ON RESUMPTION
CHAIRPERSON: The application of Joseph Mdumiseni Bengu, Amnesty Reference AM3113/96. The Panel is constituted as already been indicated on the record. Advocate Leopeng, would you put yourself on record for the applicant?
MR LEOPENG: Chairperson, my name is Leopeng P M, I am appearing on behalf of the applicant herein.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Ms Lockhat?
MS LOCKHAT: My name is Lynn Lockhat and I appear on behalf of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. Chairperson, there are no victims here today.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Yes, Mr Leopeng?
MR LEOPENG: Chairperson, the applicant applies for amnesty in respect of all the offences committed and the convictions made as appearing on page 303 of the record. That is all the convictions on two counts of murder, for attempted murder and unlawful possession of arms and ammunition.
ADV DE JAGER: That's counts 5 and 6 of page 35 of the bundle, count 10 on page 36, counts 11, 12 and 13 on page 37 and counts 17 and 18 on page 39.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, that's in accordance with the judgment. Is there anything else that you want to put on record or do you want to proceed to present evidence?
MR LEOPENG: Chairperson, I want to proceed to lead the applicant here.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Mr Bengu will you please stand and switch on your microphone? Just help him to switch it on Mr Leopeng?
JOSEPH MDUMISENI BENGU: (sworn states)
EXAMINATION BY MR LEOPENG: Mr Bengu, you are the applicant herein and you are now serving a term of imprisonment at Leeukop Prison, is that correct?
MR BENGU: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: What term of imprisonment are you serving, how many years?
MR LEOPENG: 27 years.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes thank you. Mr Leopeng?
MR LEOPENG: Thank you, Chairperson.
Mr Bengu, briefly all the acts that you committed of which you are being convicted were committed during what has been the Haggie Rand shooting incident, is that correct?
MR BENGU: Yes that is correct.
MR LEOPENG: Very briefly, explain to this Committee what caused the commission of those offences, what necessitated the commission of those offences?
MR BENGU: Those were the objectives of the upper ...(indistinct) like there were in process at the time, that led to the commission of those offences.
MR LEOPENG: Will you please explain the objectives that you sought to achieve in committing the said offences?
MR BENGU: The one thing why we were doing that is to fight the government of the day or was to fight the government of the day.
MR LEOPENG: As you said before in your evidence-in-chief and as I led you on this point, the commission of the offences were specifically labelled as the Haggie Rand shooting incidents. Could you please explain how you were involved in the Haggie Rand shooting incidents?
MR BENGU: My involvement insofar as Haggie Rand is concerned is about the strike that erupted.
MR LEOPENG: What kind of a strike was it at the Haggie Rand?
MR BENGU: There was an overtime ban that took place in this particular place.
ADV DE JAGER: But you worked at that Haggie Rand?
MR BENGU: I wasn't working there myself, I was working for a different company.
ADV DE JAGER: Now how did you get involved? Why did you concern yourself with that strike while you were not a worker at that place?
MR BENGU: Well, I was one of the comrades and working with other comrades. This is how I got involved in this strike.
MR LEOPENG: If I can take the question which was raised by the Panel further, how were you involved as a comrade, why particularly you took part in the Haggie Rand strike as you were not working there? Can you please explain and how did it happen that you became involved?
MR BENGU: I was told by other comrades that there was this situation at Haggie Rand and we went to the meeting where we concluded and took decisions, major ones.
MR LEOPENG: How was your relationship with these comrades, where did you meet them and how was your relationship with them specifically in relation to your invitation to attend the Haggie Rand strike?
MR BENGU: The relationship was quite a good one and the way we worked with one another was fine. Another thing it was not only me who wasn't working for that particular company who had been attendance of this meeting, there were some as well.
ADV DE JAGER: Perhaps you could start telling us, why did you shoot at Mr Abel Mabsabu? That was on the 24th November 1989 and near the Haggie Rand Hostel. What was the reason for you going there and shooting at a person?
MR BENGU: Well it is because I had already heard from the meeting that we had prior to that, that those ones were informers.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes thank you. Continue to lead your client Mr Leopeng.
