CHAIRPERSON: During the course of this hearing an application for my recusal was launched. Mr Hattingh who appears for certain potential victims indicated that he was bringing the application on behalf of a number of clients, in their capacities as victims or next of kin of persons who had died in the actions for which the applicants apply for amnesty.
In his argument, Mr Hattingh broadly set out the law relating to the consideration of the recusal of a presiding officer. In my view he set it out correctly and I don't think it necessary to indulge in any discussion thereon. In particular he pointed out that really, it was what the litigants themselves felt that was important.
Generally there must exist a reasonable suspicion of bias on the part of the person sought to be recused for such recusal action therefore to be justified. However, contrary to suggestion, the test must be an objective one. It is significant that Mr Hattingh was at pains to point out that his submissions were based on the instructions of his clients and were made in fact in terms of such instructions.
It will be well to point out at this stage that the litigants perceptions must also be reasonable. It follows therefore that it has nothing to do with emotions, but rather whether their perceptions were reasonable in the circumstances.
He submitted that the feeling of his clients was that I was assisting the applicants and really in effect shaping their evidence for them. He referred to only one possible example, namely that I pointed out to him that the applicant completed the original application form in a language that he was not proficient in, that was English. It was done when he was confronted with the contents or parts of the contents of that application.
In my view any presiding officer is duty-bound to point out such matters when any witness is potentially in a prejudicial position as a result of such anomalies. Secondly, it was submitted the Committee was not trying to obtain a full picture of the application. On this issue I'm not quite certain whether it was intended to suggest that there was a duty on the Amnesty Committee to investigative work. At best in my view, that is what was intended.
Lastly, it was submitted that cross-examination of the applicant was curtailed, especially in not allowing a proposition related to an irrelevant event to be put to the witness. It seems also that the globary effect of all this has given rise to the dissatisfaction, hence the application.
I wish to point out that I have on more than one occasion both privately and in public requested all representatives to conduct this hearing in such a manner such as to make the atmosphere conducive to reconciliation of people and parties who hitherto have been on opposing fronts. This indeed in my view is the purpose of the Act and consequently the aim of such hearings.
I am afraid that thusfar this has not happened in certain quarters. Indeed the adversarial manner in which certain sections of the hearing has been conducted seems to have caused the wrong type of expectation by the various interested parties and has therefore created exactly what the Act intended to avoid.
In my view it is precisely this that has led to this application. When any witness is confronted with issues which carries with it a risk of prejudice, it is the duty of the presiding officer to intervene and put the matter into proper perspective. Matters such as that often happen at hearings. This is exactly what happened in respect of the incident that had been referred to as an example of the alleged shaping of the applicant's evidence. It is time the purpose of the Act is grasped.
I wish to point out that this is not a criminal matter or a civil matter but an unusual hearing designed to reconcile the people and not to allow a replay of any trial which may have preceded it. We are not here to score points. If any interested party is here to score point then he or she is in the wrong forum.
Since the beginning of the hearing it has been obvious that the public has been divided. I'm not too sure whether such divisions are based on political affiliations or geographical differences or perhaps even cultural. Be that as it may, I want to appeal to all present to desist from creating an atmosphere of division particularly in this hearing. For example when perceived points are scored there seems to be a tendency to applaud. We are not in this hearing for that purpose.
On the other hand, if evidence is led that certain sections of the public are not happy to hear or disagree with, there's a tendency to mumble as loudly as possible to display the dissatisfaction. That type of behaviour, and I include both applauding and mumbling, does not help the process. That is what I mean by grasping the purpose and the intention of the process and Act.
If after all is said and done, we do not want to destroy this country and we want to live with each other as we should have even before apartheid, then we can only attain that type of life when we come to terms with what has happened and we can reconcile each other with the events and with each other.
It is also not the function of this Committee to indulge in full-scale investigation as it seems is expected of us. This is done by other Committees attached to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. More importantly, if certain interested parties with to place before us as a Committee, certain information, the gathering of such information is expected to be done by the different representatives who choose to place that particular information before us. After all that is what they are here for.
Lastly, the cross-examination of an irrelevant matter is not allowed because of the norms and practices which have developed over the judicial years and judicial history of this country. It is not unknown to our judicial system. While this forum may not strictly be described as a judicial forum, the rule I have referred to is in my view not out of place in this forum.
Consequently, none of the issues raised singularly or together seem to justify the application. As I have mentioned, I can only hope that the interested parties have taken to heart what I have said and not to draw the Committee into their squabbles.
In the result the application is refused.
MR BLACK: Mr Chairman, the next applicant is Mbokane. He will be testifying in Zulu.
MR HATTINGH: Mr Chairman, before we proceed with the new applicant today, perhaps I could just remind you of the position of Mr Khaba and Mr Gushu, where Mr Khaba implicated Mr Gushu. The whole issue was raised with Mr Black on Friday and that there's something of the past applicants that we still have to clarify and make sure of.
