Amnesty Hearings

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Mr Patel?

MR PATEL: As it pleases you Mr Chairman. The next applicant is Mr Mkhwanazi.

Before calling him to the stand, we wish to make an application in terms of Section 33(1)(b), namely that his evidence be heard in camera. The reason for making the application is as follows: Mr Chairman, you and your learned Committee Members are aware of the hostilities that are existing between the various parties that are present. It has been reported to me through the applicants that I represent, that they've received death threats more particularly aimed at the four people who formed the Special Committee.

The three applicants, save Mr Mkhwanazi, are resident in Ermelo and are well-known to everybody, hence a similar application will not be brought in respect of them. Mr Mkhwanazi however to a large extent and because of the manner in which he conducted himself in the Ermelo area is unknown to a lot of people, in fact his role in what took place is to a large extent unknown. Given the threats that have been made he fears for his life and safety.

My submission is that that particular fear is well-founded given the circumstances that are prevailing at this point in time. My submission is that in view of the threats and the belief that he entertains that his life is in danger, that his request that his evidence be held in camera be entertained.

My submission would be to exclude the media and members of the public, but given the antagonism that exists which we don't want to fuel and to avoid any unnecessary prejudice, we would only ask for the exclusion of those two categories. In other words we would say that the victims or their next-of-kin can be present. So all we are asking for at the end of the day is two categories to be, or rather all categories to be excluded save for victims and/or their next-of-kin. As it pleases you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: ...[inaudible] co-applicants?

MR PATEL: We don't have a problem with the co-applicants either.

CHAIRPERSON: ...[inaudible] views?

MR KEMP: Mr Chairman, I've got no particular view in this regard. My clients won't be prejudiced by such an order.

MS VAN DER WALT: With respect Chairperson, I think there has to be more concrete testimony before you for such an application. The whole amnesty hearing is there to show the people that people are prepared to testify and to tell what they did and also to tell the community how they feel about their deeds.

I think the community here in Ermelo has great interest here, not only the victims. It would seem when one listens to Mr Gushu's testimony and the cross-examination by Mr Hattingh, it would seem that the whole community actually suffered because of what happened here. I act on behalf of Mr Msibi who has an interest in this testimony and I feel that there ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Miss van der Walt, the application was directed at other people in that category.

MS VAN DER WALT: I realise that and I think that what you have said this morning and when you addressed the community this would cause more problems if the community is excluded. They have so much interest that it is evident that there, so many people are present here every day and to exclude them under these circumstances I feel the goal of the Act will not be reached.

CHAIRPERSON: What do you say about the threats or the alleged threats?

MS VAN DER WALT: If it is so and the victims are here then it won't make much difference, with respect. I have nothing further.

MR PRINSLOO: With respect Chairperson, it is for the applicant to verify this, and my colleague has to have made this application behind closed doors but it is now known what the circumstances are. The facts are already on document, testimonies are already before you, it is already known what he is going to testify about. With respect Chairperson, as my colleague indicated it has to be done in such a manner that the applicants, their families and other involved parties have to be aware of it. What protection is there for him now? It is known that he is going to testify, he is an applicant, he is not a witness and under these circumstances of the promotion of reconciliation it has to be in an open hearing, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Does this touch the people who you represent?

MR PRINSLOO: Not as such but there is testimony that Mkhwanazi already sent Gushu to Piet Retief. I don't know what else he is going to say. This does not appear in his application, it's not very complete and in that sense it could have effect.

CHAIRPERSON: And do you think that it won't touch on it? Do you say that the probability exists?

MR PRINSLOO: At this stage I don't know what he is going to.

CHAIRPERSON: But of the documents we have here, is there not a probability, there is no probability that your client would be affected by this.

MR PRINSLOO: According to the testimony of Gush Honourable Chairperson, he said that he was sent there by Mkhwanazi who was the one who gave the instructions, as I remember the testimony and that is the person who is going to testify now.

In his application form itself, that is Mkhwanazi, it does not appear in the documentation there and that is why I say it depends on what Mkhwanazi says himself if he is going to stick by Gushu's evidence. That is my only interest Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: You see Mr Prinsloo, I have to take a decision here on the probabilities.

MR PRINSLOO: That is correct Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: I cannot look at what might happen and what might not happen but I take your point.

MR PRINSLOO: Thank you Chairperson.

MR HATTINGH: Mr Chairman, in my reading of Section 33, the victims are in any event entitled to remain, they cannot be excluded.

CHAIRPERSON: Well I don't think it touches your, the concession has been made in respect of your clients.

MR HATTINGH: All I'm saying is they are in any event entitled to be here.

CHAIRPERSON: Ja.

MR HATTINGH: Secondly, to exclude other or the members of the public, the people who are not victims, that sense, once again I have received a little scribbled note from my "clients", in which they say they would prefer that the public be present.

Now for what it is worth, I think it is important to still bear in mind to what extent excluding a part of the public is going, what the result will have on the perceptions of the public as to how open this hearing is. How is this community going to benefit from excluding certain parts of community in hearing what this person has got to say.

This witness has - there are full indications that this witness will provide extensive background as to reasons and instructions for the killing of various of my clients. My position would be, although we've heard that there were threats made to the life of this witness, no mention has been made of the names of the people who made those threats. We don't know whether they form part of my client base.

CHAIRPERSON: What about putting the applicant or the witness into comfortable position, because he perceives these events and it creates a bit of an emotional charge in him which effects his ability to testify properly, what about that?

MR HATTINGH: Mr Chairman, do you mean by that that he cannot be seen by the public or ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: No, no. Look, let's assume we accept that horse is bolted and he doesn't, in his own mind he is being threatened and he sees testifying behind closed doors as a means to protect himself when it in fact need not be the case but it puts him at ease in order to testify, what about that?

MR HATTINGH: Mr Chairman, I don't really think I'm in a position to really respond to that because whether putting someone at ease, whether that is a requirement or not, I think it's more important to find out whether there is a real likelihood that harm may ensue as stated in the Act, to any person as a result of the proceedings being in an open hearing.

CHAIRPERSON: Well let's put it under Sub-Section (i) or small (1): To put him at ease to give his evidence as best he can, would surely be in the interest of Justice?

MR HATTINGH: Mr Chairman, my opposing representation ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: I just wanted to know what your attitude was to this.

MR HATTINGH: My opposing application would merely be based on the fact that it may leave the community with the sense that they were excluded and once again we are not making progress with reconciliation. That is all I think I can really ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: That's the difference between representatives and presiding officers. I have to take both sides into consideration.

MR HATTINGH: I could not really take it any further, thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well. Mr Mapoma?

MR MAPOMA: Mr Chairman, I would leave it in the hands of the Committee but Sir, I just want to note that the IFP and the ANC have been notified by the Committee in terms of Section 19 Sub-Section (iv) as interested parties. They have been notified of their right to attend the hearing. I have not received their attitude to that in this application but I would ask the Committee to also perhaps take into account their interest.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Black, have you got any particular attitude?

MR BLACK: No, I have got no views on this matter, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Patel, as it were, the horse is bolted isn't it?

MR PATEL: With respect Mr Chairman, my submission would be that it hasn't, the man hasn't testified yet, a lot of people in the public don't know who he is yet.

CHAIRPERSON: I accept that, but once the victims hear what he says are you seeking that I swear them to secrecy? Surely it will be an exercise in futility.

MR PATEL: As it pleases you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: I'm raising the issue because it is a consideration.

MR PATEL: As it pleases you Mr Chairman. The idea behind leaving the victims where they are to listen to the application, I think I made quite clear. One must also bear in mind that the threats have come about during the course of the application an not before, hence there was nothing we could do save to bring it at the time when he is about to give evidence. I think to a large extent, if for example the media is excluded, his face won't be plastered all over TV, less people will know about him. He doesn't reside in this area and at the end of the application hopefully he will go back to where he comes from and will no longer be scrutinised by members of this particular community where he could possibly be targeted as a hit. May I just ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: ...[inaudible]

MR PATEL: As I understand it, the threat does come from members of this community.

CHAIRPERSON: ...[inaudible]

MR PATEL: Well maybe I should then limit the application to just exclude then the media, particularly the TV because in essence he is very uncomfortable with that particular aspect. There was some mention made by my colleagues in objecting to the application with regard to more concrete evidence being led on these threats you know and I would expect that they would accept my word for it.

CHAIRPERSON: ...[inaudible] the revised application serious consideration.

MR PATEL: As it pleases you Mr Chairman. I think at the end of the day what it boils down to is a weighing up of rights and interests. There can be no right or interest greater than preservation of life and safety, in my submission.

The Act doesn't talk as Mr Hattingh says, of a real likelihood but merely of a likelihood that harm may ensue. The Act doesn't say that it must be a witness as suggested by Mr Prinsloo, it relates to any person in ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: ...[inaudible]

MR PATEL: Yes, but in effect he is an applicant.

CHAIRPERSON: ...[inaudible] a short adjournment.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

ON RESUMPTION

CHAIRPERSON: I'm not going to make a ruling because I don't need to I don't think. As perhaps a forerunner to what I hope is going to occur in this area, I've negotiated with the media and they have undertaken to be very sensitive. They have heard what you've got to say and to be extremely sensitive in what they publicise. I'm happy that they would have complete regard for the sensitivities at hand.

MR PATEL: I appreciate that Mr Chairman. I beg leave to call the next applicant, Mr J A Mkhwanazi.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mkhwanazi, which language would you prefer to use?

MR MKHWANAZI: Zulu.

CHAIRPERSON: That's fine.

J A MKHWANAZI: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mkhwanazi before we proceed, your advocate has made an application to me regarding your fears. I have not made a ruling on the issue because I have negotiated with the media and they had undertaken to be extremely sensitive towards the issues which your advocate has fully explained to us. I just thought that I would tell you what the position is so that you will have peace of mind when you testify.

Proceed Mr Patel.

MR PATEL: As it pleases you Mr Chairman. May I just mention by way of introduction that there were a whole lot of supplementary statements made in respect of all the applicants that I represent. None of these statements had been signed and due to what happened last week with regard to the unsigning or the non-signing of statements, I took it upon myself with the commission of all my learned colleagues that the statements could be signed and they have now been signed. As it pleases you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Would you see to it that the signed documents are at the appropriate stages in the hands of Mr Mapoma?

EXAMINATION BY MR PATEL: Yes, I will do so.

Mr Mkhwanazi, you were not born in Ermelo, is that correct?

MR MKHWANAZI: Correct.

MR PATEL: When was it that you came to reside in Ermelo?

MR MKHWANAZI: It was in the early '90's.

MR PATEL: And at that time, what was your occupation?

MR MKHWANAZI: I was a commander of the Umkhonto wesizwe.

MR PATEL: Now you have heard the evidence of Mr John Mndebele, do you confirm the background statement which I read to him and he confirmed insofar as it relates to you?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, that is correct.

MR PATEL: In your statement or rather in the schedule which details the offences for which amnesty is claimed, which appears on page 20 of Volume 1, if you turn to page 20 of those documents in front of you.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Patel, if I may just point out, there is precedent much publicised about Item 6 on the schedule. We I think are only able to grant amnesty in specifics and if the specific issues relating to robberies and setting defence units etc., amnesty would only pertain to those issues that are being discussed here.

