MR VABAZA: The third applicant, Mr Chairperson and members, is Mabitana Mani. He is also amongst the five group of people.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mani what language would you prefer to use?
MR MANI: Xhosa, Sir.
MABITANA MANI: (sworn and states)
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mani, you - were you a member of any political structure in the course of the events which has been referred to in this application.
MR MANI: Yes, Sir.
CHAIRPERSON: What was that?
MR MANI: SDU.
CHAIRPERSON: Are you the person referred to by Mr Kolela as being part of a group who embarked on this venture?
MR MANI: That is correct.
CHAIRPERSON: And in respect of the policeman, Mxolise, were you personally aware of the problems that he is alleged to have given the community? Or did you rely on the order given by the commander.
MR MANI: I relied on the orders, Sir.
CHAIRPERSON: Did you consider yourself as falling under the umbrella of authority of that Commander?
MR MANI: Yes, that is correct.
CHAIRPERSON: And you accepted what the Commander informed you?
MR MANI: Yes, I accepted it.
CHAIRPERSON: Now, you have heard the evidence of Mr Kolela.
MR MANI: Yes, Sir.
CHAIRPERSON: Do you agree with what he says?
MR MANI: Yes, it is correct, Sir.
CHAIRPERSON: Do you associate yourself with his testimony?
MR MANI: Yes, Sir.
CHAIRPERSON: Is there anything that you dispute in what he says?
MR MANI: No, there is nothing, Sir.
CHAIRPERSON: Were you armed that day?
MR MANI: I was the driver of the car, Sir.
CHAIRPERSON: But were you also armed?
MR MANI: No.
CHAIRPERSON: There is one question that I omitted to ask the previous two witnesses. I just want to find out from you. From the evidence as I understand it, no shot was discharged during either of the incidents. Am I correct?
MR MANI: Yes, that is correct.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you.
NO QUESTIONS BY MR VABAZA
NO QUESTIONS BY MS MTANGA
CHAIRPERSON: Are there any other witnesses you would like to call?
MR VABAZA: No, Mr Chairperson, there are no other witnesses. We are concluding the evidence for the applicants.
CHAIRPERSON: Is there any witness or victim who would want to testify before us?
MS MTANGA: No-one, Mr Chairperson, none.
CHAIRMAN: That seems to bring the end to the testimony in this matter application. Mr Vabaza, there's not much we would like you to argue on.
MR VABAZA: That is correct, Mr Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: I am informing you that is our view. But I want to come to issues that do concern us and we want to give you an opportunity to deal with it, it seems from the written application that application is being made for amnesty in respect of transgressions of the Arms and Ammunition Act, the Explosives Act. Now, with those two Acts and how it affects the application, we've got no trouble with. There is the matter, of course, of the application of attempted murder. We would like you to address us on that. And as you address us, I will give you our prima facie views on what the problems are.
We are of the view, at this stage, that there's no evidence to justify an allegation that attempted murder was committed, and hence, in respect of that, amnesty cannot, of course, be granted, because it was never committed. We would like to hear you on that aspect.
MR VABAZA: Thank you, Mr Chairperson and members of the Committee. It had always been our view also that no charge of attempted murder even when we appeared in the Regional Court in Zwelitshya. But the prosecutor and police said it was the instruction of the AG then that they should charged with attempted murder on the basis of how they had gone into Tembeni to do. I also agree with the Committee, Mr Chairperson, that in respect of that indeed there could be no amnesty granted, but we included it only because it was, it was formed part of the charge sheet in the Regional Court.
CHAIRPERSON: Further view is that what may be something that we consider is the issue of the planning of a murder and hence the offence of conspiracy to murder, which may be, at this point in time, more appropriate. I don't know what your views are on that.
MR VABAZA: Thank you, Mr Chairperson and members. Indeed it could be said the charge of the offence of conspiracy to commit attempted murder could be an appropriate alternative. Mr Chairperson, the only view ... (indistinct) will be able to make is that even that one it was, from our point of view, rather remote, not causally, not closely connected, more so if one takes into account that when they got into the village nothing was done, though it had originally been planned to. That's the only view .... (intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: Isn't that primarily a conspiracy?
MR VABAZA: It is, what you are saying. Even, that's what we are going to argue in the court that there's no very strong evidence. Only it is based on the statements extracted from them. It is indeed, I agree.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Vabaza, the difference between this forum and the court is that here you'd like your client to be guilty. Because then he can get amnesty.
MR VABAZA: No.
CHAIRPERSON: If he is not guilty, then he can't get amnesty.
MR VABAZA: No, Mr Chairperson, that's not what I am saying. I am saying I agree with you, Mr Chairperson and the Committee, that indeed conspiracy is.
CHAIRPERSON: What about conspiracy to robbery in respect of the firearms of the soldiers.
MR VABAZA: Even that one is an appropriate one.
CHAIRPERSON: One would have hoped that in your, at least your affidavits that supplemented the application, that would have been set out. Because the only way we can make such a finding is because it comes out of the facts of the evidence. Hopefully in future, it will be covered properly. But would you agree also that in the case of the first incident where the soldiers were going to be ambushed, there was certainly conspiracy to rob them of their firearms?
MR VABAZA: I agree with you.
CHAIRPERSON: Is there anything else you'd like to add?
MR VABAZA: There is nothing else other than the similar evidence given and tendered.
CHAIRPERSON: I see. Mtanga, have you got any ...
MS MTANGA: No, I have nothing to say, Chairperson, thank you.
CHAIRPERSON: We're going to take some time to consider this and you will probably be informed during, through the normal channels of what our decision is. I am also given to understand that the matter scheduled to begin tomorrow has been postponed and so too, the matter that was supposed to start on Thursday. We are attempting to bring forward the matter scheduled for Friday and at the moment, the best we could do is to get an undertaking about Thursday in respect of that matter. In the circumstances, we will adjourn till Thursday 9 am.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