CHAIRPERSON: I didn't hear what you said Mr, I'm sorry.
MR HATTINGH: Mr Chairman, the issue of Mr Khaba and Mr Gushu. Mr Black - Mr Chairman asked Mr Black on Friday to just clarify the issue where Mr Khaba implicated Mr Gushu with regard to an incident where Mr Gushu did not make application for that particular incident. I think just before we carry on we just have to clarity that issue.
CHAIRPERSON: I think what I did Mr Hattingh, if you remember correctly, I pointed out what I thought was of potential conflict. I'm sure everybody understands the implications of that conflict. I think it's for Mr Black to decide what he wants to do. It carries with it immense implications I would think and I don't think there's anything more I can say but to draw his attention to this issues. If he chooses to carry on like that he will run into trouble at some time or other.
MR HATTINGH: Thank you Mr Chairman.
MR BLACK: Mr Chairman, for the information of the Committee, I did consult with Mr Gushu and Khaba about this issue. I can recall Mr Khaba if necessary to clarify the issue but I've been given to understand that there's another applicant who was present when the instruction was given and that the issue would then be clarified.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Black, I have drawn your attention to it. I don't the details, that is why I can't, and I don't intend to advise you either way. I think you're experienced enough to decide what can happen, what will not happen and you have the particular information to decide what to do.
MR BLACK: I can just request that my instructions, or I'm given to understand that the matter will be clarified in the course of the hearing but if not, I may well have to recall Mr Khaba just to explain the situation, thank you.
CHAIRPERSON: Who are you calling now?
MR BLACK: Mr Chairman, this is Mr Mbokane, the third applicant which appears on the list.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mbokane, what language would you prefer to speak?
MR MBOKANE: Zulu.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
L P MBOKANE: (sworn states)
MR BLACK: Thank you. Mr Chairman, this applicant, Mr Mbokane, is applying for amnesty in respect of, if I may broadly refer to them as the events which took place at the Giwi Breyten Construction Compound(?) in Evander. He was convicted of the offences of murder, attempted murder and two attempted robberies. These convictions will appear on page 233 of the record, Volume 1, and the charge sheet is on page 216.
CHAIRPERSON: He applies for amnesty in respect of murder, the murder of whom?
MR BLACK: This is the Giwi Breyten incident. That is the murder of Mr de Breyten, the attempted murder on Mr Fourie and then I assume that the two counts of attempted robbery of which he was convicted possibly relate to the tying up of the two security guards. Mr Gushu has already testified to that incident and confirmed the fact that this applicant was present at the time the incident took place.
Mr Chairman, before we get to the actual events as it were, I need to clear up a few preliminary issues.
CHAIRPERSON: ...[inaudible]
MR BLACK: The Judgment is on page 233, that's the final conclusion.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes.
MR BLACK: And the charge sheet appears on page 216. He was convicted of counts 1, 2, 3 and 4 of the charge sheet.
Mr Chairman, the application, the original application which was submitted to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, appears on page 58 of Volume 1. I need to clarify a few issues relating to that particular application form in order to avoid any, or to curtail the proceedings.
May I proceed Mr Chairman?
EXAMINATION BY MR BLACK: Mr Mbokane, if you look at page 58 of Volume 1 which is in front of you there, this is an application form which was submitted to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in terms of which you applied for amnesty, is that correct?
MR MBOKANE: That is correct.
MR BLACK: Now who completed this form?
MR MBOKANE: It's my co-inmates in Barbeton Prison.
MR BLACK: So the handwriting which appears on this form, is that your hand writing?
MR MBOKANE: It's my co-inmates handwriting.
MR BLACK: Now, did you tell your inmate, your co-inmate as it were, the full story of what happened and Giwi Breyten?
MR MBOKANE: Yes, that is correct, I did.
MR BLACK: And did you - is that including the shooting of Mr de Bruyn and the tying of the security officers etc?
MR MBOKANE: Yes, I explained to him even with regard to - I explained to him with regard to the attempted murder but not the actual murder but I did explain in such a manner that he would believe me with regard to what I did but I think he filled the form wrongly.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mbokane, I'm sure you can talk louder, not so?
MR MBOKANE: Yes, that is correct.
CHAIRPERSON: You see those policemen there sitting in the back?
MR MBOKANE: Yes, I do.
CHAIRPERSON: Talk loud enough so they can hear you.
MR MBOKANE: Okay.
MR BLACK: Let's just - I just want to repeat, did you tell your co-inmate that Mr de Bruyn was killed and that there was and that Mr Fourie was wounded and that the two security guards were tied up?
