CHAIRPERSON: Mr Leopeng, you've got some other business? Which is the next matter?
MR LEOPENG: Chairperson, the next matter in terms of the roll is Chidi.
CHAIRPERSON: Chidi?
MR LEOPENG: Yes. However I've already had the difficulty in - well I've discussed this with my learned colleague and I've decided to call the applicant and to put it on record his difficulty and whether on questions from the Panel to proceed with the hearing despite the unavailability of the record, of the criminal record.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, so are you in a position to proceed? You've consulted with Mr Chidi?
MR LEOPENG: Yes I've thoroughly consulted with the applicant except for the difficulties as I've explained to the Panel in chambers and I was suggesting that the applicant be called on to take the stand and be asked by the Panel whether he wants to proceed despite the unavailable court record because that will come from the applicant himself. He will have to disclose to the Panel. He actually denies having taken part in the commission of the offence as referred to in the charge sheets or the trial at the court and further that he's going to testify to the effect that the information that he has been provided in the application for amnesty has been done by one of the ANC officials in prison so he doesn't completely align himself with what has been stated in the application forms for the amnesty.
CHAIRPERSON: So what is he applying for in respect of what incident?
MR LEOPENG: That is my difficulty that I had with him that's why I wanted him to come and take a stand because I have difficulty explaining to him that if he wants a postponement so that he can have it put on record and because he - during consultation he told me that there was a retrial after he was sentenced to life term and to death, there was a retrial on instructions from the court of appeal, then the 18th there was a retrial and it was found that the key state witness testified ...(indistinct) that he has been bought by the State, he has been paid by the State to implicate him. In actual fact the commissions that he has been sentenced to death he denies having committed it.
CHAIRPERSON: So, yes well let him come and explain, I don't know what is the difficulty.
ADV DE JAGER: Mr Leopeng, the difficulty I have got, if he's - I don't know whether it's been explained to him.
MR LEOPENG: ...(indistinct)
ADV DE JAGER: Ja, perhaps if he could listen before he starts giving evidence. I don't know whether it's been explained to him, if he didn't commit any offence and if he wouldn't admit that he associated himself with the commission of an offence, he can't get amnesty because we can only give amnesty to guilty persons, we can't give amnesty to people who have been wrongly convicted and who are in fact not guilty, they've got to go back to the courts and I know the concept of common purpose, it's difficult for a layman to understand, but before - I think before he should start giving evidence, perhaps you could be assisted, or the two of you could explain to him what's the concept of common purpose if he was convicted on the concept of common purpose, so that he may at least understand because if he's not guilty of any offence but he's been wrongly convicted, then we can't help him at all.
MR LEOPENG: Thank you, I for a long time explained the same problem to him, that's why I wanted him to come and testify because apparently there's this misunderstanding between me and himself to the effect that you can't apply for amnesty for a thing that you never committed. Either you must say I committed this and I'm sorry. I explained that to him and I've advised also him to the effect that the only option that he has is to appeal or to launch an application for ...(indistinct) an appeal or to open the matter for a retrial. So I wanted the Panel, the Committee, to explain again so that he must not think that I'm not taking proper instructions from him. Thank you.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Mr Chidi, did you hear me over the headphone? Can you hear?
MR CHIDI: ...(inaudible)
CHAIRPERSON: Now Mr Leopeng has explained a number of things to us which we have listened to but what I'm not sure about is firstly, are you applying for amnesty for anything?
MR CHIDI: Yes I am.
CHAIRPERSON: You are applying for amnesty?
MR CHIDI: I filled application forms for indemnity and last year I was approached by TRC staff in prison to say that my case will rather be dealt with by the TRC and I agreed with them, but I was convicted and sentenced to death for something I did not do.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, now what - you applied for indemnity you say now. For what? What for, for what incident or for what act?
MR CHIDI: I filled in the form because other people who had committed political crimes did the same.
CHAIRPERSON: What did you say in your form, what do you want indemnity for?
MR CHIDI: The murder and arson case.
CHAIRPERSON: So you applied for indemnity for the murder and arson?
MR CHIDI: Yes I did.
CHAIRPERSON: So may I perhaps first explain to you what happened with the indemnity applications. When the Truth Commission was formed, then the indemnity office stopped working and it sent all of the applications that they still had for indemnity to the Truth Commission to deal with those things and that is how it came to the TRC and that is how the TRC staff eventually got in touch with you. That's just to explain the connection. Now for us to be able to know what we should be doing with this matter because these things are now before us, we must be clear whether you are in fact asking for amnesty for anything that you have done. Now that is what I am trying to find out, are you asking for amnesty for anything that you have done?
