ON RESUMPTION
CHAIRPERSON: The next matter is the amnesty application of Dennis Kgatitsoe, Amnesty Reference AM7727/97. Mr Mohlaba, do you want to put yourself on record on behalf of the applicant?
MR MOHLABA: Thank you Chairperson. My name is Buka Mohlaba. I'm appearing for the applicant from the firm Mohlaba, Moshoana Inc in Pretoria.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you Mr Mohlaba. And then Ms Lockhat.
MS LOCKHAT: My name is Ms Lockhat and I appear on behalf of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Ms Lockhat. Yes Mr Mohlaba.
MR MOHLABA: Thank you, Chairperson.
DENNIS LUKAS MTO KGATITSOE: (sworn states)
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mohlaba.
MR MOHLABA: Thank you Chairperson.
EXAMINATION BY MR MOHLABA: Mr Kgatitsoe, you are the applicant in this matter and you are presently serving a prison term, is that correct?
MR KGATITSOE: That is correct.
MR MOHLABA: And you are applying for amnesty for an offence of abduction, murder, robbery and malicious damage to property, is that correct?
MR KGATITSOE: That is correct.
MR MOHLABA: This is the incident related to the death of Marvin Binder, is that correct?
MR KGATITSOE: That is correct.
MR MOHLABA: You are applying for amnesty because these offences were committed by you with a political objective, is that correct?
MR KGATITSOE: That is correct.
MR MOHLABA: Did you, during the period November 1991 belong to a political organisation and if so, please tell us the organisation.
MR KGATITSOE: Yes, I was a member of the ANC Youth League.
MR MOHLABA: Before joining the ANC Youth League, were you active in politics and did you belong to any organisation or an institution?
MR KGATITSOE: I became active in politics since 1984. I was a member of the South African Youth Congress. Later on I joined ECSTOP in Johannesburg. When the ANC was unbanned in 1991, I joined the ANC Youth League.
ADV DE JAGER: Sorry to interrupt but there's something disturbing, a noise on, I don't know whether it affects the other members, but ...
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, my one's seems to be better. My one was like that earlier this morning, so I don't know, perhaps it's just your one.
INTERPRETER: Maybe we should switch some of the microphones, the sound might stop.
CHAIRPERSON: Switch on your mike Chris and see.
MR MOHLABA: Thank you, Chairperson, may I proceed?
CHAIRPERSON: Just give us a second. Okay, thank you.
MR MOHLABA: Thank you. Mr Kgatitsoe, the application form which appears on page 11 of the paginated bundle until page 16 thereof, page 17 there. Is that your application form?
MR KGATITSOE: Yes, that is correct.
MR MOHLABA: It has come to our attention that it was not attested to before a Commissioner of Oaths. Do you confirm the contents of this application form and to be binding on your conscience?
MR KGATITSOE: That is correct.
MR MOHLABA: The bundles which are before the Committee, in particular from page 20 until page 42, contain statements given by yourself and faxed to the Truth Commission, is that correct?
MR KGATITSOE: Yes, that is correct.
MR MOHLABA: And do you still confirm, or do you confirm that this information contained in these bundles is the truth?
MR KGATITSOE: That is correct.
MR MOHLABA: Before the commencement of the hearings this morning, a typed version of a declaration by Mogoro Seleburu was shown to you and you perused it, is that correct?
MR KGATITSOE: That is correct.
MR MOHLABA: Did you understand what was contained in this declaration?
MR KGATITSOE: Yes, after having read it, I understood it.
MR MOHLABA: It has been noticed that the information contained in this declaration is inconsistent with what is contained in your statement. Do you have a comment with regard to this statement of Mogoro Seleburu?
MR KGATITSOE: I also found out that the information contained therein is inconsistent with what I know. I cannot understand what went through his mind when he wrote this statement.
MR MOHLABA: So is this information incorrect? That is the information contained in the declaration by Seleburu?
MR KGATITSOE: It is totally incorrect.
MR MOHLABA: Could you perhaps refer us to the incorrect passages?
MR KGATITSOE: Paragraph, first paragraph, third sentence.
"I fully declare to the best of my knowledge and clear conscience that on the 22nd November 1991, there was an ANC Youth League Rally in Ventersdorp."
That is incorrect.
"The Ventersdorp Youth League to attend the rally"
That is incorrect.
...(indistinct) at the rally."
He was just my acquaintance all along.
"The said rally was disrupted by AWB right-wingers."
MR MOHLABA: Let me interrupt you there. Maybe let me try and assist you Mr Kgatitsoe. Are you aware of a rally which was disrupted by AWB right-wingers in Ventersdorp on this particular day?
MR KGATITSOE: No, I do not know about that rally.