We are not, I don't think able unless you are going to persuade us by way of argument, in which case we would have to look at the matter afresh, we are not able to give general amnesty for undetailed crimes. I just thought I'd mention it.

MR PATEL: As it pleases you Mr Chairman.

You will see on page 21 your name appears - if I may just approach - if you turn to the next page you will see your name appears on the next page at Point 4 and you claim amnesty firstly for the same offences that Mr Mndebele claims amnesty for, do you confirm that?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, that is correct.

MR PATEL: In addition you claim amnesty for illegal possession of an AK47 and Makaroff pistol and ammunition, do you confirm that?

MR MKHWANAZI: That's correct.

MR PATEL: If we can just go to page 20 and look at the offences for which Mr Mndebele and yourself claim amnesty for. This is firstly for the murder of Jwi Zwane, do you confirm that?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes.

MR PATEL: You also claim amnesty for the attempted murder of Happy Mhlongo, Sibusiso Tito Nkosi and Eric Nkosi?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: What bout ...[inaudible]

MR PATEL: I'm still at Point 2, Mr Chairman.

MR PATEL: I don't follow ...[inaudible]

MR PATEL: I beg your pardon?

CHAIRPERSON: ....[inaudible]

MR PATEL: Yes. If Mr Chairman has regard to page 20, then I have just finished paragraph 2.2 with the applicant. As it pleases you.

The third incident that amnesty is claimed for is the murder of Chris Ngwenya, is that correct?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes.

MR PATEL: And you also claim amnesty for the murder Lindiwe Nkosi?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes.

MR PATEL: You also claim amnesty for the attempted murder of Thembisile Nkambule?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes.

MR PATEL: Finally, you claim amnesty for general instructions that you issued to set up self-defence units and who were to illegally arm themselves and to protect themselves and the community from unlawful attacks and at all costs to achieve a stability in the area, do you confirm that?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes.

ADV SANDI: I'm sorry Mr Patel, what offence is constituted in terms of Point 6

"Setting up protection structures for self-defence purposes"

In terms of what offence is this?

MR PATEL: The offence would flow from what the self-defence units did. He as a commander set up or instructed them to set up self-defence units for a certain purpose. If what the self-defence units then did was illegal, and we've heard evidence of what self-defence units did insofar as they did commit these crimes as part of a self-defence unit which this applicant was one of the founders of, in that respect he claims amnesty.

ADV SANDI: Is that not what Point 1 to 5 pertains to?

MR PATEL: Points 1 to 5 are specific incidents. As the Committee has already heard evidence, there were other incidents apart from what is covered in Points 1 to 5. As it pleases you.

The offences that we've just outlined and for which you claim amnesty, in a nutshell could you explain to the Committee what your motivation was for perpetrating the offences?

MR MKHWANAZI: There was war at Ermelo, people were fighting.

MR PATEL: And what purpose was the - let's take it this way, you gave express instructions to assassinate two people, am I correct?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, that is correct.

MR PATEL: And who were these two people?

MR MKHWANAZI: It Jwi Zwane and Chris Ngwenya.

MR PATEL: In addition you gave general instructions, is that correct?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, that's correct.

MR PATEL: To whom were these instructions given?

MR MKHWANAZI: It was directed to Mzwandile Gushu.

MR PATEL: Insofar as the assassination of Chris Ngwenya is concerned, who did you give the instructions to?

MR MKHWANAZI: I gave it Mzwandile Gushu and Paulus Nkonyane.

MR PATEL: Insofar as the assassination of Jwi Zwane is concerned, who did you give the express instruction to?

MR MKHWANAZI: It was Mzwandile Gushu.

MR PATEL: According to you Mr Mkhwanazi, the two people namely Chris Ngwenya and Jwi Zwane, who were they? Were they members of any political party?

MR MKHWANAZI: They were Black Cat members who were responsible for the violence here in Ermelo.

MR PATEL: As a commander of the ANC, how did you view people and leaders of the IFP?

MR MKHWANAZI: The leaders of IFP who were involved in violence were the enemies of ANC.

MR PATEL: In the issuing out of your instructions to Gushu, in what capacity were you acting?

MR MKHWANAZI: I was a member of the Special Committee ...[intervention]

INTERPRETER: Can the applicant please repeat the answer?

MR MKHWANAZI: I was giving him instructions as he was a commander of the MK, uMkhonto weSizwe.

MR PATEL: Yes.

ADV BOSMAN: Mr Mkhwanazi, the question your legal representative put to you a few moments ago was: To what political party did Ngwenya and Zwane belong and your answer was that Ngwenya and Zwane were Black Cat members and I don't see the connection. What connection did you see between the Black Cat members and a political party, or did you regard the Black Cats group as a political party? It's not clear from your evidence.

MR MKHWANAZI: They were Black Cat members and they were also IFP members.

MR PATEL: I thank you Madam.

The last question I asked you Mr Mkhwanazi is, in issuing out your instructions to Mr Gushu, what capacity were you acting in?

MR MKHWANAZI: I was the commander of uMkhonto weSizwe.

MR PATEL: Did you specifically get instructions from anybody else in the ANC command?

MR MKHWANAZI: I was accountable to the Chief of Staff of the uMkhonto weSizwe, that was Chris Hani.

MR PATEL: The acts for which you claim amnesty for, were you paid any salary or any other kind of remuneration for your services?

MR MKHWANAZI: No.

MR PATEL: Now just to cover some specific events, insofar as Mr Gushu was concerned, did you check out his credentials when you first met? In other words did you check out whether he was a member of the ANC, whether he was a cadre etc?

MR MKHWANAZI: I tried to check those. Mzwandile Gushu was brought to me by JJ Mabena and I asked JJ to confirm Mzwandile with the structure where he was actually coming from, where Mzwandile Gushu was coming from. And the way - when I was training him, I realised that he was not, he was experienced in using the firearm, he was ready. So it was just a refresher course.

MR PATEL: Where exactly did you train him?

MR MKHWANAZI: The refresher course, where did that take place?

MR MKHWANAZI: It was in Nelspruit.

MR PATEL: Do I understand from your answer that you did check out his military expertise?

MR MKHWANAZI: I was satisfied the way he was responding to the training and the idea that he had concerning the firearms. That indicated to me that he was trained before and therefore he had to take a refresher course.

MR PATEL: Were you satisfied that if you gave him instructions he would act responsibly?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, I was satisfied because I spent two weeks with him and the discipline that he showed, and even if we were discussing the political situation you could see that he was matured and he clearly understood the situation.

MR PATEL: In issuing out the various instructions that you did give to him, did you expect him to work on his own?

MR MKHWANAZI: I didn't think that way. I told him that it was necessary for him to establish the SDU's whom he would be a commander of and issue instructions because he wouldn't be able to do all the work alone, meaning to normalise the situation, so he needed some assistance.

MR PATEL: Insofar as training is concerned, apart from training or the refresher course that you went through with Mr Gushu, did you train any other people in the use of military weapons, in the use of weapons?

MR MKHWANAZI: Do you mean here inside the country or across the borders?

MR PATEL: No, just inside the country, in the Ermelo, Piet Retief and Secunda areas.

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, I also trained Pistol Nkonyane(?).

MR PATEL: Anybody else?

MR MKHWANAZI: So far those are the only people that I can remember.

MR PATEL: Now we've heard Mr Gushu give evidence about the envisaged attack on the Mandela Squatter Camp, can you tell the Committee what your role was if any, in that regard?

MR MKHWANAZI: I didn't play a role except when Mzwandile came to me and he reported that there was a possibility that the Mandela Squatter Camp would be attacked.

He told me about the action that they had taken. I approved that if they've the necessary action to prevent the Mandela Squatter Camp from being attacked, it was a good decision.

MR PATEL: The AK47 and Makaroff pistol that you claim amnesty for or being in possession of, where did you obtain this?

MR MKHWANAZI: I got it from Delby in Germiston. When I came into the country I was given an instruction that in Germiston I was going to get the DLB and I was going to get a Makaroff and an AK47.

MR PATEL: Will you just for the purposes of everybody, just tell us what a DLB is?

MR MKHWANAZI: It is a dead letterbox where you hide something, weapons or messages, anything that you will be able to keep there so that somebody else will get it there, we call that a DLB.

MR PATEL: Did you report - did you approve the assassination of Mr Advice Gwala?

MR MKHWANAZI: After Advice Gwala's death, Mzwandile came to me and he reported the matter, he said to me he shot Advice Gwala. He gave me the reasons why Advice Gwala was shot.

After getting those reasons I approved and JJ Mabena came before to me and he also complained about Advice Gwala and he gave some information concerning Mr Gwala's involvement. That is how I approved the killing.

MR PATEL: If I understand your evidence correctly then you never gave the instruction but you approved after the deed, would that be correct?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, the only instruction that I gave to Mzwandile was that he has got to stabilise the situation in Secunda. There was no specific instruction that was given to him to go and kill Advice Gwala but that was part of the instructions to actually stabilise the situation prevailing at the time.

MR PATEL: I'm sorry to jump around like this but the AK47 and Makaroff pistol, for what reason did you get it, for what purpose?

MR MKHWANAZI: There was a war situation at Ermelo and the community of Ermelo was unarmed and there was no defence. We took the arms because we wanted to protect the community of Ermelo.

MS VAN DER WALT: Yes. On the self-defence units, did you actively participate in their role or what exactly was the role that you played, with regard to the self-defence units?

MR MKHWANAZI: I gave Mzwandile the instruction to establish the self-defence units. I didn't want to take part because of security reasons. I was preventing a situation whereby I would be arrested and that would have led to other people being arrested, that is why I left all the responsibility to Mzwandile, strictly for security reasons.

MR PATEL: Mr Mkhwanazi, have you been convicted for any of the offences for which you claim amnesty?

MR MKHWANAZI: No.

MR PATEL: Now if you'll just turn, in the bundle before you if you will turn to pages 75 to 78, that is a supplementary statement made by yourself. Have you read this statement?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, I did, with my legal

representative.

MR PATEL: Do you confirm that the signature which now appears on page 78 is your signature?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, that's correct.

MR PATEL: Do you confirm the correctness of the contents of the statement?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, that's correct.

MR PATEL: I have not further questions Mr Chairman.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR PATEL

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Black, have you got any questions?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR BLACK: Yes, I have a few. I just want to clarify some issues.

Mr Mkhwanazi, if you page to page 13 of Volume 1, Mr Mndebele testified as to the historical background and he said, although it doesn't necessarily have to be the exact words but he more or less summed up, and he said the general instruction which was given to Gushu appears more or less as stated in paragraph 16.1 and 16.2, namely that he was to recruit the assistance from SDU's in the local community and 16.2 says he was to obtain arms and ammunition and to finance these operations from whatever sources possible, including armed robbery. Is that the gist of the general instruction which you gave to Mr Gushu?

MR MKHWANAZI: I gave him the instruction that he must establish the SDU's and arm them. I left it in his hands as to how to arm those self-defence units as a soldier, but at the end of the day the self-defence units were expected to be armed.

