gave you a couple of hundred rand for the killing of Zazi Khuzwayo, was that untrue?

MR LUTHULI: It was the truth.

MR HEWIT: Why did you say that was the only occasion?

MR LUTHULI: I was talking about Zazi's death.

MR HEWIT: Yes?

MR LUTHULI: Yamile as we were staying at his house, whatever he did for him, he gave you money for that. Not because he was buying you to do something for him later on, but that was in his nature.

MR HEWIT: Presumably like the money you received from him for killing Zazi Khuzwayo, you also didn't mention this to any of your so-called superiors, like Mr M.Z. Khumalo, the Planning Committee people in the IFP?

MR LUTHULI: No, I did not.

MR HEWIT: Any reason for that?

MR LUTHULI: The reason is that if somebody gives me something, I didn't see a reason to go to M.Z. Khumalo and tell him and so and so had given me so much money because I didn't see how that concerned him, it was my business.

MR HEWIT: Presumably Mr Yamile knew that the other Caprivi trainees were receiving salaries in any event for their services, is that right?

MR LUTHULI: Can you repeat the question please?

MR HEWIT: Did Mr Yamile know that you and other Caprivi's were receiving a salary?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, he did.

MR HEWIT: So he just decided on his own back, to pay you extra over and above your salaries, for these functions?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, it was from his own liking.

MR HEWIT: Right. Now you told us yesterday that before you took over as Supreme Commander of the Inkatha Military Wing, that it was, that the violence perpetrated by Inkatha people was completely misdirected, it had no useful purpose, it involved the killing of even innocent people who were not even UDF, is that correct?

MR LUTHULI: We are talking about a certain area, not generally.

MR HEWIT: All right, let's go back to that, which particular area was this where there were certain problems of undisciplined violence or not properly directed violence?

MR LUTHULI: I was speaking about Hammersdale, Mpumalanga township.

MR HEWIT: All right, just refresh our memories, what was the position that existed in Hammersdale and Mpumalanga, did you say?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: What was the position that existed as far as Inkatha was concerned in Mpumalanga and Hammersdale before you came in?

MR LUTHULI: There was fighting.

MR HEWIT: By Inkatha people?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is true.

MR HEWIT: What was wrong with the way that the Inkatha people were fighting in Mpumalanga and Hammersdale before you came in?

MR LUTHULI: I explained yesterday that when I arrived there, Zakhile Mkehle was the man in charge and because of the way he ruled Mpumalanga, he assumed that Mpumalanga was an Inkatha area only for Inkatha members.

Any other organisation was not allowed to exist, but unfortunately an organisation did emerge and he tried to get rid of that organisation, but without success.

That is the situation I found in the area. But he is the one who was responsible for killing people, the burning down of houses of people being suspected of being UDF members in the Mpumalanga area at that time. That is what I was saying.

MR HEWIT: Yes, but now what was wrong with that from your point of view that necessitated your intervention?

MR LUTHULI: That was not policy at the time, that people should be killed the way he was doing because his organisation was talking peace. He should have been exemplary and show that he means peace, such that if a person was not at war with him, there was no reason for him to fight that person.

MR HEWIT: Are you saying that this person was killing innocents?

MR LUTHULI: As I have mentioned before, if there was one person in a certain house, that person will be responsible for the suffering of all the other members of the household.

If they had managed to flee without having killing somebody, they would burn the house down, but a person that would really be a problem in the house, would only be just one person, maybe the son or the father or the mother.

MR HEWIT: All right, so what you are saying to us is that the situation that obtained before you intervened was that this IFP leader was killing people who were not really even enemies to IFP, he was just killing indiscriminately. To kill one UDF person, he might kill a whole lot of non-aligned people who were not even political, is that what you are saying?

MR LUTHULI: That is true.

MR HEWIT: And that was against policy as you were taught it according to you?

MR LUTHULI: That is true.

MR HEWIT: You only go for a specific target?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR HEWIT: Someone that you have established is UDF?

MR LUTHULI: That is true.

MR HEWIT: And was this person who was doing it the wrong way, was he doing it in broad daylight or were there any other criticisms about the way he was doing the killing?

MR LUTHULI: Can I just expantiate on that point?

MR HEWIT: Yes.

MR LUTHULI: The person I am talking about did not only do this to the UDF, he also did it to IFP members. If they criticised him, he would also kill them and say that they are UDF members.

MR HEWIT: Yes, and did you tell us yesterday that they were also not doing it, they were doing it in an overt way and not a covert way?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I said so yesterday.

MR HEWIT: In other words you objected to the fact that what killings he did commit or perform, were not done clandestinely?

MR LUTHULI: That is true.

MR HEWIT: And you as a Commander, Supreme Commander of the military wing, you believe that these operations should be conducted clandestinely, is that correct?

MR STUART: Mr Chairperson, if I might intervene. My learned friend has adopted the habit of using the term Supreme Commander, my recollection of the applicant's evidence is that he has never used that term.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Hewit, he described himself as being first of all being the Political Commissar and then he was asked to become the Commander. That was my understanding, but not Supreme Commander.

He was in charge of the Unit on the return.

MR HEWIT: You were the Commander of the military wing, correct?

MR LUTHULI: That is true.

MR HEWIT: As far as that military wing was concerned, you were the highest ranking person?

MR LUTHULI: No, that is not so.

MR HEWIT: Oh, who is a higher ranking person than the Commander in the military wing?

MR LUTHULI: M.Z. Khumalo.

MR HEWIT: But he wasn't a military man, was he?

MR LUTHULI: That doesn't mean that he should be a military man to be a Supreme Commander.

MR HEWIT: Do you agree with me he was not a military man?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I agree.

MR HEWIT: You after all, you told us, you were a trained MK operative?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR HEWIT: I think your affidavit earlier on talks about training in Libia, does it?

MR LUTHULI: No.

MR HEWIT: Oh, it must have been one of your previous affidavits, any way, trained in Russia?

MR LUTHULI: That is so.

MR HEWIT: What other countries?

MR LUTHULI: Tanzania, Zambia.

MR HEWIT: Had taken part in ...

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry Mr Hewit, just on this. Are you saying, or are you trying to get that he was the Commander and there was no one above him in the whole hierarchy? Well, I think perhaps - you know, it is very common in military set ups, that above the Commander, there is a political leader, for instance the President of the United States is the Chief Commander of the US Forces, but he is not a military man.

I don't think - if we can try to cut down on the time on this one, we might be going around in ages and get no ...

MR HEWIT: Yes, all I am trying to establish from Mr Luthuli, that from a soldiering point of view, you were the top soldier of the military wing, that is all I am saying? I am not interested in any political bosses you may have had.

Would you agree with that?

MR LUTHULI: That is so.

MR HEWIT: All right. So you as the top military person in charge of the Inkatha armed wing, decided that the way things were being done in Mpumalanga and Hammersdale, had to stop and they had to change?

MR LUTHULI: Let me correct this. My going to Mpumalanga was not voluntary, I did not decide on my own. I was sent by M.Z. Khumalo to go and fix the situation in Mpumalanga. My duty was then to fix the situation.

MR HEWIT: Yes, all right, and you believed that situation should be fixed in certain ways, correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR HEWIT: One of the ways of fixing the situation, was that you would conduct overt operation, but they would be covert operations and clandestine, is that correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR HEWIT: Another way that you would fix the situation, would be that you would not go and kill innocents in a house for example, if only one person in that house happened to be the enemy, the UDF, correct?

MR LUTHULI: That is so.

MR HEWIT: You certainly wouldn't give instructions for your men to fire into a crowd of people just because one person in that crowd was the enemy? Is that correct?

MR LUTHULI: That is so. Yes, that is true.

MR HEWIT: And that is the kind of thing that you wanted to remedy when you went into Mpumalanga and Hammersdale?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR HEWIT: Was that basically your approach in all areas where you operated as the Commander of the military wing?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR HEWIT: Because to operate in any other way, would hardly serve the political purposes of Inkatha, would it?

MR LUTHULI: That is so.

MR HEWIT: The killing of innocent people who were not UDF, would only alienate those innocent people from UDF whereas they may well have come over to the Inkatha side, if Inkatha hadn't attacked them?

MR LUTHULI: That is true.

MR HEWIT: And it certainly wouldn't be in the interests of your secret military wing, to do these things in broad daylight?

MR LUTHULI: That is true.

MR HEWIT: Because that was the very criticism you had of the way things were being conducted beforehand, it wasn't done clandestinely?

MR LUTHULI: That is true.

MR HEWIT: Can you please turn to page 247, you may well be already be open at that particular place, page 247, dealing with the Glover Remark, and at the typed page 37 of your affidavit.

Do you have that place I have referred you to?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR HEWIT: It starts at paragraph 14.1 and goes to 14.5, correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR HEWIT: Can we just deal with what you say in paragraph 14.1. You say there, one day I was driving to Yamile's house in my blue Mazda 323, is that correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR HEWIT: Vela Nquno and Baba Nene were passengers in my car?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR HEWIT: Were they Caprivi trainees?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is true.

MR HEWIT: And were they Caprivi trainees under your direct command?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR HEWIT: In Claremont, whilst driving past a group of pedestrians, one of the pedestrians insulted us by calling us Glovers?

MR LUTHULI: That is so.

MR HEWIT: And then in brackets is says a derogatory name for an Inkatha supporter?

MR LUTHULI: That is true.

MR HEWIT: All right, just let's pause there. How many pedestrians were there in this group?

MR LUTHULI: It was at night, I don't remember.

MR HEWIT: Pardon?

MR LUTHULI: It was at night, I do not remember the number of pedestrians.

MR HEWIT: Well, approximately 100, 10, 2, 15, 20?

MR LUTHULI: I wouldn't know but they were maybe over 20.

MR HEWIT: Over 20?

MR LUTHULI: Maybe about 50.

MR HEWIT: About 50?

MR LUTHULI: I don't know, it could have been 20, 50, I wouldn't know, it was at night.

MR HEWIT: Well, you are a military Commander, you have to assess the strength ...

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Hewit, does it really matter whether it was 20 or 50, I think what you are really trying to get at, there was a group of people?

MR HEWIT: Yes, it was a large group, correct? You said 20 to 50, we will leave it at that.

You say specifically in this affidavit that one of those pedestrians insulted you, only one of them?

MR LUTHULI: That is so.

MR HEWIT: Did you know the people in that group, the group of 20 to 50?

MR LUTHULI: No, I did not.

MR HEWIT: Total strangers to you?

MR LUTHULI: I didn't know them.

MR HEWIT: You say we were angry about this remark, is that correct?

MR LUTHULI: That is true.

MR HEWIT: And you say as my car had become well known at Yamile's house, it is not surprising that they recognised us.

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR HEWIT: Well, are you saying that the one person who in that group of 20 to 50 people, who shouted the word Glover, that would be the person that recognised you?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR HEWIT: You then say in paragraph 14.2, I turned my car around and stopped, is that correct?

MR LUTHULI: That is so.

MR HEWIT: Vela and Baba Nene alighted from the car and walked towards the group of pedestrians?

MR LUTHULI: That is so.

MR HEWIT: When they were alongside them, they drew their pistols and fired shots at them?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR HEWIT: Some of the pedestrians fell down and others fled?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR HEWIT: I was driving slowly just behind Vela and Baba Nene?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR HEWIT: Then, at the end of paragraph 14.2 you say this remarkable thing. I had given the instructions to kill these pedestrians?

MR LUTHULI: That is so.

MR HEWIT: Each of Vela and Baba Nene shot a few shots, not more than two or three each?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR HEWIT: I do not know who the pedestrians were?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR HEWIT: So from all that, I assume that you had no idea that all the other people in this group of 20 to 50, other than the one person you heard shout, had any political affiliation at all?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR HEWIT: They could have even been IFP supporters?

MR LUTHULI: No, it wouldn't be so.

MR HEWIT: Why not?

MR LUTHULI: The place where we were in did not indicate that there were IFP people. There were no IFP supporters.

MR HEWIT: Well, could all the people, other than the one person who shouted the word Glover, have been politically neutral people, who just didn't want to get involved either way?

MR LUTHULI: It is possible.

MR HEWIT: So they could be completely innocent in that sense?

MR LUTHULI: That is true.

MR HEWIT: Yet, you gave instructions to your men to kill these pedestrians?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I did.

MR HEWIT: Now, can you explain to this Committee what possible political objective you could be achieving for your masters, your party, by doing that?

MR LUTHULI: I will explain that in Claremont the IFP no longer existed. Mr Yamile wanted by all means that the IFP strength should be clear and be evident at Claremont. This group of people and this remark that you are talking about, from the IFP side, a person who makes this remark provokes the IFP or is showing the people that he is with, that here is somebody belonging to the other side, something must be done to him.

Therefore what happened at this incident, was to show that the IFP at Claremont is there. Such remarks shouldn't be used any how. That was helping Yamile at Claremont.

MR HEWIT: Why didn't you give instructions to your men just to kill the one person who had made the remark to achieve that purpose?

MR LUTHULI: It would have been impossible in that situation because an unexpected situation cannot be controlled.

You can only control a situation which you have planned and premeditated, then you can tell people to avoid certain individuals.

MR HEWIT: Mr Chairman, is this the normal time that you adjourn for tea because ...

CHAIRPERSON: I am told if we can go on until quarter past eleven Mr Hewit, although eleven o'clock is the normal time, but quarter past eleven today, will be more convenient.

MR HEWIT: So you say it would have been impossible to give instructions just to shoot this man?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR HEWIT: Take out the whole group of pedestrians, that is how you felt about it?

MR LUTHULI: Please repeat the question.

MR HEWIT: Kill the whole group of pedestrians if you can, that seemed politically feasible to you?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR HEWIT: And for that particular incident you were apparently also given a couple of hundred rands each by Mr Yamile?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR HEWIT: Was Mr Yamile just a war lord in the area or what was he?

MR LUTHULI: As I have mentioned before, Yamile was feared by even the smallest or the youngest child. Even to see his car, even a child will run away because of what he was in Claremont.

MR HEWIT: Yes, you also say here that your car had become well known at Yamile's house, is that correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR HEWIT: And that therefore it was not surprising that they recognised us?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR HEWIT: Well, what happened to this whole requirement that you believed so strongly in, that you should operate clandestinely if your car had become so well known?

MR LUTHULI: At that time this car wasn't used for anything. It was only to transport the guards to Yamile's properties.

Sometimes it would accompany him because it was difficult for him to move around in the area, he had to be escorted. That is how the car became known.

MR HEWIT: You see, I want to suggest to you that the probabilities here is that you were simply a hit man for a war lord in the area and for which you were remunerated by that specific individual and you brazenly went around the township, not worried about whether you were seen or not, isn't that correct?

MR LUTHULI: That is not so.

MR HEWIT: And that this sort of incident has absolutely nothing to do with the political objectives of the Inkatha Freedom Party.

MR LUTHULI: That is not so.

MR HEWIT: Because if they had, and if you were true to what you said earlier on, you wouldn't have allowed this car to have been seen and yourself to be associated with Yamile. What do you say about that?

MR LUTHULI: I don't have a response to that.

MR HEWIT: I am also suggesting to you that if these were political objectives and the object was just to kill UDF people and not innocents who may be neutral, you would never have given instructions to your men to fire into this group with the chance of killing innocents?

MR LUTHULI: That is not so.

