CHAIRPERSON: Mr Menyatsoe, I remind you that you are still under your former oath.
ONTLAMETSE BERNSTEIN MENYATSOE: (s.u.o.)
ADV MPSHE: Mr Chairman, with your indulgence, and Members of the Committee, about the appearance of the journalist. This was sorted out yesterday between myself and my learned friend. Only one journalist will be coming, Mr Peter de Ionne from Johannesburg.
I called him yesterday and informed him to be here, and he said he will be here as early as possible. He made a plea that he be heard first because he's got a son visiting from the UK, who wants to go back faster. We have agreed with my friend that he can continue with cross-examination and as soon as he arrives we are going to ask for a short adjournment for him to consult with him quickly.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you. Mr van der Berg, at the close of yesterday's proceedings you were still questioning the witness. You may proceed.
MR VAN DER BERG: As it pleases you Chairperson. Last night we looked at the videos once again and according to the videos we saw that I'LL have to repeat certain of the questions in order to get clarity. So in the end that will shorten that.
CHAIRPERSON: Sure, you can continue.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR VAN DER BERG: Mr Menyatsoe, I want to refer to the shooting incident which took place. When you shot at the Mercedes Benz, how long did it take before the Mercedes Benz came to a standstill?
MR MENYATSOE: I don't remember how long it took but it was a very short time, but I cannot recall precisely.
MR VAN DER BERG: Mr Menyatsoe, I also understood your evidence yesterday, when the Mercedes Benz came to a standstill you ran towards the Mercedes Benz, is that correct?
MR MENYATSOE: That's correct.
CHAIRPERSON: At that stage, - sorry, Mr van der Berg, at that stage when you started to run to the Mercedes Benz, can you approximate or indicate how far away were you from the Mercedes Benz when you started to run towards it? If you can't describe the difference, if you could point it out perhaps.
MR MENYATSOE: It might be from where I am to the entrance where the gentlemen have just walked in.
CHAIRPERSON: To those green doors? Would counsel agree on what, 15 paces? Approximately 15 paces?
MR VAN DER BERG: Mr Menyatsoe, you must have been one of the first people who arrived at the scene, is that correct?
MR MENYATSOE: According to me yes, I was the first one.
MR VAN DER BERG: And when you got there, where were the passengers of the Mercedes Benz?
MR MENYATSOE: They were - they had already alighted the car and sitting on the ground, as I've explained yesterday.
MR VAN DER BERG: Very well. Did you tell them to go and lie down on the ground or were they lying there by themselves?
MR MENYATSOE: They were sitting and the other one was already lying on the ground, and I didn't instruct him to.
MR VAN DER BERG: But you also heard them saying: "Don't shoot", is that not true?
MR MENYATSOE: Yes, I said so yesterday.
MR VAN DER BERG: Do you agree with me, if somebody says: "Don't shoot", it means he's surrendering, is that correct?
MR MENYATSOE: In a war situation I wouldn't just agree, therefore I disagree with what you are saying. I wouldn't believe them. In a war situation, if somebody says: "Don't shoot", I wouldn't believe that they are surrendering because it is a war situation. Because he might shoot me immediately after having said that.
MR VAN DER BERG: The people were lying on the ground and they had their hands in the air, they're surrendering, they show you that they're not going to do anything, are you still going to shoot them?
MR MENYATSOE: They're lying on the ground and raising their hands did not stop me from shooting them because it was a war situation prevailing. Even they had lay down in their position and surrendering, but because of the fact that we were in a war situation, I didn't believe them.
MR VAN DER BERG: So you say even if they do surrender you'd still shoot them because it's a war situation?
MR MENYATSOE: That is correct. In a war situation, if you were determined that I shouldn't shoot you, I wouldn't be concerned with you, I'd go ahead and shoot you because it's a war situation. And moreover, you have already done away with so many lives and moreover, if you had already injured me I wouldn't, I would go ahead and shoot you.
MR VAN DER BERG: Sir, when you were at that scene I'm sure the media people also came closer to the car, is that not true?
MR MENYATSOE: I told you yesterday that I didn't see any people around them and I did not know as to where journalists were or any media people. I told you that I saw nobody.
MR VAN DER BERG: Sorry, let me ask you this, when you stood at the Mercedes Benz, before you shot the people, did you see any media people there?
MR MENYATSOE: I was looking at the Mercedes and I didn't see any media people that you are referring to. I was solely concentrating on the Mercedes and these three AWB members and that is all.
MR VAN DER BERG: Do you say categorically that you did not see any media people there?
MR MENYATSOE: I've said that yesterday and I'm still insisting.
MR VAN DER BERG: Sir, I'd like to tell you, the video we watched yesterday, it was obviously that there were a lot of media people there. We can also show the court other videos which would indicate that as well. There were other media people around.
MR MENYATSOE: I do not disagree with what you saw on the videos and the fact that there were people there, but myself, Menyatsoe, did not see them. I not disagree with what you saw in the video, I was solely focusing on the three men. I said this yesterday and I'm still maintaining that.
MR VAN DER BERG: Is it correct that you stood at the Mercedes Benz the whole time, up until the time that you shot at three AWB men. You were there the whole time, is that not correct?
MR MENYATSOE: I do not understand if you say: "all the time".
MR VAN DER BERG: When you got to the Mercedes Benz, from the time you got there were you there the whole time at the scene up until the point that you shot them?
CHAIRPERSON: What he's asking, Mr Menyatsoe, is when you got to the vehicle, did you at any stage leave again and come back or did you remain there the whole time until you shot them?
MR MENYATSOE: I explained that I started running towards the Mercedes and I spoke to those people, I shot them and then I left them. That is what I said yesterday.
MR VAN DER BERG: But you do not answer my question. The question is, a certain amount of time passed from the time when you got to the Mercedes Benz, and according to your own version you were there first, up until the time when you shot the people, so a certain amount of time passed. The question I'm asking you is, were you there the whole time at the Mercedes Benz or not?
MR MENYATSOE: I said I came to the Mercedes Benz and I spoke to those gentlemen and I shot then, then I left the scene immediately.
CHAIRPERSON: I think it can be taken from that Mr van der Berg that he didn't leave the scene. When he got there he stayed there the whole time until the shooting.
MR VAN DER BERG: As it pleases you.
Mr Menyatsoe, the video we saw yesterday, and you made us watch this, Mr Uys who was at the left back wheel of the Mercedes, he said that he was lying there from 15 to 20 minutes. Have you heard that?
MR MENYATSOE: I heard that but I said that I did not know for how long was he lying there. I do not disregard or disagree with what the Tebbutt Commission said regarding the time span.
MR VAN DER BERG: So it can be the fact that it could have been 15 to 20 minutes. From the time you got there it's about 15 to 20 minutes, is that correct?
MR MENYATSOE: I would seem to respond by saying I do not know.
MR VAN DER BERG: Sir, were there some of the other security forces at the scene of the crime whilst you were there? Were there other security forces, either from the Defence Force or from the police who came and stood there with you?
MR MENYATSOE: Sir, I told you that I saw nobody there and I say that I saw nobody, that includes the policemen, any living being. When I say I saw nobody, it means any living being including the police or anyone else.
MR VAN DER BERG: At this stage I'd just like to tell you that we're going to show you a video where it's quite evident that there were other people present. I'm not going to take this any further.
MR MENYATSOE: I do not disagree with what is on the video but when you show me that video you must know the fact that I still maintain that I did not see these people, but if you insist that I saw these people we can go ahead and view the video, but I'm still maintaining that I did not see those people. I said this yesterday and I'm still maintaining the fact.
MR VAN DER BERG: Sir, as a policeman you arrive at the scene, you see the people are surrendering, they say: "Don't shoot", they're lying down there, why did you not arrest them there or make sure that they are safe and make sure that you disarm them, why didn't you do that?
MR MENYATSOE: My response yesterday was my situation and the state I was in, and I was nervous, and the fact that these people surrendered after having done what they had done to the black people, I saw it totally impossible to arrest them because of the war situation that was prevailing. It was a war situation.
MR VAN DER BERG: Was it your plan from the start to shoot them?
MR MENYATSOE: Please repeat your question.
MR VAN DER BERG: Sir, did you plan to shoot them right from the start?
MR MENYATSOE: Yes, in a war situation anything is possible.
MR VAN DER BERG: What makes it impossible for you to disarm these people and to secure a situation? Why is that impossible?
MR MENYATSOE: Sir, as I was there, when I got there I did not have any intention of disarming them. Because of the situation that was prevailing I did not have intentions of disarming them.
MR VAN DER BERG: And you also did not want to arrest them?
MR MENYATSOE: In a war situation Sir, there is no time to arrest a person. Once the war has started and all hell has broken loose, there is no time to arrest you or arrest a person.
MR VAN DER BERG: So you're saying today that you did not have time to arrest these people?
MR MENYATSOE: The situation that was prevailing at that time and the state of mind I was in at that time did not allow me to arrest them. We were at war with them after having shot black people in front of my eyes. I witnessed that.
MR VAN DER BERG: But Sir, what makes the situation so strange? I do not understand why you say it made it impossible for you to arrest these people. All you have to do is arrest three people. You the policeman, you were trained, you took an oath as a policemen, it's your task to arrest people. That is your duty. Now they are lying there, so what makes it so difficult for you to arrest these people and to perform your task?
ADV MPSHE: Mr Chairman, I don't want to be seen to be doing my learned friend's job but really this line of questioning, with due respect, I don't know where we are getting to. This man has described it so many times, even yesterday, that it was a war situation. He never said it was impossible to arrest them. I don't know where we are getting to, with due respect.
CHAIRPERSON: I think I probably agree with you, Mr Mpshe, maybe this a question for argument Mr van der Berg.
MR VAN DER BERG: As it pleases you, Mr Chairperson, I will not take it further.
Mr Menyatsoe, why did you interview the AWB members?
MR MENYATSOE: Yesterday, even now, I have just said to you I arrived at those people and I questioned those people. One of them said he is from Naboomspruit. I asked them again what they were doing here and they told me that I should ask the State President. I interviewed these people before I shot them. I said that yesterday. Even this morning I said to you I interviewed them before I shot them.
CHAIRPERSON: But the question was, Mr Menyatsoe, why did you question them? If you were going there with the intent to shoot them, why did you question them? That is the question that is being put to you.
MR MENYATSOE: I wanted to find out where they come from and what are they doing as they were attacking the black people. Who are they, who are they to come and attack the black people, where do they come from, who instructed them to come and kill the black people. That was my intention in that interview. I wanted to know that. Where do they come from, who instructed them to come in that area and as to what they are coming to do.
MR VAN DER BERG: Sir, but that was not the question, it was two questions. You said where did they come from and the other one was who sent them. I did not ask who gave the instructions, that is new evidence. The first was where they come from and what they are doing here.