MR LEOPENG: What - let me rephrase my question, you said you were called with other people to attend a meeting where it was decided that there are some acts that you must do. Briefly explain what meeting did you attend and who specifically came with the idea that some people were informers and that they must be eliminated?
MR BENGU: This is how I will put it, there was a committee of ten of the members who were elected and who had met with and in the company of others as well, we were quite many, trying and soliciting options and ways surrounding this strike and we therefore decided finally that this is the way to go, that is to eliminate them.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, carry on?
MR LEOPENG: How were these plans to eliminate them made? Please explain the efforts that you made before eliminating these people and where did you eliminate all these people as you alleged?
MR BENGU: We planned and we also assigned people there and how to go and also carried a small investigation regarding their moves, these people, that is as to where they will be found at certain times and how, that is what we went through prior to the committing of this act.
MR LEOPENG: Now in relation to the two murders that you committed, how were the plans made and where were the murders committed? Briefly explain?
MR BENGU: The one was in Tembisa, the other in Natalspruit.
MR LEOPENG: How were the plans made to eliminate them?
MR BENGU: There were people who were sort of guiding us as to how to go around these acts who will only get the instructions and execute the plan.
MR LEOPENG: Did you personally take part in planning to eliminate these people and as it appears here as you are applying for amnesty on these murders, you personally shot the two persons named here in Natalspruit and Tembisa, is that correct?
MR BENGU: Yes that is correct.
MR LEOPENG: Briefly explain the plans that you made before shooting them and what was the capacity of these people and why you specifically targeted to eliminate them?
MR BENGU: When there was a strike they ...(indistinct), some people were dismissed and some were employed. Now those were the ones we were after because they were ...(indistinct) or informers.
MR LEOPENG: If I understand you correctly, you say you eliminated them because they were informers?
MR BENGU: Yes.
MR LEOPENG: Is there any other reason that pushed you to eliminate them other than that they were informers?
MR BENGU: No, there are no other reasons except for the ones I have advanced to this Commission.
ADV BOSMAN: What did they inform on and who did they inform?
MR BENGU: From what I'd heard they were informal comrades.
ADV BOSMAN: To who, to who did they pass on the information?
MR BENGU: They will furnish the information to the management. Taking all the talks emanating or standing from the side of the comrades to the management.
ADV BOSMAN: Thank you, you may continue.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, did the comrades belong to any union?
MR BENGU: The one that I know is some of the comrades belonged to was NUMSA.
CHAIRPERSON: And these people who were not dismissed or were being employed, were they members of NUMSA or not?
MR BENGU: I have no information thereof.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Mr Leopeng?
MR LEOPENG: Did you know all the people that you killed before the killing?
MR BENGU: No.
MR LEOPENG: How was the information that they were informers conveyed to you? Who conveyed the said information that the two people were informers?
MR BENGU: I gathered that from the meeting that we had had and where the decision was taken.
MR LEOPENG: Were the two people that you shot identified to you prior to the shooting incident?
MR BENGU: Well, I was in the company of other people who had escorted us, then they were the ones who identified them positively to us.
ADV DE JAGER: And could you assist me please? This meeting you've been referring now to, I gather this from the meeting, was it a general meeting or a meeting of the committee of ten or another sort of meeting?
MR BENGU: That was the meeting of the Committee of Ten, they were the ones who would take decisions.
MR LEOPENG: And this meeting of Committee of Ten, was it specifically scheduled to discussed the Haggie Rand strike, is that correct?
MR BENGU: Yes, that was the item on the agenda.
MR LEOPENG: After shooting the said deceased, did you benefit anything financially or otherwise?
MR BENGU: No I got nothing, not even one cent.
MR LEOPENG: Was there a mission of the Committee of Ten accomplished thereof?
MR BENGU: Well I will not say if the mission was accomplished or not because I think it went on still, I'm not sure simply because I was arrested subsequent to this. I will not know further developments.
MR LEOPENG: I have no further evidence, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: What about the attempted murders? What about the four attempted murders? When did that happen? I think you must lead some evidence on that.
MR LEOPENG: I'm indebted to the Committee.
Mr Bengu, in relation to all the other attempted murders committed, where were they committed and to what necessitated the commission thereof?