MR HEWIT: Do you agree with me that what you did on this occasion, sounds just like the situation that you described in Mpumalanga and Hammersdale before you came in?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, it sounds so.

MR HEWIT: It sounds no different, does it?

MR LUTHULI: I don't understand the question.

MR HEWIT: You have agreed with me that it sounds just like the way things were before you went to Hammersdale and Mpumalanga?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR HEWIT: So you were behaving, and your men were behaving in exactly the way, I think you said it was Zakhile was behaving, was it?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I agree.

MR HEWIT: Zakhile Mkehle?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR HEWIT: So you were behaving here just like he behaved?

MR LUTHULI: No.

MR HEWIT: In what way was it different?

MR LUTHULI: The death of Zazi Khuzwayo is not the same as this.

CHAIRPERSON: We are not talking about the death of Zazi Khuzwayo now. What Mr Hewit is talking about is the so-called Glover remark incident where you instructed your trainees who were with you, to go and shoot pedestrians because you had heard a remark made by one of them.

MR LUTHULI: I had explained that.

CHAIRPERSON: So what Mr Hewit is saying is, wasn't that action where there was an order to go and shoot pedestrians who you didn't know, who might have included innocent people on your own version, wasn't that similar to the way that Zakhile Mkehle had been operating in Mpumalanga before you sorted out that problem in Mpumalanga, the killing of innocent people.

MR LUTHULI: That is true. Yes, that is so.

MR HEWIT: Can you explain to this Committee please, how you as Commander, the top military man in charge of Inkatha armed wing, with all this extensive overseas experience, can behave in this fashion, if you are being professional as a soldier and you are doing it for - in the service of an ideal that you believe in? Explain that to us.

I have a lot of difficulty with that.

MR LUTHULI: Let me put it this way. There are areas that are under the influence of a certain organisation and there could be an instruction that those areas should be cleaned up.

Who stays there and what organisation is he affiliated to, if for example the area is said to be UDF area, whether you pass by through the area, whether there are pedestrians on the streets, you just kill everybody.

For that reason you do this to show that a certain organisation is in power. It is not dormant, it exists, therefore the incidents that I am talking about, Yamile didn't have any support in Claremont, but people had to be intimidated because Yamile had to do something. It was one of the strategies that we used.

We could also shoot people in a bus, if those people were seen to be belonging to an organisation. No one would count how many people in the bus belonged to the UDF or how many did not.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Hewit, would this be a convenient time?

MR HEWIT: Yes, this would be a convenient stage Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: We will take a short adjournment for tea.

COMMISSION ADJOURNS

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, I notice that the witness is not present, nor any of the applicants. We will just wait for them to come in.

Thank you Mr Hewit, you may continue.

DALAQOLO WORDSWORTH LUTHULI: (still under oath)

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR HEWIT: (continued) Mr Luthuli, there was an objection before we adjourned for tea, about my use of the word Supreme Commander. Would you please turn to page 273 of the record, of your affidavit rather? That is typed page 63.

Have a look at paragraph 24.11, do you have that?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR HEWIT: The words that you use there is I as the Overall Commander planned and launched hundreds of attacks on the UDF areas. Are you happy with that description, you were the Overall Commander?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR HEWIT: Okay. Please now turn to page 280 of your affidavit, typed page 70. At the top you say the following: we killed people who may have had no involvement in the violence at all. I am ashamed of this and I recognise its callousness.

I was part of the attack. I personally may have killed old men and children. I do not know whether I actually killed anyone, or if so, how many. Neither do I know who the deceased are.

Do you stand by that?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR HEWIT: Now, how did that advance the Inkatha cause, killing people that aren't even involved in violence against Inkatha?

MR LUTHULI: I can give you an explanation by saying if you were Inkatha stopping UDF busses that were headed for a rally, shooting at the busses, you don't necessarily know that all the people in the bus, are UDF members, but this is what used to happen.

Because of this, we had to stamp the presence of the IFP in the area because it happened in some cases where the IFP had already left, but people UDF people, still died because they had to go to those areas so that UDF areas in those areas should live in fear, they should not think they are all alone.

And therefore, there was no discrimination as to who was a UDF member or not, that is what used to happen.

MR HEWIT: And that justified killing children who obviously at that stage hadn't even become politically aware?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: Okay. Please turn to page 244 of your affidavit. I want you to look at the very last sentence of paragraph 13.3, which is the one that ends just before the figures 13.4 on page 244, do you have that?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR HEWIT: You say there we decided to kill Zazi Khuzwayo first. I told M.Z. Khumalo and he approved.

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR HEWIT: Is that right?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: Who is the we that decided to kill Zazi Khuzwayo first?

MR LUTHULI: It is myself, M.Z. Khumalo and Yamile.

MR HEWIT: Well, if we are deciding to kill Zazi Khuzwayo, why did you tell M.Z. Khumalo afterwards?

MR LUTHULI: I had to report that such a thing had already happened.

MR HEWIT: What, the decision to kill Zazi Khuzwayo, did you report that?

MR LUTHULI: What I am saying is that M.Z. Khumalo, Yamile and myself took the decision before his death.

MR HEWIT: So is that sentence badly worded? We decided to kill Zazi Khuzwayo first. I told M.Z. Khumalo and he approved. It sounds to me as if you are saying other people decided to kill Zazi Khuzwayo and M.Z. Khumalo is only told about it afterwards?

MR LUTHULI: That is not the case. That is not the case.

MR HEWIT: It reads like that, doesn't it?

MR LUTHULI: As you are saying, that is how it reads, but that is not it happened.

MR HEWIT: Do you agree with me it reads that way? Do you? Do you agree with me it reads as if other people, other than M.Z. Khumalo made the decision and he is only told afterwards?

MR LUTHULI: No.

MR HEWIT: You don't agree?

MR LUTHULI: No, I don't.

MR HEWIT: Although you read and write English fluently?

MR MOTATA: Before you do Mr Hewit, I would say to page 243 and look at paragraph 13.2 and compare that paragraph to the answer given by the applicant.

MR HEWIT: I have read those various passages. The point is that there are contradictions in it.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Stuart, you wanted to say something.

MR STUART: Thank you Mr Chairperson. It seems in the translation the confusion may arise as to whether this happened after the decision or after the murder, and that seems to be some of the confusion. That is clarified in the questions, may sort it out.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, because I think if one reads it with as was pointed out by Mr Motata, the last sentence in paragraph 13.2, it says M.Z. Khumalo instructed that I was to see to it that Zazi Khuzwayo was killed. That would certainly indicate on this, the way it is worded, the knowledge prior to the killing that is about to take place, and then when it is read with it.

But perhaps the witness can explain if that is not the case. Just follow that Mr Hewit.

MR HEWIT: There would be no reason to tell Mr M.Z. Khumalo, would there, that a decision had been made by other people to kill Zazi Khuzwayo first if he had already given an instruction beforehand to kill him first? Would there?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: Thank you. I want to move on to a different matter now. When you were in training as an MK cadre, you were in various camps around the world with different MK people, receiving training, is that right?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: Were there ever any problems between the Zulu's who were receiving MK training for the ANC and other tribal groups for example Xhosa people, in those camps? Were there any tribal problems that arose in those MK training camps?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, such problems did exist.

MR HEWIT: Tell us about those problems.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry Mr Hewit, is this relevant to the application?

MR HEWIT: We suggest yes, if you will just give me some latitude here, and I will as soon as we get the answers, I will demonstrate the relevance.

Were there problems between Zulu's undergoing MK training for ANC and for example Xhosa's?

MR LUTHULI: Not as you put it. The MK is not specifically for Ama-Xhosa and Ama-Zulu. The MK is encompassing, it included all the organisations in South Africa.

And therefore I cannot say that Ama-Xhosa and Ama-Zulu were the only ones fighting.

MR HEWIT: Yes, well, you are making this longer than I had wanted it to be. I just want to know, you mentioned to me there were problems between the Zulu speaking group and others, and I just want you to briefly tell me what they were.

Then we will deal with the relevance of it.

MR LUTHULI: I can say first of all Ama-Zulu took a truck and they wanted to come back to South Africa and others objected to that idea.

As a result of that, there was conflict. Those who were Zulu's took the truck by force, and they left. They were arrested along the way and they were sent back where they took the truck. The matter is discussed and it came to an end.

MR HEWIT: Right, when you were waging this campaign that you told us about against the UDF, did you know any of their leaders as former MK people that you had known from overseas training?

MR LUTHULI: Would you please explain that?

MR HEWIT: The MK people that you trained with, did you ever see any of them in Natal during these years when this war was going on, who were now UDF, but you recognised them from overseas training, or knew from overseas training?

MR LUTHULI: What time frame are you referring to?

MR HEWIT: Well from when you came back to Caprivi, during that entire time, until you went to see Mr Vanni, all the assassinations you did, all the attacks you organised and committed?

MR LUTHULI: No, I did not see anyone of them.

MR HEWIT: So, any attacks that you launched on former MK people, now with the UDF, weren't part of settling old scores from problems in the past when you were in camps together, is that what you are saying?

MR LUTHULI: I don't quite understand your question.

MR HEWIT: All right, we will leave that.

Please turn to page 214, paragraph 3.3. You say there the Security Police tried to recruit me, but I refused. Leonard Nkosi had become an agent for the Security Police.

How did the Security Police, this is the Security Police of the South African Police, of the former regime, correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: How did they try and recruit you?

MR LUTHULI: So that I can leave the Umkonto weSizwe to join them, and go around, show them around where other MK members resided or they would send me to go and kill other MK members.

MR HEWIT: Were you offered any inducement to do this by way of them persuading you to join them, for example did they promise you a salary?

MR LUTHULI: I would just explain it as follows: The Special Branch never used to bag a person. The methods that they used were such that they would torture a person, so when a person agreed, it was not out of his own volition, but it was because of pain that a person was going through.

And because the pain was unbearable ...

MR HEWIT: Now, Leonard Nkosi was he in MK with you?

MR HEWIT: Sorry, Mr Hewit, I see the witness is apparently in a state of distress. Mr Luthuli, would you like a short adjournment?

MR STUART: If I might request that on his behalf Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: I think we will take a short adjournment and if you can let us know as soon as you are ready, so that we can start as soon as the witness is available.

MR STUART: Thank you Mr Chairperson.

COMMISSION ADJOURNS

DALAQOLO WORDSWORTH LUTHULI: (still under oath)

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR HEWIT: (continued) All right, so you told us just before we had the short adjournment that the Security Police did try and recruit you? Apart from the torture which you spoke about, did they also say that they would, if you join them, they would pay you?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: Right. Now, when you return from the Caprivi, you told us that you met Louis Botha who was a Security Policeman, a member of the Special Branch, correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: During the period from the time that you returned from the Caprivi until the time that you made a statement or gave information to Mr Howard Vanni, did you meet any other Security Policemen?

MR LUTHULI: No.

MR HEWIT: During that period that I have referred to, did any of the members of the South African Police try to recruit you?

MR LUTHULI: No.

MR HEWIT: Did Louis Botha ever try and recruit you for the South African Police?

MR LUTHULI: No.

MR HEWIT: Right. Please turn to page 215 of your affidavit, paragraph 3.9.

Do you have that Mr Luthuli?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR HEWIT: You say there, on my arrival at my home, I found that my father had become a member of Inkatha, is that correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: That is after you were released from Robben Island, correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: And you say as instructed, I did likewise, correct?

MR LUTHULI: That is correct.

MR HEWIT: This was in keeping with ANC policy of that time?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: So at that point in time, there was no antagonism or animosity between Inkatha and ANC or UDF?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: Then you say, despite this my father remained a staunch supporter of the ANC, is that correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: He later turned against Inkatha because he felt that Inkatha was collaborating with the South African government?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: When did your father turn against Inkatha?

MR LUTHULI: I would say when there were statements that were directed towards the ANC. Statements that came from the IFP President. That is when he turned his back.

MR HEWIT: Yes, well I am actually trying to put this into some form of time frame. We know that you basically finished with Inkatha when you went to see Mr Howard Vanni, correct?

MR LUTHULI: That is correct yes.

MR HEWIT: Was it some years before that, that your father had in fact turned against Inkatha because they thought they were collaborating too much with the South African government?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: Approximately how many years before your final disenchantment with Inkatha, was your father disenchanted with Inkatha, two years, three years, four years?

MR LUTHULI: I wouldn't not know.

CHAIRPERSON: Was it before you went to Caprivi or after you went to Caprivi that your father turned his back on Inkatha?

MR LUTHULI: That was after.

MR HEWIT: But it was some years before you turned your back on Inkatha?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: Right. Did your father tell you at the time that he was disenchanted with Inkatha when he became disenchanted with Inkatha a couple of years before you did?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: Did he try and persuade you to also leave Inkatha and to go to the ANC or UDF?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: Did he succeed in that, or did he fail?

MR LUTHULI: No, he did not succeed.

MR HEWIT: Right. Please now turn to page 216 of your affidavit. Do you have that?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR HEWIT: At the top of page 216 you say this. In 1980 or 1981 I accompanied my father to Lesotho where we met Chris Hani, is that correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: Now, at that stage you were in Inkatha?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, the two of us.

MR HEWIT: At that stage, in 1980 or 1981 when you went with your father to meet Chris Hani in Lesotho, had your father then become disenchanted with Inkatha or was he still in Inkatha or was he now with the ANC?

MR LUTHULI: He was still in Inkatha.

MR HEWIT: Still Inkatha then, at that stage?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: Right you then carry on and say, the reason for this visit was to discuss and implement plans for the recruitment of members for MK.

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: My father and I was secretly involved in this planning and actively recruited members for MK, is that correct?

MR LUTHULI: That is correct, yes.

MR HEWIT: Later when I became actively involved with Inkatha, I stopped.

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: But my father continued with the recruitment for MK?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: Then in paragraph 4.4 you say, I went to see Chris Hani and Lambert Moloi in Lesotho on three or four occasions?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: The purpose of these meetings were to pass on information concerning policy decisions of Inkatha?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: Inkatha was not aware of these meetings?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: Well, were other members of Inkatha not liaising with the ANC at that stage?

MR LUTHULI: I would not know.

MR HEWIT: You were never asked by Inkatha to tell the ANC about their policy decisions?

MR LUTHULI: No.

MR HEWIT: Is there any particular reason why - let me put it this way, did you tell any other Inkatha members or supporters at that time, that you were having these meetings in Lesotho?

MR LUTHULI: Let me explain this to you. When we went to the places to which you have just referred, it was not easy. There was even no need for me to inform another Inkatha member because the people that we were going to speak to were dangerous to your government and because of that, I would not have at the time of my working underground, told somebody else that I am here in Inkatha, but there is also something else that I am involved in.

The instruction that I received was that I was supposed to give them what information I could, because they wanted to know better about Inkatha.

MR HEWIT: So, were you spying on Inkatha for the ANC?

MR LUTHULI: I have just explained that I would not have told anyone and therefore there was no spying in the IFP. The IFP was a legal organisation accepted, and therefore I could not have spied, but if an organisation wanted to know if I were in a better position, so that they could get that better information, they indeed wanted me to send them those documents.

That is not spying.

MR HEWIT: So did you actually send Inkatha documents to the ANC at this stage?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: Nobody from Inkatha knew about that? And nobody from Inkatha knew about that?

MR LUTHULI: Let me tell you. The President Mangosuthu Buthelezi, I was on my way to Swaziland. I was asked by comrade Gideon Mlege from eSikhawini that the comrades in Swaziland wanted to see me. I told him and he personally agreed because there was no secret.