MR MENYATSOE: For me to not give you the correct answers is because you're asking me so many questions. Even now you are taking me around, that is why you find me adding in that information. You asked me as to whether I did interview those people, then I said yes, I did before I shot them.
MR VAN DER BERG: Did you at any stage see people of the media talking ...[intervention]
CHAIRPERSON: He said many, many times, Mr van der Berg, he didn't see any media people. I don't know why you insist on asking if he saw any media people talking to him. He's made it quite clear that he didn't see any media people and that he didn't see any, in fact he said he didn't even see any living being there but he's not disputing that they were there. So I mean the question of whether he saw them talking to media people I don't think is going to get anywhere.
MR VAN DER BERG: As it please you, Mr Chairperson.
Did you at any stage see of the security forces who were there, did you the security forces disarm some of the AWB members?
MR MENYATSOE: I explained yesterday that I did not see any person disarming these people. I explained to you yesterday.
MR VAN DER BERG: Sir, what according to you is a state of war, could you just explain it to the Committee? You constantly talk about the state of war, can you explain this?
MR MENYATSOE: The situation of war is the situation where people are shooting each other, when people lose their lives, when people are injured.
MR VAN DER BERG: Would you describe the stage or that period - that period that you mentioned now, would you describe that as a state of war?
MR MENYATSOE: I explained that we were in a situation of war.
MR VAN DER BERG: Sir, my question was, that specific period, would you describe that period as a state of war?
MR MENYATSOE: According to me I explained that it was a situation of war.
MR VAN DER BERG: Do you think, Mr Menyatsoe, at that stage when the three AWB members were lying outside of the vehicle, that the situation was dangerous and that it was risky?
MR MENYATSOE: I've explained to you yesterday that if you are in a situation of war, as to whether people were in what position or as they were lying down, if you are in a situation of war, if a person moves anything can happen. I said to you that one of these people moved, that is why I shot them.
CHAIRPERSON: On that, Mr Menyatsoe, if that person hadn't have moved, would you have shot them in any event?
MR MENYATSOE: It will be difficult for me because I will not know how I would respond thereafter. I don't understand how I could have acted. That is history, it wouldn't be possible for me to think what I could have done if that person did not move.
MR VAN DER BERG: Mr Menyatsoe, the way I understand your evidence which you gave yesterday, is that one of the AWB members moved his hand towards his hip, is that correct?
MR MENYATSOE: That is correct, I said so yesterday.
MR VAN DER BERG: Did I also understand you correctly yesterday in that that was the reason why you shot and killed them, because you thought he may take out a weapon?
MR MENYATSOE: The main reason is that we were in a situation or war and then again that person moved. I thought he was pulling his gun. Anything could have happened to me at that time.
MR VAN DER BERG: Mr Chairperson, if you could just give me a moment. As it pleases you, Mr Chairperson.
Mr Menyatsoe, I want you to page to page 19 of the bundle.
CHAIRPERSON: Do you have it, Mr Menyatsoe? It's the statement made by one, Andy Johan de Kocker and it's on the third page of that statement.
MR MENYATSOE: I don't have it, Sir.
CHAIRPERSON: It's part of the bundle of papers.
MR HENDRICKSE: Mr Chairman, it seems that my attorney doesn't have it before him. May Mr Mpshe just borrow his bundle?
ADV MPSHE: ...[inaudible] bundle, Mr Chairman.
CHAIRPERSON: You'll get it back straight away, Mr Mpshe.
Do you have that document now, Mr Menyatsoe?
MR MENYATSOE: Yes, Sir.
CHAIRPERSON: You may proceed Mr van der Berg.
MR VAN DER BERG: As it pleases you, Mr Chairperson.
Mr Menyatsoe, is we look at the first paragraph on page 19, I will read it to you. This is what de Kocker said under oath:
"My mamba vehicle stood on the opposite side of the road. I stood with my vehicle. I could however see the whole scene. At this stage the situation was under control. No shots were fired. There were a lot of media personnel at the scene".
Can you comment on this?
MR MENYATSOE: Mr de Kocker is saying what he saw, what he experienced. I don't dispute what he is saying but I say I did not see any person around there. I don't dispute what de Kocker says, that the situation was under control. According to him the situation was under control. According to me, Mr Menyatsoe, the situation was not under control. That is why I said it was a situation of war.
I don't dispute what de Kocker is saying, that is way he experienced the situation and that is how he observed and thought about that situation. I don't dispute what he is saying. Any person has his own perspective of analysing a particular situation.
MR VAN DER BERG: What according to you was under control?
CHAIRPERSON: No, he says according to him it was not under control.
MR MENYATSOE: ...[no English translation]
MR VAN DER BERG: I understood it in the same say but the question I'm asking is what was then under control? What does it mean if you say: "The situation was not under control"?
ADV SIGODI: With respect, Mr van der Berg, where is line of questioning going to take us, because what we are looking for, what is your main objection to this applicant? Are you attacking the political objective or are you attacking the full disclosure? Because we'd like to see some structured form of questioning here. We'd like to know where exactly, what point you're trying to make and if you have any point then put it to the applicant.
MR VAN DER BERG: Mr Chairperson, the applicant emphasises the fact that there was a situation of war and he pertinently said that there was shooting, and according to his version it stopped, the shooting that is. And where the AWB members were lying at that stage there was no shooting and that is why I'm asking this question, to find out if there was truly a situation of war. That is why we have to clear this up in order to find out if the situation was under control.
CHAIRPERSON: But haven't we gone over this about five or six times already? He said that's his perspective of it. We know that the people were lying on the ground etc. I'll allow this just this one time again, but please don't go back and ask him it again, Mr van der Berg.
The question was, why do you say that the situation was not under control at the time that you shot those three people?
MR MENYATSOE: For me to say the situation was not under control or it was a situation of war, I've explained that. The way I was, my emotions were very high, I was afraid. The first minute which I started to shoot these people, I said to myself this is the time that we should fight until I kill them.
MR VAN DER BERG: Mr Menyatsoe, let us go back to where the AWB men are lying on the ground. You did not see anybody else, in other words you just looked at them, is that correct, or what did you do?
CHAIRPERSON: He said that already, Mr van der Berg. We don't want to keep on repeating it.
MR VAN DER BERG: Mr Menyatsoe, can you specifically remember where the AWB men's hands were while they were lying on the ground?
MR MENYATSOE: I said to you yesterday that I do not remember as to the position of the three AWB members. I said so yesterday.
MR VAN DER BERG: But Mr Menyatsoe, you could remember that one of them moved his hand, is that not correct?
MR MENYATSOE: When you are in a situation of war, any movement of your opponent, you should observe each and every movement of your opponent because you are in a situation of war.
What I was trying to observe is they should move and that movement I observed. As to how they were lying on the ground, I didn't care about that. I was only trying to be alert as to where the danger would come from.
MR VAN DER BERG: Mr Menyatsoe, I know you said, and I will ask it again to you today, could you describe or explain the movement you saw?
CHAIRPERSON: Have you forgotten what it was, Mr van den Berg, or are you trying to get him to do something different now or what is the intention? Why must we keep on repeating questions?
MR VAN DER BERG: Chairperson, it's not that I forgot it but it's important that we go over this again because I'm going to offer other evidence now.
CHAIRPERSON: Alright, if you can just show it again.
Can you just describe how that man moved his hands, Mr Menyatsoe because Mr van der Berg wants to see it again.
MR MENYATSOE: Chairperson, Mr van der Berg is confusing me. I've explained to him. I even pointed with my hand how that person moved. If you don't have any questions, just tell the Chairperson that you don't have further questions.
CHAIRPERSON: He indicated by moving his left hand down to his waist and towards the back, the middle of the back.
MR VAN DER BERG: Thank you Chairperson.
Mr Menyatsoe, when he moved his hand to his hip, was that the moment you shot him?
MR MENYATSOE: I've explained, yes.
MR VAN DER BERG: Did you shoot the person who moved his hand first?
MR MENYATSOE: I explained yesterday that I don't remember as to with whom did I start and ended with whom.
MR VAN DER BERG: But you shot all three of them.
CHAIRPERSON: We know that, Mr van der Berg. Please, Mr van der Berg, we don't want to sit here for days and days. It's quite clear to everybody in this room that he shot them.
MR VAN DER BERG: Mr Menyatsoe, why did you shoot all three of them then?
MR MENYATSOE: I said to you that the situation was volatile. The situation was a situation of war. If you wanted me, I could have shot that person who moved only and then the other one would shoot me, that is why I shot them all.
MR VAN DER BERG: Chairperson, at this stage I would like to submit photographs with regard to what appeared in the newspapers and ask a few questions around it. I've made copies of that.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr van der Berg, I wonder if we shouldn't, if you're going to hand them it, do you have copies of them? If we could number them, so if we could number them A1, A2, A3 etc., consecutively and then when you refer to them we can refer to that number. It will make it easier.
MR VAN DER BERG: If you will just allow me one minute, Mr Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: What has been handed in now and which will be received as Exhibits A1, A2 and A3, are three photographs that appeared in the Beeld newspaper on Saturday the 12th of March 1994. Each of the photographs depicts the three deceased alongside the said Mercedes Benz motor vehicle. Yes, Mr van der Berg?
MR VAN DER BERG: Mr Menyatsoe, if you look at the first one which is numbered A1, you will see it's Mr Uys who is lying against the left wheel of the Mercedes Benz, do you see him?
MR MENYATSOE: Yes, I do.
MR VAN DER BERG: You will also see the heading there -this photo was taken just before he was shot.
MR MENYATSOE: I don't know Sir.
MR VAN DER BERG: We'll get to that now if you do not know. You'll see Mr Uys' hands, both his left and his right hand is in the air, is that correct?
MR MENYATSOE: Which one? Which one of the photos are you referring to?
MR VAN DER BERG: The one where you can see Mr Uys, that's A1. We are staying with photo A1.
MR MENYATSOE: May you proceed.
MR VAN DER BERG: Can you see the hands are in the air?
ADV MOTATA: Mr van der Berg, can we ...[inaudible]
INTERPRETER: The speaker's microphone.
MR VAN DER BERG: Chairperson, the point is Mr Uys is lying against the back wheel of the car, both his hands are in the air, it's quite evident that his hands are in the air.
CHAIRPERSON: One can see that in the photograph.
MR VAN DER BERG: And you can see on the photo, Mr Menyatsoe, that on the left side of Mr Uys' hip there is no firearm, can you also see that? It's quite evident but I just want to point it out to you.
ADV MOTATA: But Mr van der Berg, I don't know the witness said he could pinpoint the person who said he had a firearm. He never said he saw any firearm and I don't know if we were to proceed with that type of cross-examination whether we are going to elicit a favourable answer in your favour. And again if you say Mr Uys, he has never said he knew Mr Uys, per se.