MR MOHLABA: It is stated here that you and Seleburu, you were angered by the disruption of the rally and during that time you went out to hunt for white people to attack them, is that correct?
MR KGATITSOE: That is not correct.
MR MOHLABA: The deceased person, Marvin Binder, where did you meet him on this date of his death?
MR KGATITSOE: I met him at Kagiso police station.
MR MOHLABA: And that was per arrangement, after you had phoned him, as you've indicated in your statement, is that correct?
MR KGATITSOE: That is correct.
MR MOHLABA: So you do not agree with the submissions by Mogoro Seleburu that you attacked Binder because he was a white man who was found at Ventersdorp at a particular moment, is that so?
MR KGATITSOE: Yes, I disagree with what Mogoro Seleburu says.
MR MOHLABA: ; Did you in any way benefit from, that is monetary, did you gain, did you derive any benefit, patrimonial benefit from the death of the deceased Binder?
MR KGATITSOE: There was nothing monetary that I received through the death of Marvin Binder.
MR MOHLABA: Is there anything you want to add to, in support of this application, other than what is already on paper?
MR KGATITSOE: What I wrote in these documents before us is what is known to me and I would not like to add to it any further.
MR MOHLABA: Thank you, Chairperson, that will conclude the evidence-in-chief.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MOHLABA
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Mohlaba. Ms Lockhat, any questions?
MS LOCKHAT: Thank you, Chairperson.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS LOCKHAT: Can you just explain to us how exactly did you come to meet Mr Binder? Can you just give us more details regarding that?
MR KGATITSOE: On the 12th day of May 1991, people were killed in Swaneville. Thereafter they were buried. Before they were buried, there were rumours or what I would call allegations that when the hostel dwellers attacked the residents of Swaneville, there were white people amongst the hostel dwellers who were assisting the very hostel dwellers, such allegations. Minutes after the attack I was there and I witnessed such things. The Youth League and some of our leaders, we embarked on a programme to revitalise the structures in Swaneville and give moral support to the community in Swaneville. I was amongst some of the volunteers who went to Swaneville. I met George Nawana in that process. Originally he resided at the hostel. However, he left the hostel in 1990, when conflict arose between what we would call Xhosas and the Zulus, so I came close to him because he used to disclose to me that there are whites who do come to the hostel.
The information that I got from George, I passed it to our leaders. Amongst some of the leaders that I passed this information to was Eric Ndleleni and Ms Mandisa Shikleka. They advised me that we must recruit George to join the ANC as he was not allied to any other political party. I therefore convinced George to join the ANC and he did. Together with George, myself and George, we visited the hostel, after we agreed, or rather let me say, I was assigned to infiltrate the hostel so as to expose elements behind the violence.
As we went to the hostel, that is where I met Mr Marvin Binder, who used to come to the hostel. I introduced myself to Mr Marvin Binder and he knew me as a hostel resident. That is how I came to know Mr Marvin Binder.
MS LOCKHAT: What was Mr Binder's role at the hostel? Did he bring any arms, ammunition, or can you just explain and expound more on that for us?
MR KGATITSOE: As he came to the hostel, at time he would come during the meetings, or he had a lot of friends at the hostel. I became his friend, a very close friend and he confided in me, so much that he would explain his role to me. Amongst some of the things that he did were facilitating between the hostel dwellers and the police officers. If there would be a search taken out at the hostel, or hostel dwellers have been disarmed at a road block, Marvin would make it a point that he collects the firearms taken from hostel dwellers, back to the hostel. The other role that he had, or which he told me and which I believed, is that the attacks, he contributed in carrying out attacks against the community together with the hostel residents.
INTERPRETER: Chairperson, may we ask Mr Kgatitsoe to stick to one medium of language in a sentence?
MS LOCKHAT: You said in your submission on page 22 that you planned this killing and that you also discussed the plan to kill Marvin Binder with Eric and he said you could go ahead to question Binder, but you went ahead and you killed Binder. Tell me, Mr Eric, who was he to you? Was he your Commander? Who was he?
MR KGATITSOE: I'm going to try and correct one thing. Eric never gave me a command to kill Mr Binder. As my Chairperson, he instructed me, or us, to infiltrate the hostel and we must expose some of the elements which are at the core of the violence that erupted there. Eric was my Chairperson.
MS LOCKHAT: And who was your Commander? I don't understand. Who was your direct Commander?
MR KGATITSOE: I did not take out my duties under any military operation, I functioned under the ANC Youth League and within the ANSIL, we did not have a command structures, we had secretaries and Chairpersons.
MS LOCKHAT: So then basically Eric was the Chairperson, so he was the head of ANSIL, is that right?
MR KGATITSOE: He was the interim Chairperson.