And therefore there was no spying in the IFP.

MR HEWIT: Okay. Were you paid at all by the ANC for giving them these documents?

MR LUTHULI: The ANC let me just explain something to you about the ANC. When you join the ANC, you volunteer, you dedicate yourself.

They don't do what the Special Branch does, like torturing. They were pleading with you at the same time and if it was indicated that volunteers were needed, a volunteer is a person who dedicate himself, volitionally without any gain, that is how the ANC is.

It doesn't use electric shocks.

CHAIRPERSON: The question, I take it the answer is no, you weren't paid?

MR LUTHULI: I think you now have understood that I did not get any remuneration.

MR HEWIT: Yes, well you took a long time to say so.

Turn to page 230 please, typed page 21, do you have that?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR HEWIT: There you say although I was apparently on the Planning Committee, I only attended that one meeting. Is that correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: I think that I was not included thereafter because I grumbled about the involvement of the SADF to M.Z. Khumalo.

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: After the meeting M.Z. Khumalo and I travelled back to Ulundi together?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: During which time we had an argument about the involvement of the SADF?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: So according to you there, at a very early stage, you were objecting to certain policies of the Inkatha Freedom Party in dealing with the SADF, correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: That is why you ever attended the one meeting, you never attended another meeting after that.

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: Right, please turn to page 231, in particular to paragraph 7.6.

I have some difficulty with this paragraph, this is why I am going to ask you to explain it, I will read it to you.

The person to whom I was to report, and from whom I was given instructions, was M.Z. Khumalo. Is that correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: He in turn reported to the Committee, correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: I was given the responsibility of organising any operations to kill people?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: The leadership on the ground in any particular area, would be involved in deciding who had to be killed?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: But I would put the operation into effect?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: So what are you actually saying there? Are you saying that people who were not part of the Planning Committee, actually decided, that is people on the ground, actually decided who had to be killed? Because that is as I read that?

MR LUTHULI: I thought you had finished, so that you could give me a chance to answer you.

MR HEWIT: Right, well please explain my - try and assist me with my confusion there.

MR LUTHULI: You see, reference to the first Planning Committee and as we were going to the Planning Committee, M.Z. Khumalo did not indicate or tell me that he was now in contact or involved with the whites or the Boers and that the Caprivi training was being orchestrated by whites.

I got a shock on arrival there, that both Louis Botha the one who was Special Branch here in Durban and Louis Botha, who was a bodyguard of the IFP President, I used to see him daily. I wondered what he wanted there.

Van Niekerk as well, the one who no longer knew me now, whom I now knew that he was working for the Military Intelligence, was also there, and I wondered what he was doing there.

And therefore it was my duty to ask him as to what was happening there. Do you understand me well now?

MR HEWIT: Yes, but it doesn't answer my question. What I want to know, was it the Planning Committee who made the decision as to who to kill or was it the people on the ground who made the decision as to who was to be killed?

MR LUTHULI: You understood me well when I said M.Z. Khumalo said Zazi Khuzwayo should be killed.

I did not know where he got the instruction from, whether from the Planning Committee, I was not there when that matter was being discussed.

MR HEWIT: What do you mean when you say the leadership on the ground in any particular area, would be involved in deciding who was to be killed?

MR LUTHULI: Listen now, you see the Caprivians on return, they were brought to a Chief's place or a Headman or at a Branch, that is the IFP Branch.

I would speak to the Branch Chairman in the area, to say that these are the people who are going to assist you. That is why we had offices all over Natal. These offices were not put up there so that they could be used for writing and documentation. The one purpose of deporting the people or seconding the people there, was to kill people who were against Inkatha.

And therefore, they could not know who in the area was troublesome, the Branch leader was supposed to indicate who was troublesome in my area and Claremont itself, being so big, required that if a person was problematic, such persons should be removed.

This is how it happened.

MR HEWIT: Have you finished?

CHAIRPERSON: Apparently so Mr Hewit.

MR HEWIT: Please turn now to page 235 of your affidavit. I want to read to you what you said in paragraph 9.11.

There you say, this system operated well and may still be operating. The Caprivi trainees are still a close knit group who remain very independent. There has been a certain amount of blurring of the different roles of each of the groups.

Some trainees who were in the contra-mobilisation or defensive groups have been and are directly involved in violence and the killing of persons who are identified as enemies.

This has just been a natural progression of their roles particularly because they were all trained in these skills. Then, this is the sentence I am interested in, in addition to this, I eventually became opposed to reporting on all operations to the Planning Committee, because I knew that they in turn, reported to the Central Government. Do you confirm that there?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR HEWIT: Now, the Planning Committee that you reported to, according to your evidence, was done through one person, Mr M.Z. Khumalo, is that correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: So, a stage was reached then if what you are saying in paragraph 9.11 is correct, where you became opposed to reporting to the Planning Committee, through Mr Khumalo?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: So you stopped at a certain stage, even telling Mr Khumalo what you did?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: Now, here again it is necessary for us to understand your evidence for you to assist us and tell us when that would have been, that you decided no longer to report to Mr Khumalo on your operations and decisions and activities.

MR LUTHULI: Let me say referring to the offensive group, this offensive group was the actual group that was the Inkatha hit squad, it resided in Port Dunfort.

Its Commander was JP Opperman. He stayed there with them at Port Dunfort. My quarrel with M.Z. Khumalo was because I was asking about JP's residing with the group there, that is the offensive group.

They then must be the people or I can say they are the people who were Inkatha and on this side of Inkatha, special reference to contra-mobilisation and the Intelligence were asking me personally as to we are going to be defended or fought for by JP, how much do you trust these people?

You should not divulge this to M.Z. Khumalo because they are going to land us in jail. Indeed, I can refer you to several operations that they conducted.

CHAIRPERSON: But Mr Luthuli, the question to you was approximately when did this happen, what year, when about, that was what the question was.

MR LUTHULI: I can say that at about 1992, 1993, somewhere around there.

MR HEWIT: But hadn't you already been to see Mr Vanni? No, I withdraw that.

You went to see Mr Vanni in 1994, didn't you?

MR LUTHULI: It was late.

MR HEWIT: Towards the end of 1994?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR HEWIT: So would you say that the time you are talking about, was about two years before that?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR HEWIT: Well, is that the time that you no longer reported to Mr Khumalo or did you stop reporting to him beforehand, before that?

MR LUTHULI: Let me correct this. You should ascertain which year this Committee I am talking about, came into being. After I told Khumalo that I have a problem because the Caprivi trainees are asking me what the Boers are doing there.

MR HEWIT: Well, that must have been quite early on after you came back from Caprivi, that these people started meeting people like Mr Opperman, Jerry, Kevin, and these sort of people, isn't it?

MR LUTHULI: Who was seeing who, I don't really understand the question.

MR HEWIT: It must have been clear to everybody soon after you had come back from Caprivi, that the SADF as it then was, was involved here.

MR LUTHULI: We were not told officially of that.

MR HEWIT: But you knew that?

MR LUTHULI: I was not told officially.

MR HEWIT: Look, you told us that when the Planning Committee was started, you only ever attended one meeting and never attended any other meetings, because then at that early stage, you had quarrelled about the fact that the SADF was involved, correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR HEWIT: What I am suggesting to you if that was when you became annoyed about the SADF being involved, that must have been at a very, very early stage. It must have been as far back as about 1987, because you came - when did you go to the Caprivi, in 1986 wasn't it?

MR LUTHULI: I don't remember.

MR HEWIT: Well, there is more than enough evidence, I want to put it to you that you were in the Caprivi in 1986, for the training. Do you dispute that?

MR LUTHULI: I hear you.

MR HEWIT: And then when you came back from the Caprivi, there would have been talk about a Planning Committee, fairly shortly after that, no later than 1987, would you agree with that?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR HEWIT: And therefore it was at that stage that you knew then in 1987, that the military was involved, and you were not happy with that fact. That is why you quarrelled with Mr Khumalo and you never went to any more Planning Committee meetings.

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR HEWIT: Well then from what you tell us, you must have decided then at a very early stage, like 1987, that you weren't going to report to the Planning Committee through Mr M.Z. Khumalo because they had a link with the white South African Defence Force then, correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR HEWIT: So what I am putting to you now from that early time onwards, 1987, you are on your own, you were not reporting to the Planning Committee through Khumalo, and you were conducting operations entirely on your own and without reporting back, on your own version? What do you say about that?

MR LUTHULI: That is lies.

MR HEWIT: Do you know that all the evidence led at the Magnus Malan trial, indicated that when you came back from the Caprivi, you became a rouge element on your own.

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I am aware.

MR STUART: Mr Chairperson, with respect, it is simply not the case that all the evidence led to that conclusion as indicated by my learned friend.

It is confusing with the witness, he is not familiar with the record of the trial and it is wrong to say that all the evidence indicated that.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Hewit, we don't have that evidence before us, so I don't know what value ...

MR HEWIT: This is the problem unfortunately with the nature of these hearings Mr Chairman, is that they take place when so many other trials have gone before and findings been made, that it makes it very difficult to do complete justice to these proceedings within the limited time span one has.

But in any event, I am going to contempt myself with the answers that this witness, obviously the Committee in due course will have regard, I am sure, to all the other documentary evidence available, in coming to its conclusion about amnesty. But at this stage, Mr Luthuli, I am simply putting it to you that on your own version, you would have dissociated yourself and cut yourself off deliberately from any further contact with people that you regarded as your superiors, for example like Mr M.Z. Khumalo. What do you say about that?

MR LUTHULI: I don't agree.

MR HEWIT: And following on from that, I put it to you that thereafter you operated entirely on your own without instruction from superiors or anybody else?

MR LUTHULI: I do not agree with it.

MR HEWIT: Okay.

MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Hewit, I am a little perturbed that we are unable to operate within a particular time frame. The question that you have just put to Mr Luthuli, what period would you be referring to?

MR HEWIT: On his evidence now, he has agreed that the time we are talking about when he found out that the military was involved, and he had a reluctance to report to the Planning Committee because the military were involved, goes back to 1987.

MS KHAMPEPE: Is it not in fact September 1986, from what I have been able to read in my papers?

MR HEWIT: I may have been too generous to the witness then. I am indebted to you for drawing that to my attention.

Either way, and these dates can be checked on, you do say and following on from that question from the Committee member, would you bear with me Mr Chairman, I am just trying to find a particular part of the affidavit which puts the matter beyond all doubt, yes, please turn to page 218 of your affidavit.

Could you bear with me Mr Chairman. Can we put it this way, would you agree with me that you returned after the training in the Caprivi, during 1986, towards the second half of 1986?

MR LUTHULI: I will say so, although I don't remember correctly.

MR HEWIT: Right. It would have been at that stage that there was talk about a Planning Committee because you have told us that when you got back, there was this meeting and Louis Botha and various people were there, correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR HEWIT: And that was the one and only Planning Committee meeting which you ever attended?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR HEWIT: So that was in 1986, we have established that date, correct?

MR LUTHULI: Well, I do not know, I hear that from you.

MR HEWIT: Yes, but in any event, you decided not to deal with that Planning Committee ever again, or report back, because you knew it would just get back to the Central Government, the white SADF.

MR MOLOI: I seem to have a problem with the suggestion that from the affidavit, one can deduce the fact that there was no reporting at all. If you refer to page 235 on which your argument is based, at the foot of the page, the applicant states in addition to this, I eventually became opposed to reporting on all operations to the Planning Committee, because I knew that they in turn would report to the Central Government. Does that mean, help me if I don't understand it properly, does it mean that there was no reporting at all there?

MR HEWIT: This is with respect, not for me to explain, but for the witness to explain. This is why I am asking, for the benefit of the Committee, so that the Committee can understand precisely what he is saying, and to then decide whether this man was acting on instructions or not.

It is for the witness to tell us and clarify what dates we are talking about, and I am trying to establish what dates, and it appears the answers we are getting, is that we are getting back to as early as the latter part of 1986 which is very, very significant if one looks at the picture that the applicant is trying to paint.

It is not with respect for me to elaborate on that, but for the witness to tell us what the significance of him not reporting to the Planning Committee is, when he realised certain things. What we are endeavouring to establish is when he became aware of these matters which decided him, no longer to liaise with them. That is the point.

MR MOLOI: I don't intend getting into an argument, I would just like to clear this thing. Does that sentence that I have just read, suggest to you there was no reporting at all done, or was there no reporting on all operations?

MR HEWIT: It is not a question, with respect, what it conveys to me, I am trying to understand what the witness is trying to say.

I am asking him to elaborate.

CHAIRPERSON: Perhaps if you can just ask the witness what he meant by what was stated in his affidavit. Mr Luthuli, could I just read you the sentence from your affidavit and if you could kindly inform us what you meant by saying that.

You say, and I will read it, in addition to this, I eventually became opposed to reporting on all operations to the Planning Committee, because I knew that they in turn reported to the Central Government.

Now, when you stopped reporting, did you stop reporting completely, did you never again report to Mr M.Z. Khumalo or did you only report selectively to him?

MR LUTHULI: I reported selectively.

MR HEWIT: So you reported some matters, but not all matters?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is true.

CHAIRPERSON: That is what my understanding of this sentence is as well, just the literal meaning of that.

MR HEWIT: Well, what matters did you decide to report to him and what matters did you decide you shouldn't report to him?

MR LUTHULI: I will make an example about (indistinct) Mkhize's hit squad.

Mkhize's group, after receiving an instruction from the eSikhawini leadership, after they would go and kill certain people, they would then call me and tell me about that.

That I wouldn't pass on to M.Z. Khumalo. He was supposed to find out that information himself, from Langeni. That is one example I can give you.

MR HEWIT: Why would you not report the formation of a hit squad to Mr Khumalo? I understood you to say that this was the sort of grand plan just to alienate people who were a danger to the IFP?

MR LUTHULI: I don't remember having said that M.Z. Khumalo didn't know about the eSikhawini hit squad, but when operations were carried out, I don't remember telling him.

But its existence was known to him, but its operations I did not tell him about that.

MR HEWIT: Well, there must be better examples than that of areas that you felt you shouldn't tell Mr Khumalo about. Can you give us any other examples of where you didn't report to the Planning Committee, other than this Captain Langeni matter which you talk about. Are there any other examples?

MR LUTHULI: I will make an example about Nkosi Mlaba's death. His death was not an instruction directly sent to me by M.Z. Khumalo, but Captain Kanyele who was the Head of the BSI in KwaMashu, came to me and requested the Caprivi training staying in Nkosi Mlaba's area.

I did not know from whom he had obtained information that I had a Caprivi trainee in that area, because I knew that somebody had told him, or must have told him.

Therefore I gave him the name of Captain Kanyele or rather I gave Captain Kanyele the name of the trainee in the area. Nkosi Mlaba was then killed.

The Caprivian then came to me and told me that we had gone to kill Nkosi Mlaba. I didn't go to M.Z. Khumalo to tell him that.

MR HEWIT: So he would be kept in the dark about that?

MR LUTHULI: There was no reason for me to tell him, because he knew.

MR HEWIT: Any way, it seems what you say now, seems to bear out an earlier part of your affidavit which I put to you, where you stated that the decisions as to who were to be killed, were made on the ground, by the people on the ground and not through the Planning Committee? Is that right?