MR CHIDI: I lodged an application because whilst I was arrested for a certain crime in Benoni, police approached me and enquired if I knew somebody called Mabiza and when I said yes I did, they informed me that he says I was involved when the councillor was murdered and I denied that, but I was nevertheless charged for that incident and when we got to court, Mapedla informed the magistrate that he did not make the statement, it was just the police who wanted to implicate me. The case went up to the Supreme Court and he even mentioned that in that court, that I was not involved in that incident but the judge intimidated Mapedla to the effect that if he does not speak the truth, he is the one who is going to end up in prison. In so doing Mapedla then insisted that I was present and I was later sentenced to death. But thereafter, Mapedla contacted my advocate and informed him that he had falsely implicated me in court and that was when my advocate came to me and informed me that I was falsely implicated. I was granted a retrial and at that retrial Mapedla explained that he is one person who had been involved, but I was not and at that point he was sentenced to six months for perjury. My co-accused had admitted that he had committed a crime and he himself also explained that I was not present when this crime was committed. So when forms were filled in for indemnity I also filled one so that the truth could come out that I did not commit that murder, that I was not involved in that crime.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, so that is your position, you don't know anything about this crime that you were convicted of? Yes, now Mr Leopeng has indicated to us that he's explained to you what the legal position is and also that as my colleague has discussed with Mr Leopeng just now that this Committee can only consider cases where people had been involved in doing something so if you've been involved in some or other crime then of course it's a matter that we can deal with but if you haven't been involved in anything, you've done nothing, there's nothing that we can give amnesty for because you haven't done anything wrong. Now Leopeng says he has explained everything to you, is that correct?
MR CHIDI: Yes he did explain.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes and you understood it?
MR CHIDI: Yes I do. I do not know where to take my grievance then. Maybe you could advise me on how to proceed because I have spent 12 years and 14 days in prison for a crime I did not commit.
CHAIRPERSON: What is your present sentence? Is it 20 years?
MR CHIDI: 20 years.
CHAIRPERSON: And what portion of that sentence have you served?
MR CHIDI: 12 years, 14 days today.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, so you do understand that if you haven't done anything, if you haven't been involved in any way in committing a crime then there is no basms on which we can consider your case? In other words if you haven't been involved in planning the thing, having knowledge of it or helping the people who committed the crime, being present at the scene yourself or participating in the crime, if you haven't done anything of that, then there is no basis upon which this Committee can consider your case? Do you understand that?
MR CHIDI: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes now I think you and Mr Leopeng should perhaps have another discussion and you could perhaps just give him a clear indication as to what you want him to do because there's no sense in keeping this case in front of us because there is little that we can do with it, so Mr Leopeng would obviously want to take instructions from you whether, how we should deal with this thing, whether it should be withdrawn or whatever, but he can explain that to you, what the options are. So perhaps it's a good thing that you should be granted an opportunity to do that, to have that discussion before we finally deal with the matter, dispose of the matter. Will that be in order?
MR CHIDI: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Leopeng, you've still got the other matter on the roll, but would you like to just take the opportunity to speak to your client again and then for us to finalise this matter?
MR LEOPENG: Yes I will do so on instructions from the Panel.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, perhaps we should then just stand down, there's no sense in starting with your other matter now, we'll stand down and give you an opportunity to speak to your client, then we can reconvene and then finally deal with this matter and then we can go to the next one. We'll adjourn for a short while.
ADV DE JAGER: Ms Lockhat, page 4 of his confession or whatever it might have been before the magistrate, there's a page missing between the numbered 5's and 6.
MS LOCKHAT: I see that this is all we received, so I've got nothing else that could have been left out.
ADV DE JAGER: Because that page would deal with the incident itself?
MR LEOPENG: To add upon that if one tried to make sense out of, even despite the missing page, this was a confession or it was a statement made ...(intervention)
ADV DE JAGER: Ja, under duress, so we understand.
MR LEOPENG: Yes but one can ..(indistinct) also in this statement, he denied having taken part in the commission of this offence.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, but we'll stand down and you will indicate to us when you have had an opportunity to discuss things with your client, then we can reconvene.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
ON RESUMPTION
CHAIRPERSON: ...(inaudible) of this application?
MR LEOPENG: Yes I've explained Mr Chairperson, my attitude towards the whole matter, I've advised Mr Chidi that I will humbly ask for your postponement for a reasonable period of time so that the record can be found and if it's found that will be considered together with the Committee and necessary steps will be taken to assist him in his matter. He agrees to the postponement.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, so you're asking for the matter to be postponed?
MR LEOPENG: Indeed Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Have you got any objection Ms Lockhat?
MS LOCKHAT: No objections, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Well under the circumstances it appears to be in the interest of justice that an opportunity should be allowed for the court records to be obtained in this matter which is the amnesty application of Maphuti Joseph Chidi, reference number AM0708/96 and in the circumstances the matter will then be postponed sine die and a suitable date arranged as soon as the outstanding documentation has been obtained. So the matter will be postponed.
MR CHIDI: I'm indebted to the Committee.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you. Mr Chidi, you followed that? Have you heard? You understand?
MR CHIDI: Yes. Johannes Mema from the TRC has been visiting me in prison. I would request that you contact him because he is the one who informed me of what my co-accused said in court.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, the steps will be taken. In fact we are going to prevail upon both your lawyer and our staff to get the court records as urgently as possible because there is a possibility that at lease two members of this particular Panel would be back in Johannesburg in the next few weeks when it would be possibly in a position to deal with your matter. So we are going to prevail upon the parties to make sure that these things are obtained very quickly, so you can accept that.
MS LOCKHAT: Chairperson, just in the bundle relating to the notices, there's a report by our Investigative Unit where they attempted to get the co-accused in this matter and one of the co-accused was granted indemnity as well. So just a note, we have that attached.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, very well. Yes, so your matter will then be postponed in the meantime, Mr Chidi.
MR CHIDI: Thank you, I will be very grateful.
CHAIRPERSON: So we will excuse you.
WITNESS EXCUSED