MS LOCKHAT: But he did give you the go-ahead to question Mr Binder?
MR KGATITSOE: Yes, that is correct.
MS LOCKHAT: And then, the killing of Mr Binder you said was never discussed with him and that is at page 22 of the bundle at paragraph 2, the last line of that paragraph. You say that the killing of Mr Binder was never discussed with him, why not?
MR KGATITSOE: The killing of Mr Binder was not the mandate I received from Eric. The reason being that the killing of Mr binder occurred after I have realised that Mr Binder will be dangerous to the ANC community and Swaneville community.
MS LOCKHAT: So why would he be dangerous?
MR KGATITSOE: On the day of his killing weapons were loaded, in his motor vehicle, except the weapons that he told us in his vehicle. He told me many a times previously as he related how they attacked even Swaneville on the 12th day of May and telling me also about his role. Before his killing, he was interrogated and he confessed. That is where I saw the potential he had for killing the ANC constituency or the community as such.
MS LOCKHAT: Would you say that Mr Binder was an IFP supporter or in favour of the IFP party?
MR KGATITSOE: I cannot say he was an IFP supporter, but I would say he worked hand in glove with the IFP. He worked for the then government. On the other hand he worked for the hostel residents.
MS LOCKHAT: So are you - just in relation to Mr Seleburu's declaration, he said that because of this mass meeting and so forth, you went out and you just got a white person, in a sense, and attacked him and killed him because he was white. Do you say that this Seleburu's statement is not true? Just explain to me if Seleburu knew Mr Binder, did he have any interaction with Mr Binder with you?
MR KGATITSOE: As I have already stated when I started, I cannot tell what went in Mr Seleburu's mind when he gave this statement. Firstly he does not know Mr Binder, he has never met Mr Binder and regarding this meeting or rally in Ventersdorp, I don't know where he takes it. Now, I'm a bit confused that Mr Seleburu must give such information because he did not know Mr Binder at all.
ADV DE JAGER: But wasn't he involved in the killing of Mr Binder?
MR KGATITSOE: He was not involved, he was not present.
MS LOCKHAT: If I could just assist the Committee with that. He was found in possession of some of the items, that is how he got arrested. Who planned this whole operation to kill Marvin Binder?
MR KGATITSOE: The operation to kill Mr Marvin Binder was not a planned operation, planned days before the day of his killing. After he had collected the firearms and the ammunition, as I have stated, that's where everything changed. Ultimately he was killed. That was not a thoroughly planned operation.
MS LOCKHAT: So were you with him when he collected these firearms and weapons?
MR KGATITSOE: Yes, I was with him.
MS LOCKHAT: So where did you get the weapons from? Where did you collect it from and from which person did you collect it from?
MR KGATITSOE: These weapons, there were two shoulder bags. We took them at a certain farm in Randfontein where we found two whites. One of them looked like Mr Swanepoel, the then title holder of Swaneville.
MS LOCKHAT: Was this the first time that you collected weapons with Mr Binder?
MR KGATITSOE: Yes, it was the first time.
MS LOCKHAT: Who arranged to meet Mr Binder? Why did you exactly arrange to meet him that night, the night when he was killed?
MR KGATITSOE: Yes, I made that arrangement.
MS LOCKHAT: Why did you make the arrangement? To do what? To meet with him, why?
MR KGATITSOE: That is what he initiated to me. He said: "On this day, you must phone me" and I phoned him and we arranged an appointment. On the day we met at a certain time, then I went to the ...(indistinct), I phoned him and he said we must meet at Kagiso police station. That is where we met. He is the one actually who initiated the appointment.
MS LOCKHAT: So you didn't know that he was going to collect these firearms, or did you?
MR KGATITSOE: No, I did not know.
MS LOCKHAT: And why do you think Mr Binder contacted you to go along with him? Did you - just explain your relationship in a sense, why did he have so much faith in you and trust in you to take you along to collect these weapons?
MR KGATITSOE: Mr Marvin Binder, I used to call him Mokoepa, that is his code name, Mokoepa, he was able to communicate with me in a different manner to whoever at the hostel. He knew that I was able to talk to him in English when, with other hostel residents, they needed an interpreter. He believed in me and he believed that I was a member of the IFP. That is how I convinced him so much that he could confide in me and that on this day in question, he made an appointment with me.
MS LOCKHAT: Do you know of any diamond smuggling of Mr Binder?
MR KGATITSOE: No, I do not know.
MS LOCKHAT: Did Mr Binder offer you any money to go with him to collect these firearms and these weapons?
MR KGATITSOE: No, he did not give me money.
MS LOCKHAT: Would you say that you were, can you say that you were a double agent at that time, or were you just under cover in a sense?