MR BLACK: Now Mr Mkhwanazi, you say that you did train Mr Gushu, gave him a refresher course in military training at Nelspruit. After that course were you satisfied that he was a disciplined soldier and that he would carry out the mandate which you gave him?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, I was satisfied.

MR BLACK: You've heard the evidence of Mr Gushu, are you satisfied that those, that he did in fact carry out the mandate and that the events in respect of which he seeks amnesty fell within that mandate which you gave him?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, that's correct.

MR BLACK: If at any stage either Mr Gushu or any one of the members of the SDU's which he established went outside that mandate which you had conveyed to him as a consequence of the decision made the committee, if they had gone outside that mandate would they have in fact been called in and disciplined?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, that was possible. Although I was actually dealing with Mzwandile directly, if the members of his self-defence unit did something wrong I was able to call a person who was responsible for those SDU's to account for that. It would be very difficult because I didn't know the self-defence unit members personally.

MR BLACK: You've heard the evidence - one of the incidents for which you are applying for amnesty is as I gather, is that the, you are also asking for any amnesty in respect of any actions which may have been done by members of a self-defence unit set up by Mr Gushu as a consequence of your instructions to establish such self-defence units?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, that is correct because I was the one who instructed Mzwandile to establish the self-defence units.

MR BLACK: So I gather that you're accepting the responsibility for the actions of Mr Gushu and the consequences of the establishment of SDU's provided that any actions committed by the SDU's fell within the mandate, you're accepting the overall responsibility?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, that's correct.

MR BLACK: Now there's just one specific issue, I don't know if you have any personal knowledge of it, Mr Khaba testified that he was a member of an SDU established by Mr Gushu and he says that as a member of the SDU he killed Mr Obed Nhlabathi in hospital, are you aware of that?

MR MKHWANAZI: Bongani was not directly involved with me. I didn't even know that he was a member of the SDU. I can't comment on that basis.

MR BLACK: Now were there any actions committed by Mr Gushu or by any members of the SDU's which he established which fell outside the mandate which you'd given to Mr Gushu and that you found necessary to call in Mr Gushu and reprimand him about it or discipline him?

MR MKHWANAZI: Not as far as I know.

MR BLACK: And the are which Mr Gushu, Mzwandile was given authority to try and stabilise and normalise, was that the Piet Retief, Secunda, Ermelo and Du Wawel, Duval area? Dawel area, sorry.

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, that's correct.

MR BLACK: And when you meant: "stabilise a situation", did that include that he was authorised to kill any instigators of the violence or any enemies in those areas?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, that is correct.

MR BLACK: Thank you, I have no further questions.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR BLACK

MR HATTINGH: I have no questions Mr Chairman.

NO QUESTIONS BY MR HATTINGH

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS VAN DER WALT: Thank you Sir.

Sir, you were trained by MK and you said that you returned to the country, that is now the Republic of South Africa, when did you return?

MR MKHWANAZI: ...[no English translation]

MS VAN DER WALT: Where did you go to then?

MR MKHWANAZI: I was trained in Angola.

MS VAN DER WALT: Yes, but when you came into the country, where did you go then?

MR MKHWANAZI: I left the country in 1985, I trained in Angola, Yugoslavia and the former Soviet Union. I came back in 1989.

MS VAN DER WALT: When you returned from your training, where did you go to then in South Africa?

MR MKHWANAZI: My contact was in Piet Retief so I went to Motsamai ...[indistinct] in Piet Retief.

MS VAN DER WALT: Did you then remain there or did you go to Ermelo?

MR MKHWANAZI: I stayed for quite a while, I think it was about six months although I'm not positive as to the length of time.

MS VAN DER WALT: Did you then go to Ermelo?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, that is correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: Did you then receive any instructions of the ANC when you came into the country to come and do something here?

MR MKHWANAZI: When I arrived here the structures of the ANC were outside the country. I came already having instructions to form some structures of the MK that were going to exist within the country. So I got the instruction, when I arrived in the country I already had instructions.

MS VAN DER WALT: Who gave you these instructions?

MR MKHWANAZI: I had already pointed out that I was directly linked with the then Chief of Staff, Chris Hani.

MS VAN DER WALT: So he gave you the instruction to come and train people here?

MR MKHWANAZI: That is correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: What other instructions did you receive from him?

MR MKHWANAZI: That I should act, or I should use my own discretion in order to try and curb the violence because during the time he was still in Zambia, so he was not within the country. He gave me quite wide powers to actually act as I deemed fit.

MS VAN DER WALT: So he did not give you instructions to establish self-defence units?

MR MKHWANAZI: If you do follow the news bulletins you would appreciate the fact that there was sporadic outbreaks of violence in a lot of townships and the ANC issued a statement that people should take in their your hands or their own initiative in order to try and protect themselves, so in a lot of townships self-defence units were established.

MS VAN DER WALT: All that I asked Sir, was that Chris Hani did not give you the instruction to establish self-defence units.

MR MKHWANAZI: He did give me the powers to do anything necessary in order to defend the members of the community because he was based in Zambia and I was the one who was witnessing what was going on within the country, and that is why I established self-defence units.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you find it necessary to do so, in your opinion?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, that is so.

MS VAN DER WALT: When did Chris Hani return to the Republic of South Africa?

MR MKHWANAZI: I'm not sure because I was operating underground at that time.

MS VAN DER WALT: No, Sir, your evidence is that you reported back to Chris Hani with regards to what happened to the self-defence units.

CHAIRPERSON: Where was he when you reported back?

MR MKHWANAZI: I only reported back to him once when we were in Transkei, Umtata.

MS VAN DER WALT: So the impression that you tried to create before this Committee that you reported back to him is actually wrong, you only went back to him once?

ADV POTGIETER: Objection Mr Chairman, this witness has never sought to create that impression.

CHAIRPERSON: Why do you say that Miss van der Walt?

MS VAN DER WALT: If you look at the evidence, he said that he had to report back to Chris Hani. I mean to go to him once over a period of three years, according to his testimony, where violence was in the country and according to Mr Mndebele's testimony, if I got the wrong impression, my impression was that he was responsible for what was going on in the self-defence units and had to report back.

CHAIRPERSON: I cannot remember the specific words that were used. Report back and accountability is two different words but you will have to help me remember. I cannot remember what words were used.

MS VAN DER WALT: The Afrikaans was translated to: "to account".

CHAIRPERSON: Mrs Bosman tells me that the translation that she received was that he was accountable to Chris Hani.

MS VAN DER WALT: I will leave it there and I will continue with the next point.

Sir, you say that you went to Chris Hani, where exactly when you reported back to him?

MR MKHWANAZI: I had already said the then Transkei in Umtata.

MS VAN DER WALT: When was that?

MR MKHWANAZI: I think it was during 1991 or early 1992, I don't remember very well.

MS VAN DER WALT: Did you then at that stage already establish the SDU's?

MR MKHWANAZI: Gushu was responsible for the establishment of the SDU's.

MS VAN DER WALT: You already gave the instructions that he must establish the SDU's?

MR MKHWANAZI: That is correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: And this instruction or this broader instruction from Chris Hani you received before you came into the country?

MR MKHWANAZI: Which one exactly are you referring to?

MS VAN DER WALT: You said that you received an instruction to rectify the situation in the country where there is violence and you received this from Chris Hani.

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, when I was moving from Zambia.

MS VAN DER WALT: This was now in 1989?

MR MKHWANAZI: That is correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: Were there problems in Ermelo at that stage?

MR MKHWANAZI: I'm not aware as to whether there was but when I arrived I experienced some problems or I realised that there were some problems.

MS VAN DER WALT: Was this now in Ermelo?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, I said when I arrived there was already fighting or violence.

MS VAN DER WALT: And this violence to which Chris Hani referred to, was this the violence that you experienced in Ermelo?

MR MKHWANAZI: Chris Hani did not refer specifically to the violence in Ermelo but he issued an instruction with regard to Soweto as well as any other area that was experiencing violence problems. When I arrived in Ermelo I realised that the very same situation existed even in Ermelo. He did not specify any particular geographic area.

MS VAN DER WALT: And when you went to go and see him in the Transkei, who was with you?

MR MKHWANAZI: I was all by myself.

MS VAN DER WALT: So you only went to him once, you were alone, did you then discuss the SDU's with him?

MR MKHWANAZI: We spoke about the situation of violence in Secunda, Ermelo as well as Piet Retief. I also gave him a broader picture of the attempts in order to bring the situation under control. I also pointed out to him that I had instructed a certain person to form self-defence units within the townships that I've already counted or mentioned.

MS VAN DER WALT: Did Chris Hani then give you further instructions regarding what these SDU's must do?

MR MKHWANAZI: He was happy with the way I was able to control and get hold of the situation. He said to me I should keep it up, he was quite happy.

MS VAN DER WALT: You see Sir, I ask these questions of you because Mr Mndebele testified here and he was also called out of order especially to provide the Committee the opportunity, to give them the background history of the situation in Ermelo, do you remember that?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, I do.

MS VAN DER WALT: And Mr Mndebele testified that the organisation, the Anti-Crime Committee was only established in 1989 and it was initially a good committee who tried prevent crime here in Ermelo, do you remember that?

MR MKHWANAZI: I do.

MS VAN DER WALT: So at that stage the establishment of that Committee was directed to prevent ordinary crime, is that correct?

MR MKHWANAZI: I will not be able to answer that because I had not yet arrived in Ermelo. Mndebele would be in a better position to answer that question.

MS VAN DER WALT: Sir, but then shortly after that you came to Ermelo, that is a few months later.

MR MKHWANAZI: Although I'm not able to tell you how many months thereafter that I did come back to Ermelo.

MS VAN DER WALT: And when you lived in Piet Retief, was it peaceful?

MR MKHWANAZI: There were attacks on members of the Mass Democratic Movement.

MS VAN DER WALT: Are you finished? I do not know if I heard everything that was translated.

MR MKHWANAZI: I said there was no peace, the situation was not normal. There would be sporadic attacks on members of the Mass Democratic Movement, the Mass Democratic Front.

MS VAN DER WALT: Was there any action of the Black Cats during '89 to '91 or any violence in Piet Retief? Mr Msibi will testify with regards to that.

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, he will give that kind of evidence because he wants to benefit from it but in reality, when I came to Ermelo there was already violence between the Black Cats as well as the members of the community and the strategy that they used was to spread around all the townships in Ermelo, to such an extent that the Black Cats were able to help structures of the IFP so as to prevent members of the ANC from making the area a stronghold of the ANC.

MS VAN DER WALT: We are busy with the fact when you stayed in Piet Retief.

MR MKHWANAZI: The question is not completed, I didn't hear it.

CHAIRPERSON: Will you repeat the question?

MS VAN DER WALT: When you stayed in Piet Retief, before you came to Ermelo, I put it to you that from '89 to '91 there was no violence in Piet Retief.

MR MKHWANAZI: You were staying in the urban areas so I don't know where you get that information from because you were not directly affected by the violence in the location or the residential areas. You were not directly affected. I don't even think you noticed that there was violence in those areas because you were not staying there and it didn't affect you.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mkhwanazi, all the advocate is putting to you is what her instructions are, she is not saying that she had personal knowledge of it, do you understand?