MR VAN DER BERG: Chairperson, I apologise. The point I want to illustrate on these photos is the following: Mr Uys is lying there and on his left side there is no firearm. It's only for clarity that I'm pointing this out.
CHAIRPERSON: One cannot see any firearm in the photograph and one can see that he's lying with his back against the wheel of the vehicle, with his hands in front of him in an upward position.
MR VAN DER BERG: That's correct. You can also see on the same photo, the other person who was injured is also lying there, it's Mr Fourie and you can also see that he has no gun in his holster. Can you see that?
CHAIRPERSON: I think it's clearer in the original photograph. Maybe the witness can take a look at this. The question is that the wounded person lying next to Mr Uys, the person who is lying in a pool of blood, has got a holster on and that there's no firearm in that holster.
MR VAN DER BERG: Thank you Chairperson.
Mr Menyatsoe, if we look at A2, the next photograph, it's basically the same situation. You will see the journalists are all there busy conducting interviews with these people but you said you never saw what happened there.
You will also see that Mr Wolfaardt, that's the one who is lying on the left part of the photograph, his head is raised a bit and he's lying on his stomach. You'd see that his hands are in front of him, you'd see that his left hand is type on top of his right hand. It's quite evident, you can see it on the photograph. And then if we look at the next photograph, A3, ...[intervention]
CHAIRPERSON: Over the page, photograph A3, on the other side of the page.
MR VAN DER BERG: You will see the heading
"Everything's over. The bodies of the AWB members were lying next to a blue Mercedes Benz for about a half an hour before it was taken away".
Here you can see the action is over. You can see from the photographs, firstly the photograph right in the front. Mr Wolfaardt is still lying there with his left hand over his right hand and you'd see Mr Uys' right hand is still raised and his left hand fell as soon as the shot was fired. That is what is evidence front the photographs.
Now Mr Menyatsoe, if you dispute these photographs, we'll also show the video. It's quite evident on the video, the positions of the men's hands. Now I put it to you that you are saying in your version that one of the men moved their hands towards a firearm, is not true at all, it's a blatant lie and you are blatantly lying to this Amnesty Commission today.
MR MENYATSOE: I'm not lying. What I'm saying is the absolute truth. I do not know when these photos were taken. I am not aware as to when they were taken. I did not know whether - how can you see movements in a still photo, I do not understand. If you show me photos - I've been listening to you but I do not understand your line of questioning. And even the fact that you say that I'm lying, I do not understand what your intentions are.
MR VAN DER BERG: Mr Menyatsoe, ...[inaudible]
MR MENYATSOE: What I'm saying is, if Mr van der Berg is saying I'm lying, I do not understand why he says so because he's just shown me a still photo and how can you see movements in a still photo. And I do not know when there photos were taken.
Myself, Menyatsoe, did not see these journalists or whoever took these photos but if you maintain that I'm lying, I do not understand as to why you say I'm lying and what am I lying about.
You cannot see movement in a photograph. He can be taking a photograph whilst moving but once the photo is produced there is no more motion in it.
MR VAN DER BERG: I take notice of your answer. You're going to necessitate us to watch this video again, because in the video you can see exactly before the shooting incident that person's hands were in exactly the same position as they are in the photographs. So the video will confirm what the photos say, then you will probably be satisfied. We will watch the videos soon.
Nowhere in your affidavits did you mention the hand that moved towards a hip and that is what made you shoot them. Why did you not mention this in your statements?
MR MENYATSOE: Please be precise, I don not understand your question. You ask many things at a time.
CHAIRPERSON: The question is, Mr Menyatsoe, in your statements, that is which statements, the statement made that was handed in at the Tebbutt Commission for instance and on your application form. You do not mention in those statements the fact that one of the deceased moved his hand and that prompted you into shooting them. It's not mentioned in the statement. The question is, why didn't you say that in the statement?
MR MENYATSOE: Mr van der Berg, if you were there at that time and being in the situation that I was, and after so many years, you cannot recall everything to detail, minute by minute. You'll recall some things and some you will not recall. And some things you would recall if a person like you, Mr van der Berg, starts asking me questions.
You must take note of the fact that you cannot recall everything. You cannot tell me, Mr van der Berg, that you can recall everything that happened in your life thusfar, anything that's happened ages ago.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr van der Berg, ...
MR VAN DER BERG: As it please you Chairperson.
MR MENYATSOE: Thank you, Chairperson.
MR VAN DER BERG: Mr Menyatsoe, but this is what is so important, this is what is your case, the crux of the matter. You don't mention that in your affidavit. It's a very important thing you forgot and that is what I find quite strange.
MR MENYATSOE: You cannot recall everything in detail, regardless of how important it is but because this is of importance to you, you feel that I should not forget it. Everyone is prone to forget, including you.
You have been asking me questions and the Chairperson has been constantly reminding you that you've asked that question and you have accepting the fact that you have forgotten the fact that you have asked that question already. You are also human just like me, we forget.
MR VAN DER BERG: Mr Menyatsoe, I remember what the Chairperson told me, you don't have to remind me of it.
Mr Menyatsoe, you testified that you immediately shot the AWB person who moved his hand to his hip, and this implies that if you shot him at that stage surely his hand would have been next to his hip in that position and not in front of him as the photos indicate. Can you comment on that?
MR HENDRICKSE: Mr Chairman, I don't want to interrupt my learned friend's cross-examination, but clearly this is a matter for argument.
CHAIRPERSON: I think so, Mr van der Berg, and also it would be a question of opinion as to where the hand of the deceased might have ended up being after being shot. There's so many variables and I don't know if Mr Menyatsoe's opinion is going to sway the matter one way or the other. It's essentially a question of argument.
MR VAN DER BERG: As it please you, Chairperson. I think at this stage there are two aspects I'd like to mention. Firstly, I understand that the journalist is here and also we would also like to show a video of the events. Maybe this is then an appropriate time to adjourn so that we can get all these things fixed up and put in place.
CHAIRPERSON: What we'll do, Mr van der Berg, is we will take the early tea adjournment. We won't adjourn for tea, we'll take the tea adjournment now. Instead of us seeing the whole video with the politicians talking etc., if you could perhaps get it to a point where you want us to see, namely the actual shooting and that might save a bit of time as well. What we'll do now is we will take the tea adjournment at this stage, thank you.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
ON RESUMPTION
ONTLAMETSE BERNSTEIN MENYATSOE: (s.u.o.)
CHAIRPERSON: Mr van der Berg, what is the situation relating to the journalist who came this morning?
MR VAN DER BERG: Yes, Mr Chairman, we do have a Mr Peter de Ionne here, he is available. And I think the best is, with respect, Mr Chairman, to lead his evidence first so that he can then go back to Johannesburg where he comes from. Mr Peter de Ionne is here and available to testify.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Hendrickse, would you have any objection to that?
MR HENDRICKSE: I have no objection, Mr Chairman.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mpshe?
ADV MPSHE: No objection, thank you, Mr Chairman.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Terreblanche, do you have any objection?
MR TERREBLANCHE: I have no objection, Mr Chairman.
CHAIRPERSON: So are you going to call the witness now?
Mr Menyatsoe, what is happening now is there is a witness being called, it's going to be interposed in your evidence because apparently the witness is only here for a very limited time. So if you could stand down for a moment, then we'll continue with you thereafter. Thank you.
WITNESS STANDS DOWN
CHAIRPERSON: Are you calling the witness, Mr van der Berg?
MR VAN DER BERG: I'll call him, Mr Chairman, but he's not been sworn in yet.
CHAIRPERSON: What are your full names?
MR DE IONNE: My name is Peter Dominique de Ionne.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr de Ionne, do you have any objection in taking the oath?
PETER DOMINIQUE DE IONNE: (affirms)
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
Mr van der Berg?
EXAMINATION BY MR VAN DER BERG: Thank you, Mr Chairman.
Mr de Ionne, you were in Mmbatho during March 1994 and more specifically on the 11th of March 1994, is that correct?
MR DE IONNE: That's correct.
MR VAN DER BERG: Mr de Ionne, can you recall what happened on Friday, the 11th of March when the three AWB members were shot?
MR DE IONNE: I was present after arriving on the scene after their vehicle had been stopped by the Bop Security Forces.
CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, in what capacity were you there, Mr de Ionne?
MR DE IONNE: I was a reporter for the Sunday Times.
MR VAN DER BERG: And when did you arrive at the scene where the Mercedes Benz was stopped or came to a halt?
MR DE IONNE: We were approaching - we were driving towards Mafikeng on the road that goes past the police barracks, the shooting broke out and we arrived several minutes after the shooting had stopped.
MR VAN DER BERG: Mr de Ionne, can you just tell the Committee today what you observed during that time when you were at the Mercedes Benz and the incident that took place that day.
MR DE IONNE: When we arrived, we saw that several, three men were on the ground alongside the vehicle. They were wearing AWB uniforms. They appeared subdued and the police were milling about. There were several policemen and a number of journalists had just left the scene.
MR VAN DER BERG: And can you please proceed. Did you interview the three AWB members?
MR DE IONNE: One man lying alongside the vehicle appeared to be dead and I spoke with the other two who appeared not to be seriously injured. I think the man, Wolfaardt was lying on the ground, face down and the man Uys was up against the rear wheel of the vehicle. I spoke to them.
Uys was very distressed and I couldn't get coherent responses from him but Wolfaardt after some persuasion, answered several questions and refused to say anything else. The photographer with me took pictures. I spoke to an officer, I thought, from the BDF. I think he was a Colonel Marx(?) and asked what was going to happen to these men, and he said an ambulance had been called. We decided to wait on the scene until the ambulance arrived and take more photographs and watch what happened.
A number of other journalists also spoke to the men on the ground and we, after a short time, I think it was a Bop police officer who was wearing a hard riot helmet, I remember that very distinctly, approached the men with his rifle, pointed towards them and started threatening them. He became very abusive. I approached him and I put my arm on his shoulder or hand on his shoulder and told him to cool it, to calm down, you know, everything was under control.
Another security officer came along and sort of walked away with him. And after several more minutes a man wearing green fatigues, Bop Police uniform, approached from, if I was facing the car, from my left and my recollection is he shot Wolfaardt in the head, in the back of the head and ran to the other man and shot him as well.
MR VAN DER BERG: How long were the three AWB members lying on the ground, do you remember?
MR DE IONNE: Sorry, I didn't hear that.
MR VAN DER BERG: How long were the three AWB members lying on the ground?
MR DE IONNE: We were there for about 15 minutes, I'm guessing, before the shooting, before they were shot dead.
MR VAN DER BERG: Do you perhaps know whether the three AWB members were disarmed or not?