MR KGATITSOE: I do not know which term now to use. I can say I was operating under cover. I was not a double agent. I did not work for the IFP, I worked for the ANC, therefore I'm saying I worked underground.
MS LOCKHAT: Do you think that the Chairperson of ANSIL would have approved of you killing Mr Binder?
MR KGATITSOE: He would approve of that because I believed that as an obligation to me, for the ANC and how I would explain to him. At one stage I explained to him about Mr Binder's actions and he told me that such a person is dangerous and how he would tell us his sentiments. I think the Chairperson would agree to that.
MS LOCKHAT: Did you inform him that you killed Mr Binder after the incident?
MR KGATITSOE: Yes, I did inform him.
MS LOCKHAT: Was this before you were arrested?
MR KGATITSOE: Yes, this was before I got arrested.
MS LOCKHAT: Who were all the persons ...(intervention)
ADV DE JAGER: And what did he say when you reported it to him?
MR KGATITSOE: This, I will put it in English: "This was long overdue."
MS LOCKHAT: Whilst you were undercover did you report back to ANSIL about the activities, your activities? Did you have regular report-backs?
MR KGATITSOE: Yes, I gave a feedback on my activities.
MS LOCKHAT: Was it once a week or can you just expand on that?
MR KGATITSOE: We did not have a time limitation. Any time at my disposal, when I would meet with Mr Binder at the hostel, when I come from the hostel I would report.
MS LOCKHAT: There were lots of things taken from Mr Binder as well. He had cash on him and his radio cassette player was taken, his battery cables, his gold watch, his wallet. Was this part of the operation?
MR KGATITSOE: That was not part of the operation.
MS LOCKHAT: Who took all these items from the deceased?
MR KGATITSOE: Actually we were two of us with George and most of the items, I saw them at the court, I was supposed to have received information from George as to what happened. Unfortunately we never had a discussion with George thereafter, but as far as I believe, if those things were taken, George might have told that he took such things.
MS LOCKHAT: Just mention the names of the people that were involved with you in the killing of Mr Binder.
MR KGATITSOE: George Abanawana.
MS LOCKHAT: Is that the only person?
MR KGATITSOE: Yes.
MS LOCKHAT: So the two were alone with Mr Binder and I assume, can you just explain to me how you killed him? Who did what?
MR KGATITSOE: From Randfontein he was forced to drive to Ventersdorp at a certain place. When we reached that place, at ...(indistinct) place, I had a 9mm pistol. We fastened his hands and we got a knife that was from his car and George had an axe. We were assaulting him and looking for information from him. When we parked the car, we fastened him to a pole and we started interrogating him. One of the questions that we asked him was that I knew he was a person who worked, why was he involved in such activities because he had a full-time job? The other question was, when I asked what was he doing with the weapons, he said they were going to be used for taking out attacks at Swaneville. That's where a twist of things took place, then we decided to kill him. I stabbed him. George hacked him with the axe. Although I cannot pin down what actually killed him, but I think the post mortem said the knife stab wound actually caused the death of Mr Marvin Binder.
MS LOCKHAT: So did you decide to stab him at that stage, or to kill him? Was it your decision?
MR KGATITSOE: Yes, I was killing him, that was my decision.
MS LOCKHAT: So while all of this took place, I assume you were in full contact with George as well at that point in time, you knew exactly what George was doing, isn't that so?
MR KGATITSOE: At that time I was concentrating on what Mr Binder was answering, his response to our questions. I was not that focused on George at that time.
MS LOCKHAT: Because I can't believe that you wouldn't have seen George removing the deceased's watch and the car battery and just everything, the radio and so forth. This must have happened over a couple of minutes at least.
MR KGATITSOE: If I could give a description of this place, maybe you would have a better picture of this place.
It's a place in the open veld, it's dark. The only source of light would be a motor vehicle headlights, but they were switched off. What took place in that dark place, I could not have seen. I may repeat and say, my attention was focused on Mr Binder as I took him as a dangerous person.
ADV DE JAGER: But if you focused on him, surely you must see if his watch is removed, his purse is taken out of his possession, then you must see that, if you focus on him?
MR KGATITSOE: That is why I say, while focusing on him, I never saw anything happening, but there were times when I had to go and re-park the car and I left George and then I would come back to him, but I wouldn't know what took place, but when we interrogated him and he gave us answers, I saw nothing like a wristwatch being removed or a wallet being taken out of his possession.
MS LOCKHAT: Did you say the items you only saw at court?
MR KGATITSOE: Some of them I saw at the court, but the battery and the FM or the radio cassette player, I saw them.
MS LOCKHAT: Yes, because you had them.