MR MBOKANE: Yes, I did tell him that one of them was injured and the other one was killed, but I did explain to him that I never took part in any shooting and I was never charged with murder but he chose to write whatever he wrote.
MR BLACK: So this business of saying that the acts in respect of which you applying, it's got here
"poging tot moord"
Did you tell him to write "poging tot moord", or who, how did it come about that that was written down?
MR MBOKANE: I think because I told him with regard to the attempted murders, probably he decided to write it because I had not been filled in or told as to how to fill in the form properly.
MR BLACK: So when this form was filled in did you have the assistance of any lawyer or did anyone explain the meaning of these paragraphs that you had to fill in?
MR MBOKANE: No, nobody was assisting me in filling in the form.
MR BLACK: Now you go on in the form and you refer to, there's a name of a victim and you refer to a Fourie, is that also a thing that was filled in by this co-inmate of yours?
MR MBOKANE: Yes, everything that is contained herein was filled in by my co-inmate.
MR BLACK: And did you tell your co-inmate that a Mr de Bruyn was killed at the shooting?
MR MBOKANE: Yes, I did.
MR BLACK: Because I see he's got there
"One person was killed"
And if you look at page 60 of that, did you tell your co-inmate that you were acting on behalf of the ANC and on the orders of Mzwandile Gushu?
MR MBOKANE: Yes, I did.
MR BLACK: If you page to page 61 of Volume 1, you got page 61?
MR MBOKANE: Yes.
MR BLACK: That is the beginning of a supplementary statement, is that correct?
MR MBOKANE: That is correct.
MR BLACK: If you page to page 67 of that statement, if you look at the bottom of that page, is that your signature which appears on that page?
MR MBOKANE: Yes, that is correct.
MR BLACK: And do you confirm that what is contained in this statement, page 61 to 67, is true and correct?
MR MBOKANE: Yes, I think that is true and correct even though I didn't have the opportunity to read through it.
MR BLACK: Well did you go through - is everything ...[intervention]
CHAIRPERSON: So why do you say it's true and correct if you haven't read through it?
MR MBOKANE: I do believe whatever is written in there is what I said.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Black, has the contents of that documents not been interpreted or gone through with the applicant?
MR BLACK: Yes, I can confirm that the applicant has in fact read this statement and he has gone through it, so I can clarify perhaps what he is trying to get at. I think at the time of signing it he didn't.
Have you read this statement?
MR MBOKANE: Yes, I read the statement.
MR BLACK: Now if you look at page 66 of that statement, you drew to my attention that there was something that wasn't correct on that.
MR MBOKANE: Yes, that is true.
MR BLACK: Can you tell the Committee what is not quite accurately recorded on that statement?
MR MBOKANE: I realised later on that I had said I am applying for amnesty with regard to attempted murder and I had to apply with regard every matter in Giwi Breyten. I would like to say that I am applying for amnesty with regard to murder, attempted murder as well as robbery.
CHAIRPERSON: Tell me, what sentence did you get for all of those?
MR MBOKANE: 18 years.
MR BLACK: Right. So where it stands there I just want to correct, where it stands on the first top paragraph 6 of page 66 where it says that you received a period of 18 years imprisonment for the convictions of murder, attempted murder and unlawful possession of firearms, that that is not entirely correct? The factual situation is, and it appears from the Judgment, that you received conviction for murder, attempted murder and two attempted robberies, is that correct?
MR MBOKANE: That is correct.
MR BLACK: Right. Now let's page back to page 62. If we can just as a background, as your personal background and I don't think there's anything controversial in here. When we get to the actual events you can tell the Committee in your own words what took place, but is it correct that you were born at Breyten on the 6th of September 1969 and you passed standard six at school?
MR MBOKANE: That is correct.
MR BLACK: You state here further that your younger brother, James Mbokane was an active member of the ANC in the Secunda/Ermelo area and during 1985 and at Secunda he was killed by members of the Inkatha together with the Black Cats gang members?
MR MBOKANE: That is correct.
MR BLACK: You say that you've always supported the African National Congress and in 1986 you became an active member of the self-defence units at Secunda?
MR MBOKANE: That is correct.
MR BLACK: We've already heard evidence as to the fact that various SDU's as they were called, were established at communities throughout the country as a policy of the African National Congress and one of their principal purposes was to defend the homes and members of communities being attacked by then perceived to be government agents and person trying to oppress the African Congress, is that correct, more or less?
MR MBOKANE: Yes, that is correct.
MR BLACK: Page over to page 63 please. On page 63, Sub-Section (c) you say that you are seeking amnesty in respect of the events which occurred at the Giwi Breyten Construction Compound at Evander on or about the 6th of July 1992, okay?
MR MBOKANE: That is correct.
MR BLACK: Then you proceed at the bottom there at paragraph 3, you say you'll give outline of the events which led up to and which took place at the Evander Compound, see that?