MR DE IONNE: Ja, there was - the man who appeared to be dead, there was no weapon in his holster and I assume because the police were guarding these men, that they'd been disarmed. I certainly wouldn't have approached any of them if I'd thought they were armed and dangerous or you know, active at that point because they'd been actively threatening everyone in their path all day. Not those particular individuals but those groups of men on the bakkies.
MR VAN DER BERG: Mr de Ionne, do you perhaps know who was the first of the AWB members who was shot?
MR DE IONNE: I think it was a man by the name of Fourie from Natal.
CHAIRPERSON: You say the first person to be shot by the policeman who shot the three of them?
MR VAN DER BERG: Indeed so, Mr Chairman.
MR DE IONNE: You mean the final incident where the two remaining men were killed? I just recall seeing Wolfaardt shot in the back of the head and the man moved to my right, the back of the vehicle, and fired into the other two bodies, Uys and the other body.
MR VAN DER BERG: Mr de Ionne, can you perhaps recall whether the applicant today, Mr Menyatsoe, interviewed any of the AWB members?
MR DE IONNE: I don't recall anyone except journalists speaking to those guys on the ground.
MR VAN DER BERG: As it pleases the Committee, Mr Chairman, I've no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VAN DER BERG
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr van der Berg.
Mr Hendricks, do you have any questions to ask the witness?
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR HENDRICKSE: Yes, I do, Mr Chairman. Thank you, Mr Chairman.
Tell me, Mr de Ionne, the person that you spoke to, that you put your hand on his shoulder and calmed him, he's not the same person that actually shot the three AWB members, is that correct?
MR DE IONNE: I don't think so, that is why I made the point about him wearing the heavy hard helmet. He was dressed differently from the other man.
MR HENDRICKSE: You say that that person was abusive towards the three AWB men?
MR DE IONNE: Ja, I wrote at the time, notes I'd taken at the time and it was to the effect that: "Why do you come here"? And he called them "dogs", and said: "Why do you shoot women, I could shoot you", that kind of thing.
MR HENDRICKSE: That person must have been very angry?
MR DE IONNE: Yes.
MR HENDRICKSE: You also made mention of groups of people, of men on bakkies, who are you referring to?
MR DE IONNE: These were the - they were groups of men who appeared in Mmbatho. We heard that they had arrived early Friday morning - we heard early on Friday morning that they had arrived. We went to the airfield where they were and we were threatened and told to leave at gunpoint.
We saw convoys of vehicles with men, some in the khaki uniforms and others in plain clothes with weapons and they repeatedly threatened journalists who approached them. We saw bodies in the street in Mafikeng and we were told they had been shot by people in these groups of bakkies.
MR HENDRICKSE: Mr Chairman, just a second. Thank you Mr Chairman, I have no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR HENDRICKSE
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Terreblanche, do you have any questions to ask the witness?
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR TERREBLANCHE: Yes, please, Mr Chairperson.
I would just like to know, you said that one of the three men seemed as if he was dead. How did he appear, didn't he move or the colour of his skin, why did you think that he was dead?
MR DE IONNE: He was lying parallel to the vehicle, with his head towards the back of it. He was very still. There was a growing pool of blood under his body and in the entire time we were there I saw no movement.
MR TERREBLANCHE: Would you say that any person would immediately realise that this person is dead or very close to dead?
MR DE IONNE: Yes.
MR TERREBLANCHE: No further questions, thank you very much.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR TERREBLANCHE
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mpshe, do you have any questions?
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY ADV MPSHE: Yes, Mr Chairman.
Peter, since your arrival on the scene up till the end, how would you describe the situation?
MR DE IONNE: It seemed extremely tense. The culmination of a lot of drama in Mafikeng and Mmbatho and Montshiwe that morning, but the police seemed to have it under control.
ADV MPSHE: There has been word to the effect that it was a war situation, would you ascribe to that?
MR DE IONNE: Yes.
ADV MPSHE: No further questions, Mr Chairman, thank you.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY ADV MPSHE
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr van der Berg, do you have any re-examination?
RE-EXAMINATION BY MR VAN DER BERG: Just a second, Mr Chairman, please.
Mr de Ionne, can you still recall, whilst the three AWB members were lying on the ground were there still shots fired?
MR DE IONNE: There were no shots fired until the man appeared and shot the two remaining people.
MR VAN DER BERG: No further questions, thank you Mr Chairman.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VAN DER BERG
CHAIRPERSON: Advocate Bosman, do you have any questions to ask the witness?
ADV BOSMAN: Mr de Ionne, did you notice any movement by the AWB members while they were ...[inaudible] or were they keeping still?
MR DE IONNE: The man Wolfaardt who was lying face down, was quite agitated when he was speaking but there was no untoward movement and Uys, as I said, appeared to be distressed and just leaning back up against the wheel of the vehicle.
CHAIRPERSON: Advocate Sigodi, do you have any questions?
ADV SIGODI: No, Chairperson, thank you.
CHAIRPERSON: Advocate Motata?
ADV MOTATA: Just one or two, Mr Chairman.
Sir, when you arrived at the scene, that is where the Mercedes was and the people lying outside, you came, you didn't see the Mercedes whilst it was still in motion, you don't know what happened prior to it coming to a stop, do you?
MR DE IONNE: No, we were told by people who were there but we didn't see what happened before it was stopped, no.
ADV MOTATA: Now you say you would ascribe to what Advocate Mpshe has described as a war situation, was it the entire Mmbatho area where you could ascribe that to?
MR DE IONNE: It was sporadic but from the time these people in bakkies arrived, the whole atmosphere of the place changed. What had previously been sort of casual, well not casual but rioting and unrest around the university and other places, but the whole place had become very dangerous once these chaps were driving around.
ADV MOTATA: Did you notice these people when they were driving around and if so, what were they doing?
MR DE IONNE: On several occasion we tried to approach these small convoys and at least follow them to see what they were doing, but any time we got within sight of them we'd have weapons pointed at us and we'd be threatened. And in fact a vehicle of colleagues that was travelling nearby at the intersection near the Mmbatho Sun actually had a, I think shotgun pointed in through the passenger window at the occupants. So we took great care.
ADV MOTATA: Thank you Chairperson, I've got no further questions.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr de Ionne, approximately how far was the person who shot the deceased standing from them when the shots were fired, can you give an indication?
MR DE IONNE: No more that a couple of metres.
CHAIRPERSON: And the person who fired the shots, did he say anything at all that you heard, at the time of firing or immediately before?
MR DE IONNE: I don't recall, the first I saw was, I think I saw Wolfaardt being shot, the bullet entering his head and that was it. That was the first indication there was.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr van der Berg, do you have any questions arising out of questions that have been put by members of the panel?
MR VAN DER BERG: No, Mr Chairman.
NO QUESTIONS BY MR VAN DER BERG
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Hendrickse?
MR HENDRICKSE: No questions, thank you Mr Chairman.
NO QUESTIONS BY MR HENDRICKSE
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Terreblanche?
FURTHER CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR TERREBLANCHE: Thank you, Mr Chairperson.
I would like to ask in all modesty, you described an atmosphere of war but at that specific place where journalists and ladies and security officials and policemen, a dead man and few that were lying there, was it also a war situation there? Was there a danger of war or was the war over?
MR DE IONNE: There was no active conflict at that time but I think the, and as I say it seemed to be under police control but there was a general atmosphere in the area of great tension.
MR TERREBLANCHE: I understand, but did you feel threatened by the three men that were lying there, could they continue this war, according to you? Could they injure someone?
MR DE IONNE: No, they were subdued. I didn't feel threatened until the next lot of shooting broke out.
MR TERREBLANCHE: Thank you.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR TERREBLANCHE
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Mpshe?
FURTHER CROSS-EXAMINATION BY ADV MPSHE: Yes, Mr Chairman.
Peter, would you - given the scenario, would you describe what was happening and ascribe it to a political disturbance or upheaval of any sort?
MR DE IONNE: Sorry, could you repeat that or rephrase it?
ADV MPSHE: Ja. Given the scenario, you said it was tense, it was a state of war, would you ascribe this to any political upheaval?
MR DE IONNE: Well the whole situation derived from the general unrest against the Bop Government and that had its own level of tension but it was enormously increased once these roving bands of armed men in bakkies arrived. As I said, there had been shootings in the area and we'd been told of, for instance we'd been told of journalists who had been stopped by them and had their equipment taken from them, and we ourselves were chased away several times at gunpoint when we encountered these people. That they were the people who were causing the tension in the area at that point.
ADV MPSHE: This general unrest you refer to, do you know what the cause was?
MR DE IONNE: We went there because of the strikes at the Bop Broadcasting which developed into the rioting at the university and the conflict with the police there, and my understanding of the cause of that was that it was a protest against the Mangope regime's refusal to allow people to register to vote for the coming elections.
ADV MPSHE: Thank you, Mr Chairman.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY ADV MPSHE
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much, Mr de Ionne, you may stand down. Thank you.
WITNESS EXCUSED
RECALL OF ONTLAMETSE BERNSTEIN MENYATSOE
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Menyatsoe, I remind you that you are still under your former oath. We can now proceed with your evidence.
Mr van der Berg?
ONTLAMETSE BERNSTEIN MENYATSOE: (s.u.o.)
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR VAN DER BERG: (continued) As it pleases you, Chairperson. As I've already indicated, I'd now like to request that we look at this video. It's a very short video, it's only concerned with the shooting incident which took place.
At this stage I also pertinently want to focus the Committee's attention to the last bit of the shooting incident. We'll specifically look at Mr Uys's left hand and how it dropped and we're going to argue this point. His hands were in the air.
CHAIRPERSON: I understand. We'll look at the hands of all the people.
SHOWING OF VIDEO
CHAIRPERSON: We have again seen a short extract from the same video that we saw yesterday and that extract relating to the actual shooting that took place.
MR VAN DER BERG: Thank you, Chairperson.
Mr Menyatsoe, did you see now on this video that Mr Uys's hand, did you see it dropped to the front? Did you see that?
MR MENYATSOE: As I've already explained, I did not see who had raised hands. I do not remember who is this person who actually made the movement. I've already explained to you before teatime.
MR VAN DER BERG: Chairperson, I'm not going to argue this, I'm not to take it any further.
Mr Menyatsoe, you also made a statement to the Tebbutt Commission. You were legally represented there. You also saw the lawyers for human rights and you spoke with them and you also applied for amnesty and you were also legally represented here. There are certain discrepancies I want to put to you and I'd like you to explain them to us. In your evidence in chief you've said that you fired a warning shot, is that correct?
MR MENYATSOE: That's correct.
MR VAN DER BERG: Nowhere in your statement Sir, did you make mention of a warning shot? Do you have any comment on that?
MR MENYATSOE: I'll constantly remind you that you cannot recall everything that happened at that time and moreover, given the situation that was prevailing in Bophuthatswana at that time. Thus you cannot recall details minute by minute and some of the details actually emanate when questions are being asked. I told you the example that you cannot recall as to what happened to you when you were 19 years of age. At that time, it's been years apart since this incident. I was far younger then.