MR KGATITSOE: At the police station, when I saw them.
MS LOCKHAT: Also, how did Mr Seleburu get hold of all the items, who gave it to him?
MR KGATITSOE: When I talked to Mr Seleburu, he said he found these items with George.
MS LOCKHAT: Because, why I'm asking you this on page 56 of the judgment there's evidence that George had asked you at paragraph 15 - paragraph 10, he asked you: "Where did you find the radio and the loudspeakers?" and then you answered him that you found it and that you killed this white man and that's how you got hold of the radio and cassette player. Can you comment on that?
MR KGATITSOE: He was lying. George was not telling the truth.
MS LOCKHAT: So you're the only person telling the truth here? You don't have to comment on that.
Did you also - the deceased also had an amount of R660-00 on him. Do you know about that as well?
MR KGATITSOE: I do not know about that amount of money, I only heard from his wife at the court, when she stated same.
ADV DE JAGER: Were the deceased's clothes taken off before he was left there?
MR KGATITSOE: No.
MS LOCKHAT: Why did you burn out the deceased's car?
MR KGATITSOE: At Swaneville, there was a place that had lights on and the other part of Swaneville was dark. At the time when the possibility existed that the attack might be taken out against Swaneville, I decided that if we would set the car alight in that section that was not lit, that was dark, as such people would not have easy entry into Swaneville. On the other hand, we wanted to direct the attention of the police to the other side where we set the car alight.
MS LOCKHAT: Would you say today that the killing of Marvin Binder was necessary?
MR KGATITSOE: Yes, it was necessary.
MS LOCKHAT: Did the white people stop, you said there were lots of white people going into the hostel, did this deter any of the white people going into the hostel and associating with the hostel dwellers there?
MR KGATITSOE: The main reason was not to deter white people from coming at the hostel, but this was done in order to curb the violence and this we saw as being orchestrated by some of those who came to the hostel.
MS LOCKHAT: Would you say that Mr Binder worked hand-in-hand with the police?
MR KGATITSOE: Yes, according to what he told me and through his actions.
MS LOCKHAT: What did he tell you in relation to that?
MR KGATITSOE: At the time when we interacted with him, he related me about the 12th of May event in Swaneville, that how the residents of the hostel were taken to Swaneville and what was his disguise and he had an identity card of the police. Despite that, he was employed at a certain company.
MS LOCKHAT: You said that you didn't know of any of the articles that were taken and you saw it in court an so forth, but I see in the court judgment you had the gold watch on your own person and the wallet was found on you as well as R102-00. Can you comment on that? That's at page 63 of the bundle at paragraph 20.
MR KGATITSOE: I do not know whether I should take what was stated at court and agree with it. Firstly I had more than R2 000-00 in my possession when I was arrested. The evidence made by the police is fabricated and it was specifically against me. The court that made this judgment, made this judgment based on what did not exist. What was stated at court and the court's judgment is not the truth.
MS LOCKHAT: Didn't you also point out to Mr van Vuuren where the radio player was, or was that also fabrication?
MR KGATITSOE: I never pointed out where the radio was. During the interrogation, I pointed where Mr Binder was ultimately taken. Maybe just to add, Mr van Vuuren is a stranger to the truth.
MS LOCKHAT: Thank you Chairperson, I have no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS LOCKHAT
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Ms Lockhat. Has the Panel got any questions? Have you got any re-examination, Mr Mohlaba?
MR MOHLABA: None, Chairperson, thank you.
CHAIRPERSON: Have you got any other evidence that you intend leading Mr Mohlaba?
MR MOHLABA: No, Chairperson, that will conclude the evidence.
CHAIRPERSON: Is that the case for the applicant?
MR MOHLABA: That's correct.
WITNESS EXCUSED
ADV DE JAGER: Was there any investigation by our investigators about this matter?
MS LOCKHAT: Well the investigations there have been and that was the consultation with the accused number 2 which is Seleburu. Our Investigative Unit went there and they took that statement and then just in relation to getting confirmation from the ANC and getting the court judgement, that was the only ...(intervention)
ADV DE JAGER: They didn't inquire at the police station for instance at Krugersdorp, whether they knew Binder, or what happened to his family?
MS LOCKHAT: I believe they did look for Mr Binder's wife, but we couldn't trace her and they also put an advert in the newspaper, which is contained in the notice bundle and we've had no response regarding the family of Mr Binder.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Is there anything else you want to put before us?
MS LOCKHAT: No, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Mohlaba, have you got any submissions?
MR MOHLABA: I have.