MR MKHWANAZI: I understand.

MS VAN DER WALT: Sir, when there was violence to such an extent as you just described it, what did you do in Piet Retief to try and curb the violence?

MR PATEL: I must object to that question Mr Chairman. This questions, I'm not sure what the answer is to it but it exposes Mr Mkhwanazi to other offences to which he hasn't claimed amnesty. You will recall that his testimony relates to what he did in Ermelo and not in the Piet Retief area. The whole general trend of the questions are in my submission irrelevant but I haven't objected for various reasons but on this particular point I think I must stress that it's not a permissable question.

CHAIRPERSON: Would you like to change the question?

MS VAN DER WALT: I will change it but would just like to point out to his representative that he brought an open application regarding to what any of the SDU's did and then he cannot incriminate himself in crimes which he did not make known now.

MR PATEL: If I may just respond. The SDU's are the SDU's for which, he formulated in the Ermelo area. He can't take responsibility for SDU's who performed actions in Cape Town and Swaziland.

CHAIRPERSON: I accept that but isn't that question surrounding the Ermelo area? As I understand the question: What did he do in Ermelo to curb the violence? Is that not so Miss van der Walt?

MS VAN DER WALT: Mr Chairperson, I would also like to point out that when Mr Black asked him if he acted as commander in order to curb the violence, he specifically asked him: Ermelo, Dawel and Piet Retief and he confirmed that.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Patel, isn't that question a relevant question?

MR PATEL: I beg your pardon?

CHAIRPERSON: Isn't the question relevant?

MR PATEL: ...[inaudible]

CHAIRPERSON: I'm asking you what your views are.

MR PATEL: I cannot hear you.

CHAIRPERSON: Is the questions not relevant?

MR PATEL: The question as I understood it initially was as follows: "There was violence in the Piet Retief area, my instructions are that there was no violence, you say that you were there in Piet Retief for a short time in '89 and sometime in 1990 you came to Ermelo. For the period 1989 to 1991, my client Mr Msibi will testify that there was no violence". On the basis of that the question is: "If you say there was violence, what did you do insofar as it related to that particular situation"?

The witness has testified that when he came to Ermelo this is what he did insofar as it's related to Ermelo.

Insofar as any acts before that he hasn't claimed amnesty, whether it be with regard to specific instructions, whether it be with regard to general instructions but before getting to Ermelo he has not claimed amnesty for anything that he has done and therefore this sort of questioning opens him up to offences for which he hasn't claimed amnesty.

CHAIRPERSON: You described what you did in order to clamp down on the violence, the crime. When you got to these areas under your jurisdiction as it were, did you do anything else besides what you described, relating to the issues for which you apply for amnesty?

MR MKHWANAZI: When I arrived in Ermelo I consulted with Mndebele, I also encouraged him to speak or negotiate with members of the IFP in order to sort the problem out but his attempts were always thwarted, especially when he gave me the report back. He told me that the Black Cats members told him that they were controlled at Ulundi and they did not want to negotiate with anyone else and therefore he was not in a position to them.

MS VAN DER WALT: Sir, if I could take you back to your own testimony and that is why I asked this question, what you did at Piet Retief. Before you came back into this country you received instructions from Chris Hani,

according to your testimony, that you had to do something about the violence, you had to recruit some people here, is that correct or do you want to change it?

MR MKHWANAZI: That is true.

MS VAN DER WALT: Now you come and according to you there were problems at Piet Retief, is that right?

MR MKHWANAZI: I did point out that when I arrived in Piet Retief there were some attacks on the MDM structures.

MS VAN DER WALT: What did you do with the instruction that you received from Chris Hani, to do something about the violence in Piet Retief?

MR PATEL: Mr Chairman, my original objection to this question still stands.

CHAIRPERSON: In respect of the problems in Piet Retief, did you do anything other than what you described to us, in an attempt to quell the violence and crime?

MR MKHWANAZI: I didn't stay long in Piet Retief, I moved to Ermelo, so there isn't much that I did in the Piet Retief area in order to try and stop the violence.

CHAIRPERSON: That may be so. Did you do anything else other than what you've told us you did? Yes or no?

MR MKHWANAZI: No.

MS VAN DER WALT: Why not?

MR MKHWANAZI: When I arrived in the country my obligation was to set up structures that were going to be able to operate underground. I did not stay long in Piet Retief, so I was not able to do anything. It was only when I was settled and established in Ermelo that I was able to set up these structures. Had I stayed longer in Piet Retief, I would have been able to set up these structures or do something.

MS VAN DER WALT: If your testimony is correct, why did Mr Mndebele not speak the truth in terms of the instruction from Chris Hani because ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Just repeat that question please.

MS VAN DER WALT: ...[inaudible]

INTERPRETER: The speaker's microphone is not on.

MS VAN DER WALT: If this applicant's testimony is true then I want to know from him why would Mr Mndebele tell untruths here. I would like to the testimony to him later.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that not a question for Mr Mndebele to answer?

MS VAN DER WALT: One of the two's application ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: This witness gives a version, he says it's the truth. Can it be expected that he should explain someone else's version?

MS VAN DER WALT: Then I would just like to put to him what Mr Mndebele says.

Mr Mndebele says that in July 1990, yourself with him and a Mr Zwane went to Chris Hani where you met with him and you discussed problems in Ermelo, is that correct?

CHAIRPERSON: Where was this?

MS VAN DER WALT: This in July 1990, testimony was not given as to where it was.

MR PATEL: With respect Mr Chairman, the evidence of Mndebele was that it took place in Johannesburg at Shell House.

CHAIRPERSON: ...[inaudible]

MS VAN DER WALT: I beg your pardon, I did not note that.

That was in Johannesburg in 1990 and today you say that in 1991 you went and saw Chris Hani in Transkei and that was the only time that you negotiated with him since you entered the country in 1989.

MR MKHWANAZI: I don't remember Mndebele saying that he was with me and I don't remember being with Mndebele either. With regard to the Transkei matter, that is the truth and that is the only time that I was able to meet with him because we were operating underground and we were not able to see each other frequently.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, that may be so but if Mr Mndebele had said you were party to consulting with Mr Chris Hani, what would you say?

MR MKHWANAZI: I don't remember.

MS VAN DER WALT: I wish to refer you to Volume 1, page 10, paragraph 8. Could you page to page 10?

CHAIRPERSON: Is that Mndebele's evidence? But he says he cannot remember. I don't think there is a dispute that such evidence was given.

MS VAN DER WALT: Why did you work underground when you were here in Ermelo?

MR MKHWANAZI: Could you please repeat your question?

MS VAN DER WALT: Why did you have to work underground when you were in Ermelo?

MR MKHWANAZI: I was going to be arrested.

MS VAN DER WALT: But Sir, the ANC in February 1990 was unbanned.

CHAIRPERSON: He never said why he thought he was going to be arrested.

MS VAN DER WALT: Can you tell the Honourable Committee why you thought that you were going to be arrested?

MR MKHWANAZI: It's because I had not yet got amnesty to enter the country or indemnity.

MS VAN DER WALT: Until when did you work underground?

MR MKHWANAZI: I think it was early 1993 or late 1992 that I applied for amnesty, so I was able then to continue then to continue with whatever I was doing.

MS VAN DER WALT: I wish to take you to the instruction that you gave to Mr Gushu, can you repeat it? What was your precise instruction to him?

MR PATEL: Mr Chairman, there were a few instructions obviously given between this witness and Mr Gushu, perhaps my learned friend can just direct him as to which instruction she's talking about.

MS VAN DER WALT: All the instructions that you gave to Mr Gushu.

CHAIRPERSON: Miss van der Walt, maybe it is going to help if you ask him chronologically: "At a certain stage what is the instruction that you gave"?

MS VAN DER WALT: That is my problem Mr Chairperson. The applicant, and it is apparent of these applicants, I would like to know if this was the ANC's policy. According to me they gave such vague instructions which included deeds that I would not want to mention here because I want him to tell me what the instruction was but I will try to be more specific.

CHAIRPERSON: Did he testify that there were several instances where he received several instructions?

MS VAN DER WALT: That is not how I understood it.

CHAIRPERSON: You have testified that you gave Mr Gushu at least one instruction, do you recall that?

MR MKHWANAZI: It's for him to kill Jwi.

CHAIRPERSON: I didn't get that.

MR MKHWANAZI: For him to kill Jwi.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. At that time, can you explain to us what the exact instruction was?

MR MKHWANAZI: I laid the background with regard to the situation in Ermelo and that the person behind the violence was Jwi and he therefore had to remove him so that we could see as to whether this violence would be quelled thereafter or not.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that all you told him to do?

MR MKHWANAZI: I instructed with regard to Chris Ngwenya and the general instruction to stabilise the situation in the neighbouring townships.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you give him a discretion how to do that?

MR MKHWANAZI: Could you please repeat the question?

CHAIRPERSON: In telling him that or giving him an order that he should do, or that he should quell the violence and whatever else in the area, did your order take the form of giving him a general discretion as to use his own initiative in order to do that or did you give him specific instructions?

MR MKHWANAZI: I gave him an instruction to take the initiative. He should weight the situation first and act in accordance with whatever situation prevailed at the time and do whatever he thought was fit.

CHAIRPERSON: Now you say you gave him this instruction and you gave him an instruction to kill Zwane and you gave him an instruction to kill Ngwenya, was that all the same time or was it on different occasions?

MR MKHWANAZI: It was at different times.

CHAIRPERSON: Now which one was first?

MR MKHWANAZI: I don't remember quite well as to which instruction I gave first, but after I had trained him in Nelspruit I told him that he should stabilise the situation because he was going back to Secunda and I was coming to Ermelo, so I told him that he should try to stabilise the situation.

CHAIRPERSON: Would you accept, chronologically I think we've established that Mr Zwane died first.

MR MKHWANAZI: I think I will accept that.

CHAIRPERSON: So the order to kill Ngwenya must have come after that?

MR MKHWANAZI: I think the Jwi Zwane matter came first and then the Ngwenya matter came thereafter.

CHAIRPERSON: This other general instruction to use his discretion in his attempt to quell the situation, was that the third occasion or did you tell him that on one of those occasions where you gave him an order to kill a person?

MR MKHWANAZI: Could you repeat the question please?

CHAIRPERSON: You know that general instruction you gave him about the situation in the area, when did you give him that instruction?

MR MKHWANAZI: That is when we parted in Nelspruit.

CHAIRPERSON: Was it the time when you gave him the order to kill Zwane?

MR MKHWANAZI: No, the Zwane matter was discussed here in Ermelo.

CHAIRPERSON: Before or after you gave him the general instruction to get the matter under control?

MR MKHWANAZI: I think it was after. I started with the general instruction and I came to the Jwi Zwane matter.

CHAIRPERSON: And then to the Ngwenya matter.

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, if I remember quite well I think the Ngwenya matter came thereafter but I am not sure.

CHAIRPERSON: Miss van der Walt, I hope that helps.

MS VAN DER WALT: May I just clarify one thing please.

Mr Mkhwanazi, what did you include under the area, which places did you include under the area when you gave this general instruction?