MR LUTHULI: Maybe I don't understand you, because I told you that the Planning Committee was responsible for the Caprivians. On their return they had a meeting on how they would operate. It wasn't the Central Committee of Inkatha that decided that, it was the Planning Committee.

MR MOTATA: Mr Hewit, I think we should have regard to page 231 of the paginated papers. It would be not entirely correct to say people on the ground, because he said leadership on the ground. I think we should differentiate that, because it makes a lot of difference.

MR HEWIT: Leadership on the ground, but as opposed to members of the Planning Committee? Leadership on the ground were not members of the Planning Committee, were they?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, it is as you say.

MS KHAMPEPE: May I interpose Mr Hewit, just for my own clarity. I don't want to be confused whilst you are on this issue because I think it deals with a matter which is giving me grave concerns with regard to the structure of command.

Are you saying Mr Luthuli, that the leadership on the ground, would identify the target to be eliminated, and once that has happened, there was no need for you to go back to the Planning Committee, to clear the identify of that target with them, or to even get their authority to proceed with the elimination of the person, already targeted by the local leadership?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is true.

MS KHAMPEPE: Thank you Mr Hewit.

MR HEWIT: May I move to a different topic now Mr Luthuli.

Would you please turn to page 289 of your affidavit. Would you bear with me Mr Chairman, that appears to be an incorrect reference there. Would you please turn to page 295 of your affidavit.

Did you at any stage, have difficulties in obtaining weapons?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I did.

MR HEWIT: And to deal with this problem and difficulty of obtaining weapons, did you look for sources where you could obtain them?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR HEWIT: Where did you believe, initially where did you get your weapons from?

MR LUTHULI: From M.Z. Khumalo.

MR HEWIT: And was a stage reached where he could no longer supply you with weapons?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR HEWIT: And did it fall upon your shoulders to find alternative sources for weapons?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR HEWIT: Did you do that on your own?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is true.

MR HEWIT: But these weapons were required not to commit crimes, but to further Inkatha policy, were they?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR HEWIT: Now, at page 295 of your affidavit, dealing with the topic M.R. Mzimela, do you see that?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR HEWIT: In paragraph 27.2.1 you say I obtained a lot of weapons from M.R. Mzimela?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR HEWIT: Did you find him out as a source, rather than someone else directing you to him, did you discover him as a source? How did it come about that you knew he was a person to get weapons from?

MR LUTHULI: I can say that I was called by him and he said to me that there are AK47 rifles and I should inform everybody who needs them, that he is selling them for R1 000-00 each.

The reason for this was that if they could be given out for free, it would be just as easy to lose them. The easiest way was to know that a person who got the gun, had it, it belonged to him.

I don't know why he actually called me specifically, I don't know who told him to call me.

MR HEWIT: In any event, money would be received for these firearms?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, they were paid for.

MR HEWIT: The ones that you received according to you, from Mr M.Z. Khumalo, they didn't have to be paid for by the people in whose hands they ended up in?

MR LUTHULI: Initially he did not charge for the weapons, but as the years went passed, he demanded that the guns be bought.

MR HEWIT: We are dealing specifically, you told us that you obtained weapons from Mr M.Z. Khumalo initially, but that source dried up and alternative sources had to be found, correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR HEWIT: When you obtained your weapons from Mr M.Z. Khumalo, he didn't charge you for those weapons then, did he?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR HEWIT: Weapons sourced from him directly, money was not required?

MR LUTHULI: Well, I wouldn't know whether where he got them from, he paid for them or not. But when he gave them to me, he did not tell me to take them to a certain person and ask for money.

He would just tell me to take them to a Chief and I will take the guns and take them there, and I wouldn't receive any money or I wouldn't charge any money.

MR HEWIT: But you weren't required to get any money from the Chief to pay for the gun for Mr Khumalo?

MR LUTHULI: As I have explained before, that he would give me guns to give to Chief Kaula. He wouldn't say he is selling the guns, it was just to take the guns and leave them there.

MR HEWIT: But it was different apparently, according to your affidavit, about Mr M.R. Mzimela, is that right?

MR LUTHULI: M.Z. Khumalo and M.R. Mzimela worked in the same way. The only difference is that one works for the government and one works for the IFP office.

If you don't know them, you might actually confuse them, but if you know them well, you would know that they are in the same boat.

CHAIRPERSON: I don't think it is quite clear from the evidence Mr Hewit, that he said that Mzimela demanded a payment and, I think that is quite ...

MR HEWIT: Paragraph 27.23 of your affidavit please, on page 295. There you say on many occasions these leaders would hand me money and I would purchase the weapon from Mzimela and later deliver it to the purchaser.

I did this on hundreds of occasions, to you confirm that?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I do.

MR HEWIT: Then at page 296 you say, in paragraph 27.2.5 a case in point which I can recall was the sale of six AK47 rifles to Chief Luthuli from Port Shepstone. Chief Luthuli came to my house at Ulundi one afternoon in about 1994, he was alone and was driving his Mercedes Benz motor car.

He told me that he wanted to purchase six AK47 rifles, he had R6 000-00 cash with him, is that correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR HEWIT: I referred him to Mr M.R. Mzimela. A few weeks later I called to see Chief Luthuli and he enquired about the weapons?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR HEWIT: And he thanked you for your help at the end of the paragraph, for getting these weapons for him, is that correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Hewit, when a convenient stage arises, I am informed that it is ...

MR HEWIT: I hadn't noticed it was so late Mr Chairman, may we adjourn now?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, we will now take the lunch adjournment.

COMMISSION ADJOURNS - ON RESUMPTION

DALAQOLO WORDSWORTH LUTHULI: (still under oath)

CHAIRPERSON: You may continue.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR HEWIT: (continued) Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Luthuli, I don't want to go into any detail in your affidavit regarding the various sources where you claim you obtained the firearms, but would it be correct to say that over the period that you were the as you put it, the Overall Commander of this armed wing, that a lot of money passed through your hands for purchase of firearms from various sources?

MR LUTHULI: That is not correct.

MR HEWIT: You say a lot of money didn't pass through your hands for the purchase of firearms?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR HEWIT: You didn't hand over money from Chiefs who, as a conduit, I mean, you received money from people and then conveyed it to the supplier of the firearms?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR HEWIT: You say that didn't happen on many occasions?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: What is the grand total of money then that you say would have passed through your hands, for the purchase of firearms?

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, I wasn't quite clear what his answer was, it seems to be a little - Mr Luthuli, what are you saying? I just want for clarity, are you saying that you did receive money for firearms and paid it over to the supplier or are you saying you didn't do that?

MR LUTHULI: I would say there were instances where I would collect money from the branches to go and pay C.J. Mtethu or C.J. Mtethu would send me several types of firearms, after having spoken to the one to whom he was taking me.

My duty was to collect the arms and drop them off and give me whatever amount he was giving me, and I would give the money to C.J.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, I think that is clearer now Mr Hewit.

MR HEWIT: Please turn to page 250 of your affidavit. Do you have that?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR HEWIT: And in particular paragraph 15.16.

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR HEWIT: There you say criminals were encouraged to steal as many weapons as they could, and to hand these over to their leaders?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: When you use the word criminals, I get the impression you are not referring the IFP supporters?

MR LUTHULI: I am talking indeed about the IFP supporters.

MR HEWIT: Well, why are you calling them criminals, aren't they just people helping in the cause, to arm the IFP to fight the UDF?

MR LUTHULI: It so happened that in an area where the IFP was in control, not everybody who was in that area was an IFP member.

There were criminals as well in those areas who were known and such people were used with the knowledge that they had of stealing, they too could help steal firearms.

MR HEWIT: And when you say these criminals would hand over these to their leaders, what sort of leaders were these, gang leaders or criminal leaders or IFP people?

MR LUTHULI: We are talking about the IFP here, we have never spoken about gangs and criminals.

What I am saying here is that these criminals were plenty, they would not disappear simply because the area was controlled by the IFP. The knowledge that they had, was knowledge that was used by the local leadership.

MR HEWIT: All right, and these people wouldn't necessary IFP supporters that you used, these criminals with knowledge?

MR LUTHULI: As I have already explained, these criminals in those areas were used in areas that were controlled by the IFP.

MR HEWIT: Would these criminals be paid by you people?

MR LUTHULI: It would depend on the leader in that area, as to whether he was buying or he was being given free of charge by the criminals, but they were being encouraged.

MR HEWIT: All right, please turn to page 272 of your affidavit and in particular paragraph 24.4.

You say there, over the next year or so we had numerous meetings with Major Paul Berry, either at the Polo Pony Hotel or Botha's Hill Hotel. Mr M.Z. Khumalo was often present at these meetings. There were other white and African men with the Major at these meetings, whose names I cannot remember. Is that correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: What happened to your very reason for never going to another Planning Committee, namely that you didn't like the connection with Military Intelligence or the SANDF, why did you mix with this Major Paul Berry if that was your view?

MR LUTHULI: I indicated yesterday that on arrival in Mpumalanga, I discovered that the leadership there had bodyguards seconded to them by the Military Intelligence.

I don't know who told Paul Berry, I don't know that, but I strongly suspect that he was told by M.Z. Khumalo.

That is why he asked that we had a meeting with him because they had a problem that Zakhile Mkehle had now died. They wanted a person who would occupy his position and therefore he was coming to present himself, to say I am also here as an Inkatha member, myself also being the Military Intelligence, I am also helping because I too am at war.

Therefore I was supposed to go there, so that I could get to know him.

MR HEWIT: Let's talk about the eSikhawini hit squad. You say Major Langeni was appointed Commander of that hit squad?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: Why were you not appointed Commander of the hit squad seeing you were the Overall Commander of the Inkatha armed wing?

MR LUTHULI: Let me help you out on this one. I would go back to the Mkuze camp. When I got to Mkuze camp, there was Langeni himself being Commander of the camp, and I was from hiding.

All the Caprivians were now under his command at Mkuze camp. All these Caprivians on joining the KwaZulu Police, were such that a person who was now in charge above myself, was now Langeni himself.

The reason being that he was a Police, he was an Inkatha member and he also knew about the Caprivians. There was nothing new about that. Nothing was surprising to the fact that he was now in charge of the hit squads at eSikahwini.

MR HEWIT: So this hit squad was not under your direct control?

MR LUTHULI: No.

MR HEWIT: You told us that you entered the Witness Protection Programme at the end of December 1994, is that correct?

MR LUTHULI: No.

MR HEWIT: Well, when did you enter the Witness Protection Programme?

MR LUTHULI: That was at the beginning of 1995.

MR HEWIT: Yes, that is quite correct, you say here in paragraph 44.5 of page 331, I received my last salary at the end of December 1994, I entered the Witness Protection Programme on the 3rd of January 1995, is that correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: Now, my learned friend Mr Booyens who represents the interests of the Security Policeman, Louis Botha, yesterday referred you to the evidence which you gave at the trial of Mbambo, one of the other applicants, Mkhize and Hlongwane. Do you remember that?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR HEWIT: Now, that trial, when you gave evidence there, that was during March of 1995, correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: So you had already entered the Witness Protection Programme before you gave evidence in that trial?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: And you had presumably provided a full disclosure of everything that you knew about the activities of Mbambo, Mkhize and Hlongwane to Mr Howard Vanni and other people, Colonel Dutton and any others that may have been involved in January of 1995, you had given a full disclosure before you gave evidence in the trail against them, is that correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: Is it correct and this will emerge from the record, I just want you to, from the documentation, isn't it so that you were called by the Prosecution to rebut the evidence given by Mbambo, Hlongwane and Mkhize in mitigation of sentence?

MR LUTHULI: I don't quite get your question.

MR HEWIT: You were called by the representative of the Attorney General, you were called by the Prosecutor in the case, weren't you, not by the Defence?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HEWIT: I am putting to you that you were called to show that all the reasons they gave as to why they committed the offences they were convicted of, namely political orders, you were called to show that that was not true. Isn't that so?

MR STUART: Mr Chairman, if I might intervene.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Mr Stuart.

MR STUART: It seems to me to be unfair to ask the witness what the Prosecutor's intention was in calling him, it is not something that the witness can possibly have real knowledge of. He might be able to draw some conclusions or have an opinion on, but he doesn't have any knowledge of what the Prosecutor's intention ...

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, perhaps, Mr Luthuli, do you know at what stage of the trial you gave evidence? Did you give evidence after the accused persons in that trial, had been convicted, but before they were sentenced or did you give evidence prior to them being found guilty and convicted? Do you know?

MR LUTHULI: I cannot remember very well, but I think that was towards the end and also I stated as he is stating, this gentleman here, that when the said I should go and render my testimony, I don't want to do that because I don't want to be on the other side, on their side, rather than be on my side.

MR MOTATA: Mr Hewit, just before you proceed with your questioning, Mr Luthuli, when you were called by the Prosecution, did you volunteer to go there personally and testify at court?

MR LUTHULI: Your Honour, if I am to state it here, because this is no secret, at the time I was residing or living in Denmark.

I was called up urgently to the effect that the Attorney General wanted me to come and testify as a State witness against (indistinct) and I was not quite happy because I could not have been a State witness because it was myself who said they should do what they did, as they have done today, and I didn't want to be the one to come back and oppress them.

I cannot remember the details as to how I was pleaded with to finally agree to do what I did not want, having stated so.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Hewit.

MR HEWIT: I want to finally put it to you Mr Luthuli, that the various crimes which you have admitted you had committed, were not committed by virtue of any ideology which you held, or on the furtherance of any official political party policy. What do you say to that?

MR LUTHULI: I would say the IFP President would not have spoken to the Boers and appealed to them to do or create the para-military wing for the IFP for him, if that had come from nowhere, because in his request indeed, there were people trained, 200 of them trained at Caprivi, and there were no politicians at that training.

There was a politician rather speaking during those trainings and therefore I would not agree with the suggestion that this idea came from nowhere.

MR HEWIT: Well, no useful purpose will be served by debating with you whether such training was lawful or not, others have pronounced that it was per se lawful, so we will leave that there.

I simply want to put it to you that the following persons, whose interests I represent, deny that they ever gave you instructions to carry out crimes or to act unlawfully. Those persons are whom you have mentioned ...

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry can you take this quite slowly Mr Hewit, so we can just get the names down.

MR HEWIT: Those persons whom you have mentioned in your evidence as having participated or given you instructions or assisting you to commit these offences which you have admitted to, namely the following: Mr M.Z. Khumalo, Mr Robert Mzimela, the person you referred to in this hearing as Prince Gideon Zulu, Brigadier Mzimela, Mrs Mbuyasi, Mr Bebebeyela, Major Langeni and Mr M.R. Mkhize and I am not too clear at this stage on whether you mentioned this particular person's name, but if you did, he equally denies any association along the lines that I have mentioned, namely Joyful Mthetwa.

I think Mr Chairman that covers the names of the persons he mentioned in this trial, there were a lot of others, but they appear to be the ones that he mentioned whose interests I represent.

I put it to you, those persons deny that they associated with you, participated with you or at any stage gave you instructions to commit any offences which we are dealing with now. What is your comment?

MR LUTHULI: Let me start off with M.Z. Khumalo. Just to indicate to you that I know M.Z. Khumalo, he is the personal assistant to the IFP President, Dr M.G. Buthelezi, that was at the time.