MR BENGU: Well, that was the furtherance of the mission we were up to.
MR LEOPENG: And in relation to the firearms that were used, who gave the firearms that were used in committing the said offences?
MR BENGU: I obtained the firearms from the very Committee of Ten.
ADV BOSMAN: Who trained you how to use firearms?
MR BENGU: Well I acquired no training.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes but would you know how to handle the firearms?
MR BENGU: Well I managed because evidently I have used it, who will be shown there who to do this and that, I mean the others with whom I was, they will show, demonstrate, just a crash course orientation as such as to how to handle the firearm.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes so your other comrades who were with you, they knew how to handle a firearm and show you how to do it?
MR BENGU: Well I really don't know whether they were fully conversant in the use of firearms but they surely did demonstrate something as to how to handle the firearm.
CHAIRPERSON: Now what did you do in respect of these four attempted murders, what role did you play?
MR BENGU: Well I shot, many times I just shot. Well, two murders I committed and four attempted murders if I'm not mistaken.
CHAIRPERSON: So were you shooting, were you responsible for shooting at these people on all those occasions?
MR BENGU: Well there is one where I was present but did not shoot.
ADV BOSMAN: Did you have a firearm?
MR BENGU: No, I did not own one or I did not have mine.
ADV BOSMAN: At this particular incident where you did not shoot, I just want to make quite clear, did you not have a firearm in your possession?
MR BENGU: Well I had one on that particular day.
ADV BOSMAN: Why didn't you shoot, why didn't you use it?
MR BENGU: Well it had a problem because sometimes it will jam, so that day it was not working at all, it was not functioning, the firearm that is.
ADV BOSMAN: But if it had been functioning would you have shot?
MR BENGU: Yes I would have.
ADV BOSMAN: Thank you.
CHAIRPERSON: Now so on these occasions there were other people who were also - who were shooting. In other words was there more than one firearm?
MR BENGU: Well on that day I was only aware of two firearms.
CHAIRPERSON: That's the day that your one didn't function?
MR BENGU: Yes, it was my one and the one belonging to the other person.
CHAIRPERSON: And on the other occasions? Were you the only one who had a firearm when you were shooting or were there others with firearms and who were shooting as well?
MR BENGU: Sometimes there will be two.
ADV DE JAGER: You were charged with five other co-accused?
MR BENGU: Yes that is true.
ADV DE JAGER: Were they all convicted on different charges?
MR BENGU: Oh yes, they were convicted based on all these incidents.
ADV DE JAGER: Are they still in jail?
MR BENGU: Well they have been dismissed.
ADV DE JAGER: Were they dismissed because they've been granted indemnity?
MR BENGU: Yes I think so.
ADV DE JAGER: You also applied for indemnity but you didn't receive indemnity?
MR BENGU: Yes, I applied for one.
ADV DE JAGER: And the reason why you didn't get indemnity is because there was an allegation that you'd been paid for committing these crimes?
MR BENGU: Well I don't know that because I never got any response.
ADV DE JAGER: But you've already stated that you didn't receive anything, not a cent even?
MR BENGU: I still reiterate that fact even now.
ADV DE JAGER: And you're aware that at your trial one of the witnesses said you received money?
MR BENGU: Well yes I heard that in the court of law and I also disagreed with that as I will still repudiate the fact even now.
ADV DE JAGER: Yes, that's as far as you're concerned that was false evidence and you didn't receive anything?
MR BENGU: Yes, that person who was just backed by the police and they wanted him to speak or talk in favour of them and was a blatant lie.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes Mr Leopeng?
MR LEOPENG: Finally Mr Bengu, what objective you sought to achieve in committing all these offences that you have been charged and convicted of? That is all the five attempted murders and the two murders you have confessed to have committed. What did you want to achieve as in relation to the Haggi Rent strike?
MR BENGU: Well the one objective I sought was to bring to an end the apartheid that was in practice especially in the companies or in the firms, that was one main objective I sought in so doing.
MR LEOPENG: Mr Bengu, there was an overtime ban strike in Haggie Rand, is that correct?
MR BENGU: Yes.