MR MKHWANAZI: Mbalentle, Secunda, Ermelo as well as Piet Retief.

CHAIRPERSON: What about Dawel?

MR MKHWANAZI: Dawel as well.

MS VAN DER WALT: What was your instruction to Mr Gushu in terms of the self-defence units?

MR MKHWANAZI: I had already said that I had told him to form SDU's because he was not going to be able to quell the violence single-handedly. As to how he formed them was really up to him.

MS VAN DER WALT: What was your instruction to him with regard to Piet Retief?

MR MKHWANAZI: With what exactly in Piet Retief?

CHAIRPERSON: ...[inaudible] tell him he must go to Piet Retief?

MR MKHWANAZI: When I issued the general instruction I counted or mentioned all the townships where there was violence as well as all the townships where the Black Cats were reigning, were conducting a reign of terror.

CHAIRPERSON: Did that include Piet Retief?

MR MKHWANAZI: That is correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: How do you know that the Black Cats operated in Piet Retief?

CHAIRPERSON: He did not say so, he said his instruction was that Gushu had to cover the places where problems were and where the Black Cats operated.

MS VAN DER WALT: What was your instruction with regard to Piet Retief, because you have now said that you named all the places? What did he have to do in Piet Retief?

MR MKHWANAZI: I said if there is a need that he should stabilise the situation in Piet Retief, he should right on ahead and do it.

MS VAN DER WALT: What did you know about Piet Retief, according to what happened in Piet Retief?

MR MKHWANAZI: I had the information that MDM structures were being attacked in Piet Retief and that is one of the reasons why I said he could go ahead and do anything he thought fit in order to quell the violence.

MS VAN DER WALT: Do you know Mr Keshwa?

MR MKHWANAZI: No, I don't.

MS VAN DER WALT: And you say Mr Gushu was under your command, you were his MK commander as you put it?

MR MKHWANAZI: That is so.

MS VAN DER WALT: So except for the self-defence unit that according to your testimony he had a free hand in, he could establish them, you gave no specific instruction to him in terms of these self-defence units, is that correct?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, he had to see his way as to how he established them.

MS VAN DER WALT: And he had to receive instructions from you, from nobody else?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, he received instructions with regard to matters in which I was directly involved but with SDU's, because of security reasons I did not want to get involved with SDU's. I was not involved in other structures.

CHAIRPERSON: Miss van der Walt are you nearly finished?

MS VAN DER WALT: He could instruct the self-defence units because he received instructions from you to establish them, is that correct?

MR MKHWANAZI: I don't understand your question.

MS VAN DER WALT: Mr Gushu could give instructions to the self-defence units because he received the instruction from you to establish these self-defence units?

CHAIRPERSON: In other words, he could control the self-defence unit when he established it, he was entitled to do so?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, that is correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: There was no direct instruction from you to Gushu to shoot Mr Msibi and to rob him of his money?

MR MKHWANAZI: That is correct.

MS VAN DER WALT: No further questions, thank you.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS VAN DER WALT

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Prinsloo, do you have any questions?

MR PRINSLOO: No questions, thank you.

NO QUESTIONS BY MR PRINSLOO

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Hattingh, I would assume you do have?

MR HATTINGH: Yes, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: We can do that at 2 o'clock.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

ON RESUMPTION

J A MKHWANAZI: (s.u.o.)

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR HATTINGH: Thank you Mr Chairman.

MR MKHWANAZI: Mr Mkhwanazi, what is your present occupation?

MR MKHWANAZI: I'm working for the government.

MR HATTINGH: Just expand on that, in what department and in what capacity?

MR MKHWANAZI: South African Secret Services, VIP Protection.

MR HATTINGH: Could you just give us some indication as to what standard at school did you pass?

MR MKHWANAZI: I went as far as standard nine.

MR HATTINGH: When you initially made your application for amnesty, on the application form there is not a date or the year is not shown on the last page of the application, can you assist us and tell us in which year this application was made?

MR MKHWANAZI: I cannot remember the date but it's been a long time, in '96 I think.

CHAIRPERSON: The application was received in '97. You will see the number of the front page. I'm talking about his application itself.

MR HATTINGH: Thank you Mr Chairman. I take it that is the reference number on the first page, thank you.

At the time when your application was submitted, perhaps you could just tell us who completed this application form?

MR MKHWANAZI: It was Mohammed, my attorney.

MR HATTINGH: And where reference is made on page 5 of the application form under paragraph 12, it is noted

"See background statement"

Do you see that?

MR MKHWANAZI: Which paragraph?

MR HATTINGH: Paragraph 12 on page 5 of your application form.

MR PATEL: May I just interject for a moment Mr Chairman. The witness will probably have the incorrect application form which I pointed out earlier, I will give him mine.

MR HATTINGH: You will note in paragraph 12 of your application form on page 5 it refers to

"See background statement"

MR MKHWANAZI: Will you please repeat your question?

MR HATTINGH: Your application for amnesty consists of seven pages, on page 5 thereof at the bottom under paragraph 12 it is noted

"See background statement"

Do you see that?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, I can see that.

MR HATTINGH: The background statement that you're referring to in your application, is that the background statement that we find in the bundle of documents from pages 5 to and including page 8?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, I think that's the one.

MR HATTINGH: Did you assist in preparing this background statement or how did it come about that it was included into your amnesty application?

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Hattingh, are you referring to page 75?

MR HATTINGH: No, Mr Chairman, I'm referring to page 5, 6 and 7 of the bundle of documents, Volume 1. Just to confirm, what we see on pages 5, 6, 7 and 8 under the heading

"Background Statement"

... was that the background statement that was annexed to your initial application for amnesty?

MR MKHWANAZI: The statement is long and I therefore am not in the position to say now whether it is the one or not but I think it is the one.

MR HATTINGH: If I may just refer you also to page 4 of your application where you, under paragraphs (a) and (b), where requested to state your political objective sought to be achieved and your justification regarding such acts, you also referred to the Background Statement. All I want to clarify is that in your application, the Background Statement that you refer to which you incorporated into your application, whether it was in fact the background statement that we find on pages 5, 6, 7 and 8 of the bundle of documents?

MR MKHWANAZI: I think so, if that is the statement that was read by Mndebele.

MR HATTINGH: Now the question is, did you assist in the preparation of the background statement or how did it come about that you incorporated it into your application for amnesty?

MR MKHWANAZI: This was prepared at one of the offices of the lawyers where I was present as well.

MR HATTINGH: Did you read it at the time when it was incorporated into your application form?

MR MKHWANAZI: I think so, that my attorney tried to interpret this to me.

MR HATTINGH: Are you not fluent or conversant with the English language?

MR MKHWANAZI: That is correct.

MR HATTINGH: So you have a problem with English, is that correct?

MR MKHWANAZI: My language is siZulu.

MR HATTINGH: The question is, do you have a problem with the English language, do you understand it, can you read it?

MR MKHWANAZI: I have already indicated that I am not fluent in the language.

MR HATTINGH: Perhaps you can then just in general tell us what value can we place on this background statement that was incorporated into your application form to show your political objectives and your justification for the acts.

MR MKHWANAZI: Would you please repeat?

MR HATTINGH: In your application form on pages 3, 4 and 5 as well as page 6, in answer to various questions on the application form you see

"Refer to Background Statement"

In the light of the problems that you have with the English language the question is, what value can be placed on the contents of this Background Statement to tell us what your vies were at the time when your application was submitted for amnesty?

MR MKHWANAZI: This Background Statement covers what situation prevailed at Ermelo at the time. When we prepared this statement we did it together with other members who were applying, who are actually applying and trying to reflect upon what was prevailing at Ermelo at the time.

MR HATTINGH: I take it that in preparation for this hearing you once again went through this Background Statement, is that correct?

MR MKHWANAZI: I think so.

MR HATTINGH: Did you or did you not?

MR MKHWANAZI: I said I think so.

MR HATTINGH: Is there anything in this particular Background Statement with which you would wish disassociated yourself with? Anything that would be incorrect in this statement, this Background Statement?

MR MKHWANAZI: What's in the statement ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: I think that the proper question would be: "Is there anything that you disagree with insofar as it effects you"? Are you able to say or not?

MR MKHWANAZI: I think there isn't area here that disagrees with my position.

MR HATTINGH: Can we then take it as indicated on page 6 of the bundle, the middle of the page of this Background Statement that all decisions to eliminate members of the Black Cats were taken in this committee, referring to that Special Committee of which you were a member at the time?

MR MKHWANAZI: That is correct.

MR HATTINGH: And if I understand your evidence correctly, only two decisions were taken and that was the decision regarding Jwi Zwane as well as the decision regarding Chris Ngwenya, is that correct?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, those are the two decisions that were taken by the committee.

MR HATTINGH: Were any other decisions taken by yourself, that is not in consultation with the committee, regarding elimination of any particular person?

MR MKHWANAZI: No, I cannot remember any instance except for the self-defence units.

MR HATTINGH: On page 7 of the bundle under the heading, it's towards the end of the page, under the hearing

"Robberies"

... it is stated that a number of robberies were committed by Mzwandile Gushu acting with members of self-defence units. It also states that the amnesty application of Jabu Mkhwanazi is referred to in this regard. Did the people who committed those robberies report back to you regarding the robberies?

MR MKHWANAZI: The instruction that I gave to Mzwandile was that he should use his own discretion and report back to me.

MR HATTINGH: Would you then answer my question, did he in fact then report back to you about the robberies?

MR MKHWANAZI: I have already indicated to you that he came to report to me on what had transpired.

CHAIRPERSON: Including the robberies?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, he did.

MR HATTINGH: This Background Statement deals with a

period of approximately two and a half years, do you agree with that?

MR MKHWANAZI: I think so but I'm not obviously accurate about this.

MR HATTINGH: Now the question is, on how many robberies did Mr Gushu in particular or any other person report back to you during this two and a half year period?

MR MKHWANAZI: I cannot remember very well, I just remember that he was charged for the Piet Retief and the Mine robbery, but I cannot be sure as to how many robberies he reported on.

MR HATTINGH: If we take the two mentioned robberies as a starting point, did he report to you about any other robberies?

MR MKHWANAZI: Chairperson, may the speaker please repeat the question?

CHAIRPERSON: Did he report to you on any robberies?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, he did.

CHAIRPERSON: Now the advocate is talking about two particular robberies, I'm not too sure which. Answer the question that he puts to you on those two robberies.

I'm not too sure which robberies you're talking about.

MR HATTINGH: I think your evidence is that you just said that Gushu reported back to you about the Piet Retief robbery as well as the robbery at the construction site and I ...[intervention]

MR PATEL: That is not evidence of this witness Mr Chairman. There was a blanket question: "Did he report back to you about robberies"? and the answer was a blanket answer. Perhaps Mr Hattingh should clear it up.

MR HATTINGH: I apologise Mr Chairman, I thought I heard two places mentioned by the witness when he said there were reports, but in any event I'll take it.

Would you then be specific about the robberies that were reported to you by Mr Gushu?

MR MKHWANAZI: What clarification?

CHAIRPERSON: The robberies that he referred to you that he reported back to you on, where did they take place, do you know? Can you remember?