After scandals, his scandals, M.Z. Khumalo's scandals surfaced, scandals to the effect of the formation of (indistinct) by the Boers of the Special Branch, M.Z. Khumalo himself received instructions under the President of the IFP so that people can be trained at Caprivi. He himself, requested me to do that, M.Z. Khumalo that is.

Today I am just indicating to you that I know him. Today M.Z. Khumalo is the Secretary General of the IFP, a promotion that he has received after his deeds and work with the Boers and therefore I know him very well.

About R.M. Mkhize, I am referring to R.M. Mzimela, is that what you said?

MR HEWIT: I said Robert Mzimela.

MR LUTHULI: R.M. Mzimela is the Secretary, I don't know now, but at that time he was the Secretary of the KwaZulu Legislative Assembly. His home is Mzimela, that is his place of origin, an area that is under Chief Mzimela at Empangeni and other Caprivians helped him to kill many people in Empangeni. The very same Mzimela about whom I am talking here.

He is actually the one who was supplying people with AK47's, and he got them from the Boers because there were no other friends of his apart from the Boers.

Now, I would refer to Prince Gideon Zulu. He was my neighbour from where I stayed. I think it was a third house from my place at Ulundi.

I don't know how many times I went to his place to drink beer and celebrate with him. I used to attend rallies with him, the IFP rallies.

I also accompanied him to the King's celebration in his African regalia. I was with him at a meeting where (indistinct) Mkhize were given a government car. That very same car that was issued by M.R. Mzimela, issuing it out as a State car in my presence, and this car was given to (indistinct) Mkhize who was with Romeo in my presence.

Now, Gideon Zulu on the day when he told me that there is a person at Eshowe, a man who was apparently a male nurse, he was working at a hospital, a man who was a relative to the Kraal, that is the Kingship at Nongoma, this person had to be killed. I was present there as well.

Brigadier Mzimela is a Chief or a Headman at Sikhawini, even though I have forgotten the name of the place.

If there were Inkatha meetings, he would take off his Police hat and put it aside, and he would become a Headman and he would also become an IFP member.

He was working very close with (indistinct) Mkhize. That is Brigadier Mzimela.

Mrs Mbuyasi was or she is a member of the IFP Central Committee, while at the same time she is in the Womens' Brigade of the IFP.

Also she is occupying a top position in the IFP at eSikahwini. She is also a teacher, I do not hesitate about that.

Let us now refer to M.R. Mkhize. M.R. Mkhize is the one in charge of the IFP office at Empangeni. Zweli Dhlamini was the one who was a body guard, that is M.R. Mkhize's body guard at Empangeni.

Lastly Mthetwa, Joyful Mthetwa is also a Caprivian. He resides in Nseleni. Nseleni is known to be an IFP stronghold. Any UDF member does not even get astray into that area, because of the presence of Joyful at Nseleni.

Therefore everything that I am saying about him, is as I have stated in the document, thank you very much.

MR HEWIT: Just one last proposition to you Mr Luthuli. These people are all known to you, yes, and it is for that reason that you are using them to explain your deeds as being politically motivated. I want to put to you, your deeds were not politically motivated. Thank you.

MR LUTHULI: Let me respond to that. You should remember that the person responsible for everything that is happening here, is the President of the IFP, Dr M.G. Buthelezi.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Hewit, does that conclude your questioning of the witness?

MR HEWIT: Yes, I have no further questions Mr Chairman.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR HEWIT: .

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Mpshe, do you have any questions to put to the witness?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR MPSHE: Yes, Mr Chairman, just a very few questions. Mr Luthuli, the other Caprivians, they would only act when instructed by yourself or ordered by yourself, not so?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct. But not all the time. I will just mention that where I had placed them or deployed them, they would receive orders from the people that they were working for.

I mean under the local leadership, I wouldn't be there, but it also happened at times that I was directly involved with them.

MR MPSHE: If a member acts out of his own interest, not being directed say by yourself or by the local leadership, he will be doing that by himself and not implicating your structure, not so?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is possible.

MR MPSHE: And you would not be held responsible for that?

MR LUTHULI: I wouldn't say so because it was not common that a person would act outside our mandate. I would always find out if that happened.

MR MPSHE: I want you to turn over to page 354. We will borrow you our copy, it is faster than your copy, page 354.

That is Khumalo's application. I want you to have a look at paragraph 38 under Nature and Particulars, the third line I will read for you for convenience.

At that time I had never met Yamile in person. Mhlanduna told us that whoever was interested in those guard duties, must await the arrival of Yamile who was to come and fetch those interested. Myself and the following persons were interested. I have more interest in the word "interested", what is your comment on that?

MR LUTHULI: I can say that at this time it could have happened that the people that I had wanted, I could not find, therefore I could have asked that any other person who might have been interested in going to Claremont, could go.

MR MPSHE: Would this statement not therefore mean that since Khumalo acted out of him having interest in the matter, there was no order or instruction from yourself, for him to go there?

MR LUTHULI: I will say that according to our disciplinary procedures, he wouldn't refuse after having heard that people were required to go to a certain place, because at that time we required manpower to go to Claremont.

The people I had taken with me personally, were too few. Yamile himself went to Ulundi to fetch more and M.Z. Khumalo brought some more in a kombi, that was driven by Buthelezi.

It could have happened.

MR KHAMPEPE: Are you still on that point Mr Mpshe because I just need some clarification from Mr Luthuli. Are you saying by your explanation that if Mr Khumalo had indicated that he was not interested to come to Mr Yamile's place, then he would have been able to simply say to you I am not interested and therefore I am not coming, and that would have been the end of the matter?

MR LUTHULI: It wouldn't have happened, and he also knew that if such an instruction had arrived, he couldn't say that he was not interested. Unless, if maybe there was a death in the family, maybe another strong reason why he couldn't go in that instance, then he would be left alone, but he couldn't just refuse and say that he wasn't interested.

MR MPSHE: Would I be wrong Mr Luthuli, if I say that normally when, normally you would expect some form of thank you after having carried out an operation, not a payment but something to say thanks for the job well done? That was normal, not so?

MR LUTHULI: As in the case of Yamile, that is what happened.

MR MPSHE: Then you tell me then, if you normally expected that, that you could even think of it before even carrying out an operation?

MR LUTHULI: You wouldn't even dream of it.

MR MPSHE: Which takes me back to the question put to you by my learned friend, Adv Hewit, that you were actually being paid by Yamile for the work well done and Khumalo was also paid for the work well done, he was given an amount of R100-00 and this was a payment actually for the job because you expected it to be done at the end of the day, not so?

MR LUTHULI: I can say, no, that was not so. It is something that came from him, I cannot explain how it came about, but it was not within the planning that after killing Zazi I would give you so much money, it just happened.

MR MPSHE: But we are agreed, all the same, that even before carrying out an operation, you would expect some thank you in the form of money?

MR LUTHULI: No, that is not so.

MR MPSHE: I thought that is what you said to my question right at the beginning?

CHAIRPERSON: No, I don't think he said that you would expect a form of payment, I mean a form of thank you in the form of money. I think the question you asked to him was wouldn't you expect some thanks.

MR MPSHE: I correct that, we are agreed that even before carrying out an operation, you would expect some form of a thank you?

MR LUTHULI: No, that is not so.

MR MPSHE: Was that not your answer in the beginning then? Was that not your answer when I started with this topic of thank you that you said yes, you would expect that and at some stage, if I heard you correctly, you said even when you are asleep, you think of it, do you remember that?

MR LUTHULI: I said it is something that you wouldn't think about if you were to carry out an operation, that you would be thanked thereafter, maybe by a gift or money. You were just going to do it and not expect that because you had done it, you have to be thanked. That is what I meant to say.

MR MPSHE: Mr Luthuli, I don't want to take it to a stage of an argument, but I recall when I posed this to you, you stated that it does happen and that is exactly what happened to you by Yamile. You spoke in Zulu, I heard you very well.

Unless, if you want to change, then do so then.

MR LUTHULI: Can I then change? If I put it that way, let me change it and say you wouldn't expect to be thanked for your job that you did.

It could be that the person maybe you work for, thanked you as I made the Yamile example.

MR MPSHE: Now, the killing in retaliation for the murder of Walter Mtalani's sister, will I be correct if I say the correct word to use there is not retaliation, but revenge. Would that be correct?

MR LUTHULI: I wouldn't really put a word to it. When something happen and you would want to retaliate at that time, I wouldn't really say whether it is revenge or retaliation, but if something happened, and you were therefore angry and at that time decided to go to that place, I wouldn't really use a specific word. I could use both, I can say maybe it was revenge or retaliation.

MR MPSHE: Perhaps to assist a little bit, will you agree with me if I say that had it not been of the killing or the murder of Walter's sister, this attack would not have taken place, am I correct?

MR LUTHULI: That is true.

MR MPSHE: And that makes it a revenge, is that correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is true.

MR MPSHE: What was the status of IFP in that area, was it strong or was it weak, was it well recognised?

MR LUTHULI: At that time, it had begun to become weak because the one house that was there, was the Mtalani house in the area. If I am not mistaken, that was the only house.

MR MPSHE: But are we agreed that the IFP was in existence in Mtalani's area?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I agree.

MR MPSHE: And therefore the attack which I referred to as revenge, cannot be seen as having been to foster or to promote the interest of IFP, it was a simple revenge?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I would agree that it was a revenge, but at the same time, it was also to show that the IFP wouldn't let its members die, if there was something they could do about it, especially if a person had been killed in the manner that Mr Mtalani's sister had been killed.

MR MPSHE: Yesterday my learned friend, Mr Ngubane put this question to you, I will quote it to remind you. Did you instruct them, that is the Caprivians to kill people other than specific targets, and your answer was no, do you remember that?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I do.

MR MPSHE: I want you to turn to page 263, paragraph 20.1.2, paginated page 263, paragraph 20.1.2. I will read from the second line. We however continued with our objective and petrol bombed houses and shot at those who came running out of the burning houses. We also shot into the houses which we had petrol bombed. We damaged approximately six houses.

A line down after that one, I do not know who lived in those houses. Do you see that? Page 263, paginated 263, paragraph 20.1.2, the second line.

I will pause a bit to give you time to read it. Is it correct then that these people who were killed or shot at the six houses, for the reason that nobody knew who they were, they were not identified as targets, is that correct?

MR LUTHULI: That is true.

MR MPSHE: Therefore their killing cannot be justified because they were not identified targets, will I be right?

MR LUTHULI: I would say Mtalani being a resident in the area and him having heard from the witnesses or rather from people who had knowledge about this incident, and those people were identified to him as UDF people staying in the same area where this happened, and those people or those houses were close to him or close to his house, they were neighbours, to me it seemed that what he was saying was true.

I did not investigate thoroughly whether those people were truly UDF members.

MR MPSHE: And it is then as it was even indicated to your good self yesterday by Mr Ngubane and you agreed that innocent people may have been killed in this raid as well?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I agreed that it is so.

MR MPSHE: And if the innocent people who had nothing to do with what was happening there, then the political objective cannot be seen to be in existence in this operation?

MR LUTHULI: I would agree as you put it, but the motive for this was that the people who had killed Mr Mtalani's sister belonged to a certain organisation. That was the reason why the attack even took place.

MR MPSHE: I am happy with the first answer Mr Luthuli. Chairman, just a moment.

Still on what as put to you by my learned friend, Mr Ngubane about innocent people, how do you justify, how do you find any political objective in the killing of people who were killed in shibeens and bus stops, not having been identified nor targeted, how do you justify the deaths of all those people?

MR LUTHULI: There is no way that I can justify this, except that it sometimes happens that an area is controlled by a certain organisation and because maybe the fighting going on cannot be controlled, you cannot sit down and identify specific targets.

It will just be assumed that because in an area there are certain people who belong to a certain organisation, or which is controlled by a certain organisation, those people would have to be killed.

To make an example, the killing of the people or the attacking of the people on their way to a rally, would necessitate a counter attack. That would be in the same manner that the attack was carried out, without really verifying if the people who are going to be attacked, are necessarily targets.

Even though that was bad, it is a practice that went on or took place. That is the only way I can explain it.

MR KHAMPEPE: Mr Mpshe, sorry, Mr Luthuli, why is it that in many of the incidents that you have alluded to both in your evidence here and in your affidavit, there is not many of the services of the Defence Unit which was created specifically to confirm the information with regard to those people who had to be identified for elimination, there are not many instances where the services of the Defence Unit were used?

MR LUTHULI: This was an ongoing thing because the Caprivians were scattered all over. Then they were receiving instructions from the local leadership from a certain area, from the training that they received, it was their duty to continue to advance and train others like them in that local membership of the area.

MR KHAMPEPE: But you were the Overall Commander of these Units, you were in a position to give directions and control, why did you not do so?

MR LUTHULI: I can say that when I returned and they were scattered all over, I don't really see them or I don't have contact with them every day.

Sometimes I would get to know incidents after they had been carried out.

MR KHAMPEPE: But the incident to which Mr Mpshe has referred, is the incident in which you were personally involved?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so. In this incident I relied heavily on the Caprivians already in the area, there were quite a few.

MR KHAMPEPE: Thank you Mr Mpshe.

MR MPSHE: Mr Luthuli, on the killing of innocent people at the bus stops and the shibeens, can you safely say that there was some recklessness by your structure and therefore the murders, the killings of those people, cannot be linked to a political objective since they were innocent people as you have indicated yourself, will I be correct?

MR LUTHULI: Sir, it is difficult to comment on that because the nature of this violence resulted in a lot of bad things that were not in line with political policy, but organisations did this activities not only by the local leadership, even the higher leadership encouraged this practices by way of communicating like for instance this area because it has comrades, we should kill everybody in this area so that they all flee the area.

Such things happened and they were ordered from the top. You wouldn't know whether there was maybe one or two IFP members in the area, but because some people had been identified as belonging to another organisation, that area would be targeted.

MR MPSHE: I think Mr Luthuli, yourself and I are in agreement on those matters, and I want to believe again that yourself and I will agree that some of these acts as I have already indicated to you, at the bus stops and shibeens and the illustration that you have just given, were purely criminal or revenge? Will I be correct?

MR LUTHULI: I would also agree with you in that instance because I wouldn't really know the motive of the reason for attacking people in a shibeen, except from what I hear from the people. But I do agree with you.

MR MPSHE: Do you know the person by the name of Chief Hlabunzima Mapumulu?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I do.

MR MPSHE: How did you know him? Did you know him?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR MPSHE: My next question is how did you know him?

MR LUTHULI: I know him when he was still a member of the KwaZulu legislature, if I am not mistaken.

MR MPSHE: We all know that he is dead now?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: No, we don't, I don't know that. I am learning that now.

MR MPSHE: Thank you Mr Chairman, I withdraw that one. He is dead now, not so?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MR MPSHE: Do you know the circumstances surrounding his death, do you have any idea about it?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I know, although I was not personally involved, or partaking in that.

MR MPSHE: Yes, I am not implying that you are involved nor the Caprivians were involved, just tell us what you know surrounding his death, perhaps it may come out from your answer.

MR LUTHULI: I can say that there is a certain Caprivian that works in the BSI at Mpumalanga, who informed me that they had gone to hunt down Chief Mapumulu in Pietermaritzburg.

It appears that as he was returning from wherever he had gone to, they had lay an ambush for him. When his car went passed, I don't remember whether he was going to the garage or to his house, but they shot him at that time.

That is what I remember.

MR MPSHE: Was he shot and killed by one of the Caprivians?

MR LUTHULI: The Caprivian who was with ...