MR MOHLABA IN ARGUMENT: Briefly, Chairperson, I want to submit that the applicant is a candidate for amnesty. He needs to be granted amnesty on the basis that his application clearly sets out that these offences were committed with a political objective. There is however, Chairperson, surprisingly so, the submission by Seleburu and I just want to highlight that the declaration by Mogoro Seleburu is highly unlikely, we don't know what went into his mind but it does not even tie up with the evidence in court, like on page 81 of the bundle, there is an affidavit handed out to court about the pointing out and the applicant here pointed out the place next to a hardware, next to a police station in Kagiso, where he picked up the deceased, but Seleburu on the other hand, states in his declaration that they met Marvin Binder in town in Ventersdorp, so Chairperson, I want to submit that there has been full disclosure and the applicant should be granted amnesty. That's all, Chairperson, thank you.
ADV DE JAGER: But what's strange here, according to the applicant, Seleburu wasn't involved in the killing at all.
MR MOHLABA: Certainly that is what the applicant is saying and if I may even add, Chairperson, the role played by the key state witness who was a co-perpetrator of the applicant here, it has been highlighted and explained fully by the applicant and he does not want to attribute more blame to him because he's not here today. It would have been easier for the applicant here today to come and say that he took that watch, the wallet, I even reprimanded him about certain things, but he does not go as far as that.
ADV DE JAGER: No, the trouble I've got is, Seleburu states
"I was by then with Dennis Kgatitsoe when we bludgeoned him to death."
So why would he place himself in that position if in fact he wasn't there with the killing at all?
MR MOHLABA: Chairperson that is ...(intervention)
ADV DE JAGER: He's not applying for amnesty, so that's not, couldn't be a reason that he wanted to ...(intervention)
MR MOHLABA: We do not know whether there is, we tried, I consulted with the applicant here. We tried to try and establish what could be the motive for putting himself on the scene of murder if he did not play that role at all and we just thought that maybe he has brought an amnesty application, we do not know, but he is still in custody and it would have been better if he was brought here to be questioned on his state of mind when he gave this declaration.
ADV DE JAGER: You see, I can't see why should he implicate himself to such an extent, saying that he was present when the man was killed, if he wasn't there at all.
MR MOHLABA: Chairperson, it could be that he realised that whatever he says, it does not put him in a better position. He has already been convicted. He is serving a prison term for that and whether he comes and gives evidence which will be favourable to the applicant, he may be ...(indistinct) that somebody qualifies for amnesty or he qualifies to launch an amnesty application and he does not fall within that category and he - it's just mere speculation, I cannot say, but the truth of the matter is that he played no role there, he was not party to this murder.
ADV DE JAGER: You see he also says that
"We killed him in line with a political upheaval or unrest at that time and overwhelming anger that was with us."
But on the other hand he says that:
"We did not know that Marvin was from Krugersdorp, we only learned it on the day of our first court appearance."
And then he also says:
"After murdering him we took him along with us in his car and dumped him between Ventersdorp and Begosa."
That was a fact, he was dumped there, wasn't he?
MR MOHLABA: Chairperson, there is evidence here by the, I mean in the trial court, by the co-perpetrator of the applicant here and that information may have been found there and another thing which I just want to highlight to the Committee is that the wife of Marvin Binder explained that she received a telephone call where they wanted to talk to the deceased and subsequently he told the wife that he's going out to meet somebody who was to sell him a camera and the applicant in his application ...(intervention)
ADV DE JAGER: No, she said she had gone to meet somebody who previously sent, wanted to sell her, but it was about diamonds this time.
MR MOHLABA: No, the diamond thing, unless that has escaped me, the diamond issue is only raised on Seleburu's declaration. The wife of Marvin Binder is talking about meeting somebody who I had talked to you about with regard to the camera issue and the applicant in his application, he indicates in his supporting documents that in trying to infiltrate the hostel, he posed as somebody who is selling items such as cameras and so this issue of him going, the deceased going to see some diamonds and not being involved in any political activity as indicated by, as not being part of the AWB which disrupted the rally, ms something which remains a mystery to us, Chairperson.
ADV DE JAGER: Sorry, I may be wrong, but didn't the wife say something about diamonds?
MS LOCKHAT: It's on page 52 of the bundle. It says, just, if I can just, paragraph 20 there
"Die onderhandeling sou wees, om rede die swart man gese het hy het vir hom diamante wat hulle ander kant Ventersdorp sou gaan vind"
and then she goes on that she had given her husband the money and so forth.
MR MOHLABA: Yes, Chairperson, that I had not noticed, but it does not change the complexion of the matter. The fact of the matter is that the deceased and the applicant here had interaction before. They had interacted. It's not that they just met in Ventersdorp at the street on a particular day and they decided to kill him because there was some rally which was disrupted, so the wife confirms that the deceased told him that this is the person who previously did something. "I'm going to meet somebody". So that suggests that there had been some sort of interaction, it's not something which happened abruptly.