MR VAN DER BERG: Mr Menyatsoe, I remember very well what I did when I was 19. You also did not mention that you were a member of the ANC and this is now also why you asked for the amendment ...[intervention]
CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, Mr van der Berg, I don't think he's ever made mention or alleged that he was a member, I think the word used was a "supporter".
MR VAN DER BERG: That is indeed so, my apologies.
Mr Menyatsoe, nowhere in your affidavit do you mention the fact that you were a supporter of the ANC, that you are or where at that stage. Do you want to explain that or would you give us the same explanation again?
MR MENYATSOE: I've already explained to you that one cannot recall everything to the detail. Even if you arrest somebody and you take a statement and when they get in court there's going to be some contradictions when they appear in court. They would not stick to the statement that was taken down by the policeman. He will be saying off the cuff whatever comes to his mind, but he will forget all the details. He won't say to the Magistrate all details as given to the policeman.
ADV MOTATA: Mr Menyatsoe, this question of you being a supporter of the ANC has nothing in relation to the shooting incident, would I be wrong hearing you correctly?
MR MENYATSOE: I do not understand.
ADV MOTATA: I say you are saying - what you've been asked is that you said you were a supporter of the ANC, is that correct?
MR MENYATSOE: Please repeat your question, Sir.
ADV MOTATA: 11th March 1994, you allege that you were a supporter of the ANC, did I hear you correctly?
MR MENYATSOE: That's correct, Sir.
ADV MOTATA: Now the details of the shooting incident, you said that happened some time back and you cannot at that stage recollect chronologically, is that not so?
MR MENYATSOE: That's correct, Sir.
ADV MOTATA: But you being a supporter of the ANC has got nothing to do for the moment with the shooting incident. When you went there you were a supporter, wouldn't that be correct?
MR MENYATSOE: Please rephrase your question, maybe I just don't understand it.
ADV MOTATA: Okay, let's put it this way. In your application form you omitted to mention that you were a supporter of the ANC.
MR MENYATSOE: I forgot to mention that when I wrote that statement. I actually forgot it.
ADV MOTATA: And when you did that you did not even tell your legal representative that incidentally I'm also a supporter of the ANC.
MR MENYATSOE: I did not recall at that time to tell him. It didn't come to my mind to tell him at that time.
ADV MOTATA: And you were asked again a question and you come back and give a detailed statement. If you have regard to the papers, that would be page 10 of the paginated papers, and you look at (b)
"Reasons why I contend that my act/acts or offence/offences are associated with political objectives".
You go through the entire page, you don't mention either that you were a supporter of ANC, you don't mention it anywhere there. Would that be correct?
MR MENYATSOE: That's correct, Sir.
ADV MOTATA: Thank you, Mr van der Berg.
MR VAN DER BERG: As it please you, Chairperson.
The next contradiction: you also did not mention that you conducted interviews with the AWB members, did you also forget to mention that?
CHAIRPERSON: I think it's probably more precise to say, that he questioned them. An interview is different to just putting a few questions. I think let's rather use the term "questioned", rather than interview.
MR VAN DER BERG: Mr Menyatsoe, in your affidavits you also did not mention that you asked questions of these AWB people, did you also forget to mention that in your affidavits?
MR MENYATSOE: I would not recall everything to the detail. Some things you would recall and some you would omit.
MR VAN DER BERG: I also mention it to you, and you've already answered this, with the regards to the hand that moved - and I'm going to mention this for the record, I'm not going to ask you any questions. Nowhere in your affidavits did you mention that you raised your arms in the air and shouted: "Viva ANC".
MR MENYATSOE: I told you time and again that you cannot recall everything to the detail.
MR VAN DER BERG: And in your affidavits you did not mention that you felt nervous, and time and again you also mentioned that to the Committee. You don't mention that either. Did you also forget this?
MR MENYATSOE: Mr van der Berg, I told you that you can't recall everything to the detail. I'm telling you now that you cannot recall everything. I've said this to you timeously. You cannot take things minute by minute, some of the things you would actually forget.
MR VAN DER BERG: Mr Menyatsoe, I'm going to dispute this at the end of the day, that you deliberately misled that Amnesty Committee with regards to this information or on the other hand that you might not be telling the truth today. I'm going to argue that.
Please turn to page 11 of the bundle and specifically paragraph 5 thereof. Do you have it in front of you?
MR MENYATSOE: Yes, I have it, I can see it.
MR VAN DER BERG: I'm going to read paragraph 5 on page 11
"At the time this happened the people forced me to take a stance and defend them. I had two choices, either to disobey the will of the people and be the enemy and they would see me as a puppet of the homeland government, or to act in protection of the people and achieve a political result. The assault, it is to stop the takeover by the AWB and enable them to struggle and change and participation in elections".
Mr Menyatsoe, you did not make this allegation in your evidence in chief, why did you not mention this to the Committee?
MR MENYATSOE: It is possible to forget what you have written years ago. It is a possibility to forget things.
MR VAN DER BERG: Chairperson, if you'll just grant me a minute please. I'm almost finished with my questions. I just want to make sure of something.
Mr Menyatsoe, if I understood your evidence of yesterday correctly, you say that it was necessary for you to shoot the AWB members because after you shot them the shooting and the murdering of people stopped, is that correct? That is how I understood your evidence.
MR MENYATSOE: That's correct. After having sent them to their last destination everything came to a standstill.
MR VAN DER BERG: Mr Menyatsoe, if you did not shoot them, what would the difference have been?
MR MENYATSOE: I've explained that the shooting might have continued if I did not shoot them. Anything would have happened further on.
MR VAN DER BERG: What shooting would have continued? Because we know the AWB was retreating, so what other shooting would have taken place? It can't come from the three men who were lying there.
MR MENYATSOE: I was not aware of the fact that the AWB was retreating. This is the first time I hear of it, from you. I did not know whether they retreated or they were retreating at that moment.
As to where they were going or what was their business, I just saw them attacking. I did not get any report saying: "AWB is retreating". Nobody came to tell me that. This is the first time I heard this, from you this morning.
Even on that video you've just shown us, Colonel de Kock has told Mr Terreblanche to leave Bophuthatswana and he said: "Me, Terreblanche, I'm already in Bophuthatswana, so that is nonsense, I am not going anywhere". So if you say that they were retreating I don't know of any other place you are talking about, there was only one Bophuthatswana at that time. Where was he retreating to, because he was still in Bophuthatswana and he was refusing to go.
MR VAN DER BERG: The group that was on the way out, the convoy, didn't you see this?
MR MENYATSOE: I saw that group because the one bullet even hit next to my shoe. I said that yesterday.
MR VAN DER BERG: Sir, if you look at the same bundle in front of you, page 30, I refer you to line 14 from the top. The sentence starts with
"We should bear in mind that during this period more than 40 people had died and many were injured".
When you shot the three AWB members, you were not aware of the 40 people who had been killed, is that correct?
MR MENYATSOE: I never said to you I was not aware of this. I never said this, and you've never really asked me that question regarding this. So don't say that I've said this before.
MR VAN DER BERG: Mr Menyatsoe, you state it here in your statement. It's a statement that you make in your statement. All that I'm telling you is that you did not see these people who were killed.
MR MENYATSOE: Please reconstruct your question. You say I said I did not know how many people died. One question at a time please. I think your journey has come to an end now. I do not understand your questions, Sir. I suggest that you surrender and give in.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Menyatsoe, the question is, in this statement to which you've been referred to, you say that more than 40 people died and many were injured. Now what Mr van der Berg is asking you is, at the time that you shot the deceased did you at that time know that 40 people had died and many were injured? You've already told us, we know that you personally saw some people being shot and injured but did you know that 40 had died at that time or did you only learn that information later?
MR MENYATSOE: I knew, that is why I mentioned it in my statement. I knew what was happening and what was continuously happening and thus I mentioned it in my statement that I produced in front of this Commission.
ADV MOTATA: Mr Menyatsoe, you said whilst you were at TTA, a bullet was fired which nearly hit your foot, do you recall that?
MR MENYATSOE: Yes, Sir.
ADV MOTATA: That prompted you to go out and defend people, isn't it so?
MR MENYATSOE: That is not what prompted me to go outside. What prompted me to go outside is the people who came to me for help, either to give them the rifle or to go with them. That is when I decided to go and help the nation because as a policeman I swore to fight and die for the nation. That is why I went outside. I did not say that the bullet is the one that prompted me to go outside.
I said that this bullet was fired and I hid behind a wall until these people arrived and these are the very same people I swore to defend when I joined the police force in 1994, 1991.
ADV MOTATA: Now when you spotted the Mercedes shooting, on your way towards the Mercedes did you see dead people?
MR MENYATSOE: I did not see any dead people.
ADV MOTATA: Now the question which you have been asked and not answered is that when you wrote this statement which was presented to the Tebbutt Commission, did you know after the event that actually 40 people had died during that upheaval?
MR MENYATSOE: I'll explain that I knew before eliminating these men.
ADV MOTATA: Whereabout did you see people who lay dead on the 11th of March 1994?
MR MENYATSOE: I did not see them but my colleagues who were present here in Mmbatho and who were constantly coming to head office before this incident of the three men, they kept us informed as to all the events in Mmbatho. I was informed by my colleagues.
ADV MOTATA: And you mentioned that already 40 people are dead?
MR MENYATSOE: They could not confirm the numbers but what they said is that those people might have been more or less but most people have already died in Bophuthatswana.
ADV MOTATA: Now on the 8th of May 1997 when you presented your statement to the Tebbutt Commission, had you confirmed that it was actually 40 people that had died and several injured?
MR MENYATSOE: I did not go to confirm as to how many, find out as to how many people got injured or not.
ADV MOTATA: Could we understand you, that as you sit there today you don't know the number of people who died?
MR MENYATSOE: That's correct Sir, I don't know.
ADV MOTATA: Thank you, Mr van der Berg.
MR VAN DER BERG: As it please you Mr Chairperson.
You also did not mention it to the Committee in your evidence, why not?
MR MENYATSOE: What are you talking about Sir?
MR VAN DER BERG: These 40 people, you did not mention this in your evidence in chief, why not?
MR MENYATSOE: I cannot recall everything that I've written ages ago. Myself, I cannot recall everything to the detail. You might not be like that but personally I'm like that, I forget things. I cannot recall everything to the detail.
MR VAN DER BERG: Sir, would you page to page 9 of the bundle? I refer here specifically to the last paragraph, paragraph 6 and I will read it to you
"I had witnessed the shooting and injury of one member of the public, with a great number of people fleeing around, apparently injured and saw one person shot and apparently critically injured".
This information does not follow the other information, that you did not see 40 people, that you only mentioned one person.