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, I just want to have what is BSI?

MR LUTHULI: It is one wing that is like the Special Branch in the KwaZulu Police.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. I am informed it stands for Bureau of State Intelligence?

MR LUTHULI: Bureau of State Investigation.

CHAIRPERSON: Investigation, thank you.

MR MPSHE: Do you know the name of this Caprivian?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I do.

MR MPSHE: Is it possible for you to disclose the name?

MR LUTHULI: Sorry?

MR MPSHE: Is it possible for you to disclose the name?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR MPSHE: Please do so.

MR LUTHULI: He is Pumlani Masengo.

MR MPSHE: Finally, did you know the late Reggie Radebe?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR MPSHE: He is also dead, not so?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR MPSHE: Do you know the circumstances that led to his death?

MR LUTHULI: Yes. Even though I was not present, but one Caprivian who is in the BSI who is present.

MR MPSHE: Do you mind giving us the name of the Caprivian?

MR LUTHULI: He is Bongani Sithole.

MR MPSHE: Is it possible for you Mr Luthuli, I am not saying that you are involved in it, is it possible for you to disclose to us the circumstances that led to Reggie Radebe's death if you do know?

MR LUTHULI: According to what I heard, it appears as if there was going to be a meeting at Nqobo where they expected a delegation, the ANC delegation to attend to speak to certain IFP members to sort out the violence situation at Richmond and Nqobo.

There was then a meeting at the residence of a certain Chief, even though I cannot remember the Chief's name, that is where it was decided that Reggie must be killed.

And because the BSI members did not know him, certain members of the IFP who were also present, would go to him, shake his hand and the son of the Chief Mkhize in that very same area, he is the one who was standing with these two men, who identified the man whose hand was being shaken.

They then left. They excused themselves from the meeting so that they could not be identified. On leaving the meeting, they drove passed his car along the way and laid an ambush on the road along the way.

The one person who was in charge of G3, which G3 shot him, was Bongani Sithole, the Caprivian. That G3 was or belonged to Vezi who was the Chairman of the IFP at Pateni, and I only learnt about this when there was a rally here in Durban. I think there was a march from Karisfontein to the City Hall, and two men came in the company of Bongani Sithole and he said to me, Commissar I am in trouble.

Vezi doesn't want to hand over the gun that killed Reggie Radebe and I said, what should I do now because I don't have contact with him. The person who has contact is Vezi. And they said people who knew about this matter was Phillip Powell and Ndombela. Speak to these two men, maybe they can go and take the gun because the Police had already learnt about the whole situation.

MR MPSHE: Thank you. Mr Luthuli, yesterday you testified, you were led by your counsel, that there are some other incidents where you are involved, on which you did not testify.

I am going to mention them to you, I want you at the end to indicate to us whether you are applying for amnesty on these incidents or not, because they are in your affidavit.

MR LUTHULI: Okay.

MR MPSHE: I will just mention them out to you. It is incident number 45, that deals with the Glover remark, incident 47 ...

CHAIRPERSON: Perhaps after each one, you should get an indication rather than do the whole lot and then start again.

MR MPSHE: Thank you Mr Chairman. As mentioned before ...

MR STUART: Mr Chairman, I apologise to my learned friend, if I might just intervene. In accordance with the suggestion from yourself Mr Chairman, I am in the process of preparing a schedule which at the time of argument will then detail each incident and the possible charges or offences in respect of each, for which amnesty will be applied.

But as stated by this applicant, right at the outset of his evidence in chief, all the incidents mentioned in these papers, amnesty will be applied for in respect of all of them, but we will attempt to do is put it in a more workable form.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, to tabulate them and specifically identify each incident?

MR STUART: That is so. It may serve my learned friend some time if he knows that, rather than to try to go through and confirm every one, because I can confirm now, we are applying in respect of everything mentioned herein.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, then I think perhaps going through each one individually would be probably wasting time at this stage Mr Mpshe.

MR MPSHE: Mr Chairman, perhaps I do not understand my learned friend, but I am embarking on what I am doing because evidence was never tendered by the witness on these incidents.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, but he confirmed the contents of his affidavit, and that is part of it, that is all before here, that is what I understood. At the very commencement of his evidence, he said he confirms the contents of it, the affidavit, and he abides by the contents of the affidavit.

Are you - that affidavit do you consider it to be part of the evidence before this Committee as evidence because of that?

MR STUART: Most certainly Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, so it is there Mr Mpshe.

MR MPSHE: Thank you Mr Chairman, then that will mean that all those incidents I was just about to enumerate, are subject of cross-examination then, which means I cannot stop now.

I will have to with respect to the Chair and the Committee members, I will then have to look at these incidents for purposes of cross-examination?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, well that was quite clear that they were there, he wasn't only coming here, because he did confirm the affidavit.

MR MPSHE: I recall that very well Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR MPSHE: May I then suggest Mr Chairman, if there is going to be re-examination by my learned friend, that I stop my cross-examination now, I may continue tomorrow on these other incidents?

CHAIRPERSON: Well, I think the re-examination comes after the cross-examination Mr Mpshe. It wouldn't be right for him to re-examine and then you cross-examine, because then he will have the right to re-examine again.

There has got to be the cross-examination or questioning before the re-examination, that is the whole purpose of re-examination.

MR MOTATA: I suppose Mr Mpshe, if I understood counsel for the applicant and the applicant himself, he says there would be incidents which he is not presently aware of, but if implicated, he takes responsibility for those because he was the Overall Commander. Would I be right Mr Stuart, did I hear the witness correctly?

MR STUART: Well, Honourable Member, that is not quite how I recall it and how I understand it. The point is this, it is that the applicants was involved in a number of incidents over a long period of time. What he has attempted to do is to remember as much as he can, and that has been put in his papers, and indeed some of it has been elaborated on in evidence.

There may be other incidents which he is reminded of, which he can then, he will then be able to say I remember, yes, I confirm that incident, but it is not to say that he takes responsibility for every incident that was committed by Caprivians wherever they may have been.

It will be wrong to say that he is accepting responsibility for that, they may have been doing things he did not know about, which were outside of his orders and so on and so forth.

MR MOTATA: Thank you.

MR MPSHE: Then Mr Chairman, I think I am in a position to can round up my cross-examination as requested.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you.

MR MPSHE: Mr Luthuli, incident number 45, that is the Glover remark. You were cross-examined quite lengthily on this by my learned friend, Adv Hewit. Would you agree with me if I say that the killing of these people, was done because you got annoyed in that you were referred to as a Glover, will I be right?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR MPSHE: Thank you. Incident 52, that is the Rainbow staff bus retaliation, do you remember that is an incident wherein the IFP members were taken out of a bus when they were from the base of employment?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR MPSHE: When you were told, you went back there, because your wife worked there and some people were shot and killed, do you remember that?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I do remember the incident.

MR MPSHE: Would I again be correct then to state that this Rainbow staff bus was simply carried out and people were killed, in order to revenge the killing of certain people? It was another revenge?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I would say that is correct.

MR MPSHE: The last incident, that is the BMW motor car incident, incident number 56, I would remind you, that is the incident that took place when there was a funeral of an IFP and that of an ANC and there was the killing there of, they had killed a person who was an IFP who drove through an ANC funeral, do you remember that?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR MPSHE: And can I again safely say that this also had nothing to do with politics, but a revenge on the killing of a member who happened to be in that area, will you agree with me there again?

MR LUTHULI: No. I would say the people who did this, were going to a funeral of a certain UDF member and on crossing at Three, that is the place, they saw this BMW, belonging to the IFP member and they stopped him. They were actually on their way to a funeral.

That is how he was killed, burnt and the car too, that is how it happened.

MR MPSHE: But the IFP ...

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mpshe is referring to what happened after that killing. Perhaps you can just explain it.

MR MPSHE: Mr Luthuli, I am referring to what happened after the killing of the IFP member who was in the BMW and the other passengers who were therein. Thereafter, you went back and an attack was launched on UDF to kill, do you remember that?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I do.

MR MPSHE: And certain members of the UDF were killed, do you remember that?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I do.

MR MPSHE: What I am saying is that this was another revenge attack which cannot be linked to any political objective, do you agree with me?

MR LUTHULI: I would say this was an IFP member being killed by the UDF members, and therefore on that revenge attack, it was assumed that it was a revenge on the IFP member who was hurt or injured.

MR MPSHE: Let me put the question this way again. By revenging this man's attack, or killing, what did you expect to achieve politically?

MR LUTHULI: It was actually to show that there was no one who had the right to kill an IFP member and get away with it.

That is how I can answer that question, I don't know whether that is the correct way to answer it.

MR MPSHE: I hear you and I accept your answer and it means then that you were just showing people that no member of the IFP should be killed, but this has nothing to do with politics, but the protection of an IFP member, am I right?

MR LUTHULI: I disagree with that. I would say that was to show that they too had an organisation that can protect them and also to show other members that if such a thing happened to another member, he too is going to suffer the same fate.

MR MPSHE: Thank you Mr Chairman, no further questions.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MPSHE: .

MR KHAMPEPE: Just to make a follow up Mr Luthuli, I still do not understand. I think what Mr Mpshe wants to know is what political gain would your organisation derive from that kind of activity?

MR LUTHULI: It would actually be to show the strength of Inkatha. Nobody would do as they please to the IFP member without Inkatha answering to it.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Mpshe. Mr Stuart, do you have any re-examination?

RE-EXAMINATION BY MR STUART: Thank you Mr Chairperson. Mr Luthuli, upon being released from Robben Island, in that period between your release in 1979 and your going to the Caprivi, were you employed at all?

MR LUTHULI: No, I was not employed.

MR STUART: I am now turning to the incident of the Glover remark which is, I don't have the page number, I think it is 263.

MR MOTATA: Page 247.

CHAIRPERSON: Page 247.

MR STUART: Mr Luthuli, in reply to questions by my learned friend, Mr Hewit, you said that that incident took place at night, is that right?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR STUART: And you weren't sure how many people were there because it was at night?

MR LUTHULI: That is correct.

MR STUART: When you heard that remark, could you identify who it was that made the remark?

MR LUTHULI: I would say this remark was usually used by UDF members, referring to an Inkatha member.

MR STUART: To clarify Mr Luthuli, could you identify the individual, do you know which actual individual person made the remark?

MR LUTHULI: No. You could not have identified the person.

MR STUART: At that time, did Mr Yamile have a position in the KwaZulu government to your knowledge?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, he was an MP.

MR STUART: If you go to page 236, if I might take you one page before that, page 235, a particular sentence has been focused on earlier today, which reads right at the bottom of that page, in addition to this, I eventually became opposed to reporting on all operations to the Planning Committee, because I knew that they in turn reported to the Central Government.

Then at the top of the next page you go on to say, I discussed this with M.Z. Khumalo and he agreed with me, although he maintained his contact with the Central Government and his reliance on military intelligence. Do you stand by that?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR STUART: After that time, did you continue to discuss, plan and report with M.Z. Khumalo?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR STUART: And are there incidents in these papers where you discussed the operations before they took place, with M.Z. Khumalo?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR STUART: And did those incidents take place after this time you are talking about here on page 236?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR STUART: You explained in answer to some questions from the member of the Committee, Ms Khampepe, that the Caprivi trainees were all over the province, in various places?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR STUART: Did you have a method of communicating with them, wherever they were?

MR LUTHULI: I did not have a specific way except going to them, or someone would perhaps see me at a rally or at the Inkatha offices.

MR STUART: Did you have any instant method of communication such as radio's or telephones or something like that?

MR LUTHULI: No, we did not.

MR STUART: In answer to a question by Mr Mpshe, you agreed that attacks on areas to clear areas, you explained that sometimes, areas had to be cleared of people because maybe some UDF were there, so the whole area would be cleared and you agreed that such actions were criminal.

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR STUART: Was there a political objective to such actions?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, there were political objectives because they wanted to control those areas.

MR STUART: I don't understand properly, can you elaborate. Who wanted to control what areas?

MR LUTHULI: I will give you a small example of an incident in Maritzburg, where Ntombela and the Chiefs there, attacked places where UDF members resided.

Because these people were not Inkatha members in a place belonging to the Inkatha Chief, therefore they had to move from the area. The only way of moving them away from the area, was by attacking them. I am just giving you one example.

MR STUART: Mr Luthuli, Mr Mpshe sought to draw a distinction between an attack for retaliatory purposes and an attack for revenge purposes. Do you understand a distinction between those two, retaliation and revenge?

MR LUTHULI: I can say for example myself, if my brother had been killed, I would say that is revenge. But if a member of the organisation is killed, and go to retaliate, I do not take that as revenge, because I am not related to the person, but we are only associated because of the same political views.

That is how I can differentiate the two words.

MR STUART: Was Walter Mtalani a member of a certain organisation?

MR LUTHULI: He was an IFP member.

MR STUART: And you have said here in your papers, that his sister was attacked?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR STUART: And as a consequence of which, you planned an attack?

MR LUTHULI: That is correct.

MR STUART: Did that attack have a political objective?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I would say because Mtalani and his sister were IFP members, and they were being killed by UDF members, I perceived the whole thing as retaliation on behalf of the organisation.

MR STUART: I have no further re-examination Mr Chairman.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR STUART: .

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Stuart. Mr Moloi, do you have any questions to put to the witness?

MR MOLOI: Thank you Mr Chairman, just one aspect. On page 246 of the bundle, you refer to an incident where you reprimanded certain members of your squad, shall I call it, that is Khumalo and Molefi, for firing at the vehicle they believed Mrs Tsabalala was in.

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR MOLOI: And the reason you advance for that reprimand is they had not ascertained whether or not Mrs Tsabalala was in fact in the vehicle?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR MOLOI: Why was it of concern to you at the time, whether or not Mrs Tsabalala was in the vehicle?

MR LUTHULI: It is because the person that was wanted, was Mrs Tsabalala herself. By shooting a car, not knowing whether she was inside it or not, was just an indication that there were people who were after her life and because of that, that would give her an opportunity to defend or save herself.

MR MOLOI: It was not your concern then that innocent people could be killed in the process?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR MOLOI: Was that then in line with the policy of the organisation for which you fought, that you should be concerned about innocent life getting involved in your attacks?

MR LUTHULI: There was no time where the organisation indicated that, except in training that was obtained at the Caprivi that if a person was being hunted, it must be made a point that only that person was found.

MR MOLOI: And subsequent to that, did you have a free hand now to kill, maim and assassinate any person, irrespective of whether he is targeted or not?

MR LUTHULI: No, that was not the case.

MR MOLOI: Hence your concern about innocent people, was that hence the concern you expressed about innocent people being involved in this particular instance?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I would say it was a nature and tradition that people who were not involved, should by all means be avoided, and this did not happen all the time.

It happened under certain circumstances, that they too got hurt, even though they were not targeted.

MR MOLOI: Just on the following page, on 247, you ordered the killing of people that according to your own evidence if I understand it properly, were innocent because only one of the group of 20 to 50 referred to you as a Glover?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct. I tried to explain that this word is derogatory if you direct it to a certain member of Inkatha. Therefore you wouldn't expect that a person who says this in the presence of a crowd, the ones that he or she is with, are not in concept or do not agree with him. It is assume that because he says it in a particular group, they all agree with what he is saying.

If they don't get hurt, it is not assumed that is just because it is just one person who said the remark. I nevertheless agree that it is possible that innocent people were hurt in the process.