MR LEOPENG: And you further testify that there were some informers within the employees of Haggie Rand who used to take what has been discussed and decided in meetings, take it to the management, is that correct?
MR BENGU: Yes.
MR LEOPENG: Would I be correct to say that you were not happy as that was the ...(indistinct) of the group of ten that there were members who used to take information that has been decided by the comrades and take it to the management committee, is that correct?
MR BENGU: Yes, that was unpleasant to hear.
MR LEOPENG: Would I be correct that the objective that you sought to achieve was to discourage or rather to put it was to eliminate the informers who used to take information from the comrades to the management, is that correct?
MR BENGU: Yes that is so.
MR LEOPENG: That's the evidence of the applicant.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR LEOPENG
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Leopeng. Ms Lockhat, any questions?
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS LOCKHAT: Mr Bengu, you said you were a member of the ANC, is that correct?
MR BENGU: Yes that is correct.
MS LOCKHAT: You also said at page 5 of the bundle that at that meeting there was underground ANC activists with you. Can you comment on that for us?
MR BENGU: Could you please repeat this question?
MS LOCKHAT: In your statement that you submitted to the Committee your political motivation, you said at page 5 of the bundle, you said
"I was amongst ANC underground activists who were there to assist and guide the workers as is the usual case."
So how many of you - what underground ANC activists were with you?
MR BENGU: Well I don't know clearly about that, I don't know.
MS LOCKHAT: So why did you state that in your further submissions to the Commission?
MR BENGU: It could be that because I am not well educated. We normally request people to do the writing for us. That may be one of the mistakes that they made.
MS LOCKHAT: And how many meetings did you attend with the committee before these acts took place?
MR BENGU: There were several meetings. I cannot remember the exact number.
MS LOCKHAT: You also said that you received instructions who to eliminate. Who did you receive these instructions from?
MR BENGU: It was the members of the Committee of Ten, one of whom was Richard Ngubeni and Malam Khumalo.
MS LOCKHAT: How many of you attended these meetings, can you say besides the Committee of Ten? About how many people were there?
MR BENGU: I'm not in a position to estimate.
MS LOCKHAT: Mr Cele said in the criminal trial that Mr Khumalo, the person that gave you the instructions, actually told him that you were a hired assassin, that they procured your services?
MR BENGU: I cannot comment on that because I do not know what that was about.
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?
ADV BOSMAN: Thank you Chairperson.
At the meetings of the Committee of Ten, you say you cannot estimate how many people were there. Were there many others who were not part of the committee?
MR BENGU: There were many others who were not part of the committee.
ADV BOSMAN: Where were the meetings held?
MR BENGU: At number 51 Commissioner Street.
ADV BOSMAN: And was that held in the evenings or during the day?
MR BENGU: It would be in the afternoons around five or six.
ADV BOSMAN: Was that after you had knocked off from work?
MR BENGU: That is correct.
ADV BOSMAN: Thank you.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, any re-examination Mr Leopeng?
MR LEOPENG: Yes Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes?
MR LEOPENG: I beg your pardon, I think it will be covered by argument. That's in relation to the statement made by the applicant, the fact that Mr Ngubani also took part in taking decisions in a Committee of Ten, who was a co-accused. I just wanted to ask the applicant as to whether Mr Ngubani that he referred to was also his co-accused in the criminal trial.
CHAIRPERSON: Is it common cause?
MR LEOPENG: It's common cause.
CHAIRPERSON: Is it common cause?
MR LEOPENG: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: Alright, otherwise you could have just asked him. It doesn't matter.
RE-EXAMINATION BY MR LEOPENG: Mr Bengu, Mr Ngubani and the lady that you referred to, were they also your co-accused in the criminal trial?
MR BENGU: That is correct.
MR LEOPENG: Were they also convicted of the relevant - I mean the several counts and commissions?
MR BENGU: Yes he was.
MR LEOPENG: Is it further correct that they are out and have been released from prison in terms of the Indemnity Act?
MR BENGU: That is correct.
MR LEOPENG: With the permission of the Committee, there are two affidavits been deposed to by Ngubani as to the effect that the applicant was not an assassin, Mr Kevin lied in the criminal trial so I just want also to present that.