MR MENYATSOE: Please repeat your question, Sir.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr van der Berg, the witness did state that he saw a man being shot in the thigh and he also saw a woman that had been shot in what he said was the belly. So that is the one member of the public, shooting and the injury of one member and another one apparently critically injured. One would relate it to those two that he's described. He said that.
MR VAN DER BERG: As it pleases you, Chairperson. If you could just give me one moment please.
CHAIRPERSON: Do you have any further questions, Mr van der Berg.
MR VAN DER BERG: Mr Chairperson, I would just like to make sure that I've covered all the aspects.
CHAIRPERSON: Well don't read the whole record now.
MR VAN DER BERG: Thank you, Mr Chairperson, I've got no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VAN DER BERG
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr van der Berg.
Mr Mpshe, do you have questions to ask the witness?
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY ADV MPSHE: Yes, Mr Chairman.
Mr Menyatsoe, I want you to have a look at your application form which you submitted, which you signed on the 8th of May 1997. I want you to proceed straight to page 5 of the paginated pages, paragraph 11(a). I'll read it for convenience:
"Were there omissions or offences committed in the execution of, or on behalf of, or with the approval, the organisation, institution, body, liberation movement: state department or security force concerned."
And your answer was: "yes". Do you see that?
MR MENYATSOE: Yes, I do.
ADV MPSHE: Now who approved this act? Which party, liberation movement or body or institution?
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mpshe, I don't know if this is a fair question really. I mean it's not a question, it doesn't hang on approval because the question says
"Was the act or omission committed in the execution of an order, or on behalf of, or with the approval of the organisation".
So it might just have been done on behalf of rather than with the approval of, but I get the gist of your question but it shouldn't be confined to the approval aspect.
ADV MPSHE: I'm indebted to you, Mr Chairman. I will split it, right.
Let's go to the first part thereof, was this an act committed as an execution or as an order of any particular movement?
CHAIRPERSON: Movement, body or institution.
ADV MPSHE: Was it an order of any body, liberation movement or institution?
MR MENYATSOE: I said to kill these three people - do you talk about the killing of the three people, or maybe I don't understand?
ADV MPSHE: Alright. When you did this, was it because you were responding to an order of any movement or institution?
MR MENYATSOE: I did that on my own and to protect the community.
ADV MPSHE: Now were you doing this - did you do this on behalf of any institution or liberation or organisation?
MR MENYATSOE: Yes, that is ANC.
ADV MPSHE: You indicated that you were a supporter of the ANC. Other than what you did on this particular day, what else did you do in the past to show that you are a supporter of the ANC?
MR MENYATSOE: You mean after this incident or do you mean before this incident?
ADV MPSHE: Before.
MR MENYATSOE: I've explained that it was not difficult to show my political alliance with the ANC because I was working for the Bophuthatswana Government, which was antagonistic to ANC. Because if you are a member of the Bophuthatswana Police, you are not allowed to be a member or a supporter of any political organisation other that the United Democratic. I was supporting the ANC on my own.
ADV MPSHE: Will I be correct to say that this particular act on this day was the first physical act on your part to show that you are an ANC supporter?
MR MENYATSOE: Yes, that was the first one.
ADV MPSHE: Did you know by then what ANC stood for?
MR MENYATSOE: I was supporting the ANC not knowing the policy.
ADV MPSHE: Just a blind supporter?
MR MENYATSOE: I was not in the dark but I was supporting the ANC because I liked the ANC. Like if I can support the Kaizer Chiefs or Parrots, I don't know their policies.
ADV MPSHE: What actually were you supporting in the ANC?
MR MENYATSOE: I was supporting ANC as it stands or as it stood at that time. As I used to watch the news on TV, those who were the people who wanted to negotiate a political settlement.
ADV MPSHE: You supported them because they liked to sit and talk? Were you supporting the talking part of it?
MR MENYATSOE: That would be difficult to respond to because I don't know I can respond to that question.
ADV MPSHE: I asked you whether you knew what ANC stood for and you said: "No". I asked you: "What were you supporting then if you don't know what they stood for"? And you said you supported them because they sit down and talk. Now my question is, were you supporting them because they talk?
MR MENYATSOE: I don't know how to respond to your question, Sir.
ADV MPSHE: Do you want to reverse what you have said, that you support them because they talk? You don't know now?
MR MENYATSOE: I don't know how I can answer to that question because I supported the ANC without knowing their policies or what they stood for. I do not know their constitution.
ADV MPSHE: Normally when a person supports an organisation or liberation movement, does it not support what they stand for, normally?
MR MENYATSOE: I don't know, I don't understand your question.
ADV MPSHE: Turn to page 10 of the documents, paragraph 1.3, to be specific. I will quote it for you for convenience. You say
"The incident appeared to me to have been a complete takeover and this scared me as it meant that the people were the next to..."
...[intervention]
CHAIRPERSON
"the police were the next"
The police, not the people.
ADV MPSHE: I'm indebted, Mr Chairman, sorry.
"The incident appeared to me to have been a complete takeover and this scared me as it meant the police were the next to follow".
Do you mean you had to follow to be taken over, the police?
MR MENYATSOE: As they have already taken control of the defence force, if they could have arrived at TTA, they could have taken control of the police.
ADV MPSHE: Now will I then be correct ...[[intervention]
MR MENYATSOE: According to my observation. They could have been able to take over.
ADV MPSHE: Will I then be correct to state that you did what you did in order to preserve the status quo then, that is to protect, to ensure the non-takeover of the then Bophuthatswana Police, is that why you did this?
MR MENYATSOE: Please repeat your question.
ADV MPSHE: You did what you did in order to stop the takeover of the then Bophuthatswana (Bop) Police?
MR MENYATSOE: Yes.
ADV MPSHE: Which would then mean that your aim was to maintain the status quo, the political status quo that prevailed in Bophuthatswana?
ADV MOTATA: If I may interpose, Mr Mpshe. Are we reading the reasons for political objective by just taking one line in isolation or we look at those political objectives in totality? Because I would draw your attention to page 11
"At the time this happened, the people forced me to take a stance and defend them. I had two choices, either to disobey the will of the people and be their enemy as they would see me as a puppet of the homelands government or to act in protection of the people and achieve a political result they sought. That is to stop the takeover by the AWB and enable them to struggle for change and participation in the elections".
Wouldn't we when we read the political objective, say we should read them in totality rather than taking one at a time?
MR MENYATSOE: With great respect, I hear the Honourable Member very well, but that was my next point, to show out a contradiction. In particular, reference to the effect that in this paragraph the applicant referring to the police in particular, and if you want to change a political setup in a country then you will be seen to be wanting to overthrow every institution that exists under that particular regime.
ADV MOTATA: Thank you, Advocate Mpshe.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, you may continue.
ADV MPSHE: I'm still awaiting the answer, Mr Menyatsoe.
CHAIRPERSON: The question asked to you was, if one takes a look at paragraph 1.3 on page 10 where you said that you were scared because you thought that the police were the next to fall as the army or the defence force had already fallen, as being one of your political motives.
Mr Mpshe has then said: "Was your aim then therefore to maintain the status quo"?, because you did the shooting in order to protect the police from being taken over? That is the question.
MR MENYATSOE: It is a long question, I'm not able to apprehend the gist of it.
CHAIRPERSON: Perhaps if you could repeat it, Mr Mpshe.
ADV MPSHE: Thank you Mr Chairman.
Were you protecting the police when you did the deed?
MR MENYATSOE: I was protecting the nation, the people and the police as well. The police is part of the nation as well.
ADV MPSHE: I see you are being evasive, let's leave it at that. In any country, don't you see the police force as the agent of the wing of that government?
MR MENYATSOE: I do not understand because I do not understand how the police in other countries dress and ...[no English translation]
CHAIRPERSON: Confine your questions to the situation in BP then perhaps, Mr Mpshe.
ADV MPSHE: ...[indistinct] at your own home. The then Bophuthatswana Police Force, were they not the wing or the agent of the then government, they grey uniformed people?
MR MENYATSOE: Is the question - what is the question? Is the question the fact that the police were supporting the government or were sustaining the government at that time? Is that what the question is?
CHAIRPERSON: No, the question is - what Mr Mpshe is asking you is, what is your view, were you of the view or are you of the view that the Bophuthatswana Police Force at that time was a wing or an agent of the Bophuthatswana Government?
MR MENYATSOE: A that time, Mr Mpshe, I was not aware of what the other policemen were thinking. I did not know what was on the other policemen's minds. I did not know who wanted to sustain Mr Mangope's government or who wanted to destroy it. If you can just talk about me, maybe I can answer the question in a satisfactory manner.
ADV MOTATA: May I interpose, Mr Mpshe?
Who employed you as a policeman in 1991, which government?
MR MENYATSOE: It's the Bophuthatswana Government.
ADV MOTATA: And you fell within the ambit of the Minister of Law and Order, would that not be correct?
MR MENYATSOE: That's correct, Sir.
ADV MOTATA: And when you were employed, what were you employed to do as a policeman falling under the Ministry of Law and Order?
MR MENYATSOE: I was told that my duty is to protect the nation.
ADV MOTATA: Only Sir?
MR MENYATSOE: It is to protect the nation and to prevent crime in the country.
ADV MOTATA: Thank you, Mr Mpshe, you may continue.
ADV MPSHE: Was one of them not that you should also protect your country, Mr Menyatsoe, as a policeman?
MR MENYATSOE: Yes, Sir.
ADV MPSHE: Alright. And in protecting your country it meant that it was your duty to make sure there is no overthrowing of that country's government, not so?
MR MENYATSOE: As I've already explained, Mr Mpshe, I was scared because the army had already been taken over, because the army is a strong backbone of the government and because I was a policeman and I knew that the army was far stronger than us, and what was going to happen to us.
You know, in a war situation the key players are the army. Now if - that is why Mr Terreblanche sent his army.
ADV MPSHE: Let us sum up what you have said, Mr Menyatsoe. Would you agree with me that in terms of this paragraph 1.3 and perhaps even paragraph 2 on the same page, you're protecting the takeover of your government?
I'm sorry, Mr Chairman, to be fair to him I will read paragraph 2 for him:
"I regarded my official responsibility as one of making an attempt to ensure that there was order and prevent a takeover by the AWB".
Do you see that?
CHAIRPERSON: Right at the bottom of page 10, paragraph 2.
MR MENYATSOE: Yes, I do.
ADV MPSHE: Will I be incorrect to conclude that what you did you were doing to protect the then regime at the time?
MR MENYATSOE: No. I'm not talking about Mangope's government here.
ADV MPSHE: Which government was being taken over by the AWB then?
MR MENYATSOE: I'm talking about the nation. I'm not talking about Mr Mangope, I'm talking about the community or the nation.
ADV MPSHE: Mr Menyatsoe, it won't help to be evasive to my questions. I will repeat my question for the last time. If you don't want to answer it just say so.