MR MOLOI: What strikes me also going through the affidavit, you confirmed, is that Khuzwayo was a business man according to your affidavit, was he not?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, he was.

MR MOLOI: And so was Mrs Tsabalala? She was a business woman, was she not?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is true.

MR MOLOI: And I also gathered Yamile was also a business person?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR MOLOI: In the same vicinity, Claremont?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is true.

MR MOLOI: Did Yamile ever order you to eliminate any other person who is not a business person?

MR LUTHULI: It is difficult to give a response to that question, because there were a lot of people that Yamile wanted eliminated at Claremont.

It will be difficult for me to say whether all were business men or whether some were not.

MR MOLOI: But the priority instruction you had, was to eliminate Khuzwayo in the first instance, and then Mrs Tsabalala, Yamile's business counterparts?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I would agree. Let me just explain this. At the time that we were at Claremont, Yamile did not complain only about Zazi Khuzwayo and Mrs Tsabalala.

There were other people that I cannot remember, like Pierre and Mkhize, who were also business men, who were troublesome to him. I cannot really remember who the others were, but there were quite a few.

MR MOLOI: You have already stated that Yamile was in fact a member of Parliament of KwaZulu government?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR MOLOI: Was it conceivable or is it conceivable that he used the political clout he had, to eliminate business opposition and not so much to achieve any political end?

MR LUTHULI: I wouldn't disagree with that, but as far as I knew him, as a member of a Parliament of the KwaZulu government, with IFP members only and also him being the Chairman of the Branch of the IFP in the area, he could have done both - advancing the cause for Claremont to fall under KwaZulu government and also wanting to eliminate some business people in the area.

MR MOLOI: You and your team, would just act upon a target being pointed out to you by the likes of Yamile in an area without really verifying whether or not there is any political link between the person targeted and the act you were called upon to commit?

MR LUTHULI: I would say that if I am told by a person like M.Z. Khumalo without Yamile being close to me and M.Z. Khumalo being very close to the IFP President, him telling me to gather my forces and go to Claremont because Yamile is under attack, it occurred to me that Yamile must indeed be in trouble at Claremont.

MR MOLOI: That would be the case even if in essence, the only aim sought to be achieved, is to eliminate a business opponent?

MR LUTHULI: He put it to me as a person who wanted to regain the Claremont that was slowly moving out of IFP control, and the Claremont that was refusing to fall under the KwaZulu government.

MR MOLOI: The point which I am trying to make is you are now to act to achieve a political end, you have not investigated whether or not there is any political mileage you are going to gain out of your conduct. How then after acting, would you say it was for a political objective?

MR LUTHULI: I would say that as a Political Commissar of this group that was trained by Inkatha, that for me convinced me that what I was doing, would benefit the organisation.

MR MOLOI: Simply because the order comes from the political leadership?

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR MOLOI: I thank you, I have no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Motata, do you have any questions?

MR MOTATA: Just a few Chairman. Mr Luthuli, you responded to my colleague here that you were appraised at Caprivi that you were not to attack innocent people, did I hear you correctly?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR MOTATA: And upon your return, this was not told to you from Caprivi in other words?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is true.

MR MOTATA: Wouldn't you say when you were recruited by the IFP to be trained at Caprivi strip, as IFP members, that what you were told there was policy of the IFP, namely that avoid innocent people but attack those who were in direct opposition with the IFP?

MR LUTHULI: I would say that was part of the training, but in reality when we returned, that didn't happen because the organisation that had initially taken us for training in Caprivi, did not reprimand us when innocent people were killed, but encouraged that innocent people should also be killed.

MR MOTATA: Let's take you as an example Mr Luthuli, you had a taste of both organisations, that you were first trained by the ANC, you became a member of the MK and subsequently you were recruited by the IFP to be trained. Would I be wrong to say that when you are trained, you are actually inbibed with the policy of the organisation you are involved in at that stage?

MR LUTHULI: That is so.

MR MOTATA: Now, let's return to areas like for instance Claremont where Yamile was. You wouldn't say with absolute certainty that for instance because the majority appeared to be UDF, therefore everybody was against Yamile, would you say that?

MR LUTHULI: No, I wouldn't.

MR MOTATA: So, did I understand you correctly then when you said the presence of Yamile even though he was a fierce person and feared by everybody, had to be felt within Claremont area, then people had to be coerced if you are not following Yamile in other words, you would leave or be killed if you don't leave Claremont?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR MOTATA: Part of policy?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR MOTATA: Let us look at this derogatory remark. It was within your means to stop and ask the 20 to 50 people or so that who made that remark which made you angry, was it not within your means?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I could.

MR MOTATA: Because of this idea that Claremont is infested with UDF people, you did not deem it fit to enquire out of the people who were pedestrians who made this remark, but you ordered your two men to attack?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR MOTATA: When you testified at the Goldstone Commission, were you by that stage disgruntled with the IFP policy?

MR LUTHULI: No, that is not so.

MR MOTATA: You still regarded yourself as a staunch member?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR MOTATA: You sort of gave us time periods within which 1992/1993 when you became disgruntled and that you had to be eliminated and approached M.Z. Khumalo on two occasions and the last occasion, that is when you screamed SOS that you should be fetched from Durban, do you recall that?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I do.

MR MOTATA: The time lapsed between you having testified at the Goldstone Commission and at that time, could you give us an indication?

MR LUTHULI: I can't really tell, but it was quite some time, because the time I am referring to is the time when negotiations were being called for. I don't quite remember when the Goldstone Commission sat.

MR MOTATA: You remember during cross-examination you were referred to a period that, let's for instance take that is how the cross-examination, if I still remember it correctly, went, that during 1987 for instance you were no longer happy within the IFP because you realised that they were cohorting with the South African government by having the presence of the SADF for instance?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR MOTATA: And we look at if we take that time which counsel has asked you about, to your eventual leaving it gives us a spell of five years.

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR MOTATA: Within this spell of five years, had you already between the two periods, had you already testified before the Goldstone Commission?

MR LUTHULI: I don't remember when the Goldstone Commission sat. I don't know if it was before the Goldstone Commission.

As I remember it seems like the Goldstone Commission was investigating hit squads that were allegedly within the KwaZulu Police.

I don't know whether it is before that period. But I think that was the time when negotiations were being called for.

MR MOTATA: And lastly, please help me Mr Luthuli, because this is disturbing to me, you were able to give amounts which you received upon your return from Caprivi, your increments, but there are two amounts and let's restrict ourselves to Yamile, that one person gives you amounts in two instances.

You merely say a couple of hundred rands. What disturbs me is that if from your affidavit, a lot of people appeared and who gave you money, it would be understood that you couldn't remember the exact amounts, but you are hardly giving us an indication, R100-00, R200-00, R2 000-00, you just say amounts and you leave it just like that?

Can you now, I know it is some time back, can you really reflect and say approximately X amount, can you do that?

MR LUTHULI: It is difficult, but it could be about R100-00 or R200-00.

MR MOTATA: You see what disturbs me, you confirmed this affidavit, and it says couple of hundred rands.

MR LUTHULI: I agree with you.

MR MOTATA: You cannot be of assistance to this Committee, by giving us that kind of figures?

MR LUTHULI: No, I wouldn't be able to.

MR MOTATA: Thank you very much, Mr Chairman, I've got no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Khampepe, do you have any questions?

MR KHAMPEPE: Mr Luthuli, you have already been questioned quite extensively by the legal representatives, as well as the member of the Committee, with regard to the policy of the IFP to engage in indiscriminate attacks, against perceived ANC people.

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR KHAMPEPE: And your response has always been that it indeed was the policy of the IFP to do that?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR KHAMPEPE: Now, are you able to give an indication as to who advised you about that policy?

MR LUTHULI: M.Z. Khumalo.

MR KHAMPEPE: And at what stage of the command of the Caprivians, were you advised of that policy?

MR LUTHULI: I can say that when they started operating, where they were allocated, that is when this killing of people began without verifying whether the person really belongs to an organisation or not.

But merely for the reason that the people residing in a certain area, are known to belong to a certain organisation.

MR KHAMPEPE: Are you therefore saying that M.Z. Khumalo advised you right at the beginning of your command, that you were to engage in indiscriminate attacks against perceived ANC persons?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is so.

MR KHAMPEPE: Can you then page to 231 and I just need an explanation of what is contained in your affidavit. It is paginated page 231, but I think typed page 22. Page 22, that is the typed number.

And I am referring to paragraph 7.6. You will remember that you were sketching here about the Planning Committee, I think what had taken place which was shortly after your return from Caprivi.

MR LUTHULI: Yes.

MR KHAMPEPE: Now here you state the following: The person to whom I was to report and from whom I would receive instructions, was M.Z. Khumalo. He in turn reported to the Committee, that is the Planning Committee.

I was given the responsibility of organising any operations to kill people. The leadership on the ground, meaning the local leadership on the ground, in any particular area would be involved in deciding on who had to be killed, but I would put the operation into effect.

I was to send the Defensive Group to gather intelligence and to verify the need for the person targeted to be killed. If that is so and there was this policy of indiscriminate attack, how do you relate what is contained in this paragraph specifically with the policy of engaging in indiscriminate attacks? If what you had stated here is that there was a need to do the verification before any attacks could be launched, I just need clarification on that one, because to me it is quit vital.

MR LUTHULI: I can say that the formation of that structure, before it started operating, but when it started operating, it did not operate in the manner which is described here.

Because the Caprivians were now scattered all over and were relying on the local leadership of the area but we tried at all times, to keep contact with them.

MR KHAMPEPE: But do you agree with me then that the reading of that does not give one an impression that there was this policy of indiscriminate attacks?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, as it appears on the affidavit, I agree with you.

MR KHAMPEPE: Yesterday, I cannot remember who was questioning you, you stated that there was great reliance on the local leadership to identify targets. That once a local leader had identified a target, there was no need for you to then engage the services of the Defensive Unit to do the verification on the target who would then have been identified by the local leader, to be eliminated?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR KHAMPEPE: Now, did that take place a few years if I can just get the time span, how long did that procedure take place, or come into effect, because according to your affidavit, you have here the need for verification by the Defensive Group whereas in your evidence you have stated that there was no need to do the verification.

MR LUTHULI: I will make an example, because we are now talking of the Defensive Group.

I will make an example of KwaMakutha. This is the period when the Defensive Group was sent to the local leadership of KwaMakutha and the local leadership communicated with the Defensive Group that this area or rather they help in identifying the areas.

The Defensive Group then went to verify whether it was as the local leadership had put it to them. On returning, the Defensive Group reported and there was preparation for the Offensive Group to go and attack, to kill people.

That was the very first operation that took place. In that operation the target that we had identified, was not killed, it was women and children who were killed.

Those people came back to report and then it was discovered that they had made a blunder. But nothing was done about this, nothing was done to punish them. A goat was slaughtered to cleanse them, to show that they had killed women and children in a war situation, and this was not acceptable.

From there, things did not go as planned by the Planning Committee, that is the identifying and verification. This didn't happen because the people that had been organised by M.Z. Khumalo, did not do exactly as reported here in the affidavit.

That is why what happened at KwaMakutha happened in other areas as well. Because the only person who was now responsible or who was in charge, was M.Z. Khumalo. He is the one who now gave instructions.

Therefore it did not happen as put down in the affidavit.

MR KHAMPEPE: Thank you, at least you have given me an indication with regard to the time frames and I am greatly indebted to you therefore.

Are you able to give an indication whether when you were appointed as the Overall Commander by M.Z. Khumalo, you also were able to command the Offensive Group?

MR LUTHULI: No. The Offensive Group was always under the Boers, that is the military intelligence, under J.P. Opperman, his deputy being Cloete. They lived at Port Dunfort.

I never used to go to Port Dunfort.

MR KHAMPEPE: And as the Overall Commander, were you in a position to give instructions or orders to members of hit squad like those of eSikhawini?

MR LUTHULI: I would say on being requested by leadership just as it happened at eSikhawini where there were some Caprivians, but they were not associated with violence there.

And the leadership at eSikhawini felt that it should assist these Caprivians because they knew that they were there, but they were not active at eSikhawini itself, but Nseleni as I have pointed out, Joyful Mthetwa was also there, but here, they were asking for assistance that they be present at eSikhawini.

MR KHAMPEPE: Did you give any instructions or orders to members of those hit squad members, to engage in any of the activities that you have mentioned in your application, that is my question?

MR LUTHULI: No, not those at eSikhawini.

MR KHAMPEPE: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Just briefly Mr Luthuli, am I correct in recalling that when you gave evidence yesterday, you said that you don't know whether you yourself have killed anybody, but if you did, that you are sorry for it?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Are you saying that you can't recall whether you have killed anybody yourself?

MR LUTHULI: I am saying yes, there were people that I killed, but there are others whom I don't know whether they died or not.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. On page 235 of the record you state that the system, referring to your Group system, the hit squad system, operated well and may still be operating. The Caprivi trainees are still a close knit group who remain very independent.

Is that just your opinion, or do you know whether they are still operating now?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I would say as we are here, and they were not given an opportunity to be like ourselves, they are still continuing those who are, who were trained.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Stuart, do you have any questions arising out of questions that have been put by members of the panel?

MR STUART: I do Mr Chairman, and I understand that some of my colleagues, do as well, and I wonder ...

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, I see that it is after four o'clock. If we could then adjourn now until what time tomorrow would be suitable, half past nine again, and I wonder if the legal representatives could just briefly pop into our office, I would just like to see you briefly today to discuss about what should be done tomorrow.

COMMISSION ADJOURNS

CHAIRPERSON: Good morning everybody. Yesterday we have concluded our proceedings with the members of the panel putting certain questions to Mr Luthuli, and it is now, I will now give an opportunity to the legal representatives to ask any questions they wish, arising out of the questions put by the panel.

Mr Stuart, do you have any questions arising?

MR STUART: I do, Mr Chairperson, thank you.

FURTHER RE-EXAMINATION BY MR STUART: There are just a couple of areas which have arisen, and I will deal with them one by one. The first one is the question of Mr Samuel Yamile of Claremont.

Mr Luthuli, did Mr Yamile play a political role in Claremont?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR STUART: How did the local people of Claremont, regard Mr Yamile at that time?

MR LUTHULI: I would say they did not like him.

MR STUART: What was Inkatha's strength in Claremont at that time?

MR LUTHULI: There was no power for Inkatha in Claremont at the time. If Inkatha was present there, it must have been at areas around Claremont, and there was just a few Inkatha members.

MR STUART: You said in answer to my first question, that Mr Yamile did play a political role in Claremont. What objectives, what political objectives did he pursue in Claremont?

MR LUTHULI: I would say he wanted the whole Claremont under Inkatha control by all means. And also he did whatever he could, that those who were opposed to him and his political aims, that Inkatha be in charge, must be killed because they were an obstacle to the objectives, his personal objectives as a member of Parliament at the time, and also being an Inkatha member.

MR STUART: The next area I want to cover is the question of policy. Was it to your knowledge, ever the public policy of Inkatha to kill its opponents and to clear UDF areas of the residents there?

MR LUTHULI: I would say according to Inkatha, the policy was divided into two. There was a written policy, a policy that they used for rallies and in the radio's, and this policy suggested that they are not associated with violence, they were for peace. That was the known policy if they were talking in public.

At the same time there was also another policy to the effect that they should be fighting against those people who were opposed to Inkatha. Those people who were found or a place that was identified as requiring to be removed, so that Inkatha should remain in that area, such a thing, used to be done.