ADV DE JAGER: But, did the applicant phone him?
MR MOHLABA: Yes, Chairperson, the applicant phoned him and used his code name, Snoopy and he said it's Snoopy calling, and he found a lady and then the lady called the deceased to the phone. They discussed and met at the police station.
ADV DE JAGER: And then the deceased said it's somebody phoning him about diamonds?
MR MOHLABA: That's what the wife is saying, yes.
ADV DE JAGER: He should meet them at Ventersdorp?
MR MOHLABA: I'm not certain about meeting at Ventersdorp, but that could be the case.
MS LOCKHAT: That is correct, it is Ventersdorp.
MR MOHLABA: Yes.
ADV DE JAGER: You see, the other thing is, Seleburu also says
"Before dumping him, we took his wrist watch, the wallet and the car radio."
So if Seleburu wasn't there, how would he have known about all this?
MR MOHLABA: Chairperson, according to the applicant Seleburu was not there and it will not have been difficult, it will not make our application worse or disqualify him to get an amnesty if he had been there with Seleburu.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, have you got any other submissions Mr Mohlaba?
MR MOHLABA: Chairperson, just to, lastly to mention that it was the applicant who has led them to Seleburu and this declaration of Seleburu was obtained after he has already given the sequence of events as they were unfolding on the date of the killing itself, so it's not something which was, his application and the supporting documents were not done to try and circumvent what Seleburu has stated on paper. Thank you Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you Mr Mohlaba. Any submissions Ms Lockhat?
MS LOCKHAT IN ARGUMENT: Thank you, Chairperson. While it is clear that the applicant does belong to a political party, we have confirmation in relation to that, according to the applicant's evidence, is that he had a relationship with Marvin Binder and that he informs the Commissioner, in a lengthy supplementary affidavit and stating that he provides the Commission with a long story of his involvement with this Marvin Binder, it is true that his issue regarding the telephone call is the same version as the wife's version, that he did receive that telephone call on that particular night. It seems that the deceased was somehow involved in some illegal activities, it is clear in relation to his wife even revealing the fact that he was going to get diamonds and so forth.
On the other hand you have Seleburu's statement, where he places himself at the scene of the incident. Where he says:
"We assaulted, we vented our anger by assaulting him to death"
and he places himself right there. I don't know what - he had nothing to gain by doing that. He is also serving his prison sentence so it doesn't make sense for him to do that.
The applicant, on the other hand, denies all the allegations presented by Mr Seleburu for, well he gives a completely different version. According to Mr Seleburu there was this meeting they had and they went out basically just looking for a white person in the town to target and to kill and they were incited by this rally, but according to the applicant it's just a far-fetched story, so it's difficult to believe as to whose theory is the correct one. And then Seleburu, in the court judgment and as well as my questions I posed to the applicant in relation to the money and the gold watch, it seems that he's very evasive about that and it seemed very strange that he says it was only the two of them, himself and George at the incident, but he can't remember George ever taking off the watch or removing the car radio, the wallet etc. That seems a bit unbelievable that he did not witness any of this and seeing that he also informed us that his attention was on the deceased all the time. And then on the other hand, the police finds all these, the gold watch on him, which he, well up until now he denies and according to him everybody is not telling the truth and he's the only person that we should believe and he also take the policeman to Seleburu to tell them that he's got the radio player, he's the person where you can find it, so with all that kind of information and then he again says that someone strange, that doesn't even know Mr van Vuuren, is also concocting the story against him.
So in relation to that, it's just a pity that we don't have the deceased's wife here to give us more information regarding her husband's activities and whether he did go into the township and so forth and whether he had liaised with people and so forth.
So that is just my submission, that the applicant's version, we have his version and then we have the court records and ...(intervention).
ADV DE JAGER: What happened to George?
MS LOCKHAT: George was never charged with this offence. I'll just check whether we notified him. Can you just give me one second.
ADV DE JAGER: And in the statement, George doesn't figure either.
MS LOCKHAT: That's correct. According to the applicant, he also said that George really didn't get involved in this whole incident because he was on the side of the police in a sense and I don't know if maybe I'm, but that's the sense I got reading through the papers, that George was never charged because he knew or he was in cahoots with the police officers and investigating officers of this offence and therefore he was never charged, so in relation to George we also don't know.
CHAIRPERSON: What is the position with Seleburu?
MS LOCKHAT: Well Seleburu is, he's in prison at the moment serving sentence for this. We had notified him and he's at Rooigrond Prison, that's where he's at and I just checked with any of the police officers whether he's here, but he's not been requisitioned to come.