According to paragraph 2 on page 10, paragraph 1.3, you did what you did in order to avoid any takeover by the AWB, am I correct?
MR MENYATSOE: Let me look at it carefully. Can you repeat your question?
ADV MPSHE: You did what you did in order to prevent a takeover by the AWB?
MR MENYATSOE: Yes, I did.
ADV MPSHE: Now how do you connect that with your evidence viva voce where you stated that the idea was to see to it that there was a political change, people must be able to go to the elections?
MR MENYATSOE: These people wanted to participate in elections, that is what caused the unrest in Mafikeng and in Mmbatho.
ADV MPSHE: I don't want to take it very long. Do you see what you have said, that you were preventing the takeover of the government and at the same time assisting the people to go to elections, to participate politically, these two things are not the same?
MR MENYATSOE: I'm requesting that you repeat your question, Sir.
ADV MPSHE: You stated that you were preventing a takeover by the AWB in this area and in another breath you said you were assisting the people to go for elections because they wanted a change, to go to election, do you remember that?
MR MENYATSOE: Yes, I did.
ADV MPSHE: Now do you agree with me that there is a difference between these two statements?
Or perhaps to be more specific, Mr Chairman, to be fair to him, these two are mutually destructive.
MR MENYATSOE: These two issues you're talking about, which one is which one? Can you just shorten them and be precise so that I'll be able to understand you?
CHAIRPERSON: I think this is getting a little bit out of hand now, Mr Mpshe. Perhaps if you can be as precise as possible because there seems to be a lot of confusion going on here.
ADV MPSHE: Mr Chairman, I tried three times. Perhaps I'll even have to shorten words now.
If you say you want to assist people to overthrow a government, as you said, and at the same time you say you preventing the AWB from taking over that government, these two are mutually destructive, do you agree with me?
I don't know whether I have done it better, Mr Chairman.
MR MENYATSOE: It is possible that, it is possible that I was helping the community to achieve their intention and again to overthrow Mangope's government but on the other side I did not want the government of Bophuthatswana. I don't know how to put it. That it should be overthrown by AWB. That is to say, I was helping the community to overthrow Mangope's government, not that AWB should be the one which will be the one to do the job of overthrowing Mangope's government.
ADV MPSHE: I will proceed, Mr Chairman, I won't belabour that point any further.
You testified yesterday that you were given an R4, you remember, by the officer who instructed you to go back home and get a uniform, do you remember that?
MR MENYATSOE: I've explained here, at that time there was no officer who gave me an R4. We were given guns by a senior sergeant at that time. I don't remember the identity of that person who gave me the R4, because when we went to the armoury section we were many and then we were given guns, then we'd go to the car.
ADV MPSHE: Don't pre-empt my questions. My question was never that, my question is now, why were you given R4's?
MR MENYATSOE: It was to protect ourselves and again to protect the nation.
ADV MPSHE: Now right through in your evidence as well as in the papers filed by your good selves, you testified that what you did you did in order to protect the community. You made mention of the word: "the nation, the people, the community", am I correct?
MR MENYATSOE: People and the nation is one and the same thing.
ADV MPSHE: You said you were protecting these people, am I correct?
MR MENYATSOE: Yes, those people are part of the nation.
ADV MPSHE: I didn't ask whether they are part or not, I say you said you were protecting them.
MR MENYATSOE: That is correct.
ADV MPSHE: Now if you say you were protecting them, if you look at page 10, paragraph 13, by way of illustration which I've just quoted, to confirm your answer.
MR HENDRICKSE: Are you referring - Mr Chairman, I don't know paragraph ...[intervention]
CHAIRPERSON: You said paragraph 13, there's no paragraph 13, Mr Mpshe.
ADV MPSHE: Paragraph 1.3, I'm sorry. That is the one I quoted. The applicant too, I'm sorry. I'm not going to read it, I'm just reminding him of the whole scenario of protecting people, that's all Mr Chairman.
Mr Menyatsoe, will I then be correct if I state that your action was to protect people who were maimed and shot in your presence and not to bring about any political change? Will I be correct?
MR MENYATSOE: It was to protect the people.
ADV MPSHE: My question did not stop there. Alright, to assist you let's take for ...[intervention]
MR MENYATSOE: Let me answer it in this way. Because those people wanted a political change, that is why I was protecting them. They wanted a political change and I was protecting them. I protected the people who wanted a political change.
ADV MPSHE: They wanted a political change from the then Bop Government, not so?
MR MENYATSOE: That is correct.
ADV MPSHE: Now how does the killing of the three AWB people come into the picture in this political change?
MR MENYATSOE: That came to my mind at that time. At that time I asked myself: What does the AWB want in that area because we as the security forces of Bophuthatswana, should we confront these people? The police and the soldier were fighting those, if the soldiers and the police were fighting amongst themselves.
What I'm saying is that what came to my mind is that I asked myself what the AWB wants in Bophuthatswana because the people of Bophuthatswana want political change. Mr Mangope should liberate them to take part in the democratic elections which happened in 1994, in April. They don't want that political change from the AWB which was killing them.
I had a different idea which came to me only, that there is a hidden agenda prevailing in this situation because AWB was against those people who wanted to take part in the elections. I mean people in Bophuthatswana. Those who wanted a permission, not from Eugene Terreblanche but from Mangope, to take part in the elections.
ADV MPSHE: That is actually my problem, Mr Menyatsoe. If they wanted a political change from the Mangope government and not the AWB, why kill the AWB then?
MR MENYATSOE: It's because they were killing people in Bophuthatswana.
ADV MPSHE: To be more direct and finally, by killing these AWB members, what did you seek to achieve?
MR MENYATSOE: I wanted to achieve a political change in Bophuthatswana, that people would be able to go where they want to go. I was surprised that the AWB is killing the people who wanted to take part in the elections, meaning people of Bophuthatswana.
We were not told that Terreblanche is coming, we were not informed that Terreblanche is coming. He just invaded, he just came on his own. I don't know as to whether there is a person who would say he has called Mr Terreblanch to Bophuthatswana. I do not understand.
What I wanted is that they should not stop people to struggle for a political change. It showed that the AWB wanted to prevent people who wanted to take part in the elections, because they were killing them. Let me stop there.
ADV MPSHE: Thank you, Mr Chairman, that is all.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY ADV MPSHE
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Mpshe.
Mr Hendrickse, do you have any re-examination?
RE-EXAMINATION BY MR HENDRICKSE: Yes, thank you, Mr Chairman.
Mr Menyatsoe, let me refer you to page 15 of the bundle, the second-last paragraph, the first sentence. This is a memorandum which was written to the Amnesty Commission. First sentence:
"Our client decided to act for the public who were mostly ANC members and supporters".
Is that correct? Do you see it?
MR MENYATSOE: That is correct.
MR HENDRICKSE: These people, are those - the public that you refer to, is it the people who were at the gate at the head office, TTA?
MR MENYATSOE: The people I'm talking about - can you please repeat your question?
MR HENDRICKSE: The public that you referred to, is it the same people that were at the gate of TTA, the head office?
MR MENYATSOE: I'm talking about all citizens of Bophuthatswana who wanted to take part in the elections during that time.
MR HENDRICKSE: Okay, let's go further.
"Our client joined them and moved across the street at TTA being shielded by the group of people, thereby making a clear stance with regard to which side he is on".
Can you see that?
MR MENYATSOE: Yes, I do.
MR HENDRICKSE: Is that true?
MR MENYATSOE: That is correct.
MR HENDRICKSE: These people were mostly ANC supporters?
MR MENYATSOE: According to my observations, yes, they were supporters of ANC members because they were singing ANC slogans and they were raising their fists.
MR HENDRICKSE: And you already told the Commission you were also an ANC supporter, is that correct?
MR MENYATSOE: Yes, that is correct.
MR HENDRICKSE: I have no further questions, thank you, Mr Chairman.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR HENDRICKSE
CHAIRPERSON: Advocate Bosman, do you have any questions to ask the witness?
ADV BOSMAN: Mr Menyatsoe, did you ever become a member of the ANC after the incident?
MR MENYATSOE: I haven't been a member of the ANC, I'm still a supporter of the ANC. I haven't become a full member of the ANC. It hasn't come to my mind that I should be a full member but I'm a supporter of the ANC.
CHAIRPERSON: Advocate Sigodi, do you have any questions?
CHAIRPERSON: Advocate Motata, do you have any questions?
ADV MOTATA: I've got none, thank you, Mr Chairman.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you. I don't think there'll be any questions arising from those.
Thank you, Mr Menyatsoe, you may now stand down.
WITNESS EXCUSED
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Hendrickse?
MR HENDRICKSE: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Chairman, at this juncture may we have a short adjournment just to find out whether the other witness has arrived?
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, certainly, Mr Hendrickse. If you could just let us know as soon as possible. Do you want take an early lunch? I don't know if they will be ready with lunch yet, otherwise we could take a lunch adjournment until half past one, would that be convenient?
MR HENDRICKSE: I think that would be convenient. I don't know about my learned friends, Mr Chairman.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I think we'll take the lunch adjournment now and then we'll start at half past one or so soon thereafter as Mr Hendrickse is ready.
MR HENDRICKSE: Thank you Mr Chairman.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
ON RESUMPTION
MR HENDRICKSE: Thank you, Mr Chairman. Mr Chairman, I would like to call as a witness, Mr Lawrence Lebotso. May the witness be sworn in?
CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, it's Mr Lawrence?
MR HENDRICKSE: L-E-B-O-T-S-O.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
LAWRENCE LEBOTSO: (sworn states)
EXAMINATION BY MR HENDRICKSE: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Lebotso, is it correct that you are 38 years of age?
MR LEBOTSO: That's correct, Sir.
MR HENDRICKSE: Is it also correct that you reside at Lonely Park, here in Mafikeng?
MR LEBOTSO: That's correct.
MR HENDRICKSE: Is it also correct that on the 11th of March 1994, you were in Mafikeng town?
MR LEBOTSO: That's correct, I was in Mafikeng.
MR HENDRICKSE: Is it also correct that you went to a church on the day in question?
MR LEBOTSO: That's correct?
MR HENDRICKSE: What was the purpose of going to the church?
MR LEBOTSO: I normally do some part-time painting jobs there and they had just called me to come and check if there was any jobs for me to do there at the church, painting work.
MR HENDRICKSE: Now after you had been to the church, you were then in the Mafikeng town, is that correct?
MR LEBOTSO: That is correct, Sir.
MR HENDRICKSE: Is it correct that you met up with another person, another man?
MR LEBOTSO: That is correct, Sir.
MR HENDRICKSE: Where did you then proceed to?
MR LEBOTSO: We went home.
MR HENDRICKSE: Were you on foot or were you travelling in a car?