MR MKHWANAZI: Insofar as the construction company one is concerned, I went to hospital to see him and he told me that he was shot. They went there looking for firearms. Another one that I still remember is the Piet Retief one.

MR HATTINGH: Was that the one in respect of Mr Msibi?

MR MKHWANAZI: That is correct.

MR HATTINGH: Now the question I'm asking flowing from this is: did Mr Gushu report to you any further robberies which were committed during that period of two and a half years for the purpose of arming or financing the SDU's?

MR MKHWANAZI: When I started talking I did indicate that the ones that I still remember are the two, it is possible that he might have told me about some other robberies.

MR HATTINGH: Perhaps I could ask you, put the question differently. Are you prepared to disclose information with regard to any other reports of robberies committed by Mr Gushu or any of the SDU's?

CHAIRPERSON: Well let's put it this way.

As I understood your answer about other robberies, you say he may or may not have reported to you, can you remember?

MR MKHWANAZI: Chairperson, I do not remember quite well. The one robbery that I remember is the Piet Retief one and the mine one. I do not remember whether he did report on other robberies and if he did I may have forgotten.

MR HATTINGH: Mr Mkhwanazi, the question remains, would you be prepared to disclose information regarding other reports of robberies?

CHAIRPERSON: From Mr Gushu?

MR HATTINGH: That's correct, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: But he just says he can't remember so how can the preparedness thereof be answered?

MR HATTINGH: Mr Chairman, obviously if his inability to remember is just an explanation or an excuse for him not willing to tell this Committee about it ...

CHAIRPERSON: How do you come to that conclusion? ...[inaudible] follow as far as I am concerned. If a persons says: "I can't remember", that he is able now to answer a question which takes a form of his preparedness to answer a question on that issue. How does he answer truthfully if he can't remember?

MR HATTINGH: Mr Chairman, I'll leave it.

CHAIRPERSON: Unless I'm misunderstanding the question totally.

MR HATTINGH: Mr Chairman, I'll leave it at that.

In your supplementary statement, the one which you'll find on pages 75 to 78, you mention a:

"Brief Historical Background"

That is in paragraph 4 on page 76. Do you see that, the second last line on page 76?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, I can see that.

MR HATTINGH: That

"Brief Historical Background"

is also incorporated into your supplementary statement. This document that you refer to, is that the one that we find on pages 9 up to page 19 of the bundle of documents?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes.

MR HATTINGH: Have you or perhaps I can just rephrase myself, did you take part in the preparation of this

"Brief Historical Background Statement"

MR MKHWANAZI: I was present.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you participate in the drafting of it?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, I did partake in the drafting of the statement.

MR HATTINGH: Did you read this

"Brief Historical background Statement"

before it was annexed or included into your supplementary statement?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, I think I did read it.

MR HATTINGH: Is there anything in this statement pertaining to you which is not correct, as far as you are concerned?

MR MKHWANAZI: As far as I know, none.

MR HATTINGH: Now if we turn to page 9 of the bundle of documents, that's the first page of this

"Brief Historical Background"

Under paragraph 5 it is stated that:

"On the 22nd of July 1990 and at a public meeting called by SANCO which enjoyed the support of the majority of the community, a decision was taken to dissolve the Black Cats"

Were you present at that public meeting?

MR MKHWANAZI: I was not present.

CHAIRPERSON: What is the answer? Just repeat that answer.

MR MKHWANAZI: I said I was not present.

MR HATTINGH: On the next page in paragraph 6 reference is made to certain Annexures showing details of attacks and events and incidents during the relevant period. Did you assist in preparing this Annexure reflecting the events or the incidents that occurred in that period?

MR MKHWANAZI: I was present in some instances. There are some things that I can own up to and others, no. I was just briefed by the committee about that.

MR HATTINGH: The question is, did you assist in the preparation of this Annexure?

MR MKHWANAZI: I did assist in instances where I was present and not in others where I was not present.

MR HATTINGH: Would it then be correct if we deduct from that that you are not aware of other incidents, relevant incidents pertaining to that period which are not reflected on this Annexure A as well as Annexure A1?

MR MKHWANAZI: I am not in the position of remembering all the incidents because I was not familiar with the people around here and I was also not recording things as they happened and I therefore cannot be sure.

MR HATTINGH: But you are not aware of any incidents, is that correct?

MR MKHWANAZI: I've already stated that I was not familiar with the people around here. There are certain instances or incidents that I knew and others not. I therefore am not in the position to say whether the information here is complete or not.

MR HATTINGH: Approximately when did you come to Ermelo and commenced your work here?

MR MKHWANAZI: I came in the '90', possibly in 1991. I do not remember quite well.

MR HATTINGH: Irrespective of exactly when you actually came to Ermelo, what was the command structure for MK or the armed wing of the ANC at the time, with specific reference to your own position?

MR MKHWANAZI: When I came back to the country I came back here under the direct command of the Chief of Staff, Chris Hani to whom I reported directly.

MR HATTINGH: At this stage I'm not talking about the people or the MK commanders working under you. What I would like to find out is about the structures above you.

MR MKHWANAZI: I was trying to answer exactly to that, that when I came back to South Africa I came back here flowing the instruction of Chris Hani under whose direct instructions I operated.

MR HATTINGH: And in the period that followed your stay in Ermelo, you only reported once to Chris Hani, is that correct?

MR MKHWANAZI: That is correct.

MR HATTINGH: Did you never request instructions from any other person in the MK structure with regard with what you had to do in the Ermelo area?

MR MKHWANAZI: We used the need to know principle in the military structures. It was therefore not necessary for me to communicate this to anybody who was not necessarily connected to this, and if not, there would be a committee who would make the necessary decisions.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Hattingh, where are we getting with this cross-examination? We are we going to with it?

MR HATTINGH: Mr Chairman, all I would like to find out is to what extent the Groote Schuur Accord during 1990 had an influence on the instructions that this witness or this applicant had in his furtherance of the aims and objectives of the ANC.

CHAIRPERSON: Well let's get stuck(?).

ADV SANDI: Ja, but Mr Hattingh, the Groote Schuur Accord as I understand it, was it not essentially about the suspension of offensive operations? Wouldn't that be different to the kind of operations the applicants are talking about here, where they allege that these were essentially defensive operations? Wouldn't the Groote Schuur Minute be different to the situation we're dealing with?

MR HATTINGH: Mr Chairman, perhaps I cannot answer it, perhaps I should just ask the witness to tell us whether he was aware of the Groote Schuur Accord.

Mr Mkhwanazi, were you aware of the signing of an Accord, the Groote Schuur Accord in 1990 between the ANC and the then government?

MR MKHWANAZI: I had an idea but I didn't have the final details and the signing of that Accord did not bring violence to an end.

MR HATTINGH: You received your instruction from Chris Hani prior to that Groote Schuur Accord, did the fact that the Groote Schuur Accord dealt with the undertaking from the ANC to stop the armed struggle, did that not have an influence on your instructions of what you were to do in this area?

CHAIRPERSON: But Mr Hattingh, let's get it into perspective, isn't Mr Sandi correct? That Accord was an agreement as between the ANC in the perspective of its armed struggle as against the apartheid regime run by the Nationalists and its endeavours to attack the ANC structures and that's where this truce between the two, the government and the government in waiting occurred, is that not correct?

What we're discussing here would possibly fall into the category of defensive and offensive operations not covered by the Accord. I'm merely suggesting that.

MR HATTINGH: Mr Chairman, if I may just ask one question and ask the witness

Whatever your knowledge was at the time of the Groote Schuur Accord, didn't you think that it was necessary at the time to go back to your MK command or the Chief of Staff of MK and to ask him whether his initial instructions of 1989 were to be amended in the light of the Accord?

MR MKHWANAZI: Mr Hattingh, I think I have already indicated that the Groote Schuur Accord did not bring violence to an end. There was violence at a place where I was and therefore there was no need for me to go back to my commander.

It was not easy for that matter as well, to go back to Chris Hani for a new instruction because I was operating underground.

MR HATTINGH: Did you know or do you today know the person in the ANC, Mr Ronnie Mamwepa?

MR MKHWANAZI: He is the ANC spokesperson, he is therefore not involved in the MK.

MR HATTINGH: At the time when your supplementary statement was made and the Brief Historical Background was annexed to it, the problem that I have is how do we explain paragraph 8 on page 10 where it states that you together with the other people met Chris Hani to obtain further instructions? That was in July 1990. And that you were only then advised to return to this area to set up self-defence units and to arm yourselves.

MR MKHWANAZI: I think I have indicated that I saw Chris only once and I alone saw him. Maybe the person who typed this made a mistake. I never went to Chris Hani in the company of Mndebele.

MR HATTINGH: But Mr Mkhwanazi, at the time when your statement was made you had already indicated that you had an opportunity to read this background or further the

"Brief Historical Background"

And you already indicated that you read the document once again in preparation for the hearing and you also indicated that everything is correct as far as concerns you.

MR MKHWANAZI: I did state at the beginning that the Historical Background was prepared by myself and other members who have also applied for amnesty. I am saying a mistake may as well have happened by including my name.

The truth is that I never went to Chris Hani in the company of Mndebele.

MR HATTINGH: Can you then explain the contents of paragraph 11 on page 11? Do you agree with the contents of paragraph 11?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, JJ Mabena and myself once discussed this.

MR HATTINGH: Now if you agree to this paragraph you say that

"The same advice was received by the committee from Jacob Israel Mabena"

Was Mabena part of the MK command structure?

MR MKHWANAZI: He was Secretary General of Cosatu and he was therefore not involved with the MK.

MR HATTINGH: Then if we turn to page 12, paragraph 13 where it is stated that

"During October 1990 there was a further public meeting where the community demanded the physical removal of the Black Cats?

Were you present at that meeting?

MR MKHWANAZI: I was not present.

MR HATTINGH: Did you take part in the peace initiatives mentioned in paragraph 14?

MR MKHWANAZI: I think I have already indicated that I was underground. People who were in the Committee, Mndebele, Nkonyane and Zwane, these are the people that I encouraged to do that.

MR HATTINGH: Were you aware of these peace initiatives?

MR MKHWANAZI: I was aware, that is why I am saying I was also trying to encourage them to participate in the piece talks.

MR HATTINGH: In paragraph 15 it is stated that

"In consequence certain people formed a Special Committee and more importantly to put into practice the orders received from the ANC command"

What orders were received at that stage from the ANC command, or do you not agree with the contents of this paragraph?

MR MKHWANAZI: I did state that when I came back into the country in 1989, I received a loud and clear instruction that if there was violence where I was I would have to act to try and stabilise the situation. That is one reason that led to the formation of the committee, so that I wouldn't have to take decisions single-handedly. We then formed the committee so that we could share ideas before taking a decision.

MR HATTINGH: The reasons for the assassination of Jwi Zwane, were they discussed by your Special Committee?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, members of the committee realised how much people were dying, like shooting the coffin at a funeral.

Two or three people were killed at the funeral I think and it was then decided. There were many other cases as well. There were cases that led to the committee taking such a decision.

MR HATTINGH: Did you know Mr Zwane?