Is it correct that Ngubani deposed to an affidavit to the effect that you were not a hired assassin and paid for the commission of these offences?
MR BENGU: Yes, they did this when they were released.
CHAIRPERSON: Anything else? Thank you.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR LEOPENG
CHAIRPERSON: Yes thank you Mr Leopeng. You are excused. We'll take the luncheon adjournment and reconvene at 2 o'clock.
WITNESS EXCUSED
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
ON RESUMPTION
CHAIRPERSON: Yes Mr Leopeng, I think the evidence is concluded in the Bengu matter, isn't it?
MR LEOPENG: Indeed Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, very well. Are you ready to address us?
MR LEOPENG: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: Alright you can go ahead.
MR LEOPENG IN ARGUMENT: Very briefly, Chairperson, it is common cause that the applicant herein was invited by the Committee of Ten about the crisis in Haggie Rand strike. The applicant testified that the said Committee of Ten decided to take a drastic step against the informers at Haggie Rand factory. I respectfully submit to this Committee that the motives sought to be achieved by the actions of the applicant as he indicated in his evidence-in-chief was to send a clear message to the informers to refrain from taking the discussions of the union members or the workers of Haggie Rand factory to the management. I will submit that in actual fact even though the applicant was not an employee at Haggi factory he sympathised with the strikers or attempted to with the dismissed employees at Haggie Rand factory.
I further submit that I find that the applicant made a full disclosure of all his actions that he did to this Committee. He confessed having committed two counts of murder and five attempted murders and also the position of the offences given by the group of ten.
I further submit that his denial of him being labelled as an assassin, head assassin by one ...(indistinct) during the trial was corroborated by his co-accused, Mr Ngubene and Mr Ngubani in their affidavits attached to the record on pages 8 and 9 - I beg your pardon ...(intervention)
MS LOCKHAT: 19 to 20.
MR LEOPENG: On page 19. On the basis of the aforesaid, I humbly submit that the motive of the applicant in commission of this offence was political and therefore he be granted amnesty. As it pleases the Committee.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you Mr Leopeng. Ms Lockhat, any submissions?
MS LOCKHAT IN ARGUMENT: Chairperson, I fully concur with my colleague. It is true that the applicant did attend numerous meetings with his co-accused and with the Committee and the fact that - the important fact is that he associated himself with his aims and objectives, it wasn't really material that he didn't work at the same place as they did and neither did he belong to the unions that they did and also the fact that his evidence that he was an assassin, he did not receive any remuneration for this act is corroborated by the very person that he received instructions from, which is Mr Richard Ngubani. So in terms of the applicant and on the evidence before us, that we have no other corroboration besides that.
ADV DE JAGER: May I pose a question that comes to my mind now? The people giving instructions to him, why - he didn't belong to the group of ten or the workers at that particular business. Why should he obey or be in a position where he should take orders from them?
MS LOCKHAT: I think that once he associated himself with the committee and once he decided to join them, there was people that were involved in organising the group in guiding them, which was Mr Ngubani as well - Ngubeni as well as ...(intervention)
ADV DE JAGER: Khumalo, yes.
MS LOCKHAT: Ngubani, so in that sense they also had to take leadership and instructions from them if they wanted to carry out this effectively. So in that instance it would make sense for there to be leaders and to instruct the relevant parties that's going to be involved or else he would just then act on his own accord and I don't see why the applicant would then join the group if he didn't associate himself with their aims and objectives because then he should have just then not carried out any acts then and left it because what was he going to achieve personally? Absolutely nothing and there was no remuneration given to him either that Mr Ngubeni also in his affidavit states that.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, have you got any other submissions?
MS LOCKHAT: No Chairperson, thank you.
CHAIRPERSON: Have you got anything to add Mr Leopeng?
MR LEOPENG: No other submissions to add.
CHAIRPERSON: No other submissions?
MR LEOPENG: No other submissions.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes thank you. Yes, that concludes the formal side of this application. We will consider the matter and we will endeavour to formulate a decision as quickly as circumstances permit whereupon we will inform the parties of that decision. So in the circumstances the decision in this matter would be reserved.