MR LEBOTSO: We were walking.
MR HENDRICKSE: Yes. Which road did you walk along?
MR LEBOTSO: We were walking at the industrial site. We used a road that goes towards the industrial site.
MR HENDRICKSE: And what happened while you were walking?
MR LEBOTSO: Whilst we were walking a certain white Ford Cortina came behind us. I heard a certain voice say: "There are two kaffirs". Then the other voice came and said: "Shoot them". Whilst we were surprised, a certain white person came out of the car and he pointed us with a gun.
MR HENDRICKSE: Mr Lebotso, you must go slowly please, it has to be interpreted.
MR LEBOTSO: Okay. A certain white man came out of the car with a gun. He instructed us that: "Today you are going to die". We lifted our hands then we pleaded for mercy. After that he shot me on the chest bone. He shot me at the neck.
MR HENDRICKSE: And what happened to the person who was with you, in your company?
MR LEBOTSO: He fell on the ground, then he was not shot.
MR HENDRICKSE: And then?
MR LEBOTSO: Whilst we were lying on the ground he said to me: "Obosamang(?), we are dying" and then he started crying. Whilst he was crying I requested him to keep quiet because those white people would come and finish us off.
MR HENDRICKSE: Just stop there. These white people, how were they clad on the day in question? What clothes did they have on?
MR LEBOTSO: They were clad in khaki dress.
MR HENDRICKSE: And in which language did they converse with you?
MR LEBOTSO: In Afrikaans.
MR HENDRICKSE: Okay, after - while you were still lying there, what happened further?
MR LEBOTSO: Whilst we were lying on the ground, whilst my friend was crying I pleaded with him to keep quiet because they would come and finish us off. Then he kept quiet.
After some time the other one came to shake us on the head and then he said: "You must die in peace".
MR HENDRICKSE: How were you shook on your head? What do you mean by: "Shake on the head"?
MR LEBOTSO: He was using his foot and he tread on our heads.
MR HENDRICKSE: And what was his words?
MR LEBOTSO: Then he said: "You must die in peace, bye-bye".
MR HENDRICKSE: What happened thereafter? Did they then leave?
INTERPRETER: The witness is emotionally affected.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lebotso, can you continue or would you like a short break?
MR LEBOTSO: I'll try to proceed.
CHAIRPERSON: The last question asked to you was: "After this man said you must die in peace, goodbye, what happened then"?
MR LEBOTSO: After he said those words, after some time, the person I was with, that is Mr Fyfe, he said we should run away. I said to him he can leave, I'm okay.
MR HENDRICKSE: Yes, and then?
MR LEBOTSO: I lay on the ground. Around 4 o'clock I woke up but I heard some car noises and then I realised that I had been shot.
MR HENDRICKSE: Did you then wake up and proceed home?
MR LEBOTSO: Yes, I woke up then I was - on my way I was falling on the ground. After passing Mandela Drive, I met my cousin and he helped me. Me met with another two ladies who were crying. They helped me to go home.
MR HENDRICKSE: When you reached your home, what happened then?
MR LEBOTSO: They took me to my brother and my brother sought a car to take me to the hospital.
MR HENDRICKSE: Which hospital?
MR LEBOTSO: That's Victoria Hospital.
MR HENDRICKSE: Were you detained in Victoria Hospital?
MR LEBOTSO: In Victoria Hospital, the way I learnt they said the hospital is full and they sent me to Klerksdorp Hospital.
MR HENDRICKSE: Were you then hospitalised in Klerksdorp for a period of time?
MR LEBOTSO: Yes, they sent to me to Klerksdorp Hospital.
MR HENDRICKSE: How long were you in hospital?
MR LEBOTSO: I thought I stayed there four days.
MR HENDRICKSE: Tell me, has anybody claimed responsibility for your shooting?
MR LEBOTSO: No-one claimed responsibility.
MR HENDRICKSE: Have you received any compensation for being shot?
MR LEBOTSO: No, I didn't receive any compensation.
MR HENDRICKSE: I have no further questions, thank you Mr Chairman.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR HENDRICKSE
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Hendrickse.
Mr Terreblanche, do you have any questions to ask this witness?
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR TERREBLANCHE: Thank you very much, Chairperson.
Sir, the people who shot you, were they alone in a vehicle or was it only this one vehicle, or were the other vehicles too?
MR LEBOTSO: The people who shot me were driving in one car.
CHAIRPERSON: Were the other cars with that vehicle or was the vehicle alone, do you know?
MR LEBOTSO: I was not aware because cars used to travel in that road but that car which was driven by the people who shot us, I heard them say that, they spoke those words which I told you and thereafter they got out of the car and shot us.
MR TERREBLANCHE: Thank you very much. So you cannot say if there were other vehicles in front or behind that vehicle? Do you mean when you say the pulled off all the other cars passed? You only remember this one vehicle, is that correct?
MR LEBOTSO: Yes.
MR TERREBLANCHE: Thank you very much. You say the people were clothed in khaki clothes?
MR LEBOTSO: Yes.
MR TERREBLANCHE: You do not know who these people are? There were Boers in the dorp, do you know - they were white people in khaki clothes, do you know which political affiliation they belonged to? They did not say who they were did they?
MR LEBOTSO: I said they said to us: "Today you are going to die". They did not identify themselves or to which organisation they belonged.
MR TERREBLANCHE: Thank you very much. So you can tell this Commission that you do not know to which organisation they belonged? You don't know if they were AWB or if they were from the Volksfront but all you know is that they were white people dressed in khaki?
MR LEBOTSO: They way I observed they were members of AWB because those were the people who were shooting people in town.
MR TERREBLANCHE: So you thought they were members of the AWB because you heard that the AWB shot other people, is that correct?
MR LEBOTSO: Yes, you're telling the truth.
MR TERREBLANCHE: Thank you, Chairperson, no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR TERREBLANCHE
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Terreblanche.
Mr van der Berg, do you have any questions to ask the witness?
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR VAN DER BERG: Sir, did you describe this event to Mr Menyatsoe?
MR LEBOTSO: Which Menyatsoe are you talking about?
MR VAN DER BERG: The applicant who is here today, the one who is applying for amnesty. He's sitting over there with the black shirt, did you tell him what happened to you?
MR LEBOTSO: Do you mean today or at that time?
MR VAN DER BERG: Did you tell him at any time and if indeed, when?
MR LEBOTSO: I don't understand, where did I meet him?
CHAIRPERSON: The question, Mr Lebotso is, have you at any stage told Mr Menyatsoe, the applicant in this matter, about what happened to you, about what you've told us now? Have you at any stage spoken to him before? If not, say so. If you have then Mr van der Berg wants to know when it was you told him, if you did at all.
MR LEBOTSO: I did not tell him.
MR VAN DER BERG: No further questions, thank you.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VAN DER BERG
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
Mr Mpshe?
ADV MPSHE: No, questions, Mr Chairman.
NO QUESTIONS BY ADV MPSHE
CHAIRPERSON: Any re-examination, Mr Hendrickse?
MR HENDRICKSE: No re-examination, thank you, Mr Chairman.
NO RE-EXAMINATION BY MR HENDRICKSE
CHAIRPERSON: Advocate Bosman, do you have any questions to ask the witness?
ADV BOSMAN: No questions, thank you, Mr Chairman.
CHAIRPERSON: Advocate Sigodi?
ADV SIGODI: No, questions Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Advocate Motata?
ADV MOTATA: I've got none, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes thank you very much, Mr Lebotso, you may stand down.
WITNESS EXCUSED
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Hendrickse?
MR HENDRICKSE: As it pleases you, Mr Chairman. Mr Chairman, at this stage I would like to hand up to you and Members of this Commission, extracts from the Tebbutt Commission which deals with the background of the events around the area.
I've discussed this with my learned friend, Mr van der Berg, Mr Mpshe as well as with Mr Terreblanche. Mr van der Berg has not an objection per se but he would like to outline his stance.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Mr van der Berg?
MR VAN DER BERG: As it please you Chairperson. Chairperson, we appear on behalf of Mrs Uys and she does not know if that information is correct or not, so the correctness of that information cannot be ascribed to, but if they Committee can read it and take notice of it then we do not have a problem with that.
There are a lot of facts there, but the bit that is handed in is not the finding per se, it's says what happened there but a lot of the information is not verified.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you Mr van der Berg, we will take note of that and we do accept it as being the gospel truth as to what occurred on that occasion but we receive it on the basis as it is handed in by Mr Hendrickse, just to give some sort of background, but we won't depend on it for arriving at any firm conclusions.
MR VAN DER BERG: As it please you, Chairperson.
MR MPSHE: Mr Chairman, if I may come in here on this aspect, just to assist the Committee, Mr Chairman. The bundle that has been handed in, the pages 40 to 108, the Committee may read that in conjunction with what is in the bundle from page 13 to page 16. It's also almost the same as what is in these pages handed up.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Mpshe. Yes, we'll just mark this Tebbutt Commission Report as B.
Yes, Mr Hendrickse?
MR HENDRICKSE: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Chairman that concludes the evidence on behalf of the applicant.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Terreblanche?
MR TERREBLANCHE: Chairperson, I'm not quite sure if this is an opportunity for argument. There are no witnesses I want to call. I'll keep to the regulations of this Committee.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Terreblanche. I was at this stage just asking whether you were going to call any witness or not, or lead any testimony.
MR TERREBLANCHE: No, thank you Chairperson, I conclude as well.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr van der Berg?
MR VAN DER BERG: Chairperson, we won't be calling any witnesses.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr van der Berg. Then that will leave us with the question of argument in this matter. Would it be possible for the parties - well, when would it be possible for the parties? Mr Mpshe?
MR MPSHE: Mr Chairman, I've discussed this with my learned friends, and I must apologise to Mr Terreblanche, I don't think when we discussed this he was present. ...[inaudible]. We agreed that argument will be tomorrow at 9 o'clock.
MR TERREBLANCHE: Chairperson, if the learned friends decided like that, the unlearned friend will agree to that. I appreciate that.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Could we make sure that we will conclude argument tomorrow because I think it would be a pity to have to wait the whole of Thursday here and come back on Friday just for the end of argument. It would be very convenient if we could argue it tomorrow at nine. And then if the representatives could bear in mind that we would like to conclude it also tomorrow. Thank you very much.
We have now reached the stage of this hearing where all the evidence has been completed and all that remains is for the representatives to make their submissions to the panel and of course for the panel to then consider the evidence and the submissions and arrive at its decision.
We accordingly going to be adjourning this matter now until tomorrow morning in this hall at 9 o'clock when argument will be presented, first of all by Mr Hendrickse, then by Mr Terreblanche, then by Mr van der Berg and then if Mr Mpshe has any submissions to make, he is certainly allowed to make them. Thank you very much, we will then adjourn until tomorrow at 9 o'clock.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