MR MBOKANE: Yes.
MR BLACK: On page 64 you then proceed to give an outline of the events which led up to the actual confrontation which took place at the Giwi Compound. Now in your own words Mr Mbokane, could you please tell the Committee, from the beginning, how it came about that you went to the Giwi Compound.
MR MBOKANE: We had received a message that Giwi there were training members of the IFP as well as the Black Chain. The were being trained by the owners of the compound and there were guns at the compound. I passed the message on to my commander, that is Mzwandile Gushu. He is the one that took the decision that we should go there with the aim of retrieving or confiscating the guns, but not with the intention of killing.
MR BLACK: Sorry Mr Mbokane, when you say you received a message, did you make any efforts to verify this? Did you go and find out the story that you, the message that you heard, was it true or not, did you try and make any attempt to find out?
MR MBOKANE: Yes, I did try, I made three attempts.
MR BLACK: Was it you alone or what?
MR MBOKANE: There were two of us.
MR BLACK: Who, who? Who was it?
MR MBOKANE: It was myself and Brian Mlungisi Gombela.
MR BLACK: And what did you find out?
MR MBOKANE: When we got there we realised that there were two security guards who were armed. Even though we were not able to see inside at that stage because there was a prefabricated fence that blocked out view. We went back to Gushu to notify him that we saw some people who had guns but we were not able to gain entry and see as to whether there was training going on inside.
The most important fact for us was to retrieve the guns because we had been told that when they come back they were going to attack the Mandela Squatter Camp, and because we did not have any arms we decided to go and get those arms that they were using to train them.
MR BLACK: When you say: "they were going to attack the Mandela Squatter Camp", who is: "they"? Who are you referring to when you say: "they were going to attack the Mandela Squatter Camp"?
MR MBOKANE: They were the members of the IFP as well as the Black Chains.
MR BLACK: Now you reported your findings to Mzwandile Gushu, is that correct?
MR MBOKANE: That is correct.
MR BLACK: I think it's now common cause that Mr Gushu then was the MK commander?
MR MBOKANE: That is correct.
CHAIRPERSON: Is that common cause?
MR BLACK: I don't think - he's given his evidence ...[intervention]
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, but that's not common cause Mr Black, unless there's an agreement here.
MR BLACK: Just simply, it wasn't challenged that he was an MK commander but let's put it this way
Who was your commander at that time?
MR MBOKANE: It was Mzwandile Gushu.
MR BLACK: Right. Now when you reported to him what happened next?
MR MBOKANE: He told us that we should make an attempt to get those arms.
MR BLACK: Right. Just carry on, what took place then?
MR MBOKANE: When we got there we disarmed the two security guards and we made them lie down on the ground. Gushu had a .38 special ...[intervention]
MR BLACK: Before you go further, when you say: "we", who is: "we"?
MR MBOKANE: Mlungisi Gombela, myself as well as Mzwandile Gushu.
MR BLACK: Were you armed?
MR MBOKANE: Yes, that is myself and Mzwandile Gushu.
MR BLACK: What were you armed with?
MR MBOKANE: I had a .38 revolver, Gushu had an AK47 with.
MR BLACK: When you arrived at the compound, what took place there?
MR MBOKANE: When we got there there were two black security guys. We made them lie on the ground and Gushu directed me to tie their hands whilst they were lying on the ground.
After that we saw a car approaching and which was driven by one white security guy and there was another one on the passenger seat. Gushu went to open the gate and we also wanted to get hold of them. I think they suspected that there was something amiss and they reversed the car without entering into the yard and they started shooting towards our direction. That is when Mzwandile Gushu left the gate and went inside the yard and took his AK47 and he fired back.
He was trying to clear the way for us to be able to run out. One got injured and the other one got killed. As we were trying to flee the area or the place, the other one shot Mzwandile Gushu on the leg and Mzwandile Gushu fell and he also ran away.
MR BLACK: After this incident, you go on to say that about a week afterwards members of the Murder and Robbery Squad came to your house in Secunda and you were arrested and taken to the Middelburg Police Station, is that so?
MR MBOKANE: That is correct.
MR BLACK: You go on further to say that you were tortured, could you just tell the Committee briefly about the torturing?
MR MBOKANE: When we got to the Middelburg Police Station the members of the Murder and Robbery Squad started assaulting us and they also took us to another place called Loskop Dam. It was myself and Mzwandile. They left us there.
There were poles as wide as this table as I'm pointing and they tied me left foot to the pole as well as the hand. They did the same with the right hand and the right foot and they started assaulting us on the ribs and they forced us to make statements.
We were also electrocuted. Our private parts were also subjected to some electrocution. That is what happened at Loskop Dam.
MR BLACK: Okay. Now you say that you and Mr Gombela stood trial separately from your MK Commander, Gushu and you stood trial at the Middelburg High Court and you were sentenced to a period of 18 years imprisonment.