That was also the policy.

MR STUART: This latter policy you have dealt with, I might characterise it from the way you speak, as a clandestine policy. How did you come to know about that as policy?

MR LUTHULI: I would give you an example. Like the formation of the Caprivi group, according to policy that was not to be, but in action, the group came into being.

There was no way where there was a meeting according to my knowledge, and the Goldstone Commission also discovered that, they denied knowledge of the existence of such a group. They did not own up to the 200 members who went to Caprivi for training to defend or protect Inkatha leaders.

And therefore there was a policy that was not spoken about within the IFP.

MR STUART: You said in your evidence in chief, that you attended over a period of time, meetings of the Inkatha Central Committee. Was this policy, unspoken policy you have mentioned, acknowledged or a common understanding at those meetings?

MR LUTHULI: I can say that the policy was divided into two like I have indicated.

I would give you another example with UWUSA. Inkatha believed that they were against violence. There was a team, among teams the one to which I am referring, used to be based at Prince Msheni Hospital.

Their duty was not according to their policy, because as they were there, they were to stir trouble and disrupt meetings that were organised by either COSATU or UDF in Durban.

That was something they did in a very bad way. This was orchestrated at Prince Msheni, that is one example I can give you and there was once a meeting held by either UDF or COSATU where people died. People were called upon to come and disrupt the meeting and this they did in my presence, and when these people arrived there, (indistinct) enforcement had not yet arrived, and they found themselves facing UDF and there was fighting and these people died.

They went to a meeting to which they were not invited, this is yet another example to reflect on the policy.

MR STUART: The next area I want to touch on is one of strategy. You have spoken about a strategy which was embarked upon of targeting selected targets, and then in a relatively careful operation, eliminating those selected targets.

You have also spoken about a strategy, a much broader strategy, a less discriminating strategy to essentially kill and plunder and to assert power and to terrorise areas.

I am dealing then with those two strategies you have spoken about. Did those exist at the same time, or was there a period of time when there was the one strategy and then a later or earlier period when there was the other strategy?

MR LUTHULI: I would say these strategies worked equal way. If there was a need to follow the strategy to kill one person because it was thought that the person was an influence in the area, that is something else, that one particular person would be targeted.

There is also the other strategy to remove people from an area because one organisation would want to be the only one in charge in that area.

MR STUART: The next area I want to deal with in the incident of the derogatory remark when you were driving through Claremont. When you were driving through and you heard this remark, did you know if any of the pedestrians were armed?

MR LUTHULI: No.

MR STUART: Could they have been armed?

MR LUTHULI: They could have been armed, they could have not been armed.

MR STUART: The final point which is more really a question for the record and for the members of the Committee, I have here the transcript of your testimony before the Goldstone Commission and it is reflected on the transcript that that hearing took place on the 2nd of June, 1992.

There was some attempts to try and put a date on, it says so on the record, does that concur with your recollection of when it took place?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR STUART: No further questions, thank you.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR STUART: .

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Stuart. Mr Wills, do you have any questions arising?

FURTHER CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR WILLS: Yes, thank you Mr Chairperson. Mr Luthuli, I want to concentrate on the manner in which the so-called eSikhawini hit squad would receive their orders to kill.

Can you elaborate on that for me?

MR LUTHULI: I would say the eSikhawini hit squad was controlled mainly by the local leadership. I did mention this yesterday.

Prince Gideon Zulu, Bebebeyela, Mrs Mbuyasi and Nkosi Mataba and others whose names I have forgotten, were among the leadership in those areas. These are the people who gave orders to the hit squad as to who they wanted to be removed in the area.

A person who was directly responsible, was Captain Langeni. I am not saying I am just assuming because when (indistinct) came with Romeo, Captain Langeni, myself and Mzimela and Gideon Zulu, not at the Inkatha office or at somebody else's house, we were in Captain Langeni's office, in Parliament, the KwaZulu Parliament.

That is what I can say.

MR WILLS: And your recollection of that initial meeting, the initial meeting when Mr Mbambo was there, the meeting that you are talking about at the KwaZulu Legislative Assembly buildings, it was absolutely clear to you as I understand it, that both Mr Mkhize and Mr Mbambo were given the impression in no uncertain terms that their job for the Inkatha Freedom Party would be to kill opponents of the Inkatha Freedom Party, is that correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct, but I would like to explain. Quna Mkhize and Romeo Mbambo arrived at Mzimela's. Quna Mkhize was under M.Z. Khumalo's control. He was, that is M.Z. Khumalo was the first person to ask Quna as to how trustworthy Romeo was and that was in the IFP office at Ulundi. M.Z. Khumalo, Langeni and myself, there were three of us.

We haven't spoken about Mzimela, you know, the MP in the then KwaZulu Parliament, having started from the Inkatha office, because Quna Mkhize was under M.Z. Khumalo and on coming back to tell M.Z. that I have already woken Quna up as he was asleep at eSikhawini, he is saying he doesn't trust other Caprivians who were present. He therefore would venture to recruit his own members.

These two things clearly indicate that there was nobody who would argue that they did not know that Quna Mkhize were engaged in these activities. They would sometimes discuss things at the rallies and he would be taken by Gideon Zulu and he would be happy about it. I would not longer be able to get hold of Quna after he had left with them at rallies and there was no way that people could not have known what they were up to.

MR WILLS: So, obviously at the same time, did all the persons who were present at that meeting, not only Mbambo and Mkhize, but all the persons present at that meeting, and that includes Prince Gideon Zulu, I think you mentioned Mr Mzimela, that is Robert Mzimela?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: M.Z. Khumalo?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: Captain Langeni?

MR WILLS: Yourself?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: Would have known clearly that they had authorised and embarked upon essentially a formation of a death squad that would be utilised for the killing of IPF opponents?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct as I have already indicated. People might deny because nobody wants to own up to guilty deeds. But people knew very well what was going on.

MR WILLS: Now, just referring to the issue of the direction of orders, as I understand your answer to a question asked by Mr Ngubane, that you personally did not give orders to Mbambo, Mkhize and that hit squad to kill specific persons, my understanding of the evidence is to the effect that you were well aware of the fact that these orders were in fact being given, is that correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, as I have already explained that the eSikhawini leadership were members of the Executive, the Inkatha Executive and these members were always in touch with me often times. Therefore, I was not just thinking or dreaming about it, I knew very well that these people were working according to the orders of the Central Committee members, not the Executive.

They would not have just gone out to do what they pleased, without being told to do something at a particular place.

MR WILLS: Yes, thank you. Just referring specifically to Mr Hlongwane. It was you who organised Mr Hlongwane to first of all, travel to Ermelo to assist with the problems that the IFP were having in organising the townships surrounding Ermelo and in that I include the Wesselton township?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: And it was also you that organised Mr Hlongwane to return from the Wesselton and Ermelo area to join the eSikhawini hit squad?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: Now, Mr Hlongwane is clear in his instructions to me that the main and primary purpose of his deployment in both of these areas, was to kill IFP opponents?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, he knew very well.

MR WILLS: And that he perceives as having come from orders received from yourself?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: I want to touch on another area which I trust you can help me with.

My understanding from my instructions from the four persons I represent at this hearing, is to the effect that in the Inkatha movement, there was a hierarchical structure which had the effect that if a more senior person asked you to do something, you did that in an unquestioning manner, would you agree with that?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I agree with that because I would give you another example. Like for example Prince Gideon Zulu, he is the Prince who is very close to the KwaZulu kingdom, and he is also equally very close to the IFP President, and also he was holding a very high position within the Central Committee.

If a meeting was to start without his presence, he would be sought out and if he told you to do something, you would not even ask a question, you would do exactly as he ordered.

MR WILLS: Now, the evidence so far has been to the extent that Prince Gideon Zulu was in fact, or did play a primary role in the authorising of the eSikhawini hit squad to commit some murders.

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I have already said that his position in the eSikhawini region, was very high because when we talk about eSikhawini we do not only refer to eSikhawini the area, we also refer to places like Eshowe and places like Hluhluwe, Mkuze, all of those areas were under the control of these men.

eSikhawini is just a township because that is where they used to meet, but what they used to do in all of those areas, there is a lady in that place called - a lady who is a Chief in that area, all of those areas were under their control.

The people who were stirring trouble in those areas, knew very well. Gideon Zulu himself knew very well, therefore I am not imagining what I am saying here.

MR WILLS: The question I want to put to you is that is it not so that even though these orders to kill, these orders came from the senior people including Gideon Zulu, were in fact to kill and that is an unlawful thing to do. It would have been impossible or very difficult at the least for the persons to disobey those orders?

MR LUTHULI: I don't think that even in their wildest dreams or imaginations, they would even attempt to disobey an order, that would be extremely difficult.

MR WILLS: Why would it be difficult, what would happen?

MR LUTHULI: They too, would be killed.

MR WILLS: Just to touch on this aspect of this strategy, the evidence has been so far that on the one hand there was this plan whereby particular individuals would be targeted and sought after and killed, and then on the other hand, there was this general violence which it seems was used to clear the certain areas of people, unwanted people, are you with me?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: If the people whom I represent, the four people that I represent in these hearings, were to become involved in this strategy to clear up an area of ANC people and to that extent there is examples in their applications, of attacking busses, of shooting indiscriminately in certain areas in eSikhawini for example, which were known to be ANC areas, or to attacking and burning homes in places like Ermelo and Wesselton.

Would you say that those activities were within this policy that you described?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: And is it not so that they were in fact encouraged to behave in this way, by the Inkatha leadership?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: And is it not further so that the more successful they were in this indiscriminate killing, the more they were congratulated and respected by the leadership?

MR LUTHULI: As I have already explained, that I came to realise that they were indeed successful because they used to travel around in their own cars like Mrs Mbuyasi and Mzimela, they used to drive State vehicles and these cars were handed over onto them to use them in their killing sprees.

Therefore it was difficult for even myself to speak to them at rallies, because they were always together and I thought yes, these people must be successful in their endeavours.

MR WILLS: Finally Mr Luthuli, do you know an individual by the name of Siphiwe Umvuyani who is now deceased?

MR LUTHULI: I know him very well.

MR WILLS: Can you just describe who he is?

MR LUTHULI: Umvuyani I would say since I knew him, a person who killed him, was actually a person who must have been a very strong supporter of Inkatha.

Not that he was not being liked, when he arrived at Ulundi, it would seem like a king had arrived. I am not one of the people who would talk to him, he would speak to people in higher positions.

They knew him very well. They knew that for example, yesterday he killed an UDF or ANC person in a certain area. When he arrived, he would be the one would take the front seat, that is how I knew him.

MR WILLS: Now, if someone like this was to approach an IFP person and ask him to do a particular job, a hit or a murder, would that person, would you say that Umvuyani was acting within IFP policy in order to give those instructions?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is very, very correct, no doubt about that.

MR WILLS: What I am trying to get at, if somebody on the ground, one of the hit squad members were to rely on his authority, would you say that they would be acting within the instructions and policies of the organisation?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: Thank you, I have no further questions.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR WILLS

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Wills. Mr Ngubane, do you have any questions?

FURTHER CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR NGUBANE: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Chairman, before I proceed with the few questions that I have, I would like to place on record that I have been instructed by Mrs Khuzwayo that she is not opposing the amnesty application.

She leaves it in the hands of the Committee to decide, but she has specifically instructed me to place on record that she is grateful to the process, it has to a great extent pacified her, she was interested in knowing the truth, because all along she was in the dark as to what had happened at Claremont.

Secondly Mr Chairman, I would like to ask for leave to put certain questions which strictly are not arising from what the panel has asked, because Mrs Khuzwayo has asked me to, in the interest of full disclosure, to put these questions to Mr Luthuli.

Those questions Mr Chairman, will to a great extent also cover Mrs Mkhize who has been called here but in respect of which, who lost her husband and in respect of that incident, there has been no real evidence. It won't be long questions Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Stuart, do you have any objection to that?

MR STUART: No objection Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Ngubane. You may proceed.

MR NGUBANE: Mr Luthuli, starting from the questions arising from the panel members, you indicated that there are Caprivians who are still in operation, is that correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR NGUBANE: And most of them are known to you and you have their particulars, is that correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR NGUBANE: Are you prepared to cooperate with anyone who wants to track them down, with an aim of rehabilitating them, or punishing them?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I am prepared to assist.

MR NGUBANE: Coming to the Claremont incident, did you have a hit list of certain people at Claremont that had to be killed?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR NGUBANE: Were those, was Malan Nicholas Mkhize amongst those?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR NGUBANE: And the people that killed him, were they directed by you or did they conspire with you at any stage?

MR LUTHULI: No, they did not conspire, but as I have indicated that BSI and the Caprivians were just one thing.

And therefore that is how I knew about this because the person who was in charge of the operation, was Captain Kanyele who was in charge of BSI in KwaMashu.

MR NGUBANE: Do you know a gentleman by the name of Msisi Hlope?

MR LUTHULI: I know him very well.

MR NGUBANE: Is it correct that he is one and the same gentleman that assisted you in the murder of Mr Zazi Khuzwayo?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, I know.

MR NGUBANE: Did you at any stage, make enquiries to Msisi Hlope regarding Mr Mulna Nicholas Mkhize, enquiries such as whether Mr Mkhize has a firearm or not?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR NGUBANE: And were those enquiries made with a view of attacking Mr Mulna Nicholas Mkhize?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR NGUBANE: Okay. And the gentleman known as Qashana Sithole of Claremont, was he also in the hit list?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR NGUBANE: Was he also killed by the Caprivians?

MR LUTHULI: He was killed by BSI.

MR NGUBANE: And Orbit Mtembu of Claremont, was he also attacked by the Caprivians?

MR LUTHULI: He was attacked by BSI.

MR NGUBANE: Were all these acts as a result of the orders of Inkatha?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR NGUBANE: You referred to the attempted murder of Pam Tsabalala. Is it correct that shortly after that attempted murder, she was killed?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR NGUBANE: Was it a sequel of that attempted murder?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR NGUBANE: Did you participate in her actual assassination?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, the BSI.

MR NGUBANE: Of the members of the hit list that you had in Claremont, did you actually pull a trigger or anyone of them, you personally?

MR LUTHULI: No.

MR NGUBANE: Regarding the Planning Committee, I think there was a question from the panel regarding the Planning Committee, is it correct that when you realised that the Planning Committee had been infiltrated by the Boers, you realised at that stage that Inkatha was an organisation that was doomed to fail?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR NGUBANE: That was way back round about 1986, 1987, is it correct?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR NGUBANE: And in spite of that, you continued to participate in these acts furthering the aims of Inkatha?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR NGUBANE: And you were getting paid after you had realised that Inkatha was doomed to fail?

MR LUTHULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR NGUBANE: No further questions, Mr Chairman.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR NGUBANE

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Ngubane. Mr Falconer, do you have any questions that you would like to put?

MR FALCONER: No, Mr Chairman.

NO CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR FALCONER: .

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Booyens, do you have any questions arising?

MR BOOYENS: No, thank you Mr Chairman.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR BOOYENS: .

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Stuart, I suppose you should have the right to re-examine if there is anything arising out of Mr Ngubane's questions relating to the Claremont issue, but only on that.

MR STUART: No Mr Chairperson, thank you.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR STUART: .

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Luthuli, thank you, you may stand down now.

WITNESS EXCUSED: .