ADV DE JAGER: But George was actually involved, according to him, George was the person helping him to murder the man and not Seleburu.
MS LOCKHAT: That is correct. Maybe the applicant can help us here, whether he knows where George is or maybe if he can just, if he has any information regarding George.
MR MOHLABA: The last person, the applicant, saw George it was when he was a state witness in court and I believe that the court record or the police docket would contain his addresses.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mohlaba, did George deny being involved at all at the trial?
MR MOHLABA: George was not charged, he just turned up. They were arrested together. The applicant has seen him shortly after the arrest, but they were held in different cells and at the time of the trial, is when George appeared as a state witness.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes. I realise that, but his version at the trial, that he denied involvement, just this little bit that I looked at here, he seemed to have pushed the blame onto the applicant. He says he got some things at the applicant's house and he saw the bloodied clothes on his bed and all sorts of things, so it looks as if, from that little bit, it looks as if he says he knew nothing, he wasn't involved in the murder.
MR MOHLABA: That's correct, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Have you got any other submissions? Are you done?
MR MOHLABA: Certainly, I am done, Chairperson.
NO REPLY BY MR MOHLABA
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you. Have you got any further submissions Ms Lockhat?
MS LOCKHAT: No thank you, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes. We will have to consider this matter and perhaps we should indicate at this stage that we're simply reserving the judgment at this point and we'll take an opportunity to consider whether or not there is any useful purpose to be served by considering whether any of the other people who ostensibly seem to be involved in this matter ought to be presenting oral evidence or not, but for the moment we'll reserve the decision in the matter.
MS LOCKHAT: Thank you Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes. I think that concludes the roll for today and the next matter that we have, we were told has been arranged for Thursday morning.
MS LOCKHAT: That is correct, Chairperson. I have just been asking everybody, ...(indistinct) if she can give me some feedback as to whether we could start tomorrow with some other matters that, where there are no victims, so I just want to, just give me one minute just to consult.
CHAIRPERSON: Certainly.
MS LOCKHAT: Chairperson, just to get back to - I was attempting to have the killing of Alfred Willow and the killing of Gideon Way, two different incidents, to have that tomorrow. We've consulted, we've spoken to the advocate involved and he said that he hasn't consulted with his clients yet. The one is in Vereeniging and the other one is in Pretoria. It's possible for us to requisition them for tomorrow, he said, but he would need to consult with them and he could be available after consultation with them at 12 o'clock, so I shall leave it in the Chairperson's hands to decide whether we should adjourn.
CHAIRPERSON: What difference is that going to make in terms of the overall situation here? We've made arrangements for Thursday and Friday, to hear matters on Thursday and Friday. Is that going to affect that arrangement at all? Are we still going to have to sit here in any case on Thursday and Friday?
MS LOCKHAT: That is correct, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, well.
ADV DE JAGER: If we would start say tomorrow afternoon 2 o'clock, we would be possibly in a position to finish on Thursday afternoon or Thursday evening?
CHAIRPERSON: Or is the arrangement ...(intervention)
ADV DE JAGER: I mean, will it save a day or not?
MS LOCKHAT: It's a bit difficult to say because that Haggie Rand incident, that's the fifth one, there's quite a couple of victims there, that could take us a half a day or even longer, I concede, but that's also just one applicant, so it's possible that we could finish Friday morning maybe.
ADV BOSMAN: Is there any risk that if we stick to the schedule as it is, that we may not finish on Friday?
MS LOCKHAT: It could be possible. It's just the one incident, the Dlamini incident where there's a lot of killings, but it was random killings, but there are no victims as well, so either the matters could take - the Chidi matter, there's no judgment, there's no victims. You'll see the application is just six pages long for instance, so ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: Which one is that? Is that the one that the advocate might be available some time tomorrow? Which one is that?
MS LOCKHAT: That's Advocate Leopeng in the Chidi matter and Mpofosi, two applicants. The Chidi matter is very quick, we could do that probably in an hour and the Willow matter could probably also be about a half a day, not even three hours.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I just, what I want to know is I mean, if we go through all these arrangements now and we're able to bring some of these matters forward to tomorrow, are we going to be able to do something substantial or is it something that we will come in and sit for half an hour and have to adjourn.
MS LOCKHAT: Unless we just leave it as it is and commence on Thursday again.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, because I mean I would be reluctant to reconvene all of this for one matter that will last us an hour, whatever, half an hour.
MS LOCKHAT: That does make sense Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Alright we'll have to look into the further conduct of this matter that's before us now, but for the moment we reserve the decision and we will be in touch with the parties. We'll then adjourn and we will reconvene on Thursday morning at let's call it 9 o'clock. We're adjourned.
MS LOCKHAT: Thank you, Chairperson.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