MR MBOKANE: Yes, that is correct.
MR BLACK: If you look at page 66 of that document, you go on, and you were found guilty and that's a fact, that you were found guilty of murder, attempted murder and two counts of attempted robbery.
You go on in paragraph 3.7 of that document, you say that during the course of the events at the Giwi Breyten Compound you didn't shoot, you didn't fire any shots.
MR MBOKANE: That is correct.
MR BLACK: Who did the shooting there from as far as your group was concerned?
MR MBOKANE: It was my Commander, Mzwandile Gushu.
MR BLACK: It's been explained to you now that because you were part of that group which resulted in the death of Mr de Bruyn, you are also guilty of murder of Mr de Bruyn, do you understand that?
MR MBOKANE: Yes, I do understand.
MR BLACK: Do you accept the responsibility that you are guilty of the murder of Mr de Bruyn?
MR MBOKANE: Yes, I do accept that.
ADV SANDI: Sorry Mr Black, just a moment.
Why did you not also shoot at these people?
MR MBOKANE: When Mzwandile arrived, took the gun and started shooting. My gun was still in the holster and I realised that the other one had already fallen or had died. The other one had disappeared, so I could not continue shooting because our enemies, the other one was out of sight and the other one was already down on the ground.
CHAIRPERSON: Would you have shot if you had an opportunity?
MR MBOKANE: Probably so.
MR BLACK: Now when you went to the Giwi Breyten Compound, can you tell, did you go there for personal reasons or personal gain?
MR MBOKANE: No, that is not so.
MR BLACK: Can you tell the Committee why you went there?
MR MBOKANE: The reason was to go and retrieve some firearms so as to protect the community at Embalentle because we did not have any guns as well as ammunition because they would be confiscated by the police and given to the enemies, so we decided to go there and get some guns in order to be able to protect the community. Our aims were not to kill people, our aim was to take the guns forcefully.
MR BLACK: Did you go there on your own accord? In other words, did you yourself decided to go there?
MR MBOKANE: No, I did not go on my own accord, I had received an instruction from my commander to do so.
MR BLACK: Now if we speed things up a little bit, you were convicted in the High Court, you stood trial, do you recall that? And you were convicted.
MR MBOKANE: Yes, I do.
MR BLACK: And at the trial your were represented by, your legal representative was what they called a pro deo counsel, an advocate appointed by the state, according to you.
MR MBOKANE: That is correct.
MR BLACK: And to give the Committee a complete picture, you were convicted as a result and only on the evidence relating to a pointing out.
MR MBOKANE: Yes, that is correct.
MR BLACK: And from the papers which we've got before us it appears that you did tell the Judge that you were tortured and forced to make these pointing outs.
MR MBOKANE: Yes, I did.
MR BLACK: Now the torturing which you referred to earlier, did that take place before or after the pointing outs?
MR MBOKANE: Before the pointing out.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Black, it had to if it was a result of torture that he made the pointing out, isn't it?
MR BLACK: No, I'm just referring to the specific torturing at the Loskop Dam, whether that took place before or after.
And the words which were written down and were handed up to court as part of the pointing out statements, were those your words which appeared on the pointing out statement which was handed up to court?
MR MBOKANE: Yes, the words were mine.
MR BLACK: That appeared on the pointing out statement that was handed up to court?
MR MBOKANE: Are you referring to the words or the names? That is, my personal names or the words?
MR BLACK: I'm referring to the statements which were written down on the pointing out statement which was then handed up to ...[intervention]
CHAIRPERSON: You remember you made pointings out?
MR MBOKANE: Yes, I do.
CHAIRPERSON: And I assume there were certain explanations that you gave when you made certain pointings out, correct?
MR MBOKANE: Yes, that is true.
CHAIRPERSON: Now your advocate is referring to those explanations.
MR MBOKANE: Yes, that is correct.
MR BLACK: Now when you pointed out, something was written down by the people accompanying you at the pointing out, is that so?
MR MBOKANE: Yes, that is correct
MR BLACK: Now, what was written down there as an explanation, were they your words, did they come from you or from, what were they?
MR MBOKANE: These were my own words, they came from me but not voluntarily. I was actually forced to say certain things.
MR BLACK: Okay. To wind up, you confirmed you are applying for amnesty in respect of the murder of Mr de Bruyn, the attempted on Mr Fourie and the two counts of attempted robbery for which you received a conviction.
MR MBOKANE: That is so.
MR BLACK: Thank you, I've got no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR BLACK
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Patel?
MR PATEL: I have no questions Mr Chairman.
MR KEMP: I have no questions Mr Chairman.
CHAIRPERSON: Miss van der Walt?
MS VAN DER WALT: No questions.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Prinsloo?