MR MKHWANAZI: No, I didn't know him.

MR HATTINGH: You never met him before he got killed?

MR MKHWANAZI: I didn't know him.

MR HATTINGH: Can you give an indication as to when this decision was made by your Special Committee to have Jwi Zwane assassinated?

MR MKHWANAZI: I do not remember quite well, but I think it must be a week or three weeks before he was actually assassinated.

MR HATTINGH: Could you then explain, he was assassinated only in July 1991, now if one had regard to the Brief Historical Background Statement which we're dealing with now, it would appear that this decision was in fact made in the previous year?

MR MKHWANAZI: Would you please repeat the question?

MR HATTINGH: Zwane was assassinated in July 1991. From a reading of this Background Statement on page 12, paragraph 13 it is stated that in October 1990 something happened and thereafter further events and then we get to the assassination of Zwane in 1991, July 1991.

MR MKHWANAZI: I have already stated that the Special Committee got together, looked at the violence and tried to identify the people behind it and it was specifically discovered that Jwi was playing a very prominent role. There was a funeral at some stage and Jwi came and shot the coffin and the corpse inside and shooting people as well.

Some people were found lying dead without their private parts and a decision was decided or should I say the decision was taken after the violence exasibated.

MR HATTINGH: When one has regard to the Annexures A and A1, it would appear that as from July 1991 there was relative calm in the area because not many further incidents were noted in the following 8 months. Can you explain the reasons then why Chris Ngwenya was to be assassinated?

MR MKHWANAZI: After Jwi was assassinated the violence exasibated because we experience revenge attacks after which things remained the same. The violence never subsided. I think Mr Mndebele did indicate that there is no accuracy in the list of dates. The situation never got better, instead it became worse.

MR HATTINGH: What information was at your disposal, at your Special Committee when the decision was made in February 1992 that Chris Ngwenya was to be assassinated?

MR MKHWANAZI: There was violence and Chris was behind the violence. There was an instance where people were shot, having come from school or people who were coming from school. That was one of the cases and it was therefore necessary that such a decision be taken because people were suffering.

The people who were behind this were the Black Cats. Nobody else was behind the violence except that Black Cats.

MR HATTINGH: What happened to this Special Committee, was it disbanded at some stage?

MR MKHWANAZI: I do not remember which year it was. I decided to go back where I stayed because I had already been granted amnesty to come back home and start a new life. That is when the Special Committee came to an end.

MR HATTINGH: Exactly which year was that?

MR MKHWANAZI: I do not remember quite well but I think it was around '93.

MR HATTINGH: In your evidence earlier today you said that you're not aware of any action taken by Gushu or the SDU's which fell outside the command or your instructions, is that correct?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, that is correct.

MR HATTINGH: With regard to Advice Gwala, what were the reasons that Gushu told you afterwards were the reasons for his assassination of Advice Gwala? The family of Advice Gwala would like to know that.

MR MKHWANAZI: Gushu told me that Advice Gwala was connected to the Sasol Management. He was an organiser for AWUSA which AWUSA was killing MDM members at the mine and he was organising a counter-revolutionary youth against the structures at Mbalendle and that he had a hand with the Black Chains, the Black Chains who used to terrorise people at Mbalendle.

MR HATTINGH: When the SDU's were put into place, did you supply them with any firearms or any weapons?

MR MKHWANAZI: I gave Gushu the responsibility to take care of that.

MR HATTINGH: The question is, did you supply any firearms?

MR MKHWANAZI: No.

MR HATTINGH: When did you meet Mr Chris Hani in ...[intervention]

ADV BOSMAN: Mr Hattingh, can I just get clarification here?

Did you supply Mr Gushu personally with any firearms, Mr Mkhwanazi?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, I did give him the one that he used for Jwi and Chris's assassination.

ADV BOSMAN: How many in total then? I just want to make sure I understand you.

MR MKHWANAZI: I gave him an AK47 and a Makaroff pistol.

MR HATTINGH: When you met with Mr Chris Hani in the Transkei, I did not quite hear your answer previously, approximately when did you meet him in the Transkei?

MR MKHWANAZI: I do not remember but I think it was 1990 or 1991 even though I'm not sure.

MR HATTINGH: Did you report to Mr Chris Hani about the occurrence of armed robberies with a view of supplying the SDU's with finances and arms?

MR MKHWANAZI: I explained to him about the prevailing situation at Ermelo, Piet Retief and Secunda. I further indicated to him that I have instructed someone to form the SDU's so that this very same person must see how the SDU's operated.

MR HATTINGH: Will you please answer the question?

MR MKHWANAZI: I thought I have answered the question because I have stated that I informed and explained to Mr Chris Hani about the prevailing situation in the different townships and indicated to him that I have already instructed someone to form SDU's and that I informed this person to make use of his own discretion and initiative as to the formation and the arming of the SDU's.

MR HATTINGH: Did you discuss or report to Mr Chris Hani about the armed robberies that had taken place to finance or to arm the SDU's? It's just a yes or a no.

MR MKHWANAZI: I think I have already explained to you that I informed him that I have mandated this person as to the formation of the SDU's and the arming thereof.

MR HATTINGH: Mr Mkhwanazi, are you not prepared to answer the question?

CHAIRPERSON: What's wrong with the answer?

MR HATTINGH: Mr Chairman, I did not hear an answer to the question whether he reported to Mr Chris Hani about the armed robberies.

CHAIRPERSON: Repeat your answer please.

MR MKHWANAZI: I am saying I did inform him about the prevailing situation in the different townships and I also informed him that I have already instructed a person to form the SDU's and make use of his own discretion as to the arming of the SDU's.

MR HATTINGH: From this answer can we then take it that Mr Chris Hani was aware of the fact that armed robberies were being committed in the furtherance of the aims and objectives of the ANC?

MR MKHWANAZI: There were no rules and regulations guiding this situation. If we were facing a war situation we had to make use of whatever means at our disposal.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you think Chris Hani knew that robberies were being committed in order to fund the SDU's?

MR MKHWANAZI: I cannot assure you on that because I did not specifically tell him that we were engaged in robberies to arm the SDU's.

MR HATTINGH: Thank you Mr Chairman

ADV BOSMAN: Mr Hattingh, if I can just clarify this? Did you foresee the possibility of robberies at the time when you gave the instruction Mr Mkhwanazi?

MR MKHWANAZI: Would you please repeat the question?

ADV BOSMAN: At the time when you gave Mr Gushu this wide mandate to do what he thought was necessary in his discretion with regard to the SDU's, did you foresee the possibility that he may carry out armed robberies?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, I did. I did think about the possibility because we didn't have firearms. We didn't have money and therefore there was not any other alternative.

MR HATTINGH: With regard to Jwi Zwane, ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Did you not say you are finished?

MR HATTINGH: No, Mr Chairman, I said thank you for, I finally got the answer to my question which I've been trying to get the past 15 minutes.

CHAIRPERSON: Oh, it must be my mistake.

MR HATTINGH: Mr Mkhwanazi, with regard to Jwi Zwane, his family or his brother will say that Jwi Zwane did not play the role that the applicants including you would like to picture of him in the conflict which occurred at the time in this area.

MR MKHWANAZI: If you say that, I think he must have had his eyes closed not see what was happening. Nobody in this Ermelo community doesn't know that Zwane was leading the Black Cats. I'm shocked that there is someone who doesn't know that.

MR HATTINGH: I would further wish to put it to you with regard to Jwi Zwane, that he was working with his brother, Elias Zwane in the business and that they were in fact in competition with Mr John Mndebele and that may have been the reason for the assassination of Jwi Zwane.

MR MKHWANAZI: I think Mr Mndebele did indicate how far his business was in relation to Jwi Zwane's brother's business. John Mndebele has about six or seven shops. These are the people perhaps who may say something but finally Jwi Zwane was involved in violence. We would not go out and shoot an innocent person.

MR HATTINGH: With regard to Chris Ngwenya evidence will be led that there was apparently a problem between Chris Ngwenya and John Mndebele and John Mndebele in fact a day before Chris Ngwenya was killed filed a complaint with the police pertaining to Chris Ngwenya, were you aware of that?

MR MKHWANAZI: I think you'll be correct to direct that question to Mr Mndebele. I have no answer to it.

CHAIRPERSON: No, no, but did you know of that report to the police before the death?

MR MKHWANAZI: No.

MR HATTINGH: I merely wish to put it to you that it would appear that there was in fact a personal vendetta between Mr Chris Ngwenya and Mr John Mndebele and that the killing of Chris Ngwenya was not politically motivated.

MR MKHWANAZI: John Mndebele was not the one taking decisions about the assassination of people. I don't think he would have had that influence to mislead us so that he could protect his business interests. We could not be misled into that.

Other members within the Special Committee here at Ermelo knew Chris, they knew he was behind the violence and there was therefore no way in which John Mndebele could have influenced that decision.

MR HATTINGH: With regard to Lindiwe Nkosi and Thembisile Eldah Nkambule, I would like to put it to you just for your comments if you have any, that they were shot during the same incident in which Chris Ngwenya was shot but that they were shot after Chris Ngwenya had already been shot and that they were in fact not shot by accident but that they were in fact followed and shot after Chris Ngwenya had been killed.

CHAIRPERSON: Would he be able to say whether that is true or not?

MR HATTINGH: Mr Chairman, it's merely a fact that he made application for amnesty for their death and the shooting at Thembisile Nkambule and I'm merely making the statement for if he wants to respond to that. That is the only reason.

CHAIRPERSON: He wasn't there so, I don't know, whatever answer you're going to get is probably hearsay but anyway.

Can you answer the last question?

MR MKHWANAZI: I'm not in the position to answer that because I was not present.

MR HATTINGH: Lastly Mr Mkhwanazi, if in fact Mr Gushu committed these murders on your instructions with political motives and in the furtherance of the aims of the ANC, could you perhaps explain why no-one from the ANC, including yourself who gave him those instructions, came to his assistance at his criminal trial?

CHAIRPERSON: How would they give him assistance?

MR HATTINGH: Mr Chairman, I suppose it's up to this witness to say, to give us that answer, to say what assistance was possible if any.

CHAIRPERSON: What assistance are you talking about?

MR HATTINGH: Any assistance in support of someone who is now facing a grave jail sentence where he acted on your instructions in the furtherance of the aims of a political organisation who was by the time when this person went through his trial the government of the day.

CHAIRPERSON: What kind of assistance, evidence, financial, whatever?

MR HATTINGH: Yes, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: What are you talking about?

MR HATTINGH: Financial, evidence, support.

CHAIRPERSON: How relevant is it, whether he was supported financially or not? The fact that if he had to be supported financially he'd still go to jail, he was found guilty.

MR HATTINGH: Mr Chairman, I would submit that it is relevant as far as that it would show that that was in fact the position at the time and that we are dealing with today is not a fabrication of the event, that in fact there were instructions and in fact there was support and reasons for Gushu to act the way he did and that he was in fact acting on behalf of the ANC and per the instructions of this applicant.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mkhwanazi, you knew that Mr Gushu was on trial not so?

MR MKHWANAZI: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: The advocate is putting to you that you did not support him in any way when he was on trial, he wants to know why.