MR PRINSLOO: No questions, thank you Mr Chairman.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Hattingh?
MR HATTINGH: Mr Chairman, I do not represent anyone with regard to this incident ...[indistinct], however I would just briefly like to put a few questions with regard to the reconnaissance actions that they took and what they found with regard to the Black Chain or the Black Cats, and the preparations to be made for an attack on the Mandela Squatter Camp because that in fact forms part of the background of events that took place at the time in this area.
CHAIRPERSON: What is the purpose of the questions?
MR HATTINGH: Mr Chairman, the motives and reasons for killing people who were pertinently members of the Black Cats gangs, victims Obed and Chris Ngwenya and Zwane, they were killed for a reason, decision were made to kill them because of the violent, their violent behaviour.
Now this evidence of training of Black Cat members at this institution and allegations that planning was made for an attack on the Mandela Squatter Camp, I would suggest also forms part of the general suggestion that the members or the people referred, the reasons for them being killed was that they were part of this violent behaviour during this period and in this area.
CHAIRPERSON: Your question assumes that it's possible that he's going to say that he knows who had been trained, namely Mr Ngwenya and others?
MR HATTINGH: Yes, Mr Chairman.
CHAIRPERSON: And if he says he doesn't know then that would be the end of the issues?
MR HATTINGH: I merely would wish to make inquiries with regard to what he found on visiting the compound and the involvement of the IFP members and the Black Cats.
CHAIRPERSON: Okay. I'm just concerned about the relevance of it, so let's see how you go about it.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR HATTINGH: Mr Mbokane, just to clarify the issue of your going on a reconnaissance mission to the Giwi Breyten on the days preceding the actual events for which you make application for amnesty, as I understand your evidence you went there but you did not get access to the terrain itself, is that correct?
MR MBOKANE: That is correct.
MR HATTINGH: And the only people you saw there with arms were the security guards, is that correct, at the gate?
MR MBOKANE: I saw the security guards at the gate but there were people who were getting into the compound but I did not see what they were carrying.
MR HATTINGH: On what do you base the allegation that Black Cats, members of the Black Cats organisation as well as members of the IFP were being trained there and that they were planning an attack on the Mandela Squatter Camp? On what do you base those allegations?
MR MBOKANE: We had already heard from one of the members within our self-defence units.
MR HATTINGH: Nothing that you found at the compound when you went there yourself confirmed this information, is that correct?
MR MBOKANE: I couldn't get into the compound because I was refused permission. Only people with permission were allowed in the compound.
MR HATTINGH: Is it further correct that nothing that you personally found at the compound confirmed the information that weapons in the possession of Black Cats or IFP members were being stored at the compound?
MR MBOKANE: I suspected that there were such a thing when I got there. We tried to gain entrance but we were refused permission. I suspected some of the people that were getting into the compound had indeed been involved in this.
MR HATTINGH: The people, Zwi Zwane, Chris Ngwenya, Obed Friday Nhlabathi, did you know them?
MR MBOKANE: No, I didn't know them.
MR HATTINGH: Bongani Malinga and Advice Gwala?
MR MBOKANE: I knew Advice Gwala, not Bongani Malinga.
MR HATTINGH: Lastly just with regard to the ANC military command and the instructions that you received, were you aware of the fact that during the Groote Schuur Accord in 1990, the ANC decided to cease the armed struggle?
MR MBOKANE: No, I didn't know that.
MR HATTINGH: Did you personally receive any instructions from the ANC Command, from the Provincial or National level?
MR MBOKANE: Yes.
MR HATTINGH: From whom?
MR MBOKANE: From Mzwandile.
MR HATTINGH: Is that Gushu?
MR MBOKANE: Yes, Gushu.
MR HATTINGH: Did you consider him to be from either Provincial or National Command of the ANC?
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Hattingh, I think maybe there's a bit of a misunderstanding.
Did you ever receive direct instructions from the command, either at a Provincial or National level, not through somebody else, directly? Is that the import of your questions?
MR HATTINGH: I receive an instruction from my commander in the region.
CHAIRPERSON: Was that Gushu?
MR MBOKANE: That is correct.
CHAIRPERSON: You're not being asked from whom you got the instruction, the question is whether at any time did you ever receive a direct instruction, either from the Provincial Command or the National Command?
MR MBOKANE: No, I do not have the permission to communicate with others except Mzwandile.
MR HATTINGH: As far as you were aware at the time, what was the policy of the ANC in terms of the command structure with which you dealt with at the time with regard to armed robberies to be committed on behalf of the ANC and in the furtherance of the political aims of the ANC?
MR MBOKANE: Would you please repeat the question?
MR HATTINGH: At the time of these incidents what did you perceive to be the position with regard to the policy of the ANC in respect of armed robberies to be committed, let's say for the purpose of arming SDU's?
MR MBOKANE: The one policy I know from our side was that we were fighting for stability and reconciliation but if a person was being attacked one had to defend oneself and if one didn't have any arms with which to defend oneself, one had to do something because we were attacked and we had no arms with which to defend ourselves. We therefore had to get hold of these arms from other people, to defend ourselves and the community.
MR HATTINGH: Was this a formal policy that you were being told about or was it just something that you gathered in the circumstances, that you were allowed to do that?
MR MBOKANE: I would say it was our policy, ourselves as the self-defence unit, having received this instruction from our commander, Mzwandile Gushu.
MR HATTINGH: Then lastly, Nkompela who did not stand trial with you with regard to the incidents at Giwi Breyten, what happened to him? Is he also an applicant at this hearing, or what happened to him?
MR MBOKANE: I would be telling a lie if I were to say I know something about him. It's been a long time since I saw him. I don't know what has become of him, I don't even know his whereabouts.
MR HATTINGH: Thank you Mr Chairman, no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR HATTINGH
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR MAPOMA: Thank you Mr Sir.
Mr Mbokane, who is this person who signed, who completed the application form for you, your application for amnesty?
MR MBOKANE: Mandastole.
MR MAPOMA: Why did you ask him to do that for you?
MR MBOKANE: I realised that I would get confused and make mistakes.
MR MAPOMA: But weren't you able to write?
MR MBOKANE: Yes, I can write but I had to be sure about this seeing that I had a form to fill in, that is why I requested him to assist.
MR MAPOMA: Then who signed the form?
MR MBOKANE: The signature is mine.
MR MAPOMA: Do you realise now that in this form you have not made an application for the murder of Mr de Bruyn?
MR MBOKANE: I was not aware of that, it's only now that I am realising that.
MR MAPOMA: I am also including this because it is part of one incident and my legal representative actually drew this to my attention.
MR MBOKANE: So are you suggesting that you only became aware that you should have applied for amnesty for de Bruyn after you were advised by your legal representative?
MR MBOKANE: Yes. I am actually asking for amnesty for all these incidents.
CHAIRPERSON: I think the question is: When the form was completed by your friend, what was your intention, what should he have filled in?
MR MBOKANE: My intention was that we should the information about my involvement in the murder of de Bruyn, the attempted murder and robbery.
MR MAPOMA: In the supplementary statement which was prepared with the assistance your legal representative it does not appear that you've applied for amnesty for robbery or attempted robbery, do you realise that?
CHAIRPERSON: What page?
MR MAPOMA: Pardon Sir?
CHAIRPERSON: What page?
MR MAPOMA: Page 61 up to 67, Sir.
MR BLACK: To assist, I think the relevant page is page 66 as well as, with respect, paragraph 1 on page 63.
MR MAPOMA: Did you take any firearms from the construction?
MR MBOKANE: No, we failed in our attempt to get hold of firearms.
MR MAPOMA: You say that you had information that the IFP and the Black Chain gang were being trained there? Did you have any information about the Black Cats at all?
MR MBOKANE: Yes, I did have information about the Black Cats.
MR MAPOMA: What information was it about the Black Cats?
MR MBOKANE: It was information to the effect that they too were being trained at the very same venue and they also keep some of their firearms there.
MR MAPOMA: To your information, was there any relationship between the Black Cats and the Black Chain gang?
MR MBOKANE: Yes.
MR MAPOMA: What was it?
MR MBOKANE: They were just one and the same thing, they were using the same modus operandi.
MR MAPOMA: Now when you went to the construction actually was your order given to you by Gushu? What is the precise order that he gave?
MR MBOKANE: The instruction was that when we get to the place we should try and get entry and we should persuade whoever we could manage to get hold to show us where the firearms were being hidden.
MR MAPOMA: Were you given any instructions to shoot when necessary?
MR MBOKANE: Yes, we already had received an instruction to that effect but only to defend ourselves.
MR MAPOMA: I'm asking this question because you say Gush gave you an instruction to go and confiscate the arms and not to kill anyone there. You say you never had an intention to kill anyone by going there, would you explain this?
MR MBOKANE: I can say it was not our intention to get into the place and start shooting, instead we would get hold of two people, persuade them to show us where the firearms cache was.
MR MAPOMA: Now that you did not shoot anyone, you did not kill anyone, do you associate yourself with what was done, that is the killing and the shooting?
MR MBOKANE: I was on the scene when this happened and I was included in this because I was present when the incident took place. I am in line with that because we were trying to defend ourselves. They are the ones who started shooting.
MR MAPOMA: Thank you. No further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MAPOMA
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS VAN DER WALT: Chairperson, I did not receive direct instructions with regard to this person's evidence but he acted under Gushu who also then gave instructions to go to Mr Masebe, my client, in Piet Retief. If you will just allow me to ask him a few questions with regard to the instruction that he spoke of now, to go and steal weapons.
Sir, when your legal representative led you in your evidence you said that your instruction was to go and get weapons and you once again confirmed it when the person asked you the questions now, is that correct? Was that the instructions to go and get weapons?
MR MBOKANE: I was instructed to go and get hold of firearms at the place.
MS VAN DER WALT: Was that the only instruction that you received?
MR MBOKANE: No, not any other instruction.
MS VAN DER WALT: Sir, why do you say in your amnesty application on page 59 that you went to this place to go and get money. You say under: State Political Objectives to be achieved
"Fund raising funds of self-defence units"
Paragraph (b), exactly the same, you went there to go and get money for the self-defence unit and not to go and get ammunition of weapons.
MR MBOKANE: We went there precisely to try and get hold of arms. We would take money as well if we came across it because we needed money. Our movement did not have money. We were not getting any financial support. Money would have been of great help so that we could take people to hospital in cases of injury etc.
MS VAN DER WALT: But it was not your instruction from Gushu to go there to get or to go and steal money?
MR MBOKANE: No, that was not the instruction, the instruction was that we should try and get hold of these firearms.
MS VAN DER WALT: And why do you not say this in your application form. You were very careful that you did not want to fill it in yourself and you even asked someone else to do it in order for you not to make a mistake and now you make the biggest mistake because you do not say that you went there to steal weapons, why?
MR MBOKANE: I would like you to know that if one is doing something for oneself, one is sure about what one is doing but if somebody else is doing something for me, it's a different story.
MS VAN DER WALT: According to you it was then not the policy of the ANC to rob people for money, you went to go and get weapons in order to protect yourselves, is that correct?
MR MBOKANE: No, I repeat: We went there with an aim of getting hold of firearms, not money.
MS VAN DER WALT: No further questions.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Black?
MR BLACK: I have no re-examination Mr Chairman.
NO RE-EXAMINATION BY MR BLACK
ADV BOSMAN: Mr Mbokane, at the time when this form was filled in, did you have any court documentation with you? Did you have the documents setting out the charges at the time when you were tried? Did you have it with you in prison after you had been convicted?
MR MBOKANE: No.
ADV BOSMAN: Did you still remember what you were charged with when you filled in the form?
MR MBOKANE: Yes.
ADV BOSMAN: Did you think about these charges when you filled in the form, the charges of robbery? Did you remember that you were charged with robbery?
MR MBOKANE: Yes, I remember I was charged for that.
ADV BOSMAN: And you remembered that you were charged with the possession of ammunition.
MR MBOKANE: Yes, I do remember but I do not remember that I was charged for being found in possession of firearms. What I remember is that I was charged for attempted robbery, attempted murder and murder.
ADV BOSMAN: So did you not think that the robbery should be mentioned in the form?
MR MBOKANE: Chairperson, may the speaker please repeat the question?
ADV BOSMAN: Did you not them remember that the robbery should also be mentioned in the form?
MR MBOKANE: A person who was assisting me had the necessary information. I was telling him as he was filling in. I guess he chose to fill in the information as he did.
ADV BOSMAN: Did you look what he had filled in before you signed the form or didn't you understand it?
MR MBOKANE: I did not understand this.
ADV BOSMAN: Thank you.
ADV SANDI: This person who completed this form for you, do you know his standard of education?
MR MBOKANE: I know him to be still studying in prison.
ADV SANDI: What is he studying, if that is in any way relevant?
MR MBOKANE: I know that he is just completing his studies.
ADV SANDI: I take it that you would not perhaps be able to say what his level of proficiency is in the English language would you?
MR MBOKANE: That is correct.
ADV SANDI: What is correct.
MR MBOKANE: I'm not in the position to say how proficient he is in English.
ADV SANDI: I see that in your statement you mention that your brother was killed, when was this?
MR MBOKANE: This happened in 1985.
ADV SANDI: And when did you become a supporter of the ANC?
MR MBOKANE: In 1986.
ADV SANDI: Would the fact that your brother was killed by members of the IFP, would that have anything to do with your joining the ANC and become its supporter in 1986, a year later?
MR MBOKANE: No, I was already determined to join the ANC and I did this voluntarily, out of my volition.
ADV SANDI: Why do you mention this incident concerning your brother in your application?
MR MBOKANE: It is because I want to come up with a complete picture so that people should understand what experiences I went through, myself and my family.
ADV SANDI: You have said in your evidence you received information that members of the Black Cats were receiving training at the Giwi Breyten, at the compound you were talking about. How long did your investigation of that take, how long did it take to investigate that?
MR MBOKANE: My investigation lasted for three days.
ADV SANDI: Thank you Mr Mbokane.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
WITNESS EXCUSED