MR MKHWANAZI: I don't know what kind of support he is talking about. Is he talking about financial support? Mzwandile had a lawyer and really I don't know what kind of support he is talking about.

CHAIRPERSON: I also asked the question and he says financial and just moral support perhaps. Did you attend the trial? I don't really know what the purpose of the question is but I'm asking it also to get finished with this.

MR MKHWANAZI: I didn't go to the trial because I was avoiding being arrested. I didn't know what he had said. Insofar as money is concerned the Ermelo Committee tried to raise funds for his legal assistance.

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

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR HATTINGH

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR MAPOMA: Thank you Sir, just one point.

Mr Mkhwanazi, in your evidence in chief you said you were only advised by Mr Gushu about the assassination of the late Advice Gwala after he had already carried out the operation, do you remember that?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, I do.

MR MAPOMA: And you said you did approve or what he did, do you remember that?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, that is correct.

MR MAPOMA: You went on to say that in any event complaints were made to you by Mr JJ Mabena about the actions of Mr Advice Gwala, do you remember that?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, I do remember that.

MR MAPOMA: What complaints were they that Mr JJ Mabena gave to you of Advice Gwala?

MR MKHWANAZI: He told me that Advice Gwala was part and parcel of the Sasol Management dealing with the Cosatu members of the Sasol employees killing some of the Cosatu members at the mine during stay-aways and that he was organising the youth in the township, the youth that became known as the Mbalendle Cultural Youth whose aim it was to oppose the ANC Youth League and that he had a hand with the Black Chains.

MR MAPOMA: Now this discussion, did it take place before or after the assassination of Mr Gwala?

MR MKHWANAZI: We discussed this before Mr Gwala was assassinated.

MR MAPOMA: Then did you not take any decision about what must be done about Mr Advice Gwala?

MR MKHWANAZI: No, I did not.

MR MAPOMA: I'm asking this question Mr Mkhwanazi, because the mother of Advice Gwala says or in fact will say when she gives evidence, that Mr Gushu said in court that he killed Advice Gwala on the instructions of Mr JJ Mabena, do you have any knowledge about that?

MR BLACK: That's ...[indistinct] Whatever she may or may not have heard, but that's quite clearly incorrect. Gushu at no stage said that he killed Mr Gwala on the instructions of Mr Mabena.

ADV SANDI: Isn't Mr Mapoma referring to the evidence in court?

MR MAPOMA: Yes, evidence in the criminal trial, I'm sorry.

MR BLACK: I beg your pardon I misunderstood.

MR MAPOMA: If I may just repeat this. What the mother of Advice says is that Gushu said in the criminal court he killed Advice on the instructions of Mr JJ Mabena. Now what I want to know from you, do you know of any involvement of Mr Mabena in the killing of Advice Gwala?

MR MKHWANAZI: No, there is nothing that I know except that he briefed me about Mr Gwala and nothing beyond that.

MR MAPOMA: Had you knew of his involvement, would you be ready to tell the Committee?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, I would.

MR MAPOMA: Thank you, no further questions.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MAPOMA

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Patel?

RE-EXAMINATION BY MR PATEL: As it pleases you Mr Chairman.

Mr Mkhwanazi, up until the time that you were granted the amnesty in 1993, how easy was it for you to move around?

MR MKHWANAZI: It was not as easy because the Security Forces had deployed Askaris around and these Askari members are people with whom we trained, they knew me. They could easily identify me, pinpoint me, shoot me or get me arrested. That was after the ANC was unbanned.

MR PATEL: Your initial stay in Piet Retief when you just arrived in the country, was that residence intended to be permanent.

MR MKHWANAZI: No, no.

MR PATEL: In other words you understood it to be a temporary placement?

MR MKHWANAZI: That is correct.

MR PATEL: It's been put to you that Mr Mndebele laid a charge or a complaint against Mr Ngwenya the day before he was killed, when was the decision taken or rather how long before he was killed was the decision taken to assassinate Mr Ngwenya?

MR MKHWANAZI: I do not remember exactly but I think it must have been a month.

MR PATEL: Sorry, I didn't get that.

Insofar as the might be relevant, this question of support for Mr Gushu at his criminal ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: It's not relevant.

MR PATEL: As it pleases you Mr Chairman, I have no further questions.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR PATEL

ADV BOSMAN: Mr Mkhwanazi, it was asked of you whether you received any salary or any compensation and your answer was: "No", how did you survive during this fairly long period that you were working underground?

MR MKHWANAZI: I was staying with Mr Mndebele. That is one person who made it easy for me to survive.

ADV BOSMAN: And then you did say that it was not easy for you to move around during this period, how did you sort of communicate with Mr Gushu during this time? In what manner did you communicate?

MR MKHWANAZI: If Mr Gushu was in Secunda, I would telephone Mr JJ Mabena's office and indicate to him that I would like to be connected to Mr Gushu and we would then decide where to meet personally and that would be where we would discuss issues.

ADV BOSMAN: How often did these communications take place?

MR MKHWANAZI: We were not communicating frequently, maybe we would meet once in a month's time or twice in two month's time or twice in one month's time.

ADV BOSMAN: Did you ever during this time feel that you reason to limit Mr Gushu's very wide mandate?

MR MKHWANAZI: At the time the violent situation was terrible and therefore I would not have reduced the mandate. I would only do that if the violence had subsided but that was not the case.

ADV BOSMAN: Mr Mndebele if I remember correctly, said that he knew that the issue of robbery fell outside the general ANC policy at national level, were you also aware of that?

MR MKHWANAZI: I know that that is not the policy of the ANC but the situation under which we lived at the time was that we had no alternative.

ADV BOSMAN: That evidence was also given by Mr Gushu, but did you discuss this policy with Mr Gushu at all, did you say to him: "This is a general ANC policy but under the circumstances we are not going to follow it, we have to take emergency sort of steps"?

MR MKHWANAZI: The decisions that we took at the time were inspired by the circumstances and therefore Mzwandile took such decisions because he knew that we didn't have any other alternative.

ADV BOSMAN: ...[inaudible] Mr Mkhwanazi, I don't think you really followed my question. What I really wanted to know is, did you make Mr Gushu aware that you were actually him an instruction which goes outside the policy of the ANC at national level?

MR MKHWANAZI: The instruction that I gave was that he should form and arm the self-defence units. It was therefore up to him to take the necessary steps as to how the self-defence units should be armed and that's what decision he took, armed robbery.

ADV BOSMAN: No, that I follow. I will leave it at that. Just one more question and it's just a question of clarification. The evidence has been that you were a three-man committee of which Mr John Mndebele was one and I, the evidence was that you were a three-man committee that took the decision about the elimination of Chris Ngwenya and Jwi Zwane and Mr Mndebele was one of the members and yet you said Mr Mndebele could not possibly have influenced this committee. If you could just explain that because I find it contrary to logic.

MR MKHWANAZI: There were four of us in the Committee and Mr Mndebele was one of the members. What I was saying, they had actually asked me, they indicated that Mr Mndebele took the decision because it was a personal vendetta.

What I was saying was that it was not possible for Mr Mndebele to influence a decision in a committee of four members because there were many other people here at Ermelo who knew exactly what was happening. He could not have influenced us to kill Chris because of his own personal vendetta. These other people here at Ermelo knew exactly what situation or atmosphere prevailed here.

ADV BOSMAN: Yes, thank you. Thank you Chairman.

ADV SANDI: Mr Mkhwanazi, this Special Committee, did it have a chairman?

MR MKHWANAZI: No, it didn't have a chairperson.

ADV SANDI: Did it have a co-ordinator of some kind? How would you call meetings?

MR MKHWANAZI: No, we did not have, but when we needed to convene meetings we would communicate amongst ourselves that we should convene a meeting. That is how we would discuss the issues.

ADV SANDI: If you were to rank members of this Special Committee in terms of their influence, who would you say was the most influential member of the committee?

MR MKHWANAZI: Every member played almost the same role, so it is very difficult for me to pinpoint or differentiate as to who played the most important role.

ADV SANDI: This meeting you had with Mr Hani, did you tell him about this Special Committee?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, I did, I told him that there was people that I was working with and I was making decisions in consultation with them because I did not want to take decisions single-handedly.

ADV SANDI: Did you mention the names of those people to Mr Hani?

MR MKHWANAZI: No, I did not mention the names.

ADV SANDI: Did you mention the name of Mzwandile Gushu to Mr Hani?

MR MKHWANAZI: No, I did not.

ADV SANDI: This meeting you had with Mr Hani, did you tell your colleagues about it, members of the Special Committee?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, I did report back that we held a meeting or I held a meeting with the Chief of Staff and reported the situation in Ermelo as well as the surrounding areas, as well as the decisions that we took or we were taking.

ADV SANDI: Just one final question. When you met Mr Hani did it appear to you that someone had been in contact with him to inform him as to the happenings in Ermelo as well as other surrounding areas?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, he did appear to have quite a lot of information. As to where he got the information I do not know, whether it was from the media or from a certain person because there was quite wide media coverage with regard to the happenings in other areas. It's possible that he got the information from other ANC structures or the regional offices were briefing him or maybe the Executive Committee but he did have information. As to where and how he got it I don't know. I do believe he got it from the Executive Committee.

ADV SANDI: I will have to apologise if I'm repeating this question to you, I may have asked you. Did you mention the name of Mzwandile Gushu to Mr Hani?

MR MKHWANAZI: No, I did not.

ADV SANDI: Did you have any particular reason for not doing so?

MR MKHWANAZI: For security reasons.

ADV SANDI: Thank you Mr Mkhwanazi.

ADV BOSMAN: Flowing this question put by my colleague Mr Mkhwanazi, Mr Gushu in his application form states that he was an MK soldier and the previous witnesses refer to him as their commander, did you place Mr Gushu in the position of commander? In other words, did you in fact as it were promote Mr Gushu to an MK commander? I don't have clarity on that.

MR MKHWANAZI: There were certain trained units and these units would become part of the MK structures and Mr Gushu was part of the MK structures because he was trained within the country and so he had all the authority to form the defence units and become a commander thereof. That was part of his duties as a member of the MK structure which operated within the country.

ADV BOSMAN: Do I understand you correctly then that Mr Gushu had virtually by his activities placed himself in the position of a commander?

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, he was the commander of the self-defence unit. He had to be the commander according to the military ranks.

ADV BOSMAN: I don't want to belabour the issue Mr Mkhwanazi, but I still don't have clarity in my own mind. I don't really know military procedures, but if a person becomes a commander someone must confer that authority on him, is that not so?

MR MKHWANAZI: That is the regular army that has such a procedure, where there is finance but the circumstances under or a situation which is normal, but with our situation there was no normality so things were not done quite procedurally. In the position that he was he was supposed to be the commander because he was commanding other people directly.

ADV BOSMAN: So he had worked himself into a position of a commander? I just want to make sure that I understand you, I'm not setting any trap here.

MR MKHWANAZI: Yes, the work he did pushed him to the position of a commander, as well as the training that he got.

ADV BOSMAN: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you, you are excused.

WITNESS EXCUSED

CHAIRPERSON: We will take a five minute adjournment.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS